I. THE Isaiah 1-6The extent and the grand contents of Isaiah’s prophecies justify the artistic, complex form of the introduction. It is not merely one gate; there are three gates that we must pass through in order to reach the majestic principal edifice of Isaiah’s prophecy. That the entire first six chapters constitute the introduction of the whole book, yet so that this introduction itself again appears as threefold, (chap. 1, chaps. 1–4, chap. 6) becomes plain both from the contents and from the form of these chapters. That chap. 1 is introduction requires no proof. Both the contents, which comprehend in grand outlines the entire past, present and future, and also the title, with its formal reference, guarantee that.
Chaps. 2–5, however, whose connection we shall show hereafter, have essentially the same contents and the same title. The same contents; for these chapters comprehend in general the present and future. Caspari has completely demonstrated how in chaps. 1, 2–4, 5 threatening and promise have still quite a general character in distinction from the later prophecies. Compare in regard to chap. 1, Beitr., p. 227 sqq., in regard to chaps. 2–4, p. 283 sqq., in regard to chap. 5, p. 325 sq., 334.—Drechsler, too, says (I. p. 225): “A certain character of generality attaches to all these chapters (1–5). Comp. Delitzsch, p. 114 sq.—Hengstenberg, Christol.
I. p. 484.—Hendewerk, I. p. 64.
As regards the form: it is of the greatest significance that chap. 2 bears essentially the same title at its head as chap 1 And this title does not recur again. This repetition of the title of chap.1 at the head of chap. 2, has occasioned commentators great trouble. But they were hampered by the strange assumption that only chap. 1 could be introduction. As soon as we give up this assumption, we at once recognize the meaning of the title of chap. 2. Thereby it is outwardly and right away shown to the reader, that all which this title concerns bears the same character as chap. 1, i. e., that it is also Introduction.
Jeremiah also has a double introduction; a fact that escaped my notice when preparing my commentary on that prophet. For Jeremiah 2 is also introduction, because that chapter, like an overture, represents in advance all the principal thoughts of Jeremiah’s prophecy (even the warning against the expedition into Egypt, Isaiah 1:16, 18, 36, 37).
That chap. 6 also bears the character of an introduction cannot be doubted, and is acknowledged by all expositors. It contains indeed the call of Isaiah to the prophetic office. But why does not this history stand at the beginning, like the story of the call of Jeremiah and Ezekiel? This question, too, has given the commentators great trouble. Many have resorted to the following explanation (comp. Caspari, p. 332): they say chap. 6 contains the account of a second calling, after Isaiah has been once already called, but had forfeited the office on account of his silence about the notorious arbitrary deed of Uzziah (2 Chronicles 26:16 sqq.).
Others assume that chap. 6 contains only the call to a special mission, and to a higher degree of prophecy. But these are only expedients to which expositors were driven because they were controlled by the assumption that only the first chapter can be introduction. All these and other artful devices are unnecessary as soon as one knows that chap. 6 is introduction indeed, yet the third introduction.
But why does not this stand at the beginning? We will hereafter in the exposition show that Isaiah, unlike Moses, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, did not decline the divine commission, but rather, to the Lord’s question: “Whom shall I send,” Isaiah 6:8, at once boldly replied: “Here am I, send me.” That Isaiah, therefore, not only accepts the call, but offers himself, is something so extraordinary that one may easily imagine why he would not put this narrative at the head of his book. He had rather prepare the reader for it: he would give beforehand proofs of his prophetic qualification, in order thereby to explain and justify that bold speech. It does not stand outside by the gate, offering itself at once to every profane eye, but one must first pass through two other portals, by which the mind is prepared and translated into that sentiment which is necessary in order to understand and appreciate that exalted vision, and the part that Isaiah plays in it. Jeremiah and Ezekiel were not sensible of the necessity of preparing in this way for the representation of their calling, because they behaved in respect to the divine calling in quite a normal way, i. e., declining it. The one, Jeremiah, declined in express terms Jeremiah 1:6; the other, at least by silence, let himself be so understood, Ezekiel 2:8.
But why does Isaiah let two doctrinary introductions, if I may so call them, precede the historical one, whereas Jeremiah follows his historical introduction by only one doctrinary one, Jeremiah 2? I believe this has a double reason. First: threatening and promise form the chief contents of Isaiah’s prophecy, as of all prophecy. In every single prophetic address one or the other ever preponderates. Either threatening forms the warp and promise the woof, or the reverse. So Isaiah would even prelude with two addresses, of which the first has an undertone of threatening with which it begins and ends, while the element of promise is represented only by intermediate chords,—the second, however, has promise for undertone, for this is represented by the two fundamental prophetic lights (Isaiah 2:2-4, and Isaiah 4:2-6) in the second introduction.
Second: It seems to me also that the three portals are demanded by the architectonic symmetry. On the assumption that these introductions have Isaiah himself for their author, which so far as I know has never been disputed, we have therein a strong presumption in favor of the composition of the whole book by Isaiah (therefore also the second part, 40–66). For a small building one entry is sufficient. A great, comprehensive, complex building, however, that pretends to artistic completeness, may very well require various graded approaches that the introduction to the chief building may stand in right proportion. Thus the book of Jeremiah has a twofold introduction, but the book of Isaiah, which is still grander, and more comprehensive, and altogether more artistic even down to minutiζ, has a threefold entrance.
_______________
A. THE FIRST 1As regards the time of the composition of this section, it seems to me all depends on the question: was Isaiah prompted to utter this prophecy by a definite historical transaction that demands his prophetic guidance? No such transaction appears. Expositors on the contrary recognize the chapter to be of a general character. Comp. the complete proof in Drechsler I. p. 93 sq. If, therefore, the address was not composed for a definite historical event, according to which it must be understood; if it is rather meant to be only an introduction to the whole book, then the time of its origin is in itself a matter of indifference.
But it is probable that Isaiah wrote the address at the time he began to put his book together, or when he had completed it. This does not exclude the possibility that some important events are reflected in the address. And such is really the case. The verses 7–9 and especially Isaiah 1:8, are so specific in their contents that one must say: the prophet describes here his personal experience, and in fact a present one (comp. the exposition).
Now, during Isaiah’s life time. Jerusalem was only twice hard pressed by enemies in its immediate neighborhood: once in the war with Syria and Ephraim (2 Kings 16:5); the other time by Sennacherib (2 Kings 17, 19). If, then chap. 1 was written as a preface, it is by far the most probable that it was written in Hezekiah’s time, than in that of Ahaz. For Isaiah undertook the collection of his book certainly not in the midst of his ministry, but at the close of it. Moreover what is said in 2 Kings 18:13; 2 Kings 19:32, fits admirably the description of Isa 1:7-8. For in the first-named place it is said Sennacherib took all the fenced cities of Judah, which quite corresponds to ςָ ?ψֵ ?ιλֶ ?νωְׂ ?ψֻ ?τּ ?εֹ ?ϊΰֵ ?ωׁ Isaiah 1:7.
In the second-named place, however, we read: “The king of Assyria shall not come into this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor come before it with shield, nor cast a bank against it.” This corresponds to the specific situation in which, according to Isaiah 1:7, Jerusalem must have been. We say, therefore, chap. i. was written at the time of Sennacherib’s invasion. We know this from Isaiah 1:7-8, but do not assert that chap. 1 was written for that time, but regard the historical trait that points us to this time only as a proof of the charge that the prophet raises against the Israel of all times. The prophet adduces this proof from the present, because the conduct of the people during and after the invasion of Sennacherib could be regarded as a characteristic symptom of a stiffneckedness that was not to be subdued by any blows. Moreover the vain ceremonial service spoken of in Isaiah 1:10 sqq. would suit the times of Hezekiah. But I lay no stress on that, since there is nothing specific about it.
If the prophet warns against such ceremonial service, and exhorts to sincere repentance; if, further, to the purified Israel he holds up the prospect of a glorious future, while, to those persevering in their apostacy from Jehovah, he displays a frightful one, it is not that he speaks of a specific occasion; but that, like the whole book, has regard to all times: even primitive time may be reflected in the language.
Concerning the difference between this first and the second introduction see above the general remarks on the threefold introduction. The analysis of the chapter is as follows:
1. The Title, Isaiah 1:1.
2. The mournful present, Isaiah 1:2-9.
3. The means to securing a better future, Isaiah 1:10-20.
4. Comprehensive review of the past, present and future, Isaiah 1:21-31.
1. THE TITLE
Isaiah 1:11 The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, Kings of Judah.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_1:1. ηζδ .ΰωׁ ?ψηζδ is the proper word for prophetic seeing in the double sense named below; whence δֹ ?ζֶ ?δ is used synonymously with ψֹ ?ΰֶ ?δ ,πָ ?αִ ?ιΰ (1 Samuel 9:9; 2 Kings 17:13). Thence also the expressions δַ ?γָּ ?αָ ?ψΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψηָ ?ζָ ?δ Isaiah 2:1; γִּ ?αְ ?ψֵ ?ιΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψηָ ?ζָ ?δ Amos 1:1; γְּ ?αַ ?ψιΧΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψδָ ?ζָ ?δ Micah 1:1; ξַ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψδָ ?ζָ ?δ Isaiah 13:1; Habakkuk 1:1. These are the only places where ηָ ?ζָ ?δ occurs as part of a superscription.
AND We must consider this title in reference to three things, viz., in its relation to chap. 1 and to chap. 2, where a title essentially like this recurs, and to the entire collection. That the superscription belongs to the entire collection, is evident at once from the words, “in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.” That the title is comprehensive enough to apply to the entire book is clear when we consider that ηָ ?ζεֹ ?ο“the vision” has a collective meaning, (comp. Hosea 12:10; Ezekiel 7:26; Lamentations 2:9, etc.), and that Judah and Jerusalem represent the centre of the prophetic view, around which also the prophecies that relate Ephraim and the world potentates are grouped as radii servi. In this connection Caspari says very appropriately: “Jerusalem, Judah, Israel, are, from Isaiah 7 on, the centre of prophecy in such a way that they form three concentric circles, of which Jerusalem is the smallest. Jerusalem and Judah the wider, while Jerusalem, Judah and Israel is the widest. To these three the heathen world joins on as a fourth circle.” (Beitr. z.
Einleit. in, d. B. Jes., p. 231 sq.). Therefore both ηָ ?ζεֹ ?ο and “concerning Judah and Jerusalem” make a denominatio a potiori. The first, because prophetic sight, in the double sense of more or less bodily vision, (comp. chap. 6) and of pure spiritual knowing, gave origin to the nucleus of the book, so that about this nucleus doctrine, warning, comfort and history should find their place. The latter because, as has already been remarked, Judah and Jerusalem must be regarded as those to whom the prophet speaks first of all, and for whose sake he speaks of others.
But it has seemed strange, especially to Vitringa, that in Isaiah 2:1 a superscription of almost the same sound recurs; and he would infer from it that originally in this title the date (αִּ ?ιξֵ ?ιεβε “in the days of”) was wanting, and the remaining words were only a title to the first chapter. Against this the following is to be remembered: 1) The two superscriptions are not quite alike. In this one we have δָ ?ζεֹ ?ο; in Isaiah 2:1ηָ ?ζεֹ ?ο—.δַ ?γָּ ?αָ ?ψ is plainly a word of weightier import. It is better fitted, therefore, for the beginning of the book, and in a certain measure for its title; wherefore we see (2 Chronicles 32:32), that the book even at that time was known under that title. 2) That a superscription almost alike occurs twice, has its reason in the fact that Isaiah 2:1 is the title of the second introduction. For the book of Isaiah has a threefold portal, as said above; and that the superscription “vision or word that Isaiah saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem” occurs only Isaiah 1:1, and Isaiah 2:2, and not again afterwards, is precisely proof, that with chap. 2 we enter the second portal which comprehends chapters 2–5
Finally, as regards the relation of this superscription to chap. 1, we may fittingly say that the entire Isaiah 1:1, date included, is the title of chap. 1 For chap. 1. is just the whole prophecy of Isaiah in nuce, as he delivered it under the four kings; an assertion whose correctness can only appear indeed as the result of exposition.
At the beginning of prophetic books as here we find δָ ?ζεֹ ?οObadiah 1:1, Nahum 1:1.—Isaiah the son of Amoz. For the meaning of the name and the lineage of the prophet see the Introduction.—Concerning Judah and Jerusalem. Jerusalem, as the holy city and centre of the theocracy is made equal to the entire region of Judah, and distinguished from it, which also happens elsewhere; Jeremiah 9:2; Jeremiah 17:20, etc.;2 Kings 18:22, etc.;2 Chronicles 34:3; 2 Chronicles 34:5, etc.; and in a reversed order, Jeremiah 36:31; 2 Kings 24:20; Ezra 2:1. We have already remarked that the naming of Judah and Jerusalem presents no incongruity between the superscription and the whole book. It is worthy of special remark, that only in Isaiah 2:1 beside this does the expression form part of the title, and that it occurs in chap. 2–5 relatively with most frequency. For it is found beside Isaiah 2:1, also Isaiah 3:1; Isaiah 3:8; Isaiah 5:3.
Beside this only in Isaiah 22:21; Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 44:26. Comp. remarks at Isaiah 2:1.—In the days of, etc. That Isaiah lived and labored under these four kings cannot be doubted. Comp. the Introduction. The time designated is identical with that given Hosea 1:1, and with that in Micah 1:1, only that in the latter the name of Uzziah is wanting. Even the asyndeton and the form ιְ ?ηִ ?ζְ ?χִ ?ιָּ ?δεּ instead of ηִ ?ζְ ?χִ ?ιָ ?δεּ (about which comp.
Drechslerin loc.) are to be found in both the places named.
2. THE PRESENT
Isaiah 1:2-92 Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth:
For the Lord hath spoken,
I have nourished and brought up children,
And they have rebelled against me.
3 The ox knoweth his owner,
And the ass his master’s crib:
But Israel doth not know,
My people doth not consider.
4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity,
A seed of evil-doers, children that are corrupters:
They have forsaken the Lord,They have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger,
They are gone away backward.
5 Why should ye be stricken any more?
Ye will revolt more and more:
The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint.
6 From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it;
But wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores:
They have not been closed, neither bound up,
Neither mollified with ointment.
7 Your country is desolate,
Your cities are burned with fire:
Your land, strangers devour it in your presence,
And it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers.
8 And the daughter of Zion is left as a cottage in a vineyard,
As a lodge in a garden of cucumbers,
As a besieged city.
9 Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant,
We should have been as Sodom,
And we should have been like unto Gomorrah.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_1:2. The formula λִּ ?ιιΧγִ ?αֵּ ?ψ, is found Joe 3:8; Obadiah 1:18; Micah 4:4; Jeremiah 13:15. Beside these, in Isaiah partly in the simple form as here (Isaiah 22:25; Isaiah 25:8), partly somewhat extended (Isaiah 21:17; Isaiah 24:3). The more extended form λּ ?ιτִ ?ιιΧγִּ ?αֵּ ?ψ is found in Isaiah only, Isaiah 1:20, and Isaiah 40:5; Isaiah 58:14.——βִ ?γֵֹּ ?μ, is often used by Isaiah especially, for bringing up children, Isaiah 23:4; Isaiah 49:21; Isaiah 51:18 : comp. Isaiah 44:14; Hosea 9:12.——It is to be seen from the exposition that we take ψεֹ ?ξַ ?ξְ ?ϊִּ ?ι in an emphatic sense. Although elsewhere (Isaiah 23:4; Ezekiel 31:4) it means the same as βִּ ?γֵּ ?μ, yet our construction (which is found in Luther, Knobel, et al.) is justified here because ψεֹ ?ξֵ ?ξ, does not stand in a parallel phrase to βִ ?γֵּ ?μ, but follows with epexegetical emphasis.
For if ψεֹ ?ξַ ?ξְ ?ϊִּ ?ι is taken as meaning just the same as βִּ ?γַּ ?μְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, it would be empty repetition. Besides, Vitringa refers appropriately to Deuteronomy 32:6. [Ezekiel 31:4. The same words occur: Children I have made great and set on high.—M. W. J.]
Isaiah 1:3. χֹ ?πֶ ?δ properly “the buyer,” (comp. Isaiah 24:2) then, “the owner, the possessor,” (Leviticus 25:50; Zechariah 11:5). ΰֵ ?αεּ ?ν is found only in Job 39:9; Proverbs 14:4, beside this place. From these places it is not evident whether “stall” or “crib” is the correct meaning. As little decisive is the root meaning “fatten” (1 Kings 5:3, (Eng. Bib. 1 Kings 4:23), Proverbs 15:17). Still in the later Hebrew, which uses the word for the platter of the laborer (see Buxtorf Lex., p. 16.
Gesenius and Delitzsch in loc.) the meaning “crib” seems to prevail. The earliest versions, moreover, all give this rendering. The context demands that the object of ιָ ?γַ ?ς and δִ ?ϊְ ?αּ ?εֹ ?πֵ ?ο be supplied from what precedes. For would one take the words absolutely (Rosenmueller, Fuerst) then the two members of the comparison do not harmonize. Just what ox and ass do notice, Israel does not notice. δϊαεπο is used as verb. trans. by Isaiah, also Isaiah 43:18; Isaiah 52:15. As substantially parallel we may compare (Jeremiah 8:7)
Isaiah 1:4. δεֹ ?ι, (frequent in Isaiah, also in the 2d part; Isaiah 45:9-10; Isaiah 55:1; he uses it twenty-one times, whereas in the rest of the prophets it occurs twenty-eight times; for it is only found in the prophetic books, with the exception of 1 Kings 13:30) is distinguished from ΰεֹ ?ι in that the latter is more substantive, the former more adverb. Hence it is that ΰεֹ ?ι, with few exceptions (Numbers 24:23; Ezekiel 24:6; Ezekiel 24:9) has μִ after it, whereas δεֹ ?ι is followed by μְ only Ezekiel 13:18, and by ςַ ?μ, Ezekiel 13:3; Jer. 1:27, and by ΰֶ ?μ, Jeremiah 48:1; everywhere else (e. g. 1 Kings 13:30; Isaiah 5:8; Isaiah 5:11, etc.) it is used without a connecting proposition. δει therefore has more the character of a prepositive exclamation, though in regard to the meaning no essential difference is noticeable. It is taken for granted that an intentional paronomasia influenced the selection of the word βει. On the other hand it is clear that a synonym of ςַ ?ν was meant, as after this ζֶ ?ψַ ?ς and αָּ ?πִ ?ιν correspond to one another.——λֶּ ?αֶ ?γςָ ?εֹ ?ο is “guilt-encumbered.” Regarding the meaning, comp. Genesis 13:2; Exodus 4:10; Ezekiel 3:5-6; regarding the form (the construct-form, λֶּ ?αֶ ?γ along with λְּ ?αַ ?γ, like ςֶ ?ψֶ ?μ along with ςֲ ?ψַ ?μ, only here).——A αֵּ ?οξַ ?ωְׁ ?ηִ ?ιϊ is not one who destroys another, but one that acts ruinously (direct causative Hiphil, 2 Chronicles 27:2). The expression is partly stronger, partly more general than the kindred ones: αָּ ?πִ ?ινρεֹ ?ψְ ?ψִ ?ιν Isaiah 30:1; αָּ ?πִ ?ινλֶּ ?ηָ ?ωִׁ ?ινμֹ ?ΰΰָ ?αεּ ωְׁ ?ξεֹ ?ςַ Isaiah 30:9. αָּ ?πִ ?ινωׁ ?εֹ ?αָ ?αִ ?ιּ ?ν Jeremiah 3:14; Jeremiah 3:22; Jeremiah 4:22.
Comp. αָּ ?πִ ?ινμֹ ?ΰιְ ?ωַׁ ?χֵּ ?ψεּ Isaiah 63:8. We see that this form of expression is especially current with Isaiah, for, excepting the phrase just quoted from Jeremiah, it is to be found in no other prophet.
Isaiah 1:5. ρָ ?ψָ ?δ, Isaiah 1:5, declinatio, defectus only in Deuteronomy 13:6; Deuteronomy 19:16; Jeremiah 28:16; Jeremiah 29:32 and Isaiah 14:6; Isaiah 31:6; Isaiah 59:13.——It is true that λֹּ ?μ without the article sometimes has the meaning of “whole” (Isaiah 9:11; Ezekiel 29:7; Ezekiel 36:5; 2 Kings 23:3; see Delitzsch in loc.; Ewald § 290, c). But a comparison of these passages shows that the expressions in question are partly proverbial, (see Drechsler in loc.) partly do not admit of the meaning “all” in any wise. In the present case both meanings are in themselves possible. If, then, the prophet would convey the meaning “whole,” he must use the article. μָ ? ?ֽ ?ηֳ ?μִ ?ι must, any way, be regarded as dependent on δָ ?ιָ ?δ understood. But it is doubtful whether that is to be taken in the sense of “belongs, is fallen to,” or as meaning “is become.” The latter is the more probable, because δָ ?ιָ ?δμָ ? ?ֽ ?ηֳ ?μִ ?ι bears analogy to expressions like δָ ?ιָ ?δμָ ?ξַ ?ν ,μָ ?αεּ ?ζ. It is a strong expression, stronger than ηָ ?μָ ?δ. ηֳ ?μִ ?ι is then to be taken as abstractum pro concrete. Apart from this concrete meaning of the word, we may compare the construction of δָ ?ιָ ?δ with μְ with passages like 1 Samuel 4:9 (εִ ?δְ ?ιεּ μַ ? ?ֽ ?ΰֲ ?πָ ?ωִׁ ?ιν) and 1 Samuel 18:17 (δֱ ?ιֵ ?δΞμιμְ ?αֶ ?οΞηַ ?ιִ ?μ).—ελμΞμααγει. μֵ ?αγַּ ?εָּ ?ι is found also Jeremiah 8:18, and Lamentations 1:22. γַּ ?εָּ ?ι does not occur again in Isaiah.
Isaiah 1:6. The expression ξλτΞψβμεςγΞψΰω is found only here. Every where else it reads εְ ?ςַ ?γχָ ?γְ ?χֹ ?γ, (Deuteronomy 28:35; 2 Samuel 14:25; Job 2:7).—ΰιοαε. We would expect αָּ ?αֶ ?ν, as in Isaiah 1:5. But such changes in person and number occur frequently in Hebrew, comp. Isaiah 17:13; Psalms 5:10.—ξְ ?ϊֹ ?ν integrum, sanum, is found beside only Judges 20:48; Psalms 38:4; Psalms 38:8.—λֶּ ?φַ ?ς (from τָּ ?φַ ?ς fidit) is fissura, a wound that comes from tear or scratch; found in Isaiah only here. ηַ ?αּ ?εּ ?ψָ ?δ (joined to τֶּ ?φַ ?ς, also Proverbs 20:30) is “the extravasated stripe or swelling,” (see Delitzsch in loc.); only here in Isaiah. ξַ ?λָּ ?ηθְ ?ψִ ?ιָּ ?δּ (θָ ?ψִ ?ι from θָ ?ψָ ?δ = θָ ?μָ ?δ recent fuit, found beside only in Judges 15:15) is the raw wound of a cut. ζֹ ?ψεּ with accented penult cannot be derived from ζָ ?ψָ ?δ dispersit: nor can it be the same as ζֹ ?ψεּ in Psalms 58:4.
It is either an intensive form analogous to ΰֹ ?ψεּ ,αּ ?ωׁ ?εּ, 1 Samuel 14:29; θֹ ?αεּ, Numbers 24:5; Son 4:10; or an archaic passive form from ζεּ ?ψ (comp. ψֹ ?ξּ ?εּ, Job 24:24). The latter seems to me likely for δַ ?ζּ ?εּ ?ψֶ ?δָ, Isaiah 59:5, “the squeezed, crushed” (egg), ϊְּ ?ζεּ ?ψֶ ?δָ (the foot shall crush it, Job 39:15) εַ ?ιָּ ? ?ֽ ?ζַ ?ψ (he squeezed out the fleece, Judges 6:38), as well as the substantive ξָ ?ζεֹ ?ψ compressio, compressum, vulnus, (Jeremiah 30:13; Hosea 5:13) prove that there is a root ζεּ ?ψ with the meaning “press together” (comp. φָ ?ψַ ?ψ), to which then our ζֹ ?ψεּ would serve as a passive, like ψֹ ?ξּ ?εּ to ψεּ ?ν; comp. Gesenius Thesaur., p. 412.——ηָ ?αַ ?ωׁ in Isaiah beside this Isaiah 3:7; Isaiah 30:26; Isaiah 61:1.—The first two verbs are in the plural, which shows that the substantives are to be understood collectively: the third verb is fem. singular. No grammatical necessity appears for this. It seems as if the prophet wanted to vary the form of expression and the fem. sing, with its quality of taking a neuter construction offered the handle for it. Pual ψֻ ?λַּ ?κְ only found here; Kal of it is found Isaiah 7:4.
Isaiah 1:7. ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ξָ ?δ occurs in Isa also Isaiah 6:11; Isaiah 17:9; Isaiah 62:4; Isaiah 64:9. The expression ωְׂ ?ψֻ ?τεֹ ?ϊΰֵ ?ωׁ (Psalms 80:17) is only found here.——The following εּ ?ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ξָ ?δ does not belong as a second predicate to ΰγξϊλν, for then δִ ?ιΰ ought not to be absent. But it is itself subject, to which δָ ? ?ֽ ?ιϊְ ?δ must be supplied. The last, then, has the words λְּ ?ξַ ?δְ ?τֵּ ?λַ ?ϊζָ ?ψִ ?ιν as attribute. These last-named words are explained quite variously. But as it is established that the first word is used only in reference to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the meaning of it cannot be doubtful. From the original passage, Deuteronomy 29:22 (23) we find the words cited in Amos 4:11, and in Isaiah 13:19 and Jer. 1:40 exactly alike. In Jeremiah 49:18 we find them as in Deut.
Isaiah 1:8. επεϊψδαϊΞφΧ. The ε here is not conversive but simple conjunctive, as the whole context proves, which is only a representation of things present.——ρֻ ?λָּ ?δ from ρָ ?λַ ?κְ, “to weave together,” the lair of the lion as well as the foliage of the feast of tabernacles, Leviticus 23:34 sqq., or the booth of the watchman, Job 27:18; found again Isaiah 4:6.——ξμְ ?εּ ?πδָ synonym of ξָ ?μֹ ?εο locus pernoctandi, night lodging Isaiah 10:29, is used Isaiah 24:20, for the watchman’s sleeping rug, that swings to and for, having been hung up and spread out.——ξִ ?χְ ?ωָׁ ?δ, from χִ ?ωֻׁ ?ΰ cucumis, “field of cucumbers,” found also only Jeremiah 10:5.
Isaiah 1:9. The expression δεֹ ?ϊִ ?ιψωָׂ ?ψִ ?ιγ as to its meaning, is borrowed from the usus loquendi of the Pentateuch and Joshua. Only there it always reads, δִ ?ωְׁ ?ΰִ ?ιψωָׂ ?ψִ ?ιγ, Numbers 21:35; Deuteronomy 2:34; Deuteronomy 3:3; Joshua 8:22; Joshua 10:28 sq.—Jeremiah 44:7 reversed δεֹ ?ϊִ ?ιψωְׁ ?ΰֵ ?ψִ ?ιϊ.
AND 1. The prophet first introduces Jehovah Himself speaking, (Isaiah 1:2-3). He calls heaven and earth to witness in order to enhance His lament over the people Israel. For His beneficence the Lord had only a harvest of disobedience, (Isaiah 1:2). The ox and ass are attached to their lord. Israel is not, (Isaiah 1:3).
Therefore the prophet pronounces a war against the people that had forsaken the best and the greatest Lord, the Holy One of Israel, (Isaiah 1:4). Had the Lord been wanting in discipline? No. He had chastised the people so much, that for the future He hopes for nothing more from that. Israel is (inwardly, morally) incurably sick, vers. (5, 6). While outwardly (from the chastisement) it is reduced to a minimum, (Isaiah 1:7-8).
Thus far, (directly and indirectly) the address of Jehovah. In the last verse, (9), the prophet himself confirms the fact, that still a little remnant exists on which to build the hope of a better future.
2. Hear heaven—do not consider it, Isaiah 1:2-3. When the Lord of the world speaks, the world must hear in silence. Comp. Deuteronomy 32:1; Psalms 50:1; Psalms 50:4; Micah 1:2; Micah 6:1-2. But here, as elsewhere, (Deuteronomy 4:26; Deuteronomy 30:19; Deuteronomy 31:28; Psalms 1:4) the world is not invoked as simply an audience, but as a witness, before whom the Lord would make good His claim of right.
For it concerns a matter of universal interest. The world must react with Jehovah against Israel’s infraction of law, that the ξεֹ ?ρְ ?γֵ ?ιΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ, foundations of the earth, Psalms 82:5, may not totter. At the same time one must assent to the remark of Delitzsch: “heaven and earth were present and participants when Jehovah gave His people the law (comp. Deuteronomy 4:36, and the places cited above)—so then must they hear and witness what Jehovah, their Creator and Israel’s God, has to say and complain of,” [after seven centuries.—M. W. J.]
As Isaiah begins his book of prophecy with almost the words of Deu 32:1, he indicates that he had that prophetic song before his eyes, which, with Delitzsch, may be called, “the compendious outline and the common key to all prophecy.” He does not indeed quote verbatim, for the predicates δֶ ? ?ֽ ?ΰְֶ ?ζִ ?ιο and ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ς are transposed (comp., too, Isaiah 28:23; Isaiah 32:9). But the thought is the same. The same is true in regard to the causal phrase, λִּ ?ιιΧγִ ?αֵּ ?ψ. In Deut. it reads: δַ ?ΰֲ ?ζִ ?ιπεּ δַ ?ωָּׁ ?ξַ ?ιִ ?νεַ ?ΰֲ ?γַ ?αֵּ ?ψָ ?δεְ ?ϊִ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?ςδָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υΰִ ?ξְ ?ψֵ ?ιτִ ?ι. What Isaiah assigns as the reason, is in Deut. designated as object and effect. The difference is substantially a formal one.
Jehovah is indeed Father of all men and all creatures. He is even called (Numbers 16:22; Numbers 27:16) “God of the spirits of all flesh;” and Psalms 145:15 sq.—comp. Psalms 104:27 sqq.—we read that the eyes of all wait on the Lord, and that He fills everything that lives with satisfaction (comp. Romans 3:29; Romans 9:24 sqq.; Isaiah 10:12 sqq.). But among the many children that He has, there is one race that He has not only brought up to maturity, but has elevated to high honor. The Lord did not suffer all peoples to attain the grown-up state; or rather, not all sons of the original Father, became the fathers of nations.
But to Abraham precisely this was granted as the first promise: “I will make of thee a great nation,” Genesis 12:2; and, “Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt, unto the great river, the river Euphrates,” Genesis 15:18. And this promise was fulfilled. Abraham’s seed became a great and numerous people. But this people also were the recipients of high honor. For it is the holy nation, Deuteronomy 7:6, to whom the Lord drew near and revealed Himself in an especial manner, Deuteronomy 4:6 sqq.; 32 sq.; Psalms 147:19 sq. It is therefore the peculiar people (ςָ ?νρְ ?βֻ ?μָּ ?δ, Deuteronomy 7:6; Deuteronomy 14:2) through whom the blessing of Jehovah shall come on all nations (Genesis 12:2 sq.; Isaiah 22:18; Jeremiah 4:2).
And in consequence of all this, it is called “high above all nations,” Deuteronomy 26:19; Deuteronomy 28:1; comp. 2 Samuel 7:23. The time of David and Solomon, and Uzziah’s and Jotham’s time, the echo of the former, are to be regarded as forerunner and type of these promises. And they have rebelled against me.—According to well-known Hebrew usage, what in substance stands related as opposite is designated as equivalent in form. τָ ?ωַׁ ?ς is a current word in Isaiah 1:28; Isaiah 43:27; Isaiah 46:8; Isaiah 59:13, etc. Expositors inquire whether only idolatry is meant, or also every kind of transgression. But we can’t see why every thing should not be meant that could be called opposition to the Lord; or rather, why every transgression should not be regarded as idolatry. [They have broken away from me.—M. W.
J.] The ox knoweth his owner.—An ox knoweth his owner, any ox. The words explain the rebelling, Isaiah 1:2, by a rhetorical contrast that sets this in clearer light. The unthinking brutes, even those of lowest degree, as the ox and ass, still know their masters that feed them, and the crib out of which they eat, and acquire a certain attachment for master and crib, so that they do not voluntarily forsake them.
3. Ah, sinful nation—besieged city.Isaiah 1:4-8. Jehovah’s benefactions have not sufficed to awaken in Israel the feeling of grateful attachment. On the contrary this nation forsakes its God, rejects Him, and sinks back into the darkness of heathendom, out of which He had rescued them. The three verbs in Isaiah 1:4 b express the positive consequences of the negative “doth not know,” Isaiah 1:3; and Isaiah 1:3-4 together contain the more particular signification of “rebelled against me,” Isaiah 1:2. Thus a climax occurs in Isaiah 1:2-4.
The outward construction of the language also corresponds to this. Isaiah 1:2-3 consist of four members, and Isaiah 1:4 of seven, of which the first begins with an impressive assurance. But in the first four members of Isa 1:4 the reason is given why Israel became untrue to its God. The reason is a subjective one. Israel itself is good for nothing—it is a bad tree with bad fruit. The meaning heathen nation need not be pressed, and so much the less, seeing the singular is often used for Israel without any secondary idea of reproach (Exodus 19:6; Joshua 3:17, etc.), and also parallel with ςַ ?ν.
We have translated it “Woe world” in order to re-echo the consonance of the original as nearly as possible. It has been justly remarked besides that Israel is called here βεֹ ?ιηֹ ?θֵ ?ΰ, “sinful nation,” in contrast with βεֹ ?ιχָ ?λεֹ ?ωׁ, “holy nation,” which it ought to be according to Exodus 19:6; Deuteronomy 7:6; Deuteronomy 14:2; Deuteronomy 14:21; and ςַ ?νλֶּ ?αֶ ?γςָ ?εֹ ?κ in contrast with ςַ ?νπְ ?ωֻׂ ?ΰςָ ?εζ, which it is called Isaiah 33:24. Israel is called moreover “a seed of evil doers,” though it ought to be “a holy seed” (Isaiah 6:13; Ezra 9:2). Many expositors (e. g., Drechsler) scruple to render these words as in the Genitive relation, because then the ancestors themselves would be called reprobates. They therefore take ξψςιν as in apposition with ζψς. But, apart from the fact that then it must rather read ζָּ ?ψςξֵ ?ψֵ ?ςַ, as in Isaiah 57:3, ζֶ ?ψַ ?ςξְ ?πָ ?ΰֵ ?σ, that scruple is entirely groundless.
For ζֶ ?ψַ ?ςξְ ?ψֵ ?ςִ ?ιν is not only a posterity from reprobates, but also a posterity that consists of reprobates, as Isaiah 65:23, ζֶ ?ψַ ?ςαְּ ?ψεּ ?λֵ ?ιιΧ, means, not the descendants of blessed ones, but those themselves blessed, and like the expressions, αְּ ?πֵ ?ιπָ ?αָ ?μαְּ ?πֵ ?ιφֹ ?ΰο ,αְּ ?πֵ ?ιδַ ?πְּ ?αִ ?ιΰִ ?ιν ,αּ ?πֵ ?ιαְ ?μִ ?ιַּ ?ςַ ?μ, etc., do not mean the sons of fools, of worthless fellows, of prophets, of sheep, but sons that are themselves fools, worthless, prophets, sheep. But as the idea ζֶ ?ψַ ?ς points to the essential identity in fruit and seed, and to the former being conditioned by the latter, so one must think, not of the original ancestors of the nation, but rather of the generation immediately preceding, chiefly, however, of an ideal ancestry, a notion that even underlies the expression γεννήματαἐχιδνῶν, “generation of vipers,” Matthew 3:7. ζψςξψςιν is therefore a genitive relation, in which the ideas of causality and of the attribute are combined. The expression is found again Isaiah 14:20.—Finally, the Israelites are called αָּ ?πִ ?ινξψςιν, “children that are corrupters,” although, according to Isaiah 1:2, they are children whom the Lord has brought up and made high; for, although any one may be called αֵּ ?οξַ ?ωְׁ ?ηִ ?ιϊ, who as a man (not as a son) is ξַ ?ωְׁ ?ηιϊ, all reference must not be denied to Isaiah 1:2, and all the places that express Israel’s filial relation to Jehovah, e. g.Deuteronomy 14:1.
In three phrases, now, the bad fruits are declared that the bad tree has borne. They have (negative) forsaken Jehovah, they have (positive) rejected with scorn (Isaiah 5:24; Isaiah 52:5; Isaiah 60:14), the Holy One of Israel (an expression peculiarly Isaiah’s, that occurs fourteen times in the first part, and fifteen times in the second, and in other parts of the Old Testament only six times), and they have turned themselves backwards. This turning backwards can only mean the turning to idols. For the Lord had turned Israel from idols to Himself, comp. Joshua 24:2; Joshua 24:14. If the nation then turned their backs to Him, it was precisely that they might return to their idols. This is confirmed by Ezekiel 14:5, the only place beside the present in which the expression occurs.
Isaiah 1:5-6 seem to respond to an objection. For after the description in Isaiah 1:3-4, of the nation’s deep depravity, the prophet proceeds to portray the impending chastisement of it, Isaiah 1:7. But before he does so, he removes an objection that might be raised from the stand-point of forbearing love, viz. had sufficient discipline been exercised on Israel? if not, might not the renewed application of it ward off the judgment? The inquiry is negatived. For the uselessness of the smiting has long been proved by the ever-repeated backsliding of the nation. It is seen that we render the beginning of Isa 1:5 : “To what purpose shall one smite you still more?” For there are three expositions of these words.
The first is: “On what part of the body shall one still smite you?” (thus Jerome, Saada,Gesenius, Rosenmueller, Umbreit, Knobel and others [J. A. Alexander, Barnes].
This rests chiefly on what follows, where the body is described as beaten all over. However, four things are to be objected to this view: a) it could not then read ςַ ?μΞξֶ ?δ, but ΰֵ ?ιζֶ ?δδֻ ?λּ ?εּ ςεֹ ?γ, or the like. For ξָ ?δ is purely the general, abstract “what?” never the partitive, distinguishing one part from another: “which?” Job 38:6 cannot be appealed to. For the meaning of that place is not: On which foundations do the pillars of the earth rest?” But: do they rest at all on anything? b) Were the rendering: “where shall we smite?” correct, then the intermediate phrase, ϊּ ?εֹ ?ρִ ?ιτεּ ρָ ?ψָ ?δ, were out of place. For then one would right off look for the answer: “nowhere, for all is beaten to pieces.” The insertion of those words in this form plainly indicate that they themselves contain the answer to the inquiry, ςμΞξδεβεΧ, and that what follows is only to be viewed as the nearer explanation of this reply. It would be very different if the words were in apposition with the subject of ϊֻּ ?λּ ?εּ. c) It is remarked by Luzzatto (see in Delitzsch) that the fact that the body was beaten all over would not hinder its being smitten more d) The phrase, Isaiah 1:6 b, μΰζψεּ. etc., “they have not been closed,” shows that not the being wounded itself was the matter of chief moment, but the being wounded without application of curatives.
The latter, however, as little hinders the smiting as the binding up and healing would provoke it. If ςμΞξδ = “where?” then the whole phrase, Isaiah 1:6 b, would be superfluous.—A second exposition (Delitzsch) takes ςμΞξδ = μָ ?ξָ ?δ, and ϊֻּ ?λּ ?εּ = ye want to be smitten. Then the remote thought would be: “That were an insane delight in self-destruction.” But the “that were” must not be adopted as the underlying thought, but: “that is indeed delight in self-destruction.” For: “that were” would involve the thought that this delight is not presupposed, consequently there can be no question about a wanting to be smitten. But if we supply “that is,” etc., that would impute too much to the simple Imperfect. The idea of wanting it must then be more strongly indicated, say by ηָ ?τֵ ?υ, or the like.—According to the third rendering, which seems to me the correct one. ςμΞξδ means “to what purpose?” Comp. Numbers 22:32; Psalms 10:13; Jeremiah 16:10.
The imperfect Passive is then simply a briefer expression for the Active: why should I, or should one smite you more? with which at least a suffix were needed. ϊּ ?εֹ ?ρִ ?ιτεּ ρָ ?ψָ ?δ need not then be taken as a dependent adverbial phrase; as if, “in that ye add revolt,” which involves a certain grammatical harshness, that might be easily avoided by a participial construction. But ϊεΧρָ ?ψָ ?δ is principal phrase and reply to the inquiry: to what purpose shall one smite you more?
However, the following words give the reason for the saying. That is: Israel adds revolt to revolt, because it is thoroughly sick, and does not even use curatives for its sickness. We therefore construe the words λָּ ?μΞψֹ ?ΰωׁ to αַּ ?ωָּׁ ?ξֶ ?ο not as describing a condition resulting from the previous smiting, much as this seems to answer the inquiry, ςμΞξδεβε, but as a figurative expression for the moral habit of the nation. λָּ ?μΞψֹ ?ΰωׁ ,λָּ ?μΞμֵ ?αָ ?α, especially seem to favor this view. This does not mean “the whole head, the whole heart,” but “every head, every heart.” If it read λָּ ?μΞδָ ?ψֹ ?ΰωׁ εβει, the meaning might easily enough be that head and heart were already so sore and sick that no spot remained for a blow. But every head, every heart only expresses that no head, no heart remained intact.
The context closely considered forbids our understanding by head and heart “all that exercise indispensable functions in spiritual and temporal offices” (Drechsler). For by Isaiah 1:6 it plainly appears that not only the heads, but all individuals of the nation, are described as seriously sick. Head and heart are rather the central and dominant organs in the life of every single person, whereas Isaiah 1:6 speaks also of the structure of the outward manifestation of the life. From a comparison of μααγει with Isaiah 1:6, it seems to me that by ηֳ ?μִ ?ι not an outward wounding of the head is meant, but an internal disorder (comp. 2 Kings 4:19).—From the sole of the foot,etc. Isaiah 1:6. As has been remarked, these words describe the moral condition as to its outward manifestation, as Isaiah 1:5 b described its inward form. We must not press too far the figurative language of the prophet in regard to this inward and outward disorder, and especially the wounds of Isa 1:6 must not be regarded as presenting something additional.
The three substantives ηַ ?αּ ?εּ ?ψָ ?δ ,τֶּ ?φַ ?ς and ξַ ?λָּ ?δθΧ are followed by three corresponding verbs, and one is tempted to construe them as if those occupying the same relative position belonged to each other. But such strict parallelism cannot be carried out. It is rather to be said that each of the three sorts of wounds referred to requires all the three means of healing. Each wound must be pressed together, and treated with healing stuffs. The former process is two-fold: first it is done by the hand in order to cleanse the wound from blood and matter, and then by the bandage, that prevents further bleeding and promotes the growing together of the several parts. Thirdly, mollifying, healing oil (see Luke 10:34; Herzog’s R.
Encyc. X., p. 548) must be superadded as organic means of cure.
The words of Isa 1:6 b moreover contain another proof for the assertion that from λָ ?μΞψֹ ?ΰωׁ, “every head,” on, only the moral habit of the nation is described. For is not the want of all bodily therapeutics a figure for the want of the spiritual; i. e. repentance? Not only is Israel inwardly sick, but also in its outward life it presents the picture of a torn and distracted existence without one trace of discipline or effort at improvement. If the chief thought of Isa 1:5-6, were that Israel cannot be smitten any more because it is beaten all to pieces, then, as already remarked, the phrase μֹ ?ΰΞζֹ ?ψεּ εβεΧ, “not closed up,” would be quite without meaning. For may a bandaged-up person be sooner smitten than one not bound up? But this phrase becomes very significant if we regard the words: “every head,” etc., as portraying the moral condition of things. For it is most important in regard to a man’s moral state whether the proper curatives for the moral disorder are used or not.
Your land, etc. The outward state of the nation answers to the moral state. The nation had already begun to reap the fruits of their revolt. The country is desolate; only the metropolis still remains intact, yet isolated in the midst of a land that has been made a desert. Therefore it may be said that the train of thought that began with Isaiah 1:5 ends with Isaiah 1:8. The Lord declares, Isaiah 1:5, that for the present He will smite Israel no more.
For there is no use. This is because Israel is still sick inside and out, spite of having suffered chastisement almost to annihilation. It seems to me therefore that Isaiah 1:7-8 stand in contrastive relation to the two preceding, although this contrast is indicated by no particle. Israel is morally sick, the country is turned into a desert. Had things taken a normal course, then the country had been desolated, but Israel would have been in health. Then Israel had received instruction, Proverbs 8:10; Proverbs 19:20.
But now that the country is waste, and Israel still sick, one sees that whipping is of no use. Comp. Jeremiah 2:30; Jeremiah 5:3; Isaiah 9:13; Isaiah 42:25. Thus I construe Isaiah 1:7-8, not as a mere change from figurative language (Isaiah 1:5-6) to literal, because, as was shown, both Isaiah 1:5 b and 6b contain thoughts that do not answer to purely outward circumstances. Moreover, according to our explanation, it is clear that Isaiah 1:7 sqq. does not speak of future, but of present affairs. These verses do not contain threats of judgment, but a portrait of judgment already accomplished.
If it were otherwise, then surely the threatenings of judgment would not stop outside of the gates of the metropolis, which yet was crater and fountain of all the revolt. This is not opposed by Jeremiah 4:27; Jeremiah 5:10; Jeremiah 5:18 : “Yet will I not make a full end,” which some adduce against our view. For threats of Judgment only for the country, but that spare the capital, are not to be found in any prophet.—The words: “your land waste,” etc., are quoted from Leviticus 26:33, where it is said: “Your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste.”
Your ground before, etc. Here, too, imprecations from the Law are in the mind of the prophet, and particularly Deuteronomy 28:33 : “The fruit of thy land, and all thy labors, shall a nation which thou knowest not, eat up.” Comp., too, 1:51; Lev. 21:16, 32. From Deuteronomy 28:33; Deuteronomy 28:51, it is seen what is meant by ζָ ?ψ. It is one that Israel does not know, and whose language is not understood. That the word “stranger” includes also the idea of “enemy,” is manifest from the parallel passages in Leviticus 26:16; Leviticus 26:32, where for ζָ ?ψִ ?ιν we have ζָ ?ψ .ΰֹ ?ιִ ?αְ ?ιν occurs Isaiah 17:10; Isaiah 25:2; Isaiah 25:5; Isaiah 28:21; Isaiah 29:5; Isaiah 43:12; Isaiah 61:5. The participle ΰֹ ?λְ ?μִ ?ιν confirms our view that the prophet speaks of present and still continuing circumstances.
The metonymy (the enemies eat the land) is as in Isaiah 36:16; Genesis 3:17, etc.—μְ ?πֶ ?βְ ?γְּ ?λֶ ?ν, according to the accents and the sense, relates to what follows. Before your eyes, without your being able to hinder them, the enemies devour your land.
In our passage it is evident the prophet would compare the destruction of the land of which he speaks to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. He calls the Jewish country a second destroyed Sodom, only with the difference that that was a destruction of God, this of strangers. The question whether we have here a genitive of the subject or of the object thus settles itself. It is the genitive of the subject. For then God was the destroyer; here it is the strangers. If ζָ ?ψִ ?ιν, “strangers,” be taken as object, it will not suit the context.
For immediately before the strangers were named as destroyers. How shall they suddenly be named the destroyed?—From the connection it appears that the “daughter of Zion” means Jerusalem. Zion is originally the mountain, then the castle, then the quarter built about it (2 Samuel 5:6-9; 1 Kings 8:1); then in an extended sense the city without the inhabitants (Lamentations 2:8) or the inhabitants without the city (Micah 4:10), or as both together, as in our passage.
Jerusalem with its inhabitants lying isolated in the midst of a desolated country is now compared to: a) a booth in a vineyard; b) to a hanging mat [hammock] in a cucumber field, which like the booth of the vineyard-keeper, is a lonely and scanty dwelling-place for men; c) to a besieged city. But why is Jerusalem only compared to a beleagured city? After all that Isaiah 1:7-8 say of it, is it not such itself? First of all we must investigate the meaning of πְ ?φεּ ?ψָ ?δ. The verb πָ ?φַ ?ψ means primarily observare, which can be said of commandments, Psalms 78:7, and of covenants, Deuteronomy 33:9, as well as of the overseeing of a protector or keeper, Isaiah 27:3; 2 Kings 17:9, and of the attention of a besieger, Jeremiah 4:16; comp. 2 Samuel 11:16; Jeremiah 5:6. An ςִ ?ιψπְ ?φεּ ?ψָ ?δ is therefore either a watched or a beleaguered city.
But the first does not suit the connection. The latter is equally unsuitable if Jerusalem at the time of writing was actually besieged. But Isaiah 1:7 speaks only of the desolating of the country. That Jerusalem itself was besieged or blockaded is not said directly. At the moment of saying this, therefore, the position of Jerusalem seems to have been that the enemy enclosed the city, not yet in its immediate neighborhood, but still so as to restrict all intercourse with it, so that it lay there isolated like a blockaded town No one ventured out or in, for the enemy was near, though his forces were not seen encamped around the walls of the city. The other renderings: “as a rescued city” (Gesenius,in loc.;Maurer,etc.), “as a devastated city” (Rabbins, Vulg., Luther), “as a watch tower” (Hitzig, Tingstad, Gesenius in his Thesaurus, p. 908), etc., which are to be found in Rosenmueller, either conflict with the requirements of the language or the context.
4. Had not—we were like, Isaiah 1:9. We must regard it, not as accidental, but as an evidence of the artistic design of this address, that in Isaiah 1:2-3, Jehovah Himself speaks, in Isaiah 1:4-8 the prophet in the name of Jehovah, and in Isaiah 1:9 the prophet in his own and the people’s name. It is therefore a climax descendens. The first word belongs to Jehovah the Lord. After that Jehovah’s prophet speaks in His name to the people.
Last of all the prophet, who is in a sense the mediator of the people, speaks in their name to Jehovah. In this scheme is prefigured in a certain degree the direction of all prophetic discourse. For it is either Jehovah speaking, directly or indirectly, or it is a speaking to Jehovah. But Isaiah 1:9 is joined by a double band to what precedes: by δεֹ ?ϊִ ?ιψ, “had left,” and by the comparison to Sodom and Gomorrah. As to the former, it is recognized that something remains in Israel, επεϊψδ, Isaiah 1:8, and that this remnant is owing to the grace of Jehovah. But so the clear consciousness is expressed, that but for the grace of God, the resemblance to Sodom and Gomorrah, which in Isaiah 1:7 was only slightly intimated, would have been a notorious one.
This is, on the one hand, an humble confession, for this comparison is not honorable for Israel; but on the other hand there is the opposite thought that underlies the hypothetic reflection: “he has, however, left something remaining; therefore we are still not like Sodom and Gomorrah;” and that forms a comforting germ of hope for the future.
The expression ιδεδφαΰεϊ, Jehovah Sabaoth, is not to be found in the Pentateuch, nor in Josh., Jud., Ezek., Joel, Obad., Jonah. In Exodus 12:41λָּ ?μΞφִ ?αְ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊι is said of the Israelites. If one may regard the completest form as the original one, then we must designate Hosea as the originator of the expression. For in Hosea 12:6 we find εַ ?ιηεֹ ?δΰֱ ?μֹ ?δֵ ?ιδַ ?φְּ ?αָ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊιδְ ?εָֹ ?δζִ ?λְ ?ψεֹ; similarly Amos 3:13; Amos 6:14; Amos 9:5. Here it is seen that φְ ?αָ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ is still construed as appellative. They are not the φִ ?αְ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊιΧ, Exodus 12:41, but λֻ ?μΞφְ ?αָ ?ΰδַ ?ωָּׁ ?ξַ ?ιִ ?ν, Isaiah 34:4, whose relation to the stars may be debated.
Comp. Delitzsch,The Divine Name Jahve Zebaot, in der Zeitschrift f. d. ges. luth. Theologie u. Kirche 1874, Heft 2, p. 217.—But “Hosts” becomes gradually a proper name. It is so beyond doubt in God of Hosts, Psalms 59:6; Psalms 80:5, 8, 15, 20; Psalms 84:9, and Lord of Hosts, Isaiah 10:16. Probably it is to be so rendered in “Jehovah of Hosts,” which is very frequent in the first and second parts of Isaiah.
Also Jer, Zech., Mal., use it very often.—λִּ ?ξְ ?ςַ ?θ is not added to the verb here adverbially with the meaning “almost,” but united to it substantively, and as in 2 Chronicles 12:7, is object (as apposition with the object). In Proverbs 10:20; Psalms 105:12, it is similarly a predicate. In respect to its sense, it is a dimished ξςֲ ?θ, i. e. not paulum, but quasi paulum. I do not think with Delitzsch that referring to Psalms 81:14 sq.; Job 32:22, it may be construed with what follows. For with the supposition that is expressed in the first clause of the verse, they had been, not almost, but altogether a Sodom and Gomorrah. Moreover, it is affecting to observe how the man penetrates through the prophet.
He began as the mouth of God, that does not distinguish himself from God; he proceeds as servant of God, that clearly distinguishes himself from God; he concludes as citizen of Jerusalem, that comprehends himself with the men against whom he directs his words of threatening.
[Isaiah 1:7. λξδτλϊζΧ, like the overthrow of strangers, J. A. Alexander, “i. e. as foreign foes are wont to waste a country in which they have no interest, and for which they have no pity.” Barnes, similarly.
Isaiah 1:9. “The idea of a desolation almost total is expressed in other words, and with an intimation that the narrow escape was owing to God’s favor for the remnant according to the election of grace, who still existed in the Jewish Church. That the verse has reference to quality, as well as quantity, is evident from Romans 9:29, where Paul makes use of it, not as an illustration, but as an argument to show that mere connection with the Church could not save men from the wrath of God. The citation would have been irrelevant if this phrase denoted merely a small number of survivors, and not a minority of true believers in the midst of the prevailing unbelief.” J. A. Alexander].
3.THE MEANS FOR A BETTER FUTURE
Isaiah 1:10-2010 Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom;
Give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.
11 To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord:I am full of the burnt-offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts;
And I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or ofhe goats.
12 When ye cometo appear before me,
Who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts?
13 Bring no more vain oblations;
Incense is an abomination unto me;
The new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with;It Isaiah 18 iniquity, even the solemn meeting.
14 Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth:
They are a trouble unto me;
I am weary to bear them.15 And when ye spread forth your hands,
I will hide mine eyes from you:
Yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear:
Your hands are full of blood.
16 Wash you, make you clean;
Put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes:
17 Cease to do evil; learn to do well;
Seek judgment, relieve the oppressed,
Judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.
18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord:Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow;
Though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
19 If ye be willing and obedient,
Ye shall eat the good of the land:
20 But if ye refuse and rebel,
Ye shall be devoured with the sword:
For the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.TEXTUAL AND Isa_1:10. χָ ?φִ ?ιο is found in Isa. also; Isaiah 3:6-7; Isaiah 22:3.
Isaiah 1:12. In regard to the construction λιϊαΰεμψΰεϊτπι, it is to be noticed especially that we have here an old, solemn form of expression. It is found first, Exodus 23:17, where it is said: ιֵ ?ψָ ?ΰֶ ?δλָּ ?μΞζְ ?λεּ ?ψְ ?κָ ΰֶ ?μΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ιδָ ?ΰָ ?γֹ ?ο—”All thy males shall appear before the Lord;” also Psalms 84:8. This is the customary, and besides very frequent construction of the Niphal πִ ?ψְ ?ΰָ ?δ, Genesis 12:7; Genesis 35:1; Exodus 3:16, etc. But then the form πִ ?ψְ ?ΰָ ?δΰֶ ?ϊΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ιιΧ is found in five places: Exodus 34:23 sq.; Deuteronomy 16:16; Deuteronomy 31:11; 1 Samuel 1:22. Here the question arises, whether ΰֵ ?ϊ is nota accusatavi, or preposition with the meaning “cum, coram;” or finally, whether the accusative, as in ηֶ ?ψֶ ?αϊְּ ?ΰֻ ?λְּ ?μεּ: “Ye shall be devoured by the sword,” Isaiah 1:20, is to be taken in an instrumental sense, as if it ought to be rendered: “was seen of God’s face” (so Ewald, Gram. § 279, c).
This last rendering commends itself the least. For in ηψαϊΰλμε, the ηψα is conceived of as adverbial. It is as one would say in Latin: gladiatim devorabimim, “Ye shall be sword-fashion devoured.” It is essential to this construction that the substantive so used be without suffix, or a genitive following. In μֵ ?ψָ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊτָּ ?πַ ?ι or πִ ?ψְ ?ΰָ ?δΰֶ ?ϊΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ιιΧ, however, this adverbial use is not admissible. It is to be objected against the first rendering that ΰֵ ?ϊ always marks distinctly the definite object, and never is used after the question “where?” On the other hand it is admitted that ΰֶ ?ϊΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ι means coram facie, e. g. Genesis 27:30 : ιָ ?φָ ?ΰιַ ?ςֲ ?χֹ ?αξֵ ?ΰֵ ?ϊτְּ ?πֵ ?ιιִ ?φְ ?ηַ ?χ.
Comp. 2 Kings 16:14 : Genesis 19:13. “The cry of them is waxen great, ΰֶ ?ϊΞ ?τְּ ?πֵ ?ιιΧ before the face of the Lord.” Comp. 1 Samuel 22:4; Genesis 33:18. According to that we must translate the expression in question: “appear before the presence of Jehovah.” It may be remarked, in passing, that Deuteronomy 16:16, μֹ ?ΰιֵ ?ψָ ?ΰֶ ?δΰֶ ?ϊΞτְּ ?πִ ?ιιΧψֵ ?ιχָ ?ν, is to be translated; “the face of the Jehovah is not seen empty,” i. e. without the presentation of a gift: where the passive, according to well-known usus loquendi, is construed as active. This latter form of expression is, as to sense, like those found Exodus 23:15; Exodus 34:20,—Lastly, in two places, viz. Psalms 42:3 and in our text πִ ?ψְ ?ΰָ ?δ with τְּ ?πֵ ?ιιΧ is found without ΰֵ ?ϊ. In both places αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ stands before the Niphal of ψָ ?ΰָ ?δ. Here, without doubt, τְּ ?πֵ ?ιιΧ is the accusativus localis.
In itself, this accusative can depend on αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ as well as on the Niphal πִ ?ψְ ?ΰָ ?δ. However, the original sense of the formula favors decidedly the last supposition. Thus the expression, as found in our text and in Isaiah 42:3, is to be taken as a modification of the older formula, and as having the same meaning. τָּ ?βַ ?ι therefore is here accusativus localis in the same sense as ΰֶ ?ϊΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ιιΧ in the places cited above.—αֵּ ?χִּ ?ωׁ ξִ ?ιַּ ?γ, Genesis 31:39; Genesis 43:9; 1 Samuel 20:16.—(ψְ ?ξֹ ?νηΧ is in restrictive apposition with ζֹ ?ΰϊ. Isaiah uses ψָ ?ξַ ?ν pretty often: Isaiah 16:4; Isaiah 26:6; Isaiah 28:3; Isaiah 41:25; Isaiah 63:3. Moreover, the substantive ξִ ?ψְ ?ξָ ?ν is used by him relatively oftener: Isaiah 5:5; Isaiah 7:25; Isaiah 10:6; Isaiah 28:18.
Isaiah 1:13. It is debated whether the following χְ ?θֹ ?ψֶ ?ϊ, incense, is to be taken as stat. absol. as distinct from ξִ ?πְ ?ηָ ?δ, or as stat. construct., and as designating that which the ξִ ?πְ ?ηַ ?ϊΞωָׁ ?εְ ?ΰ is to Jehovah (“it is abominable incense to me”). Grammatically both renderings are admissible. It is not decisive for the latter rendering that the Masorets have pointed χְ ?θֹ֧ ?ψֶ ?ϊ with the conjunctive Darga. It seems to me important to our inquiry, that with the exception of Psa 66:15 (which confessedly dates after the exile), neither burnt-offerings nor meat-offerings are ever called χְ ?θֹ ?ψֶ ?ϊ, although δִ ?χְ ?θִ ?ιψ is the solemn word employed for the consumption of both. Rather it is always said, that the sacrifice shall be ψֵ ?ιηַ πִ ?ιηֹ ?ηַ, “a sweet savor” to the Lord.
I believe, therefore, that the prophet must have written ψֵ ?ιηַ ϊּ ?εֹ ?ςֵ ?αָ ?δ had he wished to express what the defenders of the second rendering take the words to mean.—The combination of ηֹ ?γֶ ?ωׁ and ωַׁ ?αָּ ?ϊ, beside the text, is to be found also 2 Kings 4:23; Hosea 2:13.—The expression χְ ?ψֹ ?ΰξִ ?χְ ?ψָ ?ΰ is only found here. Everywhere else we read: ξִ ?χְ ?ψָ ?ΰχֹ ?γֶ ?ωׁ, “a holy convocation,” Exodus 12:16; Leviticus 23:3 sqq.; Numbers 28:18 sq.; Isaiah 29:1 sqq. As regards the meaning of the phrase, it is not indictio sancti, i. e. the publication of a feast, but convocatio, the assembling of the nation to the feast. For only on the principal feast-days was the nation obliged to appear in the sanctuary, (comp. the citations immediately above, and Oehler in Herzog’s R. Encycl. IV., p. 385).
The three substantives stand before as casus absoluti, and represent a premise, to which μֹ ?ΰΰεּ ?λַ ?μεβεΧ forms the conclusion: as for new moon, Sabbath, solemn assembly, I can’t bear them, etc. The word ςֲ ?φָ ?ψָ ?δ is found beside only in 2 Kings 10:20 and Joe 1:14. In the Pentateuch only the form ςֲ ?φֶ ?ψֶ ?ϊ (stat. absol. and constr.) is used: Leviticus 23:36; Numbers 29:35; Deuteronomy 16:8. It is absolutely parallel with ξִ ?χְ ?ψָ ?ΰχֹ ?γֶ ?ω, “holy convocation;” comp. 2 Chronicles 7:5; Nehemiah 8:18; Amos 5:21. The fundamental idea of ςָ ?φַ ?ψ is cogere, conciere, continere, to draw together, to keep together. The noun, therefore, denotes coactio, concio.
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
THE SECOND PORTALIsaiah 2-5Chapters 2–5 contain the second introduction, the second portal, so to speak, of the majestic cathedral of the prophecies of Isaiah. This portal is the greatest as regards the extent of it. It is meant to afford us a more exact insight into the contents, the power and the reach of Isaiah’s prophecies. The first introduction proceeds from the mournful condition of the present, speaks of the means of securing a better future, and closes with a grand survey of past, present and future, from which it appears that, for the believing part of the people, the end shall correspond to the beginning as its much more glorious antitype, whereas, for the unbelieving part, there is only the prospect of a wretched and total destruction. In that chapter, therefore, threatening constitutes the key-note, the promise appears, as it were an interlude. But that chap. 1 gives only brief outlines. Particularly the future is indicated only by a few, albeit significant words, Isaiah 2:26, 27.
The second introduction looks entirely away from the past. It treats only of future and present. It does this, however, in such a way that the Prophet, as it were, with arms reaching out far before him, holds, one after another, two lights out into the remotest future, that make it appear as a time of the greatest glory. These two prophetic lamps, however, must serve at the same time to show in so much the more glaring light the distress and also the nothingness of that present time that precedes that period of glory. Involuntarily the eye turns backwards from it to the circumstances of the present, and these appear all the more gloomy because the eye has beheld before such bright light in the future. But just the inward nothingness and emptiness of the bad present is, in some sense, the first step to the revelation of the divine glory.
For the bad bears, indeed, the judgment in itself. But this ideal judgment must become real, and then is the moment come wherein the majesty of the only true God, hitherto hidden and ignored, bursts forth in its full splendor
We must remark in advance that this second introduction is built upon the fundamental number two. It divides into two principal parts. At the head of each of these parts stands a prophetic announcement of glorious contents relating to final events of history, the first of which portrays more the future, outward glory, the second more the inward glory of Israel, that which lies at the base of the first, and is identical with holiness. These two announcements extend far into the future to the very end of history.
Each of these lamps is followed by a look at the present, taking this expression in a relative sense, so that by it everything is understood that precedes the future events lighted up by the two lamps. Each of these two looks at the present divides again into two parts that differ from one another in their structure. The first look resolves itself into a general (Isaiah 2:5-11) and a particular part (Isaiah 2:12 to Isaiah 4:1); the last again falls into two subdivisions, of which the first portrays the judgment in the extra-human sphere, the second that in the human sphere. The judgment in the extra-human sphere, then again, subdivides into two halves, of which the first embraces all that is beneath mankind (Isaiah 2:12-17), the second all that is above mankind, i. e., idols (Isaiah 2:18-21). The judgment of things belonging to the human sphere also subdivides into two halves, the first of which (Isaiah 2:22 to Isaiah 3:15) has men for its subject, the second (Isaiah 3:16 to Isaiah 4:1) the women. The second lamp (Isaiah 4:2-6) has an attendant section (5) that again is composed of two members.
The first is a parable (Isaiah 5:1-7) which, though as to form it departs surprisingly from Isaiah 4:2-6, still in sense joins closely on to it. For as Isaiah 4:2-6 treats of the glorious rod, and the glorious fruit of the future, Isaiah 5:1 sqq. treats of the mournful fruits of the present. The second part specifies more particularly the bad fruits of the present and their consequences in a sixfold woe, which again subdivides into two chief parts. The first two woes, namely, evidently refer back to the first principal part of the whole discourse (Isaiah 2:2 to Isaiah 4:1) and contain relatively to it an appropriate conclusion; whereas the last four woes refer more to the second principal part of the discourse (4, 5) and contain the definitive chief conclusion of the discourse.
In regard to the date of the composition of this discourse, I must first of all warn against the petty and superficial way of viewing this thing, that ignores the grand, comprehensive glance of prophecy, and restricts to a special point of time what concerns the whole and the general. Thus I challenge the right of exegesis altogether to draw conclusions regarding the date of composition from single exhortations, warnings, threatenings or promises, if those are not quite decidedly of a specific nature. If, for example, the Prophet speaks against idolatry, the injustice and oppressions of the great intemperance and licentiousness, one is not justified in concluding therefrom that he spoke these words under a godless prince, an Ahaz or Manasseh. He could have spoken them under an Uzziah or Hezekiah, for the prophet may have had in his mind the entire present, i. e., the whole time preceding the redemption that terminates history. It, on the other hand, the Prophet speaks of boy and woman government (Isaiah 3:4; Isaiah 3:12) that is not necessarily something general. That is not a standing and abiding characteristic of rebellious Israel, but an abnormity, that even in the times of deepest degradation does not always happen.
Where such a reference is made, one may reasonably infer that the Prophet has in mind quite special and actual circumstances of his own time. It may therefore be assumed with a degree of probability (for certainty is not to be thought of) that chap. iii. was composed under Ahaz. But I shall show hereafter that this chapter betrays the marks of another sort of origin in the form of its transitions and combinations: i. e., it gives evidence of being an older piece, already prepared, that is only put in here as in a suitable place.
Now if we consider that our passage (ii.–v.) as second portal belongs to the introduction to the entire book, then we must say, the obvious date of its origin is that time when the Prophet compiled his book into a whole. He could then very well make use of older discourses already on hand for introduction, but on the whole, as introduction, as overture, as preface the passage presupposes the whole book. The comprehensive character of our passage, which surveys the entire present and the future into the remotest distance, has long been recognized, and with that it has been admitted that it has essentially and generally the same extension as the whole book, thus it possesses the qualities that belong to an introductory preface. With this correspond the chronological indications that appear in Isaiah 2:2-4, as related to Micah 3:12; comp. Jeremiah 26:18.
From Jeremiah 26:18 we receive the impression that Micah spoke the words Isaiah 3:12 (that are closely connected with Isaiah 4:1 sqq.), under Hezekiah. How could they previously be known to Isaiah? Therefore if Isaiah 2:2-4 presupposes the time of Hezekiah, then this agrees with our assumption that the chapters 2-5 only then originated as a whole, when the prophet compiled his whole book.
The structure of our passage is made clear by the following scheme.
Israel Of The Present Time In The Light Of Its Final GloryA. The Superscription, Isaiah 2:1.
B. The first prophetic lamp, which in the light of the divine eminence that shall finally appear makes known the things falsely eminent of the present time, Isaiah 2:1 to Isaiah 4:1.
1. The first prophetic lamp itself, Isaiah 2:2-4.
2. The falsely eminent things and their abasement in general, Isaiah 2:5-11.
a. The judgment against the things falsely eminent in the sub-human and superhuman sphere, Isaiah 2:12-21.
b. The judgment against the falsely eminent things in the human sphere, Isaiah 2:22 to Isaiah 4:1.
á. The judgment against godless men, Isaiah 2:22 to Isaiah 3:15.
â. The judgment against godless women, Isaiah 3:16 to Isaiah 4:1.
C. The second prophetic lamp which, in the light of the glorious divine fruit of the last time, makes known the bad fruits of the present, Isaiah 4:2 to Isaiah 5:30.
1. The second prophetic lamp itself, and the glorious divine fruit displayed by it, Isaiah 4:2-6.
2. The bad fruits of the present in the light of the glorious divine fruit of the final period, Isaiah 5:1-30.
a. The bad fruits of the present shown in the parable of the vineyard, Isaiah 5:1-7.
b. The bad fruits of the present and their consequences more nearly described in a sixfold woe, at the same time, double conclusion of the whole discourse, Isaiah 5:8-30.
ISRAEL OF THE PRESENT TIME IN THE LIGHT OF ITS FINAL GLORYA.—The Superscription Isaiah 2:11 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.
TEXTUAL AND The formula “the word which saw,” is found only here. It does not occur again either in Isaiah or in any other prophet. The form of expression δγαψΰωׁ ?ψ, beside this place, is only found in Jeremiah, where, however, it is regularly followed by δָ ?ιָ ?δΰֶ ?μεβεΧ.—Concerning ηָ ?ζָ ?δ in this connection comp. Isaiah 1:1.
The expression “concerning Judah and Jerusalem” connects Isaiah 1:1 with Isaiah 2:1, because it occurs in no other superscription. The likeness that exists between Isaiah 1:1 and Isaiah 2:1 in reference to the first half, is completed by this similarity of sound in the second half, where we would not omit to point out a second time that the difference between Isaiah 2:1 and Isaiah 1:1 in expression quite corresponds to the difference of the position of either chapter. Now as the expression “concerning Judah and Jerusalem,” Isaiah 2:1, helps connect with Isaiah 1:1, so it does in like fashion with the following chapters ii.—v. For, as was remarked Isaiah 1:1, it is a fact not to be overlooked that the expression “Judah and Jerusalem” occurs relatively the oftenest in these chapters. It occurs Isaiah 3:1; Isaiah 3:8, and Isaiah 5:3, whereas in all the rest of the book of Isaiah, it occurs only three times, viz., Isaiah 22:21; Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 44:26.
B.—The first prophetic lamp, which in the light of the divine eminence that shall finally appear, makes known the things falsely eminent of the present time Isaiah 2:2 to Isaiah 4:11. The First Prophetic Lamp
Isaiah 2:2-42 And it shall come to pass in the last days,
That the mountain of the Lord’s house
Shall be established in the top of the mountains,
And shall be exalted above the hills;
And all nations shall flow unto it.
3 And many people shall go and say,
Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
And he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths:
For out of Zion shall go forth the law,
And the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
4 And he shall judge among the nations,
And shall rebuke many people:
And they shall beat their swords into plowshares,
And their spears into pruning hooks:
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war any more.
TEXTUAL AND It is now admitted by almost all expositors that this passage is borrowed from Micah. It is old orthodox opinion that the passage may be original as well with Isaiah as with Micah. This view occurs in Abarbanel, with the additional notion that the passage is indeed older in Isaiah, but taken from Isaiah, not by Micah himself, but that it was brought to him in the way of inspiration from the older prophet. (Micha visionem suam enarravit illis verbis, qu� tunc ex Jesaia ori ipsius erant indita). That the passage is original with Isaiah and borrowed from him by Micah is maintained by Calmet, Beckhaus (Integr. d. proph. Schr. d. Alten Bundes, 1798), Umbreit.
Some recent expositors (Koppe, Rosenmueller, Hitzig, Maurer. Ewald), are of the opinion that our passage is the expression of a third person, from whom Isa. and Micah have drawn in common. Hitzig and Ewald even indicate Joel as the third person, and Joel 4:10 as the source of our text. If there were an expression of essentially the same import in any older prophet, this hypothesis might have some ground. But such a passage is not to be found. Joel 4:10 contains in fact precisely the opposite.
For there Israel is summoned to forge its mattocks into swords, and its pruning hooks into spears, for a war of destruction against the heathen. In as much as a third place from which both may have drawn, is actually non-existent, this hypothesis is in itself superfluous and null. The question can only be, which of the two contemporaries has drawn from the other? And there everything favors the view that Micah is original. In the first place the form of the text in both points that way. For the text of Isaiah, although in the main sounding the same, has still some modifications that characterize it as a free citation, drawn, not from the manuscript original, but from memory. “All nations shall flow unto it,” Isaiah 2:2, certainly comes from the harder, “people shall flow unto it,” Micah 4:1, and not the reverse.
And if Isaiah 2:4 is compared with Micah 4:3, the unusual ςֲ ?φֻ ?ξִ ?ιν, strong, and the still more unusual ςַ ?γΞψָ ?ηεֹ ?χ afar off, certainly do not make the impression of being additions. Rather the language of Isaiah. “And he shall judge among the nations, and rebuke many people,” appears as an abbreviation that reproduces only what is essential. In the second place the passage in Micah stands in the closest connection with what precedes. For with the threatening prophecy that for the sake of Judah’s sins “Zion shall be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places φf the forests,” Micah 3:12, the promise is connected…by way of contrast, that this desolation of the divine mount shall be superseded by a wonderful glory (comp. Caspari, Micah der Morasthite s. 444 sqq.). It is most intimately connected with this that εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ, Micah 4:1, has a motive in what goes before, whereas, Isaiah 51:2 it has no motive, and is without example in so abrupt a position (comp.
Delitzsch). In the third place the passage in Isaiah appears, in reference to what follows, as a motto, or a torso, prefixed theme-like, whereas in Micah it forms a well-rounded whole with two following verses. Hengstenberg is wrong when he refers the words Micah 4:4 to the Israelites. The heathen, too, according to Isaiah 2:2-3 are Israelites, and thereby partakers of the promise given to Israel (Leviticus 26:5). For (such is evidently the meaning of Isa 2:5), while Israel holds to its God forever as the rightful one, the heathen shall hold to their gods, only for a season, viz., until the revolution announced, Isaiah 2:1, takes place. The imperfect ιμλε, ver 5 a. is therefore not future, but signifies continuance in the present.
At present the prophet would say, all people walk after their gods, but they will not do this forever as Israel. For, Isaiah 2:1-3, he had expressly announced that all heathen shall flow to the mountain of Jehovah. As, therefore, Isaiah 2:4 completed the all-comprehensive portrait of peace in the old theocratic sense, according to passages like Leviticus 26:5; 1 Kings 4:25, Isaiah 2:5 assigns the reason for the glorious promise made in Isaiah 2:1-4. Israel has already now the true way, therefore it needs only to persevere on its way. But the heathen, that are now in the false way, will one time forsake this false way and turn to the right way. The same construction proceeds, and the Isaiah 2:1-5 appear completely as one work from one mould.
In the fourth place, the characteristics of the language in several respects bear the decided impress of Micah. The expression “in the last days,” occurs in Isaiah as in Micah, only in this one place. The expression δψαιϊιΧ is an evident connection with δψδαιϊ Micah 3:12, a designation that occurs only here, therefore is peculiar to Micah. 2 Chronicles 33:15 δַ ?ψαιϊιΧ occurs again for a special reason, and possibly with reference to our passage. πλεο only here in both Isaiah and Micah: likewise πִ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ ּ ?αψΰωׂ δδΧ in Micah only here: in Isaiah three times beside, evidently occasioned by our text in Isaiah 2:2 : see Isaiah 2:12-14 : beside these Isaiah 6:1; Isaiah 52:13; Isaiah 57:7; Isaiah 57:15.—πָ ?δָ ?ψ with the meaning confluere only here in Isaiah and Micah.—The expression βεινψαιν does not occur in Isaiah except Isaiah 2:2; on the other hand in Micah twice; here and 4:11, (comp. the remark on ςξινψαιν at Isaiah 2:3). Later prophets, following Micah’s example, make use of it, especially Ezek. (Ezekiel 3:6; Ezekiel 27:33; Ezekiel 32:3; Ezekiel 32:9-10. etc.). δψιδεδ only here in Micah; and also in Isaiah only once beside, Isaiah 30:29.—ΰμδιιςχα in Isaiah and Micah only here. Isa. always says ΰμδιιωׂ ?ψΰμ, once ξֶ ?μֶ ?οְ ιςχα (Isaiah 41:21); twice ΰֲ ?αִ ?ιγιςχα (Isaiah 49:26; Isaiah 60:16). ιεψπεξγψλιε in both prophets only here (comp. Micah 3:11; Isaiah 28:9; Isaiah 28:26).
Likewise πμλδαΰΧ.—The pairing of Zion and Jerusalem occurs in Micah in 3, 4, relatively often;Micah 3:10; Micah 3:12; Micah 4:2; Micah 4:8. But in Isaiah, too, it occurs often; Isaiah 4:3-4; Isaiah 10:12; Isaiah 10:32; Isaiah 24:23; Isaiah 30:19; Isaiah 31:9; Isaiah 33:20; Isaiah 37:22; Isaiah 37:32; Isaiah 41:27; Isaiah 52:1-2; Isaiah 62:1; Isaiah 64:9.—ςַ ?ξִּ ?ινψַ ?αִּ ?ιν occurs in Isaiah in only one other place, Isaiah 17:12. whereas it occurs in Micah four times: Micah 4:3; Micah 4:13; Micah 5:6; Micah 5:27.—The use of ψַ ?αִּ ?ιν and ςφεξιν together does not occur again in Micah; on the other hand once in Isaiah 53:12. The singular βειςφεν once in Isaiah 60:22. The words ςγΞψηεχ are wanting in Isaiah. In fact they occur only here. λϊϊ in Micah again Isaiah 1:7; in Isaiah 24:12; Isaiah 30:14. Plural of ηψα in Isaiah only Isaiah 21:15.—ΰּ ?ϊִּ ?ιν only here and Joel 4:10. ηπιϊ nowhere in Isaiah.—ξζξψεϊ in Isaiah again Isaiah 18:5.
The other words have no specific importance. The following expressions, therefore are decidedly peculiar to Micah: 1) δַ ?ψαֵּ ?ιϊιΧ; 2) βεֹ ?ινψַ ?αִּ ?ιν; 3) ςַ ?ξִּ ?ινψַ ?αִּ ?ιν; 4) ΰμδιιςχα; for Isa. constantly says, ΰμδιιωψΰμ, and ιςχψ is generally a favorite expression of Micah, which he uses eleven times (comp. Casp. Mic. d. Mor. ss. 412, 444). Only once in Micah and Isaiah, and that in our passage, do the expressions occur; πָ ?δַ ?ψαְּ ?ψֹ ?ΰωׁ δֶ ?δָ ?ψִ ?ιν ,πָ ?λεֹ ?ο ,αΰηψιϊδιξιν, confluere, πֵ ?μְ ?λָ ?δαְ ?ΰֹ ?γְ ?ηֹ ?ϊָ ?ιε ,ιεֹ ?ψֵ ?πεּ ξִ ?γְּ ?ψָ ?λָ ?ιִ ?ε, At most πִ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ and the use of ψַ ?αִּ ?ιν and ςֲ ?φεּ ?ξִ ?ιν remind us of Isaiah’s style.
But it is to be considered that owing to the difference in the size of the books, a single occurrence in Micah has relatively much more weight in settling the usus loquendi.
Isaiah 2:2. This beginning of the discourse with εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ is unexampled. As is well known, several books begin with εַ ?ιְ ?δִ ?ι, (Josh., Judges, 1 Sam., 2 Sam., Ezek., Jonah, Neh.). But nowhere except here does εδιδ stand at the beginning of a discourse without a point of support given in what precedes. We recognize in that, as shown above, a proof that Isaiah took the words, Isaiah 2:2-4, from Micah 4:1-4 as the basis of his discourse. Unmoved, fixed‘ Such is the meaning of πָ ?λεֹ ?ο, comp. αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊπָ ?λεֹ ?ο ,λִּ ?ρֵּ ?ΰπָ ?λεֹ ?ο 2 Samuel 7:16; 2 Samuel 7:26; 1 Kings 2:45; Psalms 93:2. πָ ?δַ ?ψ is probably denom. from πָ ?δָ ?ψ, and does not occur again in Isaiah in the sense of “flowing.” For εְ ?πָ ?δַ ?ψְ ?ϊְּ Isaiah 60:5, comes from another root, kindred to πεּ ?ψ, comp.
Psalms 34:6. The word occurs in Jeremiah 31:12; Jeremiah 51:44, with the meaning of “flowing, streaming,” but also only in regard to nations.
Isaiah 2:4. ωָׁ ?τַ ?θ with αֵּ ?ιο is found again in Isa. only Isaiah 5:3. δεֹ ?λִ ?ιηַ is a juridical term as well as ωָׁ ?τַ ?θ. The fundamental meaning is “εὐθύνω,” “make right, straight,” and corresponds to our “richten und sclichten.” Comp. Isaiah 11:3-4. In the latter place we find the construction with μְ (direct causative Hiphil). Comp. Job 16:21; Job 9:33; Genesis 31:37. ΰִ ?ϊִּ ?ιν, which, as already remarked, excepting here occurs only Micah 4:3 and Joel 4:10. is, doubtless, radically related to ΰֵ ?ϊιν ,ΰֵ ?ϊ, which occurs 1 Samuel 13:20-21.
The first the LXX translate in all cases by ἄροτρα, the Vulgate by aratra (in Joel) or vomeres (in Isa. and Mich.); the latter the LXX translates σκεῦος, Vulgate, ligo. It is uncertain whether the distinction between ΰֵ ?ϊִ ?ιν and ΰִ ?ϊִּ ?ιν is only to be referred to the Masoretic pointing, or to a real etymological difference. In the latter case it is not agreed whether the roots of the words in question are ςεּ ?θ–ΰεּ ?ϊ, from which ςֵ ?θ, style, “engrave, draw,” thence ΰεֹ ?ϊ ,ΰֵ ?ϊ, not. acc., or ΰָ ?πָ ?δ, from which on the one hand, is ΰֳ ?πִ ?ι, ship=σκεῦος on the other hand ΰϊ ,ΰֵ ?πֶ ?ϊ, or still another root.
AND 1. At the end of days shall the mountain of the house of Jehovah be higher than all mountains, and all peoples shall flow to it, (Isaiah 2:2). They shall encourage themselves to walk thither in order to be instructed in the law of Jehovah. For the law going forth from Zion shall be acknowledged as the right lamp of truth (Isaiah 2:3). Then shall all strife among nations be decided by the application of this law, and therefore, so to speak, by the Lord Himself, so that there shall be no more war, but rather weapons of war, and warlike exercises, shall cease.
2. And it shall come to pass … from Jerusalem.
Isaiah 2:2-3. ΰηψιϊδιξιν, last days, which Isaiah never uses, is a relative conception, but always of eschatological significance, whence the LXX correctly translate it by “ἐνταῖςἐσχάταιςἡμέραις,” or by “ἐπ’ ἐσχάτουτῶνἡμερῶν,” or by “ἐπ’ ἐσχάτωντῶνἡμερῶν.” It is therefore not = in the time following, but = in the last time. Yet it is to be remarked herewith, that, as Oehler says: “Also the nearer future is set in the light of the last development of the divine kingdom.” Comp. the admirable exposition of this by Oehler, Herzog’sR. Encycl. XVII. S. 653.—In this last time now shall the mountain of the house of Jehovah (comp. Micah 3:12) for all time stand unmoved on the top of the mountains, and be exalted above all hills.
The mountains are the protuberances of the earth, in which, so to speak, is embodied its effort upwards, its longing after heaven. Hence the mountains also appear especially adapted as places for the revelation of divinity, and as places of worship for men adoring the divinity. (What is great generally, in contrast with little human works, is conceived of as divine work, compare δַ ?ψְ ?ψֵ ?ιΞΰֵ ?μPsalms 36:7; Psalms 68:16, ΰַ ?ψְ ?ζֵ ?Ξΰֵ ?μPsalms 80:11, ςִ ?ιψβְ ?γֹ ?μָ ?δμֵ ?ΰμֹ ?δִ ?ινJonah 3:3). But there are mountains of God in a narrower sense; thus Horeb is called Mount of God, Exodus 3:1; Exodus 18:5; and Sinai, Numbers 10:33. But above all the mountain of the temple, to which per synecdochen the name of Zion is given, is called the “Mount of God,” the “holy mountain of God,” Psalms 2:6; Psalms 3:5; Psalms 24:3, etc.;Jeremiah 31:23; Joe 2:1; Joe 3:17, etc. But the idols compete with the Holy God for possession of the mountains. For the high places of the mountains are also consecrated by preference to their worship, so that Israel is often reproached with practising fornication with the idols on every high mountain, 1 Kings 14:23; 2 Kings 17:10; Isaiah 57:7; Isaiah 65:7; Jeremiah 2:20; Jeremiah 3:6; Jeremiah 17:2; Jeremiah 50:6; Ezekiel 6:2-3; Hosea 4:13.
But the Scripture recognizes still another rivalry between the mountains. Psalms 68:16 speaks of the basalt mountains of Bashan with their many pinnacles that look down superciliously upon the lowly and inconsiderable Mount Zion. All these rivalries shall come to an end. It is debated, how does the prophet conceive of the exalting of Mount Zion over the others? Many have supposed he conceives of Mount Zion as piled up over the others, (aliis montibus veluti superimpositum,Vitr.), or thus, that “the high places run together toward it, which thus towers over them, seem to bear it on their heads” (Hofmann,Weisz. u. Erf.
II. p. 101). But, comparing other passages, it seems to me probable that Isaiah would say: there will be in general no mountain on earth except Mount Zion alone. All will have become plain; only the mount of God shall be still a mountain. One God, one mountain. If, for example, we consider the words below, Isaiah 2:12-17 the prophet says there that divine judgment shall go forth upon all that is high in the world, and all human loftiness shall be humbled, that “the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day.” Just so, too, we read Isaiah 40:4, “Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low, and the crooked shall be made straight and the rough places plain.” When hills and vallies disappear, the land becomes even. To be sure, it seems as if 40 treats only of a level road for the approaching king.
But this level road is prepared for the Lord precisely and only thereby, that in all the land, all high places shall disappear upon which idols could be worshipped. Zechariah expresses still more clearly the thought that the sole dominion of the Lord is conditioned on the restoration of a complete plain in the land. He says, Isaiah 14:9-10. “And the Lord shall be king over all the land; in that day shall be oneLord, and His name one. All the land shall turn to lowness from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem; But this itself shall be lifted up, and shall abide in its place,” etc. It may be objected to this explanation that Isaiah 2:2, the presence of mountains and hills is in fact presupposed, because it says, “at the top of the mountains,” and “higher than the hills.” But must the prophets in the places cited above, have thought of the restoration of a plain in a mathematical sense? Certainly not.
The notion of a plain is relative. There shall, indeed, remain therefore, mountains and hills, but in comparison with the mountain of the Lord, they shall no more deserve these names; they shall appear as plains.
From this results that αψΰωׁ is not=upon the head (this must be expressed by ςַ ?μψֹ ?ΰωׁ, comp. Exodus 34:2. 1 Samuel 26:13; Isaiah 30:17) but=at the top or head (comp. Amos 6:7; Deuteronomy 20:9; 1 Samuel 9:22; 1 Kings 21:9; 1 Kings 21:12). This latter however, cannot mean that the mountain of the Lord shall have the other mountains behind it, but under itself. Without doubt “the mountain of the house of the Lord,” and the δַ ?ψξְ ?ψεֹ ?νιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ and δַ ?ψβַּ ?αֹ ?δּ of Ezekiel are identical, (Ezekiel 17:22 sq.; Ezekiel 20:40, Ezekiel 34:14; Ezekiel 40:2).
This high mountain shall be exactly the opposite of that “tower whose top may reach unto heaven” Genesis 11:4, which, being a self-willed structure by die hands of insolent men, separated mankind. For our divine mountain, a work of God, reunites mankind again. They all see it in its glory that is radiant over all things, and recognize it not only as the source of their salvation, but also as the centre of their unity. Therefore they flow from all sides to it. These “Many people,” i.e., countless nations, which are essentially the same as the “all nations” mentioned before, shall mutually encourage one another “to go up,” (the solemn word for religious journies, comp. Caspari,Micha, p. 140), for which a fourfold object is named: the mountain of Jehovah; on the mountain the house of the God of Jacob; in the house the instruction out of the ways of God (the ways of God are conceived of as the source of the instruction, comp.
Isaiah 47:13; Psalms 94:12); and, in consequence of this instruction, the walking in the paths of God. Only the words from “Come ye” to “his paths” contain the language of the nations. The following phrase “for out of Zion,” gives the reason that shall determine the nations to such discourse and conduct. ϊּ ?εֹ ?ψָ ?δ, law, is neither the (Sinaitic) law, for it must then read ηַ ?ϊּ ?εֹ ?ψָ ?δ, nor the law of the king ruling in Zion. For what goes forth from Zion is just what the nations seek. They do not seek a political chief, however, but one that will teach them the truth, ϊּ ?εֹ ?ψָ ?δ is therefore to be taken in the sense of the preceding ιֹ ?ψֵ ?πεּ, he will teach us. It is therefore primarily doctrine, instruction in general, but which immediately is limited as γְּ ?αָ ?γιΧword of the Jehovah.
But shall the nations, turn toward Zion only because “law” goes forth from thence? Did not then, even in the Prophet’s time and before that, law go out from Zion; and did the nations let themselves be determined by that to migrate to Zion? We shall then need to construe “law” and “word of the Lord” in a pregnant sense: that which deserves the name of divine doctrine in the highest and completest sense, therefore the absolute doctrine, which alone truly satisfies and therefore also irresistibly draws all men. This doctrine, i.e., the gospel of Jesus Christ is, true enough, gone forth out of Jerusalem, and may be called the Zionitic Tora, in contrast with the Sinaitic. (Comp. Delitzschin loc.). Therefore that “preaching repentance and remission of sins in the name of Christ to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem,” Luke 24:47, is the beginning of the fulfilment of our prophecy.
Comp. Zechariah 8:20 sqq.
3. And he shall judge—learn war any more.Isaiah 2:4. The consequences of this divine instruction, sought and received by the nations, shall be, that the nations shall order their affairs and compose their judicial processes according to the mind of him that has taught them. So shall God appear as that one who judges between the nations and awards a (judicial) sentence. The Spirit of God that lives in His word is a Spirit of love and of peace. The God of peace sanctifies, therefore, the nations through and through (1 Thessalonians 5:23) so that they no more confront one another in the sense and spirit of the brute power of this world, but in the mind and spirit of the Kingdom of God.
They are altogether children of God, brothers, and are become one great family. War ceases; the implements of war become superfluous; they shall be forged over into the instruments of peace. The exercises at arms, by which men in peace prepare for war, fall of themselves away. The meaning “plowshare” evidently corresponds best to the context, in which the contrast between agriculture and war is the fundamental idea; at the same time it may be remarked that a scythe, mattock, or hoe, does not need to be forged over again to serve for arms, Joe 3:10.—The ξַ ?ζְ ?ξֵ ?ψָ ?δ (Isaiah 18:5) is the vine-dresser’s knife. A lance head may easily be made out of it. It is remarkable, that excepting this place, Isaiah, who speaks so much of war, uses, none of the words that in Hebrew mean “spear, lance.”
As regards the fulfilling of our prophecy, the Prophet himself says that it shall follow in the last time. If it now began a long time ago; if especially the appearance of the Lord in the flesh, and the founding of His kingdom and the preaching of the gospel among all nations be an element of that fulfilment, yet it is by no means a closed up transaction. What it shall yet bring about we know not. If many, especially Jewish expositors have taken the words too coarsely, and outwardly, so, on the other hand, we must guard against a one-sided spiritualizing. Certainly the prophets do not think of heaven. Plows and pruning hooks have as little to do with heaven, as swords and spears.
And what has the high place of Mount Zion to do in heaven? Therefore our passage speaks for the view that one time, and that, too, here on this earth, the Lord shall appropriate the kingdom, (Isaiah 60:21; Matthew 5:5), suppress the world kingdoms and bring about a condition of peace and glory. That then what is outward shall conform to what is inward, is certain, even though we must confess our ignorance in regard to the ways and means of the realization in particulars.
[Regarding the question of Isa 2:2-4 being original to Isa. or Micah, J. A. Alexander says: “The verbal variations may be best explained, however, by supposing that they both adopted a traditional prediction current among the people in their day, or, that both received the words directly from the Holy Spirit. So long as we have reason to regard both places as authentic and inspired, it matters little what is the literary history of either.”
Barnes says: “But there is no improbability in supposing that Isa., may have availed himself of language, used by Micah in describing the same event.”
At Isaiah 2:2. “Instead of saying, in modern phraseology, that the church, as a society, shall become conspicuous and attract all nations, he represents the mountain upon which the temple stood as being raised and fixed above the other mountains, so as to be visible in all directions.”—J. A. A.
Isaiah 2:4. “Volney states that the Syrian plow is often nothing but the branch of a tree, cut below a bifurcation, and used without wheels. The plowshare is a piece of iron, broad but not large, which tips the end of the shaft. So much does it resemble the short sword used by the ancient warriors, that it may with very little trouble, be converted into that deadly weapon; and when the work of destruction is over, reduced again to its former shape.”—Barnes.]
[So we have seen it—ploughing on Mount Zion.—M. W. J.]
Footnotes:Or, prepared.
peoples.
nations.
award sentence.
Or, scythes.
2. THE FALSE EMINENT THINGS AND THEIR IN GENERAL
Isaiah 2:5-115 O house of Jacob, come ye,
And let us walk in the light of the Lord.6 Therefore thou hast forsaken thy people the house of Jacob,
Because they be replenishedfrom the East,
And are soothsayers like the Philistines,
And they please themselves in the children of strangers.
7 Their land also is full of silver and gold,
Neither is there any end of their treasures;
Their land is also full of horses,
Neither is there any end of their chariots:
8 Their land also is full of idols;
They worship the work of their own hands,
That which their own fingers have made;
9 And the mean man boweth down,
And the great man humbleth himself:
Therefore forgive them not.
10 Enter into the rock, and hide thee in the dust,
For fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty.
11 The lofty looks of man shall be humbled,
And the haughtiness of men shall be bowed down,
And the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_2:5. μְ ?λεּ and εְ ?πֵֽ ?μְ ?λָ ?δ, Come, and we will walk, are taken from Isaiah 2:3, and αְּ ?ΰεֹ ?ψιΧ not only reminds of εְ ?ιεֹ ?ψֵ ?πεּ, Isaiah 2:3, but one is almost tempted to believe that αְּ ?ΰεֹ ?ψιΧ Isaiah 2:3 is an echo of αְּ ?ΰ̇ψְ ?ηֹ ?ϊָ ?ιε, which, Isaiah 2:3, follows εְ ?πֵ ? ?ֽ ?μְ ?λָ ?δ. And if the words are compared that in Mich. follow the borrowed verses Isaiah 4:1-3; (“For all people will walk every one in the name of his God, and we will walk in the name of the Lord our God forever and ever.” Isaiah 2:5) it will be seen that these words, too, floated before Isaiah’s mind. Grammatically there is nothing to object to the view of the comment below. For πֵ ? ?ֽ ?μְ ?λָ ?δαְּ ?ΰεֹ ?ψ may just as well mean eamus in lucem, as in luce, let us walk into the light, as in the light. And if the words of Isa 2:2-3 that sound alike are not taken in quite the same meaning, I would ask: are they then identical? And if they were identical, must then the αְּ ?ΰֹ ?ψְ ?ηεֹ ?ϊιΧμֶ ?λֶ ?ϊ (that must, according to Isaiah 2:3, occur in the last time) be the same with μֶ ?λֶ ?ϊαְּ ?ΰεֹ ?ψιΧ that the Prophet imposes as a duty o n the Israel of the present?
Isaiah 2:6. πָ ?θַ ?ωׁ stands very commonly in the sense of repudiate: Judges 6:1; 1 Samuel 12:22; 1 Kings 8:57; Psalms 27:9; Psalms 94:14; Jeremiah 7:29; Ezekiel 29:5; Ezekiel 32:4. But especially the notion of πָ ?θַ ?ωׁ appears significantly as contents of the “burden of Jehovah,” and probably with reference to our passage; Jeremiah 23:33; comp. Jeremiah 12:7 and 2 Kings 21:14. In many of these places ςָ ?ζַ ?α stands parallel with πָ ?θַ ?ωׁ. From that, and from the impossibility of taking γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ ςַ ?ν—ςַ ?ν, way, fashion of the people, nationality, the inaccuracy appears of the explanation given by Saadia, Targ., J. D.
Michaelis and others: “thou hast abandoned thy nationality.” ξμΰεξχγν, according to the comment below is particularly to be maintained as the correct reading. Thus both the conjecture of Brenz and Bφttcher (Exeg. Krit. Ζhrenlese, p. 29) ξִ ?χְ ?ρָ ?ν (comp. Ezekiel 12:24; Ezekiel 13:7), and that of Gesenius (in his Thesau, s. v. χֶ ?γֶ ?ν, p. 1193, though in his commentary he declares for the text). ξִ ?χֶּ ?ρֶ ?ν (comp. Jeremiah 14:14; Ezekiel 13:6; Ezekiel 13:23) are needless. Also the signification of old translations (ὡςτὸἀπ’ ἆρχῆς,LXX., ut olim, Vulg., ut antea, Peschit., sicut ab initio, Targ., Jon.) is incorrect, because the insertion of the particle of comparison and the leaving out of account the εְ before ςֹ ?πְ ?πִ ?ιν are arbitrary.
Drechsler has justly called attention to the fact that ξָ ?μֵ ?ΰ with ξִ ?ο never means the same as ξָ ?μֵ ?ΰ with the accusative. For the first does not so much name the matter with which one is filled as the source, the fund, the provision out of which the matter is drawn. Thus e.g. Exodus 16:32, ξְ ?μֹ ?ΰδָֹ ?ςξֶ ?ψξִ ?ξֶּ ?πּ ?εּ is not: imple mesuram eo, but ex eo, i.e., fill the omer with the proper quantity taken from the whole mass. Comp. Leviticus 9:17; Jeremiah 51:34; Ezekiel 32:6; Psalms 127:5.
It is different Ecclesiastes 1:8. ςֹ ?πְ ?πִ ?ιν, (Leviticus 19:26; Isaiah 57:3; Jeremiah 27:9; 2 Kings 21:6; 2 Chronicles 33:6) or ξְ ?ςֹ ?πְ ?πִ ?ιν (Deuteronomy 18:10; Deuteronomy 18:14; Micah 5:11) according to the context of the passages cited, are places of magicians or diviners. For the word stands parallel with λִּ ?ωֵּׁ ?σ sometimes, and sometimes with πηωׁ, as, then, in substance both are nearly related. But the fundamental meaning is doubtful. Fleischer in a note in Delitzsch in loc. controverts the fundamental meaning maintained by Fuerst, “tecta, arcana faciens,” and also the derivation from ςַ ?ιִ ?ο (oculo maligno fascinans), and would derive it either from ςָ ?πָ ?ο, cloud (weathermaker), or from the Arabic root anna (coercere, stop by magic).—As regards the construction, Drechsler has remarked that the absence of δֵ ?ν must occasion no surprise. The verb ιωׂ ?τιχε in this sentence causes no little trouble. ωָׂ ?τַ ?χ occurs in only three places in the Old Testament: Job 27:23; 1 Kings 20:10 and here. Beside that there is also the noun ωֶׂ ?τֶ ?χ (ρֶ ?τֶ ?χ) Job 20:22; Job 36:18.—Job 27:23 we read the words ιִ ?ωְׂ ?τֹּ ?χςָ ?μֵ ?ιξεֹ λַ ?τֵּ ?ιξεֹ.
Here evidently ωָׂ ?τַ ?χ=ρָ ?τַ ?χ which often occurs for clapping the hands together, or for slapping on the thigh: Numbers 24:10; Lamentations 2:15; Jeremiah 31:19; Ezekiel 21:17. But 1 Kings 20:10, the king Ben-Hadad of Syria says: “The gods do so unto me and more also, if the dust of Samaria shall suffice (ιִ ?ωְׂ ?τֹּ ?χ) for handfuls for all the people that follow me.” And with this agrees also the Aramaic ρτֲ ?χ redundare, and the δִ ?ωְׂ ?τִּ ?ιχ “superfluere, satis esse” of the late Hebrew.—Also in regard to the substantive ωֶׂ ?τֶ ?χ the same division of meaning occurs. For while Job 20:22 the context requires the meaning “abundantia,” opinions vary a great deal in regard to Job 36:18. Still to me the weight of reason seems on the side of the meaning “explosio,” (disapproval, insult by hand clapping, comp. Job 34:26-27). And the explanations of our passage divide into two classes, in that the one bring out the fundamental idea of striking, the other that of superabundance, but each variously modified.
The Hiphil occurs only here. It is to be construed in a direct causative sense (complosionem facere).
Isaiah 2:7. χֵ ?φֶ ?δ always with εְ ?ΰֵ ?ιο only here and Nehemiah 2:10; Nehemiah 3:3; Nehemiah 3:9.
Isaiah 2:8. ΰֱ ?μִ ?ιμִ ?ιν from ΰַ ?μ with intentional like sound to ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δִ ?ιν ,ΰֵ ?μ, comp. Zechariah 11:17; Jeremiah 14:14; Isaiah 2:18; Isaiah 2:20; Isaiah 10:10 sq.; Isaiah 19:1; Isaiah 19:3; Isaiah 31:7. The singular suffix in ιγιε and ΰφαςϊιε is to be noticed in grammatical respects. Expositors correctly construe the suffixes as distributive. Comp. Isaiah 5:23 concerning the ideal number.
Isaiah 2:9. At first sight the explanation (adopted, e.g., by Luther), commends itself, that takes the verbs ιωׁ ?η and ιωׁ ?τμ as descriptive of the voluntary homage that the Israelites rendered to the great things depicted verse 7 sq. It appears to belong to the completeness of the mournful picture that the Prophet draws here of the condition of Israel, that also that recognition should be mentioned which those great things named, Isaiah 2:7-8, received at their hands. Moreover the similarity of construction seems to point to a continuation of that strain of complaint against Israel already begun. Indeed the second half of Isa 2:9 “and forgive them not,” seems to form the fitting transition to the announcement of judgment, whereas these words, if the announcement of judpment begins with 9 a already, seem to be an ὕστερονπρότερον. That ωׁ ?ηη and ωׁ ?τμ in what follows (Isaiah 2:11-12; Isaiah 2:17) and especially Isaiah 5:15, are used for involuntary humiliation would be no objection, in as much as a contrast might be intended.
Nevertheless I decide in favor of the meaning approved by all recent expositors, viz., involuntary bowing. What determines me is, first, that already Isaiah 2:8 b speaks of the voluntary bowing to idols. Had the prophet meant to emphasize, not simply this, but also the bowing before the idols of riches and power, he would surely have joined both in a different fashion than happens if Isaiah 2:9 a is referred to Isaiah 2:7. And then Isaiah must have said: εΰֲ ?ϊָּ ?δΰַ ?μϊΧ, but thou forgive them not. That the antithesis is not marked in Isaiah 2:9 b, is proof that none exists. But then in this case Isaiah 2:9 a itself must contain a threatening of judgment.
It is no objection to this that it is expressed in narrative form with the vav. consecutivum; comp. Drechsler in loc. Isaiah 2:9 b is then not antithesis but explanatory continuation. ΰַ ?μ must then be taken in the weaker signification of μֹ ?ΰ. Comp. 2 Kings 6:27.—ΰָ ?γָ ?ν and ΰִ ?ιωׁ (comp. Isaiah 5:15; Isaiah 31:8; Psalms 49:3; Proverbs 8:4) form only a rhetorical, not a logical antithesis. It is not = mean and great, but—all and every.
The idea of “man” is only for the sake of parallelism expressed by two synonymous words. Comp. Isaiah 2:11. After ϊִּ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ must ςָ ?εֹ ?ο be supplied, comp. Genesis 18:24; Genesis 18:26; Hosea 1:6, coll. Isaiah 33:24.
Isaiah 2:10. τηγιΧ genitive of the object, comp. 1 Samuel 11:7; 2 Chronicles 14:13; 2 Chronicles 17:10 and below Isaiah 2:19; Isaiah 2:21. δγψβΰεο only here.
Isaiah 2:11. βαδεϊ only here and Isaiah 2:17. ψεּ ?ν in Isaiah only here and Isaiah 2:17; Isaiah 10:12. The singular ωָׁ ?τֵ ?μ is explained in that βαδεϊ is the main idea. Comp. Isaiah 5:15. ωָׁ ?τֵ ?μ, a common word with Isaiah (Isaiah 2:9; Isaiah 2:11-12; Isaiah 2:17; Isaiah 5:15; Isaiah 40:4, etc.) is verb, not adjective, for the latter is ωָׁ ?τָ ?μ. The same ramark obtains in reference to ΰγν and ΰπωׁ ?ιν that was made Isaiah 2:9 concerning ΰγν and ΰιωׁ.
AND 1. The Prophet’s glance has penetrated into the farthest future. There he gazes on the glory of Jehovah and his people. In the words of his fellow prophet Micah, to whom he thereby extends the hand of recognition and joins himself, he portrays how highly exalted then the Lord and His people shall be. That is the true eminence to which Israel is destined, and after which it ought to strive. But what a chasm between that which Israel shall be and what it actually is!
The Prophet calls on the people to set themselves in the light of that word of promise, that promise of glory (Isaiah 2:5). What a sad picture of the present reveals itself! The people in that glorious picture of the future, so one with its God that it does not at all appear in an independent guise, appears in the present forsaken of God, for it has yielded itself entirely to the influences of the world from the East and West, and all sides (Isaiah 2:6). In consequence of this, much that is high and great has, indeed, towered up in the midst of them. But this highness consists only of gold and silver, wagons and horses, and dead idols made by men (Isaiah 2:7-8). For that, in the day of judgment, they shall be bowed down so much the lower and obtain no pardon (Isaiah 2:9). For in that day they must creep into clefts in the rocks and holes in the ground, before the terrible appearance of Jehovah (Isaiah 2:10), and then shall every false, earthly eminence be cast down, that Jehovah alone may appear as the high one (Isaiah 5:11).
2. O house of Jacob—light of the Lord.Isaiah 2:5. “House of Jacob,” so the Prophet addresses the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem (Isaiah 2:1), in that he connects what he says in this address, and in the second half of the verse with the prophetic address uttered in what precedes, in which (Isaiah 2:3) the temple was named “the house of the God of Jacob.” The expression “house of Jacob” for Israel is besides frequent in Isaiah 8:17; Isaiah 10:20; Isaiah 14:1; Isaiah 29:22; Isaiah 46:3; Isaiah 48:1; Isaiah 58:1.—As the Prophet at once expresses what he has to say to the house of Jacob in words that are taken from the prophecy that precedes, he intimates what use he intends to make of these words.
Expositors understand, ΰεֹ ?ψιΧ partly of the favor and grace of the Lord (for which otherwise often ΰεֹ ?ψΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ιιΧPsalms 89:16; Psalms 4:7; Psalms 36:10), partly of the instruction through the law of the Lord (lux Jehovζ lex Dei,Vitr.). But neither the one nor the other meaning seems to me to suit the context. For in what follows there is neither a promise of divine grace, nor exhortation to holy walk. I am therefore of the opinion, that the prophet by “light of Jehovah,” understands that light which Jehovah Himself extends to the people by the prophetic word that just precedes. In the light of that word ought Israel to set its present history. The Prophet shows, in what follows, how infinitely distant the present Israel is from the ideal that, Isaiah 2:2-4, he has shown, and which shall be the destiny of this degenerate Israel in “the last time.” Now if Israel will apply the measure of that future to its present, it may escape the judgment of the last time. On this account the Prophet summons his people to set themselves in the “light of Jehovah.”
3. Therefore thou hast—strangers, Isaiah 2:6. The words “thou hast repelled thy people” seem to me to indicate the fundamental thought of the whole address to the end of Chap. 5. From Isaiah 2:2-4, where Jehovah is named the God of Jacob, and Zion the place where God’s word shines so gloriously that all nations assemble to this shining, it is seen that Israel in this last time shall live in most intimate harmony with its God. That it is not so now he proceeds to describe. For God has repudiated His people.
Jehovah, however, has not arbitrarily repudiated His people. He could do no otherwise. For the nation had forsaken Him, had abandoned itself to the spirit of the world. They accorded admittance to every influence that pressed on them from East and West. Such is the sense of the following words. “From the east,” means primarily, indeed, those parts of Arabia bordering on Palestine (Judges 6:3; Judges 6:33; Judges 7:12; Judges 8:10), but here, in contrast with Philistines, it signifies the lands generally that lie east of Palestine. That destructive influences, especially of a religious kind, proceeded from these lands to Israel, appears from the instance of Baal-Peor (Numbers 25:3; Deuteronomy 4:3), and of Chemosh (1 Kings 11:7; 2 Kings 23:13) of the Moabites, and Milcom of the Ammonites (1 Kings 11:5; 1 Kings 11:7) the altar in Damascus (2 Kings 16:10), and the star worship of Manasseh (2 Kings 21:5; Jeremiah 7:18; Jeremiah 44:17 sqq.; Ezekiel 8:16).
But Drechsler,in loc, has proved that not only religious influences, but also social culture of every sort penetrated Israel from the East (comp. on Isaiah 3:18 sqq.; 1 Kings 5:10; 1 Kings 10:1-15; 1 Kings 11:1 sq. If, then, we translate “for they are full from the East,” we would thereby indicate the Prophet’s meaning to be that Israel has drawn from the Orient that of which it is full, in the sense of intellectual nourishment. But the West, too, exercised its destructive influences. The Philistines are named, as representatives of it, and especially they are indicated as Israel’s examples and teachers in witchcraft. It is true that we have no express historical evidence that the Philistines were especially given to witchcraft. Yet 1 Samuel 6:2 mentions their “diviners,” and 2 Kings 1:2, refers to the sanctuary of Baalzebub at Ekron, as a celebrated oracle.
And in the children,etc. Excepting Targ. Jonathan (et in legibus populorum ambulant) all the ancient versions find in our passage a accusation of sexual transgression. The LXX, Peschit, and Ar. understand the words to refer to intercourse of Jewish men or women with the heathen, and the generation of theocratic illegitimate posterity. Jerome, however, understands the “et pueris alienis adh�serunt” of Pederasty, as he expressly says in his commentary. The translation of Symmachus, too, which Jerome quotes, “et cum filiis alienis applauserunt,” is to be understood in the same sense.
For Jerome remarks expressly: “Symmachus quodam circuitu et honesto sermone plaudentium eandem cum pueris turpitudinem demonstravit.” Gesenius in his Commentary p. 18 has overlooked this. It is seen that LXX. (τέκναπολλὰἀλλόφυλαἑγενήθηαὐτοῖς), Peschit. (plurimos exterorum filios educarunt), Arab. (nati sunt eis filii exteri permulti) have found the notion of “fulness, superfluity” in ιωּ ?τιχε. But Jerome and the Hebrew scholars that after him translate ἑσφηνώθησαν (wedging oneself in, in an obscene sense) proceed evidently from the fundamental meaning “striking.” The later expositors divide into these two classes. Still the majority decide in favor of the meaning, “striking into, i.e., the hand, as sign of making a covenant,” and refer to the construction τָּ ?βַ ?ςαְּ (Genesis 32:2; Joshua 16:7; Joshua 17:10, etc.), to illustrate the construction with αְּ here. Still better is it to compare the construction with αְּ of the verbs, αָּ ?ηַ ?γ ,ΰָ ?ηַ ?ζ ,δֶֽ ?ηֱ ?ζִ ?ιχ ,γָּ ?αָ ?χ ,πָ ?βַ ?ις. are the children of strangers (Psalms 18:45, sq.; Isaiah 60:10, etc.), with only the difference that in ιμγιπ the idea of a profane birth is more prominent. The expression is to be understood as generally comprehensive of the eastern and western nations named immediately before, word ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ itself, it occurs not seldom in Isaiah 9:5; Isaiah 8:18; Isaiah 11:7; Isaiah 29:23; Isaiah 57:4-5.
4. Their land—have made.Isaiah 2:7-8. Neither the having abundance of children of strangers (Ew.), nor the contenting oneself with such (Drechsler) explains to us why the land of Jacob was full of silver and gold, of horses and wagons. But it is very easily explained if Israel had treaties and a lively commerce with foreign nations. But this was contrary to the law and the covenant of Jehovah. For according to that Israel should be a separate people from all other nations: “And ye shall be holy unto Me; for I the Lord am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be Mine.” Leviticus 20:26.
Commerce with the world, of course, brought the Israelites material gain, in gold and silver, horses and wagons, so that, in fact, there was a superfluity of these in the land. But by this growth in riches and power the divine prohibition (Deuteronomy 17:17,) was transgressed. It is plain enough now how necessary this prohibition was. For with the treasures of this world the idols of this world are drawn in. This prohibition would guard against that, for the subtile idolatry of riches and power would serve as a bridge to coarser idolatry, because it turns the heart away from the true God, and thereby opens a free ingress to the false gods. Thus is Israel, in consequence of that being full, of which Isaiah 2:6 speaks, also outwardly become full of that which passes for great and glorious in the world.
But, regarded in the light of Jehovah, this is a false eminence. On the subject matter comp. Micah 5:9 sqq.
5. Enter into—in that day.Isaiah 2:10-11. These words stand in an artistic double relation. First, they relate to what precedes (Isaiah 2:9) as specification. Second, to what follows (as far as Isaiah 3:26) as a summary of the contents. For the brief words of Isa 2:9 express only in quite a general way the human abasement, and indicate the sole majesty of Jehovah only by ascribing to Him the royal right of pardon.
These words are now in both these particulars more nearly determined in Isaiah 2:10-11. With dramatic animation the prophet summons men, in view of the terror that Jehovah prepares, and before the majestic appearance of His glory, to creep into the clefts of the rocks, and rock chasms (comp. Isaiah 2:19 and Isaiah 2:21), and in the depths of the dust i.e., holes or caves in the earth, (comp. Isaiah 2:19). The terror, therefore, shall be like that which spreads before an overpowering invasion of an enemy (Judges 6:2; 1 Samuel 13:6). Then shall the lofty eye be cast down and,—which is the reason for the former—all human highness shall be humiliated.
Jehovah alone shall be high in that day, just as all mountains shall have disappeared before the mountain of Jehovah (Isaiah 2:2). It will immediately appear that the matter of both these verses shall be more exactly detailed in what follows.
[Isaiah 2:5. “From this distant prospect of the calling of the gentiles, the Prophet now reverts to his own times and countrymen, and calls upon them not to be behind the nations in the use of their distinguishing advantages. If the heathen were one day to be enlightened, surely they who were already in possession of the light ought to make use of it.” “In the light of Jehovah; (in the path of truth and duty upon which the light of revelation shines). The light is mentioned as a common designation of the Scriptures and of Christ Himself.” (Proverbs 6:23; Psalms 119:105; Isaiah 51:4; Acts 26:23; 2 Corinthians 4:4). J. A. A.
Isaiah 2:6 c. And with the children of strangers they abound.—The last verb does not mean they please themselves, but they abound.—Children of strangers.—Means strangers themselves,—foreigners considered as descendents of a strange stock and therefore alien from the commonwealth, of Israel.”—J. A. A. [See comment on Isaiah 1:4αָּ ?πִ ?ινξַ ?ωְׁ ?ηִ ?ιϊִ ?ιν——Tr.]
Isaiah 2:7. “The common interpretation makes this verse descriptive of domestic wealth and luxury. But these would hardly have be en placed between the superstitions and the idols, with which Judah had been flooded from abroad. Besides, this interpretation fails to account for gold and silver being here combined with horses and chariots.—But on the supposition that the verse has reference to undue dependence upon foreign powers, the money and the armies of the latter would be naturally named together.—The form of expression, too, suggests the idea of a recent acquisition, as the strict sense of the verb is, not it is full, nor even it is filled, but it was, or has been filled.”—J. A. A.
Isaiah 2:9. “They who bowed themselves to idols should be bowed down by the mighty hand of God, instead of being raised up from their wilful self-abasement by the pardon of their sins. The relative futures denote, not only succession in time, but the relation of cause and effect.”—J. A. A.
Isaiah 2:10. And hide thee in the dust. “May there not be reference here to the mode prevailing in the East of avoiding the Monsoon, or poisonous heated wind that passes over the desert? Travelers there, in order to be safe, are obliged to throw themselves down, and to place their mouths close to the earth until it has passed.”—Barnes.]
Footnotes:repudiated.Or, more than the East.
Or, abound with the children, etc.make covenant with foreign born.a man is bowed down.everybody humbled.And thou wilt not forgive them.
a. The judgment against the things falsely eminent in the sub-human and superhuman spheres Isaiah 2:12-2112 For the day of the Lord of hosts shall be
Upon every one that is proud and lofty,
And upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be brought low:
13 And upon all the cedars of Lebanon, that are high and lifted up,
And upon all the oaks of Bashan,
14 And upon all the high mountains,
And upon all the hills that are lifted up,
15 And upon every high tower,
And upon every fenced wall,
16 And upon all the ships of Tarshish,
And upon all pleasant pictures.
17 And the loftiness of man shall be bowed down,
And the haughtiness of men shall be made low:
And the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day.
18 And the idols he shall utterly abolish.
19 And they shall go into the holes of the rocks,
And into the caves of the earth,
For fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty,
When he arises to shake terribly the earth.
20 In that day a man shall cast his idols of silver, and his idols of gold,
Which they made each one for himself to worship,
To the moles and to the bats;
21 To go into the clefts of the rocks,
And into the tops of the ragged rocks,
For fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty,
When he ariseth to shake terribly the earth.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_2:12. βֵ ?ΰֶ ?δ in Isaiah only here. ψָ ?ν is often found: Isaiah 2:13-14; Isaiah 6:1; Isaiah 10:33; Isaiah 57:15. On πִ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ comp. above Isaiah 2:2.—εωτμ is to be construed as future, since λιιενμιΧ must be regarded as a determination of time that points to the future.
Isaiah 2:16. ωׂ ?λιεϊ is ἅπ. λεγ. It comes from ωָׂ ?λָ ?δ certainly, which, although unused itself, is kindred to ωָׁ ?ςָ ?δ, to behold, is only now identified in the substantive ξַ ?ωְׂ ?λִּ ?ιϊ. According to this etymology ωְׂ ?λִ ?ιָ ?δ must mean θέαμα, show piece, thus every work of art that is fitted to gratify the beholder’s eye.
Isaiah 2:18. I do not deny that ΰμιμιν is taken as ideal singular, and may accordingly be joined to the predicate in the singular. But then λָּ ?μִ ?ιμ must be taken as adverb. Yet wherever this word occurs (only this once in Isa.; comp. Leviticus 6:15 sq.; Deuteronomy 13:17; Deuteronomy 33:10; Judges 20:40; 1 Samuel 7:9; Ezekiel 16:14. etc.) it is adjective or substantive: entire or entirety. I agree therefore with Maurer, who takes εδΰμιμιν as casus absolutus put before, and λָּ ?μִ ?ιμ as subject: et idola (quod attinet, eorum) universitas peribit.—The fundamental meaning of ηָ ?μַ ?σ seems to me to be “to change.” Out of that develope the apparently opposite meanings “revirescere” (Psalms 90:6; Job 14:7; Isaiah 9:9; Isaiah 40:31; Isaiah 41:1) and “transire, pr�terire, perire” (Isaiah 8:8; Isaiah 21:1; Psalms 102:27). The last is proper here.
Isaiah 2:19. ξְ ?ςָ ?ψָ ?δ (in Isaiah again Isaiah 32:14) is the natural rock caves, ξְ ?ηִ ?μָּ ?δ (ἅπ. λεγ., comp. ηַ ?μּ ?εֹ ?ο ,ηָ ?μִ ?ιμ) is the cave hewn out by art Notice the paronomasia in μςψυδΰψυ.
Isaiah 2:20. The Prophet might have written here and Isaiah 30:22; Isaiah 31:7, ΰֱ ?μִ ?ιμָ ?ιελֶּ ?ρֶ ?σεΧ, his idols of silver. But he has chosen the common construction, which rests on this, that nomen rectum and nomen regens are construed as one notion, and thus in some measure as one word.—If μεֹ after ςָ ?ωׂ ?εּ is taken in a reflexive sense, the enallage numeri would certainly be very strong. Therefore most expositors justly regard the artificers as subject of ςַ ?ωׂ ?εּ.—The words μητψτψεϊ, as they stand, can only present an infinitive with the prefix, and object following, for there is no noun ηֲ ?τֹ ?ψ. But an infinitive does not suit here, and besides there is no noun τֵּ ?ψָ ?δ. Therefore the rendering “hole of the mice,” for which expositors have gone to the Arabic, is only an arbitrary one.
Evidently the Masoretes, according to the analogy of αְּ ?χַ ?ηΞχεֹ ?ηַ, Isaiah 61:1, and ιְ ?τֵ ?δΞτִ ?ιָ ?δ Jeremiah 46:20 would separate what was to he united. We must then read μητψτψεϊ as one word. But how it is to be pointed is doubtful. According to the analogy of ςֲ ?χַ ?μְ ?χַ ?μּ ?εֹ ?ϊ ,ιְ ?ψַ ?χְ ?ψַ ?χεֹ ?ϊ ,ηֲ ?μַ ?χְ ?μַ ?χεֹ ?ϊ ,ΰְ ?γַ ?ξְ ?γַּ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ϊ, we might point it μַּ ?ηְ ?τַּ ?ψְ ?τָּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ from a singular ηֲ ?τַ ?ψְ ?τָּ ?ψָ ?δ. The meaning of this word can only be digger. But what sort of burrowing animal is meant, is doubtful.
Jerome translated it talpa, mole. Gesenius and Knobel object to that, that the mole does not live in houses: Drechsler that the Hebrew has another word for mole, i.e., ηֹ ?μֶ ?γ. But regarding the former, as Delitzsch, remarks, the mole does, true enough, burrow under buildings, and in regard to the latter consideration of Drechsler, ηֹ ?μֶ ?γ also occurs only once (Leviticus 11:29), and two words for one thing are not unusual in any language. Yet the foundation for a positive opinion is wanting.—ςֲ ?θַ ?μֵּ ?σ is the bat (Leviticus 11:19; Deuteronomy 14:18).
AND 1. With this section the Prophet begins his explication and specification of what he has previously Isaiah 2:9-11 said in general. That last time, Isaiah 2:2-4, which the Prophet described above in its glorious aspect for Israel, coincides with the time when the Lord shall sit in judgment on everything humanly high, that is hostile to Him. And even all impersonal things, thus creatures beneath man, on which, in proud arrogance, men put their trust, shall the Lord make small and reduce to nothing; the cedars of Lebanon, the oaks of Bashan, the high mountains and hills, the towers and walls, the ships of Tarshish, and all other pomp of human desire (Isaiah 2:12-16). All this shall be abased that the Lord alone may be high (Isaiah 2:17). But the same shall happen to the beings above men, viz.; to the idols (Isaiah 2:18). That is the idolaters shall hide themselves in terror before the manifestation of that Jehovah whom they have despised (Isaiah 2:19); they shall themselves cast their idols to the unclean beasts, in order, mindful only of their own preservation, to be able to creep into the hollows and crevices of the rocks. (21).
2. For the day—brought low.Isaiah 2:12. The Prophet had used for the first time Isaiah 2:11 the expression “in that day” that afterwards occurs often (comp. Isaiah 5:17; Isaiah 5:20; Isaiah 3:7; Isaiah 3:18; Isaiah 4:1-2; Isaiah 5:30). He points thereby to the time which he had before designated as “the last days.” Of course he does not mean that this last time shall comprehend only one day in the ordinary sense. The day that Isa., means is a prophetic day, for whose duration we must find a different measure than our human one.
With the Lord one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. (2 Peter 3:8; Psalms 90:4). But the chief concern is whether there is really such a day of the Lord. This the Prophet asserts most distinctly. For precisely because there is such a day (λִּ ?ιfor, Isaiah 2:12) Isaiah could Isaiah 2:17 refer to it. But this day is a day for Jehovah Sabaoth (comp. Isaiah 1:9), or more correctly: Jehovah has such in preparation, so to speak, in sure keeping, so that, as soon as it pleases Him, He can produce it for His purpose (comp.
Isaiah 22:5; Isaiah 34:8, and especially Isaiah 63:4; Jeremiah 46:10; Ezekiel 30:3). This day is a day of judgment, as already even the older prophets portray it: Joel 1:15; 2:1, 2, 11; 3:4; 4:14; Amos 5:18; Amos 5:20. Obadiah 1:15. Indeed the notion of judgment is so closely identified with “the day of Jehovah” that Isaiah in our text construes ιενa day directly as a word signifying “court of justice,” for he lets ςַ ?μ depend on it. Once more in Isaiah 2:12, the notion of high and proud is generally expressed before (Isaiah 2:13) it is individualized.
3. And upon all—in that day.Isaiah 2:13-17. The judgment of God must fall on all products of nature (Isaiah 2:13-14), and upon human art (Isaiah 2:15-16). It may be asked, how then have the products of nature, the trees and mountains become blameworthy? Knobel, to be sure, understands by the cedars houses made of cedar (comp. 2 Samuel 7:2; 2 Samuel 7:7) and by oaks of Bashan houses of oak wood (Ezekiel 27:6) such as Uzziah and Jotham constructed partly for fortifying the land, partly for pleasure, and by mountains and hills “the fastnesses that Jotham built in the mountains of Judah (2 Chronicles 27:4).” But, though one might understand the cedars to mean houses of cedar, (for which, however, must not be cited Isaiah 9:9; Nahum 2:4, but Jeremiah 22:23 comp. Isaiah 60:13) still the mountains and hills can never mean “fortified places.” 2 Peter 3:10, seems to me to afford the best commentary on our passage.
As sure as ξַ ?μְ ?ΰַ ?κְ ιΧangel of theLord of the Old Testament, is identical with the ἄγγελοςκυρίου of the New Testament so is also the ιεֹ ?νιΧ, day of the Lord identical with the ἡμέρακυρίου (1 Corinthians 1:8; 1 Thessalonians 5:2, etc.). Now of this day of the Lord it is said, in the above passage in Peter, that in it, “the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” If now this last great day has its preliminaries, too, like, on the contrary, the revelation of glory Isaiah 2:2 sqq., has, then we are justified in regarding all degrees of God’s world-judging activity as parts of “the day of the Lord.” If then the prophet here names only the high mountains and the highest trees growing on them as representatives of nature, he evidently does so because it is his idea, according to the whole context, to make prominent that which is high in an earthly sense, especially what is wont to serve men as means of gratifying their lust of power and pomp. But the mountains and the trees on them could not be destroyed without the earth itself were destroyed. Therefore the high mountains and trees are only named as representatives of the entire terrestrial nature, of the γῆ as it is called by Peter, as also afterwards the towers, ships of Tarshish, etc., are only representative of the ἔργα, the human works, thus the productions of art. The oaks of Bashan, beside this place, are mentioned Ezekiel 27:6; Zechariah 11:2. A parallel is drawn between Lebanon and Bashan also Isaiah 33:9; Jeremiah 22:20; Nahum 1:4.—High towers and strong walls were built by others as well as by Uzziah and Jotham; comp. 2 Chronicles 14:7; 2 Chronicles 32:5, etc.—Tarshish is mentioned by Isaiah again: Isaiah 23:1; Isaiah 23:6; Isaiah 23:10; Isaiah 60:9; Isaiah 66:19.
It is now generally acknowledged that the locality lay in south Spain beyond the Pillars of Hercules. It is the Ταρτησσὸς Tartessus of the Greeks; not a city, likely, but the country that lay at the mouth of the Bζtis (Guadalquiver): comp. Herzog,R. Encycl. XV. p. 684. Ships of Tarshish are thus large ships fitted for distant and dangerous voyages (Jonah 1:3; Jonah 4:2; 1 Kings 10:22; 1 Kings 22:49; Psalms 48:8).
All this must be destroyed and so must the arrogance of men be humbled, that Jehovah alone may be high in that day. So the prophet repeats, with some modification, the words of Isa 2:11, to prove that the specifications just given are only meant as the amplification of that general thought expressed in Isaiah 2:9. For these verses 12–16, refer as much back to Isaiah 2:9 as do Isaiah 2:18 sqq., (especially Isaiah 2:18; Isaiah 2:21,) to Isaiah 2:10 a.4. And the idols—the earth.Isaiah 2:17-21. The judgment against the sub-human creatures is followed by that against the superhuman, the idols. As verses 13–16 refer back to Isaiah 2:7, so Isaiah 2:18 sqq., does to Isaiah 2:8.
But the judgment against the idols is most notably accomplished when the worshippers of idols, now visited by the despised, true God, in all His terrible reality, see themselves the nothingness of their idols and cast them away in contempt. Jehovah appears in the awful pomp of His majesty. If the gods were anything, then they would now appear and shield their followers. But, just because they are ΰֱ ?μִ ?ιμִ ?ινnothings; they cannot do it. We see from this that the “enter into the rock and hide thee in the dust” Isaiah 2:10, refers especially to the bringing to shame these illusory superhuman highnesses. In Revelation 6:12 sqq., when at Isaiah 2:15 our passage is alluded to, the shaking of the earth appears as the effect of a great earthquake.
Regarding the uses loquendi comp. Isaiah 8:12-13; Isaiah 29:23; Isaiah 47:12.
Therefore men shall cast their idols away to the gnawing beasts of the night, in their unclean holes, not that their flight may be easier, but because the idols belong there. May there not be an allusion in the words to the demon origin of the idols (1 Corinthians 10:20 sq.)? In the description of “A little excursion into the Land of Moab,” contained in the Magazine Sueddeutche Reichspost, 1872, No. 257 sqq., we read in No. 257 the following, in reference to the discovery of a large image of Astarte. “The Bedouins dig in the numerous artificial and natural caves for saltpetre for making gunpowder. In this way they find these objects that in their time were buried or just thrown there, which, in the judgment of those that understand such matters, belonged all of them once in some way to heathen worship, and on which the prophecy of Isa 2:20 has been so literally fulfilled.”—Thus they cast their idols away, they entertain themselves no more with the care and worship of them, all trust in them is also gone. They only hasten to save themselves by flight into the caverns (πְ ?χָ ?ψָ ?δ) see Exodus 33:22 from πָ ?χַ ?ψ, to bore,) and crevices of the rocks (comp. Isaiah 57:5). We are, moreover, reminded of the words in Luke 23:30. “Then shall they begin to say to the mountains fall on us; and to the hills, cover us.” For what wish can be left to those that have fled to the rocks, when the rocks themselves begin to shake, except to be covered as soon as possible from the tumbling mountains.
[Isaiah 2:20. Idols of silver and idols of gold. “Here named as the most splendid and expensive, in order to make the act of throwing them away still more significant.
“Moles and bats are put together on account of their defect of sight.”—J. A. A.]
Footnotes:For the Lord of hosts has a day on every thing proud, etc.Heb. pictures of desire.spectacles of desire.Or, shall utterly pass away.Heb. the dust.Heb. the idols of his silver, etc.Or, Which they made for him.fissures.
b. The judgment against the eminent things in the human sphere
Isaiah 2:22 to Isaiah 4:1a. THE AGAINST GODLESS MEN
Isaiah 2:22 to Isaiah 3:1522 Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his nostrils:
For wherein is he to be accounted of?
1 For, behold, the Lord, the Lord of hosts,
Doth take away from Jerusalem and from Judah
The stay and the staff,
The whole stay of bread, and the whole stay of water,
2 The mighty man, and the man of war,
The judge, and the prophet, and the prudent, and the ancient,
3 The captain of fifty, and the the honorable man,
And the counsellor, and the cunning artificer, and the eloquent orator.
4 And I will give children to be their princes,
And babes shall rule over them.
5 And the people shall be oppressed,
Every one by another, and every one by his neighbour:
The child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient,
And the base against the honourable.
6 When a man shall take hold of his brother of the house of his father, saying,
Thou hast clothing, be thou our ruler,
And let this ruin be under thy hand:
7 In that day shall he swear, saying,
I will not be a healer;
For in my house is neither bread nor clothing:
Make me not a ruler of the people.
8 For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen:
Because their tongue and their doings are against the Lord,To provoke the eyes of his glory.
9 The show of their countenance doth witness against them;
And they declare their sins as Sodom, they hide it not.
Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves.
10 Say ye to the righteous, that it shall be well with him:For they shall eat the fruit of their doings.
11 Woe unto the wicked! it shall be ill with him;For the reward of his hands shall be given him.
12 As for my people, children are their oppressors,
And women rule over them.
O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err,
And destroy the way of thy paths.
13 The Lord standeth up to plead,
And standeth to judge the people.
14 The Lord will enter into judgment
With the ancients of his people, and the princes thereof:
For ye have eaten up the vineyard;
The spoil of the poor is in your houses.
15 What mean ye that ye beat my people to pieces,
And grind the faces of the poor?
Saith the Lord God of hosts.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_2:22. The verb ηָ ?γַ ?μ occurs several times in Isaiah 1:16; Isaiah 24:8, coll. Isaiah 53:3. The construction with the dative of the person addressed (Dat. ethicus) has here the meaning that this ceasing is in the interest of the person addressed himself.—ηָ ?γַ ?μ with ξִ ?ο: Exodus 14:15; Exodus 23:5; Job 7:16; Proverbs 23:4; 1 Samuel 9:5; 2 Chronicles 35:21.
Chap. III. Isaiah 3:1. ξַ ?ωְׁ ?ςֵ ?οεּ ?ξַ ?ωְׁ ?ςֵ ?πָ ?δ: logically considered there can be no difference between these two words, which moreover occur only here. But the Prophet designs by the words only a rhetorical effect. With sententious brevity he sketches thus the contents of the chapter whose first half treats of the male supports, whose second half of the female.—Examples are not few of concrete nouns which, placed along side of one another, designate the totality by the masculine and feminine endings: Isaiah 11:12; Isaiah 43:6; Jeremiah 48:19; Nahum 2:13; Zechariah 9:17. It is doubtful about πְ ?ξִ ?αְ ?ζָ ?δεְ ?πָ ?ξֵ ?ν, 1 Samuel 15:9.
But abstract nouns are very few that at the same time differentiate the idea as to gender by the gender endings. The most likely case of comparison is ηַ ?φֶּֽ ?ΰֱ ?φָ ?ΰִ ?ινεְ ?δַ ?φְּ ?τִ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ, the male and female branches (Isaiah 22:24). It is doubtful about πְ ?δִ ?ιβִ ?δְ ?ιָ ?δ Micah 2:4 (comp. Caspari, Micah, p. 117). ξִ ?ωְ ?ςָ ?ο found elsewhere only 2 Samuel 22:19 (Psalms 18:19). The feminine form occurs more frequently ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ςֶ ?πֶ ?ϊ: Numbers 21:19; Psalms 23:4; Isaiah 36:6, etc.
Isaiah 3:4. ϊςμεμιν occurs only here and Isaiah 66:4. The form is like ϊַּ ?ηֲ ?πεּ ?πִ ?ιν ,ϊַּֽ ?ςֲ ?πεּ ?πִ ?ιν, etc. The plural can signify the abstract, and this abstract may possibly stand pro concreto; the plural may also have a simple concrete meaning. All these constructions are grammatically possible and have found their defenders. As regards the meaning of the word, the questions arise, whether the word contains the notion of “child” (comp. ξְ ?ςεֹ ?μֵ ?μ ,ςεֹ ?μֵ ?μ) or the notion, “inflict, bring upon, mishandle,” (comp. δִ ?ϊְ ?ςַ ?μֵּ ?μ, Judges 19:25; 1 Samuel 31:4, etc., ϊַּֽ ?ςֲ ?μεּ ?μ ,ξַֽ ?ςֲ ?μָ ?μςֲ ?μִ ?ιμִ ?ιָּ ?δ ,ςֲ ?μִ ?ιμָ ?δ, Isaiah 66:4), or both notions, and whether it is to be taken as subject or as acc. adverbialis to designate the manner and means. That the notion “child” lies in the word appears very conclusively from the preceding πְ ?ςָ ?ψִ ?ιν and from ξְ ?ςεֹ ?μֵ ?μ, Isaiah 3:12.
But it is not at all necessary to exclude the notion vexatio which is decidedly demanded, Isaiah 66:4. One may easily unite both by translating as Delitzsch does, “childish appetites,” or “childish tricks, childish follies.” But the personifying of this idea, or construing it as abstr. pro concreto (puerilia = pueri, Gesenius) though grammatically possible, is still hard. I agree therefore with Hitzig, who translates by “with tyranny, arbitrariness.” Comp. τְ ?μָ ?ΰִ ?ιν ,πεֹ ?ψָ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ ,ξֵ ?ιωָׁ ?ψִ ?ιν, etc.Isaiah 3:5. (Faustrecht.) Such is the sense of πִ ?βַּ ?ωׁ. The word is used of the violent oppression of the Egyptian taskmakers (Exodus 3:7; Exodus 5:6 sqq.), of the creditor (Deuteronomy 15:2-3), of a superior military force of an enemy (1 Samuel 13:6), also of overpowering fatigue (1 Samuel 14:24) or of an unsparingly strict judicial process (Isaiah 53:7). In our passage the Niphal, as one may see from following ΰιωׁ αΰιωׁ εβε, appears intended in a reciprocal sense. Moreover Isaiah uses the word often: Isaiah 3:12; Isaiah 9:3; Isaiah 14:2; Isaiah 58:3; Isaiah 60:17. ψָ ?δָ ?α tumultuari, insolenter tractare: comp.
Isaiah 30:7; Isaiah 51:9.—πִ ?χְ ?μֶ ?δ contemtus, vilis; comp. Isaiah 16:14; 1 Samuel 18:23.
Isaiah 3:6. λִּ ?ι is rendered by many expositors “when”: Vitringa, Hitzig, Ewald, Drechsler, Delitzsch. They therefore take the phrase as protasis to Isaiah 3:7. The consideration that Isaiah 3:6-7 evidently portray, not the reason, but rather the consequence of Isa 3:4, determines me also to adopt this view. By λִּ ?ι, then, a possibility is signified that may often ensue. ξַ ?λְ ?ωֵׁ ?μָ ?δ occurs again only in the plural, Zephaniah 1:3, where it means offendiculum, σκάνδαλον. Besides it is synonym of ξִ ?λְ ?ωֹׁ ?μ. The present situation therefore is manifestly designated as a scandalous one, as a subject of offence.
Isaiah 3:7. ηֹ ?αֵ ?ωׁ part. occurs only here. Other forms of the verb occur in Isaiah in the sense of binding and healing wounds: Isaiah 1:6; Isaiah 30:26; Isaiah 61:1. He repels the allegation that he still has clothing and bread, and declines therefore the honor of becoming judge of his people. χָ ?φִ ?ιο is principally a poetic word. It occurs only twelve times in the Old Testament; three of these in historical books: Joshua 10:24; Judges 11:6; Judges 11:11. Isaiah uses it four times, viz., here, Isaiah 1:10; Isaiah 20:3.
Isaiah 3:8. λָּ ?ωַ ?μ, stumble, totter, fall, Isaiah uses often: Isaiah 5:27; Isaiah 8:15; Isaiah 28:13; Isaiah 40:30; Isaiah 59:10; Isaiah 59:14, etc.—ξַֽ ?ςֲ ?μָ ?μ Isaiah uses only Isaiah 1:16 and Isaiah 3:8; Isaiah 3:10.—ΰֶ ?μ in an inimical sense, as Isaiah 2:4; Genesis 4:8, etc.—The form μַ ?ξְ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ is syncopated from μְ ?δַ ?ξְ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ (Ewald, § 244 b). Comp. Isaiah 1:12; Psalms 78:17. ξָ ?ώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώώψָ ?δ and Hiph. δִ ?ξְ ?ψָ ?δ occur very often with ΰֶ ?ϊΞτִּ ?ιιΧ: Numbers 20:24; Numbers 27:14; Deuteronomy 1:26; Deuteronomy 1:43, etc. Once the Hiph. occurs with the following ΰֵ ?ϊψεּ ?ηεֹ Psalms 106:33, with following γְּ ?αֵ ?ψιΧ Psalms 105:28 ΰִ ?ξְ ?ψֵ ?ιΰֵ ?μ Psalms 107:11; once with ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τָּ ?θַ ?ι Ezekiel 5:6. And so here, too, with following ςֵ ?πֵ ?ιιΧώώώώώώ. In Isaiah the construction with the accusative does not again occur: ξָ ?ψָ ?δ alone with the meaning “rebellem, contumacem esse,” occurs again Isaiah 1:20; Isaiah 1:5; Isaiah 63:10.
Isaiah 3:9. δַ ?λָּ ?ψָ ?δ, which only occurs here, can, in union with τָּ ?πִ ?ιν, have no other meaning than the adverbial form of speech δִ ?λִּ ?ιψτָּ ?πִ ?ιν (Deuteronomy 1:17; Deuteronomy 16:19; Proverbs 24:23; Proverbs 28:21), which means “dignoscere facies, distinguish the countenances, i. e., make a partial distinction” (comp. πָ ?ωָׂ ?ΰτָ ?πִ ?ιν). The notion of partiality indeed does not suit here, although not a few Jewish and Christian expositors understand the words in this sense. The context constrains us rather to go back to the simple fundamental meaning of close observance, particular notice, which is the preliminary of partial distinction. We are the more justified in this as δִ ?λִּ ?ιψ elsewhere too (Isaiah 61:9; Isaiah 63:16; Genesis 31:32, etc.) is used in a sense that proceeds from this fundamental meaning. δλψϊτΧ is therefore the magisterial, so to speak, the juristic, exact observance and investigation of countenances. ςָ ?πֽ ?ϊֳ ?δ, which is likewise a legal term, also favors this view. For it is used as much of the judge that takes cognizance (Exodus 23:2) as of the witness that deposes to the interrogation of the judge: Deuteronomy 19:16; 2 Samuel 1:16 : “thy mouth hath testified (ςָ ?πָ ?δ) against thee.” βָּ ?ξַ ?μ occurs in Isaiah again only Isaiah 63:7. The form of sentence in Isaiah 3:10 a is owing to the well known attraction, common also in Greek, by means of which the subject of the dependent phrase becomes the object of the principal verb.
There is no need, therefore, of taking ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψ in the sense of pr�dicare. But it is simply “say, speak out loud, be not silent, that the righteous is well off.” There is, thus, no need of referring to passages as Psalms 40:11; Psalms 145:6; Psalms 145:11. That θεֹ ?α may mean not only bonus, but also bene habens, well off, is shown beyond contradiction by passages like Amos 6:2; Jeremiah 44:17; Psalms 112:5.
Isaiah 3:11. According to our remarks at Isaiah 1:4 concerning ΰεֹ ?ι, it is agreeable to usus loquendi to connect it with μְ ?ψָ ?ωָׁ ?ς. Besides in the best editions they are so bound (comp. Delitzsch in loc.). Therefore ψַ ?ς is to be taken in the same way as θεֹ ?α Isaiah 3:10. To be sure, there is no passage we can cite in which ψַ ?ς means infelix, as we can for θεֹ ?α meaning felix.
For Psalms 106:32, and Genesis 47:9 ψַ ?ς is both times not used of personal subjects. And there are no other places to cite. One must therefore say, that the prophet in respect of the meaning of ψַ ?ς has in Isaiah 3:11 a imitated the corresponding part of Isa 3:10.—βְּ ?ξεּ ?μ is performance, product, desert. Comp. Judges 9:16; Proverbs 12:14. The word is found in Isaiah again Isaiah 35:4; Isaiah 59:18; Isaiah 66:6.
What the hands of the wicked have themselves produced shall be joined to, put on them.
Isaiah 3:12. The singular ξְּ ?ςεֹ ?μֵ ?μ has general significance and hence represents an ideal plural. Comp. ψςֵ ?δφֹ ?ΰοςֲ ?λָ ?γֶ ?ικָ Genesis 47:3. As regards the form of the word, which occurs here only, ξְ ?ςεֹ ?μֵ ?μ is the root form for ςεֹ ?μֵ ?μ (1 Samuel 15:3; Isaiah 13:16, etc.) or ςεֹ ?μָ ?μ (Jeremiah 6:11; Jeremiah 9:20).
Isaiah 3:13. πִ ?φָּ ?α (in Isaiah only again Isaiah 21:8) expresses the opposite of movement. πִ ?φָּ ?α and ςֹ ?ξֵ ?γ along side of each other occur 1 Samuel 19:20.—ψִ ?ια and γִּ ?ιο though not seldom interchanged (comp. Isaiah 1:17), still stand here side by side. But comp. Jeremiah 15:10; Hebrews 1:3.—The expression αεֹ ?ΰαξωׁ ?τθ “enter into judgment” occurs only here in Isaiah. Comp. beside Job 9:32; Job 14:3; Job 22:4; Psalms 143:2; Ecclesiastes 11:9; Ecclesiastes 12:14.
Isaiah 3:14. The Piel αִּ ?ςֵ ?ψ occurs in this sense in Isaiah only again Isaiah 5:5; comp. Exodus 22:4. It is depascere, grazing of cattle. Elsewhere it is used of fire (Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 40:16; Isaiah 44:15; Isaiah 1:11). βζμδ only here in Isaiah, βָּ ?ζֵ ?μ Isaiah 61:8.
Isaiah 3:15. γִּ ?λָּ ?ΰ to stamp, trample (Isaiah 19:10; Isaiah 53:5; Isaiah 53:10) is intensified by ύτּ ?ΧςΧϊθηπεis to grind, pound fine, Isaiah 47:2.
AND 1. Isaiah 3 connects quite easily and simply with Isaiah 2 so far as it continues the idea of the judgment, and to this effect, that it is now extended to the sphere of human existence. Isaiah 2:22 makes the appropriate transition. For therein the Prophet warns against trusting in men, who are only weak transitory creatures. Isaiah 3, also, with this fundamental idea, subdivides into two parts, of which the first (Isaiah 3:1-15) treats of the men, the second (Isaiah 3:16 to Isaiah 4:1) of the women. And yet we at once receive the impression that in Isaiah 3 he is treading ground dominated by other sentiments.
For while chap. 2 discourses quite evidently of the judgment that in the last time, the great day of Jehovah, shall be passed on sub-human and superhuman creatures, Isaiah 3 seems only to speak of acts of judgment that do not bring the continuation of human kind into question. Moreover, in as much as an ordered government is essential to the very existence of such continuance, the removal of those in power enumerated in Isaiah 3:2-3 does not appear to be a punishment of these themselves for their loftiness, but of the people. Those authorities appear as a benefit that is withdrawn from the sinful nation, and in their stead they are abandoned to the miseries of anarchy, or of a boy and woman government. If now the removal of these pillars, the great and mighty (Isaiah 3:2-3), is because they on their part share the blame, still that is not the principal thought. But the chief matter is that from the nation, which (Isaiah 3:8) had “provoked the eyes of the glory” of the Lord, shall be taken away the indispensable support of its customary and natural rulers. In connection with Isaiah 2 one expects a specifying of the contents, that as the sub-human and superhuman magnates must be humbled so, too, must the human magnates be.
But this thought comes up only at Isaiah 3:13-15. Hence Isaiah 3:1-21 make on me the impression of a discourse that originally did not belong in this connection, but which was inserted here because it still in some measure suits the context. It is possible that originally these words were directed against the bad government of Ahaz, who came to the throne as a young man of 20 years (2 Kings 16:2), although, taken strictly, they portray conditions that really never occurred either under Ahaz or in any other stadium of Jewish history.
Because Isaiah 3:1, presupposes the destruction of human magnates, that were for themselves and others an object of unjustifiable confidence (Isaiah 2:22), the discourse as regards its matter fits the context (comp. Isaiah 2:11). But it fits in also in chronological respects, so far as all acts of divine judgment constitute a unity; consequently all visitations that precede the last judgment belong essentially to it as precursors. But that the Prophet notwithstanding makes a distinction appears from Isaiah 3:13-15.
The order of thought in our passage, then, is as follows: After the Prophet had signified by Isaiah 2:22, that now he would proceed to the judgment against every high thing among men, he classifies in advance Isaiah 3:1 the contents of what he has to say, in that he announces that Judah and Jerusalem shall be deprived of every support, male and female. The male supports he then enumerates Isaiah 3:2-3. If these are removed, of course only children and women remain as supports of the commonwealth. The misery of boy rule, that gradually degenerates into anarchy, is portrayed Isaiah 3:4-7 in vigorous lines. This misery is the symptom of prevalent ruin in Judah and Jerusalem, and the consequence of those crimes committed against the Lord (Isaiah 3:8), that are public and not at all denied. These, therefore, are the self-meriting cause of that misery (Isaiah 3:9); for as the righteous reap salvation as fruit of their works (Isaiah 3:10), so the wicked destruction (Isaiah 3:11).
Thus it comes that children and women rule over the nation and that these bad guides lead it into destruction (Isaiah 3:12). But this self-merited temporal misfortune is only the prelude of that still higher judgment that Jehovah shall conduct in proper person which, according to chap. 2, shall take place at the end of days, and by which the Lord shall finally rescue the pith of the people, but will drag their destroyers to a merited accountability.
2. Cease ye—accounted of ?—Isaiah 2:22. As, in what precedes, the trust in things falsely eminent, in money, in power, in idolatry, was demonstrated as vanity, so the same occurs here in regard to men. “Cease from men,” says the Prophet. How shall man be an object of trust, how shall he be a support, seeing the principle of his life is the air that he breathes in and out of his nostrils, thus the fugitive quickly disappearing breath? Thence man himself is called so often δֶ ?αֶ ?μbreath;Psalms 39:6-7; Psalms 39:12; Psalms 62:10, etc., comp. Genesis 4:2.—The expression “whose breath is in his nostrils” calls to mind Genesis 2:7; Genesis 7:22; Job 27:3.—“For wherein is he to be accounted of?” Man as such, i. e., as bearer of the divine image in earthly form (ΰָ ?γָ ?ν) is of course of great value before God.
Comp. Psalms 8:5 sqq.; Job 7:17. In these passages the inquiry “what is man” reminds one very much of the inquiry of our Prophet. But as helper, saviour, defender, support, man counts for little, yea less than nothing, according to Psalms 62:10. For as one knows at once from Isaiah 3:1 sqq., human props may in a twinkling all of them be taken away. The preposition αְּ stands here as elsewhere (comp.
Isaiah 7:2) as sign of the price that is regarded as the means for purchasing the wares or work.
3. For behold—eloquent orator.—Isaiah 3:1-3. The solemn accumulation of the names of God that occurs here, occurs in like manner Isaiah 1:24; Isaiah 10:16; Isaiah 10:33; Isaiah 19:4. The subject addressed appears here also the chief city and the chief tribe of the people of Israel. But while, 1 and 2, it is always said “Judah and Jerusalem,” here (Isaiah 3:8) it is said “Jerusalem and Judah.” This is not without meaning, and we are perhaps justified in finding therein a support for the conjecture expressed above, that our passage did not originate at the same time with what precedes and what follows it, but is inserted here. The following words: “the whole stay of bread and the whole stay of water” appear to interrupt the connection.
For when, Isaiah 3:2-3, the different categories of kinds of human callings are enumerated, and Isaiah 3:16 sqq., the proud, aristocratic, decked out ladies are portrayed, is that not the specification of the ideas ξωׁ ?ςο and ξωׁ ?ςπδ, stay and staff? And what have bread and water to do here, seeing everything impersonal has already been noticed above Isaiah 2:13-16? It is conceivable that a reader, who did not understand the relation of the two words to what follows, had made a gloss of them in this sense, and that this gloss then had crept into the text. Such is the conjecture of Hitzig, Knobel, Meier, and—though afterwards retracted—of Gesenius and Umbreit. The expression “stay” might call to mind the expression “comfort your hearts with a morsel of bread” (Genesis 18:5; Judges 19:5; Judges 19:8; Psalms 104:15) and the expression “staff of bread” (Leviticus 26:26; Ezekiel 4:16; Ezekiel 5, 16). That just bread and water are named as corresponding to ξωׁ ?ςο and ξωׁ ?ςπδ might have its reason in this, that they recognized in bread the female principle and in water the male.
But it is always doubtful to assume an interpolation only on internal grounds. Ewald and Drechsler understand the words in a figurative sense. The stay of bread and of water signify the supports that are necessary as bread and water. But Knobel justly remarks that this were an unheard of trope. May not all those be called “staffs of bread and water” that provide the state with bread and water, i. e., with all that pertains to daily bread? Call to mind the explanation of the fourth petition in Luther’s catechism, wherein “pious and faithful rulers” and “good government” are reckoned as daily bread too.
Staff of bread, etc., would be therefore, not the bread and water themselves as supports for preserving life (Genitive of the subject), but the supports on which bread and water, i. e., the necessities and nourishment of life depend (genitive of the object).
In the following enumeration, as Drechsler remarks, the instructors and military profession are especially represented. Even the entire apparatus of state machinery of that day is mentioned. But as all that are named are designated as those that the Lord takes away, it is seen that they are all regarded as false supports. They may even be that per se in so far as they ought not to exist at all among the people of God; as e. g., the χֹ ?ρֵ ?ν, diviner and the πְ ?αεֹ ?ομַ ?ηַ ?ωׁ, expert enchanter, (Deuteronomy 18:10-14). μַ ?ηַ ?ωׁ is the murmuratio (magia murmurata Apul.), the muttered repetition of the magic formulas (Isaiah 26:16); πַ ?αεֹ ?ο occurs again Isaiah 5:21; Isaiah 29:14.
Even the πָ ?αִ ?ιΰ may, according to the context and the kindred passage Isaiah 9:14, be only prophets that prophesy falsely in the name of Jehovah. The use of the rest of the callings named is indeed legally justified, but nevertheless they are subject to abuse. One may indeed cast a doubt on the legality of the πְ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?ΰτָ ?πִ ?ιν (comp. Isaiah 9:14) the amicus regis, the preferred favorite, but not on that of the others. Especially the men of war appear to be indispensable, whence each of the verses 2 and 3 begins with the naming of such. βִּ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ψ seems to mean ‘the warrior proved by deeds; ΰִ ?ιωׁ ξִ ?μְ ?ηָ ?ξָ ?δ the man of war in general; ωַׂ ?ψΞδֲ ?ξִ ?ωִּׁ ?ιν the rank of captain; while the ωׁ ?εֹ ?τֵ ?θ = state officer and ζָ ?χֵ ?ο = officer of the congregation. Ahithophel and Hushai (2 Samuel 17) are practical illustrations of ιεֹ ?ςַ ?υ, counsellor. The ηֲ ?λַ ?νηֲ ?ψָ ?ωִׁ ?ιν is the engineer, master of the preparation of warlike weapons and military machines (comp. on Jeremiah 24:1).
4. And I will give—a ruler of the people.
Isaiah 3:4-7. When a state trusts to an arm of flesh, and puts its trust solely in its princes and men of might, in its diplomats and generals, in a word, in the strength of its men, and the Lord takes away these strong ones as false supports, then, of course, a condition must ensue in which weak hands manage the rudder of state. No earthly state has continuously maintained a position strong and flourishing. One need only call to mind the world-monarchies. That gradual weakening of the world-power indicated in Daniel’s image of the monarchies (Daniel 2), takes place also within each individual kingdom. Call to mind the vigorous Assyrian rulers, a Tiglath Pileser, Sargon, Sennacherib, and the inglorious end of the last of their successors, whatever may have been his name: think of Nebuchadnezzar, and Belshazzar, of Cyrus and Darius Codomannus, of Augustus and Romulus Augustulus, etc.
In Judah, too, it was not different. Zedekiah was a weakling that perpetually wavered between a fear of Jehovah’s prophet and of his own powerful subjects. It may, therefore, be said that not some quite definite historical fact is prophesied here, but a condition of punishment is threatened such as always and everywhere must ensue where the strength of a national life is exhausted, and the end approaches (comp. Ecclesiastes 10:16).
When weak hands hold the reins of government a condition of lawlessness ensues, and of defencelessness for the weak. The strong then do as they wish. They exercise club law. A further consequence of that anarchical condition is that those of lower rank no longer submit to the higher ranks, but, in wicked abuse of their physical strength, lift themselves above them. The misery of that anarchical condition, however, stands out in strongest relief when at last no one will tolerate any government. Although the inhabitants would gladly make a ruler of any one that rises in any degree above the universal wretchedness (say any one that has still a good coat), yet every one on whom they would put this honor will resist it with all his might. “Under thy hand,” comp.
Genesis 41:35; 2 Kings 8:20. With loud voice will the chosen man emphatically protest. This is indicated by the expression ιִ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ to which χεֹ ?μ must be supplied (Isaiah 42:2; Isaiah 42:11). “I will not be surgeon,” he says, by which he calls the state life sick. [“The sick man,” as modern designation for the Turkish Empire.—Tr.].
[On Isaiah 3:4. “I will give children.” “Some apply this, in a strict sense, to the weak and wicked reign of Ahaz, others in a wider sense to the series of weak kings after Isaiah. But there is no need of restricting it to kings at all. The most probable opinion is that incompetent rulers are called boys or children not in respect to age but character.—J. A. A. Similarly Barnes.On Isaiah 3:6. “The government shall go a begging.
It is taken for granted that there is no way of redressing all these grievances, and bringing things into order again, but by good magistrates, who shall be invested with power by common consent, and shall exert that power for the good of the community. And it is probable that this was in many places the true origin of government; men found it necessary to unite in a subjection to one who was thought fit for such a trust,—being aware that they must be ruled or ruined.”—M. Henry.On Isaiah 3:7. “The last clause does not simply mean do not make me, but you must not or you shall not make me a ruler.”—J. A. A.
“The meaning is, that the state of affairs was so ruinous and calamitous that he would not attempt to restore them—as if in the body, disease should have so far progressed that he would not undertake to restore the person, and have him die under his hands, so as to expose himself to the reproach of being an unsuccessful and unskilful physician.”—Barnes.On Isaiah 3:9. “The sense is not that their looks betray them, but that they make no effort at concealment, as appears from the reference to Sodom. The expression of the same idea first in a positive and then in a negative form is not uncommon in Scripture, and is a natural if not an English idiom. Madame D. Arblay, in her memoirs of Dr. Burney, speaks of Omiah, the Tahitian, brought home by Capt. Cook, as uttering first affirmatively, etc., then negatively all the little sentences that he attempted to utter.”—J.
A. A.
On Isaiah 3:10. “The righteous are encouraged by the assurance that the judgments of God shall not be indiscriminate.—The object of address seems to be not the prophets or ministers of God, but the people at large or men indefinitely.”—J. A. A.
“Whatever becomes of the unrighteous nation, let the righteous man know that he shall not be lost in the crowd of sinners: the Judge of all the earth will not slay the righteous with the wicked (Genesis 18:25); no, assure him, in God’s name, that it shall be well with him. The property of the trouble shall be altered to him, and he shall be hidden in the day of the Lord’s anger.—M. Henry.]
5. For Jerusalem—thy paths.
Isaiah 3:8-12. Such a condition of anarchy is only a symptom of the outward and inward decay. It is never blameless, but always blameworthy misfortune. As the second hemistich of Isa 3:8, evidently describes the inward decay, the first must consequently be referred to the outward. But hemistich 2 is strung on with λִּ ?ι with a chain-like effect. The anarchy is the symptom of the outward decay; but the outward decay is the consequence of that which is inward.
With Drechsler I translate by “insult the eyes of his glory.” It is evident, that the Prophet would indicate a direct antithesis between the glory of Jehovah, and the bad tongues and works, as also an antithesis between “the eyes of the loftiness of man” Isaiah 2:11; Isaiah 5:15 and “the eyes of the glory of Jehovah.” The eyes of God who is God of light (Isaiah 60:19; Micah 7:8; 1 John 1:5) are insulted just by this, that they must see the works of darkness. It seems to me, on this account, clear that the divine majesty is designated as glorious chiefly in respect to its purity and holiness; therefore ethically. That, moreover, the eyes of the glory of God, are not something different from the eyes of God Himself is just as clear as that the eyes of the glory must themselves be glorious. They are here the organ of the manifestation of His glory (comp. Revelation 2:18), as in other places it speaks of the arm of His salvation (Isaiah 40:10), of His holiness, (Isaiah 52:10) of His strength (Isaiah 62:8). Besides the expression is only found here, as may be said also of the defective writing of it.
The Prophet had (Isaiah 3:8) assigned the badness of the words and work as the cause of the fall. But is this accusation well founded? Yes, it is. A double and unexceptionable witness testifies to its truth: 1) the cognitio vultuum, knowledge of countenances. Thus we might translate: “appearance testifies against thee.” (See Text. and Gr.)
2.) Their own declaration, though not made with this intention. “Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.” The godless cannot lock up that of which his heart is full. The mouth, as it were, foams over involuntarily with it. The Sodomites, too, (comp. Isaiah 1:9-10) spoke out insolently the shameful purpose they had in mind (Genesis 19:3). So the Israelites made no concealment of the evil they had in mind. Therefore their ruin is merited (comp.
Genesis 50:15; Genesis 50:17) and just. The sentence: “woe to them, for they have hurt themselves” which, Isaiah 3:9 b, is especially applied to Israel, is established in what follows, by stating in its double aspect the fundamental and universal truth that underlies it, that a man must reap what he sows. First, the righteous is pronounced blessed because he shall eat the (good) fruits of his (good) works. As that universal truth of the causal connection between works and the fate of men is not expressed, but assumed, so that aspect of it that relates to the righteous is not expressed in doctrinal form, but, vigorous and life like, in the form of a summons to declare the righteous blessed.
The happiness of the righteous will consist in this, that he shall enjoy the fruit of his works (Proverbs 1:31). To the wicked, on the other hand, a woe is proclaimed. The happiness of the pious is announced to every one; the vengence that shall overtake the wicked is announced to himself alone.
Isaiah 3:12. Is a resumι. In these words the whole course of thought from Isaiah 3:1-11, is comprehended again. The two halves of Isa 3:12 begin with ςַ ?ξִּ ?ι“My people” put before absolutely, which shows how much the Lord loves His people, and how much the state of things portrayed makes Him sorry for His people. The word πֹ ?βְ ?ωִׂ ?ιν, oppressors, is used of those whom the people, for want of better, in consequence of that oppression mentioned in Isaiah 3:5, had been obliged to make chiefs. By this is intimated that these supports of necessity shall themselves be no proper chiefs that merit the name, but only rude oppressors. Comp. Isaiah 9:3; Isaiah 14:2; Isaiah 60:17. They are so, not in spite of, but just because of their being children, boys.
ξְ ?ΰַ ?ωֵּׁ ?ψqui rectβ ducit, comp. Isaiah 1:17. The word is meant ironically, for how else could the ξΰωּ ?ψ be a ξַ ?ϊְ ?ςֶ ?δ? Our passage as already remarked stands in evident connection with Isaiah 9:15. There too the leaders are called misleaders; there, too, the word αμς is used of those who mislead, for they are called ξְ ?αֻ ?μָּ ?ςִ ?ιּ ?ν. We see by this that the Prophet has not in mind the same persons in the second half of the verse that he has in the first.
He speaks in the second clause of the false prophets, as in Isaiah 9:14 sq. Like flies in honey, this vermin is ever found where there are bad rulers. For they need false prophets to cover over their doings. These false prophets, however, devour the path of the people. Delitzsch (like Jerome, Theodoret, Luther before him) understands by “the way of their paths” the right way, the way of the law. “The prophets, that ought to preach it, say mum, mum, and retain it swallowed. It has gone into oblivion by false prophetic, errorneous preaching:” But it seems to me as if then it must not read γψκΰψηϊικ, the way of thy paths.
For this is just the way that Israel actually treads, the direction that its life path actually tends. It must then read way of Jehovahγֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ ιΧ as Psalms 18:22, or γΰֱ ?ξεּ ?πָ ?δ, or ύψΧξִ ?ςְ ?εֹ ?ϊιΧ, as Psalms 119:30; Psalms 119:32, or ΰֹ ?ψַ ?ηξωְׁ ?τָּ ?θ as Isaiah 40:14 or ύγ֝ ωָׁ ?μζֹ ?ν as Isaiah 59:8, or such like. I therefore agree with the explanation of those that take αμς in a metaphorical sense like that where this word is elsewhere used of the destruction of a city (2 Samuel 20:19-20) or of a wall (Lamentations 2:8). The expression only occurs in this place in relation to a way, but it must mean nothing else than to direct the path of one’s life down into the depths of destruction in which the devourers themselves are. Comp. Job 6:18.
6. The Lord standeth up—the Lord of Hosts.
Isaiah 3:13-15. At first sight one might think these three verses bring the further explication of one matter of moment in Isaiah 3:1-12, viz., the more particular laying down of the judgment against the chiefs of the nation which was only indicated in Isaiah 3:1, by ξֵ ?ρִ ?ιψ“taking away” and in Isaiah 3:12 by the reproach uttered against them.
But we see from the solemnity of Isa 3:13, especially from the antithesis between ςַ ?ξִּ ?ιν and ςַ ?ξּ ?εֹ (ςַ ?ξִּ ?ι Isaiah 3:14-15), “the people and His people” that we are introduced into quite another moment of time. For evidently Isaiah 3:13-15 depict again the judgment of the world. “The world’s judgment presents itself anew before his soul,” says Delitzsch. “The people” Isaiah 3:13, recalls distinctly “the nations” and “many people” of Isaiah 2:2-4. However, it is not the judging of the nations generally that is portrayed, but only the judging of the people of God as a part of this universal judgment. Moreover, not of the nation in its totality, but of the destroyers of this totality, the princes and elders (Isaiah 3:14 a). These appear, therefore, as the chief agents of that inward and outward decay that has invaded the nation. If, according to Isaiah 2:3, all nations are to stream to the mountain of the Lord, because the law shall go forth out of Zion, then, evidently, Jerusalem itself must previously be cleansed and filled with the word of God.
This cleansing, according to Isaiah 9:13 sqq., begins with this, that the Lord will cast off from Israel head and tail. The elders are the head, the false prophets are the tail. Here too, though a briefer, still a comprehensible, hint is given that indicates the sort of purifying that Israel itself must undergo in order to become what, according to Isaiah 2:3, it ought to become. This hint makes on me the impression that Isaiah 3:1-12 does, viz., that a word spoken on some other occasion has been applied to this purpose. Comp., the comment on Isaiah 3:16 sqq. Unmoved and unmovable (comp.
Genesis 37:7) i.e., as one whom no one can crowd from this place, the Lord conducts the judgment; and that standing, not sitting, therefore ready and prepared for instant execution of the judgment, He exercises the magisterial function, Psalms 82:1, which so far resembles our passage that it also describes the judgment upon the magistrates of the people, represents too, the Lord as a judge in standing posture. Elsewhere He is represented as sitting in judgment: Psalms 9:5; Psalms 29:10; Joel 4:12, etc.The discourse of the Lord begins with the second clause of Isa 3:14, with εΰϊν, “but ye,” thus with a conclusion to which the premise must be supplied. It is the same construction as Psalms 2:6. The premise to be supplied must be to this effect: “I have made you commanders that ye might administer justice. But ye,” etc. The princes have regarded the nation as their domain which they might use up as they pleased.
They have, therefore, themselves become the cattle from which they ought to have protected the vineyard. The he-goat had become gardener (Delitzsch). Comp. Isaiah 1:23; Micah 3:1-3. The image of the devoured vineyard is at once explained; robbery, plunder wrested from the poor is found in their houses. To the “but you” of Isaiah 3:14 corresponds an equally emphatic “what mean ye” that begins Isaiah 3:15.
The flow of words is so fast that even the λִּ ?ιfor, that otherwise would follow the question (comp. Isaiah 22:1; Isaiah 22:16) is wanting (comp. Jonah 1:6, where, however, the construction is somewhat different). To grind to pieces the face of a man appears to me to be the expression for beating to pieces the face (1 Kings 22:24; Mich. 4:14) in the intensest degree. The expression is exactly the opposite of permuclere faciemημδτּ ?ΧPsalms 45:13; Proverbs 19:6. The high significance of the declaration is, in conclusion, evidenced by the reference of it to “the Lord Jehovah Sabaoth,” concerning which see the comment at Isaiah 1:9; Isaiah 1:24.
[On Isaiah 3:13. “Nations here as often elsewhere means the tribes of Israel. See Genesis 49:10; Deuteronomy 32:8; Deuteronomy 33:3; Deuteronomy 33:19; 1 Kings 22:28; Micah 1:2.”—J. A. A.
On Isaiah 3:15. “Grind the faces of the poor. The simplest and most natural interpretation is that which applies it to the act of grinding the face upon the ground by trampling on the body, thus giving the noun and verb their proper meaning and making the parallelism more exact.”—J. A. A.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 2:2. Domus Dei, etc. “The house of God is built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, who, themselves, too, are mountains, quasi imitators of Christ. (They that trust in the Lord shall be as Mount Zion, Psalms 125:1) Whence, also, upon one of the mountains Christ founded the Church and said: Thou art Peter, etc., Matthew 16:18.” Jerome.——“We can understand Jerusalem by the mountain of God, for we see how the believing run thither, and how those that have accepted the testimony come thither and seize the blessing that proceeds thence. But we may also by the house of God understand the churches spread over land and sea, as we believe St. Paul, who says, ‘we are the house of God,’ Hebrews 3:6. And so we may recognize the truth of the prophecy.
For the Church of God stands shining forth, and the nations, forsaking wickedness that has long had dominion over them, hasten to her and are enlightened by her.” Theodoret.——Ecclesia est, etc. “The church is a mountain exalted and established above all other mountains, but in spirit. For if you regard the external look of the church from the beginning of the world, then in New Testament times, you will see it oppressed, contemned, and in despair. Yet, notwithstanding, in that contempt it is exalted above all mountains. For all kingdoms and all dominions that have ever been in the world have perished. The church alone endures and triumphs over heresies, tyrants, Satan, sin, death and hell, and that by the word only, by this despised and feeble speech alone. Moreover it is a great comfort that the bodily place, whence first the spiritual kingdom should arise, was so expressly predicted, that consciences are assured of that being the true word, that began first to be preached in that corner of Judea, that it may be for us a mount Zion, or rule for judging of all religions and all doctrines.
The Turkish Alcoran did not begin in Zion—therefore it is wicked doctrine. The various Popish rites, laws, traditions began not in Zion—therefore they are wicked, and the very doctrines of devils. So we may hold ourselves upright against all other religions, and comfort our hearts with this being the only true religion which we profess. Therefore, too, in two psalms, Psalms 2, 110, mount Zion is expressly signified: “I have set my king upon my holy hill of Zion;” likewise: “The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion.” Luther.2. On Isaiah 2:2. Luther makes emphatic, as something pertaining to “the wonderful nature of this kingdom,” that “other kingdoms are established and administered by force and arms.
But here, because the mountain is lifted up, the nation shall flow (fluent), i.e., they shall come voluntarily, attracted by the virtues of the church. For what is there sweeter or lovelier than the preaching of the gospel? Whereas Moses frightens weak souls away. Thus the prophet by the word fluent, “flow,” has inlaid a silent description of the kingdom of Christ, which Christ gives more amply when He says: Matthew 11:12, “the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force,” i.e. “they are not compelled, but they compel themselves.” “Morever rivers do not flow up mountains, but down them; but here is such an unheard-of thing in the kingdom of Christ.”—Starke.3. Luther remarks on “and shall say: come,” etc. “Here thou seest the worship, works and efforts and sacrifices of Christians. For they do only the one work, that they go to hear and to learn.
All the rest of the members must serve their neighbors. These two, ears and heart, must serve God only. For the kingdom rests on the word alone. Sectaries and heretics, when they have heard the gospel once, instantly become masters, and pervert the Prophet’s word, in that they say: Come let us go up that we may teach him his way and walk in our paths. They despise, therefore, the word as a familiar thing and seek new disputations by which they may display their spirit and commend themselves to the crowd. But Christians know that the words of the Holy Ghost can never be perfectly learned as long as we are in the flesh.
For Christianity does not consist in knowing, but in the disposition. This disposition can never perfectly believe the word on account of the weakness of the sinful flesh. Hence they ever remain disciples and ruminate the word, in order that the heart, from time to time, may flame up anew. It is all over with us if we do not continue in the constant use of the word, in order to oppose it to Satan in temptation (Matthew 4). For immediately after sinning ensues an evil conscience, that can be raised up by nothing but the word. Others that forsake the word sink gradually from one sin into another, until they are ruined.
Therefore Christianity must be held to consist in hearing the word, and those that are overcome by temptations, whether of the heart or body, may know that their hearts are empty of the word.”
4. Vitringa remarks on the words, “Out of Zion goes forth the law,” Isaiah 5:3. “If strife springs up among the disciples concerning doctrine or discipline, one must return to the pattern of the doctrine and discipline of the school at Jerusalem. For ιָ ?φָ ?ΰ “shall go forth,” stands here only as in Luke 2:1, “There went forth a decree from Cζsar Augustus.” In this sense, too, Paul says, 1 Corinthians 14:36, “What? came the word of God out from you?” The word of God did not go forth from Corinth, Athens, Rome, Ephesus, but from Jerusalem, a fact that bishops assembled in Antioch opposed to Julius I. (Sozom. hist. eccl. III. 8, “the orientals acknowledged that the Church of Rome was entitled to universal honor—although those who first propagated a knowledge of Christian doctrine in that city came from the East”). Cyril took ιָ ?φָ ?ΰ in the false sense of κατελἐλοιπετὴνΣιών, “has forsaken Zion.” When the Lord opened the understandings of the disciples at Emmaus, to understand the Scriptures and see in the events they had experienced the fulfilment of what was written concerning Him in the law, Prophets and Psalms, He cannot have forgotten the present passage. Of this we may be the more assured since the words: “Thus it is written and thus it behooved Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations beginning at Jerusalem.” Luke 24:46-47, point clearly to Isaiah 2:2-3 of our passage.
Therefore too, Justin Martyr Apol. i. (commonly ii.), § 49, says: “But where the prophetic spirit predicts the future, he says: from Zion shall go forth the law, etc. And that this finally came to pass in fact, you may credibly assure yourselves. For from Jerusalem have men gone forth into the world, twelve in number, and these were unlearned, that knew not how to speak. But by the might of God they have proclaimed to all mankind that they were sent by Christ in order to teach all the word of God.”
“Zion is contrasted here with Mount Sinai, whence the law came, which in the Old Testament was the foundation of all true doctrine: But in the New Testament Mount Zion or Jerusalem has the privilege to announce that now a more perfect law would be given and a new Covenant of God with men would be established. Thus Zion and Jerusalem are, so to speak, the nursery and the mother of all churches and congregations of the New Testament.”—Starke.5. Fφrster remarks on the end of Isa 2:3, that the gospel is the sceptre of Jesus Christ, according to Psalms 110:2; Psalms 45:7 (the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre). “For by the word Christ rules His church (Romans 10:14 sqq.).”
6. On Isaiah 2:4. “Pax optima rerum.” Foerster. The same author finds this prophecy fulfilled by Christ, who is our peace, who has made of both one, and broken down the partition that was between, in that by His flesh He took away the enmity (Ephesians 2:14). Foerster, moreover, combats the Anabaptists, who would prove from this passage that waging war is not permitted to Christians. For our passage speaks only against the privata Christianorum discordia. But waging war belongs to the publicum magistratus officium.
Waging war, therefore, is not forbidden, if only the war is a just one. To be such, however, there must appear according to Thomas, part. 2 th. qu�st. 40. 1) auctoritatis principis, 2) causa justa, 3) intentio bellantium justa, or ut allii efferunt: 1) jurisdictio indicentis, 2) offensio patientis, 3) intentio finem (?) convenientis.7. On Isaiah 2:4. Jerome regarded the time of Augustus, after his victory at Actium, as the fulfilling of this prophecy. Others, as Cocceius, refer the words, “they shall turn their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning-hooks,” to the time of Constantine the Great; and the words “nation shall not lift up sword against nation” to the period of the restoration of religious peace in Germany,—finally the words: “they shall no more learn war,” to a future time that is to be hoped for. Such interpretations are, however, just as one-sided as those that look only for a spiritual fulfilment of prophecy.
For how is an inward fulfilment of this promise of peace to be thought of which would not have the outward effects as its consequence? Or how is an outward fulfilment, especially such as would deserve the name, conceivable without the basis of the inward? Or must this peaceful time be looked for only in heaven? Why then does the promise stand here? It is a matter of course that there is peace in heaven: for where there is no peace there can be no heaven. The promise has sense only if its fulfilment is to be looked for on earth.
The fulfilment will take place when the first three petitions of the Lord’s prayer are fulfilled, i.e. when God’s name shall be held holy by us as it in itself is holy, when the kingdom of God is come to everything, without and within, and rules alone over all, when the will of God is done on earth as in heaven. Christendom makes this prayer quite as much with the consciousness that it cannot remain unfulfilled, as with the consciousness that it must find its fulfilment on earth. For, if referred to heaven, these petitions are without meaning. Therefore there is a time of universal inward and outward peace to be looked for on earth. “It is not every day’s evening,” i.e. one must await the event, and our earth, without the least saltus in cogitando, can yet experience a state of things that shall be related to the present, as the present to the period of trilobites and saurians. If one could only keep himself free from the tyranny of the present moment! But our entire, great public, that has made itself at home in Philistia, lives in the sweet confidence that there is no world beside that of which we take notice on the surface of the earth, nor ever was one, nor ever will be.
8. On Isaiah 2:4. Poets reverse the figure to portray the transition from peaceful to warlike conditions. Thus Virgil, Georg. I. 2:506 sq.:
Non ullus aratro
Dignus honos, squalent abductis arva colonis.
Et curvζ rigidum falces conflantur in ensem.
Aeneide VII. 2:635 sq.:
Vomeris huc et falcis honos, huc omnis aratri
Cessit amor; recoquunt patrios fornacibus enses.
Ovid, Fast. I. 2:697 sqq.:
Bella diu tenuere viros. Erat aptior ensis
Vomere, cedebat taurus arator equo.
Sarcula cessabant, versique in pila ligones.
Factaque de rastri pondere cassia erat.
9. On Isaiah 2:5. As Isaiah puts the glorious prophecy of his fellow prophet Micah at the head, he illuminates the future with a splendid, shining, comforting light. Once this light is set up, it of itself suggests comparisons. The questions arise: how does the present stand related to that shining future? What difference obtains?
What must happen for that condition of holiness and glory to be brought about? The Christian Church, too, and even each individual Christian must put himself in the light of that prophetic statement. On the one hand that will humiliate us, for we must confess with the motto of Charles V.: nondum! And long still will we need to cry: Watchman what of the night (Isaiah 21:11)? On the other hand the Prophet’s word will also spur us up and cheer us. For what stronger impulse can be imagined than the certainty that one does not contend in vain, but may hope for a reward more glorious than all that ever came into a man’s heart? (Isaiah 64:4; 1 Corinthians 2:9).
In the time of the second temple, in the evenings of the first days of the feast of Tabernacles, great candelabras were lighted in the forecourt of the temple, each having four golden branches, and their light was so strong that it was nearly as light as day in Jerusalem. That might be for Jerusalem a symbol of that “let us walk in the light of the Lord.” But Jerusalem rejoiced in this light, and carried on all sorts of pastime, yet it was not able to learn to know itself in this light, and by this self-knowledge to come to true repentance and conversion.
10. On Isaiah 2:8, “their land is full of idols.” “Not only images and pictures are idols, but every notion concerning God that the godless heart forms out of itself without the authority of the Scripture. The notion that the Mass is effective ex opere operato, is an idol. The notion that works are demanded for justification with God, is an idol. The notion that God takes delight in fasts, peculiar clothes, a special order of life, is an idol. God wills not that we should set up out of our own thoughts a fashion of worshipping Him; but He says: “In all places where I record My name, I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee,” Exodus 20:24—Luther.11.
On Isaiah 2:9-21. When men have brought an idol into existence, that is just to their mind, whether it be an idolum manu factum, or an idolum mente excogitatum, there they are all wonder, all worship. “Great is Diana of the Ephesians.” Then the idol has a time of great prosperity and glory. But sooner or later there comes a time when the judgment of God overtakes the idol and its servants. God suffers sin to become ripe like men let a conspiracy, like they let fruit ripen. But when the right time comes then He steps forth in such a fashion that they creep into mouse-holes to hide themselves, if it were possible, from the lightning of His eye and His hand. Where then are the turned-up noses, the big mouths, the impudent tongues?
Thus it has often happened since the world began. But this being brought to confession shall happen in the highest degree to the puffed-up world at that day when they shall see that one whom they pierced, and whom they thought they might despise as the crucified One, coming in His glory to judge the world. Then they shall have anguish and sorrow, then shall they lament and faint away with apprehension of the things that draw nigh. But those that believed on the Lord in His holiness, shall then lift up their heads for that their redemption draws nigh. At that time, indeed, shall the Lord alone be high, and before Him shall bow the knees of all in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, and all tongues must confess that Christ is the Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
12. On Isaiah 2:22. Of what do men not make idols! The great industrial expositions of modern times often fill me with dismay, when I have seen how men carry on an actual idolatrous worship with these products of human science and art, as if that all were not, in the end, God’s work, too, but human genius were alone the creator of these wonders of civilization. How wickedly this so-called worship of genius demeans itself ! How loathsome is the still more common cultus of power, mammon and the belly!
13. On Isaiah 3:1 sqq. Causa σωστική, etc. “The saving cause of the commonwealth is the possession of men of the sort here mentioned, which Plato also knew, and Cicero from Plato, each of whom judge, commonwealths would be blessed if philosophers, i.e., wise and adept men were to administer them.”—Foerster. The same writer cites among the causes why the loss of such men is ruinous, the changes that thence ensue. All changes in the commonwealth are hurtful. Xenoph. Hellen. Isaiah 2 : “εἰσὶμὲνπᾶσαιμεταβολαὶπολιτειῶνθανατηΦόροι.” Aristot. Metaph. Isaiah 2 : “ᾱἱμεταβολαὶπάντωνταραχώδεις.”
14. On Isaiah 3:1. “The stay of bread,” etc. Vitringa cites Horat. Satir. L. II., 3 5:153 sq.:
Deficient inopem ven� te, ni cibus atqueIngens accedit stomacho fultura ruenti.And on Isaiah 3:2 sq. he cites Cicero, who, De Nat. Deorum III., calls these “pr�sidia humana,” “firmamenta reipublic�.” On Isaiah 3:6 sq. the same author cites the following passage from Livy (26 chap. 6): “Cum fame ferroque (Capuani) urgerentur, nec ulla spes superesset iis, qui nati in spem honorum erant, honores detrectantibus, Lesius querendo desertam et proditam a primoribus Capuam summum magistratum ultimus omnium Campanorum cepit!” On Isaiah 3:9 he quotes Seneca: De vita beata, chap. xii.: “Itaque quod unum habebant in peccatis bonum perdunt peccandi verecundiam. Laudant enim ea, quibus erubescant, et vitio gloriantur.”15. On Isaiah 3:4; Isaiah 3:12. Foerster remarks: Pueri, etc. “Boys are of two sorts. Some are so in respect to age, others in respect to moral qualifications.
So, too, on the contrary there is an old age of two sorts: “For honorable age is not that which standeth in length of time, nor that is measured by number of years. But wisdom is the true gray hair unto men, and an unspotted life is the true old age.” Wis 4:8-9. Examples of young and therefore foolish kings of Israel are Rehoboam (“the young fool gambled away ten whole tribes at one bet” 1 Kings 12). Ahaz, who was twenty years of age when he began to reign (2 Kings 16:2). Manasseh who was twelve years (2 Kings 21:1,) and Amon who was twenty-two years (2 Kings 21:19).
16. On Isaiah 3:7. Foerster remarks: Nemo se, etc. “Let no one intrude himself into office, especially when he knows he is not fit for it,” and then cites: “Seek not of the Lord pre-eminence, neither of the king the seat of honor. Justify not thyself before the Lord; and boast not of thy wisdom before the king. Seek not to be judge, being not able to take away iniquity.” Sir 7:4-6.”—“Wen aber Gott schickt, den macht er auch geschickt.”17. On Isaiah 3:8. “Their tongue and their doings are against the Lord.” Duplici modo, etc. “God may be honored by us in two outward ways: by word and deed, just as in the same way others come short; “to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds, which they have committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” Judges 15.—Vitringa.18.
On Isaiah 3:9. “They hide not their sin.” Secunda post, etc. “The next plank after shipwreck, and solace of miseries is to hide one’s impiety.”—Jerome.19. On Isaiah 3:10. “Now He comforts the pious as in Psalms 2. His anger will soon kindle, but it shall be well with all that trust in Him. So Abraham, so Lot was delivered; so the apostles and the remnant of Judah when Jerusalem was besieged. For the Lord helps the righteous (Psalms 37:17; Psalms 37:39).”—Luther.20. On Isaiah 3:13-14.
“Judicabit judices judex generalis,
Neque quidquam proderit dignitas papalis,
Sive sit episcopus, sive cardinalis,
Reus condemnabitur, nec dicetur qualis.”
“Rhythmi vulgo noti,” quoted byFoerster.21. On Isaiah 3:16 sq. Usus vestium, etc. “Clothes have a four-fold use: 1) they are the badge of guilt, or souvenir of the fall (Genesis 3:7; Genesis 3:10; Genesis 3:21); 2) they should be coverings against the weather; 3) they may be ornaments for the body, (Proverbs 31:22; Proverbs 31:25); 4) they may serve as a mark of rank (2 Samuel 13:18).—The abuse of clothes is three-fold; 1) in regard to the material, they may be costlier or more splendid than one’s wealth or rank admits of; 2) in respect of form, they may betray buffoonery and levity; 3) in respect to their object, they may be worn more for the display of luxury and pride than for protection and modest adornment.”—Foerster.22. On Isaiah 4:2. “Germen Jehovae est nomen Messi� mysticum, a nemine intellectum, quam qui tenet mysterium Patris et Christi. Idem valet quod filius propago Patris naturalis, in quo patris sui imago et gloria perfectissime splendet, Jessaiae in seqq. (Isaiah 9:5) αο ,ιμγ, filius, Joanni ὁλόγενήςτοῦθεοῦ,ὁυἱὸςπρωὀτοκοςμονογενής, processio Patris naturaλis. Est hic eruditi cujusdam viri elegans observatio, quae eodem tendit, quam non licet intactam praetermittere.
Comparat ille inter se nomina Messi� φξηγεγ (Jeremiah 23:5) et φξηιδεδ in hoc loco. Cum autem prior appellatio absque dubitatione innuat, Messiam fore filium Davidis, docet posteriorem ἀναλογικῶς non posse aliud significare quam filium Jehovae, quod nomen Christi Jesu est μυστικώτερον, omni alio nomine excellentius. Addit non minus docte, personam, quae hic germen Jehovae dicitur, deinceps a propheta nostro appellari Jehovam (Isaiah 28:5).”—Vitringa. This exposition, which is retained by most Christian and orthodox commentators, ignores too much the fundamental meaning of the word φֶ ?ξַ ?η, “Branch.” It is, nevertheless, not incorrect so far as the broader meaning includes the narrower concentrically. If “Branch of Jehovah” signifies all that is the personal offshoot of God, then, of course, that one must be included who is such in the highest and most perfect sense, and in so far the passage Isaiah 28:5 does not conflict with exposition given by us above.
[J. A. Alexander joins with Vitringa and Hengstenberg in regarding “the fruit of the earth,” as referring to the same subject as “the branch of the Lord,” viz.: the Messiah; and thus, while the latter term signifies the divine nature of the Messiah, the former signifies His human origin and nature; or if we translate “land” instead of earth, it points to his Jewish human origin. Thus appears an exact correspondence to the two parts of Paul’s description, Romans 1:3-4, and to the two titles used in the New Testament in reference to Christ’s two natures, Son of God and Son of Man.—Tr.].
23. On Isaiah 4:3-4. Great storms and upheavals, therefore, are needful, in order to make the fulfilment of this prophecy possible. There must first come the breath of God from above, and the flame of God from beneath over the earth, and the human race must first be tossed and sifted. The earth and mankind must first be cleansed by great judgments from all the leaven of evil. [J. A.
Alexander, with Luther, Calvin, Ewald, maintains concerning the word Spirit in Isaiah 4:4, that “the safest and most satisfactory interpretation is that which understands by it a personal spirit, or as Luther expresses it, the Spirit who shall judge and burn.”—Tr.]. What survives these judgments is the remnant of which Isaiah speaks. This shall be holy. In it alone shall the Lord live and rule. This remnant is one with the new humanity which in every part, both as respects body and soul, will represent the image of Christ the second Adam. This remnant, at the same time, comprehends those whose names are written in the book of life.
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
B.—The judgment upon the godless womenIsa_3:16 to Isaiah 4:116 Moreover the Lord saith,
Because the daughters of Zion are haughty,
And walk with stretched forth necks
And wanton eyes,
Walking and mincing as they go,
And making a tinkling with their feet:
17 Therefore the Lord will smite with a scab
The crown of the head of the daughters of Zion,
And the Lord will discover their secret parts.
18 In that day the Lord will take away
The bravery of their tinkling ornaments about their feet,
And their cauls, and their round tires like the moon,
19 The chains, and the bracelets, and the mufflers,
20 The bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands,
And the tablets, and the earrings,
21 The rings, and nose jewels,
22 The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles,
And the wimples, and the crisping pins,
23 The glasses, and the fine linen,
And the hoods, and the veils.
24 And it shall come to pass, that instead of sweet smell, there shall be stink;
And instead of a girdle, a rent;
And instead of well set hair, baldness;
And instead of a stomacher, a girding of sackcloth;
And burning, instead of beauty.
25 Thy men shall fall by the sword,
And thy mighty in the war.
26 And her gates shall lament and mourn;
And she being desolate shall sit upon the ground.
Isaiah 4:1 And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying,
We will eat our own bread,
And wear our own apparel:
Only let us be called by thy name,
To take away our reproach.
[For the different renderings of the commentator see the comment itself. On the importance of them see J. A. A’s note on Isaiah 3:18 below.—Tr.]
Exegetical And Critical1. This section, too, has for its subject an event that cannot possibly coincide with the last judgment to which 2, refers. For that great day, the last of all, will not have to do with a mere sinking down from the heights of luxury and pride to the plane of poverty; it will not treat of the exchange of a girdle for a rope, of a mantle for a sack, nor of a defeat in war, nor of mournful sitting on the ruins of the city; there will be nothing said of wives wanting nothing beside the prop of a man. For in that day all will be over; the old world generally shall be out and out destroyed in order to make room for a new. Thus this section, too, makes the impression of being some declaration, meant originally to serve some special object, but inserted here in order to complete the grand picture of the future in this particular aspect. The Prophet had occasion once, and this may likely have been in the days of Uzziah or Jotham, to declare himself against the irruption of pomp of dress and luxury.
This declaration, or at least a part of it, he pieces in here to his comprehensive prophecy of judgment. And he may do this. For whenever this denunciation against the arrogance of woman may have been fulfilled, such fulfilment always constitutes a part of the great whole of judgment which is to be completed with the judgment of the last day. The Prophet assumes in the prophecy that stands at the head (Isaiah 2:2-4), that Israel itself, too, must be subjected to a judgment. For only by a great process of refining can the mountain of Jehovah rise to the height which, according to Isaiah 2:2, it must attain, and only when Zion itself is full of the Spirit of God can it become the embodied ideal for all nations. How this refining is to take place in every respect and at different times is described in what follows up to Isaiah 4:1.
In this description the Prophet makes use also of older utterances, which were perhaps too short to appear independently, and that might more suitably be joined in just here than elsewhere. Thus there was a section of this sort that referred to the men, Isaiah 3:1 sqq.; so now, too, we have one that has the women for a theme. The connecting formula, “and Jehovah said,” favors the view that this is a joined on piece. It would be quite superfluous if the discourse proceeded from one mould. Comp. on this the comment on Isaiah 3:16. The order of thought is as follows: The luxurious pride of the women, too, shall be humbled (Isaiah 3:16-17).
In the day that this shall happen all their splendid garments shall be taken from them (Isaiah 3:18-23) and replaced by wretched ones to correspond (Isaiah 3:24). Their husbands, too, they shall lose in a brief space (Isaiah 3:25), lamenting and desolated, they shall sit in the gates (Isaiah 3:26); yea, their want shall be so great that seven women shall attach themselves to one man, without demanding support from him, only thereby to escape the misfortune of being unmarried (Isaiah 4:1).
[On Isaiah 3:16 sqq. “The Prophet here resumes the thread which had been dropped or broken at the close of Isa 3:12, and recurs to the undue predominance of female influence, but particularly to the prevalent excess of female luxury, not only as sinful in itself but as a chief cause of the violence and social disorder previously mentioned, and therefore to be punished by disease, widowhood, and shameful exposure. These two verses (16, 17), like the sixth and seventh, form one continued sentence. And Jehovah said (in addition to what goes before, as if beginning a new section of the prophecy), because the daughters of Zion (the women of Jerusalem, with special reference to those connected with the leading men,” etc.)—J. A. A.
On Isaiah 3:18. “As in other cases where a variety of detached particulars are enumerated simply by their names it is now very difficult to identify some of them. This is the less to be regretted, as the main design of the enumeration was to show the prevalent extravagance in dress, an effect not wholly dependent on an exact interpretation of the several items. The interest of the passage in its details is not exegetical but arch-ζological.”—J. A. A.
On Isaiah 3:26. “The gates of Ziou are said to mourn, by a rhetorical substitution of the place of action for the agent, or because a place filled with cries seems itself to utter them. She is described, not as lying, but as sitting on the ground. So on one of Vespasian’s coins, a woman is represented in a sitting posture, leaning against a palm-tree, with the legend Jud�a Capta.”—J. A. A.]
2. Moreover the Lord—secret parts.
Isaiah 3:16-17. The formula “and the Lord saith” occurs in Isaiah on the whole, relatively not often. It occurs in all thirty-two times; of these, sixteen times in the historical chapters 36–39, where it indicates the actual exchange of words in conversation. Beside that, it is only employed where the Lord appears actually speaking, and speaks of Himself in the first person (comp. Isaiah 23:12; Isaiah 29:13; Isaiah 49:3; Isaiah 49:6; Isaiah 63:8). But in our passage Jehovah is immediately spoken of again in the third person. “The Lord will smite, the Lord will uncover” Isaiah 3:17.
Moreover, in what follows, the Lord Is not introduced again as speaker. It is thus seen that by this formula what follows is only marked as God’s word so far as its contents are concerned, and not formally so. But as this is self-evident, it is further plain, that the formula is meant to serve as a transition, a link, a means of uniting. We recognize, therefore, in it a sign that here is a piece of an address, already on hand, that has been skilfully strung on here. As in Isaiah 2:11 it was said that all lofty looks shall be humbled and all haughtiness of men be bowed down, so the Prophet here with entire justice declares that also feminine arrogance must expect its share in this judgment. Are proud, etc., stands, therefore, in direct relation with the entire section Isaiah 2:6-17.
What is said there in general of riches (Isaiah 3:7), of arrogance and haughtiness (Isaiah 3:11-12; Isaiah 3:17) of works of splendour (Isaiah 3:16), has its special application to the proud display of the women. But our passage stands in still closer connection with ξַ ?ωְׁ ?ςֵ ?πָ ?δ supportress Isaiah 3:1. We showed there that this expression points to the second half of this chapter where the women are spoken of. That these, too, are called “supports,” staffs, refers evidently to the fact that women, even in the commonwealth of Israel, played a considerable part. Let it be remembered that the Book of Kings expressly names the mother of each king. Individual women are designated as enjoying political influence in a high degree; Deborah (Judges 4); Bathsheba (1 Kings 1); Jezebel (1 Kings 16:31 sqq.); Athaliah (2 Kings 11).
We are expressly informed that Solomon’s wives had a bad influence over him (1 Kings 11:3 sqq.). As long as a regular king ruled there must be a woman’s court household. If there were none such. then there would be surely no king. How closely kingdom and harem hung together, may be seen from the fact that the possession of the harem obtained as a sign that the royal dignity had been received. Therefore Absalom lay publicly with the coucubines of his father (2 Samuel 16:21). David, too, inherited the wives of Saul, and this is related in a connection (2 Samuel 12:8) that leads us to conclude that the fact must have been important to the recognition of David’s succession to the throne being a rightful one.
Adonijah, after David’s death, begs for the hand of Abishag the Shunamite, and we see from Solomon’s reply that he regarded this request as an attempt to use the possession of the concubine as a step to the throne (1 Kings 2:22). Comp. Michaelis,Mos. Recht, I. p. 207. Saalschuets,Das Mos. Recht, p. 85.
According to this the harem was, in some measure, a political institution, an attribute of royalty as such, and in so far in a special sense a support of the life of the state. Yet if Isaiah here has especially in mind the royal ladies, that does not exclude the other noble and proud women from a share in his reproachs.
In εַ ?ϊֵּ ?μַ ?λְ ?πָ ?δ the imperfect with vav. consec. is not necessarily to be construed as aorist. The word ξְ ?ωַׂ ?χְּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ is ἄπαξλεγ. The root ωָׂ ?χַ ?ψ even does not again occur in all the Old Testament. The Aramaic ρְ ?χַ ?ψώ may be most suitable to compare here, which means “intueri, conspicari.” The Piel then may have the meaning “blinking, winking:”ςֵ ?ιπַ ?ιִ ?ν stands in the accusat., like βָּ ?ψεֹ ?ο. There is indeed a ρָ ?χַ ?ψִ that means to color, to paint, whence also, the Chald., Abarbanel and others express this idea (Luther: with painted faces). But the custom of painting the eye-brows black is so universal a custom or the Orient, that it has been justly objected, Isaiah would hardly have spoken out against it.
Moreover the rest of the reproachful expressions relate to bodily gestures. Buxtorfin Lex. Chald., Talm, et Rabb., p. 1542 cites the talmudic dictum: “Non creavit deus mulierum ex capite Adami, ne caput suum nimium ornaret and efferret; negue ex oculo, ne essetρַ ?χְ ?ψָ ?πִ ?ιϊ, oculis omnia observans.”Hitzig, justly cites Plaut. Aulul. I. 1, Isaiah 2 : “circumspectatrix cum oculis tuis emissiciis,” although this is spoken of an old tramp with thievish propensities. Also θָ ?τַ ?σ (from which θַ ?σToppler, Tripler, Child) is ἄπ. λεγ.
The tripping short steps are the necessary consequences of the step-chains which were fastened by means of a ring (ςֶ ?λֶ ?ν, Isaiah 3:18, again only in Proverbs 7:22) surrounding the leg above the ankle joint. The little chains themselves were called φְ ?ςָ ?γεֹ ?ϊ Isaiah 3:20. The verb ςִ ?λֵּ ?ν, which occurs only here, is denominative. According to the context the meaning can be nothing else than; rattling the rings to make a noise, to clink. Comp. Herzog’sR.
Encycl. VII. p. 731. As chastisement for such arrogance the daughters of Zion shall be punished with disgraceful disorders. Their proud head shall become scurfy, covered with scabs, thus loathsomely unclean (Leviticus 13:2; Leviticus 13:6-8; Leviticus 14:56). ωִׂ ?τַּ ?η, (which, written with ωׂ, occurs here only), is according to some a denominative from ξִ ?ρְ ?τַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ ,ρַ ?τַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ, scab. scurf (vid. Leviticus 13:14) Still it is possible ωִׂ ?τַ ?η means, to make flow, suppurate, and thus deprive of the hair, and that, so derived, ρτηϊ means the fluid scab or scurf. Comp., at Isaiah 37:30.
Their shame, to whose impure pleasure those luxurious gestures were meant to minister, shall be disgracefully exposed (Isaiah 47:3; Jeremiah 13:22; Jeremiah 13:26; Ezekiel 16:37, etc.). The singular τֹּ ?ϊ (from τּ ?εּ ?ϊ ,τָּ ?ϊָ ?δτָ ?ϊַ ?η, pat-ere) occurs only here; the plural 1 Kings 7:50 of the cardo femina from an obvious resemblance.—ςָ ?ψָ ?δ (from which ςֶ ?ψְ ?εָ ?δ and ςָ ?ψεֹ ?ϊloca nuda (Isaiah 19:7) which does not occur in the Kal, means nudum esse, hence Piel to make bare, (in Isaiah again only Isaiah 22:6); Hiphil, (because what has been hitherto concealed, when it is laid bare, is at the same time poured out) effundere, (Isaiah 53:12), Niphal, effundi (Isaiah 32:15).
Without excluding the literal rendering of Isa 3:17, we may still construe the language first in an inexact sense and generalize it. In the day of judgment loathsome uncleanness shall take the place of the splendor of Zion’s daughters; disgrace and shame the place of their prond display. The Prophet has in this expressed something in general which he proceeds to specify in what follows. Feminine interest revolves chiefly around two poles: the decking out of the body and the surrender of the body to the husband; therefore about dress and husbands. Therefore the disgrace of the daughters of Zion in what follows is portrayed in these two respects. And first it is shown of what they shall be deprived in the way of dress (Isaiah 3:18-23), and what shall be given them instead (Isaiah 3:24).
3. In that day—instead of beauty.
Isaiah 3:18-24 “In that day,” refers back immediately to Isaiah 3:17. But we showed above that not the day of the last judgment is meant here, but only a prelude to it, which, of course, however, combines with the last judgment to make a unity of divine world-judgment. In that day, then, the Lord will take away the adornment (ϊτΰψϊ). All that follows is summed up-under this word. The word is found often in both parts of Isa 4:2; Isaiah 10:12; Isaiah 13:19; Isaiah 44:13; Isaiah 52:1; Isaiah 62:3; Isaiah 63:14, etc.). Concerning the ςλριν comp., at Isaiah 3:16.
Concerning the ωׁ ?αιριν there are two views held. From Schroeder down a number of expositors (Rosenmueller, Winer, Ewald, Knobel, Drechsler) have taken the word for a kindred form of the Arabic schumeisa (diminutive of schems, the sun), the letters m and b being interchanged, as is common between these two kindred letters: Schroeder proves, besides, from Theoph,hist. pl. IX. 4 and Plin. H. N. XII. 14, Σαβις to have been a name of the sun among the Arabians.
The meaning then would be little suns i.e., a metallic ornament shaped like a sun. That would suit very well to the following ωׁ ?δψο, crescents, as generally to the words that precede and follow, all of which designate metal ornaments. In as much as in the following list occur several expressions borrowed from the Arabic (comp. Drechsler on Isaiah 2:6), and this word in Hebrew is ἄπλεγ., and even the root ωָׁ ?αַ ?ν does not again occur, so that word and thing both appear to be of foreign origin, I prefer this view. The other view takes ωָׁ ?αָ ?ν in the sense of ωָׁ ?αָ ?υ and (Aram,) ωְׁ ?αָ ?ωׁ ?“plectere, to braid,” and ωָ ?αִ ?ιν therefore, for opus reticulatum (LXX ἐμπλόκια) network. hair net: (Delitzsch, “ribbons for the forehead worn underneath the hair net, and braided of gold or silver thread:” Buxtorf, Lex. Chald., p. 2315, “Ornamentum,” etc., a peculiar ribbon ornament, extending in front from one ear to the other”).
The ωׂ ?δψπιν are lunul�, μηνίσκοι, moonshaped, or rather half-moon shaped decorations. They are mentioned Judges 8:21; Judges 8:26 as neck ornaments of camels. That they had a moon shape appears from this, that sahro in the Syriac, schahr in the Arabic mean the moon. Here, too, therefore word and thing are certainly of foreign origin. Ξεֹ ?ο is a diminutive ending, comp. ΰִ ?ιωׁ ?εֹ ?ο; Ewald § 167, a.—πְ ?θִ ?τεֹ ?ϊ (Judges 8:26) from πָ ?θַ ?σto drop (comp. Exodus 30:34, dropping resin, and Job 36:27) are a drop shaped ornament, as they were likely worn as pendants from the ears (ear drops). ωֵׁ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ (ἄπ. λεγ,) from ωָׁ ?ψַ ?ψtorquere, to twist, is torques, a collar, chain, not for the neck, however, but an armlet, bracelet, as is to be seen from the dialects. Onkelos,e.g., translates, Genesis 24:22; Genesis 24:30; Genesis 24:47, the Hebrew word φָ ?ξִ ?ιγ (the proper word for bracelet for the arm) by ωֵׁ ?ιψָ ?ΰ.
Comp., too, ωַׁ ?ψְ ?ωְׁ ?ψָ ?δ and ωַׁ ?ψωָׁ ?δchainsExod. Isaiah 28:14; Isaiah 28:22.—ψְ ?ςָ ?μεֹ ?ϊ (ἄπ. λεγּ) from ψָ ?ςַ ?μto tremble, wave, are veils, and that, as appears, of a costly kind: viz.Herzog,R. Encycl. VII. p. 728.—τְּ ?ΰֵ ?ψִ ?ιν are diadems, tiar�., that are also elsewhere named as part of the head ornament of the priesthood (Exodus 39:28; Ezekiel 44:18), or of the dress of a bridegroom (Isaiah 61:10). What part of the head covering or what sort, is not clear.—φְ ?ςָ ?γָ ?δ from φָ ?ςַ ?γ, to march, pace, on account of the etymology seems most naturally to mean the step chains (comp. on ϊּ ?ςλρπδ, Isaiah 3:16). But 2 Samuel 5:24 and 1 Chronicles 14:15, where the word occurs, it seems to mean “the stepping, walking along;” and Numbers 31:50; 2 Samuel 1:10ΰֶ ?φְ ?ςָ ?γָ ?δ designates arm bands, arm clasps, as one sees clearly in 2 Samuel 1:10 from the ςַ ?μΞζְ ?ψֹ ?ςεֹ.
Hence many expositors, both old and new, (among the last, Ewald), translate “arm clasps.” And yet it is only ΰֶ ?φְ ?ςָ ?γָ ?δ that has this meaning. The circumstance that φִ ?ςָ ?γָ ?δ occurs twice in the sense of “walking along” is no obstacle to its meaning step-chainlets. For the abstract word could easily be taken in a concrete sense; the walking in the sense of the instrument of walking.—χִ ?ωֻּׁ ?ψִ ?ιν from χָ ?ωַׁ ?ψto bind) are, according to Jeremiah 2:32, comp. Isaiah 49:18, mentioned as pieces of a bride’s outfit. But whether the girdle is meant or bandages (perhaps the breastband, στηθόδεσμος LXX. in Jeremiah 2:32) is uncertain.—αָּ ?ϊֵּ ?ιδַ ?πֶּ ?τֶ ?ωׁ are smelling bottles. For αιϊ often stands for receptacle, place of storage generally (comp.
Exodus 26:29; Job 8:17; Ezekiel 41:9, and for the very common use of this word in Aram, and Rabb. language, see Buxtorf, Lex. p. 301 sqq.). πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ, however is breath, scent (comp. Niphal δִ ?πָּ ?τֵ ?ωׁ ?respirare, to breathe out, Exodus 23:12; Exodus 31:17. ύςֲ ?φַ ?ϊπֶ ?τִ ?ωׁ. fragrant wood, Proverbs 27:9; and the original passage Genesis 1:20; Genesis 1:30; Job 41:13). The expression occurs only here—μְ ?ηָ ?ωִׁ ?ιν (comp. Isaiah 3:3; Isaiah 26:16) are instruments of magic, amulets.—θַ ?αַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ from θָ ?αַ ?ς, imprimere, is the ring, generally, and especially the signet ring. Comp. Genesis 41:42; Exodus 25:12; Exodus 25:14, and many places beside in Exodus.—πִ ?ζְ ?ξֵ ?ιδָ ?ΰַ ?σ are the nose rings which are in use in the East to the present day.
Comp. Proverbs 11:22; Ezekiel 16:12; WinerR. W. B. the word, nose-ring.
So far the prophet has named articles of embellishment made of metal. In what follows he chiefly enumerates articles of clothing proper.—The ξַ ?ηֲ ?μָ ?φεֹ ?ϊ, according to Zechariah 3:4, are such as are the opposite of filthy garments, therefore stately, splendid clothes. According to the fundamental meaning (ηָ ?μַ ?υ, extrahere, exuere) they are clothes that one takes off at home, comp. ηֲ ?μִ ?ιτεֹ ?ϊ. The expression appears to be one of general meaning, and occurs only here, and in the passage cited from Zech.—ξַֽ ?ςֲ ?θָ ?τεֹ ?ϊ (properly covers, from ςָ ?θַ ?σoperire) are mentioned only here. The word in Arabic signifies the second tunic, broader, longer and provided with sleeves, that corresponds to the Roman stola, the garment peculiar to women.—ξִ ?θְ ?τַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ from θτηexpandere (Isaiah 48:13) is the great wide over all, shawl (Rth 3:15, the only place beside that the word occurs). ηָ ?ψִ ?ιθ is found beside only 2 Kings 5:23, from which place it is seen that it means a bag or pocket that may serve to carry money.—βִּ ?μְ ?ιֹ ?πִ ?ιν, according to LXX. would be διαΦανῆΔακωνικά, i.e., Lacedζmonian gauze dresses that expose the body more than cover it. But βִּ ?μָּ ?ιεֹ ?ο, Isaiah 8:1, is the smooth, polished tablet.
Such served for mirrors, as the ancients knew nothing of glass mirrors. Travellers assure us that such mirrors in the form of small plates set in a ring are worn to this day. Comp. Herzog,R. Encycl. XIV., p. 666.—ρְ ?γִ ?ιπִ ?ιν are σινδόνες, i.e., garments of fine India linen.
It is debated whether undergarments, such as shirts, are meant, or some sort of light thing to throw over one. The word is found again Judges 14:12 sq.; Proverbs 31:24.—φְ ?πִ ?ιτεֹ ?ϊ (from φָ ?πַ ?σ, tegere, velare) are the head-band, turban. The word bands, turbans, occurs Isaiah 62:3; Job 29:14; Zechariah 3:5.—ψָ ?γִ ?ιψ (from ψָ ?γַ ?γspread, spread under, spread out, Isaiah 45:1; Psalms 144:2; 1 Kings 6:32) is the wide veil that covered over the rest of the clothes (Arab, rida ridat) Son 5:7.—But not only shall all ϊִּ ?τְ ?ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?ϊadornment, Isaiah 3:18, be taken away, they shall also be replaced by worse things. Instead of αּ ?ωֶֹׁ ?ν, balsam, (product of the balsam bush, vid.Exodus 30:23; Ezekiel 27:22; 1 Kings 10:10) ξַ ?χ shall be given. This latter word is only found again Isaiah 5:24, where, however, it is written ξָ ?χ, which has no effect on the meaning. The root ξָ ?χַ ?χ, diffluere is used of the flowing of matter from a wound; e. g.Psalms 38:6. ξַ ?χ seems therefore rather to mean matter than the dry decay.
In place of ηֲ ?βεֹ ?ψָ ?δ (apron, Genesis 3:7; girdle, Isaiah 32:11; 1 Kings 2:5) shall be a rope, πִ ?χְ ?τָּ ?δ. The word is ἅπ. λεγ. There is conflict regarding the meaning. Some derive it from πָ ?χַ ?σpercutere, to strike (Isaiah 10:34; Isaiah 17:6) and take it in the sense of vulnus (so the Chald. and the most of the Jewish expositors). But this meaning does not well suit the context. It is better to derive it from πָ ?χַ ?σ=circuire, gyrare, circle, gyrate (see Isaiah 29:1; Hiphil δִ ?χִּ ?ισ). πִ ?χְ ?τָּ ?δ would be, then, feminine of πֵ ?χֶ ?σ or πֶ ?χֶ ?σ=turning around, i. e., that resulting from twisting.
Delitzsch derives it from χָ ?τַ ?δ, contorquere, but this does not occur in biblical idiom, which uses only χָ ?τָ ?ΰ, to contract, congeal.
Instead of the artistically curled hair, shall baldness be given. ξִ ?χְ ?ωֶׁ ?δ (ἄπ. λεγ.,) in apposition with ξַֽ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ is synonymous with ξִ ?χְ ?ωָׁ ?δExodus 25:18; Exodus 25:31; Exodus 25:36; Jeremiah 10:5, opus tornatile, twisted, turned work. Baldness, compare 2 Kings 2:23; for women it is doubly disgraceful. And instead of a splendid mantle, shall be given a girding of sackcloth. τְּ ?ϊִ ?ιπִ ?ιμ, ἄπ. λεγ., is of uncertain derivation and meaning. Expositors waver between the derivation from τָּ ?ϊַ ?βamplum esse, with affix –ִ ?ιμ (like λַּ ?ψְ ?ξִ ?ιμ from λֶּ ?ψֶ ?ν) and that from τְּ ?ϊִ ?ιdistance, βִּ ?ιμfestival joy, and between the meanings fascia pectoralis (Vulg.) and broad mantle; yet the grammatical and hermeneutical grounds for the latter overbalance. ξδβψϊ, too, is ἄπ. λεγ. Girding with sackcloth, as is known, is often mentioned as sign of the deepest mourning and humiliation: Genesis 37:34, Isaiah 15:3; Isaiah 22:12; Jeremiah 6:26, &c.
The conclusion of this list of mournful exchanges is made by the phrase: “Branding for beauty.” The words are strange. They appear disjointed and unsymmetrical. For εְ, and, is wanting which connects all the preceding members, and thus this small member of the sentence stands independent, and by its inversion (the thing given stands first) in contrast with all that goes before. It appears to me as if the prophet recalled a passage of the law wherein a number of exchanges or recompenses are defined by means of the preposition “instead of.” Such a passage is Exodus 21:23-25. Among these specifications occurs, “burning for burning.” λּ ?εִ ?ιָּ ?δϊַ ?ηַ ?ϊλְּ ?εִ ?ιָּ ?δ. The Prophet, however, was not speaking of jus talionis, therefore the idem per idem or idem pro eodem, “like for like,” did not suit his purpose.
He speaks of the recompense that threatened the daughters of Zion. Among the things to be taken from them he had not mentioned beauty, the direct gift of nature, which to women is of the greatest price. He had to this point spoken only of productions of art. Now as beauty is ιְ ?τִ ?ι (in Isa. again only Isaiah 33:17), he might easily happen to think of λְּ ?εִ ?ιָּ ?δ as a suitable rhyme for it. However, λְּ ?εִ ?ιָּ ?δ itself does not rhyme, but a word of kindred root, properly its simple masculine form, λְּ ?εִ ?ι, which appears only to have been used in the contracted form λִּ ?ι (comp. ψִ ?ι ,φִ ?ι ,ςִ ?ι ,ΰִ ?ι). Thus too the inversion explains itself.
For as we find the words, they most resemble the passages in Exod.; much more than if they read “instead of beauty burning.” λִּ ?ι or λְּ ?εִ ?ι is ἄπ. λεγ. Its root is λָּ ?εָ ?δ“to burn,” and means, like λְּ ?εִ ?ιָּ ?δ, and like the Arabic kej, the branded mark, στίγμα. If even it cannot be proved that it was customary to mark captives by branding them, that does not affect the matter. It was also not customary to offer them pus instead of balsam. Such traits of poetic speech must not be pressed. Enough if the thought in itself affords a suitable meaning.
I think, therefore, the established meaning “brand mark,” which indicates a strong contrast with “beauty,” is not to be departed from, and we need not with Knobel understand “scratchings.”
4. The women—our reproach.
Isaiah 3:25 to Isaiah 4:1 But the misery of the daughters of Zion is not yet exhausted. Worse things yet must happen to them. They shall be robbed, too, of the men. From the singular suffix, it is seen that the Prophet Isaiah 3:25 now addresses Zion itself, thus not “the daughters of Zion,” Isaiah 3:16, but “daughter of Zion.” The loss of splendid garments is not to be understood as if only articles of luxury would be taken from the women of Zion. It is seen from Isaiah 3:25 that the blow is to be universal, falling upon all. Therefore all shall suffer under it: but the rich and noble most of all.
The loss of the men however, shall concern all in equal measure. For this reason the Prophet no longer addresses the daughters, but the daughter of Zion. ξְ ?ϊִ ?ιν does not appear to involve the notion of strength, manhood. For it is wont to stand where inferiority, lowness are predicated of the subject man. ξְ ?ϊֵ ?ιξִ ?ρְ ?τָּ ?ψ, people of number, a few, Genesis 34:30, and often. ξΧξְ ?ςַ ?θ Deuteronomy 26:5; Deuteronomy 28:62. ξΧωָׁ ?εְ ?ΰ Psalms 26:4; ξΧΰָֽ ?εֶ ?ζ Job 22:15. ξΧψָ ?ςָ ?λ Isaiah 5:13 : and Isaiah 41:14ξְ ?ϊֵ ?ιιִ ?ωְׁ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ stands directly parallel with ϊּ ?εֹ ?μַ ?ςַ ?ϊιַ ?ςֲ ?χαworm Jacob. It stands then as the antithesis of βְּ ?αεּ ?ψָ ?ϊֵ ?οְ ?the troops, and designates not the manhood with emphasis, but only masculine individuals (people). βְּ ?αεּ ?ψָ ?δ (a word of frequent occurrence in Isaiah 11:2; Isaiah 28:6; Isaiah 63:15, &c.) only here stands in a concrete meaning=troops. For Jeremiah 49:35 there is no reason for taking it in any other than the usual abstract sense, strength.
And her gates, etc. Isaiah 3:26. ΰָ ?πָ ?δ, to sigh, groan, occurs only here and Isaiah 19:8, where, too, it stands with ΰαμ. The latter word is in general more frequent, and common, too, in Isaiah: 24:4, 7; Isaiah 33:9; Isaiah 66:10. Most expositors translate; “and her gates groan and lament.” With that τֶּ ?ϊַ ?ηgate, is personified and used by metonymy for the assemblies in the gate, which is grammatically allowable. But I would make three objections: 1) It is surprising that we do not read, then, ωַׁ ?ςַ ?ψ, gate. For τֶּ ?ϊַ ?η is only the door opening (hence so often τϊηδωׁ ?ςψ, door of the gate, Joshua 20:4; Judges 9:35; Judges 9:44 : 2 Samuel 10:8; Jeremiah 1:15; Jeremiah 19:2; Proverbs 1:21, etc.), while ωַׁ ?ςַ ?ψ stands for gate in its emphatic, and also its comprehensive meaning. 2) Does it not seem strange in this exposition, that the discourse suddenly turns from the women to speak of the totality of the people?
For the gates do not represent the women alone, but the entire people; whence Drechsler justly calls attention to the fact that this exposition occasions “something fluctuating in the connection of ideas.” 3) τֶּ ?ϊַ ?η, times without number, stands as acc. localis to the question where? or whither? without a preposition, vid. Lexicon and Concordances. It comes very natural therefore to translate; “and they (the women) groan and sigh at her gates.” There they await, and there they receive the mournful intelligence. The suffix in τϊηιδ relates naturally to Zion addressed in the verse before.
The following words are obscure. εְ ?πִ ?χָּ ?ϊָ ?δ can be nothing else than Niph. perf. 3 pers. fem., from πָ ?χָ ?δpurum esse. Niphal often occurs in the sense of culpa vacuum, immunem esse, which gives no sense here. Purificari here can only mean “swept out, cleared up, emptied, desolated.” In this sense the word does not again occur; only Zechariah 5:3, may in some degree be compared. Hofmann (Schriftbeweis II. 2, p. 503) translates: “on the bareness, off on the bare ground sits she.” But πχϊδ is neither participial nor nominal form. If now we translate: “and she was emptied, desolated, on the ground she sits,”—we must first remark concerning the construction, that Drechsler is right in connecting the two verbs so that the first contains an adverbial qualification of the second. Sitting on the ground is the posture of those mourning: Isaiah 47:1; Job 2:13; Lamentations 2:10.
The subject of πχϊδ as well as of ϊωׁ ?α is Zion, to which also the suffixes in Isaiah 3:25-26, refer. Therefore if the widows of Zion weep at the gates, Zion itself appears desolate and lies on the ground. Yet I confess that this exposition is not entirely satisfactory, although it fits the existing text. Perhaps the text is corrupt in πχϊδ.
At all events, according to Isaiah 3:25, a great scarcity of men exists. For the Hebrew woman that was the greatest misfortune. For in its most ancient parts the Old Testament knows no other genuine life than that on this earth, and thus no other continuation of living after death than by means of children. To be childless was, then, the same as being deprived of continuance after death. It corresponded to the being damned of the New Testament. Physical reasons, therefore, were not all that made marriage appear as a pressing necessity.
It is now said here that seven women (notice the sacred number) shall lay hold of one man and, renouncing all claim of support and clothing, beg only the right to be called his wives.—Only let thy name, etc.—As the temple was called the house that bears the name of Jehovah, without however the temple being called Jehovah Himself, so, among the Hebrews, the wives were not called by the same name as their husbands, which would be to transfer modern customs to the ancients; but the name of the husband was named on her, when she was called this or that man’s wife. Comp. “Sarai, Abram’s wife,” Genesis 12:17, “Rachel, Jacob’s wife,” Genesis 46:19. Gesenius quotes the beautiful parallel from Lucan, Pharsal. II. 342, which was first adduced by Grotius.
——da tantum nomen inaneConnubii, Liceat tumulo scripsisse: CatonisMarcia *
—Give only the empty name of marriage. Let my monument be inscribed: Cato’s Marcia.
ΰָ ?ρַ ?σ with the meaning “auferre, demere,” bear away, like Isaiah 16:10; Isaiah 57:1. As a parallel expression comp., too Zechariah 8:23. The division of chapters is evidently incorrect here. That the words “seven women,” etc., were carried over to chap. 4, as Vitringa remarks, happened because it was supposed that the seven women represented the seven graces of the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 11:1-2), thus Jerome and Cyril—or the believing women under the one man or Christ, the Branch, Isaiah 3:2.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 2:2. Domus Dei, etc. “The house of God is built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, who, themselves, too, are mountains, quasi imitators of Christ. (They that trust in the Lord shall be as Mount Zion, Psalms 125:1) Whence, also, upon one of the mountains Christ founded the Church and said: Thou art Peter, etc., Matthew 16:18.” Jerome.——“We can understand Jerusalem by the mountain of God, for we see how the believing run thither, and how those that have accepted the testimony come thither and seize the blessing that proceeds thence. But we may also by the house of God understand the churches spread over land and sea, as we believe St. Paul, who says, ‘we are the house of God,’ Hebrews 3:6. And so we may recognize the truth of the prophecy.
For the Church of God stands shining forth, and the nations, forsaking wickedness that has long had dominion over them, hasten to her and are enlightened by her.” Theodoret.——Ecclesia est, etc. “The church is a mountain exalted and established above all other mountains, but in spirit. For if you regard the external look of the church from the beginning of the world, then in New Testament times, you will see it oppressed, contemned, and in despair. Yet, notwithstanding, in that contempt it is exalted above all mountains. For all kingdoms and all dominions that have ever been in the world have perished. The church alone endures and triumphs over heresies, tyrants, Satan, sin, death and hell, and that by the word only, by this despised and feeble speech alone. Moreover it is a great comfort that the bodily place, whence first the spiritual kingdom should arise, was so expressly predicted, that consciences are assured of that being the true word, that began first to be preached in that corner of Judea, that it may be for us a mount Zion, or rule for judging of all religions and all doctrines.
The Turkish Alcoran did not begin in Zion—therefore it is wicked doctrine. The various Popish rites, laws, traditions began not in Zion—therefore they are wicked, and the very doctrines of devils. So we may hold ourselves upright against all other religions, and comfort our hearts with this being the only true religion which we profess. Therefore, too, in two psalms, Psalms 2, 110, mount Zion is expressly signified: “I have set my king upon my holy hill of Zion;” likewise: “The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion.” Luther.2. On Isaiah 2:2. Luther makes emphatic, as something pertaining to “the wonderful nature of this kingdom,” that “other kingdoms are established and administered by force and arms.
But here, because the mountain is lifted up, the nation shall flow (fluent), i.e., they shall come voluntarily, attracted by the virtues of the church. For what is there sweeter or lovelier than the preaching of the gospel? Whereas Moses frightens weak souls away. Thus the prophet by the word fluent, “flow,” has inlaid a silent description of the kingdom of Christ, which Christ gives more amply when He says: Matthew 11:12, “the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force,” i.e. “they are not compelled, but they compel themselves.” “Morever rivers do not flow up mountains, but down them; but here is such an unheard-of thing in the kingdom of Christ.”—Starke.3. Luther remarks on “and shall say: come,” etc. “Here thou seest the worship, works and efforts and sacrifices of Christians. For they do only the one work, that they go to hear and to learn.
All the rest of the members must serve their neighbors. These two, ears and heart, must serve God only. For the kingdom rests on the word alone. Sectaries and heretics, when they have heard the gospel once, instantly become masters, and pervert the Prophet’s word, in that they say: Come let us go up that we may teach him his way and walk in our paths. They despise, therefore, the word as a familiar thing and seek new disputations by which they may display their spirit and commend themselves to the crowd. But Christians know that the words of the Holy Ghost can never be perfectly learned as long as we are in the flesh.
For Christianity does not consist in knowing, but in the disposition. This disposition can never perfectly believe the word on account of the weakness of the sinful flesh. Hence they ever remain disciples and ruminate the word, in order that the heart, from time to time, may flame up anew. It is all over with us if we do not continue in the constant use of the word, in order to oppose it to Satan in temptation (Matthew 4). For immediately after sinning ensues an evil conscience, that can be raised up by nothing but the word. Others that forsake the word sink gradually from one sin into another, until they are ruined.
Therefore Christianity must be held to consist in hearing the word, and those that are overcome by temptations, whether of the heart or body, may know that their hearts are empty of the word.”
4. Vitringa remarks on the words, “Out of Zion goes forth the law,” Isaiah 5:3. “If strife springs up among the disciples concerning doctrine or discipline, one must return to the pattern of the doctrine and discipline of the school at Jerusalem. For ιָ ?φָ ?ΰ “shall go forth,” stands here only as in Luke 2:1, “There went forth a decree from Cζsar Augustus.” In this sense, too, Paul says, 1 Corinthians 14:36, “What? came the word of God out from you?” The word of God did not go forth from Corinth, Athens, Rome, Ephesus, but from Jerusalem, a fact that bishops assembled in Antioch opposed to Julius I. (Sozom. hist. eccl. III. 8, “the orientals acknowledged that the Church of Rome was entitled to universal honor—although those who first propagated a knowledge of Christian doctrine in that city came from the East”). Cyril took ιָ ?φָ ?ΰ in the false sense of κατελἐλοιπετὴνΣιών, “has forsaken Zion.” When the Lord opened the understandings of the disciples at Emmaus, to understand the Scriptures and see in the events they had experienced the fulfilment of what was written concerning Him in the law, Prophets and Psalms, He cannot have forgotten the present passage. Of this we may be the more assured since the words: “Thus it is written and thus it behooved Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations beginning at Jerusalem.” Luke 24:46-47, point clearly to Isaiah 2:2-3 of our passage.
Therefore too, Justin Martyr Apol. i. (commonly ii.), § 49, says: “But where the prophetic spirit predicts the future, he says: from Zion shall go forth the law, etc. And that this finally came to pass in fact, you may credibly assure yourselves. For from Jerusalem have men gone forth into the world, twelve in number, and these were unlearned, that knew not how to speak. But by the might of God they have proclaimed to all mankind that they were sent by Christ in order to teach all the word of God.”
“Zion is contrasted here with Mount Sinai, whence the law came, which in the Old Testament was the foundation of all true doctrine: But in the New Testament Mount Zion or Jerusalem has the privilege to announce that now a more perfect law would be given and a new Covenant of God with men would be established. Thus Zion and Jerusalem are, so to speak, the nursery and the mother of all churches and congregations of the New Testament.”—Starke.5. Fφrster remarks on the end of Isa 2:3, that the gospel is the sceptre of Jesus Christ, according to Psalms 110:2; Psalms 45:7 (the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre). “For by the word Christ rules His church (Romans 10:14 sqq.).”
6. On Isaiah 2:4. “Pax optima rerum.” Foerster. The same author finds this prophecy fulfilled by Christ, who is our peace, who has made of both one, and broken down the partition that was between, in that by His flesh He took away the enmity (Ephesians 2:14). Foerster, moreover, combats the Anabaptists, who would prove from this passage that waging war is not permitted to Christians. For our passage speaks only against the privata Christianorum discordia. But waging war belongs to the publicum magistratus officium.
Waging war, therefore, is not forbidden, if only the war is a just one. To be such, however, there must appear according to Thomas, part. 2 th. qu�st. 40. 1) auctoritatis principis, 2) causa justa, 3) intentio bellantium justa, or ut allii efferunt: 1) jurisdictio indicentis, 2) offensio patientis, 3) intentio finem (?) convenientis.7. On Isaiah 2:4. Jerome regarded the time of Augustus, after his victory at Actium, as the fulfilling of this prophecy. Others, as Cocceius, refer the words, “they shall turn their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning-hooks,” to the time of Constantine the Great; and the words “nation shall not lift up sword against nation” to the period of the restoration of religious peace in Germany,—finally the words: “they shall no more learn war,” to a future time that is to be hoped for. Such interpretations are, however, just as one-sided as those that look only for a spiritual fulfilment of prophecy.
For how is an inward fulfilment of this promise of peace to be thought of which would not have the outward effects as its consequence? Or how is an outward fulfilment, especially such as would deserve the name, conceivable without the basis of the inward? Or must this peaceful time be looked for only in heaven? Why then does the promise stand here? It is a matter of course that there is peace in heaven: for where there is no peace there can be no heaven. The promise has sense only if its fulfilment is to be looked for on earth.
The fulfilment will take place when the first three petitions of the Lord’s prayer are fulfilled, i.e. when God’s name shall be held holy by us as it in itself is holy, when the kingdom of God is come to everything, without and within, and rules alone over all, when the will of God is done on earth as in heaven. Christendom makes this prayer quite as much with the consciousness that it cannot remain unfulfilled, as with the consciousness that it must find its fulfilment on earth. For, if referred to heaven, these petitions are without meaning. Therefore there is a time of universal inward and outward peace to be looked for on earth. “It is not every day’s evening,” i.e. one must await the event, and our earth, without the least saltus in cogitando, can yet experience a state of things that shall be related to the present, as the present to the period of trilobites and saurians. If one could only keep himself free from the tyranny of the present moment! But our entire, great public, that has made itself at home in Philistia, lives in the sweet confidence that there is no world beside that of which we take notice on the surface of the earth, nor ever was one, nor ever will be.
8. On Isaiah 2:4. Poets reverse the figure to portray the transition from peaceful to warlike conditions. Thus Virgil, Georg. I. 2:506 sq.:
Non ullus aratro
Dignus honos, squalent abductis arva colonis.
Et curvζ rigidum falces conflantur in ensem.
Aeneide VII. 2:635 sq.:
Vomeris huc et falcis honos, huc omnis aratri
Cessit amor; recoquunt patrios fornacibus enses.
Ovid, Fast. I. 2:697 sqq.:
Bella diu tenuere viros. Erat aptior ensis
Vomere, cedebat taurus arator equo.
Sarcula cessabant, versique in pila ligones.
Factaque de rastri pondere cassia erat.
9. On Isaiah 2:5. As Isaiah puts the glorious prophecy of his fellow prophet Micah at the head, he illuminates the future with a splendid, shining, comforting light. Once this light is set up, it of itself suggests comparisons. The questions arise: how does the present stand related to that shining future? What difference obtains?
What must happen for that condition of holiness and glory to be brought about? The Christian Church, too, and even each individual Christian must put himself in the light of that prophetic statement. On the one hand that will humiliate us, for we must confess with the motto of Charles V.: nondum! And long still will we need to cry: Watchman what of the night (Isaiah 21:11)? On the other hand the Prophet’s word will also spur us up and cheer us. For what stronger impulse can be imagined than the certainty that one does not contend in vain, but may hope for a reward more glorious than all that ever came into a man’s heart? (Isaiah 64:4; 1 Corinthians 2:9).
In the time of the second temple, in the evenings of the first days of the feast of Tabernacles, great candelabras were lighted in the forecourt of the temple, each having four golden branches, and their light was so strong that it was nearly as light as day in Jerusalem. That might be for Jerusalem a symbol of that “let us walk in the light of the Lord.” But Jerusalem rejoiced in this light, and carried on all sorts of pastime, yet it was not able to learn to know itself in this light, and by this self-knowledge to come to true repentance and conversion.
10. On Isaiah 2:8, “their land is full of idols.” “Not only images and pictures are idols, but every notion concerning God that the godless heart forms out of itself without the authority of the Scripture. The notion that the Mass is effective ex opere operato, is an idol. The notion that works are demanded for justification with God, is an idol. The notion that God takes delight in fasts, peculiar clothes, a special order of life, is an idol. God wills not that we should set up out of our own thoughts a fashion of worshipping Him; but He says: “In all places where I record My name, I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee,” Exodus 20:24—Luther.11.
On Isaiah 2:9-21. When men have brought an idol into existence, that is just to their mind, whether it be an idolum manu factum, or an idolum mente excogitatum, there they are all wonder, all worship. “Great is Diana of the Ephesians.” Then the idol has a time of great prosperity and glory. But sooner or later there comes a time when the judgment of God overtakes the idol and its servants. God suffers sin to become ripe like men let a conspiracy, like they let fruit ripen. But when the right time comes then He steps forth in such a fashion that they creep into mouse-holes to hide themselves, if it were possible, from the lightning of His eye and His hand. Where then are the turned-up noses, the big mouths, the impudent tongues?
Thus it has often happened since the world began. But this being brought to confession shall happen in the highest degree to the puffed-up world at that day when they shall see that one whom they pierced, and whom they thought they might despise as the crucified One, coming in His glory to judge the world. Then they shall have anguish and sorrow, then shall they lament and faint away with apprehension of the things that draw nigh. But those that believed on the Lord in His holiness, shall then lift up their heads for that their redemption draws nigh. At that time, indeed, shall the Lord alone be high, and before Him shall bow the knees of all in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, and all tongues must confess that Christ is the Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
12. On Isaiah 2:22. Of what do men not make idols! The great industrial expositions of modern times often fill me with dismay, when I have seen how men carry on an actual idolatrous worship with these products of human science and art, as if that all were not, in the end, God’s work, too, but human genius were alone the creator of these wonders of civilization. How wickedly this so-called worship of genius demeans itself ! How loathsome is the still more common cultus of power, mammon and the belly!
13. On Isaiah 3:1 sqq. Causa σωστική, etc. “The saving cause of the commonwealth is the possession of men of the sort here mentioned, which Plato also knew, and Cicero from Plato, each of whom judge, commonwealths would be blessed if philosophers, i.e., wise and adept men were to administer them.”—Foerster. The same writer cites among the causes why the loss of such men is ruinous, the changes that thence ensue. All changes in the commonwealth are hurtful. Xenoph. Hellen. Isaiah 2 : “εἰσὶμὲνπᾶσαιμεταβολαὶπολιτειῶνθανατηΦόροι.” Aristot. Metaph. Isaiah 2 : “ᾱἱμεταβολαὶπάντωνταραχώδεις.”
14. On Isaiah 3:1. “The stay of bread,” etc. Vitringa cites Horat. Satir. L. II., 3 5:153 sq.:
Deficient inopem ven� te, ni cibus atqueIngens accedit stomacho fultura ruenti.And on Isaiah 3:2 sq. he cites Cicero, who, De Nat. Deorum III., calls these “pr�sidia humana,” “firmamenta reipublic�.” On Isaiah 3:6 sq. the same author cites the following passage from Livy (26 chap. 6): “Cum fame ferroque (Capuani) urgerentur, nec ulla spes superesset iis, qui nati in spem honorum erant, honores detrectantibus, Lesius querendo desertam et proditam a primoribus Capuam summum magistratum ultimus omnium Campanorum cepit!” On Isaiah 3:9 he quotes Seneca: De vita beata, chap. xii.: “Itaque quod unum habebant in peccatis bonum perdunt peccandi verecundiam. Laudant enim ea, quibus erubescant, et vitio gloriantur.”15. On Isaiah 3:4; Isaiah 3:12. Foerster remarks: Pueri, etc. “Boys are of two sorts. Some are so in respect to age, others in respect to moral qualifications.
So, too, on the contrary there is an old age of two sorts: “For honorable age is not that which standeth in length of time, nor that is measured by number of years. But wisdom is the true gray hair unto men, and an unspotted life is the true old age.” Wis 4:8-9. Examples of young and therefore foolish kings of Israel are Rehoboam (“the young fool gambled away ten whole tribes at one bet” 1 Kings 12). Ahaz, who was twenty years of age when he began to reign (2 Kings 16:2). Manasseh who was twelve years (2 Kings 21:1,) and Amon who was twenty-two years (2 Kings 21:19).
16. On Isaiah 3:7. Foerster remarks: Nemo se, etc. “Let no one intrude himself into office, especially when he knows he is not fit for it,” and then cites: “Seek not of the Lord pre-eminence, neither of the king the seat of honor. Justify not thyself before the Lord; and boast not of thy wisdom before the king. Seek not to be judge, being not able to take away iniquity.” Sir 7:4-6.”—“Wen aber Gott schickt, den macht er auch geschickt.”17. On Isaiah 3:8. “Their tongue and their doings are against the Lord.” Duplici modo, etc. “God may be honored by us in two outward ways: by word and deed, just as in the same way others come short; “to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds, which they have committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” Judges 15.—Vitringa.18.
On Isaiah 3:9. “They hide not their sin.” Secunda post, etc. “The next plank after shipwreck, and solace of miseries is to hide one’s impiety.”—Jerome.19. On Isaiah 3:10. “Now He comforts the pious as in Psalms 2. His anger will soon kindle, but it shall be well with all that trust in Him. So Abraham, so Lot was delivered; so the apostles and the remnant of Judah when Jerusalem was besieged. For the Lord helps the righteous (Psalms 37:17; Psalms 37:39).”—Luther.20. On Isaiah 3:13-14.
“Judicabit judices judex generalis,
Neque quidquam proderit dignitas papalis,
Sive sit episcopus, sive cardinalis,
Reus condemnabitur, nec dicetur qualis.”
“Rhythmi vulgo noti,” quoted byFoerster.21. On Isaiah 3:16 sq. Usus vestium, etc. “Clothes have a four-fold use: 1) they are the badge of guilt, or souvenir of the fall (Genesis 3:7; Genesis 3:10; Genesis 3:21); 2) they should be coverings against the weather; 3) they may be ornaments for the body, (Proverbs 31:22; Proverbs 31:25); 4) they may serve as a mark of rank (2 Samuel 13:18).—The abuse of clothes is three-fold; 1) in regard to the material, they may be costlier or more splendid than one’s wealth or rank admits of; 2) in respect of form, they may betray buffoonery and levity; 3) in respect to their object, they may be worn more for the display of luxury and pride than for protection and modest adornment.”—Foerster.22. On Isaiah 4:2. “Germen Jehovae est nomen Messi� mysticum, a nemine intellectum, quam qui tenet mysterium Patris et Christi. Idem valet quod filius propago Patris naturalis, in quo patris sui imago et gloria perfectissime splendet, Jessaiae in seqq. (Isaiah 9:5) αο ,ιμγ, filius, Joanni ὁλόγενήςτοῦθεοῦ,ὁυἱὸςπρωὀτοκοςμονογενής, processio Patris naturaλis. Est hic eruditi cujusdam viri elegans observatio, quae eodem tendit, quam non licet intactam praetermittere.
Comparat ille inter se nomina Messi� φξηγεγ (Jeremiah 23:5) et φξηιδεδ in hoc loco. Cum autem prior appellatio absque dubitatione innuat, Messiam fore filium Davidis, docet posteriorem ἀναλογικῶς non posse aliud significare quam filium Jehovae, quod nomen Christi Jesu est μυστικώτερον, omni alio nomine excellentius. Addit non minus docte, personam, quae hic germen Jehovae dicitur, deinceps a propheta nostro appellari Jehovam (Isaiah 28:5).”—Vitringa. This exposition, which is retained by most Christian and orthodox commentators, ignores too much the fundamental meaning of the word φֶ ?ξַ ?η, “Branch.” It is, nevertheless, not incorrect so far as the broader meaning includes the narrower concentrically. If “Branch of Jehovah” signifies all that is the personal offshoot of God, then, of course, that one must be included who is such in the highest and most perfect sense, and in so far the passage Isaiah 28:5 does not conflict with exposition given by us above.
[J. A. Alexander joins with Vitringa and Hengstenberg in regarding “the fruit of the earth,” as referring to the same subject as “the branch of the Lord,” viz.: the Messiah; and thus, while the latter term signifies the divine nature of the Messiah, the former signifies His human origin and nature; or if we translate “land” instead of earth, it points to his Jewish human origin. Thus appears an exact correspondence to the two parts of Paul’s description, Romans 1:3-4, and to the two titles used in the New Testament in reference to Christ’s two natures, Son of God and Son of Man.—Tr.].
23. On Isaiah 4:3-4. Great storms and upheavals, therefore, are needful, in order to make the fulfilment of this prophecy possible. There must first come the breath of God from above, and the flame of God from beneath over the earth, and the human race must first be tossed and sifted. The earth and mankind must first be cleansed by great judgments from all the leaven of evil. [J. A.
Alexander, with Luther, Calvin, Ewald, maintains concerning the word Spirit in Isaiah 4:4, that “the safest and most satisfactory interpretation is that which understands by it a personal spirit, or as Luther expresses it, the Spirit who shall judge and burn.”—Tr.]. What survives these judgments is the remnant of which Isaiah speaks. This shall be holy. In it alone shall the Lord live and rule. This remnant is one with the new humanity which in every part, both as respects body and soul, will represent the image of Christ the second Adam. This remnant, at the same time, comprehends those whose names are written in the book of life.
What sort of a divine book this may be, with what sort of corporal, heavenly reality, of course we know not. For Himself God needs no book. Yet if we compare the statements of the Revelation of John regarding the way in which the last judgment shall be held, with certain other New Testament passages, I think we obtain some explanation. We read Matthew 19:28, that on the day of the regeneration, when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, the twelve apostles, too, shall sit on twelve thrones to judge the generations of Israel. And 1 Corinthians 5:2, we read that the saints shall judge the world. But, Revelation 20:11, we find again the great white throne, whereon sits the great Judge of the living and the dead, after that, just before (Revelation 4:4), it was said: “And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them.” Afterwards it reads (Rev4:12): “And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.” And (Revelation 4:15). “And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.” From this description there seems to me to result that the books necessarily are meant for those who are, by the Supreme Judge charged with the judgment of particular ones.
To this end they need, in the first place, many books that contain the works of individuals. God has a book-keeping for the life of every man. This divine record will be produced to every single one at the day of judgment. Is he a Jew? by one of the twelve Apostles. Is he a heathen? by some other saint. No man shall be able to remonstrate against this account for it will carry the evidence of truth in itself, and in the consciences of those to be judged.
Should such a protest occur, the arraigned will be referred to the book of life. This is only one. For it contains only names. After this manner will the separation be accomplished, spoken of in Matthew 25:32 sq. For those whose names are found in the book of life go to the right side; the rest to the left. Then the great Judge Himself takes up the Word in the manner described in Matthew 25:34 sqq., and calls the righteous to Himself, that they may inherit the kingdom that is prepared for them.
But the wicked He repulses from Him into everlasting fire, that is prepared for the devil and his angels, in regard to which the account of the judgment in Matthew 25, as far as the end is concerned, harmonizes entirely with Revelation 20:15.
24. On Isaiah 4:5-6. “The pillar of fire and cloud belongs to the miraculous graces by which the founding of the Old Testament kingdom of God was glorified just as the New Testament kingdom was by the signs that Jesus did, and by the charismata of the Apostolic time. But that appearance was quite appropriate to the state of developed revelation of that time. This had not reached the New Testament level, and not even the prophetic elevation that was possible under the Old Testament, but only the legal in which the divine stands outwardly opposed to the human. God is present among His people, but still in the most outward way; He does not walk in a human way among men; there is, too, no inward leading of the congregation by the Holy Spirit, but an outward conducting by a visible heavenly appearance. And, for these revelations to the whole people, God makes use entirely of nature, and, when it concerns His personal manifestation, of the elements.
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
C.—The second prophetic lamp, which, in the light of the glorious divine fruit of the last time, makes known the bad fruits of the present Isaiah 4:2 to Isaiah 5:301. THE SECOND LAMP ITSELF AND THE DIVINE FRUIT OF THE FUTURE BY IT
Isaiah 4:2-62 In that day shall the branch of the Lord be beautiful and glorious1,
And the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely
For them that are escaped of Israel,
3 And it shall come to pass, that he that is left in Zion,
And he that remaineth in Jerusalem,
Shall be called holy,
Even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem;
4 When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion,
And shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof
By the spirit of judgment, and by the cspirit of burning.
5 And the Lord will create upon every dwelling place of Mount Zion,
And upon her assemblies,
A cloud and smoke by day,
And the shining of a naming fire by night:
For upon all the glory shall be a defence.
6 And there shall be a tabernacle for a shadow in the day time from the heat,
And for a place of refuge, and for a covert from storm and from rain.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_4:2. φְ ?αִ ?ι vid. Isaiah 13:19; Isaiah 23:9; Isaiah 24:16; Isaiah 28:1; Isaiah 28:4-5.—βΰεο and ϊτΰγϊ occur again together only Isaiah 13:19.—τְּ ?μֵ ?ιθָ ?δ abst., pro concr., comp. Isaiah 3:25; Isaiah 10:20; Isaiah 15:9; Isaiah 37:31 sq.
Isaiah 4:3. Niph. πֶ ?ΰֱֽ ?ξַ ?ψ is a peculiarity of Isaiah. It is found in no book of the Old Testament, relatively so often as in our prophet: Isaiah 19:18; Isaiah 32:5; Isaiah 61:6; Isaiah 62:4 (bis.).—The construction λϊεαμηιιν is dubious, λָּ ?ϊַ ?α in this sense is nowhere else construed with μְ, unless perhaps Isaiah 44:5 (wh. see) may be compared. ηιιν may be abstractum (vita) or concretum (vivi).
Isaiah 4:4. ψηυ occurs again in Isaiah only Isaiah 1:16.—φΰָ ?δ in Isaiah again only Isaiah 28:8, and Isaiah 37:12, K’ri.—The verb δֵ ?γִ ?ιηַ is found only in the Hiphil; in Isaiah it occurs only here; it is found elsewhere only in Jeremiah 51:34; Ezekiel 40:38; 2 Chronicles 4:6. As the parallel passages show, it means: “wash away, rinse away,” and thereby cleanse. It is therefore synonymous with ψָ ?ηַ ?υ.
Isaiah 4:5. ξִ ?χְ ?ψָ ?ΰ which occurs here and Isaiah 1:13 in Isaiah, and in Nehemiah 8:8 (where it seems to mean “lecture”), occurs elsewhere only in the Pentateuch. There, too, with the exception of Num 10:2, where the ξִ ?χְ ?ψָ ?ΰδָ ?ςֵ ?γָ ?δ convocatio coetus is indicated as the object of the use of the trumpets, it is always joined with χֹ ?γֶ ?ωׁ: Exodus 12:16; Leviticus 23:2 sq.; Numbers 28:18; Numbers 28:25 sq; Isaiah 29:1; Isaiah 29:7; Isaiah 29:12. It is therefore a liturgical term, and means the assembling of the congregation.—ςָ ?πָ ?ο occurs again in Isaiah only Isaiah 44:22. But ςָ ?ωָׁ ?ο he often uses: Isaiah 6:4; Isaiah 9:17; Isaiah 14:31; Isaiah 34:10; Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 65:5. Moreover πֹ ?βַ ?δּ, which does not occur in the Pentateuch, is peculiar to Isaiah 50:10; Isaiah 60:3; Isaiah 60:19; Isaiah 62:1; comp. Isaiah 9:1; Isaiah 13:10.
So too μδαδ flame never occurs in the Pentateuch, except in Numbers 21:28, where it is not used of the pillar of fire. But it is found in Isaiah 5:24; Isaiah 10:17; Isaiah 43:2; Isaiah 47:14. He intimates by it that one must picture to himself, not an even, steady gleam of fire, but an agitated flaming fire. λιςμΞμΞλαεγεβεΧ. I join these words to what follows, as Hitzig also does. The Masoretic division is probably occasioned by the fact that the preceding sentence from εּ ?αָ ?ψָ ?ΰ to μιμδ present no strongly marked point for setting an Athnach. But this, as is well known, is not at all necessary; comp.
Isaiah 4:4; Isaiah 5:3. And besides, if one disjoins these words from the following, he must conceive such a verb as decet supplied, or at least a ϊִ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ, shall be. But this is hardly admissible, which those, too, maintain who take ηֻ ?τָּ ?δ as Pual (“For all that is glorious shall be defended” Gesenius; Knobel somewhat differently.—ηֻ ?τָּ ?δ occurs beside this place only in Psalms 19:6, and Joe 2:16 in the sense of “bridal chamber, bridal canopied bed.” And so it means here a protecting cover, and sheltering baldachin.
Isaiah 4:6. On ρֻ ?λָּ ?δ booth, see Isaiah 1:8, the only other place where it occurs in Isaiah.—The expressions φֵ ?μξֵ ?ηֹ ?ψֶ ?α and ξַ ?ηְ ?ρֶ ?δξִ ?ζֶּ ?ψֶ ?ν recur Isaiah 25:4—φֵ ?μ vid. Isaiah 16:3; Isaiah 25:5; Isaiah 30:2; Isaiah 49:2 etc.—δֹ ?ψֵ ?α Isaiah 25:5; Isaiah 61:4.—ξַֽ ?ηֲ ?ρֶ ?δ Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:17.—ξִ ?ρְ ?ϊּ ?εֹ ?ψ (comp. ρֵ ?ϊֶ ?ψζֶ ?ψֶ ?ν Isaiah 32:2 and ξρְ ?ϊּ ?εֹ ?ψ Isaiah 45:3) is ἅπ. λεγ.—ζֶ ?ψֶ ?ν is a word of frequent recurrence in the first part of Isaiah. Besides the passages already cited see Isaiah 28:2 (bis.); Isaiah 30:30. Beside those only Job 24:8, and Habakkuk 3:10.—ξָ ?θָ ?ψ again in Isaiah 5:6; Isaiah 30:23.
AND 1. Just at that time, i.e., at the time to which the parallel passage Isaiah 2:2-4 refers, the rescued ones of Israel shall partake of a glory that shall appear as fruit of the life that Jehovah Himself shall produce (Isaiah 4:2). In consequence of that all that still remain in Jerusalem shall be called holy, all whose names shall be written in the book of life (Isaiah 4:3). But the ones left remaining are those that shall be present when all moral filth and all blood-guiltiness shall have been cleansed away by the tempest of the divine judgment (Isaiah 4:4). Then shall Jehovah hover over each house and over the assembled total of the dwellers of Jerusalem, as formerly over the tabernacle, with a cloud by day, with smoke and appearance of fire by night (Isaiah 4:5), for the presence of the glory of Jehovah shall be protection and shelter against every attack (Isaiah 4:6).
2. I regard this section as parallel member to Isaiah 2:2-4. Like that, it transports us into the last time: like that, it sets before our eyes the glory that Israel shall then enjoy. Only there is this difference, that, whereas Isaiah 2:2-4 describes the outward eminence and exaltation of Zion, as the central point of dominion over all nations, Isaiah 4:2-6 rather describes the inward glory of Zion as one that is now purified and sanctified. For the tempest of judgment has cleansed away all morally impure and ungodly elements. Whatever personal life remains in Zion is a divine scion, and therefore whatever the land produces must be glorious divine fruit.
And as in the wilderness the cloud by day and the appearance of fire by night was over the Tabernacle, so shall every single house in Israel and the whole congregation in its entirety be marked as the holy abode of Jehovah by the glorious signs of His presence warding off every hostile storm. This is the second prophetic lamp with which the prophet, so to speak, stretches his arm far out and illuminates the distant future. But as in Isaiah 2:5 to Isaiah 4:1 he sets the present that lies between (we comprehend all that precedes that last time as present) in the light of that prophetic word Isaiah 2:2-4, and by this means makes manifest the immense difference between the present and the future, so he does likewise here. I am of the opinion therefore that 5. has the same subordinate relation to Isaiah 4:2-4 that Isaiah 2:5 to Isaiah 4:1 has to Isaiah 2:2-4. That 5. is not independent, but integral part of the prophecy that begins with Isaiah 2:1, has already been asserted by Forerius, Vogel, Doederlein, Jahn, Hitzig, Ewald (comp. Caspari, Beitr, p. 234).
I maintain the same, only I have other grounds for it than they. If one were to assume with Caspari (int. al. p. 300) that the passage Isaiah 2:2-4, “is not in the proper sense prophecy; they are repeated, quoted, recited by Isaiah, as a prophecy given to Israel by another prophet, for the purpose of joining on to it the warning and reproof of Isa 2:5-8,”—then indeed must Isaiah 4:2-6 be regarded as the promise appertaining to Isaiah 2:5 to Isaiah 4:1.
But that assumption of Caspari is as unnatural as can be. The glorious words of Micah must be no prophecy! But they are so per se. This cannot be controverted. They must serve only as “points of departure and connection!” That would need to be indicated. Then Isaiah must have presented them in a form that would reveal at once that he employs the words only as introduction to his address proper.
They must be separated from the discourse of Isaiah, and be expressly designated as a citation by some sort of historical reference. But such is not the case. Isaiah make the words entirely his own. He does not say that they are borrowed from another: those informed know it and draw their own conclusion; but that is another thing. The main thing is that the Lord has so said, and therefore Isaiah too may use the words and found his discourse on it.
It is clear as day and undisputed that Isaiah from Isaiah 2:2 to Isaiah 4:1 shows the false estimate of human glory in the light of the divine. But just as clear, it seems to me, is it that Isaiah, in 4 and 5, also contemplates, as it were, the condition of the fruits in the field of the hearts of Israel in the present in the light of the fruitage that, in the last time, shall be produced on the soil of the judged and purified Israel. For Isaiah 4:2, “the Branch,” and “Fruit of the earth” are evidently the main ideas. These both shall become glorious. This, however, is explained Isaiah 4:3 : all that then remain in Zion shall be called holy, because the tempest of judgment has removed from Zion all pollution and all guilt. Then shall both, each individual and the totality, be fully as secure a dwelling place of Jehovah as once the Tabernacle was.
Therefore the prophet speaks Isaiah 4:2-6 also of a glory indeed, but of a different one from Isaiah 2:2-4. In the latter place he has in view more that glory which in that time Israel shall develop externally: it shall as the solitary eminence of the earth shine far around, and all nations shall flow to this eminence. But Isaiah 4:2 sq. speaks of that glory that is identical with holiness, the notion “holy” taken in the sense of sanctus and sacer: this glory, however, is first of all inward. But as that outward glory takes the inward for granted, which is indicated Isaiah 2:3 by the terms “out of Zion shall go forth the law,” etc., so, too, the inward glory cannot last without the outward, which is expressed Isaiah 4:2 by the terms “beautiful and glorious, excellent and comely,” and plainly enough in Isaiah 4:5-6. When now we read in chap. 5 of a vineyard that produces wild grapes instead of grapes, and when Isaiah 5:7, this is expressly interpreted to mean that Jehovah has found in the field of the hearts of Israel bloodshed and the cry of woe instead of judgment and righteousness, and when, after that, this evil fruit is more particularly characterized in the following sixfold woe, can we then in the least doubt that the section that treats of the bad fruits of the present stands in the same relation to the section immediately preceding which describes the glorious fruits of the last time, that the section Isaiah 2:5 to Isaiah 4:1 concerning false great things does to the section that immediately precedes it, and that describes the true divine greatness.
I do not suppose that this would ever have been doubted, did not chap. 5 appear so independent, so peculiar, so distinct in itself and well rounded, and were not suddenly Isaiah 4:1, a totally different tone assumed; I mean the parable tone. But we must not overlook the relationship of the contents because of the difference in the form. This relationship will appear plainer as we contemplate the particulars: but we must at this point draw attention to one thing. As Isaiah 2:5 to Isaiah 4:1 the outward decay appears as symptom and consequence of the inward, so in chap. 5 the inward decay appears as the root from which the outward develops by an inevitable necessity. According to this the two dominant passages Isaiah 2:2-4 and Isaiah 4:2-6 stand in an analogous inverted relation, like the sections governed by them Isaiah 2:5 to Isaiah 4:1, and chap. 5.
Finally let it be noticed here, what we shall prove in particular further on, that in Isaiah 4:2-6, as a matter of course, there occur back looks or references to what has preceded. (Comp. e. g. Isaiah 4:4) This cannot be otherwise, in as much as Isaiah 4:2 to Isaiah 5:30 is the second organic half of the great second portal of Isaiah’s prophecies. But noticing this does not in the least hinder the assertion that section Isaiah 4:2-6 in the main looks forward and not backward.
3. In that day,—spirit of burning.
Isaiah 4:2-4. By the words “in that day” the prophet refers back to “in the last days” Isaiah 2:2. For according to all that we have just laid down, Isaiah 4:2-6 stands parallel with Isaiah 2:2-4, both as to time and subject matter. This last time may have begun since the birth of Christ, but it is not finished; it is fulfilled by degrees through many a rising and subsiding. In this last time, therefore, shall “the branch” and “the fruit of the earth” be for beauty and honor, splendor and glory to the saved ones of Israel. What is φֶ ?ξַ ?ηιΧ “branch?” The word means germinatio, the sprouting, and means first of all, not a single sprout, but sprouting in general, and the total of all that sprouts.
Thus it means Genesis 19:25 : “And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground” (εְ ?φֶ ?ξַ ?ηδָ ?ΰֲ ?γָ ?ξָ ?δ). So again we read, Ezekiel 16:7 : “I have caused thee to multiply as the bud of the field” (λְּ ?φֶ ?ξַ ?ηδַ ?ωָּׂ ?γֶ ?δ) i.e. I have made thee like the vegetation of the field. Again Hosea 8:7 : “It hath no stalk, the bud (φֶ ?ξַ ?η) shall yield no meal.” The word has the same meaning also Isaiah 61:11; Psalms 65:11. In Ezekiel 17:9-10, the abstract meaning germinatio predominates. If now we compare Jeremiah 23:5; Jeremiah 33:15, we find that there “righteous Branch” (φֶ ?ξַ ?ηφַ ?γִּ ?ιχ) means a single personality. “I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as King, and shall prosper, and execute judgment and justice in the land; in his days,” etc.
Notice the singular after Branch. So too, Jeremiah 33:15. In Zechariah, however, we find φֶ ?ξַ ?ηTzemach, has become altogether a proper name. “Behold I will bring forth my servant Tzemach, (Branch),” Zechariah 3:8. And Zechariah 6:12 : “Behold the man whose name is Tzemach, and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord. “If we agree with expositors that refer the Tzemach of Jer. and Zech. (which in them, beyond all doubt, means the Messiah), to our passage as its original source, still the conclusion must not be countenanced that the word is to be taken in the same meaning in our passage as in Jer. and Zech. For in our passage a condition, habitus, is evidently described, not a personality. “Fruit of the land” stands as correlative of “Branch of Jehovah.” This is so general and comprehensive an expression, that it is impossible to understand by it any single fruit, even though it were the noblest. The passages Isaiah 11:1; Isaiah 11:10; Isaiah 53:2, do not contradict this.
For just in those passages the Messiah is designated, not as the fruit of the land, (or of the earth), in general, but a shoot out of the root of Jesse. “Fruit of the land” in the general and indefinite form of its expression, can only signify the products of the land in general (not of the earth, for, according to the context, only Israel is spoken of). Thus what grows of Jehovah and what grows of the land stand in antithesis; spiritual and corporal fruits, the products of the heavenly and of the earthly life.
But what are the products of the heavenly, spiritual, divine life? This, it seems to me, Isa. himself tells us Isaiah 61:11 : “For as the earth bringeth forth her bud, and as the garden causeth the things that are sown in it to spring forth; so the Lord God will cause righteousness and praise to spring forth before the nations.” Thus, “whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue and if there be any praise” Philippians 4:8 (and may not Paul have had Isaiah 61:11 in his mind?) that is Tzemach of Jehovah. That is the divine fruit with which the fruit of the land stands in contrast, viz.: all corporal life that the land produces in all the kingdoms of nature. Therefore Tzemach of Jehovah comprehends the entire sphere of the free, conscious, personal life, all that is product of “the breath of life” (Genesis 2:7); whereas “fruit of the land” designates the entire impersonal, corporal life, all that is “the production of the earth” (Genesis 1:12). If this is the meaning of Tzemach of Jehovah in our passage, then this general notion may easily condense and, so to speak, crystallize to the conception of a definite personality. Thus, for instance, the idea of the seed of the woman (Genesis 3:15) proceeding originally from a conception general and indefinite, gradually, in the consciousness of believing Israel, condensed to the notion of a definite personality.
According to this I cannot agree with those that understand φξδιΧ Tzemach of Jehovah of the Messiah only (as many Jewish and Christian expositors), or of the Church alone (so Jerome: nomen Christianum), or of the people of Israel alone (thus Knobel, who confounds φξηιΧ with ξַ ?θַּ ?ςιΧ), or of Christ and the church (thus Zwingli: “both expressions suit to the Branch Christ and to His body the church.” Hofmann’s explanation (Schriftbew. II. 2, p. 503 sq.): “What Jehovah causes to grow and the land brings forth, the Prophet opposes to the thousands of human productions with which the previously rebuked luxury decked itself, especially in the case of women,” seems to me to construe the idea of Tzemach of Jehovah too narrowly, and too little in its distinction from “Fruit of the land,” as well as too much with reference to Isaiah 3:16 sqq.
Therefore, the entire products, both of the spiritual and the corporal life shall be such that the rescued ones of Israel shall be highly honored and glorified thereby. That which has its immediate source of life in Jehovah Himself, which is the fruit of His Spirit (Galatians 5:22) must redound to the honor of those in whom it makes its appearance (comp. Romans 2:7 sqq.). We read elsewhere (Isaiah 28:5) that Jehovah Himself “shall be for a crown of glory and for a diadem of beauty unto the residue of His people.” Both amount to the same thing. For where Jehovah is, there He is with His life and with His power; and where He lives and works, there He makes glory. Moreover the fruits of the earth, where the Lord alone becomes the principle of spiritual life, must themselves become glorious and, as it were, the cause of a glory like Paradise. All, in fact, will become new: body and soul, nature and history, heaven and earth.
τγιδΰψυ (or δָ ?ΰֲ ?γָ ?ξָ ?δ) never means anything else than the products of the ground. The expression is found often in the Pentateuch (Genesis 4:3; Leviticus 25:19; Numbers 13:20; Numbers 13:26), most frequently in Deut. (Isaiah 1:25; Isaiah 7:13; Isaiah 26:2; Isaiah 26:10; Isaiah 28:4; Isaiah 28:11; Isaiah 28:18, &c). Beside these only in Jeremiah 7:20, and Psalms 105:35. But all this splendor and glory shall exist only for “the escaped of Israel.” This is the conception so frequent in Isa., which he elsewhere designates as “remnant,” “him that remaineth,” “residue,” (,πεֹ ?ϊָ ?ψ ,ωְּׁ ?ΰֵ ?ψִ ?ιϊ ,ωׁ ?ΰָ ?ψπִ ?ωְׁ ?ΰָ ?ψ comp. Isaiah 4:3; Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 10:20-22; Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 11:16; Isaiah 28:5; Isaiah 37:31 sq.; Isaiah 46:3), and which expresses that, not all Israel, but only the remnant left after the judging and sifting shall partake of the salvation.
Isaiah 4:3 says expressly, that the glory of which Isaiah 5:2 speaks shall depend on inward purity and spotlessness, on that light that is said to be the garment of God (Psalms 104:2). This verse, therefore, contains the more particular definition of Isa 5:2. “The left over” (πִ ?ωְׁ ?ΰָ ?ψ comp. Isaiah 37:31) and “the remaining over” (πεֹ ?ϊָ ?ψ comp. Isaiah 7:22, and Delitzsch, in loc.) in Zion and Jerusalem (vid.Isaiah 2:3) shall be called holy, i.e., not only be so, but be recognized and called such.
This holiness, which becomes God’s house, Psalms 93:5, is, any way, to be construed objectively as well as subjectively. It includes the sacer and the sanctus. But these holy men of God are His elect in reference to whom He has made the counsel of His love documentary by entering their names in the book of life.
“To be written to the living” or “to the life” calls to mind Psalms 69:29, ςִ ?νφַ ?γִּ ?ιχִ ?ινμֹ ?ΰιִ ?λָּ ?ϊֵ ?αεּ, “let them not be written with the righteous,” or Jeremiah 22:30, where it is said: “write this man ςֲ ?ψִ ?ιψִ ?ι childless.” This book of life is not that in which are written those destined to earthly life (1 Samuel 25:29, Psalms 139:16), but that wherein stand written those appointed to everlasting life. What sort of a book that may be, and how the entry in it comports with free self determination in men we cannot here investigate. This book is first named Exodus 32:32-33. Later Isa. in this place, and Psalms 69:29; Psalms 87:4-6; Daniel 12:1 mention it. In the N. Test, we read of it Luke 10:20; Philippians 4:3; Revelation 3:5; Revelation 13:8; Revelation 17:8; Revelation 20:12; Revelation 20:15; Revelation 21:27. Some, not without propriety, have reminded, in connection with Isaiah 10:19; Ezekiel 13:9; Exodus 30:12, etc., of the genealogical registers or roll of citizens, in so far as those inscribed for life are at once citizens of the kingdom of God and of the city of God (Galatians 5:26; Hebrews 12:22; Revelation 21:2).
When the Lord shall have washed.
Isaiah 4:4. It seems to me that the contents of Isa 4:4 show decidedly that it is no premis to Isaiah 4:5, but is to be regarded as specification of the time and conditions in reference to Isaiah 4:2-3. For only the purifying and sifting judgments of God, that cleanse away all filth, bring it about that any holy, divine life still remains in Jerusalem. The filth of the daughter of Zion is not only her moral degradation, but all that appears as fruit of it and means for furthering it; thus the entire apparatus of luxury discoursed of in Isaiah 3:16 sqq. Though outwardly showy and splendid, regarded from the Prophet’s point of view it was only vile filth. The blood-guiltiness of Jerusalem (comp.
Isaiah 1:15; Isaiah 9:4; Isaiah 26:21; Isaiah 33:15) proceeds from the innocent blood shed by the injustice and tyranny of the powerful (Isaiah 1:15 sqq.). Concerning Zion and Jerusalem, see Isaiah 2:3. This cleansing shall be brought about by a spiritual force that is analogous to that force of nature that purifies, viz., the wind. Like that rushes over the earth and bears away all impure vapors, so shall God let loose His judgments over Israel, destroy the wicked and drive to repentance those in whom the Spirit of God finds still a point of contact, thus spiritually purify the nation. I do not think, therefore, that ψεּ ?ηַ here is to be translated “spirit.” The context evidently demands the meaning “wind.” In Isaiah 30:28, also ψεּ ?ηַ is the breath of God, as one sees from the connection with the lips and tongue (4:27). Comp.
Isaiah 41:16, ψεּ ?ηַ ϊִּ ?ωָׂ ?ΰֵ ?ν “the wind shall carry them away.” Meier translates our passage “breath of wrath.” In the kindred passage Isaiah 28:6, however, the meaning “spirit” seems to predominate. Whether αָּ ?ςֵ ?ψ is kindred to that αָּ ?ςֵ ?ψ that means “to burn, to kindle” (see Isaiah 4:5; Isaiah 40:16; Isaiah 44:15; 2 Chronicles 4:20; 2 Chronicles 13:11) is doubtful. Our αςψ is, like Isaiah 6:13, used in the sense of “to cast off, cut away, brush off,” in which sense the word often occurs in Deut. in reference to exterminating the scabby sheep out of the holy theocratic congregation (Deuteronomy 13:6; Deuteronomy 17:7; Deuteronomy 19:19; Deuteronomy 26:13 sq., comp. Numbers 24:22, &c.) The word therefore involves the notion of a sifting. After the purification is accomplished by judgment and sifting, measures shall be taken against further corruption in that the Lord shall hover with the pillar of smoke and fire over the individual dwellings of Mount Zion and over the whole assembly of the holy nation for their protection.
Isaiah 4:5εּ ?αָ ?ψָ ?ΰ therefore introduces a complementary idea of what precedes. ξָ ?λζֹ ?ο (again in Isaiah only Isaiah 18:4) is sedes, habitatio parata, stabilita. It is used almost exclusively of the divine indwelling. For with the exception of Psa 104:5, where the ξְ ?αεֹ ?πִ ?ιν (foundations) of the earth are named (which any way are a divine work too), ξλεο stands only for the earthly, (Exodus 15:17, &c) or the heavenly (1 Kings 8:39; 1 Kings 8:43; 1 Kings 8:49, etc.) dwelling-place of God. One is tempted, therefore, to understand ξλεο here of the temple as God’s dwelling place. But then the λֹּ ?μ would be incomprehensible. Or if this be translated “whole,” then there must be an article.
We must, therefore, understand by it all the dwellings that were found on Mount Zion (comp. Isaiah 2:2-3, naming of the city Jerusalem a potiori). The whole of these have become holy dwellings of God, too, inasmuch as their inhabitants are themselves scions of God (Isaiah 4:2).
“Assemblies,” is evidently in contrast with “every dwelling,” and declares that the sign of Jehovah shall hover over both the dwellings of individual families and over the assembled total of the nation. Every single house, as well as the house of Jacob as a whole, shall be God’s holy tabernacle, as formerly the typical Tabernacle was alone. Even before the passage of the Red Sea, the pillar of cloud and fire went before the Israelites (Exodus 13:21 sq.). It stood as a protection between the armies of Israel and Egypt (Exodus 14:19 sq). But when the Tabernacle was completed, the pillar of cloud and fire rested over it (Exodus 40:34 sqq.).
In the Pentateuch the expression ςָ ?ωָׁ ?ο, smoke, is never used for this wonderful phenomenon. It is put in here in such a way that one does not know whether to join it to ςπָ ?οcloud, or to βֹ ?βַ ?δּ ζΧshining, etc. According to the accents the former should be done. Moreover it may be urged that smoke is not seen by night. But why then is ςָ ?ωָׁ ?ο placed after ιεֹ ?ξָ ?ν? Some consider the construction a hendiadys: cloud and smoke = smoke cloud; for an ordinary vapor cloud it was not.
This may be correct. But from the nature of things smoke belongs to fire. For there is no fire without smoke, nor smoke without fire. Like Hengstenberg, therefore, I refer εְ ?ςָ ?ωָׁ ?ο, and smoke to what follows. Precisely as smoke would the cloud at night be most plainly visible, for then the smoke was seen mounting out of the fire and illuminated by it.
For upon all glory, etc.—If the Prophet, as has been shown, regards every single house as God’s holy tabernacle, then he can call it glorious too, like in Exodus 40:34 sq., that which filled the dwelling of the sanctuary is called the glory of Jehovah. Comp. on Exodus 4:13. This glory of Jehovah in the pillar of cloud and fire served on the one hand for Israel’s protection—viz., standing between them and the Egyptians,—on the other for a guide in the desert. The sanctified Israel of the last time will not need a guide, for they will no more wander. They are to be firmly founded on the holy mountain. But they will still need protection.
For if even the majority of the nations flow to them, shall then at once all enmity in the world against God’s sanctuary be extinguished? Is it not conceivable that both in the world of men and of devils hostile powers may exist, inclined to and capable of doing harm? (Revelation 20:7 sqq.)
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 2:2. Domus Dei, etc. “The house of God is built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, who, themselves, too, are mountains, quasi imitators of Christ. (They that trust in the Lord shall be as Mount Zion, Psalms 125:1) Whence, also, upon one of the mountains Christ founded the Church and said: Thou art Peter, etc., Matthew 16:18.” Jerome.——“We can understand Jerusalem by the mountain of God, for we see how the believing run thither, and how those that have accepted the testimony come thither and seize the blessing that proceeds thence. But we may also by the house of God understand the churches spread over land and sea, as we believe St. Paul, who says, ‘we are the house of God,’ Hebrews 3:6. And so we may recognize the truth of the prophecy.
For the Church of God stands shining forth, and the nations, forsaking wickedness that has long had dominion over them, hasten to her and are enlightened by her.” Theodoret.——Ecclesia est, etc. “The church is a mountain exalted and established above all other mountains, but in spirit. For if you regard the external look of the church from the beginning of the world, then in New Testament times, you will see it oppressed, contemned, and in despair. Yet, notwithstanding, in that contempt it is exalted above all mountains. For all kingdoms and all dominions that have ever been in the world have perished. The church alone endures and triumphs over heresies, tyrants, Satan, sin, death and hell, and that by the word only, by this despised and feeble speech alone. Moreover it is a great comfort that the bodily place, whence first the spiritual kingdom should arise, was so expressly predicted, that consciences are assured of that being the true word, that began first to be preached in that corner of Judea, that it may be for us a mount Zion, or rule for judging of all religions and all doctrines.
The Turkish Alcoran did not begin in Zion—therefore it is wicked doctrine. The various Popish rites, laws, traditions began not in Zion—therefore they are wicked, and the very doctrines of devils. So we may hold ourselves upright against all other religions, and comfort our hearts with this being the only true religion which we profess. Therefore, too, in two psalms, Psalms 2, 110, mount Zion is expressly signified: “I have set my king upon my holy hill of Zion;” likewise: “The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion.” Luther.2. On Isaiah 2:2. Luther makes emphatic, as something pertaining to “the wonderful nature of this kingdom,” that “other kingdoms are established and administered by force and arms.
But here, because the mountain is lifted up, the nation shall flow (fluent), i.e., they shall come voluntarily, attracted by the virtues of the church. For what is there sweeter or lovelier than the preaching of the gospel? Whereas Moses frightens weak souls away. Thus the prophet by the word fluent, “flow,” has inlaid a silent description of the kingdom of Christ, which Christ gives more amply when He says: Matthew 11:12, “the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force,” i.e. “they are not compelled, but they compel themselves.” “Morever rivers do not flow up mountains, but down them; but here is such an unheard-of thing in the kingdom of Christ.”—Starke.3. Luther remarks on “and shall say: come,” etc. “Here thou seest the worship, works and efforts and sacrifices of Christians. For they do only the one work, that they go to hear and to learn.
All the rest of the members must serve their neighbors. These two, ears and heart, must serve God only. For the kingdom rests on the word alone. Sectaries and heretics, when they have heard the gospel once, instantly become masters, and pervert the Prophet’s word, in that they say: Come let us go up that we may teach him his way and walk in our paths. They despise, therefore, the word as a familiar thing and seek new disputations by which they may display their spirit and commend themselves to the crowd. But Christians know that the words of the Holy Ghost can never be perfectly learned as long as we are in the flesh.
For Christianity does not consist in knowing, but in the disposition. This disposition can never perfectly believe the word on account of the weakness of the sinful flesh. Hence they ever remain disciples and ruminate the word, in order that the heart, from time to time, may flame up anew. It is all over with us if we do not continue in the constant use of the word, in order to oppose it to Satan in temptation (Matthew 4). For immediately after sinning ensues an evil conscience, that can be raised up by nothing but the word. Others that forsake the word sink gradually from one sin into another, until they are ruined.
Therefore Christianity must be held to consist in hearing the word, and those that are overcome by temptations, whether of the heart or body, may know that their hearts are empty of the word.”
4. Vitringa remarks on the words, “Out of Zion goes forth the law,” Isaiah 5:3. “If strife springs up among the disciples concerning doctrine or discipline, one must return to the pattern of the doctrine and discipline of the school at Jerusalem. For ιָ ?φָ ?ΰ “shall go forth,” stands here only as in Luke 2:1, “There went forth a decree from Cζsar Augustus.” In this sense, too, Paul says, 1 Corinthians 14:36, “What? came the word of God out from you?” The word of God did not go forth from Corinth, Athens, Rome, Ephesus, but from Jerusalem, a fact that bishops assembled in Antioch opposed to Julius I. (Sozom. hist. eccl. III. 8, “the orientals acknowledged that the Church of Rome was entitled to universal honor—although those who first propagated a knowledge of Christian doctrine in that city came from the East”). Cyril took ιָ ?φָ ?ΰ in the false sense of κατελἐλοιπετὴνΣιών, “has forsaken Zion.” When the Lord opened the understandings of the disciples at Emmaus, to understand the Scriptures and see in the events they had experienced the fulfilment of what was written concerning Him in the law, Prophets and Psalms, He cannot have forgotten the present passage. Of this we may be the more assured since the words: “Thus it is written and thus it behooved Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations beginning at Jerusalem.” Luke 24:46-47, point clearly to Isaiah 2:2-3 of our passage.
Therefore too, Justin Martyr Apol. i. (commonly ii.), § 49, says: “But where the prophetic spirit predicts the future, he says: from Zion shall go forth the law, etc. And that this finally came to pass in fact, you may credibly assure yourselves. For from Jerusalem have men gone forth into the world, twelve in number, and these were unlearned, that knew not how to speak. But by the might of God they have proclaimed to all mankind that they were sent by Christ in order to teach all the word of God.”
“Zion is contrasted here with Mount Sinai, whence the law came, which in the Old Testament was the foundation of all true doctrine: But in the New Testament Mount Zion or Jerusalem has the privilege to announce that now a more perfect law would be given and a new Covenant of God with men would be established. Thus Zion and Jerusalem are, so to speak, the nursery and the mother of all churches and congregations of the New Testament.”—Starke.5. Fφrster remarks on the end of Isa 2:3, that the gospel is the sceptre of Jesus Christ, according to Psalms 110:2; Psalms 45:7 (the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre). “For by the word Christ rules His church (Romans 10:14 sqq.).”
6. On Isaiah 2:4. “Pax optima rerum.” Foerster. The same author finds this prophecy fulfilled by Christ, who is our peace, who has made of both one, and broken down the partition that was between, in that by His flesh He took away the enmity (Ephesians 2:14). Foerster, moreover, combats the Anabaptists, who would prove from this passage that waging war is not permitted to Christians. For our passage speaks only against the privata Christianorum discordia. But waging war belongs to the publicum magistratus officium.
Waging war, therefore, is not forbidden, if only the war is a just one. To be such, however, there must appear according to Thomas, part. 2 th. qu�st. 40. 1) auctoritatis principis, 2) causa justa, 3) intentio bellantium justa, or ut allii efferunt: 1) jurisdictio indicentis, 2) offensio patientis, 3) intentio finem (?) convenientis.7. On Isaiah 2:4. Jerome regarded the time of Augustus, after his victory at Actium, as the fulfilling of this prophecy. Others, as Cocceius, refer the words, “they shall turn their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning-hooks,” to the time of Constantine the Great; and the words “nation shall not lift up sword against nation” to the period of the restoration of religious peace in Germany,—finally the words: “they shall no more learn war,” to a future time that is to be hoped for. Such interpretations are, however, just as one-sided as those that look only for a spiritual fulfilment of prophecy.
For how is an inward fulfilment of this promise of peace to be thought of which would not have the outward effects as its consequence? Or how is an outward fulfilment, especially such as would deserve the name, conceivable without the basis of the inward? Or must this peaceful time be looked for only in heaven? Why then does the promise stand here? It is a matter of course that there is peace in heaven: for where there is no peace there can be no heaven. The promise has sense only if its fulfilment is to be looked for on earth.
The fulfilment will take place when the first three petitions of the Lord’s prayer are fulfilled, i.e. when God’s name shall be held holy by us as it in itself is holy, when the kingdom of God is come to everything, without and within, and rules alone over all, when the will of God is done on earth as in heaven. Christendom makes this prayer quite as much with the consciousness that it cannot remain unfulfilled, as with the consciousness that it must find its fulfilment on earth. For, if referred to heaven, these petitions are without meaning. Therefore there is a time of universal inward and outward peace to be looked for on earth. “It is not every day’s evening,” i.e. one must await the event, and our earth, without the least saltus in cogitando, can yet experience a state of things that shall be related to the present, as the present to the period of trilobites and saurians. If one could only keep himself free from the tyranny of the present moment! But our entire, great public, that has made itself at home in Philistia, lives in the sweet confidence that there is no world beside that of which we take notice on the surface of the earth, nor ever was one, nor ever will be.
8. On Isaiah 2:4. Poets reverse the figure to portray the transition from peaceful to warlike conditions. Thus Virgil, Georg. I. 2:506 sq.:
Non ullus aratro
Dignus honos, squalent abductis arva colonis.
Et curvζ rigidum falces conflantur in ensem.
Aeneide VII. 2:635 sq.:
Vomeris huc et falcis honos, huc omnis aratri
Cessit amor; recoquunt patrios fornacibus enses.
Ovid, Fast. I. 2:697 sqq.:
Bella diu tenuere viros. Erat aptior ensis
Vomere, cedebat taurus arator equo.
Sarcula cessabant, versique in pila ligones.
Factaque de rastri pondere cassia erat.
9. On Isaiah 2:5. As Isaiah puts the glorious prophecy of his fellow prophet Micah at the head, he illuminates the future with a splendid, shining, comforting light. Once this light is set up, it of itself suggests comparisons. The questions arise: how does the present stand related to that shining future? What difference obtains?
What must happen for that condition of holiness and glory to be brought about? The Christian Church, too, and even each individual Christian must put himself in the light of that prophetic statement. On the one hand that will humiliate us, for we must confess with the motto of Charles V.: nondum! And long still will we need to cry: Watchman what of the night (Isaiah 21:11)? On the other hand the Prophet’s word will also spur us up and cheer us. For what stronger impulse can be imagined than the certainty that one does not contend in vain, but may hope for a reward more glorious than all that ever came into a man’s heart? (Isaiah 64:4; 1 Corinthians 2:9).
In the time of the second temple, in the evenings of the first days of the feast of Tabernacles, great candelabras were lighted in the forecourt of the temple, each having four golden branches, and their light was so strong that it was nearly as light as day in Jerusalem. That might be for Jerusalem a symbol of that “let us walk in the light of the Lord.” But Jerusalem rejoiced in this light, and carried on all sorts of pastime, yet it was not able to learn to know itself in this light, and by this self-knowledge to come to true repentance and conversion.
10. On Isaiah 2:8, “their land is full of idols.” “Not only images and pictures are idols, but every notion concerning God that the godless heart forms out of itself without the authority of the Scripture. The notion that the Mass is effective ex opere operato, is an idol. The notion that works are demanded for justification with God, is an idol. The notion that God takes delight in fasts, peculiar clothes, a special order of life, is an idol. God wills not that we should set up out of our own thoughts a fashion of worshipping Him; but He says: “In all places where I record My name, I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee,” Exodus 20:24—Luther.11.
On Isaiah 2:9-21. When men have brought an idol into existence, that is just to their mind, whether it be an idolum manu factum, or an idolum mente excogitatum, there they are all wonder, all worship. “Great is Diana of the Ephesians.” Then the idol has a time of great prosperity and glory. But sooner or later there comes a time when the judgment of God overtakes the idol and its servants. God suffers sin to become ripe like men let a conspiracy, like they let fruit ripen. But when the right time comes then He steps forth in such a fashion that they creep into mouse-holes to hide themselves, if it were possible, from the lightning of His eye and His hand. Where then are the turned-up noses, the big mouths, the impudent tongues?
Thus it has often happened since the world began. But this being brought to confession shall happen in the highest degree to the puffed-up world at that day when they shall see that one whom they pierced, and whom they thought they might despise as the crucified One, coming in His glory to judge the world. Then they shall have anguish and sorrow, then shall they lament and faint away with apprehension of the things that draw nigh. But those that believed on the Lord in His holiness, shall then lift up their heads for that their redemption draws nigh. At that time, indeed, shall the Lord alone be high, and before Him shall bow the knees of all in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, and all tongues must confess that Christ is the Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
12. On Isaiah 2:22. Of what do men not make idols! The great industrial expositions of modern times often fill me with dismay, when I have seen how men carry on an actual idolatrous worship with these products of human science and art, as if that all were not, in the end, God’s work, too, but human genius were alone the creator of these wonders of civilization. How wickedly this so-called worship of genius demeans itself ! How loathsome is the still more common cultus of power, mammon and the belly!
13. On Isaiah 3:1 sqq. Causa σωστική, etc. “The saving cause of the commonwealth is the possession of men of the sort here mentioned, which Plato also knew, and Cicero from Plato, each of whom judge, commonwealths would be blessed if philosophers, i.e., wise and adept men were to administer them.”—Foerster. The same writer cites among the causes why the loss of such men is ruinous, the changes that thence ensue. All changes in the commonwealth are hurtful. Xenoph. Hellen. Isaiah 2 : “εἰσὶμὲνπᾶσαιμεταβολαὶπολιτειῶνθανατηΦόροι.” Aristot. Metaph. Isaiah 2 : “ᾱἱμεταβολαὶπάντωνταραχώδεις.”
14. On Isaiah 3:1. “The stay of bread,” etc. Vitringa cites Horat. Satir. L. II., 3 5:153 sq.:
Deficient inopem ven� te, ni cibus atqueIngens accedit stomacho fultura ruenti.And on Isaiah 3:2 sq. he cites Cicero, who, De Nat. Deorum III., calls these “pr�sidia humana,” “firmamenta reipublic�.” On Isaiah 3:6 sq. the same author cites the following passage from Livy (26 chap. 6): “Cum fame ferroque (Capuani) urgerentur, nec ulla spes superesset iis, qui nati in spem honorum erant, honores detrectantibus, Lesius querendo desertam et proditam a primoribus Capuam summum magistratum ultimus omnium Campanorum cepit!” On Isaiah 3:9 he quotes Seneca: De vita beata, chap. xii.: “Itaque quod unum habebant in peccatis bonum perdunt peccandi verecundiam. Laudant enim ea, quibus erubescant, et vitio gloriantur.”15. On Isaiah 3:4; Isaiah 3:12. Foerster remarks: Pueri, etc. “Boys are of two sorts. Some are so in respect to age, others in respect to moral qualifications.
So, too, on the contrary there is an old age of two sorts: “For honorable age is not that which standeth in length of time, nor that is measured by number of years. But wisdom is the true gray hair unto men, and an unspotted life is the true old age.” Wis 4:8-9. Examples of young and therefore foolish kings of Israel are Rehoboam (“the young fool gambled away ten whole tribes at one bet” 1 Kings 12). Ahaz, who was twenty years of age when he began to reign (2 Kings 16:2). Manasseh who was twelve years (2 Kings 21:1,) and Amon who was twenty-two years (2 Kings 21:19).
16. On Isaiah 3:7. Foerster remarks: Nemo se, etc. “Let no one intrude himself into office, especially when he knows he is not fit for it,” and then cites: “Seek not of the Lord pre-eminence, neither of the king the seat of honor. Justify not thyself before the Lord; and boast not of thy wisdom before the king. Seek not to be judge, being not able to take away iniquity.” Sir 7:4-6.”—“Wen aber Gott schickt, den macht er auch geschickt.”17. On Isaiah 3:8. “Their tongue and their doings are against the Lord.” Duplici modo, etc. “God may be honored by us in two outward ways: by word and deed, just as in the same way others come short; “to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds, which they have committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” Judges 15.—Vitringa.18.
On Isaiah 3:9. “They hide not their sin.” Secunda post, etc. “The next plank after shipwreck, and solace of miseries is to hide one’s impiety.”—Jerome.19. On Isaiah 3:10. “Now He comforts the pious as in Psalms 2. His anger will soon kindle, but it shall be well with all that trust in Him. So Abraham, so Lot was delivered; so the apostles and the remnant of Judah when Jerusalem was besieged. For the Lord helps the righteous (Psalms 37:17; Psalms 37:39).”—Luther.20. On Isaiah 3:13-14.
“Judicabit judices judex generalis,
Neque quidquam proderit dignitas papalis,
Sive sit episcopus, sive cardinalis,
Reus condemnabitur, nec dicetur qualis.”
“Rhythmi vulgo noti,” quoted byFoerster.21. On Isaiah 3:16 sq. Usus vestium, etc. “Clothes have a four-fold use: 1) they are the badge of guilt, or souvenir of the fall (Genesis 3:7; Genesis 3:10; Genesis 3:21); 2) they should be coverings against the weather; 3) they may be ornaments for the body, (Proverbs 31:22; Proverbs 31:25); 4) they may serve as a mark of rank (2 Samuel 13:18).—The abuse of clothes is three-fold; 1) in regard to the material, they may be costlier or more splendid than one’s wealth or rank admits of; 2) in respect of form, they may betray buffoonery and levity; 3) in respect to their object, they may be worn more for the display of luxury and pride than for protection and modest adornment.”—Foerster.22. On Isaiah 4:2. “Germen Jehovae est nomen Messi� mysticum, a nemine intellectum, quam qui tenet mysterium Patris et Christi. Idem valet quod filius propago Patris naturalis, in quo patris sui imago et gloria perfectissime splendet, Jessaiae in seqq. (Isaiah 9:5) αο ,ιμγ, filius, Joanni ὁλόγενήςτοῦθεοῦ,ὁυἱὸςπρωὀτοκοςμονογενής, processio Patris naturaλis. Est hic eruditi cujusdam viri elegans observatio, quae eodem tendit, quam non licet intactam praetermittere.
Comparat ille inter se nomina Messi� φξηγεγ (Jeremiah 23:5) et φξηιδεδ in hoc loco. Cum autem prior appellatio absque dubitatione innuat, Messiam fore filium Davidis, docet posteriorem ἀναλογικῶς non posse aliud significare quam filium Jehovae, quod nomen Christi Jesu est μυστικώτερον, omni alio nomine excellentius. Addit non minus docte, personam, quae hic germen Jehovae dicitur, deinceps a propheta nostro appellari Jehovam (Isaiah 28:5).”—Vitringa. This exposition, which is retained by most Christian and orthodox commentators, ignores too much the fundamental meaning of the word φֶ ?ξַ ?η, “Branch.” It is, nevertheless, not incorrect so far as the broader meaning includes the narrower concentrically. If “Branch of Jehovah” signifies all that is the personal offshoot of God, then, of course, that one must be included who is such in the highest and most perfect sense, and in so far the passage Isaiah 28:5 does not conflict with exposition given by us above.
[J. A. Alexander joins with Vitringa and Hengstenberg in regarding “the fruit of the earth,” as referring to the same subject as “the branch of the Lord,” viz.: the Messiah; and thus, while the latter term signifies the divine nature of the Messiah, the former signifies His human origin and nature; or if we translate “land” instead of earth, it points to his Jewish human origin. Thus appears an exact correspondence to the two parts of Paul’s description, Romans 1:3-4, and to the two titles used in the New Testament in reference to Christ’s two natures, Son of God and Son of Man.—Tr.].
23. On Isaiah 4:3-4. Great storms and upheavals, therefore, are needful, in order to make the fulfilment of this prophecy possible. There must first come the breath of God from above, and the flame of God from beneath over the earth, and the human race must first be tossed and sifted. The earth and mankind must first be cleansed by great judgments from all the leaven of evil. [J. A.
Alexander, with Luther, Calvin, Ewald, maintains concerning the word Spirit in Isaiah 4:4, that “the safest and most satisfactory interpretation is that which understands by it a personal spirit, or as Luther expresses it, the Spirit who shall judge and burn.”—Tr.]. What survives these judgments is the remnant of which Isaiah speaks. This shall be holy. In it alone shall the Lord live and rule. This remnant is one with the new humanity which in every part, both as respects body and soul, will represent the image of Christ the second Adam. This remnant, at the same time, comprehends those whose names are written in the book of life.
What sort of a divine book this may be, with what sort of corporal, heavenly reality, of course we know not. For Himself God needs no book. Yet if we compare the statements of the Revelation of John regarding the way in which the last judgment shall be held, with certain other New Testament passages, I think we obtain some explanation. We read Matthew 19:28, that on the day of the regeneration, when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, the twelve apostles, too, shall sit on twelve thrones to judge the generations of Israel. And 1 Corinthians 5:2, we read that the saints shall judge the world. But, Revelation 20:11, we find again the great white throne, whereon sits the great Judge of the living and the dead, after that, just before (Revelation 4:4), it was said: “And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them.” Afterwards it reads (Rev4:12): “And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.” And (Revelation 4:15). “And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.” From this description there seems to me to result that the books necessarily are meant for those who are, by the Supreme Judge charged with the judgment of particular ones.
To this end they need, in the first place, many books that contain the works of individuals. God has a book-keeping for the life of every man. This divine record will be produced to every single one at the day of judgment. Is he a Jew? by one of the twelve Apostles. Is he a heathen? by some other saint. No man shall be able to remonstrate against this account for it will carry the evidence of truth in itself, and in the consciences of those to be judged.
Should such a protest occur, the arraigned will be referred to the book of life. This is only one. For it contains only names. After this manner will the separation be accomplished, spoken of in Matthew 25:32 sq. For those whose names are found in the book of life go to the right side; the rest to the left. Then the great Judge Himself takes up the Word in the manner described in Matthew 25:34 sqq., and calls the righteous to Himself, that they may inherit the kingdom that is prepared for them.
But the wicked He repulses from Him into everlasting fire, that is prepared for the devil and his angels, in regard to which the account of the judgment in Matthew 25, as far as the end is concerned, harmonizes entirely with Revelation 20:15.
24. On Isaiah 4:5-6. “The pillar of fire and cloud belongs to the miraculous graces by which the founding of the Old Testament kingdom of God was glorified just as the New Testament kingdom was by the signs that Jesus did, and by the charismata of the Apostolic time. But that appearance was quite appropriate to the state of developed revelation of that time. This had not reached the New Testament level, and not even the prophetic elevation that was possible under the Old Testament, but only the legal in which the divine stands outwardly opposed to the human. God is present among His people, but still in the most outward way; He does not walk in a human way among men; there is, too, no inward leading of the congregation by the Holy Spirit, but an outward conducting by a visible heavenly appearance. And, for these revelations to the whole people, God makes use entirely of nature, and, when it concerns His personal manifestation, of the elements.
He does so, not merely in distinction from the patriarchal theophanies, …, but, particularly in contrast with heathenism, in order to accustom the Israelitish consciousness from the first not to deify the visible world, but to penetrate through it to the living, holy God, who has all the elements of nature at command as the medium of His revelation.”—Auberlen.As at the close of John’s Revelation (chaps. 21, 22) we see the manifestation of the Godhead to humanity return to its beginning (Genesis 2, 3, 4), in as much as that end restores just that with which the beginning began, i.e. the dwelling of God with men, so, too, we see in Isaiah 4:5-6, a special manifestation of the (relative) beginning time recur again in the end time; the pillar of fire and cloud. But what in the beginning was an outward and therefore enigmatical and unenduring appearance, shall at last be a necessary and abiding factor of the mutual relation between God and mankind, that shall be established for ever in its full glory. There shall come a time wherein Israel shall expand to humanity and humanity receive power to become Israel, wherein, therefore, the entire humanity shall be Israel. Then is the tabernacle of God with men no more a pitiful tent, made of mats, but the holy congregation is itself the living abode of God; and the gracious presence of Almighty God, whose glory compares with the old pillar of fire and cloud, like the new, eternal house of God, with the old perishable tabernacle, is then itself the light and defence of His house.
25. On Isaiah 4:5-6. “But give diligence to learn this, that the Prophet calls to mind, that Christ alone is destined to be the defence and shade of those that suffer from heat and rain. Fasten your eyes upon Him, hang upon Him as ye are exhorted to do by the divine voice, ‘Him shall ye hear!’ Whoever hearkens to another, whoever looks to any other flesh than this, it is all over with him. For He alone shelters us from the heat, that comes from contemplating the majesty (i.e. from the terror that God’s holiness and righteousness inspire), He alone covers us from the rain and the power of Satan. This shade affords us a coolness, so that the dread of wrath gives way. For wrath cannot be there where thou seest the Son of God given to death for thee, that thou mightest live. Therefore I commend to you that name of Christ, wherewith the Prophet adorns Him, that He is a tabernacle for shade against the heat, a refuge and place of concealment from rain and tempest.”—Luther.—With some modification, we may apply here the comprehensive turn Foerster gives to our passage: 1) The dwelling of Mount Zion is the church; 2) the heat is the flaming wrath of God, and the heat of temptation (1 Peter 4:12; Sir 2:4-5); 3) tempest and rain are the punishments of sins, or rather the inward and outward trials (Psalms 2.; Isaiah 57:20); 4) the defence or the pillar of cloud and fire is Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 10).
26. On Isaiah 5:1-7. This parable has a brother in the New Testament that looks very much like it. I might say: the head is almost the same. For the beginning of that New Testament parable (Matthew 21:33; Mark 12:1), “A man planted a vineyard, and set an hedge about it, and digged a wine-fat and built a tower,” is manifestly imitated after our passage. But here it is the vineyard that is bad, while there, in the New Testament, the husbandmen are good for nothing.
Here the Lord appears as at once owner and cultivator of the vineyard; there the owner and cultivators are distinguished. This arises from the fact that the Lord Jesus apparently had in His mind the chiefs of the people, “the high-priests and elders” (Matthew 21:23-24). From this it is manifest that here as there the vineyard is the nation. In Isaiah, however, the vineyard, that is to say the vine itself is accused. The whole people is represented as having equally gone to destruction. In the Synoptists, on the other hand, it is the chiefs and leaders that come between the Lord and His vineyard, and would exclude Him from His property, in order to be able to obtain it wholly for themselves, and divide it amongst them.
Therefore there it is more the wicked greed of power and gain in the great that is reproved; here the common falling away of the whole nation.
27. Isaiah 5:8. Here the Prophet denounces the rich, the aristocracy, and capital. Thus he takes the part of the poor and lowly. That grasping of the rich and noble, which they display sometimes like beasts of prey, at other times gratify in a more crafty and legal fashion, the Prophet rebukes here in the sharpest manner. God’s work is opposed to every sin, and ever stands on the side of those that suffer oppression, no matter what may be their rank. God is no respecter of persons (Deuteronomy 10:17 sq.).
28. Isaiah 5:11-17. The morning hour, the hour when light triumphs over darkness, ought to be consecrated to works of light, as it is said: Aurora Musis amica, ἡώςτοιπροΦέρειμἑυ, προφέρειδὲκαὶἕργου (Hesiod. ἑργ. κ. ήμ. 540) Morgenstund hat Gold im Mund. “It was,” says Foerster, “a laudable custom among the Persians, that the chamberlains entering in to their kings early in the morning, cried out with a loud voice: ‘Arise, O king, attend to business, as Mesoromastes commands.” On the other hand, “they that be drunken are drunken in the night,” 1 Thessalonians 5:7 sq. So much the worse, then, when men do the works of night even in the early hour, and dare to abuse the light. “Plenus venter despumat in libidines,” says Augustine. In vino ἀσωτία (Ephesians 5:18). Corpus, opes, animam luxu Germania perdit.
Melancthon. On Isaiah 5:15 Foerster cites the expression of Augustin: “God would not suffer any evil to be done in the world unless some good might thence be elicited.”
29. Isaiah 5:18. “Cords of vanity are false prejudices and erroneous conclusions. For example: no one is without sin, not even the holiest; God does not take notice of small sins; he that is among wolves must howl with them; a man cannot get along in the world with a scrupulous, tender conscience; the Lord is merciful, the flesh is weak, etc. By such like a man draws sin to him, binds his conscience fast, and resists the good motions of preventing grace. Thick cart-ropes signify a high degree of wickedness, the coarsest and most revolting prejudices. For example: God has no concern about human affairs; godliness delivers no one from misery and makes no one blessed; the threatenings of the prophets are not to be feared; there is no divine providence, no heaven, no hell (Deuteronomy 29:17-19).
Out of such a man twists and knots a stout rope, with which he draws to him manifest blasphemy, entangles himself in it, so that often he cannot get loose, but is sold as a servant under sin (Romans 6:16; 1 Kings 21:20; 1 Kings 21:25).” Starke.30. Isaiah 5:19. “The wicked mock at the patience and long-suffering of God, as if He did not see or care for their godless existence, but forgot them, and cast them out of mind (Psalms 10:11), so that the threatened punishment would be omitted. They would say: there has been much threatening, but nothing will come of it; if God is in earnest, let Him, etc.; we don’t mind threats; let God come on if He will! Comp. Isaiah 22:12-13; Isaiah 28:21-22; Amos 5:18; Jeremiah 5:12; Jeremiah 8:11; Jeremiah 17:15; Ezekiel 12:21 sqq.” Starke.31. Isaiah 5:20. “To make darkness of light, means to smother in oneself the fundamental truths that may be proved from the light of nature, and the correct conclusions inferred from them, but especially revealed truths that concern religion, and to pronounce them in others to be prejudices and errors.
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
2. The bad fruits of the present in the light of the glorious divine fruit of the last time. Isaiah 5:1-30a. THE BAD FRUITS OF THE PRESENT SHOWN IN THE PARABLE OF THE
Isaiah 5:1-71 Now will I sing to my well-beloved
A song of my beloved touching his vineyard.
My well beloved hath a vineyard
In a very fruitful hill:
2 And he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof,
And planted it with the choicest vine,
And built a tower in the midst of it,
And also made a winepress therein:
And he looked that it should bring forth grapes,
And it brought forth wild grapes.
3 And now, O, inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah,
Judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard.
4 What could have been done more to my vineyard,
That I have not done in it?
Wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes,
Brought it forth wild grapes?
5 And now go to; I will tell you
What I will do to my vineyard:
I will take away the hedge thereof, and it shall be eaten up;
And break down the wall thereof, and it shall be trodden down:
6 And I will lay it waste:
It shall not be pruned, nor digged;
But there shall come up briers and thorns:
I will also command the clouds
That they rain no rain upon it,
7 For the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel,
And the men of Judah his pleasant plant:
And he looked for judgment, but behold oppression;
For righteousness, but behold a cry.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_5:1. Attention has often been called to the artistic, rythmical structure of Isa 5:1 : to ΰָ ?ωִׁ ?ιψָ ?δ corresponds ωִׁ ?ιψַ ?ϊ; to μִ ?ιγִ ?ιγִ ?ι corresponds γּ ?εֹ ?γִ ?ι. The first clause of the verse concludes with μִ ?λַ ?γְ ?ξεֹ; the second begins with λֶּ ?ψֶ ?ν, and the third word is again μִ ?ιγִ ?ιγִ ?ι. χֶ ?ώώώψֶ ?ο rhymes to χֶ ?ψֶ ?ν, and the last three words of the verse end with ֶ ?ο. Moreover the rythm continues into the 2d
Ver.; for the three verbs that begin it, resemble one another in formation and ending.
The verb ωִׁ ?ιψ joined with the noun ωִׁ ?ιψ occurs of joyful song in Isaiah in two other places, Isaiah 26:1; Isaiah 42:10. ωִׁ ?ιψָ ?δ always has the pronoun δַ ?ζּ ?ΰֹ ?ϊ after it (Exodus 15:1; Numbers 21:17; Deuteronomy 31:19; Deuteronomy 31:21-22; Deuteronomy 31:30; Deuteronomy 32:44; 2 Samuel 22:1; Psalms 18:1); only in Isaiah, who beside here uses it Isaiah 23:15, is it determined by only a noun following in the genitive. ιָ ?γִ ?ιγ (the closely bound, beloved, friend) used by Isaiah only here. Comp. Deuteronomy 33:12; Jeremiah 11:15; coll. Isaiah 7:7; Psalms 60:7; Psalms 127:2 γּ ?εֹ ?γ, kindred to ιָ ?γִ ?ιγ, is originally an abstract noun = amor, caritas (comp. Son 5:9) especially in the plural (love deeds, fondling, Son 1:2; Son 4:4, etc.; Ezekiel 16:8; Proverbs 7:18, etc.). Then γּ ?εֹ ?γ stands for the person beloved (compare the words Liebschaft, Bekanntschaft, acquaintance, ξεֹ ?γַ ?ςַ ?ϊ Rth 3:2) and signifies both the beloved generally (Son 2:3, etc.), and a beloved and near relation (Leviticus 10:4; 1 Samuel 10:16, etc.).
That it here means the beloved generally appears from its connection with ιָ ?γִ ?ιγ. This word, too, does not again occur in Isaiah. μְ indicates the object after verbis decendi: Genesis 20:13; Leviticus 14:54; Psalms 3:3; Psalms 22:31; Isaiah 27:2, etc.—χֶ ?ψֶ ?ο is used only here in the Old Testament of a horn shaped hill. In Ovid mountain spurs are called cornua terr�. In Greek too κέρας is so used. Compare the German Schreckhorn, Wetterhorn, etc.—The expression αοΞωׁ ?ξο occurs only here. Yet comp. βֵּ ?ιΰωְׁ ?ξָ ?πִ ?ιν Isaiah 28:1, and the kindred expressions used of the fruitfulness of the soil. ωָׁ ?ξֵ ?ο (Isaiah 30:23; Ezekiel 34:14), ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?πִּ ?ιν (Genesis 27:28; Genesis 27:39) ΰַ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?πֵּ ?ιν (Isaiah 59:10).
Isaiah 5:2. ςִ ?ζֵּ ?χ is ἅπ. λεγ., but its meaning is definitely derived from the dialects.—ρִ ?χֵּ ?μ in this sense only here and Isaiah 62:10.—πָ ?θַ ?ς with double accusative comp. Jeremiah 2:21; where, beside, the word is borrowed from our passage.—ωׂ ?ψֵ ?χ only here and Jeremiah 2:21; Genesis 49:11, ωׂ ?ψχδ; Isaiah 16:8, ωְׂ ?ψεּ ?χִּ ?ιν: etymology doubtful, some taking the underlying idea, to be without seeds, others the shooting up, others purple color [Zechariah 1:8]: comp. Leyrer in Herzog’s R. Encycl. XVII. p. 612.
Isaiah 5:3. On “Jerusalem and Judah” comp. at Isaiah 2:1. The expression ιωֵׁ ?αιψεωׁ ?μν occurs beside in Isaiah 8:14; Isaiah 22:21; Isaiah 10:24 ιωֵׁ ?αφִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ο occurs. Except these only Zechariah 12:7-8; Zechariah 12:10, uses ιωׁ ?αιΧ. The more usual expression is ιωְׁ ?αֵ ?ιιΧ; 2 Kings 23:2, especially in Jer. (Isaiah 8:1; Isaiah 11:2; Isaiah 13:13, etc.), and in 2 Chron. (2 Chronicles 20:15; 2 Chronicles 21:11; 2 Chronicles 21:13; 2 Chronicles 32:26; 2 Chronicles 32:33, etc.).
Isaiah 5:4. On μςωׂ ?εϊ Gesenius § 132, Rem. 1.—ξζεςχειϊιεβεΧ. Comp. 1. 2.
Isaiah 5:5. ξωׂ ?ελδ, which some of the MSS. write with Dag. forte, is = ωׂ ?κְ (Lamentations 2:6) and ξְ ?ρεּ ?λָ ?δ (Micah 7:4; Proverbs 15:19). The word occurs only here in Isaiah. The meaning is: a hedge, a thorn hurdle, from ωׂ ?εּ ?κְ sepire (Hosea 2:6 (8); Job 1:10). εδιδμαςψ et erit ad depascendum, comp. Isaiah 3:14; Isaiah 4:4; Isaiah 6:13. The expression μְ ?αָ ?ςֵ ?ψ occurs also with the meaning “ad comburendum;” Isaiah 44:15, comp. Isaiah 40:16; Isaiah 50:11.—τָּ ?ψַ ?υ in the sense “to tear down” only here.
Beside this in Isaiah 54:3, in the sense “to break out, extend oneself abroad.” βָ ?γֵ ?ψ may signify the low wall of a vineyard as well as the high wall of a city: comp. Jeremiah 49:3; Numbers 22:24. In Isaiah the word does not again occur. Hedge and wall might be combined in such a way that the hedge surrounded the foot of the wall so as also to protect it. Yet perhaps the double enclosure is not to be pressed literally, but, may be construed rhetorically, since no actual vineyard is meant.—ξִ ?γְ ?ξָ ?ν conculcatio: Isaiah 7:25; Isaiah 10, 6; Isaiah 28:18.—Giving up His vineyard, the Lord abandons it to desolation.
Isaiah 5:6. ωִׁ ?ιϊαָּ ?ϊָ ?δ appears to correspond to the expression ςָ ?ωָ ?δλָ ?μָ ?δ often used, by Jer. especially, but which does not occur in Isaiah. αָּ ?ϊָ ?δ is ἅπ. λεγ. According to its meaning and derivation it is one with αַּ ?ϊָּ ?δ Isaiah 7:19. The verb αָּ ?ϊַ ?ϊ does not occur in Hebrew. Yet the meaning “abscindere” is established from the dialects. From that develops αַּ ?ϊ = the close-cut-off, exactly measured out, as the name of a fluid measure, (comp. Isaiah 5:10), and αָּ ?ϊָ ?δ vastatio and αַּ ?ϊָּ ?δ abscissum, pr�ruptum.—The vineyard abandoned to desolation will, of course, no more be pruned (ζָ ?ξַ ?ψ in this sense only here in Isa., otherwise Isaiah 12:5) and no more digged (ςγψ in the sense of “to dig” only again Isaiah 7:25).
Consequently it springs up with thorns and thistles (the construction of ςָ ?μδ with the accusative like Isaiah 34:13; Proverbs 24:31. The two words ωָׁ ?ξִ ?ιψ and ωַׁ ?ιִ ?ϊ, excepting Isaiah 32:13, are always joined together by Isaiah 7:23-25; Isaiah 9:17; Isaiah 10:17; Isaiah 27:4. Both words, as one may see from the passages cited, signify combustible vegetation of the desert, although nothing as yet has been established concerning the etymology and meaning of either. But comp. Dietrich, Abhandl. fur semit. Wortforschung, p. 73, and the Denkschrift der Erfurter Akademie von S.
Cassel, 1854, p. 74 sqq., cited by Delitzsch.
Isaiah 5:7. πְ ?θַ ?ς occurs again in Isaiah 17:10-11. Isaiah uses ωַֽׁ ?ςֲ ?ωεּ ?ςִ ?ιν only here.—ξִ ?ωְׂ ?τָּ ?η occurs only here. The verb ωָׂ ?τַ ?η occurs in Hebrew only in the Piel form ωִׂ ?τַּ ?η Isaiah 3:17. It is identical with ρτη (Habakkuk 2:15) according to a frequent exchange of sound. Not only the Arabic saphacha proves that ρָ ?τַ ?η means effundere, but also passages like Job 30:7; then the substantive ρָ ?τִ ?ιηַ that means effusio, inundatio (Job 14:19) and effusum, i.e., especially the grain that falls out (Leviticus 25:5; Leviticus 25:11). Of course then ξִ ?ωְׂ ?τָּ ?η means first of all effusio.
But for the sake of a play on words, an author may indulge in such an incomplete expression. The reader at once thinks of passages like Isaiah 4:4; Isaiah 1:15, and fills out the conception “sanguinis” of himself. The word φְ ?ςָ ?χָ ?η cry, is not repeated in Isaiah, he also chooses it for the sake of the play on words. For my own part I have allowed myself to waive a literal translation in favor of a likeness of sound and to use a word that at least corresponds to the proper intention of the Prophet.
AND 1. When we read the introduction of this piece it sounds like a lovely musical prelude. All sounds like singing. It is as if the Prophet tried every harmonious sound of speech in order to turn the hearts of his hearers to joy. But it happens to us as he says, Isaiah 5:7, it happened to God in reference to Israel. Instead of a joyful report we receive a mournful one; instead of happiness, a gloomy prospect of evil is presented.
The piece therefore bears the character of bitter irony. This is especially in the beginning carried out even to minuteness. The Prophet makes as if he would sing a joyous song, a song of the vineyard, thus perhaps of wine, a drinking song! It shall be of the vineyard of a boon companion. And then the Prophet describes the situation. It is a good site.
For there is no better than on a sunny knoll with a good, fat soil (Isaiah 5:1 a). But the owner aided nature as much as possible by art (Isaiah 5:2 a.). He had a right therefore to expect a good yield. His hopes were disappointed. Instead of good grapes the vines bore wild grapes (Isaiah 5:2). Thus far the Prophet speaks.
From this point he lets the owner of the vine speak. One looked to hear of a real vineyard. But what sort of a vineyard is that whose owner accuses it and charges it with guilt! Now, therefore, when the inhabitants of Jerusalem and Judah are summoned to judge between the vineyard and its lord (Isaiah 5:3), in as much as he has faithfully done his best, yet instead of grapes has gathered only wild grapes (Isaiah 5:4), it is noticed at once that behind this is concealed something else than the story of a real, natural vineyard. And step by step this becomes plainer. For the lord of the vineyard declares that he will tear away hedge and wall, and give the vineyard up to be browsed upon and trampled down (Isaiah 5:5), yea, that he will make a ruin of it, he will no more hoe and prune it, but let it grow rank with thorns and thistles, and will forbid the heavens to rain on it (Isaiah 5:6).
This last word lifts the mask entirely. It is now seen who is the owner and who the vineyard. And this is now (Isaiah 5:7) openly declared: Jehovah is the lord; Israel, summoned to judge between the lord and his vineyard, is itself the vineyard. The Lord had expected of Israel the fruits of righteousness, but only gathered the fruits of unrighteousness. What a contrast between this fruit of the land and that which, according to Isaiah 4:2, the land shall one time bear!
2. I will sing—wild grapes. Isaiah 5:1-2. Everything in this passage tends to express the idea of disappointment, the contrast between incipient hope and the final, mournful event. Hence the joyous, one may say the lark-like trilling commencement. Every harvest is preceded by a season of hope. Israel too awakened such. How joyous this was, Isaiah 5:1 portrays. One must not, therefore, be misled by the peculiar joyous tone of Isa 5:1, to think that here begins an essentially new and independent piece. For this sound-coloring of Isa 5:1, is intentional, is art.
The address begins with ΰָ ?ωִׁ ?ιψָ ?δ, I will sing. One, therefore, expects a ωִׁ ?ιψ, a jovial song: but a χιπָ ?δ. (Amos 8:10), a lament follows. What a contrast, therefore, between the sixfold woe of Isa 5:8 sqq., and this joy bespeaking beginning! μִ ?ιγִ ?ιγִ ?ι seems, at first sight, to be an ordinary dative, and to say that the prophet would sing to his friend a song, thus likely a song of right hearty and enlivening contents. But μְ ?λַ ?γְ ?ξεֹ suggests that that may be an incorrect meaning: for this must mean “in regard to his vineyard.” Thus μְ must here be μְ of the object. Then it seems likely that in the preceding case it has the same force. This conjecture becomes a certainty when we read further “my friend (μιγιγι) had a vineyard.” From this it becomes plain: 1) that the friend in each case is the same, for the owner of the vineyard is called both γּ ?εֹ ?γ and ιָ ?γִ ?ιγ; 2) that we must translate μιγιγι in Isaiah 5:1 “of my friend,” for the song shall treat of the vineyard of his friend; 3) what the Prophet would sing is not a song of his own composing, but one that his friend has made of his vineyard, so that “I will sing” is qualified by the following, “a song of my friend,” &c.; 4) from the words “my friend had a vineyard,” &c, we know that the song of the friend does not yet begin.
For to the end of Isa 5:2 we have still the words of the Prophet, by which, as it were, he preludes the song of the friend, in order to acquaint the hearer with the facts that the song presupposes. Thus the Prophet gives us one disappointment after the other. Though they are only of a formal kind, still they prepare us for the more earnest and material disappointments that follow.
We have already remarked that with “my friend had,” &c., the song of the friend by no means begins, as one would expect, and that what the Prophet himself says is by no means a song, but a very earnest presentation of gloomy facts. This is a further disappointment. That αְּ ?ο, as commentators remark, signifies the natural fruitfulness in opposition to what is artificial appears to me to lie less in the expression itself than in its relation to Isaiah 5:2. The usus loquendi in itself is well known: Umbreit’s translation “on the prominence of a fat spot” is incorrect. For αּ ?οΞωׁ ?ξο in itself is not a “fat spot” but a real son, a man, whom the notion “oil” characterizes (comp. αְּ ?πֵ ?ιιִ ?φְ ?δַ ?ψZechariah 4:14). It can only become predicate of a place by connection with an idea of place.
Such is χψο with which αοΞωׁ ?ξο stands in apposition. If they were taken as standing in a genitive relation the meaning would be: horn of a man of oil, of one oiled, of an anointed man. However, to this naturally fruitful spot, the owner had done everything that the art of wine culture could suggest. He had hoed it, gathered out the stones, and planted it with a choice vine. But not only did the owner undertake such labor as was important for the flourishing of the vines themselves, but also such as were for the protection of the fruit and putting it to use. Such are the watch tower (vid.
Matthew 21:33) and the wine press (ιֶ ?χֶ ?α the lower wine-press trough, comp. Isaiah 16:10, Numbers 18:27, &c), both of them costly, &c.,—especially the latter, hence εְ ?βַ ?νand also—demanding hard labor, because the wine-press trough, as ηָ ?φֵ ?α (Isaiah 10:15; Isaiah 22:16; Isaiah 51:1; Isaiah 51:9) indicates, was hewn out of the rock. See Herzog’sR. Encycl. VII., p. 508, Art. Wine-press, by Leyrer.
But—disappointed hope! Instead of ςֲ ?πָ ?αִ ?ιν (in Isa. only here, and Isaiah 5:2; Isaiah 5:4) good grapes, the vineyard bore only αְּ ?ΰֻ ?ωִׁ ?ινsour grapes. This last word occurs only here and Isaiah 5:4. It comes from αָּ ?ΰַ ?ωׁ “to be bad, stink,” and means the fruit of the wild vine, the labrusca. It has, therefore, happened to the choice vine according to the word of Jer. (Isaiah 2:21), which may be regarded as a commentary on our passage: “thou art turned into a degenerate plant of a strange vine.” The noble vine is degenerated and become wild, so that it produces wild grapes instead of grapes.—Comp. Job 31:40.
3. And now, O inhabitants—no rain upon it.
Isaiah 5:3-6. The song of the “friend” begins first at Isaiah 5:3. It is, however, no gladsome song, but a lament and a complaint. And the friend is not some good friend or boon companion of the Prophet, but the Lord Himself, which comes out clearly at the end of Isa 5:6. This one, now, summons the inhabitants of Jerusalem and Judah to judge between him and his vineyard.
Judge between me, etc.—Comp. Isaiah 2:4; Exodus 18:16; Ezekiel 34:17; Ezekiel 34:20; Ezekiel 34:22. The summons of Isa 5:3 to judge between the vineyard and its owner, must of itself awaken the thought that no actual, physical vineyard is meant here. For where is the owner that would ever think of laying a complaint against his vineyard? One sees from this, and other obvious traits of the description, that the subject here is not an ordinary vineyard and its owner; and Isaiah 5:6 b. one is made aware that the owner is God Himself. For only He has the power to cause it to rain, and to shut up the rain.
Notice, moreover, how Isaiah 5:1-2 the Prophet himself has spoken, although announcing a song of the friend, and only at Isaiah 5:3 the friend begins to speak, in that with “and now” he takes up the discourse of the Prophet and continues it. One may say: quite unnoticed the Prophet glides over into the part played by him whom properly he has to produce to view. And to the first “and now” corresponds a second in Isaiah 5:5, that introduced the judgment, so that the extraordinary judgment begins in precisely the same way that the extraordinary complaint does.
The Lord will command the clouds to let no rain fall on the vineyard. With these words the vail falls completely. It is plain now that the beginning of Isa 5:1 was irony. A fearful disappointment comes on those that had disappointed the Lord Himself, and, by the art of the Prophet, the reader, too, must share this disappointment, in that he is conducted from the charming pictures of Isa 5:1, to the dreadful ones that are now to follow.
For the vineyard—a cry.
Isaiah 5:7. Like the prophet Nathan, 2 Samuel 12:5, first provoked King David to a stern judgment of a wicked man by means of a fictitious story, and then exclaimed: “thou art the man,” so here Isaiah explains to the men of Jerusalem and Judah, after they had at least silently given their assent to the judgment on the bad vineyard: “The vineyard of Jehovah is the house of Israel.” But this statement is connected by λִּ ?ιfor, with what precedes, because a consequence of this fact was already indicated at the end of Isa 5:6. For this not letting it rain explains itself from the fact that the Lord Himself is the owner, and the vineyard is the house of Israel. For, though one must admit that Isaiah 5:7 refers to all that precedes, yet still that trait in Isaiah 5:1-6 which especially receives its light from the identity of the owner with Jehovah, is precisely that which we read in Isaiah 5:6 b.But why does the prophet vary from the designation “Judah and Jerusalem” hitherto employed by him? Why does he here make “house of Israel” and “men of Judah” parallel? Caspari attempts in his Beitrδgen, p. 164, an extended proof that here, as Isaiah 4:2 and Isaiah 1:2, Israel is Judah as Israel, and as Israel in Judah.
But one naturally asks: why, if Isaiah meant only Judah, does he not name Judah exclusively? Why does he suddenly drop the designation used hitherto? But if with the name “house of Israel” he designates Judah (to be) as Israel, is it not therewith admitted that the conception Israel extends over Judah, and is not then this more comprehensive Israel in its totality, the vineyard of Jehovah? It is true that the figure of the vineyard is nowhere in older writings applied either to Judah or Israel. But the Lord calls Israel His people (Isaiah 3:12, &c), His flock (Psalms 95:7, &c), His peculiar treasure (Exodus 19:5; Deuteronomy 6:6), His inheritance (Jeremiah 2:7; Jeremiah 16:18, &c), and all these expressions refer to Israel entire. Thus it cannot be contested that Israel in the narrower sense belongs also to the vineyard of Jehovah.
If now, too, in general, as can not be denied, Judah and Jerusalem form the principal object of the discourse (Isaiah 2:1), yet the prophet may here and there cast a glance aside at the kingdom of Israel. Prophets of Jehovah can never forget that Israel, which hastens faster to the abyss of destruction than Judah, as Jer. expressly says: Jeremiah 31:20; comp. Jeremiah 11:11 sqq. I therefore share the view of Vitringa, Drechsler, Delitzsch, that “house of Israel” of course means all Israel. This view is not refuted but rather confirmed by the fact that the men of Judah are presently called “the plant of his pleasure.” For this expression that accords to Judah a certain precedence, suits better when “house of Israel” does not signify Judah over again, but the Israel of the Ten Tribes.
The Lord had planted with pleasure. But He was outrageously deceived in His just expectations. He had expected a “fruit of the earth” Isaiah 4:2, that would do Him honor. But behold! instead of ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τָ ?θmishpot, He gathers ξִ ?ωְׂ ?τָּ ?ηmispahh: instead of φְ ?γָ ?χָ ?δtzedhaka, he gathers φְ ?ςָ ?χָ ?δtzeaka. The poet here choicely depicts by the word-likeness, which yet conceals a total difference of meaning, the deceptive appearance in the conduct of the Israelites, which at first looked like good vines and then developed a wild wine.
Footnotes:of my friend.
Heb. the horn of the son of oil.
a hill of fat soil.
Or, made a wall about it.
hoed it.
Heb. hewed.Heb. for a treading.
Heb. plant of his pleasure.
auf Gutthat und siehe da: Blutthat! Und auf Gerechtigkeit, und siehe da: Schlechtigkeit. [The commentator's license in translating with reference to the sound and sense combined may be imitated in English thus: He waited for equity, and lo, iniquity: For right and lo, riot.—Tr.]
Heb. a scab.b. THE BAD FRUITS AND THEIR EFFECTS MORE IN A SIXFOLD WOE–AT THE SAME TIME A TWOFOLD OF THE WHOLE
Isaiah 5:8-308 Woe unto them that join house to house,
That lay field to field,
Till there be no place,
That they may be placed alone in the midst of the earth!
9 In mine ears said the Lord of hosts,
Of a truth many houses shall be desolate,
Even great and fair, without inhabitant.
10 Yea, ten acres of vineyard shall yield one bath,
And the seed of an homer shall yield an ephah.
11 Woe unto them that rise up early in the morning, that they may follow strong drink;
That continue until night, till wine inflame them!
12 And the harp, and the viol, the tabret, and pipe,
And wine, are in their feasts:
But they regard not the work of the Lord,Neither consider the operation of his hands.
13 Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge:
And their honorable men are famished,
And their multitude dried up with thirst.
14 Therefore hell hath enlarged herself,
And opened her mouth without measure:
And their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp,
And he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.
15 And the mean man shall be brought down,
Andf the mighty man shall be humbled,
And the eyes of the lofty shall be humbled:
16 But the Lord of hosts shall be exalted in judgment,
And God that is holy shall be sanctified in righteousness.
17 Then shall the lambs feed after their manner,
And the waste places of the fat ones shall strangers eat.
18 Woe unto them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity,
And sin as it were with a cart rope:
19 That say, Let him make speed, and hasten his work,
That we may see it:And let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and come,
That we may know it.20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil;
That put darkness for light, and light for darkness:
21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes,
And prudent in their own sight!
22 Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine,
And men of strength to mingle strong drink:
23 Which justify the wicked for reward,
And take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!
24 Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble,
And the flame consumeth the chaff,
So their root shall be as rottenness,
Because they have cast away the law of the Lord of hosts,
And despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.
25 Therefore is the anger of the Lord kindled against his people,
And he hath stretched forth his hand against them,
And hath smitten them: and the hills did tremble,
And their carcasses were torn in the midst of the streets.
But his hand is stretched out still,
26 And he will lift up an ensign to the nations from far,
And will hiss unto them from the end of the earth:
And, behold, they shall come with speed swiftly:
27 None shall be weary nor stumble among them;
None shall slumber nor sleep;
Neither shall the girdle of their loins be loosed,
Nor the latchet of their shoes be broken:
28 Whose arrows are sharp,
Their horses’ hoofs shall be counted like flint,
And their wheels like a whirlwind:
29 Their roaring shall be like a lion,
They shall roar like young lions:
Yea, they shall roar, and lay hold of the prey,
And shall carry it away safe, and none shall deliver it.30 And in that day they shall roar against m them like the roaring of the sea:
And if one look unto the land, behold darkness and sorrow,
And the light is darkened in the heavens thereof.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_5:8. πָ ?βַ ?ς is often construed with αְּ: Genesis 26:11; 32:33; Leviticus 11:36; 1 Kings 19:5; 1 Kings 19:7, etc. Comp. especially Hosea 4:2. Hiphil δִ ?βִּ ?ιςַ occurs beside only Isaiah 6:7; Isaiah 8:8; Isaiah 25:12; Isaiah 26:5; Isaiah 30:4. χָ ?ψַ ?α is generally not construed with αְּ. But when Drechsler says that this construction never occurs, it is asserting too much. For Psalms 91:10 it is said “No plague ιִ ?χְ ?ψַ ?ααְּ ?ΰָ ? ?ֽ ?δֳ ?μֶ ?κָ.” Comp. Judges 19:13.
In our passage the construction of the first clause has doubtless influenced that of the second. Hiph. δִ ?χְ ?ψִ ?ια only again Isaiah 26:17.——ΰֶ ?τֶ ?ν (defectus, non-existent) occurs oftener in the second part than in the first: Isaiah 40:17; Isaiah 41:12; Isaiah 41:29; Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 44:14; Isaiah 44:22; Isaiah 46:9, Isaiah 52:4; Isaiah 52:10; Isaiah 54:15. In the first part it occurs again only Isaiah 34:12.——The Hophal δεּ ?ωַׁ ?αְ ?ϊֶּ ?ν (Isaiah 44:26) indicates that their dwelling alone in the land was not a natural thing, but something contrived. Compare complaints of like import Isaiah 3:14 sq.; Micah 2:2; Micah 3:2, sq.
Isaiah 5:9. In mine ears, etc. In Isaiah 22:14 an address of Jehovah begins with the words “and it was revealed in mine ears.” etc. In our passage εְ ?πִ ?βְ ?μָ ?δ “and, it was revealed” is omitted. It does not follow from this that this or some similar word has fallen out of the text. For the Prophet may very well have had in thought the bare notion of existence as predicate of his sentence; “In mine ears is Jehovah Sabaoth.” It must not however be construed in a pregnant sense: Jehovah keeps ever saying to me (liegt mir in den Ohren).
For there is not a thought of any resistance on the part of the Prophet that had provoked a persistence on the Lord’s side. Neither may the expression mean: Jehovah whispers in my ear; as if the secrecy of the address were meant by it; for there exists no reason for such secrecy. But the Prophet will only say, that what follows he has clearly heard by the inward ear as the word of Jehovah. There lies thus in the expression a distinguishing of actual from merely imaginary hearing. Comp. Psalms 44:2; Job 28:22; Job 33:8.
The pointing of the word αΰζπι as a pausel from appears to have for its object to separate it from what follows and to signify thereby that in this word alone is contained the predicate of the sentence.—μωׁ ?ξδ again Isaiah 13:9, comp. Deuteronomy 28:37; Micah 6:16.—ξΰιοιεωׁ ?α comp. Isaiah 6:11; Jeremiah 2:15; Jeremiah 4:7, etc.; Zephaniah 2:5; Zephaniah 3:6.
Isaiah 5:11. A likeness of structure is to be noticed in the two halves of the verse. The verb. fin. in the phrase ωֵׁ ?λָ ?ψιִ ?ψְ ?γּ ?τεּ relates to the foregoing participle, not simply like ιַ ?χְ ?ψִ ?ιαεּ Isaiah 5:8, as the dominant form, but at the same time as assigning thepurpose; and so is it too with ιַ ?γְ ?μִ ?ιχֵ ?ν—The Pi. of ΰָ ?ηֵ ?ψ again in Isaiah 46:13. πֶ ?ωֶׁ ?σ from πָ ?ωַׁ ?σ to breathe, to blow, the time of day when cooler air stirs, the morning and evening twilight: comp. Isaiah 21:4; Isaiah 59:10. The verb γָּ ?μַ ?χ (comp. Ezekiel 24:10) is found only here in Isaiah.
Isaiah 5:12. If ξωׁ ?ϊιδν (sing. comp. Gesenius, § 93, 9) were subject, it must follow εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ, for this position is constantly maintained, after a verb with Vav consec. But if it were predicate, it would say nothing; for what else would music and wine be but a feast. For that εδιδ would be superfluous. We construe δָ ?ιָ ?δ therefore, not as mere copula, but in the sense of being on hand; and there is on hand.——The combination of ξςωׂ ?δ with ιγ in a manfold sense is quite current with Isaiah 2:8; Isaiah 17:8; Isaiah 19:25; Isaiah 29:23; Isaiah 37:19; Isaiah 60:21; Isaiah 64:7; Isaiah 65:22.
Isaiah 5:13. βָ ?μָ ?δ in the sense of “making bare, i.e., clearing out the land” occurs in Isaiah only again Isaiah 24:11, which passage generally resembles this one.—ξְ ?ϊֵ ?ιψָ ?ςָ ?α has without reason been discredited, and instead some would read ξְ ?ζֵ ?ιψςα according to Deuteronomy 32:24, for ξְ ?ϊִ ?ιν is wont to be used in a contemptuous sense, comp. Isaiah 3:25.—φִ ?ηֶ ?δ (comp. Green’s Gram. § 187,1 b.) is adjectivum ad f. ΰִ ?μֵּ ?ν ,πִ ?αֵּ ?ο ,ςִ ?εֵּ ?ψִ etc., and only occurs here.
Isaiah 5:14. τָּ ?ςַ ?ψ aperire, that always stands with τֶּ ?δ (Job 16:10; Job 29:23; Psalms 119:131) occurs in Isaiah only here. The same with μִ ?αְ ?μִ ?ι (comp. Job 38:41; Job 41:25). ηֹ ?χ again only Isaiah 24:5 .——The suffixes of the nouns are to be referred to the notion “Jerusalem,” although immediately before Isaiah 5:13, the masculine ςַ ?ν is used. But it is plain that the Prophet in Isaiah 5:14 b., aims at a mimicry of sound. For this purpose he employs the clear a sound as often as possible. Delitzsch calls attention to the omission to draw the tone back on the penult of the word εςμζ, “so that one may hear the object that is falling down as it rolls and at last strikes bottom.” δָ ?γָ ?ψ comp. Isaiah 2:10; Isaiah 2:19; Isaiah 2:21; Isaiah 35:2; Isaiah 53:2.
Isaiah 5:15. The aorists ειβαδ ,ειωׁ ?τμ ,ειωׁ ?η are to be construed as Pr�terita prophetica. Also ϊωׁ ?τμπδ, with the Vav preceding and separate, is, as Drechsler has remarked = εַ ?ϊִּ ?ωְׁ ?τַ ?μְ ?πָ ?δ.
Isaiah 5:17. ψָ ?ςεּ is to be taken absolutely, without object. What is understood suggests itself from what precedes. The pronoun of the third person is, as object of the phrase, very often omitted; Genesis 2:19; Genesis 3:21; Genesis 6:19-21, etc. It is not necessary, with Gesenius to take λγαψν for λִּ ?αְ ?γָ ?αְ ?ψָ ?ν: for ψָ ?ςָ ?δ very often stands with the accusative of the place that is pastured: Isaiah 30:23; Micah 7:14; Jeremiah 6:3; Jeremiah 1:19, etc. As their pasture shall the sheep graze over the ruins of Jerusalem, in so far as the inhabited city becomes a sheep walk. When Delitzsch thinks that no accusative object is to be supplied to ψςε, but that the determination of the locality results from the context, it is seen that still there is a supplying of the object.
One may as well supply the definite locality as object according to frequent usus loquendi, as imagine it from the context. The sense, in any case remains the same.—λֶּ ?αֶ ?ωׂ found again only Isaiah 1:11; Isaiah 11:6, ξִ ?γְ ?αָּ ?ψ = γּ ?αֶ ?ψ the place whither flocks are driven, found again only Micah 2:12. ξֵ ?ηִ ?ιν found beside only Ps. 65:6, 15. βָּ ?ψִ ?ιν are not βֵּ ?ψִ ?ιν the strangers that are constant dwellers in the land, but as participle from βεּ ?ψ, those en passant. The LXX translate ἄρνες. They may have read perhaps βγιν(βְּ ?γָ ?ιִ ?ν). This word, moreover, Schleussner, Hitzig, Ewald and others would restore. But we have shown above that an emphasis rests on the idea of a transitory stopping. βָּ ?ψ in Isaiah again Isaiah 11:6; Isaiah 54:15.
The plural ηψαεϊ occurs only here in the first part of Isaiah; but six times in the second part: Isaiah 44:26; Isaiah 49:19; Isaiah 51:3; Isaiah 52:9; Isaiah 58:12; Isaiah 61:4. The singular is found only Isaiah 64:10.
Isaiah 5:18. I take ξωׁ ?κ in its usual meaning in which it often occurs with the accusative (in Isaiah again only Isaiah 66:19, coll. Isaiah 13:22; Isaiah 18:2). ηαμιηωׁ ?εΰ are ropes of lies, for what binds them to sin, is the illusion that sin makes one happy. Hence every sin is a fraud (Hebrews 3:13). The expression further calls to mind Jonah 2:9; Psalms 31:7; and also ηַ ?αְ ?μֵ ?ιηַ ?θָּ ?ΰָ ?δ Proverbs 5:22, and ηַ ?αְ ?μֵ ?ιΰָ ?γָ ?ν Hosea 11:4. Regarding the use of ωָׁ ?εְ ?ΰ in Isaiah, comp.
Isaiah 1:13 (ξπηϊΞωׁ ?Χ). Isaiah 30:28 (πָ ?τַ ?ϊωׁ ?Χ), Isaiah 59:4, (γַּ ?αֶּ ?ψΞωׁ ?Χ). The word occurs only in these places in Isaiah. In λςαεϊ the prefix αְּ is wanting according to the familiar rule; comp. Gesenius. § 118, Rem. ςֲ ?αεֹ ?ϊ (from ςָ ?αַ ?ϊ to twist, the twisting, twisted work, rope) Isaiah uses only here. Comp.
Hosea 11:4. ςֲ ?βָ ?μָ ?δ, “a freight wagon.” found too Isaiah 28:27-28.
Isaiah 5:19. ξδψ and ιηιωׁ may be taken transitively and intransitively. I decide for the latter construction, 1) because ξδψ is used by Isaiah only intransitively (Isaiah 32:4; Isaiah 49:17; Isaiah 51:14; Isaiah 59:7), ιηιωׁ, that occurs twice beside here (Isaiah 28:16; Isaiah 60:22), is one of these times (Isaiah 28:16) used intransitively; 2) because in the parallel phrase εϊχψαεβεΧ not Jehovah but ςφϊχΧ is subject. The sense is any way in both instances the same. The forms ιָ ?ηִ ?ιωָׁ ?δ and ϊָּ ?αֹ ?ΰָ ?δ belong to the few instances of the voluntative δ appended to the third person, (comp. Psalms 20:4, and the more doubtful cases Leviticus 21:5; Deuteronomy 33:16; Job 11:17; Job 22:21; Ezekiel 23:20; Olshausen, § 228 b. Anm. [Green, § 97, 7).
Let it be noticed moreover that this He so stands in two pairs of verbs, that each time it is only appended to the last word. It seems that each time it should avail as well for the first word. Comp. Isaiah 1:24 b.—ςֵ ?φָ ?δ is a current word with Isaiah that occurs thirteen times in the first part and five times in the second. On “the Holy One of Israel” see Isaiah 1:4.
Isaiah 5:20. ωׂ ?εּ ?ν with μְ following in the sense “to make into something;” Isaiah 13:9; Isaiah 23:13; Isaiah 25:2; Isaiah 41:15; Isaiah 42:15; Isaiah 49:11, etc.Isaiah 5:21. On πβγτπιδν comp. Hosea 7:2; Lamentations 3:35; the expression does not again occur in Isaiah. παεο part. Isaiah 3:3; Isaiah 29:14.
Isaiah 5:22. ξρκ in Isaiah again Isaiah 19:14. ξֶ ?ρֶ ?κְ – ξִ ?ξְ ?ρָ ?κְ Isaiah 65:11. Hiph. δִ ?φְ ?γִּ ?ιχ found again Isaiah 50:8; Isaiah 53:11. ςֵ ?χְ ?α. only here. ωֹׁ ?ηַ ?γ again Isaiah 1:23; Isaiah 33:15; Isaiah 45:13. Hiph. δֵ ?ρִ ?ιψ frequent in the first part (Isaiah 1:16; Isaiah 1:25; Isaiah 3:1; Isaiah 3:18; Isaiah 5:5; Isaiah 5:23; Isaiah 10:13, etc), in the second part only in Isaiah 58:9. The singular suffix in ξξπε must be construed distributively. The righteousness of the righteous they let disappear from him, i.e., from the righteous man in question. Comp., at Isaiah 2:8 and Isaiah 1:23.
Isaiah 5:24. As regards the construction; λΰλμ is a predicate infinitive dependent on a preposition, which is followed immediately, not as usually by the subject, but by the object, because the order λΰλμμωεοΰֵ ?ωׁ χַ ?ωׁ offends against euphony; also in Isaiah 20:1, the object precedes, because it is a pronoun (ΰֹ ?ϊεֹ). Commentators call attention to the multiplication of sibilants in the sentence. “One hears the crackling sparks, the sputtering flames” says Delitzsch. ηֲ ?ωַׁ ?ωׁ occurs only once again in the Old Testament, Isaiah 33:11.—ψָ ?τָ ?δ is “to become lax, withered, weary, fall away” (especially of the hands Isaiah 13:7). μֶ ?δָ ?αָ ?δ is accus. loci.——The suffixes in ωׁ ?ψωׁ ?ν and τψην refer back to those whom the preceding four woes concern. To these then their punishment is announced. ξַ ?χ only occurs again Isaiah 3:24. τֶּ ?ψַ ?η (only Isaiah 18:5 again) is the blossom. ΰָ ?αָ ?χ dust, only occurs again Isaiah 29:5.—The second clause of the verse calls to mind Isaiah 1:4. They were therefore the opposite of “the branch of Jehovah” Isaiah 4:2, and much rather comparable to the bad grape-vine, Isaiah 5:1 sqq. ΰִ ?ξְ ?ψָ ?δ occurs again Isaiah 28:23; Isaiah 29:4; Isaiah 32:9.
Isaiah 5:25. The expression ηָ ?ψָ ?δΰַ ?σ does not occur again in Isaiah, and, excepting the part, Niph. Isaiah 41:11; Isaiah 45:24, no other form of the verb ηψδ occurs in Isaiah. Our expression, however, calls to mind, Numbers 11:33, “And the wrath of the Lord was kindled against His. people, and the Loan smote the people,” as all those numerous places in the Pentateuch, especially Num. where the expression εַ ?ιִּ ?ηַ ?ψּ ΰַ ?σιΧ “and the anger of the Lord kindled,” etc., occurs (Exodus 4:14; Numbers 11:1; Numbers 11:10; Numbers 12:9, etc.)—ειθιγε is also a reminiscence of the Pentateuch from Exodus 8:2; Exodus 8:13; Exodus 10:22; Exodus 14:21; Exodus 14:27, where the expression is used of Aaron and Moses as they stretched out the hand to the performance of their miracles. In Isaiah, this expression is repeated in the same manner in Isaiah 23:11; Isaiah 31:3, coll. Isaiah 14:26-27.——ψָ ?βַ ?ζ (Kal., in Isaiah 14:9; Isaiah 32:10-11; Isaiah 28:21; Isaiah 64:1), used of the trembling of the earth (Joe 2:10) or of the foundation of the mountains (Psalms 18:8, coll. 2 Samuel 22:8).
The expression that the carcass (πְ ?αֵ ?μָ ?δ occurs Isaiah 26:19) shall be as the sweepings (ρεּ ?ηָ ?δ from ρָ ?ηָ ?δ Ezekiel 26:4, everrere, detergere = ρְ ?ηִ ?ι Lamentations 3:45, “leavings, sweepings out;” α̈π.λεγ..), occurs only here. Elsewhere it is, that the παμδ shall be as dung in the field (Jeremiah 9:21), shall be cast as a prey (Deuteronomy 28:26; Jeremiah 7:33; Jeremiah 16:4; Jeremiah 19:7, etc.), to the wild beasts. The reading ηֻ ?φּ ?εֹ ?η (the London Polyglot has ηεּ ?φεֹ ?ϊ) is both etymologically incorrect, and also in conflict with every other place in which the word occurs in Isaiah (Isaiah 10:6; Isaiah 15:3; Isaiah 24:11; Isaiah 51:20.
Isaiah 5:26. ξֵ ?ψָ ?ηεֹ ?χ does not belong to πָ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ, but it has become an adjective conception and takes the place of an adjective, as may be seen from passages like Jeremiah 23:23; Jeremiah 31:10. The same is true of ξִ ?ξֶּ ?ψְ ?ηָ ?χ that has the same meaning. The former word occurs in Isaiah twelve times; five times in the first and seven times in the second part (Isaiah 22:3; Isaiah 22:11; Isaiah 23:7; Isaiah 25:1; Isaiah 43:6; Isaiah 49:1; Isaiah 49:12; Isaiah 57:9; Isaiah 59:14; Isaiah 60:4; Isaiah 60:9). πֵ ?ρ a signal set up on a high point; Isaiah 11:12; Isaiah 13:2; Isaiah 18:3; Isaiah 33:23; Isaiah 62:10. Only in the last named passage does the verb δֵ ?ψִ ?ιν occur. ωָׁ ?ψַ ?χ “to hiss, whistle,” is taken from the practice of bee keepers, as may be seen in Isaiah 7:18, where the same figure recurs. ξχφδ recurs Isaiah 13:5; Isaiah 13:10; Isaiah 43:6, thus equally in both parts. In each place, Isaiah 13:5 excepted, δΰψυ follows it. ξְ ?δֵ ?ψָ ?δ properly substantive—celeritas: recurs Isaiah 58:8; combined with χַ ?μ according to Joel 4:4. χַ ?μ recurs, in Isaiah 19:1; Isaiah 30:16; Isaiah 18:2. On the change of number in μֹ ?ε, comp., at Isaiah 5:23. The singular here apparently indicates that though the signal is given at various times and to different nations, still always, it shall be only one at a time, that they shall be summoned.
Isaiah 5:27. Drechsler justly calls attention to the perfect equilibrium in the structure of this Isaiah 5:27; in the first hemistich two clauses, each with two members of like arrangement; in the second hemistich two clauses, each with one member, the corresponding words in which rhyme together: ωֹׁ ?ψεκ–ΰζεψ ,πϊχ–λּ ?ϊηςָ ?ιֵ ?σ .πςμιε–ημφιε recurs in Isaiah 28:12; Isaiah 29:8; Isaiah 32:2; Isaiah 46:1. On λָּ ?ωַׁ ?μ see at Isaiah 3:8. The Participle (Jeremiah 46:16; Psalms 105:37; 2 Chronicles 28:15), occurs only here in Isaiah. πεּ ?ν recurs only Isaiah 56:10, ιָ ?ωֵׁ ?ο only here in Isaiah. Niph. πτϊη Isaiah 24:18; Isaiah 35:5; Isaiah 51:14.
Isaiah 5:28. φַ ?ψ in the sense of “stone, flint” occurs only here and Isaiah 5:30, if this interpretation is allowable in the second case; it has then the same meaning as φֹ ?ψ Ezekiel 3:9; Exodus 4:25; ????Exodus 2:10; Exodus 8:14, etc. Niph. πηωׁ ?α like Isaiah 2:22; Isaiah 29:16-17; Isaiah 40:15.
Isaiah 5:29. μָ ?αִ ?ιΰ (again in Isaiah 30:6) is by most held to mean lioness. Comp. Gesenius, Thes. p. 738 … On the construction of λַּ ?μָּ ?αִ ?ιΰ see at Isaiah 5:18.—εωׁ ?ΰβ is according to K’thibh εְ ?ωָׁ ?ΰַ ?β, according to K’ri ιִ ?ωְׁ ?ΰַ ?β. The reading of K’ri is the correct one, for there is no reason for the perfect with the Vav consec., whereas the imperfect stands here, according to rule, to describe permanent qualities.—πָ ?δַ ?ν only here in Isaiah, see Proverbs 28:15; Proverbs 19:12; Proverbs 20:2). Of τָ ?μַ ?θ the form found here is the only one used by Isaiah, and that only here. The formula εΰιζξφιμ occurs again Isaiah 42:22, and Isaiah 43:13, in which latter place it sounds the same as the original passage Deuteronomy 32:39.
Isaiah 5:30. The subject of ιπδν, “he shall roar,” is the same that it has in the preceding verse. But we translate “it roars dull,” only to give prominence to the collective more than to the individual as indicated in λπδξϊΞιν “as the roaring of the sea.” The suffix, in ςָ ?μָ ?ιε can refer only to the one seized, i.e., Judah.—πδξδ occurs only again Psalms 38:9.—Drechsler, has justly called attention “to the sound painting produced by accumulating the buzzing and rumbling sound of m, and n, too,” in the first hemistich of this verse. Both sounds are in ιִ ?πְ ?δֹ ?ν; to this word λַּ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ν rhymes; in λְּ ?πַֽ ?δֲ ?ξַ ?ϊΞιָ ?ν we find m. and n. again, and the syllable am twice.—To this hemistich, which I may say has itself a low rumble, the second is opposed, which portrays the conquered by its many, i. e, and a sounds, thus by thinner sounds, that in a measure paint weakness.
AND 1. The meaning of this section is twofold. First of all it contains a specification of the sour grapes, and a corresponding announcement of punishment. In this matter the Prophet begins with a certain selection. For he does not censure all sins, but only the sins of the eminent, and eminent sins. Thus six evil fruits are enumerated, and what the Prophet has to say with reference to each begins with a woe.
But a detailed announcement of punishment follows on each of the first two woes only, after the description of the sinful condition with which they are concerned. For the following woes there follows an announcement of punishment common to all from Isaiah 5:24 on. This difference observed by the Prophet in regard to the order of his topics is connected with the second meaning of the passage: that is to say it contains at the same time the twofold conclusion of the second portal, i.e. of the whole discourse from chap. 2–5. For the announcement of punishment after the second woe, which is in proportion long extended through five verses (Isaiah 5:13-17), manifestly contains a relative ending: the wicked city sinks into the lower world, and the grass grows over its grave. These are manifestly, I may say, final chords. But in as much as the Prophet, Isaiah 5:15-16, reiterates verbatim the fundamental thought of his first illumination of the present, he gives us to understand that he would have this first (relative) conclusion refer to the first half of his discourse (chap. 2 and 3).
And as he handles the following twice-two woes differently from the first two, he intimates that they have another purpose. They are not interrupted in their sequence by announcements of punishment coming between, but these follow after as common to all, Precisely by this concentration the Prophet gains a highly effective conclusion of the whole discourse, but which at the same time undeniably refers to the second lamp (chap. 4 and 5), just as we have seen that the first (relative) conclusion refers to the first lamp. One recognizes this from the comparison of Isa 5:24, drawn from vegetation, especially from the notions “root” and “scion,” in which the reference’ back to the φֶ ?ξַ ?ηbranch, chap. 4, as also to the vineyard and its fruit cannot be mistaken.
Thus this most artistically composed, ending is at the same time an image of the whole discourse, whose unity, comprising chaps, 2–5, here becomes most evident. As the twofold division forms the ground-work of the whole discourse, so it does of this conclusion. And this twofold division appears in the conclusion in a double form: first the simple two for the first (relative) conclusion; then the potent, doubled two for the great principal conclusion. From this we know, at the same time, why there must be six woes, and not seven, as one inclines to expect.
The first woe concerns the rich and mighty, that swallow up the property of inferior people, so that at last they possess the land alone (Isaiah 5:8). These are threatened that their houses shall be destroyed (Isaiah 5:9), and their ground shall become so sterile that ten acres shall yield only a bucketful of must, and a bushel of seed a peck [i.e. 1–16 of a German bushel.—Tr.] of fruits (Isaiah 5:10). The second woe pertains to high livers and gluttons, that begin early and leave off late (Isaiah 5:11), and who, amid the noise of music and the banquet, never come to regard Jehovah’s work (Isaiah 5:12). For this the people must wander into exile, and high rank and low rank shall perish of hunger and thirst (Isaiah 5:13), and be used only to be cast into the jaws of the insatiably greedy underworld (Isaiah 5:14). Then shall human pride be humbled (Isaiah 5:15), and the Lord, the righteous judge shall appear then as alone high in His righteousness and holiness (Isaiah 5:16), the waste places of the fallen grandees shall become the pastures of the flocks of alien tribes (Isaiah 5:17). The third woe is proclaimed against the insolent mockers that do evil with a very rage for it (Isaiah 5:18), and with blasphemous contempt, challenge the Lord, in whom they do not believe, to oppose His work to their own (Isaiah 5:19).
The fourth woe strikes those who perversely call exactly that good which is bad, and that bad which is good (Isaiah 5:20). The fifth woe concerns the conceited that think they alone are wise (Isaiah 5:21). The sixth woe, finally, is proclaimed against the oppressors and unjust, who in order to live high, turn aside justice for a vile reward (Isaiah 5:22-23). The threatening, that those who have despised the law of Jehovah, shall be destroyed root and branch, corresponds to the last four woes in common (Isaiah 5:24). For this the people shall be smitten and their dead bodies be cast into the streets like sweepings. But that is not enough even (Isaiah 5:25).
Foreign nations shall be brought from a distance against Israel (26). They shall vigorously and zealously accomplish the work to which they are called (27–29). Then like the roaring surges of the sea the enemy shall break over Israel. Israel shall see nothing on the earth but dark night: instead of a protection against rain and storm (Isaiah 4:6), a dark storm-cloud shall envelop the earth that shall turn aside the vivifying and warming light (Isaiah 5:30).
This is the result of the contemplation that the Prophet sets forth in regard to the (relative) present. Sad and gloomy as this result is, the realization of that glorious future which he holds in prospect (Isaiah 4:2-6) is not thereby hindered: on the contrary it postulates and prepares the way for that future. The words “in that day” point away to that.
2. Woe unto them—yield an epha.Isaiah 5:8-16. On δֹ ?ει comp. remarks at Isaiah 1:4. The Prophet first proclaims a woe against the rich and mighty, who with insatiable greed annex the houses and fields of their poor neighbors, so that these are crowded out of the land, and the country becomes the exclusive domain of these oppressors.
This accumulation of property violates both the statutes concerning the inheritance of real estate, and the year of Jubilee (Leviticus 25:10-13; Leviticus 25 sqq.). What the Prophet has heard is this; not merely some, but many houses, i.e. the houses, all that there are of them (Isaiah 2:3), shall be desolated, and the great and beautiful ones shall be without dwellers. This desolation of the houses is ascribed to the sterility that comes on the land as a punishment from God. For the Pentateuch threatens the disobedience of Israel with this punishment, and that in not a few passages: Leviticus 26:18-20; Deuteronomy 11:17; Deuteronomy 28:17 sq., 23 sq., 38 sqq. How great the barrenness shall be may be determined from the fact, that ten acres of vine land will only yield a bucket of wine, and a bushel of seed only the tenth part as much fruit.—φֶ ?ξֶ ?γ is a pair of beasts of burden bound by a yoke (Judges 19:10; 1 Samuel 11:7; Isaiah 21:7; Isaiah 21:9), then a piece of ground as great as such a φξγ could plow up in a day. If a vineyard is not plowed it might still be measured by the acre.
How large a surface a φξγ might be according to our measures, has never yet been made out. Comp. Unterss. όber die Lδngen-Feld-und Wege Masse, insbesondere der Greich en und der luden von L. Fenner v. Fenneberg,Berlin, 1859, p. 96.
αַּ ?ϊa bath (comp. at αָּ ?ϊָ ?δ Isaiah 5:6) is the principal measure for fluids, like the ephah for dry measure. Both are the tenth part of a homer or λּ ?εֹ ?ψ, cor. (Ezekiel 45:11; Ezekiel 45:14), αϊ occurs only here in Isa. ηֹ ?ξֶ ?ψhomer, (probably the burden of a ηֲֹ ?ξψ, an ass., whence Judges 15:16; 1 Samuel 16:2ηֲ ?ξεֹ ?ψ stands directly for ηֹ ?ξֶ ?ψ) does not again occur in Isa. in this sense. Also ΰֵ ?ιτָ ?δ “an ephah” is only here in Isa. There is still great uncertainty regarding the relation of these measures to those used by us. If Thenius (The ancient Hebrew long and hollow measures, Studien und Krit., 1846, Heft. 1 and 2) is correct, who sets the contents of the homer at 10143.9 Paris cubic inches, then this would about correspond to the burden an ass can bear.
3. Woe unto them that rise up early—shall strangers eat.Isaiah 5:11-17. The second woe, the longest and most detailed, is directed against the high livers and gluttons. They rise early so as to go soon to drinking; they remain long sitting of evenings so as to inflame themselves with wine. “Woe to thee, O land, when thy king is a child, and thy princes eat in the morning! Blessed art thou, O land, when thy king is a noble, and thy princes eat in due season, for strength and not for drunkenness!” Ecclesiastes 10:16-17; Comp. Isaiah 22:13; Isaiah 56:12; Amos 6:3 sqq.
The Romans called feasts that began before the usual time (i. e. in the ninth hour) tempestiva convivia., seasonable feasts (Cic. de Senect. 14, &c.). Ab octava hora bibere was accounted debauchery (Juven. 1, 49, comp. Gesenius on our ver.). ωֵׁ ?λָ ?ψ is the artificial wine, and ιַ ?ιִ ?ο the natural. The first was prepared partly from dates, apples, pomegranates (Son 8:2), honey, barley, (ζῦθος, οῖ ?̓νοςκρίθινος, Her. 2, 77), partly by mixture (like our punch, hence ξְֹ ?ρκְ ωֵׁ ?λָ ?ψ to mingle drink Isaiah 5:22); Comp. Herzog’sR. Encycl.
XVII. p. 615. In general comp. Isaiah 24:9; Isaiah 28:7; Isaiah 29:9; Isaiah 56:12.
The inflaming caused by wine is physical and psychical; (the former was by the ancients referred to the hepar and oculi, the liver and the eyes); comp. Proverbs 23:29 sq.
But to a jovial banquet belongs music. There does not fail λִּ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ψ (the harp, i. e. a stringed instrument, with strings resting free and plumb on the sounding board, comp. Isaiah 16:11; Isaiah 23:16; Isaiah 24:8; Isaiah 30:32), πֶ ?αֶ ?μ (i.e., every stringed instrument, whose strings are stretched over a bag-shaped sounding board by means of a bridge, for πֶ ?αֶ ?μ is properly the bag.—comp. Isaiah 14:11; Isaiah 22:24), ϊֹּ ?σ (the hand drum, the tambourine, Isaiah 24:8; Isaiah 30:32), and ηָ ?μִ ?ιμ (the flute, literally bored out, hollow, Isaiah 30:29). Comp. Herzog’sR. Encycl. X. p. 126 sqq. If now it is added, “and wine” is their drink, it is to prevent one from thinking that Isaiah 5:12 a indicates a different situation from that of Isa 5:11; rather the identity of both is expressly made prominent.
While nothing is wanting to the scene as regards worldly pleasure and joy, there is the most serious poverty in regard to spiritual life. In this respect they are as if blind and dead; the revelations of God that are written both in the book of nature and in history, they do not in any way regard. The greatest misery ever known to antiquity was destined to follow this luxury, and debauchery that wickedly forgot the one thing needful; the wandering into exile. One may see from Lamentations 5, how distressingly it went with such a herd of humanity, driven away as they were like cattle. Because the nation had not regarded what would promote its peace, it must go out “unawares,” ξαμιγςϊ. In this is signified both: without insight, and unawares.
The word designates the subjective state that was portrayed Isaiah 5:12 b, and at the same time the manner in which the objective divine judgment should break over them. ξαμιγςδ is only found here. But in Hosea 4:6, which comp. ξִ ?αְּ ?μִ ?ιδַ ?γַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ is found in a connection similar to this. Every where beside it reads αִּ ?αְ ?μִ ?ιγΧ (Deuteronomy 4:42; Deuteronomy 19:4; Joshua 20:3; Job 36:12). ξִ ?κ here is not causative, but negative = without. [Lowth, Barnes and J. A. Alexander retain the meaning of the Eng. Vers.: “for want of knowledge.”—Tr.]
The honored, the nobility of the people (λָּ ?αεֹ ?γabstr. pro concr. comp. Isaiah 4:5; Isaiah 16:14; Isaiah 17:3; Isaiah 60:13; Isaiah 66:12;) shall become starvelings, and the great crowd (δָ ?ξεֹ ?οnoise, then what makes noise, the great crowd Isaiah 17:12; Isaiah 29:5-8,) shall pant with thirst. Many, like Gesenius, would take δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο to mean the rich, because the word occurs in the sense of “riches, treasures” (Isaiah 60:5; Jeremiah 3:23). But the Prophet announces the judgment to the entire people (comp. ςַ ?ξִּ ?ι in the beginning of the verse): according to which it is quite suitable for him to divide the totality into nobility and common people. When death has rich harvest on the earth, then the underworld must open its gates wide to receive the sacrifice. According to that then μָ ?λֵ ?οtherefore, Isaiah 5:14 stands to the μλο Isaiah 5:13, not in a co-ordinate but in a subordinate relation.
A soul is ascribed to Sheol (the word is with few exceptions, e. g.Job 26:6, feminine). It is therefore personified. The notion “soul” is at the same time used in the meaning of “desire, greed,” a usage that is not infrequent in the O. Test., as is well known. Thus it is used, e. g., Deuteronomy 23:25, “When thou comest into thy neighbor’s vineyard, then thou mayest eat grapes λְּ ?πַ ?τְּ ?ωְׁ ?κָ ωָׂ ?αְ ?ςֶ ? ?ֽ ?κָ ?“ Comp. Proverbs 23:2αַּ ?ςַ ?μπֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ a greedy person; τμָ ?αַ ?ινςַ ?ζּ ?ιֵ ?Ξπֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ ?Isaiah 56:11, dogs strong in greediness; comp.
Psalms 27:12. The same expression as in our passage is found in Habakkuk 2:5. The insatiable nature of the underworld is declared also Proverbs 27:20; Proverbs 30:16.
Sheol (in Isa. again Isaiah 14:9; Isaiah 14:11; Isaiah 14:15; Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:18; Isaiah 38:10; Isaiah 38:18; Isaiah 57:9), according to the O. Test. representation, is the resting-place of departed souls, corresponding to the Hades of the Greeks, which is conceived of as in the inward part of the earth (hence ωְׁ ?ΰִ ?εֹ ?μϊַּ ?ηְ ?ϊּ ?ιϊthe lowest hell, Deuteronomy 32:22; Psalms 86:13, coll.Psalms 88:7; Lamentations 3:55; Isaiah 44:23; Ezekiel 26:20; Ezekiel 32:18; Ezekiel 32:24), because, naturally, the kingdom of death must be conceived of as in the opposite direction from the kingdom of life. When, therefore, God, the Lord of light, has His seat in light which envelops us from above, then must the kingdom of death be sought under us in the dark depths of the earth.
There are three views regarding the derivation of the word ωְׁ ?ΰεֹ ?μ: 1) the older, according to which the word should be derived from ωָׁ ?ΰַ ?μ, to demand. The underworld was called “the demanding, the summons,” in accordance with its insatiableness (comp. the passages cited above); and because it will only receive and never gives; 2) Gesenius, and at the same time with him, though quite independently, Bφttcher, Ewald, Maurer (comp. Thesaur. p. 1348) maintain that ωְׁ ?ΰεֹ ?μ is softened from ωְׁ ?ςεֹ ?μ. But ωָׁ ?ςַ ?μ, which never occurs, must, according to ωֹׁ ?ςַ ?μ the hollow hand, ωׁ ?εּ ?ςָ ?μ the excavator, inhabitant of caves, the fox, ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ςεֹ ?μ (Numbers 22:24) the hollow way, have the meaning of being hollow. Sheol would, then, be “the cavern.” 3) Hupfeld, �hler, Delitzsch, refer the word back to the root ,ωׁ ?μωׁ ?εμ, which is the root of ωָׁ ?ςַ ?μ itself, and has the meaning of “hanging down loose, sinking down,” so that Sheol would be “the sinking, going down deep.” The matter is still undetermined. If it is opposed to the first explanation that, according to it, a poetic epithet is made the chief name of the kingdom of the dead (comp. �hler in Herzog’sR.
Encycl. XXI. p. 412); so, too, both the other views must make it comprehensible how an ΰ comes to take the place of the middle radical.
All the glory of Jerusalem descends into the wide gaping throat of hell, δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο means the crowd here too (as in Isaiah 5:13), but as there is here no contrast with the honored ones as there, but only the notion of superabundance, of multitude, of tumult is added to that of glory, I allow myself with Drechsler to translate “riot and revel.” ωָׁ ?ΰεֹ ?οstrepitus, noise, is used of the roar of water (Isaiah 17:12-13), and of a multitude of men (Isaiah 13:4; Isaiah 24:8; Isaiah 25:5; Isaiah 66:6). The three substantives designate everything that is splendid and makes a noise, be it person or thing. ςָ ?μֵ ?ζ (ᾶπ. λεγ.), too, before which ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ is to be supplied, does not seem to exclude reference to things. For why should not the music and all that pertains to a banquet (Isaiah 5:12) be called jovial? Comp. Psalms 96:12.
In as much as the Prophet in Isaiah 5:15-16 partly repeats verbatim the fundamental thoughts of the first half of this discourse, that we have called the first prophetic lamp (comp. Isaiah 2:9; Isaiah 2:11; Isaiah 2:17), he intimates that the two parts belong to one another. Those false eminences illumined by the first lamp, and the false fruits of which the second treats, lead to the same end: to the humiliation of the wickedly insolent men, and to the proof that the holy and just God is alone high. But why the Prophet just at this point casts back this connecting look, is explained in the fact that here we stand at a point of relative conclusion. This we recognize, as was shown above, partly from the contents of this second woe, which sounds like a finale, partly from the form, for the following woes have a very different structure from this first. But notice with what art the Prophet leads over to the theme of the first lamp, and thus unites the fundamental thought of both lamps.
By the description of the destruction of the wicked multitude by hunger and thirst, he comes quite naturally on the idea of their sinking down into the underworld. Therewith he has touched the deepest point of antagonism which human enmity against God can attain. For it goes no deeper down than the jaws of Sheol. This mention of the deepest deep reminds him that therewith, what he had said above on the abasement of human pride, appears in a new light. That is to say it appears, by what is threatened in Isaiah 5:14, to be absolute. Precisely thereby the highness of the Lord appears in its fullest light.
For He that is able to cast down into the lowest deep must for His own part necessarily be the highest. But He is so as the holy one that judges righteously. Now if the highness of God calls to mind the first lamp, His holiness calls to mind the second (comp. the sacred and sanctifying Branch of God, Isaiah 4:2-3). And thus the fundamental thoughts of the first and second lamp combine most beautifully.
The first half of Isa 5:15 is repeated verbatim from Isaiah 2:9 a. The second half of Isa 5:15 is, with some abbreviation, taken from Isaiah 2:11 coll. Isaiah 5:17. ξַ ?ωְׁ ?τָּ ?θ is the judicial act (comp. Isaiah 1:21); in so far as it is a realization of the idea of righteousness, God at the same time proves Himself to be holy (comp. Ezekiel 20:41; Ezekiel 28:22; Ezekiel 28:25; Ezekiel 36:23; Ezekiel 38:16; Ezekiel 38:23). For holiness and righteousness belong together like lamps and burning (Isaiah 5:17).
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
C.—THE THIRD PORTALIsaiah 6.We have already shown above, in the general introduction to the threefold entrance, that Isaiah would not place this account of his call at the head because he felt the need of preparing his readers for it. At the same time he brings it about that this, not merely elevated, but holy, and even holiest of all dramas, is put in the place that becomes a holiest of all, that is to say, not without, but within; not in aditu, but in adyto. As in the temple, the court of the priests and the holy place, with the altar of incense, constituted the approach to the holiest of all, so, too, here Isaiah puts two entrances in front of that history that really transposes us into the inmost sanctuary, that explains to us how it was possible that Isaiah, the son of Amoz, should be admitted to the vision of God, and had the boldness to offer himself as God’s messenger. If one were not governed by the illusion that only chap. 1. can be an introduction, it would never enter his mind that chap. 6. is the account of a second call to a merely special mission. Delitzsch remarks: “What Umbreit says, that chap. 6. makes the impression on every unprejudiced mind of being the inaugural vision of the Prophet cannot in fact be denied. Only the position that chap. 6. has in the book wields a contrary influence against this impression as long as it does not admit of being understood in some other way.
But the impression remains (as with Isaiah 1:7-9) and even reappears.” Well, then, we bring the impression that chap. 6. makes (of being the account of the inauguration) into the most harmonious relation to the place it holds in the book, by explaining it as the third, the most elevated and holiest entrance to the prophecies of Isaiah. Concerning the time of its composition not much need be said. That Isaiah wrote chapter 6. no one denies. Whether, then, he wrote it immediately after he had the vision, or later, is indifferent. From the nature of things the former is more probable. At all events he assigned the chapter its present position when he made up his book.
______________
THE SOLEMN OF THE PROPHET
Isaiah 6:1-131 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, 2high and lifted up, and his train filled the the temple. Above it stood the seraphim: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain 3he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. And one cried unto another, and said,
Holy! holy! holy! is the Lord of hosts:
The whole earth is full of his glory.
4And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke. 5Then said I, Woe is me! for I Amos 8 undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts.
6Then flew one of the seraphim unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which7 he had taken with the tongs from off the altar: and he laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged.
8Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me. 9And he said, Go, and tell this people,
Hear ye indeed, but understand not;
And see ye indeed, but perceive not.
10Make the heart of this people fat,
And make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes,
Lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears,
And understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.
11Then said I, Lord, how long? And he answered,
Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant,
And the houses without man,
And the land be utterly desolate;
12And the Lord have removed men far away,
And there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land.
13But yet in it shall be a tenth,
And it shall return, and shall be eaten:
As a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves.So the holy seed shall be the substance thereof.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_6:1. The prophet designates the Lord as ΰγπι (with the sign of the accusat., but without the article as a proper noun). Both ΰָ ?γεֹ ?ο Isaiah 1:24; Isaiah 3:1; Isaiah 10:16; Isaiah 10:33; Isaiah 19:4) and ΰֲ ?ψֹ ?πָ ?ι (Isaiah 3:17-18; Isaiah 4:4; Isaiah 6:1; Isaiah 6:8; Isaiah 6:11; Isaiah 7:14, 29; Isaiah 8:7; Isaiah 9:7; Isaiah 9:16; Isaiah 10:12; Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 21:6; Isaiah 21:8; Isaiah 21:16; Isaiah 29:13; Isaiah 30:20; Isaiah 37:24; Isaiah 38:16) occur only in the first part of Isaiah.—ψνεπωׂ ?ΰ is used by Isaiah 2:13-14; Isaiah 57:15, where the Lord Himself is so named.—ωׁ ?εμιν the hem, the broad folded train of which the hems are the ends. The word (used mostly of the priestly garments, Exodus 28:33-34; Exodus 39:24-26; comp. Jeremiah 13:22; Jeremiah 13:26; Nahum 3:5) does not again occur in Isaiah.
Isaiah 6:3. ξְ ?μֹ ?ΰ (is not infin., which is always ξְ ?μֹ ?ΰϊ, but) is substantive, written oftener ξְ ?μεֹ ?ΰ. Comp. Isaiah 8:8; Isaiah 31:4; Isaiah 34:1; Isaiah 42:10.
Isaiah 6:7. Piel λִּ ?τֶּ ?ψ and Pual λֻּ ?τַּ ?ψ in Isaiah 22:14; Isaiah 27:9; Isaiah 28:18; Isaiah 47:11.
Isaiah 6:8. μָ ?πεּ after ιֵ ?μֵ ?κְ, is grammatically considered Dat. commodi. Who will do us a service by going? is the sense.
Isaiah 6:10. The verb ωָׁ ?ξֵ ?ο, pinguem esse, is found in the Kal. only Deuteronomy 32:15, and Jeremiah 5:28; beside the present the Hiph. occurs only Nehemiah 9:25, with the meaning “to become fat.” The ears shall become heavy, hard of hearing, deaf. λָּ ?αֵ ?γ (Kal) is used in this sense Isaiah 59:1. Also the word is used of the eyes (Genesis 48:10) and of the tongue (Exodus 9:10 [λְּ ?λַ ?γ adj.]). Comp. Zechariah 7:11 (Hiph.). The Hiph. occurs more frequently of making heavy, i.e., hardening the heart: Exodus 8:11; Exodus 8:28; Exodus 9:34; Exodus 10:10. δָ ?ωַׁ ?ς is the Hiph. imperat. from ωָׁ ?ςַ ?ς oblinere, to besmear, plaster over (comp.
Isaiah 29:9; Isaiah 32:3). ψָ ?τָ ?ΰ is always used transitively. It must therefore be thought of as joined to the general, ideal subject, which the notion of the verb of itself suggests. As is well known, especially verbs that designate a trade or an occupation in some art are wont to be so used. Therefore may a verb that signifies the healing art be readily so construed. Isaiah resorts to this mode of speech not seldom; Isaiah 7:24; Isaiah 8:4; Isaiah 21:9; Isaiah 34:11. One might fall on the conjecture by comparison of Isa 53:5, that as there so here it ought to read πִ ?ψְ ?τָּ ?ΰ.
Isaiah 6:11. As to particulars, it is to be noted that ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψΰִ ?νςַ ?γ “until” (comp. beside Genesis 28:15; Numbers 32:17) involves a conditional sentence; the end does not come, except that before, etc.—In the root ωָׁ ?ΰָ ?δ the meaning “to be desert” developes out of the meaning “to make a noise, to rage;” comp. Isaiah 17:12 sq.; Isaiah 37:26, and substantive ωָׁ ?ΰεֹ ?ο Isaiah 5:14; Isaiah 13, 4; Isaiah 24:8; Isaiah 25:5; Isaiah 66:6.—ξΰιοιεωׁ ?α comp. on Isaiah 5:9.—ξΰιοΰγν comp. Jeremiah 32:43; Jeremiah 33:10; Jeremiah 33:12. The expression occurs beside here only in the second comforting discourse of Jeremiah.
Isaiah 6:12. The Piel ψִ ?ηַ ?χ is used by Isaiah again only Isaiah 26:15; Isaiah 29:13. On the contrary Kal. occurs in the second part: Isaiah 46:13; Isaiah 49, 19; Isaiah 54:14; Isaiah 59:9; Isaiah 59:11. The Hiph. does not occur in Isaiah at all.
ςֲ ?ζεּ ?αָ ?δ properly the forsaken one, fem. But this feminine here must be taken as the collective genus, so that the word signifies the forsaken (the forsakenness, desolation). Comp. Isaiah 17:2; Isaiah 17:9.
Isaiah 6:13. μαςψ comp. Isaiah 4:4.—ΰֵ ?μָ ?δ is terebinth (Isaiah 1:30) and ΰַ ?μּ ?εֹ ?ο oak (Isaiah 2:13; Isaiah 44:14). Both are extremely lasting trees, that become very old and grow steadily in size. Comp. Gesen. Thes. p. 51; Job 14:7-9—ωַׁ ?μֶּ ?λֶ ?ϊ occurs again only 1 Chronicles 26:16, where a ωַ ?ςַ ?ψωַ ?μֶּ ?λֶ ?ϊ is spoken of.
Is this the gate of casting out (probably only an opening in the wall through which things were thrown out) then the word here is dejectio, prostratio (comp. Jeremiah 9:18). Instead of αָּ ?ν we look for ξֵ ?δֶ ?ν according to our mode of expression. But the Hebrew in his way of representation sees, as it were, the idea of the whole tree before him still, and in or on this ideal tree he distinguishes the stump still present and the (in reality severed) trunk. This is that use of αְּ that may be called partitive. Comp. at Isaiah 10:22.—ΰַ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ and αָּ ?ν belong together.—ζψςχγωׁ (comp.
Isaiah 1:4; Ezra 9:2) signifies the still-existing principle of holy life. The suffix in ξַּ ?φַּ ?αְ ?ϊָּ ?δּ (ξַ ?φֶּ ?αֶ ?ϊ only here in Isaiah, ξַ ?φֵ ?αָ ?δ Isaiah 19:19) refers to ςωׂ ?ιψιδ.
AND 1. Isaiah describes in plain and simple language, by which the grandeur of the contents is only made the more conspicuous, how, in the year that King Uzziah died he saw the Lord sitting on a high, elevated throne. The train of His garments filled the temple (Isaiah 6:1). Seraphim surrounded Him, each having three pairs of wings: one covered the countenance, one the feet, and with the third they flew (Isaiah 6:2). One cried to the other the thrice-holy (Isaiah 6:3), a cry whose power shook the threshold. But the house was full of smoke (Isaiah 6:4).
The majestic vision awakes in the Prophet the feeling of his sinfulness, and the fear that he shall be destroyed, because he, as a sinful man, has seen the Lord (Isaiah 6:5). But one of the Seraphs reconciles him with a glowing coal that he has taken from the altar (Isaiah 6:6-7). Thereupon the Prophet hears the voice of the Lord himself, who asks: whom shall I send? Isaiah offers himself as messenger (Isaiah 6:8). He is accepted and his commission is imparted to him. But this commission is of an extraordinary character.
For it is not so much told him what he shall announce, but what shall be the immediate consequence of his announcement. That is to say, he shall speak to the people, but with the (express) consciousness that not only will it be of no use, but that the people will become only the more hardened (Isaiah 6:9-10). The Prophet, without regarding the difficulty for himself in the matter, only inquires, because the fate of his people distresses him, how long this anger of the Lord against His people is to last (Isaiah 6:11 a.). This answer is: until all is destroyed (Isaiah 6:11 b.), the land devoid of men (Isaiah 6:12), and not more than a tenth part of the inhabitants remain in it, that shall be dealt with as a tree that was felled for burning. For such becomes a prey to the flames to the very stump that remains in the ground. So there will remain of Israel but the remnant of a remnant (Isaiah 6:13).
The structure of the chapter is extremely simple: Isaiah 6:1-4 describe the scene of the transaction; Isaiah 6:5-7 the terror of the Prophet and the allaying of it; Isaiah 6:8-13 his call to the prophetic functions and the commission imparted to him.
2. In the year—filled with smoke.Isaiah 6:1-4. The year that Uzziah died was the year 758 B. C. Jerome (in the Epist. 18 ad Damas.) remarks that this was the same year “quo Romulus, Romani imperii conditor, natus est,” that Romulus was born. The theocracy declines: the world-power springs up.
It is asked whether the event took place before or after the death of Uzziah. Without doubt the event took place before the death, but the record of it was made after it. For if both occurred before Uzziah’s death there would have been no mention made of it. If both occurred after the death of the king, then the event would belong to the period of Jotham’s rule, and one would justly look for the name of this king. Thus what has been just stated remains the only possible answer to the above question. Our passage then agrees very well with Isaiah 1:1, for then Isaiah had prophesied already under Uzziah.
Moreover, Isaiah 14:28 (“in the year King Uzziah died”) supports this explanation, for there it is presumed in the whole context that Uzziah still lives. The opinion of those Rabbis, who, following the lead of the Chaldee, understand the passage to refer to the civil death of Uzziah, i.e., to his becoming a leper, is justly pronounced by Gesenius a rabbinical caprice.
How did Isaiah see the Lord? In reality? or only in the idea, i.e. in fancy, so that, then, the grand painting were only the poetic clothing of a purely subjective, inward transaction? The latter is the opinion of rationalistic expositors. For example, Knobel says: “At all events there happened a moment in Isaiah’s life, when the seer, in holy, divine enthusiasm, soared aloft to Jehovah and heard the Lord’s call to the prophetic office. This event of his God-inspired inward man he portrays in the passage before us, and amplifies it with free, poetic art, more, completely than he experienced it.” But one must be, just a rationalist, to hold that such a transaction cannot possibly be an historical fact, and therefore that it must be declared to be unreal. At the same time one must resolve to pronounce what the Prophet professes to do a pious fraud.
For that he would only give a poem is neither intimated in the narrative itself, nor does the character of the entire book suggest it. The Prophets are historians, even where they write poetry. The Prophet speaks here as an historian. Did he represent as an outward calling what was only inward, he would have arrogated an honor that did not become him, and this very arrogance would have deprived him of all claim to credibility. For countless ones have received an inward call. But precisely this outward call, just that which Isaiah here beheld, heard and spoke, is so extraordinary, that only privileged men can boast that they have experienced the like.
Of Jeremiah (chap. 1) and Ezekiel (chaps. 1.–3) similar things are told. These men, as Isaiah himself, would be guilty of wicked presumption did they invent a glorious, outward call. We must therefore hold the narrative of Isaiah to be historical.
But if real, was it a physical or spiritual reality? That is to say, did Isaiah behold all this with the eyes of the body or the eyes of the spirit (ἐνπνεύματι)? With the eyes of the body these things are not to be seen. Spiritual corporality can only be taken notice of by the opened inward sense (2 Kings 6:17). Therefore something, real of course, but only inward, can be meant here, a spiritual beholding of spiritual reality (1 Kings 22:17 sqq.; Ezekiel 8 sqq.; Daniel 7:13 sqq.; Revelation 1:10 sqq., etc.).
To this is joined the inquiry: In which temple did Isaiah see the Lord? In the earthly, at Jerusalem, or in the heavenly, the pattern of the former? It is no reason against the former, that Isaiah was no priest, and therefore dared not go into the temple. Amos, also, was no priest, and yet saw the Lord in the temple (Isaiah 9:1). The Prophet did not need to be in the temple bodily in order to see what was present in the temple. Comp.
Ezekiel 8:3—But in the earthly temple the throne of the Lord was the ark of the covenant. On this account it is expressly called ιωֵׁ ?αδַ ?λְּ ?ψֻ ?αִ ?ιν “dwelling between the cherubim” (2 Samuel 6:2; 2 Kings 19:15; Isaiah 37:16; Psalms 80:2; Psalms 99:1; 1 Chr. 13:16). Why should Isaiah, if he saw the Lord in the earthly temple, not have named the ark of the covenant? The expression “throne high and elevated” does not appear to point to the ark of the covenant. For it cannot be said that it is high and lifted up. We shall therefore have to place the vision in the upper, heavenly sanctuary (the original of the Tabernacle in the first place, Exodus 25:9; Exodus 25:40; Exodus 26:30; Exodus 27:8, and afterwards of the temple).
Thither Isaiah was transferred in spirit.
The Seraphim are not mentioned anywhere else in the whole Old and New Testaments except here. The word ωְׂ ?ψָ ?λּ ?ιν is found Numbers 21:6, but as qualifying πְ ?ηָ ?ωִׁ ?ιν (God sent among the people burning, fiery serpents). The singular ωָׂ ?ψָ ?σ occurs, too, Numbers 21:8; Deuteronomy 8:15; Isaiah 14:29; Isaiah 30:6, but always in the sense of “serpent.” In Numbers 21:8, it is synonym of πָ ?ηָ ?ωׁ. For it is said there; make thee a ωׂ ?ψσ, serpent, and set it on a pole. And then Isaiah 6:9, it proceeds: and Moses made a πְ ?ηַ ?ωׁ πְ ?ηωֶׁ ?ϊ and set it on a pole. Again Deuteronomy 8:15πָ ?δָ ?ωׁ ωָׂ ?ψָ ?σ are found joined.
In both places in Isaiah, we read ωָׂ ?ψָ ?σξְ ?ςεֹ ?λֵּ ?σ. Therefore, ωָׂ ?ψָ ?σ evidently means the serpent, but only by an originally predicate description becoming the designation of the chief conception. For originally ωָׂ ?ψָ ?σ means “the burner,” from ωָׂ ?ψַ ?σ “to burn, burn up.” The burning smart of a wound occasioned this designation. It is, moreover, not impossible that the burning fire is designated by the word ωָׂ ?ψַ ?σ because it moves itself serpent fashion. And in so far the roots ἕρπειν, serpere and ωָׂ ?ψָ ?σ may agree; and an original connection between ωָׂ ?ψָ ?σ and serpens might exist, only the meaning “to crawl,” would not be the medium of this connection. For only the burning fire is thought of as crawling; but the serpent is called ωָׂ ?ψָ ?σ, not because it creeps, but because it burns.
On these grounds I do not believe that the angel name ωָׂ ?ψָ ?σ has anything to do with the serpent. According to our passage indeed, the Seraphim have human form, for they have a countenance, they have feet (Isaiah 6:2) and hands (Isaiah 6:6). But, Gesenius, before this has shown that the Seraph has nothing whatever to do with the Egyptian Serapis, by the proof that this name has sprung from the names Osiris and Apis (Osar-Api). Comp. Thesaur. p. 1342. Gesenius, with whom recently Herm.
Schultz agrees, takes the word in the meaning of the Arabic scharaph (nobilitas), schariph (sheriff , princeps), comp. Daniel 10:13; Daniel 8:25; which, however, hardly agrees with the use of the Hebrew ωׂ ?ψσ given above. That the Seraphim belong to the highest rank of the angel world, appears from their relation to God and His throne as it is described in our chapter. For they appear here in immediate nearness to the divine throne, and beside them no others are named. That the Seraphim are essentially identical with the Cherubim, has been maintained already by Maimonides (in the ξεψδδπαελιν3:6). Hendewerk, has tried to prove the identity in the dissertation De Seraphim a Cherubim in Bibliis non diversis,Kφnigsberg, 1836.
So, too, Stickel in the Stud. u. Krit. 1840 Heft. II. Boehmer also takes this view (Herzog’sR. Encycl. IV. p. 24).
Of course the passage Revelation 4:8 seems to favor this view strongly. For there we find ascribed to Cherubim on the one hand the animal forms of Ezekiel, (1 and 10), and on the other the six wings and the Trishagion (thrice holy) of the Seraphim. It appears to me that the forms of John combine in themselves the traits of the Cherubim and Seraphim, and if it is said that the Seraphim of Isaiah differ from the Cherubim of Ezekiel so, too, do the Johannic Cherubim differ from those of Ezekiel, and the Seraphim of Isaiah are the mediating member. After all the question is an open one. If it is asked; why are the Seraphim called “the burning ones?” Philo answers: “because they devour the unformedness of matter, bring it into form and order, and thereby render it a Cosmos.” Boehmer,among others, calls them “fire beings, that burn up everything unholy.” Lange (in the Art. Zorn Gottes, Herzog’sR.
Encycl. XVIII. p. 662 sq.), distinguishes the revelation of wrath against universal human sinfulness and sin and the revelation of wrath against the conscious revolt against the revelation of salvation in law and gospel. The first degree seems to him symbolized by God’s dominion over His Cherubim (Genesis 3:24; Psalms 18:11-15; Psalms 104:4), the second by His appearance between the Seraphim (Isaiah 6). “That the Seraphim represent a vision of the judgment of fire, in which, with the hardening of the people, the temple must burn up, is expressed also in the meaning of the word “the consumers.” When Isaiah received the call to preach the hardening of the people, he saw, also, in spirit the temple occupied by the fire angels of God, and filled with smoke.” Apart from the distinction between Seraphim and Cherubim, which I do not think has sufficient motive, it only seems to me that their meaning is too narrowly construed in the above. They do not merely serve as a revelation of the wrath of God. They belong, since there was a world, to the immediate organs of the divine revelation in the world generally. They are ever with God, and “rest neither day nor night,” and when they ceaselessly offer praise, honor, and thanksgiving to Him that lives from everlasting to everlasting, and when they thereby give the tone, as it were, to the song of praise of the four and twenty elders (Revelation 4:8 sqq.), so it is seen plainly, that they have not only a mission in relation to the wicked, but also in relation to the pious, even to God Himself.
It does not decide the matter of their significance in general, that they appear just here in a moment when wrath is revealed, and that a Seraph burns away the sin of the Prophet. However, this is not the place to penetrate deeper into these mysteries (μυστήρια).
The Seraphim stood ξξςμμε, “above him. By a very frequent usage ςξγ is joined with ςַ ?μ so that by this preposition the one standing is represented, so to speak, as covering up the one before whom he stands, from the eyes of the spectator standing opposite; Genesis 18:8; Genesis 24:30; Exodus 18:13; Judges 3:19; Judges 6:31; 2 Kings 23:3; Jeremiah 36:21; 2 Chronicles 23:13. Even standing before Jehovah is designated by this preposition Job 1:6; 1 Kings 22:19; Zechariah 4:14; Zechariah 6:5.—But in our passage it is not merely said ςָ ?μָ ?ιε, but ξξςμμε. This expression is so strong that we can do nothing else than represent the Seraphim to ourselves as hovering about the Lord, “and with two he flew,” so that they stood, not indeed above his head, but relatively above him. Each Seraph had six wings. The imperfects manifestly serve to indicate a continuous circumstance that is an essential part of the scene, whereas the perfects εχψΰ and εΰξψ, “and cried and said,” express an incident that forms part of the transaction.
For what the Seraphim did with their wings went on continuously and does not belong to the transaction. But the crying out belongs to the transaction, yet does not go on continuously, but is only an incident that serves to finish the picture. We cannot suppose that the crying out continued while the Prophet, and the Seraph and the Lord talked. Targ. Jonathan happily translates Isaiah 6:2 b., “duabus velabat,” etc. “With two (wings) each one veiled his face that he might not see, and with two he veiled his body, that he might not be seen.”
It must not be concluded from ζδΰμζδ that there were only two Seraphim, but that there were two choirs, say one on either side. Alternative song is founded in the essence of communion. It is the musical expression of the διαλογισμοί that move the congregation. Therefore it is found in the heavenly congregation as well as in the earthly. But the Seraphim sing “Holy, holy, holy is Jehovah Sabaoth; fullness of the whole earth is His glory.” Thus they praise Him here as the Holy One, because in what follows (Isaiah 6:9 sq.), He makes known in what degree His holiness shall react against unholy Israel. Delitzsch calls attention to the fact that Isaiah cherished his whole life through, a deep, indelible impression of that holiness of the Lord that confronted him here so mightily in word and aspect.
Fourteen times in the first part does he use the expression χγεωׁ ιωׂ ?ψΰμ, “Holy One of Israel,” which is, as it were, the concentrated expression of that impression; fifteen times in the second (comp. at Isaiah 1:4), whereas the expression occurs beside only thrice in the Psalms, (Psalms 71:22; Psalms 78:41; Psalms 89:19), twice in Jer. Psalms 50:29; Isaiah 51:5), and once in 2 Kings 19:22 parallel with Isaiah 37:23.
But why this thrice repeated χָ ?γεֹ ?ωׁ ??. There are, to be sure, examples of such repetition that only aim at rhetorical emphasis (Jeremiah 7:4; Ezekiel 21:32; Nahum 1:2). In fact Calvin and Vitringa construe the thrice holy in this sense, while, yet, they expressly say that they would not exclude a deeper significance. Herm. Schultz, (Alttest. Theol.
I. p. 345) says: “the choir rests on a song and counter song, combined in the double choir, therefore the threeness of the Holy.” But here we stand before the holiest of all of the Godhead, that is opened up for a moment, and receive a glimpse into the βάθητοῦθεοῦ (1 Corinthians 2:10, “the deep things of God”). The Christian consciousness, from the remotest period, has not been able to resist the impression that this thrice-holy is a reflex of the triune being of the Godhead. And in the New Testament sphere this impression is the more justified because the evangelist John (John 12:41) says expressly Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus when he heard the words of Isa 6:10. In that John says nothing extraordinary. Rather he quite accords with Peter who says (1 Peter 1:11) that the Spirit that swayed in the Prophets of the Old Testament was the Spirit of Christ; and with Paul, who says (1 Corinthians 10:4) it was Christ that as a spiritual rock led Israel through the wilderness. This is only the confirmation of what we have long known as the significance of the Son, viz.: that He is the medium, and therefore also the mediator of all and every revelation.
In regard to the second clause of Isa 6:3, the question arises, first of all, what is subject? Is ξְ ?μֹּ ?ΰ subject, then earth is the principal notion, and it is said here what fills it. Is λְּ ?αεֹ ?γεֹ subject, then the glory of God is the principal notion and it is declared here how comprehensive it is. The latter alone corresponds with the context. But the further inquiry arises: whether λְּ ?αεֹ ?γ, “glory,” is to be taken in an active or a passive sense, i. e., as praise, or as majesty, glory. The two cannot be essentially disconnected.
For as God’s glory is everywhere, so in a certain sense also it is everywhere praised. For its very enemies even must involuntarily do it honor (Psalms 8:2-3). And I do not see why in our passage one should separate the two. Does it not then become those who sing unceasingly the praise of God in His immediate presence to declare that, not only they, but the entire creation continually proclaims the praise of the Lord? But it says only “all the earth.” Of course: for this song of praise sounds here primarily for one man and for men. It is just in respect to these that the truth is declared, on the one hand comforting, on the other appalling, that the glory of the Lord is everywhere, and everywhere it makes itself known and felt.
Comp. Isaiah 40:5; Habakkuk 3:3; Numbers 14:21; Psalms 72:19.
Isaiah 6:4. ΰַ ?ξָּ ?δ signifies in Hebrew primarily the elbow-socket (Armgelenk-Mutter), i. e., the depression resembling the box screw (Schraubenmutter), in which the arm turns itself, the elbow. The word has this meaning, too, in the noted passage 2 Samuel 8:1, where it is said that David took from the Philistines ΰֶ ?ϊΞξֶ ?ϊֶ ?βδָ ?ΰַ ?ξָּ ?δ. The bridle of the elbow is the contrast of ξֶ ?ϊֶ ?βωְׂ ?τָ ?ϊַ ?ιִ ?νIsaiah 37:29, “the bridle of the lips,” a bridle attached to the elbows. The meaning of 2 Samuel 8:1 is that the Israelites had the bridle of the Philistines, no longer in their mouths indeed, yet still on their arms, so that they were hindered from the free use of them. Therefore ΰַ ?ξָּ ?δ is the elbow, from which the meaning “ell” is derived. Accordingly ΰξεϊδρτιν are the elbows of the sills.
The sills are compared to the arms and the joints in the angle are the arm joints or elbows. Because the sills, and in fact both the upper and lower, and as well as the side beams, are joined together in these, therefore they are the centre of motion, and every shock felt in such a centre must be communicated to all the radii. ΰַ ?ξָּ ?δ occurs only here in this meaning. ρִ ?τִ ?ιν (only here in Isaiah) are the sills, and primarily the under sills. For the upper sill is called ξַ ?ωְׁ ?χεֹ ?σ and the side posts ξְ ?ζεּ ?ζεֹ ?ϊ (Exodus 12:7; Exodus 12:22-23). But in our passage ρִ ?τִ ?ιν as denominatio a potiori stands for all parts of the door-way. The verb πεּ ?ςַ occurs only in the first part of Isa 7:2; Isaiah 19:1; Isaiah 24:20; Isaiah 29:9; Isaiah 37:22.—χεμδχεψΰ (comp. Isaiah 40:3) is primarily “the voice of the caller.” But in what precedes it speaks, not of one, but of many criers.
Thus we know that χεψΰ is to be taken collectively and as concr. pro abst.
The house filled with smoke.—It was then not full of smoke from the commencement, and still less did a cloud of smoke conceal the Lord as Exodus 40:34; 1 Kings 8:10. For (Isaiah 6:1) Isaiah saw the Lord. It has been said, the smoke came from the altar of incense (Isaiah 6:6) and symbolized the seraphic praise. There may appear some truth in that from a comparison of Rev 5:8; Revelation 8:3 sq. But it seems to me that the smoke has still another meaning. In so far as it constitutes an antithesis to the light in which the Lord dwells, it seems to me, wherever it occurs in connection with the appearance of the divine glory, to signify the reverse side of the same, the severity, the wrath of God.
Thus here, too, the smoke, with whose appearance is connected immediately in Isaiah 6:5 the Prophet’s confession of sin and mortal fear, introduces the words of condemnation which the Lord afterward speaks to the Prophet as the manifestation of His holy indignation. Comp. Isaiah 4:5; Isaiah 9:17; Isaiah 14:31; Isaiah 34:10; Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 65:5.
3. Then said I——is purged.
Isaiah 6:5-7. After the Prophet had heard the Seraphim praise the holiness of the Lord, after he had beheld them themselves in the splendor of their holiness, and also had seen its consequence, the wrath, imaged in the smoke, he is seized with the feeling of his own sinfulness. Every creature that beholds or comes in contact with an immediate trace of the divine Being, has a sense of not being able to exist under the burden of the absolute majesty (Genesis 16:13; Genesis 32:31; Exodus 33:20; Judges 6:22 sq.; Isaiah 13:22; 1 Samuel 6:19 sq.; 2 Samuel 6:7). This sense must have made itself felt in the Prophet in the highest degree, seeing he beheld the divine Being in a greater proximity and clearness, than, since Moses at least, ever a man did. He cries, therefore: woe is me (comp. Isaiah 1:4), I am lost (Isaiah 15:1; Hosea 4:6; Hosea 10:7; Hosea 10:15), for a man of unclean lips am I, and among a people of unclean lips do I dwell!
That he emphasizes just the unclean lips comes from the fact that he had just heard the Seraphim bring an offer of praise with clean lips. In contrast with these circumcised lips he becomes conscious how his are uncircumcised (Exodus 6:12); in contrast with these calves of the lips (Hosea 14:3) and with this fruit of the lips (Proverbs 18:20; Isaiah 57:19; Hebrews 13:15) he feels that he is quite unfit for such an offering, both in respect to his own person, and in respect to that totality to which he belongs; in fact that this unfitness, when he has gone with it into the jurisdiction of the highest King (Isaiah 33:22; Isaiah 41:21; Isaiah 43:15; Isaiah 44:6) must bring upon him the sentence of death. “Such is the confession which the contrite Prophet makes; on this confession follows the forgiveness of sins, which is confirmed by a heavenly sacrament, and is extended to him by a seraphic absolution.”—Delitzsch.The altar, which is mentioned, we must think of as an altar of incense, since any other kind of offering than incense in the heavenly sanctuary is inconceivable, and the glowing coals also indicate an altar of incense. From this altar one of the Seraphim took with the tongs a ψִ ?φְ ?τָ ?δ “hot coal.” That he took it with the tongs, not only corresponds to the usage of the earthly sanctuary (Exodus 25:38; Numbers 4:9; 1 Kings 7:49), but has in any case also its internal reasons, as that even in the sphere of heavenly corporal existence such distinctions occur, or that the touching with the tongs has a symbolical meaning.
ψִ ?φְ ?τָ ?δ (comp. ψֶ ?ωֶׁ ?σHabakkuk 3:5; Son 8:6) is something aglow, whether coal or stone. The word occurs only here [in Isaiah.—Tr.] In the earthly sanctuary the burning of incense was performed by taking coals from the altar of burnt-offering and pouring them on the altar of incense, and then upon these was scattered the incense (Leviticus 16:12; comp. Isaiah 10:1). In the heavenly sanctuary there was no altar of burnt-offering. At all events ψִ ?φְ ?τָ ?δ designates the glowing body on which the incense was cast in order to burn it. With such a glowing body, therefore, the Seraph touched the lips of the Prophet in order to reconcile him.
The Prophet’s lips are touched with fire therefore, and that with the same holy fire out of which proceeds the cloud of smoke. Thus from the place that occasioned in him before the painful feeling of his uncleanness, must the holy fire penetrate and burn out the entire man. It must burn up all uncleanness. The Seraph shows himself here right properly as ωָׂ ?ψָ ?σ, as burner. As water has primarily generating and fructifying power, but secondarily also a judging and destroying power (comp. creation, the flood, and Baptism), so fire has primarily devouring, and thereby judging, purifying, and secondarily warming and illuminating power. Omnia purgat edax ignis, vitiumque metallis excoquit, says OvidFast. iv. 785. Τὸπῦρκαθαίρει, τὸὕδωρἁγνὶζειPlut.qu�st.
Romans 1). Comp. Numbers 31:23; Herzog’sR. Encycl. IX. p. 717 sq.—As here the touching takes place for the purpose of atonement, so Jeremiah 1:9 it is for the purpose of inspiration; in Daniel 8:17 sq.; Isaiah 10:8 sqq.; Revelation 1:17, it is for the purpose of imparting strength.
4. Also I heard—and be healed.
Isaiah 6:8-10. The Lord Himself now begins to speak. Having seen Him (Isaiah 6:1), Isaiah now hears Him. “I heard” corresponds to the “and I saw” (Isaiah 6:1). It is worthy of notice that the Lord asks: whom shall I send? that He, therefore, as it were, calls for volunteers. So we read, too, 1 Kings 22:20, that the Lord in an assembly of heaven, portrayed very much as the one here, asks: “Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-Gilead?” There it appears, 1 Kings 6:23 (from the circumstance that Micaiah would have been a deceiver, if a real transaction were reported in 1 Kings 6:19-22) that this prophet only narrates a fictitious vision. But anyway the representation remains that the Lord not only gives His servants and messengers command and commission according to His own election, but also proposes the undertaking of a commission to the voluntary determination.
Now when the Lord in our passage, as was said, calls for volunteers, as it were, this is not to be explained by the greater difficulty or danger of the mission. For Isaiah’s mission was not as difficult and dangerous as that of Moses or Jeremiah. Now Moses resists the commission all he can (Exodus 3), though he was an ΰִ ?ιωׁ ηַ ?ιִ ?μ, “able man,” as few were. Luther says of him (on the call of Moses, Exodus 3): “Moses begins, as it were, a wrangling and disputing with God, and will not accept this office.” Jeremiah refuses because he feels himself really too young and made of too tender stuff. Ezekiel, too, appears inwardly at least to have had no relish for undertaking the commission. For he is exhorted not to be disobedient (Ezekiel 2:8), and, though he does not express them, his doubts and fears are disarmed (Ezekiel 2:6 to Ezekiel 3:9).
Jonah, the most rebellious and self-willed of all Prophets, actually flees from the Lord. All these, who would not, are not even asked if they will, but they must. Isaiah, who will, is asked. It appears, therefore, that the manner of the calling is regulated according to the individuals. Where the Lord in His chosen and prepared instruments (Jeremiah 1:5) observes also the subjective readiness of mind, He affords it the opportunity to manifest itself by the question: “who will.” That the Lord, by this question, would not draw out something concealed from Himself is manifest. For how can a thing be unknown to the Lord?
There was, in fact, no one there but Isaiah that could have replied to His question. For, it could only be a man that could be in question for the undertaking of the prophetic office in Israel. No such person except Isaiah was present. The question is therefore a form by which the Lord honors the ψεּ ?ηַ πְ ?γִ ?ιαָ ?δ, “free spirit” (Psalms 51:14 (12)), that He knew was present in the Prophet, in that He gave it opportunity to manifest itself.
Who are the many for whom the service is to be done? The plural is here as little as Genesis 1:26; Genesis 3:22; Genesis 11:7 mere form (Plur.-majest). It is rather, as Delitzsch expresses it, communicatively intended. Jehovah includes the whole assembly. He honors thereby the assembled ones, by taking for granted that His interest is theirs and their interest His. Isaiah at once replies: “Behold, here am I; send me.” This prompt offer quite corresponds with the strong and bold spirit of Isaiah.
There is no need of assuming that he had already been called, and had already been in office for a time. He, the mighty man, is at once conscious that this is his affair. He feels that he can do it, and he will do it, too. We find here not a trace of fear or other consideration. It was, however, no proud self-sufficiency that led the Prophet. He has just been reconciled in fact as a sinner.
The flame that blazes in him and impels him must have been a pure flame. He feels himself strong in Him that makes him mighty (Philippians 4:13; Isaiah 40:29 sq.). This “here am I; send me” is, however, so grand, in fact, when one reflects on the examples of other prophets mentioned already, it is so unique in its way, that one understands wherefore Isaiah would not put this history of his calling quite in the beginning of his book, but rather makes it the third portal of his prophetic building. He feared this intrepid ready-mindedness would be found incomprehensible. He puts in advance of it therefore two other entrances, that the reader may learn thereby to know him and thus come prepared to this scene of his calling. And, in fact, he that has read chapters 1–4 must confess that here “is a Prophet” (Ezekiel 2:5; Ezekiel 33:33), a man that had the stuff in him, and the right to say, “Here am I; send me.”
In Isaiah 6:9-10 follows out of the mouth of the Lord Himself the commission that the Prophet must discharge. The manner of imparting this commission is directly the opposite of what is usual among men in like circumstances. One seeks, namely, in giving a servant or messenger a hard commission, to represent it, at least, at first, in the most advantageous light. This the Lord does not do. On the contrary, He plainly emphasizes just the hardest part. He acts as if the Prophet were to have nothing joyous to announce, but only judgment and hopeless hardening.
Isaiah is called the evangelist of the Old Testament. But there is not a trace of it found here. It is not once said even that he shall warn, exhort, threaten. But, overleaping all intermediate members, only the sorrowful effect is emphasized, and that with such pointedness, that, what in truth can be only an unintended effect, appears as directly designed. It is as if the Lord would give the intrepid man that had said “here am I, send me,” to understand at once, that he would require all his boldness in order to carry through the commission he undertook. Grammatically the words offer almost no difficulty.
The inff. absol. in Isaiah 6:9 cannot have an intensive meaning, as though the Lord had said: hear and see well, with effort, zeal and diligence. For then must they even attain to understanding. But the Lord would say: spite of the much, and ceaseless hearing they shall still understand nothing. This ceaseless but still fruitless hearing is only the correlative of that ceaseless but fruitless preaching, of which especially Jeremiah so often speaks (Jeremiah 7:13; Jeremiah 7:25; Jeremiah 11:7, etc.). Let it be noticed, too, that Jeremiah every where points, as the cause of this fruitless hearing, to the ωְׁ ?ψִ ?ιψεּ ?ϊμֵ ?α, “the hardness of heart,” and the stiffening of the neck (δִ ?χִ ?ωׁ ?εּ ΰֶ ?ϊΞςָ ?ψְ ?τָ ?νJeremiah 7:26). The Prophet never spoke to the people such words as we read in Isaiah 6:9.
Therefore it cannot be the meaning of the Lord that He should so speak. But the Lord would say: Whatever thou mayest say to this people, say it not in the hope of being understood and regarded, but say it with the consciousness that thy words shall remain not understood and not regarded, although they might be understood and regarded, and that consequently they must serve to bring out the complete unfolding of that hardness of heart that exists in this people, and thereby be a testimony against this people and a basis of judgment. Thus Isaiah 6:10 it is not meant that the Prophet shall do what is the devil’s affair, that is, positively and directly lead men off to badness and godlessness. Rather the Lord can ever want only the reverse of this. If, then, it says: “harden the heart, deafen the ear, plaster up the eyes, that they may not see, nor hear, nor take notice and be converted to their salvation,” still this form of speech seems to me to be chosen for the sake of the Prophet. There is, namely, a great comfort for him in it.
For what is sadder for a man of God than to see day after day and year after year pass away without any fruit of his labor, in fact with evidence that things grow rather worse than better? Is it not for such a case a mighty comfort to be able to say: that is precisely what the Lord predicted, yea, expressly indicated as His relative and previous intention. Thus one sees that He has not labored in vain, but that He has performed his task. And inasmuch as that judgment is still only a transition point, and by the wonderful wisdom of the Lord, shall become a forerunner of higher development of salvation, so the servant of God can say this for comfort, that even out of the judgment of hardening, that it is His part to provoke, salvation shall grow. God’s wrath, in fact, is never without love. The preliminary earthly judgments, as is well recognized, are to be regarded as chastenings, that have a becoming-better as their aim.
And if a people like Israel suffers one judgment after another through thousands of years, and still never becomes better, until at last the Lord breaks in pieces the economy of the Old Testament, like one shivers an earthen vessel by throwing it on the ground, so just this destroying of the old covenant is the previous condition to the arising of a new one, that attains to what the old one could not. But the individuals themselves whose hardening and judgment is an example and beacon for the after-world? Here we touch on a difficult point. Will those whose fall was the riches of the world (Romans 11:12) be eternally damned, or will their fall here below also for them become some time a means to their conversion and raising them up again? The answer to this appears to me to lie in Romans 9-11 But here is not the place to go into it more particularly.—Heart, ear, eye (comp. Isaiah 32:3-4) are named as the representatives of the inward sense; the heart represents the will, eye and ear the knowing.
The heart shall become fat and covered with grease, and thereby be made incapable of emotion.
After it is said what shall be done in regard to the three organs, it is said what shall be guarded against by such doing; and here a reversed order is observed in respect to the positive phrases. What must be guarded against is something immediate and something mediate. Immediately must seeing, hearing and observing be hindered; mediately the penitent conversion and being saved.
In the N. T. our passage is cited five times. In Matthew 13:14; Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10 it is applied to the fact that Jesus always spoke to the people in parables. Thereby was the prophecy of our passage fulfilled. Jesus would manifestly say: Were I not to speak in parables, then they would understand nothing at all; my discourse would outwardly rebound, and not penetrate at all, and consequently effect no condition of responsibility on their part. But as I speak by parables, my discourse at least penetrates so far that a certain relative understanding, and consequently, too, a responsibility, is possible.
But in as much as they oppose themselves to the realization of this possibility of understanding, they let it be known that evil has the upper hand in them: thus they pronounce in a measure their own judgment. Our passage is cited in John 12:40 as explaining why the Jews could not believe in Jesus spite of the signs He did. To this end our passage is construed in the same sense in which the Synoptists take it: even the signs of Jesus, no matter how near they come, still do not bring about faith, because the susceptibility is wanting. Finally in Acts 28:25 sqq. Paul makes use of our passage in order to prove generally the unsusceptibility of the Jewish nation to the preaching of the gospel.
5. Then said I——substance thereof.
Isaiah 6:11-13. The announcement of the judgment of hardening in Isaiah 6:9-10 sounds quite absolute. Yet the Prophet hears underneath all that it is not so intended. It is impossible that the Lord should quite and forever reject His people, and abrogate the promises given to the fathers. He asks, therefore, “How long, Lord?” (comp. Psalms 6:4; Psalms 90:13; Habakkuk 2:6). He would say: What are to be quantitively and qualitatively the limits of that judgment of hardening? The answer is: First there must be an entire desolation and depopulating of the land; and when at last still a tenth of the inhabitants is in the land, that tenth part also must be decimated till nothing is left but the stump of a root or stem. That shall then be the seed of a holy future. The meaning of the words is perfectly clear.
The construction is as follows: and still there is in it (the land) a tenth part, and this is again decimated—after the manner of or in resemblance to the terebinth and oak, in which, when felled, a stump remains, its stump (of the tenth) is holy seed. Therefore a stump always remains, and that suffices to guarantee a new life and a new glorious future. This has been steadily verified in the people Israel, both in a corporeal and spiritual respect. After every overthrow, yea, after the most fearful visitations, that aimed at the very extinction of the people, a stump or stem was still always left in the ground. This people is even not to be destroyed. There is nothing tougher than the life of this everlasting Jew.
And in spiritual respects it is just the same. Though every knee seems to bow to the old or the new Baal, yet the Lord has preserved always a fragment (7,000 it is called, 1 Kings 19:18) in faithfulness.
AND ETHICALOn Isaiah 6:1. The question: why this vision in the year of Uzziah’s death? coincides evidently with the question: why an Isaiah any way, and why was he needed just at this time? If prophets were to be, then must prophecy at some time culminate; and that happened in Isaiah, the greatest of all the prophets that have written. Thence Isaiah can stand neither at the beginning, nor at the close. Not at the beginning, for he is far in advance of the elementary stadium; he represents the summit. Not at the close, for in the days of decline art cannot flourish.
It needs quiet times for its development. Such a quiet time (relatively) was that of the four kings under whom Isaiah labored. Caspari (Beitr. p. 218) says of the Uzziah-Jotham period, that for the kingdom of Judah it was 1) a time of great power and prosperity, 2) beside the time of Jehoshaphat (2 Chr. 17:18, 20), it was the greatest period since its existence by the rending away of the Ten Tribes from the house of David, 3) the longest continued prosperity during its existence, 4) the last that it had till it fell, 5) the only period of prosperity during Isaiah’s prophetic ministry. But this period of prosperity was, so to speak, only the spring-time, the youth and formative period of the Isaiah prophecy. It was under Ahaz especially that it had to make trial of itself. The league with Assyria fastened the gaze of the Prophet on the Assyrian dominion, the Babylonian embassy in Hezekiah’s time (chap. 39) on that of Babylon.
Although, even under Ahaz and Hezekiah, there were wars and great distress by means of the Syrians and the Ephraimites, as also by the Assyrians, still the destruction was graciously postponed.
In that time, therefore, when the theocracy began to show its relations to the worldly powers in a decisive way, there appeared a prophet, who, thoroughly cultivated under the prosperous period of Uzziah and Jotham, could recognize the portentous characteristics of the time of Ahaz and Hezekiah, and see deep into the signs pregnant with the future; and who could reveal their meaning with such wisdom, power and art as are seen in the book of Isaiah. When Uzziah died, Isaiah was just old enough and far enough advanced in training to begin the prophetic career; under Ahaz he had attained manly maturity; and under Hezekiah, with glorified vision, like one near his death, he beheld the glories of redemption.
2. On Isaiah 6:1. Jerome inquires: how could Isaiah have seen the Lord, seeing John says (John 1:20) “No man hath seen God at any time,” and God Himself said to Moses: “Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live,” Exodus 33:20? He replies to the question: that not only the Godhead of the Father, but also that of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, are invisible to bodily eyes, because one essence is in the Trinity. But the eyes of the spirit are able to behold the Godhead according to the saying: “blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God,” Matthew 5:8. And Augustine cites this saying of Jerome approvingly, and comments on it (Epist. ad Fortunatianum) Addendo ergo, etc.: “Therefore by saying in addition, ‘but the eyes of the spirit,’ he makes vision of this sort totally different from every kind of bodily vision. But lest any might think he spoke of the present time, he subjoins the testimony of the Lord, wishing to show what he had called eyes of the spirit: by which testimony the promise is declared, not of a present, but of a future vision.”
3. On Isaiah 6:2. Foerster explains the fact of the Seraphim covering their feet with their wings as proof that they would confess that their holiness was imperfect and impure in comparison with the absolute holiness of God. For this he cites Job 4:18, “Behold, He put no trust in His servants; and His angels He charged with folly,” and John 15:15, “Behold, He putteth no trust in His saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in His sight.”
4. It was even the opinion of many Rabbis that a trace of threeness of the divine essence was contained in the three times holy of the Seraphim. Peter Galatinus (Italian, baptized Jew, Franciscan monk) in his Arcanis catholicae veritatis II. 1, has proved this especially of Rabbi Simon Jochai and Jonatan ben Ufiel (the Targumist). Comp. Raymundus Martini in the pugio fidei, and especially Joh. Meyer in the Dissertatio theologica de mysterio sacrosanctae trinitatis ex solius V. Ti. libris demonstrato. Harderwich, 1712.
On the ground of this recognized reference to the Trinity, this song of the Seraphim has obtained great significance in Christian liturgies to the present time. “Its introduction into them has been ascribed to Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch († 116), and already in a letter of Clement, Bishop of Rome († 100), there is found a hint of it. Pope Sixtus I. († 130) is said to have adopted it into the Romish mass.” Schoeberlein, Schatz des liturg. Chor. und Gemeindegesangs I. p. 333. [On the Trishagion comp. a Bib. Encycl. or Bingham’s Antiquity of the Christian Church, Book Isaiah 14:2 § 3, 4, and Book Isaiah 15:3 § 10].
5. On Isaiah 6:4. If a typical meaning of the shaking of the door-posts is insisted on, it must be sought in that power of the revelation of divine glory that affects and moves everything, impressing both personal and impersonal creatures; and an example must be found in the events attending the death of Christ (Matthew 27:50 sq.).
6. On Isaiah 6:5. “God does not put angels into the pulpit, but poor, weak men. The angels do not know how sinful men are affected; but ministers of the Church, chosen from men, know that well.”—Foerster.7. On Isaiah 6:8. Vitringa remarks here that Christian expositors, Grotius excepted, explain the change from the singular to the plural number, in “whom shall I send, and who will go for us” as implying the Trinity. “Calvin, too,” he says, “and Piscator, usually more cautious than others in observations of this sort, here plainly utter this sentiment.” [“This explanation is the only one that accounts for the difference of number in the verb and pronoun.”—J. A.
Alexander.—Tr.]. The opinion of the Jews, however, is that God is represented metaphorically here, as taking counsel with His family, i. e. the angels. Vitringa remarks also that Sanctius attributes to Thomas and Hugo the important emphasis laid on the plural “for us,” which involves the meaning “who will go for us and not for himself.”
8. On Isaiah 6:9-10. What God says to the Prophet here rests on a law that may be called the law of the polarity of the will. For every thing here concerns the will, i. e., that will-do that is conditioned by the will-be (comp. my book, Der Gottmensch, p. 46 sqq.). As in electricity similar poles repel one another, and dissimilar attract, which depends on the principle of deep inward relationship and mutual completion, so in like manner it happens in spiritual life. The Lord says, John 8:37 : “My word hath no place in you,” and again, John 8:43 : “Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my words;” which question he proceeds to answer himself John 8:44): “ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do;” and immediately after He says, John 8:47 : “He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not because ye are not of God.”
Therefore where the word of God comes in contact with a heterogeneous pole, it is repelled. And not only that, but that negative pole becomes more intensely negative by the exercise of its negative power. And the stronger the power that provokes its energetic reaction, and the oftener this provocation occurs, so much the more is it strengthened in that negation till it becomes quite hardened. The magnet loses its power by disuse, whereas frequent use strengthens it. Thus we find that every where the most glorious, clearest, loveliest testimonies to divine truth are not received where the will is wanting to receive them, i. e., where, to speak biblically, the flesh is stronger than the spirit. Therefore must all prophets of the Lord be hated and persecuted in proportion as they announced the truth mightily and penetratingly; and that hate must attain its climax in opposing Him who was Himself the truth.
8. On Isaiah 6:13. “Paul, also, when he represents the rejection of the Jews in Romans 11, calls the race, Romans 11:16, a holy root, and, Romans 11:23-25, severed branches that God will again graft in.” Starke. HINTS1. On Isaiah 6:3. The thrice holy of the Seraphim a Revelation 1. Of the holiness of God. 2. Of His glory. 3. Of the Trinity.
2. On Isaiah 6:5-8. The way of reconciliation to God prefigured by the example of the Prophet Isaiah 1. The beginning of this way is the knowledge of sin: a. occasioned by the knowledge of the holiness of God, b. manifesting itself by the confession of sin, c. constraining one to cry for deliverance (woe is me). 2. The end of this way is the forgiveness of sins: a. made possible by the sacrifices to which the altar points, b. applied by the word and sacrament (the address of the angel and the live coal), c. appropriated by faith (the Prophet yields himself to the action of the angel).
3. On Isaiah 6:8. Installation address. Whom shall I send? etc. Herein lies: 1. The divine call to office. 2. The high importance of the office. 3. The joyful inspiration for the office. Hahn.4. On Isaiah 6:9-13. The fruit of preaching. 1. It is gratifying only in a small portion of the hearers (Isaiah 6:13 b; Matthew 22:14). 2. In most hearers it is rather mournful, because by preaching: a. they are only moved to the full unfolding of their enmity; b. they are made ripe for judgment (Isaiah 6:11-13 a).
Footnotes:
Or, the skirts thereof.him.Heb. this cried to this.Heb. His glory is the fulness of the whole earth.elbow joints.Heb. threshold.the cry.Heb. cut off.Heb. and in his hand a live coala glowing-stone.Heb. caused it to touch.is covered up.Heb. Behold me.Or, without ceasing, etc., Heb. in hearing, etc.Heb. in seeing.always.plaster up.Heb. desolate with desolation.will remove.And great will be the desolation.Or, when it is returned and hath been broused.that shall again bum up.terebinth.of which in falling a stump remains,Or, stock or stem.a holy, seed is their stump.make war on it.
II.—THE FIRST GRAND Isaiah 7-39FIRST Chaps. 7–12Israel’s Relation to Assyria as Representative of the World-Power generally in its Destructive Beginning and Prosperous EndingChapters 7–12 deal wholly with the relation of Israel to Assyria. They show how the way was opened for this relation by the unhappy league that Ahaz concluded with the king of Assyria for protection against Syria and Ephraim. The Prophet announces first that the fear of the Syrians and of Ephraim is groundless: but Assyria is to be feared. Taking with Assyria a comprehensive view of all later developments of the world-power, he announces to Israel a second exile, corresponding to that of Egypt as the first, but also a second return, corresponding to that glorious return in which Moses led them. This deliverance will be brought about by a Branch that is to be expected from the house of David, that shall spring as son of a virgin from the apparently dried up root of this house, and, in the might of the Spirit of God, will found a kingdom of peace that shall embrace and have dominion over all nature.
This prophetic cycle divides in three parts. In the first part (Isaiah 7:1 to Isaiah 9:6) the Prophet opposes to the false reliance on the aid of Assyria against the apparent danger that threatened from Syria and Ephraim, the ideal figure of a child, that finds its type in the half-frightful, half-comforting phenomenon of the virgin’s son Immanuel, partly in the form of a son born to the Prophet himself: types that at the same time are earnest of a preliminary deliverance.
In the second part (Isaiah 9:7 to Isaiah 10:4) the Prophet turns to the Israel of the Ten Tribes, with a short, as it were, passing word. Prompted by their proud words, as if it were a little thing for them to make good the loss so far sustained from Assyria, the Prophet announces to Ephraim that what they regarded as the end was only the first of many degrees of ruin that they were to suffer from Assyria.
In the third part (Isaiah 10:5 to Isaiah 12:6) the Prophet turns against Assyria itself. Because it would not be the instrument of the Lord in the Lord’s sense, to it is announced its own destruction, but to Israel deliverance and return by the Messiah the Prince of Peace.
____________________
A.—THE OF THE TIME OF AHAZ
Isaiah 7:1 to Isaiah 9:6 In the beginning of the reign of Ahaz Judah was seriously threatened by the league between Syria and Ephraim. Thereupon Isaiah received the commission from Jehovah to say to Ahaz that there was nothing to fear from Syria and Ephraim. Ahaz being summoned to ask for a sign as pledge of the truth of this announcement, refused to do so. In punishment a sign is given to him. He must hear that a virgin of the royal house, probably his daughter, is pregnant, and will bear a son. But this son of a virgin shall receive the exceeding comforting name, “Immanuel.” Before he will be able to distinguish between good and evil, the lands of Syria and Ephraim shall be forsaken and desert.
But danger threatens from that side from which Ahaz hopes for help and deliverance—that is, from Assyria. For Assyria will turn the holy land into a desert. Shortly after, the Prophet announces that a son will be born to himself. He does not do this publicly, however, but to two reliable men. At the same time the Prophet must set up a public tablet with the inscription, Maher-shalal-hash-baz. When the boy was born, he received these words as his name.
And it was revealed as the meaning of the words, that before the boy could say father and mother, the spoil of Damascus and Samaria would be carried away by the king of Assyria. By this second child, then, substantially the same thing was predicted as by the first, the son of the virgin. Both prophecies must in general have occurred in the same period, in the beginning of the reign of Ahaz (743 B. C). Only the announcement of Immanuel precedes somewhat that of Maher-shalal-hash-baz. Wherefore this double prediction of the same thing?
It seems to me that the announcement of Immanuel was intended immediately for the royal family. For it was a sign involving punishment (comp. comment on Isaiah 7:14). But the people, too, were mightily concerned in this affair. Therefore there was given to them a special sign by Maher-shalal. Such is the extent of the two prophecies at the beginning of Ahaz’s time. It is seen that each has for its central point the future birth of a child.
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
I.—THE TWO CHIEF THE BIRTH OF THE VIRGIN’S SON AND OF THE SON Isaiah 7:1 to Isaiah 8:4I.—THE OF THE VIRGIN’S SON
Isaiah 7:1-25a) Isaiah and Ahaz at the conduit of the upper poolIsa_7:1-91 And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it.
2And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind. 3Then said the Lord unto Isaiah, Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller’s field; and say unto him,
4Take heed, and be quiet;
Fear not, neither be faint hearted
For the two tails of these smoking fire-brands,
For the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah.
5Because Syria, Ephraim, and the son of Remaliah,
Have taken evil counsel against thee, saying,
6Let us go up against Judah, and vex it,
And let us make a breach therein for us,
And set a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal:
7Thus saith the Lord God,
It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.
8For the head of Syria is Damascus,
And the head of Damascus is Rezin;
And within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.
9And the head of Ephraim is Samaria.
And the head of Samaria is Remaliah’s son.
If ye will not believe, surely, ye shall not be established.
TEXTUAL AND Chap. 7 Isaiah 7:1. ςָ ?μָ ?δ is used not only of motion towards a place that is conceived of as higher (e. g., 1 Kings 12:27 sqq.; 2 Kings 24:1, and ιָ ?ψַ ?γ of the opposite, e. g. 1 Kings 22:2; 2 Kings 8:29) but also of any hostile proceeding, entering on a plan (1 Samuel 17:23; 1 Samuel 17:25; Micah 2:13; Nehemiah 2:2, etc).—ιָ ?λֹ ?μ changed 2 Kings 16:5 to ιָ ?λְ ?μεּ comes from the preceding ςָ ?μָ ?δ, and from the additional idea, perhaps, that Rezin was the chief person.
Isaiah 7:2. πεּ ?ηַ is never used in the sense of niti, confidere. But it is used of swarms of birds, grasshoppers and flies, that settle down somewhere (Isaiah 7:19; Exodus 10:14; 2 Samuel 21:10). Such is its meaning here: the army of Syria has settled down like a swarm of grasshoppers on the spot where the army of Ephraim was encamped. Comp. 2 Samuel 17:12. On the fem. πָ ?ηָ ?δ after ΰֲ ?ψָ ?ν comp. 2 Samuel 8:5; 2 Samuel 10:10; coll. Isaiah 14:15; Isaiah 14:18.
Isaiah 7:3. ϊְּ ?ςָ ?μָ ?δ occurs again in Isaiah only Isaiah 36:2. ξִ ?ρְ ?μָּ ?δ Isaiah used often beside here: Isaiah 36:2; Isaiah 11:16; Isaiah 19:23; Isaiah 33:8; Isaiah 40:3; Isaiah 49:11; Isaiah 59:7; Isaiah 62:10. λּ ?εֹ ?αֵ ?ν only here and Isaiah 36:2, in Isaiah.
Isaiah 7:4. After δִ ?ωָּׁ ?ξֵ ?ψ should follow properly a negative notion, whence the word always has after it the conjunctions τֶּ ?ο or ΰַ ?μ or the preposition ξִ ?ο (as solitary exceptions, comp. Exodus 19:12; Exodus 23:13). Therefore a negation must be supplied out of the following δωׁ ?χθ, “take heed of (unbelieving, thus sinful) disquietude, but rather be quiet.” The direct causative Hiphil δַ ?ωְׁ ?χֵ ?θ has evidently the meaning that Ahaz must control his anxiety, quiet himself. The word occurs in Isaiah again Isaiah 30:15; Isaiah 32:17; Isaiah 57:20, whereas the Niph. πִ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?ψ occurs in Isaiah only here. ιֵ ?ψַ ?κְ Niph. of ψָ ?λַ ?κְ; with the exception of Psa 55:22, it always occurs in connection with μֵ ?αָ ?α or μֵ ?α in the sense of becoming weak, timorous (Deuteronomy 20:3; Jeremiah 51:46; 2 Kings 22:19; Job 33:16); it does not occur again in Isa. Only once he uses the Pual Isaiah 1:6. ζָ ?πָ ?α (according to Isaiah 9:13-14; Isaiah 19:15) “the tail, the end piece.” ΰεּ ?γ (found beside only Amos 4:11; Zechariah 3:2) is the charred stick of wood that may have been used to stir the fire. ςָ ?ωֵׁ ?ο “smoking,” only here in Isaiah, and Exodus 20:18. αηψιΰσεβε, to understand the prefix αְּ to be of time–“while glowing” seems to me unsuitable. ξִ ?ο marks the object of fear. αְּ following rather distributes the common notion “smoking firebrands” to the two so-named, as αְּ often stands after general expressions of number, (especially after λֹּ ?μ).
Comp. Exodus 12:19, “whosoever eateth leaven shall be cut off αַּ ?βֵּ ?ψεּ ?αְ ?ΰֶ ?ζְ ?ψַ ?ηδָ ?ΰָ ? ?ֽ ?ψֶ ?υ.” Genesis 7:21; Genesis 9:2; Genesis 9:10. Comp. Ewald, § 217 sq. The LXX. translates singularly ὅτανγὰρὀργὴτοῦθυμοῦμουγένηται, πάλινἰάσομαι. ΚαὶὁυίὸςτοῦἈρἀμκαὶὁυιὸςτοῦ P̔ομελίου, etc. Gesenius correctly conjectures that the translator instead of ΰτψφιο reads ΰψτΰλο, or rather ΰψτΰεαο.
Isaiah 7:6. δֵ ?χִ ?ιυ is Hiph. from χָ ?υ. The fundamental meaning is: “to experience a shaking, a shock.” From this are derived the meanings a) timere, “trembling, quaking,” (Isaiah 7:16, Exodus 1:12; Numbers 22:3); b) taedere, fastidire. Disgust brings about a shock (comp. “es schόttelt mich”) which, when it is powerful, occasions vomiting (χεֹ ?ΰ) (comp. e.g. Genesis 27:46; Numbers 21:5); c) in the Hiphil: “to wake up;” for waking up is the effect of a shock that the sleeper experiences from without or within. In this sense, however, the Hiphil is evidently a direct causative, since it properly means “to make a shaking, a shaker.” Wherever else this Hiph. δχιυ occurs, except our verse, it means “to awake.” Our verse is therefore the only one where the word occurs as the causative of the notion χָ ?υ = timere (verse 16). Many expositors therefore have hesitated to take the word in this sense.
Thus Fuerst (Concord., p. 988) would give our δֵ ?χִ ?ιυ the meaning incidere, impungere, or abscindere, in that he combines it with χεֹ ?υ “thorn,” or with χַ ?ιִ ?υ tempus abscissionis, “harvest.” Gesenius, (Thes. p. 1208) proposes to read πְ ?φִ ?ιχֶ ?πְָ ?δ coarctemus, urgeamus, (Isaiah 29:2; Isaiah 29:7). However, as this Hiphil is in any case unusual, it seems better to take it in a sense that is suggested by something near at hand, Isaiah 7:16. The feminine suffix here and afterwards in παχςπδ and αϊελδ relates plainly to Judah as land. The meaning of the Hiph. δαχις is not quite clear. The fundamental meaning of the word is: “to split.” It is used of splitting wood (Ecclesiastes 10:9, coll. Genesis 22:3) of eggshells (Isaiah 59:5) of the earth from which springs forth the fountain (Ps. 124:15) of the waters of the Red Sea (Psalms 78:13); it is said that a besieged city is split when it is taken, that is, a breach is made in its walls (2 Kings 25:4; Jeremiah 39:2; Jeremiah 52:7; Ezekiel 26:10).
In the last-named sense it is used 2 Chronicles 32:1, where it is said of Sennacherib: “He encamped against the fenced cities and thought μְ ?αִ ?χְ ?ςָ ?νΰֵ ?μָ ?ιε,” where the constructio praegnans is important to the exposition of our passage. The word however is also used of a land. 2 Chronicles 21:17 we read of the Philistines and Arabians: “they came up into Judah, εַ ?ιִ ?αְ ?χָ ?ςεּ ?δָ, and carried away all the substance,” etc. Beside the present place, the Hiph. occurs only 2 Kings 3:26, where it is used of an intended breaking forth on the part of an enclosed army. According to all this, the use of the word for breaking through, forcing a fortified city, seems to me to settle the meaning. A land is forced, broken through, as well as a city, when the living wall that defends it, the defensive army is broken through. Thus the sense of our passage will be: let us break through it (the land of Judah) i. e., take it by breaking through the protecting army, and thereby take it to ourselves.
There lies in the expression, beside the pregnant construction, at the same time a metonomy.
It is not known who “the son of Tabeal” was. θָ ?α is the Hebrew θεֹ ?λ (comp. θַ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ο 1 Kings 15:18); the ending ΰַ ?μ changed in the pause from ΰֵ ?μ, whereby, perhaps intentionally, arises the meaning “not good” (good for nothing). If the name was of Israelitish origin (comp. θεּ ?αָ ?ιִּ ?δ) then likely that Tabeal or his son was a fugitive of Judea of note. The name is found again Ezra 4:7. On the Assyrian monuments of the time of Tiglath-Pileser is mentioned however an I-ti-bi’-i-lu, or Ti-bi’-i-lu, with the addition “mat A-ru-mu” i. e., from the land of Aram.
Isaiah 7:8 b. The position of these words is surprising. Why do they not stand after Isaiah 7:9 a? And how is the ε at the beginning of Isa 7:8 to be construed? Is it that paratactic Vav, that is determined only by the connection? And what is it that so determines it?
Shall we regard it as causal, which were quite grammatical? (Comp. Genesis 24:50; Deuteronomy 17:16; Psalms 7:10, etc. Ewald’s Gram., § 353 a; Gesen. § 155, 1 c). Or shall we, like Chrysostom and Calvin, with whom Tholuck agrees, take it in the sense of νῦν or. interea? Take one or the other and it is not satisfactory. It seems to me to answer best, to assume that the words are a sample of the oracle-like, lapidary style (Lapidarstils) and thence no grammatically correct construction is to be looked for.
Did the words in question stand after 9 b, whither Lowth has transposed them, then indeed the disposition of the sentence would be more correct, but the construction would be monotonous. ψΰωׁ occurring four times in succession would sound bad. By the interposition of Isa 7:8 b, this evil is avoided. Thus manifoldness is combined with equilibrium. And thus, without ignoring the difficulties, we will still recognize the possibility of the passage being genuine as it is, against which there is grammatically nothing to oppose (comp. Tholuck, Die Propheten und ihre Weissagungen, and Ewald). Examples of the construction εαςεγωׁ ?ωׁ ?ινεΧ Genesis 40:13; Genesis 40:19; Joshua 1:11; 2 Samuel 12:22; Isaiah 21:16; Jeremiah 28:3; Jeremiah 28:11; Amos 4:7. ιֵ ?ηַ ?ϊ is imp.
Kal. from ηָ ?ϊַ ?ϊ fractus est. Isaiah 30:31; Isaiah 31:4; Isaiah 51:6, etc.—ξֵ ?ςַ ?ν = ξִ ?ηְ ?ιεֹ ?ϊςַ ?ν, comp. Isaiah 17:1; Isaiah 23:1; Isaiah 62:10.
Isaiah 7:9. Niph. πֶֽ ?ΰְ ?ξֲ ?ο is firmum, stabilem, perennem esse (Isaiah 22:23; Isaiah 22:25; Isaiah 33:16; Isaiah 49:7; Isaiah 55:3; Isaiah 60:4). λִּ ?ι is pleonastic, but very expressive, and is to be treated as dependent on an ideal verbum dicendi (Numbers 22:29; Numbers 22:33; Psalms 128:4).
AND 1. And it came to pass——with the wind.—
Isaiah 7:1-2. This war expedition of the united Syrians and Ephraimites is mentioned 2 Kings 15:37; 2 Kings 16:5 sq. and 2 Chronicles 28:5 sq. Were one to follow the statement of 2 Kings 15:30, then Pekah did not at all live to see Ahaz. For there it reads: “And Hoshea the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah, and smote him and slew him, and reigned in his stead in the twentieth year of Jotham the son of Uzziah.” If Pekah was killed after Jotham’s death under Ahaz, it must any way read “in the first year of Ahaz.” But according to all other data, Pekah must undoubtedly have lived to see Ahaz. For 2 Kings 15:1 it reads that Ahaz became king in the seventeenth year of Pekah, who, according to 2 Kings 15:27, reigned twenty years. How otherwise could Pekah, according to Isaiah 7:1, wage war against Ahaz?
How could Tiglath-Pileser, according to 2 Kings 15:29, whom Ahaz summoned (2 Kings 16:7), in Pekah’s day, still occupy the region of Ephraim and carry the people away? But the statement of 2 Kings 15:30 b proves itself false in other ways. For, 2 Kings 15:32-33, we read that Jotham became king in the second year of Pekah, and reigned sixteen years. Accordingly Jotham must have died in the eighteenth year of Pekah. Therefore Pekah survived Jotham, and not Jotham Pekah, as 2 Kings 15:30 gives the impression. Hitzig (Gesch. d.
Volkes Isr. I. p. 212) makes the original form of the statement to be: “And he killed him in the twentieth year of his reign, and became king in his stead;” but the following “of Jotham the son of Uzziah,” etc., are the superscription of 2 Kings 15:32 sqq.
However this may be, the statement of 2 Kings 15:30 b is in any case incorrect. Therefore we have here a plain example of the corruption of the text, unless we assume an inexact or erroneous use of original sources.
Pekah not only survived Jotham, but he lived during three years of Ahaz, because, according to 2 Kings 15:27, Pekah reigned twenty years, and in his seventeenth year Ahaz became king. Therefore in these three years must occur the events related in Isaiah 7, 8. Drechsler says correctly, the spoiling of Ephraim, spoken of 2 Kings 15:29, presupposes the conception, birth, and learning to talk of “Hasten-spoil, Quick-prey” (Isaiah 8:3 sqq.); consequently one must say that the attack of Rezin and Pekah must be located in the first half of the three years that the latter lived in common with Ahaz.
Rezin was the last king of independent Syria—for by his overthrow it became an Assyrian province. The founder of the kingdom of Syria of Damascus was Rezin (ψְ ?ζεֹ ?ο), who, having run away from his lord Hadadeser, king of Syria of Zobah, gathered a horde of fighting men, and settled with them in Damascus (1 Kings 11:23 sqq.). From that period we find the Syrian power, hitherto divided into many small kingdoms, concentrated under the king of Damascus. Rezin is followed by Hezion (ηֶ ?ζְ ?ιεֹ ?ο, if he is not identical with ψְ ?ζεֹ ?ο as Ewald,Gesch. d. V. Isr.
III. 151, and Thenius, on 1 Kings 15:19, conjecture); he by his son Tabrimon, who, according to 1 Kings 15:19, appears to have made a league with Abijam the king of Judah, which Benhadad, son and successor of Tabrimon, renewed with king Asa; an un-theocratic proceeding, which, according to 2 Chronicles 16:7, provoked the sharp censure of the prophet Hanani. We have, then, here the example of a league that a king of Judah made with the heathen king of Syria in order to war upon Baasha, king of Israel, to which in addition must be observed the grave fact that Benhadad at the very time was in league with Baasha, and consequently must have been solicited to break an existing alliance.
Thus the league between Pekah and Rezin against Ahaz appears as a retribution for the league that Asa had made with Benhadad against Baasha. That Benhadad, whom we may call Benhadad I., was suceeeded by Benhadad II., of whom we read that he combined thirty-two kings under his supreme command against Israel (1 Kings 20:1 sqq.). Benhadad II. was succeeded by Hazael, who murdered his master (1 Kings 19:15; 2 Kings 8:7 sqq.). Hazael was succeeded by Benhadad III., his son (2 Kings 13:24); finally Rezin succeeded him; his name possibly is identical with that of Rezin, the founder of the dynasty, as Gesenius (Thesaur. p. 1307) and Baihinger (Herzog’sReal-Encyclop. VII. p. 44) conjecture. The sounds ζ and φ, as is well known, being nearly related (ds and ts; comp. φָ ?ςַ ?χִ and φָ ?δַ ?ψ ,ζָ ?ςַ ?χ, and ςָ ?μַ ?υ ,ζָ ?δַ ?ψ and φָ ?ςַ ?ψ ,ςָ ?μַ ?ζ and Aram. ζְ ?ςַ ?ψ, etc.). But if ψְ ?ζεֹ ?ο and ψָ ?ζεֹ ?ο (Proverbs 14:28, where the word is parallel with ξֶ ?μֶ ?κְ) and ψֹ ?ζֵ ?ο (Judges 5:3; Psalms 2:2, gravis, augustus, princeps, stand related in root and meaning, we would then see this kingdom of Damascus also begin and end with an Augustus.
Pekah, son of Remaliah, an otherwise unknown name, was ωָׁ ?μִ ?ιωׁ of the king Pekahiah. Luther translates the word by Ritter = “knight,” but it means properly “chariot warrior,” because three always stood on a chariot (comp. Exodus 14:7; Exodus 15:4). It signifies a follower generally (2 Kings 10:25), as well as particularly a favored follower, on whose hand the king leaned (2 Kings 7:2; 2 Kings 7:17; 2 Kings 7:19). Pekah killed his master after a reign of two years (2 Kings 15:23 sqq.). Like all other rulers of the kingdom of Israel, “he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord,” 2 Kings 15:28. Our passage is explained by the parallel passages, 2 Kings 16:5 sqq. and 2 Chronicles 28:5 sqq.
The words of 2 Kings 16:5 sqq. correspond almost verbatim with Isaiah 7:1. Such difference as there is indicates that the author of 2 Kings meant, not that Jerusalem itself, but only the king, was hard pressed,—meaning, of course, the king as representative of the land. Moreover that the author of 2 Kings drew from Isaiah, and not the reverse, appears to me beyond doubt. For 2 Kings is without doubt a much more recent book than Isaiah. At most, Isaiah could only have used one of the sources used by the writer of 2 Kings. But why need the Prophet look into the archives of the kingdom for a summary notice of an event of his own times, and known to all his contemporaries? Combining then the accounts of 2 Kings and 2 Chron. we obtain the following facts: 1, the hostile incursion of Rezin and Pekah into Judah; 2, a defeat of Ahaz by Rezin (2 Chronicles 28:5); 3, a defeat of Ahaz by Pekah (Isaiah 7:6-15); 4, the taking of Elath by the Syrians (2 Kings 16:6); 5, an expedition of Rezin and Pekah against Jerusalem (Isaiah 7:1), with which also the notice Isaiah 7:2 of the fact that “Syria has settled upon Ephraim” has more or less connection.
The question arises: Is the expedition referred to in our passage identical with that related 2 Kings and 2 Chron.? or if not, did it occur before or after the latter? At the first glance, indeed, one is liable to regard Isaiah 6:1 as a brief, summary notice of all the transactions of that war. But then it is surprising that this notice—with the promises that follow it in close connection—gives the impression that the war progressed in a way wholly favorable for Judah; whereas we know from the parallel passages that Judah suffered severe defeats and prodigious loss. Therefore we cannot take our verse as such a parallel and summary account. But it is impossible also that what our passage recounts preceded the defeats of which we have account in the parallel passage. For then the statements of our passages would equally disagree with the event.
They would announce only good, whereas in reality great misfortunes occurred. We must therefore assume that our passage refers to an expedition that occurred after the events of 2 Kings 16:5 sqq., and 2 Isa 28:5 sqq.; and we must conceive of the matter as follows: Rezin and Pekah operated at first separately, as is expressly indicated, 2 Chronicles 28:5. The former, likely, traversed the East of Judah’s territory and proceeded at once south toward Elath. But Pekah engaged in battle with Ahaz to the north of Jerusalem, with the bad result for Ahaz, related 2 Chronicles 28:5 b sqq. After these preliminary successes, Rezin and Pekah united their armies and marched against Jerusalem itself. This is the expedition of which our passage informs us, and this is the meaning of πηδ Isaiah 7:2.
The expedition, however, did not succeed. For Ahaz had applied to the King of Assyria, and the news that the latter was in motion in response to the request of Ahaz, moved the allied kings to hasten home into their countries. Thus is explained why Isaiah 7:1 speaks only of an intended war against the city of Jerusalem, and why the author of 2 Kings who mistook our passage for a general notice, and used it as such, resorted to the alterations we have noticed (viz., the omission of “against it,” and “they besieged Ahaz, but could not overcome him” 2 Kings 16:5). This is essentially the view of Caspari too (in the Universitδts-Programm όber den syrisch-ephraimitischen Krieg, Christiani, 1849), with which Delitzsch agrees (in his review of the foregoing writing in Reuter’sReport., April, 1851, reprinted in his commentary).
In regard to Isaiah 7:1 b, a double matter is to be noticed: 1. that it does not say “he could not take it, or make a conquest of it” or the like; but he could not make war upon it. That must plainly mean that Rezin and Pekah could not find even time to begin the siege. 2. The clause “he could not,” etc., must be construed as anticipation of the result, which the Prophet, after the well-known Hebrew manner of writing history, joins on to the account of the beginning. What follows then Isaiah 7:2, and after, is thus, as to time, to be thought of as coming between Isaiah 7:1 a and b.To the house of David.Isaiah 7:2. This expression (found again in Isaiah only, Isaiah 7:13; Isaiah 22:22) can, indeed, mean the race of David, (comp. 1 Samuel 20:16; 1 Kings 12:16; 1 Kings 12:20; 1 Kings 12:26, etc.); and Isaiah 7:13 the plural ωִׁ ?ξְ ?ςεּ, “hear ye,” seems really to commend this meaning. But the singular suffix in μְ ?αָ ?αεֹ and ςַ ?ξּ ?εֹ “his heart,” “his people,” proves that the meaning is not just the same.
Therefore it seems to me that “house of David” here means the palace, the royal residence. There was the seat of government, the king’s cabinet; thither was the intelligence brought. It is as when one says: it was told the cabinet of St. James, or the Sublime Porte. Of course the expression involves reference to the living possessor of the government building, and the governing power, the king. Hence the language proceeds with pronouns (suffixes) in the singular.
2. Then said the Lord—the son of Remaliah.Isaiah 7:3-4. The Prophet receives command to go and meet the king, who had gone out, and thus whose return was to be looked for. But he must not go alone, but in company with his son, Shear-jashub. The son is no where else mentioned. The name signifies the chief contents of all prophecy, according to its two aspects.
In the notion ωְׁ ?ΰָ ?ψShear, is indicated the entire fulness of the divine judgments, that the Prophets had to announce: whereas ιָ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?αJashub opens up the glorious prospect of the final deliverance. [The name means a remnant may return.—Tr.] Comp. Isaiah 1:8-9; Isaiah 4:3; Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 10:20 sqq. (especially Isaiah 7:21 where the words ωְׁ ?ΰָ ?ψιָ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?α expressly recur). We have shown in commenting on Jeremiah 3 sqq.; Jeremiah 31:16-22 what an important part the notion ωׁ ?εּ ?α “to return,” plays in Jeremiah’s prophecy. The significance of Shear-jashub’s name, however, makes us notice, too, that the Prophet himself bears a significant name. ιְ ?ωַׁ ?ςְ ?ιָ ?δεּ means “salvation of Jehovah.” And that the proclamation of salvation, comfort is the chief contents of His prophecies Israel has long known, and acknowledged. An old rabbinical saying, quoted by Abarb. reads ατψιΰςιδελμεּ πδξϊΰ comp. Introduction.
Threatening and consolation therefore go to meet Ahaz embodied in the persons of Isaiah and his son, yet so that consolation predominates, as also the words that Isaiah has to speak are for the most part consolatory. Had Israel only been susceptible of this consolation!
The locality where Isaiah was to meet the king is mentioned Isaiah 36:2, and in the same words. There, Rabshakeh, the envoy of Sennacherib, according to that passage, held his interview with the men that Hezekiah sent out to him. It must, therefore, have been an open, roomy spot, suited for conferences. According to the researches of Robinson, against which the results of Krafft, Williams and Hitzig prove not to be tenable, (comp. Arnold in Herzog’sR. Encycl.
XVIII. p. 632 sq.), the upper-pool is identical with the Birket-el Mamilla, which in the west of Jerusalem his in the basin that forms the beginning of the Vale of Hinnom, about 2100 feet from the Jaffa Gate. Moreover this pool is identical with “the old pool” mentioned Isaiah 22:11. Hezekiah, when he saw that Sennacherib was coming (2 Chronicles 32:2 sqq.), stopped up the fountains outside of the city, and conducted the water of the fountain of Gihon and that of the upper-pool in a new conduit between the two walls (Isaiah 22:11 coll.2 Kings 20:20; 2 Chronicles 32:30), in contrast with which it was that the upper-pool was called the older. The fuller’s field, the place where the fullers washed, fulled and dried their stuffs, must have been in the neighborhood of a pool. Now Josephus (Bell. Jud.
V. 4, 2) speaks of a μνῆμαγναφέως, “fuller’s monument,” that must have had its position north of the city. For this reason many (Williams, Krafft, Hitzig) look for the fuller’s field in the neighborhood of the fuller’s monument. But fuller’s field and fuller’s monument need not necessarily be near one another. For the latter does not necessarily concern the place of the fullers as such, but may have been erected on that spot to a fuller or by a fuller for any particular reason unknown to us. And anyway the existence of a pool in ancient times north of Jerusalem cannot be proved. Therefore the fuller’s field lay probably in the neighborhood of the upper-pool west of the city.
Ahaz had probably a similar end in view at the upper pool to Hezehiah’s, according to 2 Chronicles 32:2 sqq. It was to deprive the enemy of all fountains, brooks and pools, and yet preserve them for the use of the city. The end was obtained by covering them over above and conducting them into the city. Perhaps in this respect Ahaz did preparatory work for Hezekiah (comp. Arnold,l. c.). The Prophet warned the king against sinning through unbelieving despondency.
The expression “fear not, neither be fainthearted,” is here and Jeremiah 51:46, borrowed from Deuteronomy 20:3, where it is said to the people how they must conduct themselves when they stand opposed in fight to superior forces of the enemy. The expression occurs only in the three places named. Why Ahaz should not fear is expressed in this, that the enemy that threatened him are compared to quenched firebrands and stumps of torches. Two firebrands are mentioned in the first clause, and yet the idea is distributed over three bearers, Rezin, Syria and the son of Remaliah. We see that the Prophet takes prince and people as one; and here he names the two halves of the whole, as instantly afterwards Isaiah 7:5, Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, bat the second time he does not mention Rezin at all, but only opposes Syria to Ephraim and its king. There appears to me to lie in this an expression of contempt for Rezin, who first is named in connection with his nation and the second time, not at all, so that he plainly appears as a secondary person.
On the other hand contempt was expressed for Pekah by calling him only the son of Remaliah. But what is the son of Remaliah, a man utterly unknown, opposed to the son of David!
3. Because Syria—shall not be established.Isaiah 7:5-9. The conclusion of the premise “because Syria, etc., have taken evil counsel,” etc., begins Isaiah 7:7, “thus saith the Lord.” The evil counsel is set forth Isaiah 7:6. “It shall not come to pass,” says literally, what is expressed figuratively by μִ ?ΰϊχεν = it shall not stand. For there underlies the latter expression the figure of a prostrate body that attains to standing, therefore gets to its feet and to life. Comp. Isaiah 14:24; Isaiah 28:18; Isaiah 46:10; Proverbs 19:21.
Had this promise been given at the first beginning of the Syro-Ephraimite war, it would have found no complete, corresponding fulfilment. For, as shown above, the counsel did not remain quite unaccomplished. Precisely the δַ ?λְ ?χִ ?ςַ (Isaiah 7:6), “the forcing a breach,” succeeded, according to 2 Chronicles 28:5. Hence we must, in accordance too with πָ ?ηָ ?δ Isaiah 7:2, assume, that Isaiah addressed this prophecy to Ahaz after the beginning of the second act of that war.
For the head of Syria,etc.Isaiah 7:8. These words are very difficult. Especially has the second clause of Isa 7:8, given great offense both by its contents and by its position. Many expositors therefore attempt, either to alter the text, or to reject the words ελςεγ to ξςν as a gloss. These, in some instances very ingenious, attempts may be found recapitulated in Gesenius. The Prophet had said, Isaiah 7:6, that Syria and Ephraim had the purpose of making the son of Tabeal king in Judah.
That shall not come to pass, says Isaiah 7:7. This assertion is established by the double statement Isaiah 7:8-9. The latter consist of two members each, of which the first corresponds to the third, and the second to the fourth. The first and third member are constructed in pyramidal form: Syria, Damascus, Rezin,—Ephraim, Samaria, Pekah. But the third member is quite conformed to the first in reference to what is affirmed of the subjects. Thus it says: the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin.
And likewise; the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Pekah. Saying that Damascus had dominion over Syria and Rezin over Damascus, accurately designates the limits of the power of Rezin and Damascus. They may command within these limits and no more. Therefore they have not the power to set a king over Judah according to their pleasure. Moreover, if Damascus is head of Syria and Rezin the head of Damascus, the question arises, too: what sort of a head is it? Is it a strong, mighty head to which no other is equal, that is therefore safe in its sphere of power, and unassailable in it?
This question must be negatived. For how can it be said of Damascus, the great, beautiful, and rich city, but still the profane and heathen city, that she enjoys the privilege of being unassailable; that she is able under all circumstances to protect and maintain her dominion? And what of Rezin? Is he an elect? Can his name give a guaranty of the permanence of the region he rules? Not at all.
Quite otherwise is it in Judah, where Jerusalem, the city of God, stands opposed to the city of Damascus, and the theocratic king of David’s line to the profane, heathen ruler. Behind Jerusalem and the house of David, stands the Lord as the true head in chief of Israel. What is then the head of Syria, and Damascus compared with the head of Judah and Jerusalem? Thus is explained why Judah has nothing to fear from Rezin and Syria. But of Ephraim Isaiah 7:9, the same thing is affirmed. Plainly the Prophet would intimate that Pekah and Samaria, too, have only a sphere of power limited to Ephraim, and that Samaria is not to be brought into comparison with Jerusalem, nor the son of Remaliah with the son of David, that consequently, Ephraim is essentially the same as the heathen nation Syria, and just as little to be dreaded by Judah.
Thus the meaning of Isa 7:8 a, and 9a, as also their relation to one another is perfectly clear. But what of the two other members Isaiah 7:8 b, 9b? If we had only to do with 9b, it would be an easy affair; for it contains a very appropriate conclusion to 8a, 9a. It is, if I may so speak, double-edged. Judah is not to appropriate unconditionally the comfort of the promise given to it. Only if it believes and obeys its Lord, need it have nothing to fear from Syria and Ephraim.
But if it does not believe in the Lord, it shall itself fall to pieces as the others. It cannot be said that anything essential would be wanting if Isaiah 7:8 b were not there. Neither can it be said, that in that case an essential member would be abstracted from the outward structure. For 8a and 9a correspond; but 9b is the one conclusion that corresponds to both these members in common. Only if 9b, were wanting, would there be an essential member missing. For then it would appear strange that 9a, should have no conclusion like 8a, and an appropriate termination to the whole address would be wanting.
But even if 8b appear unnecessary in the context, that is not saying that it is generally out of place. Many have affirmed this, because it contradicts Isaiah 7:16, because it does not suit the cheering character of the address, and because the Prophets anyway never have such exact figures. As regards the relation to Isaiah 7:16, it was long ago pointed out that to the desertion of the land, that was the consequence of the Syro-Ephraimite war (2 Kings 15:29), in fact to the deportation by Salmanassar, not sixty-five years, but a much less number of years elapsed. Hence, after the example of Piscator, Jacob Cappellus and others, Usher (Ann. V. T., at the year 3,327) proposed to take as the concluding point of the sixty-five years, the planting of Assyrian subjects in the deserted region of Ephraim (2 Kings 17:24) which, according to Ezra 4:2, took place under Esar-haddon.
This fact, which indeed may be regarded as the sealing of the doom of Ephraim in regard to its existence as a state, must coincide with the time of Manasseh, and can with the carrying away this king, which according to the assumption of the Jewish chronology in Seder Olam. p. 67, took place in the twenty-second year of his reign. This would of course bring out the sixty-five years.
14 years of Ahaz.
29 years of Hezekiah.
22 years of Manasseh.
65 years.
This reckoning, indeed, rests on no sure data, but it is still possible, and we can meanwhile quiet ourselves and say: if the Prophet meant the sixty-five years so, there exists no contradiction of Isa 7:16, and ϊςζα, shall be forsaken, is not to be taken in an absolute sense. And the comfort that Ahaz was to find in the ruin of Ephraim that was to happen only after sixty-five years, was this, that he could say: a city devoted to remediless ruin, even though not in a very short time, is not to be feared. But as for the exact data of figures, Tholuck (D. Proph. u. ihre Weiss., 1861, p. 116 sqq.), has proved the existence of such in the Old Testament (Isaiah 16:14; Isaiah 20:3; Isaiah 21:16; Isaiah 38:5; comp. Ezekiel 4:5 sqq.; etc.). Whatever may be thought of the reason of the matter, the fact itself cannot be denied; and I do not comprehend how Diestel (in Knobel’sKomm. 4 Aufl. p. 66) can contend against this reality, on which everything here depends.
In order that Judah may partake of the blessing of this promise, it must itself fulfil a condition; the condition especially on which depends the blessed fulfilment of all promises: it must believe. If it believes not, which, alas, was the actual case, then it will not continue to exist itself.
[J. A. Alexander on Isaiah 7:4. The comparison of Rezin and Pekah to the tails or ends of firebrands, instead of firebrands themselves, is not a mere expression of contempt, nor a mere intimation of their approaching late, as Barnes and Henderson explain it, but a distinct allusion to the evil which they had already done, and which should never be repeated. If the emphasis were only on the use of the word tails, the tail of anything else would have been qually appropriate. The smoking remnant of a firebrand implies a previous flame, if not a conflagration. This confirms the conclusion before drawn, that Judah had already been ravaged.
Pekah being termed simply the son of Remaliah, is supposed by some to be intended to express contempt for him, though the difference may after all, be accidental, or have only a rhythmical design. The patronymic, like our English surname, can be used contemptuously only when it indicates ignoble origin, in which sense it may be applied to Pekah, who was a usurper
On Isaiah 7:5. The suppression of Pekah’s proper name in this clause, and of Rezin’s altogether in the first, has given rise to various far-fetched explanations, though it seems in fact, to show that the use of names in the whole passage is rather euphonic or rhythmical than significant.
On Isaiah 7:9. Another rendering equally natural to that of Luther (viz.: if ye believe not, then ye abide not) is; “if ye do not believe (it is) because ye are not to be established.”]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
Footnotes:Heb. resteth on Ephraim.
That is, The remnant shall return.
Or, causeway.
Heb. let not thy heart be tender.
Before these two smoking torch-ends.
devised evil.
Or, waken.
shake it.
the Lord Jehovah.
Heb. from a people.
Or, Do ye not believe? it is because ye are not stable.
If ye believe not, then ye continue not.
b) Isaiah in the bosom of the royal family giving a sign by announcing the Virgin’s Son ImmanuelIsa_7:10-2510 Moreover the Lord spake again unto Ahaz, saying,
11 Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God;
Ask it either in the depth, or in the height above.
12 But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the Lord; 13And he said,
Hear ye now, O house of David;
Is it a small thing for you to weary men,
But will ye weary my God also?
14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign;
Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,
And shall call his name Immanuel.
15 Butter and honey shall he eat,
That he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
16 For before the child shall know
To refuse the evil, and choose the good,
The land that thou abhorrest
Shall be forsaken of both her kings.17 The Lord shall bring upon thee,
And upon thy people, and upon thy father’s house,
Days that have not come,
From the day that Ephraim departed from Judah;
Even the king of Assyria.
18 And it shall come to pass in that day,
That the Lord shall hiss
For the fly that is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt,
And for the bee that is in the land of Assyria.
19 And they shall come, and shall rest all of them
In the desolate valleys, and in the holes of the rocks,
And upon all thorns, and upon all bushes.
20 In the same day shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired,
Namely, by them beyond the river, by the king of Assyria,
The head, and the hair of the feet:
And it shall also consume the beard.
21 And it shall come to pass in that day,
That a man shall nourish a young cow, and two sheep;
22 And it shall come to pass,
For the abundance of milk that they shall give he shall eat butter:
For butter and honey shall every one eat
That is left in the land.
23 And it shall come to pass in that day,
That every place shall be,
Where then were a thousand vines at a thousand silverlings,
It shall even be for briers and thorns.
24 With arrows and with bows shall men come thither;
Because all the land shall become briars and thorns.
25 And on all hills that shall be digged with the mattock,
Then shall not come thither the fear of briers and thorns:
But it shall be for the sending forth of oxen,
And for the treading of lesser cattle.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 7:10. εַ ?ιεֹ ?ρֶ ?σεΧ occurs again in Isaiah only Isaiah 8:5.
On Isaiah 7:11. The words δςξχεπεΧ admit of several explanations. But that must be excluded at once which reading ωְׁ ?ΰָ ?μָֽ ?δ (with the tone on the ultima) takes the word as substantive. For “request” is ωְׁ ?ΰֵ ?μָ ?δ, and there is no reason for assuming that the Masorets punctuated falsely. The explanation is very old that takes ωְׁ ?ΰָֽ ?μָ ?δ as a pausal form for ωְׁ ?ΰμָ ?δ (Genesis 37:35; Genesis 42:38; Genesis 44:29; Genesis 44:31; Numbers 16:30; Numbers 16:33; Ezekiel 31:15 sqq.). The LXX.
Vulg., Pesch., Arab, have it, and it commends itself in point of sense very much. For when it says. “Descending deep into hell, or mounting up to the height,” both members correspond admirably both in respect to sense and to sound. But this construction is dubious. For the examples cited by Ewald § 93, a, 3, rest all of them on this, that an existing or possible form with a may be chosen in pause for the form with o in accordance with the law of variation. For there is no such thing as an o changed into a in pause. We must therefore take ωְׁ ?ΰָֽ ?μָ ?δ as imperative (comp. ψְ ?πָֽ ?ζָ ?δ Isaiah 32:11; ωְׁ ?ξָֽ ?ςָ ?δְ ρְ ?μָֽ ?ηδ Daniel 9:19; ρְ ?ςָֽ ?γָ ?δ 1 Kings 13:7.
Then δַֽ ?ςֲ ?ξֵ ?χ (Isaiah 29:15; Isaiah 30:33; Isaiah 31:6) δַ ?πְ ?λֵּ ?δּ (Psalms 113:5) are inffabs. with a gerund sense: “going deep ask or mounting up high.”
On Isaiah 7:12. εμΰΞΰπρδ a paratactic construction.
On Isaiah 7:13. The construction δξςθξλν means originally “is it from you out (from your point of view) a little?” The λִּ ?ι has a causal sense: because ye insult my God. One sees that to insult men is a small matter, an unsatisfying indulgence to your haughtiness. Comp. Numbers 16:9; Job 15:11; Ezekiel 34:18.
On Isaiah 7:14. Regarding ςַ ?μְ ?ξָ ?δ it may be considered settled that directly and properly it can never signify a married woman. It may, perchance, be used of a young married woman, whose youth or youthful looks one would especially emphasize, like Ruth (Isaiah 2:5-6) as a young wife is called πַֽ ?ςֲ ?ψָ ?δ. But in point of fact no such form of expression occurs in the Old Testament. On the other hand a virgin, as such, (as virgo illibata) is never called ςμξδ. For the proper term for virgin is αּ ?ϊְ ?εּ ?μδָ (Genesis 24:16; Leviticus 21:3; Leviticus 21:13-14; Deuteronomy 22:14; Deuteronomy 22:19-20; Judges 19:24; 2 Samuel 13:2; 2 Samuel 13:18) and virginity is αְּ ?ϊεּ ?μִ ?ιν (Deuteronomy 22:15; Deuteronomy 22:17; Judges 11:37 sq.; Ezekiel 23:3; Ezekiel 23:8). ςַ ?μְ ?ξָ ?δ is fem. of ςֶ ?μֶ ?ν (1 Samuel 17:56; 1 Samuel 20:22) and has nothing to do with ςָ ?μַ ?ν “to conceal.” ςֶ ?μֶ ?ν, however, is from a root ςָ ?μַ ?ν, kindred to ςεּ ?μ (trans. sugere, potare, intr. redundare, succulentum, vegetum esse).
The latter ςָ ?μַ ?ν occurs in Hebrew only in the words ςֲ ?μֻ ?ξִ ?ιν ,ςַ ?μְ ?ξָ ?δ , ςֶ ?μֶ ?ν (�tas juvenilis of women Isaiah 54:4, of men Psalms 89:46; Job 20:11; Job 33:25) more common in the dialects, where it has the meaning of “becoming fat, thick, strong, mature, manly.” ςμξδ occurs (not to count the musical term ςֲ ?μָ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ Psalms 46:1; 1 Chronicles 15:20) six times: Genesis 24:43; Exodus 2:8; Proverbs 30:19; Psalms 68:26; Son 1:3; Son 6:8. In none of these passages can it be proved to have the sense of virgo illibata or conjux. Especially from Song of Sol. it appears that the third class of the occupants of Solomon’s harem comprised the ςֲ ?μָ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ. Was virginity characteristic of them? Proverbs 30:19 is difficult. According to all the foregoing it seems to me certain that every αְּ ?ϊεֹּ ?μָ ?δ is indeed a ςַ ?μְ ?ξָ ?δ, but not every ςַ ?μְ ?ξָ ?δ a αְּ ?ϊεּ ?μָ ?δ.
As ςֲ ?μεּ ?ξִ ?ιν is the time of youth generally, and may be used of men as well as of women, (αִּ ?ϊεּ ?μִ ?ιν could not be said of men) then ςμξδ is the young woman, still fresh, young and unmarried, without regard to whether still a virgin in the exact sense.—δπδδςΧδψδ, that these words may be read: “behold, the virgin is pregnant,” is owned by every one. The expression occurs twice beside. Genesis 16:11 the angel says to Hagar, who was already pregnant: δπָּ ?κְ δָ ?ψָ ?δεְ ?ιֹ ?μַ ?γְ ?ϊְּ αֵּ ?οεְ ?χָ ?ψָ ?ΰϊωְׁ ?ξεֹ ιִ ?ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ςֵ ?ΰμ. This passage has, moreover, so much resemblance to ours that we must suppose that it was in the Prophet’s mind. Judges 13:5; Judges 13:7, it is at least very probable, considering Isaiah 7:12, that the wife of Manoah was already pregnant. The form χָ ?ψָ ?ΰϊ in the original passage, Genesis 16:16, Isaiah 2 pers. fem.
In our passage it may also be 3 pers. fem. For this form is still to be found Genesis 33:11; Exodus 5:16 (?); Leviticus 25:21; Leviticus 26:34; Deuteronomy 31:29; Jeremiah 13:19; Jeremiah 44:23; 2 Kings 9:37 (K’thib); Psalms 118:23. It is seen that the form occurs most frequently in the Pentateuch, while Jeremiah 44:23 is a verbatim quotation from Deuteronomy 31:29; and 2 Kings 9:37, there exists likely an error of the pen, thus leaving only two instances not in the Pentateuch beside our verse. The form occurs nowhere else in Isaiah.
On Isaiah 7:15. That μγςϊε is not: “until his knowing,” appears from this, that, the Prophet would in that case say that from his birth on to the years of discretion the boy would be nourished with butter and honey, and then no longer. Thereby, too, the prospect of a brief period of desolation for the land would be held out, which plainly is not the meaning of the Prophet. For Isaiah had in mind the periods of exile, both the Assyrian and the Babylonian, and neither comprises in itself and in the Prophet’s representation so short a period. That the latter is so is seen in the way he expresses himself (Isaiah 7:17 sq.) on the occasion and extent of the desolation. Therefore μγςϊε means: “to the time of his knowing; or about the time.” Comp. μָ ?ΰεֹ ?ψ ,μָ ?αֹּ ?χֶ ?ψμְ ?ςֵ ?ϊςֶ ?ψֶ ?α ,ְ ?μָ ?ςֶ ?ψֶ ?α, Psalms 30:6 : Job 24:14; Genesis 3:8; Genesis 8:14; Genesis 49:27, etc.—δξΰδ is “thick milk,” lac spissum, (comp. Genesis 18:8; Judges 5:25; Proverbs 30:33).
On Isaiah 7:16. That the Prophet says δΰγξδ and not δΰγυ, has for its reason doubtless that he would designate Syria and the territory of the Ten Tribes by one word. But the two together did not constitute an ΰψυ, but a land complex in a physical sense.—On χָ ?υ comp. at Isaiah 7:6.
On Isaiah 7:17. The form of expression ΰωׁ ?ψμΰαΰε is like Exodus 10:6; Exodus 34:10; Daniel 9:12. The construction μξιενεπε is like Jeremiah 7:7; Jeremiah 7:25; Jeremiah 25:11. All that follows depends as one notion on the distributive μְ. Without μְ Exodus 10:6.
On Isaiah 7:18. εδιδαιενδδεΰ, this formula occurs Isaiah 7:21; Isaiah 7:23; Isaiah 10:20; Isaiah 10:27; Isaiah 11:10; Isaiah 11:1; Isaiah 17:4; Isaiah 22:20; Isaiah 23:15; Isaiah 24:21; Isaiah 27:13, and not again. In this formula ιεν does not designate only a day in the ordinary sense, but, according to circumstances, an undetermined period, like we use the word “period.”—ζαεα only here in Isaiah.—ιְ ?ΰֹ ?ψ is an Egyptian word (comp. on Isaiah 19:6) which, however, has become naturalized in Hebrew. It is partly appellative, and as such means “ditches” (Exodus 8:1; Isaiah 33:21) and rivers (Nahum 3:8; Daniel 12:5); partly a proper name, and as such means the Nile (Isaiah 19:7-8; Isaiah 23:10). The ιΰψιξςψιν (comp. Isaiah 19:6; Isaiah 37:25; 2 Kings 19:24) are the canals of the Nile (Exodus 8:1).
On Isaiah 7:19. αּ ?ϊּ ?εֹ ?ϊ is ἅπ. λεγ. If it is kindred to αָּ ?ϊδ (Isaiah 5:6) which is most probable, it means abscissum praeruptum, the steep side of a wady.—πָ ?χִ ?ιχ (found beside only Jeremiah 13:4; Jeremiah 16:16) is, as appears plain from Jeremiah 13:4, “the cleft.”—πַֽ ?ςֲ ?φεּ ?υ (again only Isaiah 55:13) is “the thornbush; πַֽ ?δֲ ?μֹ ?μ (from πֵ ?δַ ?μ Exodus 15:13; Isaiah 40:11; Isaiah 49:10; Isaiah 51:18, “to lead to pasture”) pascuum, the pasture, grazing ground.
On Isaiah 7:20. πִּ ?μַּ ?η and ϊςψ only here in Isaiah. ωׂ ?λιψδ subs. abstractum (conductio), but may be also fem. of ωָׂ ?λִ ?ιψ (conductus, “hired”) occurs nowhere else. This razor is to be had πδψ ּ ?αςαψιπδψ without article, like Micah 7:12, and Jeremiah 2:18 (which passage, more over, looks back to ours), is the Euphrates. The ςαψι are the two sides of the Euphrates; for ςֶ ?αֶ ?ψ alone may mean the territory on the hither side as well as the further side (comp. Joshua 24:2-3; Joshua 24:14-15; 2 Samuel 10:16; 1 Chronicles 19:16, with 2 Kings 5:4; Ezra 8:36; Nehemiah 2:7; Nehemiah 2:9; Nehemiah 3:7), and ςַ ?αָ ?ψִ ?ιν are the sides generally: Exodus 32:15; 1 Kings 5:4; Jer. 58:28; 49:32.—ωׁ ?ςψψπμιν is euphemistic, like Deuteronomy 28:57; Isaiah 36:12 K’ri. Comp. Judges 3:24; 1 Samuel 24:4. ϊρλּ ?δ proves that the Prophet uses ϊςψ as fem., which usually is masc.
Thereby the adjective construction of ωׁ ?λιψδ is confirmed as the correct one. Regarding the usus loquendi, comp. Isaiah 13:15; Isaiah 29:1; Isaiah 30:1.
On Isaiah 7:21. ωׁ ?ϊιφΰο, because female sheep, yielding milk are meant. He does not kill them, but lets them live, raises them. ηιδ is “to make live.” This does not occur only when something dead, or non-existent, is called into life: but also when something living, but on the point of dying, is let live; therefore “preserves alive.” Comp. Isaiah 38:1; Genesis 7:3; 2 Samuel 12:3; 1 Kings 18:5, etc.On Isaiah 7:23. On ωׁ ?ξιψεωׁ ?ιϊ see on Isaiah 5:6.
On Isaiah 7:25. Both the verb πֶ ?ςְ ?γַּ ?ψ and the substantive ξַ ?ςְ ?γִּ ?ψ occur only in Isaiah, viz., here and Isaiah 5:6.—ξִ ?ωְׁ ?μָ ?η is a place where cattle are allowed to roam free (comp. Isaiah 32:20). The expression belongs to Deuteronomy, where only, except here, it is found; Deut. 12:7; 15:10; 13:21; 28:8, 20.—ξִ ?ψְ ?ξָ ?ρ see on Isaiah 5:5.
AND 1. Moreover the Lord—tempt the Lord, Isaiah 7:10-12. When Isaiah says: “Moreover the Lord spake,” he puts himself quite in the background. He gives prominence only to the proper author of the address, as Isaiah 7:3, he reports only the words of Jehovah to himself, and passes over the performance that was his, a man’s work, as a matter of course. Though Ahaz was a backslider, the divine love on its part does not let him go. The Lord says still to him: I am thy God.
De jure. He is so, though de facto so no longer. Because Jehovah still loves Ahaz, He seeks to reclaim him, coming to him half way, and holding out His hand in order to make return as easy for him as possible. That is, the Lord demands no unconditional faith from Ahaz, but He permits him to attach his faith to any condition that he will. If Jehovah fulfils the condition, then that is security, or the sign, that Jehovah deserves to be believed, that He is therefore the God He gives Himself out to be.
There is no other instance of submitting to a man’s choice what the sign shall be. It may be fearlessly said that for Isaiah to propose to Ahaz the choice of a miraculous sign is itself a sign. It is a pledge that he serves the true, living, and almighty God; that therefore there is such a God, who not only can do miracles, but who, under circumstances, will do them. Had Isaiah offered Ahaz this choice without possessing the power to perform what he promised, he would have been either a deceiver or a crazed enthusiast. In the name of science, rationalistic expositors may be challenged to prove that Isaiah was a deceiver or an enthusiast. In any case the Prophet leaves it to Ahaz, from what part of the universe he will have a miracle.
The reply of Ahaz is hypocritical. He acts as if he still believed in Jehovah, and as if he declined the proposal only through fear, lest he should have the appearance of tempting God (Deuteronomy 5:16). But he had already his own plans. He had already resolved to oppose to the gods and kings of Syria and Ephraim, not Jehovah, the God of Judah, but the gods and the king of Assyria.
[Isaiah 7:11. “Ask it in the depth,” etc. There may be an historical relation between this expression and Deuteronomy 30:11-14, and John 4:11-13, and Romans 10:6-8, and comp. Psalms 139:6-10, that makes them useful for mutual interpretation. Τὴνἃβυσσν, Romans 10:7, seems to show that Paul combines the language of Deuteronomy and Isaiah, and also to favor the LXX. and Vulg. in reading our passage as if ωְׁ ?ΰֹ ?μָ ?δ were meant.—Tr.].
2. And he said—Immanuel, Isaiah 7:13-14. It seems to me that this form of address, joined to the “moreover the Lord spake,” Isaiah 7:10, intimates that the Prophet spoke these words, not on the spot mentioned Isaiah 7:3, but in the house of David, i. e., in the royal palace, and before the royal family, and that the contents of his address concerned very nearly the house of David as a family, (not merely as representative of the government). δμΰδ, to weary,” corresponds exactly to the French ennuyer, which means primarily the discomfort one experiences from anything that lasts too long, and then any sort of discomfort. Without doubt Ahaz had often enough made trial of human patience. But “to weary men” seems to point to the fact that in Ahaz’s refusal lay an insult to the Prophet. For this refusal might be regarded as indirectly repelling an insane presumption on the part of Isaiah.
Still, doubtless, the insult to his God is the chief matter to the Prophet. Notice that by “my God” here, he in a measure retracts the “thy God” of Isaiah 7:10. By this one word he lets Ahaz know that by his unbelief he has excluded himself from a part in the Lord. Full of this displeasure, the Prophet declares to the house of David: Because ye will have no sign, one shall be given to you. The sign must therefore be one that Ahaz could observe, and every meaning that ignores this, must from the outstart be regarded as mistaken. It is further clear that the sign which Ahaz must accept against his will must be of a character unpleasant to him.
The whole connection shows this clearly. The unbelief, the desertion, the hypocrisy of Ahaz must be punished. Had he accepted the offer of the Lord, he might at will have chosen a sign from any sphere. But because he insolently declined the offer, he must put up with a sign that will appear in a very delicate quarter, and consist in a fact very unpleasant for him. Consider in addition that the Prophet, as we learned above, spoke these words in the royal palace, and before the royal family, and we obtain an important threefold canon for the exposition of the passage: the sign must have been for Ahaz, 1) recognized; 2) unpleasant, punishing; 3) of concern to his whole family.
Behold the virgin,etc.—“Behold” has great emphasis. “It stands here as if the Prophet raised his hand, signed to all the world that they should be still and give heed to this the chiefest miracle of which he would now preach.” (Foerster).—On δςμξδ see Text. and Gr. Who is “the virgin” here? To whom does the definite article point? We must at the outset exclude all those exposisions according to which the Alma = “virgin” is a purely ideal person, whether belonging to the present or the future. What sort of a sign for Ahaz could it be, if the Prophet in spirit saw in the remote future a virgin that bore the Messiah; even if, by means of an ideal anticipation, the wonderful child, which formed, as it were, the soul of the people’s life, is construed as representative of the contemporaries of Ahaz (Hengstenberg)? It is no better when, by a figurative construction the Alma is made to mean Israel, out of which a people of salvation shall arise, which, after it has endured the consequences of the present ignorance, shall know to prefer the good to the bad (v.
Hofmann). It is the same with the explanation of W. SchultzProf, in Breslau, Stud. and Krit., 1861, Heft. IV.) who by comprehending under the Alma or virgin the Messiah and His mother, and all their typical forerunners, understands by this person “the quiet ones of the land, who needed not the king nor his co-operation.” The canon we have set up as imperative, is equally violated by Kueper (Die Proph. d. A. B. όbersichtle dargestellt, Leipzig, 1870, p. 216): he admits that Alma does not necessarily mean a pure virgin, yet he lays especial emphasis on the virginity of the mother, because it may be inferred from the name Immanuel, which proves the piety of the mother; and he sees precisely in this virginity the threat against Ahaz, because it follows that Immanuel is to be born without co-operation of a man of the race of David.
For it is impossible that Ahaz could infer this virginity thus from the words of the Prophet. Beside, there is nothing threatening in the promise that the Messiah shall be born as the Son of God in the sense of Luk 1:35, without co-operation of a man, of the race of David; it is rather the highest honor. The latest attempt at exposition, too, by Ed. Engelhardt (Zeitschr. f. Luth. Theol. and K. 1872 Heft.
IV.), does not satisfy. “The house of David cannot be destroyed before the promised deliver comes forth from it. The mother is therefore, yet to appear that bears Him, and this mother, determined by the word of the Prophecy, it is that the Prophet means here “(l. c. page 627).” How is it to be proved that δςμξδ was a standing expression for the mother of the Messiah? What, moreover, was there punitive in this? What in the text says that the house of David would be destroyed after the birth of the Messiah’s mother? Moreover, how is this conceivable? To express what Engelhardt fancies is the meaning of the Prophet, the words must read: the Alma has not yet borne.
What sort of a sign, would that be?
Others adopt an ideal construction in the sense that they regard the birth of a son from the Alma, at the time indicated, as an idea, a possibility, without reference to its realization (“were a virgin to conceive this instant a boy as an emblem of his native land, the mother would name her babe like the land at that time must say: God was with us,” Eichhorn, comp. J. D. Michaelis, Paulus, Staehelin,etc.). The arbitrariness of this exposition is manifest; the Prophet does not speak hypothetically, but quite categorically. This sign, too, would be neither observable, nor threatening.
Others find the key to the exposition (Rosenmueller, Ewald, Bertheau), in the supposition that Isaiah saw the Messiah Himself in the child to be born, and that consequently we have before us, an erroneous hope and an unfulfilled Prophecy. But it is incredible that the Prophet, accompanied as he was by his son Shearjashub, could have expected in so short a period the fulfilment of the Prophecy contained in his name. The people must first become a remnant. Comp., the Prophet’s inquiry Isaiah 6:10 and the reply Isaiah 7:11. If the Alma does call her son Immanuel, he is not necessarily therefore really Immanuel. It may mean only that he signifies the Immanuel.
And so, too, Isaiah 8:8, the land of Immanuel is not the land of the present, but of the future Immanuel, who only is the true Lord and Master of the land. In Isaiah 8:10 where ςִ ?ξָּ ?πεּ ΰֵ ?μ is written separately as two words, can at most only a play on the name Immanuel be recognized. Moreover if Isaiah saw in the boy Immanuel the Messiah himself, then must certainly his mother be the legitimate wife of a member of the family of David. But it is incredible that ςַ ?μְ ?ξָ ?δ alone without any qualification, can mean married women.
The ancient Jewish explanation, according to which the Alma was the mother of Hezekiah, that Abi. daughter of Zachariah (2 Kings 18:2), was shown by Jerome even to be impossible, inasmuch as Hezekiah at the time Isaiah spoke these words was already 12 years old. The later Jewish explanation ranks among its supporters Faustus Socinus, Joh. Crellius, (Socinian), Grotius, (who in his Dever. religionis Christ. still presented the orthodox view, but afterwards went over to Crellius’ views), Joh. Ludwig Von Wolzogen (Socinian), John Ernst. Faber (in the Anm. zu Harmar’s Beobachtungen όber den Orient, etc., I. S. 281), [Put Dr.
Barnes here: only that he includes a reference to Messiah, according to Matthew 1:22.—Tr.] Gesenius, Hitzig, Heudewerk, Knobel,etc. According to this view the Alma is the wife of the Prophet himself, either the mother of Shear-jashub, or a younger one, at that time only betrothed to him. But this is wrecked on the impossibility of referring δςμξδ to the wife or the betrothed of the Prophet without any nearer designation and without the faintest hint of her being present. Beside, how should the family of the Prophet happen to have the Immanuel born in it? Were the promises to David to be transferred to Isaiah? Kimchi and Abarbanel modify this view by saying that by the Alma must be understood the wife of Ahaz.
But then, instead of something bad, the Prophet would rather have announced something joyful. Others again understand by the Alma any virgin, not more particularly specified, that was present at the place of interview, and to whom the Prophet pointed with the finger.
For my part I believe, that in expounding our passage, it is an exegete’s duty to leave out of view at first Matthew 1:23. We have only to ask: What, according to the words and context, did Isaiah in that moment wish to say, and actually say? How far his word spoken then was a prophecy, and with what justice Matthew 1:18 regards the fact recounted there as the fulfilment of this prophecy will appear from inquiry that must be made afterwards. Bearing in mind then the canon proposed above, and we obtain the meaning: Behold the (i. e. this) virgin (i. e. this yet unmarried daughter of the royal house) is pregnant, etc. After the indignant words of the Prophet, Isaiah 7:14 a, that roll up like dark clouds, we must look for a sign that strikes the house of David like thunder and lightning. Doubtless Ahaz was not the only guilty person.
While Joshua (Joshua 24:15) had said: “I and my house will serve the Lord,” Ahaz had said the contrary. If not, why did the Prophet, instead of addressing himself to the king with such emphasis, address the whole house? And did what was said Isaiah 3:16 sq. about the luxury of the daughters of Zion have no application to the women in the household of Ahaz? Therefore the whole house must with terror endure the shame of one of the princesses who was present being pointed out as pregnant. That is the bold manner of the prophets of Jehovah—a manner that is no respecter of persons—the “sackcloth roughness” of men that know that they have Almighty God for their support. Thus, for example, Jeremiah said to king Jehoiakim that he should be buried with the burial of an ass, drawn and cast forth beyond the gates of Jerusalem, Jeremiah 22:19.
As regards the sense, it remains essentially the game whether χψϊΰ is translated “thou wilt call” or “she will call.” For in any case the word is spoken in presence of the Alma. She herself takes note of what the Prophet announces in regard to the name to be given. Whether she is spoken to or spoken of, remains immaterial. If God, with no expression of disapproval, says “she will call him Immanuel,” is not that as much as to say: “she shall so call him?” She would hardly have thought of that name herself. It was not a usual name. It is found only here in the Old Testament.
It was a beautiful name, rich in consolation. The Lord would have spoken quite differently if the name had given Him displeasure. That such was not the case, we see from Isaiah 8:8; Isaiah 8:10 very decidedly. If often occurs in Scripture that mothers give names to their children: Genesis 4:25; Genesis 19:37 sq.; Genesis 29:32; Genesis 30:6; Genesis 30:8; Genesis 30:11; Genesis 30:13; Genesis 30:18; Genesis 30:20; Genesis 30:24; Genesis 35:18; 1 Samuel 1:20. Often the name is determined by divine command: Genesis 16:11; Genesis 17:19; Hosea 1:4; Hosea 1:6; Hosea 1:9; 1 Chronicles 22:9; Matthew 1:21. Here, now, grave doubts arise.
Is it conceivable that God has made a fallen woman the type of the θεοτόκος, and an illegitimate child the type of the Son of God become man? The objections to our view, founded on the piety of the Alma (see above), disappear when we refer back the giving of the name to the announcement of the divine will. For if the Alma does not name the child Immanuel self-prompted, she gives no proof of fearing God and faith in God. She did only what she could not have omitted to do without defying the divine will. But how is it conceivable that God should make such a child the bearer and symbol of His holy purpose of salvation, a child to which clung the reproach of illegitimate birth, that was therefore the fruit and the continual monument of sin, whose mother, in fact, in some circumstances, might have incurred the penalty of stoning, according to Deuteronomy 22:21? How can this fruit of sin bear the holy name of Immanuel?
Does this not involve the dangerous inference that God does not take strict account of sin? that in some cases He does not mind using it as means and instrument for His plans? To this I would reply as follows. The Prophet is extremely sparing in portraying the historical background of his prophecies. He indicates only what is indispensable. It is just this scantiness that makes our passage so difficult, and all effort’s at expounding it suffer alike from this. For there is not a single one against which it may not be objected that one explanatory statement or other is necessary to its complete establishment.
It seems to me that the presence of the article in ”the Alma” is easiest explained if, in the circle to which the Prophet addressed, there was only one person present that could be designated as Alma. In every language in such a case a more exact pronominal definition may be dispensed with. Besides, in Hebrew, the article in some cases has decidedly a demonstrative meaning, and can be used δεικτικῶς (comp. δַ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?δ ,δַ ?ωָּׁ ?πָ ?δ ,δַ ?τַּ ?ςַ ?νδַ ?μַּ ?ιְ ?μָ ?δ,).
The Prophet, as the servant of Jehovah, might come to the king unannounced. Though hated by the king, the king still dreaded him, and, according to Isaiah 7:12, Ahaz did not venture to express his unbelief openly, but only under the mask of reverence. Assuredly Nathan did not first request an audience and permission to deliver a message of Jehovah’s to the king (2 Samuel 24:11 sq.). And thus we may assume that the Prophet came to the palace at a time when the king was not surrounded by officers of state—at least not by these alone, but also by his family. And in the circle into which Isaiah stepped in the discharge of his prophetic disciplinary office there must have been one—but only one—daughter of the royal house who was indeed unmarried, but no longer a virgin. More than this we do not know.
The Prophet writes no more than he said, perhaps out of compassion, or perhaps to avoid making the person in question the object of honors she did not deserve (possibly of idolatrous worship in after days). By revealing this secret to the dismay of the family, the Prophet had of course given a sign, a pledge of the credibility of what was promised Isaiah 7:7. For whoever knew that secret of the past and present could know also the secret things of the future. And the king could at once ascertain the verity of the sign that was given. Of course he might take measures to defeat the prophecy and render its accomplishment impossible. But what good would that do?
The chief thing, that there was a boy in the body of the (supposed) virgin, he could not undo, and this boy was called, and was de jure, and indeed de jure divino, Immanuel, even though the king (or his mother) gave him no name at all, or another name. [See addenda of Tr. pp. 127, 128.
But how shall we account for so unholy a transaction being made the type of the holiest transaction of history? Here we must consider the relation of our passage to Matthew 1:23. The sacred history narrates that Mary, before Joseph took her home, was found with child, and that Joseph had resolved not to denounce her, but to leave her privately (Matthew 1:18 sq.). Ought it to surprise us if this part of the history of the fulfilment should be prefigured, too, in the period of the prophecy? But why just so and then? If that event, that the mother of the Lord was to be found pregnant before marriage, was to be prefigured, could it be done otherwise than that there should happen to a virgin in a natural way and in sinful fashion what happened to Mary in a supernatural way and without sin?
Sinful generation occurs in the list of the ancestors of Jesus more than once. Compare only the genealogy in Matthew that calls especial attention to these cases by naming the mother concerned. Remember Judah and Tamar. And not to mention Rahab and Ruth, there is Solomon, born of David and the wife of Uriah. “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me,” Psalms 51:7, applies to the whole genealogy, and, apart from the birth, we must apply to every individual of it the words: “there is none that doeth good, no, not one” (Psalms 14:3; Romans 3:10 sq.). Let one call to mind the sins of Jacob, a David, a Solomon, and one must say it depends on circumstances which was the more unworthy vessel, they or this unfortunate virgin. In short, we here stumble on secrets of divine sovereignty that we cannot fathom.
The day shall declare it (1 Corinthians 3:13).
Moreover Immanuel is only a transitory apparition. He is named only here and chap. 8. It is a single though significant point, that is visible above the horizon once and then disappears again. Therefore it is also to be noted that spite of Mat 1:23, and that the words of the angel Luke 1:31 remind us of our text and of Gen 16:11, Mary still did not receive command to call her son Immauel. Had our passage the significance that is attributed to it; were it a direct prophecy of the birth of Jesus from a virgin, then properly the name that the son of Mary was to bear was already settled, and one can’t comprehend why the angel (Luke 1:31) gives another name. But Immanuel is not Himself and immediately Jesus.
He is only a type, like many others. And, indeed, as a son of a virgin, He is a type of that reproach of antenuptial conception which the Saviour of the world had to bear as a part of the general reproach that was meted out to Him, and which He has now-a-days to bear still. This is a point that prophecy might not pass in silence, and yet could touch only lightly.
But by his name he points to the faithfulness of God that will not forsake His people, even when they have become a αֶּ ?οΞζְ ?πεּ ?πִ ?ιν, and have signalized their desertion of Him by the alliance with the secular power. And this faithfulness is itself a pledge in turn of that which had determined on the most glorious visitation of the people (Luke 1:78) in the person of the God-man, precisely for that time when the nation would lose the last remnant of its independence in the embrace of the secular powder. All the features must not be pressed; which is the case with Isaiah 7:15 sqq. especially. The prophetic word hovers freely over present and future, combining both, yet leaving both their peculiarities. It was God’s providence that Isaiah should select these words that at the same time fitted so wonderfully the event narrated Matthew 1:18 sqq., to whom the tongue of an Isaiah was just as subservient as that of a Caiaphas (John 11:51).
3. Butter and honey—the King of Assyria.Isaiah 7:15-17. Butter and honey is by no means a mean food. That appears from Deuteronomy 32:13-14; Job 20:17, where the words rather mean a very noble food. Comp. 2 Samuel 17:29. Nor do they appear in any passage of the Old Testament, as children’s food.
Rather from Isaiah 7:21 sqq. it appears that butter and honey represent natural food in contrast with that procured by art. For butter comes immediately from milk, and honey, too, may be had ready from bees in a form that men can enjoy. And as Palestine had and still has many wild bees, on account of which it is called a land “flowing with milk and honey” (comp. Exodus 3:8; Exodus 3:17, sqq. and the characteristic passage 1 Samuel 14:25 sqq.; Judges 14:8), therefore we may suppose that wild honey (Matthew 3:4) is especially meant here. Therefore the boy shall eat butter and honey on to the time when he shall know evil and good (anni discretionis). If the ability to distinguish good and evil is employed as marking a period of time, it can only be in a moral sense.
For even the smallest child distinguishes in a physical sense what tastes bad and what good. Moreover the expression reminds one of Gen 2:9; Genesis 2:17; Genesis 3:5; Genesis 3:22; comp. Deuteronomy 1:39. Naturally the land must be deserted before the boy knows how to distinguish between good and evil, in order that at the time when this happens, his food may be reduced to butter and honey.
The two kings of the land are Rezin and Pekah. It may be seen from Isaiah 7:2 how great was the dread of these
experienced by Ahaz.
The Lord shall bring,etc.—It is to be noticed here, first of all, that the Prophet adds these words roughly and directly, without any particle connecting them with what goes before. This mode of expression is explained by the fact that the Prophet contemplates the transactions of Isa 7:17 as immediately behind those of Isa 7:16. From his point of view he sees no interval between them. That is not the same as saying that there is no interval between. Prophecy sees all as if in one plane, that in the fulfilment is drawn apart in successive planes. Hence one may say: Isaiah prophesies here the Assyrian and Babylonish exile.
For the desolation that (Isaiah 7:16) is to befall Ephraim happened by the carrying away of the Ten Tribes (comp. 2 Kings 17:6; 2 Kings 17:23 sqq.). But what the Prophet predicts Isaiah 7:17 sqq. was fulfilled by the captivity of Judah more than 120 years later. Accordingly, the relation of the prophecy to the fulfilment takes the following shape. Our prophecy must have happened in the beginning of the reign of Ahaz, consequently about the year B. C. 743. The first devastation and partial desolation of the territory of Ephraim by the Assyrians, i. e., by Tiglath-Pileser, happened already in the time of Pekah (2 Kings 15:29), who died B.
C. 739. The boy, that was to be born according to Isaiah 7:14, in fact did not live to see any period of the desolation of his native land, nor did he use butter and honey in the manner designated. This form of expression is traceable solely to contemplation of events together that in reality are far apart. For Judah succumbed to such a devastation not till 130 years later. But if we may assume that a child awakes. to moral consciousness in its third or fourth year, and is consequently to be regarded as a personality, capable of distinguishing between good and evil, then that child was alive to see the first inroad of the Assyrians into the territory of Ephraim (and Syria according to 2 Kings 16:9) and consequently the beginning of the fulfilment of our prophecy. But did it live to see the beginning, then the Prophet might regard it as one that had lived through the entire fulfilment, because, as remarked before, he does not distinguish successive plains of fulfilment.
And he has good reason for this. For as all consequences are contained in the principle, so in the first-fruits of fulfilment are contained the rest of the degrees of fulfilment. For him, who has an eye open to divine realities, all these degrees are ideally contained, but just on that account divinely and really contained in the degree that is the first-fruits. For divine ideas bear the pledge of their reality in themselves. Therefore where a complex of divine ideas is realized even in its beginnings, there the whole is become real for Him who contemplates things with an eye divinely illuminated. Thus Jeremiah regards the world-dominion of Nebuchadnezzar, the subjection of all nations under his power, and the seventy years of Judah’s exile as realized practically by the battle at Carchemish, although, to human eyes, Nebuchadnezzar during several years did nothing to extend his kingdom on one side or other.
Comp. my remarks on Jeremiah 25:11. So, too, the Lord says Matthew 24:34; Luke 21:32, “This generation shall not pass away till all this be fulfilled.” He could, with entire justice, say that the generation then living would live to see the last judgment because they would witness the beginning of it, the destruction of Jerusalem. Comp. Van Oosterzee on Luke 21:32.
It is seen from the foregoing that, regarding the passage in the light of its fulfilment, we understand “the king of Assyria” Isaiah 7:17, to include the king of Babylon. But Isaiah could speak here only of the king of Assyria. For in the foreground of his tableau of the future he saw only the king of Assyria. He did not know, or did not need to intimate that the king of Babylon stood behind the former as continuer and accomplisher. The Assyrian king, this would-be-helper and protector, for whose sake Ahaz has so impiously contemned the support of Jehovah (see on Isaiah 7:12), just he must be designated as the instrument of the judgment that was to burst in on unbelieving Judah and its equally unbelieving royal house. Thus it appears how impossible it is to treat the words “the king of Assyria” as a gloss, like Knobel and Diestel do.
If the words were not there, there would be no hint as to who was to be the instrument of the judgment predicted Isaiah 7:16-17. The words connect very well with “days” in apposition as being explanatory—for it is just as easy to say “bring days on a people” as “bring a king upon any one.”
4. And it shall come to pass——treading lesser cattle.Isaiah 7:18-25. These verses connect very closely with Isaiah 7:17, as its amplification. This happens as follows: that in a section underlying which is a duality, there is described first, the means and instruments of the desolation, second the consequences of the desolation. The means and instruments are characterized in a two fold image. First, the destroyer is compared to flies and bees, second, to a razor.
The flies mean Egypt, the bees Assyria. But both images merge into one, into that of the razor, and Assyria appears as the razor, by which we are to understand not Assyria alone, but also Babylon. The consequences of the desolation, again, are portrayed under a double figure, or rather by the presentation of two examples. The first example: a man has nothing of his cattle left but a little cow (young cow). But he feeds on thick milk, for, in consequence of the superabundance of food for stock, the remnant of the inhabitants will feed on butter and honey. The second example is itself again divided in two: a.) a vineyard once well cultivated, planted with noble vines, is so over-grown with thorns and thistles, that no one ventures into it without bow and arrow; b.) all the once cultivated heights are so overgrown with thorns and thistles, that they are only fit for the pasture of cattle.
Will hiss,etc.—Jehovah’s might and sovereignty will reveal itself here in the most glorious manner. He only needs to whistle (comp. on Isaiah 5:26; Zechariah 10:8), and the flies of Egypt and the bees of Assyria come obedient to His call. That Egypt was a land abounding in flies may be supposed from the warmth of its climate and the frequent overflows with their slimy sediment. Comp. Exodus 8:12 sqq. If the flies at the extreme ends of the canals (see crit. note on Χΰψ) are called, those that are nearer would not stay away.
The expression then means that all the Egyptian flies, even the farthest off, shall come on.—The Assyrians are compared to the bee as noble, martial, strong, dangerous. Assyria had many bees. Comp. Knobelin loc. Therefore the entire land, to the steep, rocky ravines and cliffs of the brooks, and to the prickly thorn hedges and the trampled cattle pastures will be covered (πָ ?ηεּ comp. a Isaiah 7:2) with the swarms of flies and bees. Thus, extensively and intensively, an entire devastation of the land is predicted.
The same appears by the second figure Isaiah 7:20. Ahaz, at a great price, had hired the Assyrian king as an ally against Syria and Ephraim. For this purpose he had not only sacrificed great treasures but also the independence of his land. For he had caused it to be said to Tiglath-Pileser: “I am thy servant and thy son, come up and save me out of the hand of the king of Syria and out of the hand of the king of Israel.” 2 Kings 16:7. For this purpose he sent the Assyrian the gold and silver that was in the house of Jehovah and in the house of the king. The definite article in ϊςψηωׂ ?λιψδ, “the hired razor,” was both historically justified and comprehensible to Ahaz, who must have felt the reproach that lay in the expression.
Thou hast hired a razor to shave others, says Isaiah to him, but this razor will shave thee. In Leviticus 14:8 sq. the shaving off all the hair on the body is prescribed as a part of the purification to be observed by one recovered from leprosy. Perhaps the Prophet would intimate that this devastation was also an act of purification, by which the nation was to be purified from the leprosy of sin, that therefore the punishment is intended for the improvement of those that would accept the chastisement (Proverbs 8:10; Proverbs 19:20). The shaving bald evidently signifies the entire devastation and emptying of the land in every quarter and with regard to men, cattle and every other possession.
In Isaiah 7:21-25, the degree and extent of the devastation is portrayed by two illustrative figures. The first example shows that instead of skilful cultivation, the grass shall grow rank. A man rescues from his stock a heifer, the Prophet supposes, (comp. Isaiah 15:5; Jeremiah 48:34; Deuteronomy 21:3; 1 Samuel 16:2) and two sheep. Because there is no regular cultivation, grass grows in every field. Therefore there is abundant pasture for the few cattle.
Beside, the wild bees produce honey in abundance. Thus honey and butter are the food of that man and of all the remnant of the inhabitants still in the land. The second example presents a still greater degree of uncultivated wildness; the whole land growing rank with thorns and thistles. And this greatest wildness appears in a double gradation: first, every place for growing wine appears covered with thorns and thistles (Isaiah 7:23-24), and then the same is affirmed of all the hills. It is hard to find a distinction here, because wine grows on the hills, or mountains, too. It seems to me that the Prophet carries out completely in this last member the duality which, as was remarked, rules in the whole section.
Everything is double. Already in Isaiah 7:18 we have flies and bees, meaning Egypt and Assyria; ravines and clefts of the rock; thorn-hedges and pastures. Only Isaiah 7:20 neglects the rule, because the Prophet would designate the two enemies in an unity. But Isaiah 7:21 and on, this rule of duality is carried out, and at the close becomes emphatic. We observe two degrees of growing wild. In the first appear: one man and the entire remnant of the inhabitants, cattle and sheep, butter and honey.
The second degree, subdivides in two again, in which appears to me to lie the emphasis, and both are characterized by the double notions of thorn and thistle, arrow and bow, a seeding place for cattle, and a trampling place for sheep. The thousand vines and thousand shekels recall Son 8:11. In Syria at the present time the vineyards are still taxed according to the number of the vines; a good vine at one Piaster = about four cents. Therefore, the price of one shekel = to about 25 cents is high. The construction of Isa 7:23 betrays a certain luxuriance and rankness. The first or the last ιִ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ “shall be” is certainly an excess.
Perhaps the Prophet would thereby express by word painting the rank growth of the weeds. Will one go into the property with bow and arrow in order to hunt, or to protect himself? I believe, with Gesenius, both. He that goes in will need his weapons for protection; he that would hunt needs only to go into the nearest vineyard. The protecting fence is gone; beasts wild and tame, penetrate into it. The vineyards of Israel are now a copy of what Israel itself as the vineyard of Jehovah had become (Isaiah 7:5).
[J. A. Alexander on Isaiah 7:14-16. “The two interpretations that appear to me the most plausible, and the least beset with difficulties are those of Lowth and Vitringa, with which last Hengstenberg’s is essentially identical. Either the Prophet, while he foretells the birth of Christ, foretells that of another child, during whose infancy the promised deliverance shall be experienced; or else he makes the infancy of Christ Himself, whether seen as still remote or not, the sign and measure of that same deliverance. While some diversity of judgment ought to be expected and allowed in relation to this secondary question, there is no ground, grammatical, historical or logical, for doubt as to the main point, that the church in all ages has been right in regarding this passage as a signal, and explicit prediction of the miraculous conception and nativity of Christ.” On δָ ?ςַ ?μְ ?ξָ ?δ, “the Alma.” “It is enough for us to know that a virgin or unmarried woman is designated here as distinctly as she could be by a single word. That the word means simply a young woman, whether married or unmarried, a virgin or a mother, is a subterfuge invented by the later Greek translators, who, as Justin Martyr tells us, read νεα̈νις, instead of the old version παρθένος, which had its rise before the prophecy became a subject of dispute between Jews and Christians. The use of the word in this connection makes it, to say the least, extremely probable that the event foretold is something more than a birth in the ordinary course of nature.”
“To account for the Alma by a second marriage of Ahaz, or of Isaiah, or by the presence of a pregnant woman, or the Prophet’s pointing at her,” “may be justly charged with gratuitously assuming facts of which we have no evidence, and which are not necessary to the interpretation of the passage.” “A further objection is, that though they may afford a sign in one of the senses of the word, viz.: that of an emblem or symbol, they do not afford such a sign as the context would lead us to expect. It seems very improbable, after the offer to Ahaz, which he rejected, that the sign bestowed (unasked) would be merely a thing of every-day occurrence, or at most the application of a symbolical name. This presumption is strengthened by the solemnity with which the Prophet speaks of the predicted birth, not as a usual and natural event, but as something which excites his own astonishment, as he beholds it in prophetic vision.”
This last objection applies equally to the Author’s theory of the Alma being an unmarried princess detected in pregnancy. In addition to all the other assumptions of this theory, which are greater than those of any other, it must be assumed that the pregnancy was at a stage that could be kept secret from the scrutiny that ever characterized the regime of the women’s apartments in an oriental family. Otherwise it would be no sign in the Author’s sense.
The Author’s threefold canon has its foundation in what are obviously conjectures. Whether the sign was to be such as Ahaz was to test, because he would see it accomplished, depended precisely on the sign itself. It might be a sign like that to Moses Exodus 3:12, which could only be fulfilled after other events predicted, with which it was associated as a sign, had come to pass. Comp. Isaiah 37:30. It may have been like those signs given by Christ to unbelievers in His day, that were not meant to induce belief in those that asked, but were the refusal of a sign to them. (vid.John 2:18-22; Matthew 12:38-40).
If it was such a sign, then the Author’s first canon is an error. Whether the sign was meant for the whole royal family, according to this third canon, depends wholly on the “house of David” having the meaning he gives it. Yet that meaning has no other foundation than the conjecture that Isaiah had intruded on the private, domestic retirement of Ahaz. The second canon, viz.: that the sign in its form must be punitive, is only an assumption. The contrary is as easily assumed.
The connection of the words Isaiah 7:10-16 with the Isaiah 7:9 b is very close. The belief there challenged is, by a second message, brought to the test. Ahaz does not stand the test. He does not believe, or he would joyfully avail himself of the offered sign, as Hezekiah did later 2 Kings 20:8 sq. Thereupon Isaiah proceeds to denounce the consequences already threatened Isaiah 7:9 b, that must follow unbelief. But first, as to unbelieving Saul was announced the man after God’s own heart that was to be raised up in his place, so to Ahaz is announced, in a clearer light than ever before, the promised “seed of the woman” who would deliver Israel.
But before that would come to pass, the two kingdoms of which Israel was composed, Judah as well as Ephraim must suffer desolation. Thus the prophecy of Immanuel relates to Christ alone, as J. H. Michaelis and others suppose (vid. J. A.
Alex,in loc.); and Isaiah 7:16 is (with Henderson) to be understood of Canaan and its two kingdoms, Ephraim and Judah. This view encounters fewer difficulties than any other, while such as it does encounter are felt as much by any other. On the other hand it is much in favor of this view, that there is then in Isaiah 7:17 simply a continuation and amplification of the theme begun in Isaiah 7:16, and no such abruptness as the Author, with most expositors, finds in what Isaiah 7:17 announces.
The chief difficulty is that in λִּ ?ιαְּ ?θֶ ?ψֶ ?νιֵ ?γַ ?ςδַ ?πַּ ?ςַ ?ψ the λִּ ?ι must be given the force of “but” (Umbreit). Yet λִּ ?ι may have its usual sense “for,” and assign the reason why an Immanuel, that knows good and evil, shall be needed. For before such a one comes, those that call good evil and evil good (vid.Isaiah 5:20), etc., shall have brought the inheritance of Jehovah to that extremity, by their unbelief, where only such a deliverer can save.—Tr.On Isaiah 7:18. “Assyria and Egypt are named as the two great rival powers, who disturbed the peace of Western Asia, and to whom the land of Israel was both a place, and a subject of contention. The bee cannot of itself denote an army, nor is the reference exclusively to actual invasion, but to annoying and oppressive occupation of the country by civil and military agents of these foreign powers. It was not merely attacked, but infested by flies and bees of Egypt and Assyria. Fly is understood as a generic term, including gnats, mosquitoes, etc., by Henderson, and bee as including wasps and hornets, by Hitzig and Umbreit.”
On Isaiah 7:20. “The rabbinical interpretation of ωׂ ?ςψψπμιν is a poor conceit, the adoption of which by Gesenius [and Naegelsbach—Tr.], if nothing worse, says but little for the taste and the “ζsthetic feeling” which so often sits in judgment on the language of the Prophet. The true sense is no doubt the one expressed by Ewald (von oben bis unten) [from head to foot] and before him by Clericus. ”J. A. Alex.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
2. ISAIAH GIVING THE WHOLE NATION A SIGN BY THE BIRTH OF HIS SON MAHER-SHALAL-HASH -BAZ
CHAPTER Isaiah 8:1-41 the LORD said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with 2a man’s pen concerning1 Maher-shalal-hash-baz. And I took unto me faithful witnesses 3to record, Uriah the priest, and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah. And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived and bare a son. Then said the LORD to me, Call his name Maher-shalal-hash-baz. 4For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, My father, and my mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 9:1. ηֶ ?ψֶ ?θ (found only here and Exodus 32:4), is an instrument for cutting in, engraving in wood, metal, wax, etc., the chisel, style. It stands here as stylus, metonymically as efficiens pro effecto, i. e., the writing instrument stands for the writing. ηψθΰπεω seems to me not to mean writing of the common man in distinction from that of men of higher degree, say, a popular as distinguished from priestly writing. [In an ordinary and familiar hand, J. A. , BARNES.] For in the first place it is very doubtful if ΰֱ ?πεֹ ?ωׁ has this meaning. The word is distinguished from ΰָ ?γָ ?ν (comp. Psalms 73:5) but only by its poetic use. It occurs in Isaiah six times, here, and Isaiah 13:7; Isaiah 13:12; Isaiah 24:6; Isaiah 33:8; Isaiah 51:7; Isaiah 56:2.
In the second place we have no trace of there being two sorts of writing in use among the Hebrews before the exile. The passages Habakkuk 2:2; Psalms 45:2, cited by some in support of the notion, prove nothing. I much rather believe that a contrast of human and superhuman writing is meant. For as Paul distinguishes between human and angel tongues (1 Corinthians 13:1) so we may distinguish between human and angel writing. Of the latter, Daniel 5:5 sqq. offers us an example. Comp.
Exodus 32:32; Psalms 69:29; Psalms 139:16; Daniel 12:1; Revelation 19:12; Revelation 20:12; Revelation 20:15; Revelation 21:12; Revelation 21:27. For the prophets were not merely “hearers of the words of God,” but also “men whose eyes were open,” “who saw the vision of the Almighty” (Numbers 24:3-4). The μְ is variously explained. It is taken as constructio periphrastica (acceleratura sunt spolia or accelerationi spolia, comp. Genesis 15:12; Joshua 2:5; Isaiah 10:32; Isaiah 37:26; Isaiah 38:20, etc.), as depending on λְּ ?ϊֹ ?α in the sense of commanding (1 Chronicles 21:17), as sign of dedication, or as stating the object. The first two explanations are inadmissible, because μְ would then fit only the first member (ξδψ as infinitive), not the second (ηָ ?ωׁ particip.). μְ can thus be taken only as a dedication or as stating the aim.
Both these ways of explaining it agree in not taking ξδψ as infin., but as a verbal adjective like Zephaniah 1:14 (comp. ξָ ?ΰֵ ?οξַ ?χֵּ ?μ). But they differ in sense. This can be no dedication in the common sense. For there is no gift to be presented to Maher-shalal, only the attention of the nation is directed to him. The μְ can define therefore only the reference or the destiny, the aim. It is thereby said that this tablet with its inscription concerns a Maher-shalal-hash-baz, but of whom absolutely nothing is known, not even whether a person or a thing.
Comp. Ezekiel 37:16. The case is different with Jeremiah 46:2; Jeremiah 48:1; Jeremiah 49:1. Comp. on Jeremiah 46. sqq.
On Isaiah 9:2. εΰςιγδεβεΧ the LXX. translates μάρτυράσμοιποίησον as if εְ ?δָ ?ςִֽ ?ιγָ ?δ stood in the text. So, too, the SYR., CHALD. and ARAB. in the London Polyglotte, which HITZIG follows. The VULG. translates: ”et adhibui;” it therefore read εָ ?ΰָ ?ςִֽ ?ιγָ ?δ; and so, too, would , DE WETTE, ROORDA, KNOBEL, and others read. But, after mature consideration, I find there is no ground for departing from the reading of the text. It is perfectly supported by testimony. First of all it is the more difficult reading, and both the others give evidence of being attempts to relieve the difficulty by correction.
Then, too, Isaiah never uses the cohortative form with the weakened sense, as it occurs elsewhere with the Vav consec. imperf. in the first pers., especially in Dan., Ezra, and Neh. Thus the form εָ ?ΰָ ?ςִֽ ?ιγָ ?δ especially occurs Nehemiah 13:21 (along with εָ ?ΰָ ?ςִ ?ιγ ibid. Isaiah 9:15). Why did not Isaiah write εָ ?ΰָ ?ςֵ ?ιγ as Jeremiah did in precisely the same sense, Isaiah 32:10? Comp. 1 Kings 2:42. The form εְ ?ΰָ ?ςִ ?ιγָ ?δ is found Deuteronomy 31:28; Psalms 50:7; Psalms 81:9; Jeremiah 6:10, everywhere as cohortative.—δςιγςγιν like Jeremiah 32:10; Jeremiah 32:25; Jeremiah 32:44.
On Isaiah 9:4. ιִ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ = “one will bear.”—ηַ ?ιִ ?μ in the sense of possession, riches, treasures is found beside here Isaiah 10:14; Isaiah 60:5; Isaiah 60:11; Isaiah 61:6.
AND 1. Moreover the Lord said——the king of Assyria.Vers 1-4. A compound token! First, Isaiah is to take a large tablet (only found beside Isaiah 3:23; here is meant certainly a tablet coated with smooth wax), and write on it with human handwriting some words. It is therefore assumed here that there is a superhuman handwriting (see Text. and Gram.) and that the Prophet could understand and make use of it (comp. Daniel 5:5 sqq.).
But Isaiah must not employ this superhuman, but common, human writing. Isaiah must write on the tablet “Maher-shalal-hash-baz.” It is clear that when he wrote these words they were not designated as the name of a son to be expected. For, first, there is nothing of this in the text. Second, there is a two-fold gradation of the prophecy wherein the first stage gives a pledge of the second. The words on the tablet are the prophecy of a Maher-shalal-hash-baz to be looked for; the appearance of the latter is therefore the fulfilment of this prophecy, and so the guaranty that the event, to which the significant name itself in turn refers, shall certainly come to pass.
The Lord commands the Prophet therefore to set up a tablet with the inscription mentioned, and at the same time makes known his will, that Uriah and Zechariah shall act as witnesses. What they are to witness is as little stated as that Isaiah shall accomplish the will of the LORD in regard to the witnesses and that he actually did this. The latter is assumed as being a matter of course. This scantiness is too common in the prophetic manner of narrating to cause us any surprise. The former is to be obtained from the context. For when we read immediately after: “And I went unto the Prophetess,” etc., it is plain that the witnesses should testify that Isaiah, at the time he set up the tablet, had communicated to them that he would approach his wife, and that she, in consequence, would become pregnant and bear a son.
But why, it may be asked, did not the Prophet declare this publicly? Not out of regard for propriety certainly; for there would not have been anything the least offensive in doing so. But why must then the witnesses receive this announcement? I can think of no other reason than the enmity and vindictiveness of Ahaz. He was, we may be sure, only half rejoiced at the quieting of his fears in regard to the impending danger from Rezin and Pekah. The way in which he, according to Isaiah 7:10 sqq., received that reassuring announcement, and what was connected with it as a further finger-board for the remote future (Isaiah 7:17 sqq.), all this was calculated to embitter him and his against the Prophet.
Had, therefore, the Prophet announced publicly the pregnancy of his wife, the mother and child might have incurred danger. This was easiest avoided by imparting the announcement only to witnesses, who, however, were in such esteem with the nation, that their assurance that they had at the proper time received such a communication from the Prophet was universally credited. Then we obtain the following chain of events. First, the tablet. This, makes known in general that the LORD purposes a great crisis of war, and that it is to be looked for shortly. Immediately thereupon the witnesses receive the announcement of the pregnancy of the Prophetess, The son is born, and thereby, on the authority of the witnesses, is given to all, the pledge that the event to which the inscription of the tablet and the corresponding name of the child pointed, shall really come to pass.
Whether Uriah is the priest mentioned, 2 Kings 16:10 sqq. [BARNES, J. A. ], who, out of regard for Ahaz, placed in the temple the altar made after the heathen pattern, is just as doubtful as whether Zechariah is identical with the one said to be the author of Zechariah 9-11, or with the son of Asaph (2 Chronicles 29:13).
Isaiah’s wife is hardly called Prophetess, because she was the wife of a Prophet, but because she herself was a prophetic woman. We do not indeed know of prophecies of which she was the authoress, but she, along with other things of the Prophet’s family, was set for a sign and wonder (Isaiah 9:18).
Our exposition of Isa 7:14 of itself shows that the present history is not coincident with Isaiah 7:10 sqq., and therefore that Maher-shalal is not identical with Immanuel. Yet the present narrative is nearly related to Isaiah 7:10 sqq. In both, pregnancy and the birth of a son are pledges of deliverance. In both, a stage of development in the child is made the measure that defines the period of the deliverance. But a child can say father and mother, sooner than it can distinguish between good and evil. If then, as also the place of the passage in the book, indicates, what is now narrated, took place somewhat later than the events Isaiah 7:10 sqq., it agrees very well.
Both have the same objective end, viz., the rendering harmless Syria and Ephraim. Therefore the later one must use the shorter time measure. As Pekah and Rezin lived during the events prophesied here, yet the former died B. C. 739, so the transactions related here must fall between B. C. 743 and 739. The king of Assyria did not at that time destroy Samaria.
He only desolated a few border regions (2 Kings 15:29). But as we showed at Isaiah 7:17, that the prophecy contemplated two events, inwardly related, but separated as to time, so it is here. That first, preliminary devastation of the region of Ephraim bears the later one (2 Kings 17:6) so really in it, that the Prophet is justified in comprehending both together.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
II.—THE 1. THOSE THAT DESPISE SHILOAH SHALL BE BY THE WATERS OF THE
Isaiah 8:5-85 THE LORD spake also unto me again, saying,
6 For as much as this people refuseth
The waters of Shiloah that go softy,
And rejoice in Rezin and Remaliah’s son;
7 Now therefore, behold, the LORD bringeth up upon them
The waters of the river, strong and many, even the king of Assyria, and all his glory; And he shall come up over all his channels,
And go over all his banks;
8 And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over,
He shall reach even to the neck;
And d the stretching out of his wings shall fill
The breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 9:6. ειρσγαψ comp. at Isaiah 7:10.—μְ ?ΰַ ?θ is compounded of ΰַ ?θ (1 Kings 21:27) lenitas and the prefix. The prefix is used like in μָ ?ψֹ ?α ,μָ ?αֶ ?θַ ?η (EWALD, § 217 d); comp. Genesis 33:14; 2 Samuel 18:5; Job 15:11.—Corrections of the reading like ξְ ?ρεֹ ?ρ (MEIER = “fainting away before Rezin,” Isaiah 10:18) and εּ ?ξָ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?ωׁ (“and blind groping seized,” Aehrenl. p. 30, comp. Job 5:14 are unnecessary. Isaiah often uses the verb ωׂ ?εּ ?ωׂ (Isaiah 35:1; Isaiah 61:10; Isaiah 62:5; Isaiah 64:4; Isaiah 65:18 sq; Isaiah 66:10; Isaiah 66:14) and the substantive ωָׂ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ζ (Isaiah 12:3; Isaiah 22:13; Isaiah 35:10; Isaiah 51:3; Isaiah 51:11; Isaiah 61:3) and ξָ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ωׂ (Isaiah 24:8; Isaiah 24:11; Isaiah 32:13 sq.; Isaiah 60:15; Isaiah 62:5; Isaiah 65:18; Isaiah 66:10). Here ξָ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ωׂ seems chosen for the sake of a paranomasia with ξָ ?ΰַ ?ν.
The following ΰֵ ?ϊ cannot be the sign of the accusative, because the subject of joy is never so designated. It resembles the proposition like Isaiah 66:10 (ωִׂ ?ιωׂ ?εּ ΰִ ?ϊָּ ?δּ ξָ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ωׂ). Joy with Rezin and Pekah is the rejoicing that is felt in communion, in connection with these rulers. Moreover the substantive ξωׂ ?εֹ ?ωׂ is dependent on ιַ ?ςַ ?ε, which accordingly governs two clauses, a verbal and a nominal clause. Thus, too, . There is then no need for regarding ξְ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ωׂ as the status absol. according to EWALD, § 351, 6.
According to a usage especially common with Isaiah, the status constr. stands before the preposition.
On Isaiah 9:7. ςφενεψα combined like Exodus 1:9; Deuteronomy 7:1; Deuteronomy 9:14; Deuteronomy 26:5; Joe 2:2; Joe 2:5; Micah 4:3; Zechariah 8:22; ςφεν signifying rather the intensive, ψα the extensive greatness.—λָּ ?αεֹ ?γ here involves the secondary notion of “might,” as elsewhere that of riches (Isaiah 10:3; Isaiah 61:6; Isaiah 66:12, the last citation seeming to stand in intentional contrast with our passage. Comp. the Latin opes). KNOBEL regards ΰϊΞξμγ to ααεγε as a gloss, because “good poets do not add explanatory notes to their metaphors.” As if Isaiah were only a poet, and had not, too, a very practical interest! Comp. Isaiah 7:17; Isaiah 7:20.—ΰָ ?τִ ?ιχ (not again in Isaiah) is the bed of a torrens, synonymous with πַ ?ηַ ?μ (Josh. 1:20; 4:18); βγεϊ, plur. tantum, in Isa only here; besides Joel 3:15; 4:18; 1 Chronicles 12:15 K’ri (beside K’thib βִּ ?γְ ?ιεֹ ?ϊ), is from βָּ ?γָ ?δ, kindred to βָּ ?γַ ?γ incidit, secuit, is “the indentation, the shore-line, the shore.”
On Isaiah 9:8. ηָ ?μַ ?σ (comp. on Isaiah 2:18) is originally “to change” thence transire (to change place, whence “to change” in hunters’ language said of wild game). Comp. Isaiah 21:1; Isaiah 24:5. ωׁ ?θσ means the spreading out, ςαψ the pressing forward (both notions joined as in Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:18), ςγΞφεΰψιβις the height of the water.—ξֻ ?θּ ?εֹ ?ϊ from πָ ?θָ ?δ “to spread out,” are the out-spreadings, expansiones; ἅπ. λεγ.—The sing. εδιδ is in consequence of the verb coming first.—ξְ ?μֹ ?ΰ is to be construed in an active sense (comp. Isaiah 6:3; Isaiah 31:4; Isaiah 34:1; Isaiah 42:10). ψηα not again in Isaiah.
AND 1. This section has the external mark of a supplement in the transition formula “the LORD spake also again,” which occurs again only Isaiah 7:10, and which here as well as there intimates that an interval occurred between these words and what goes before. But the contents, too, show that we have no immediate and necessary amplification of the foregoing words and deeds before us. Nothing more is said of the son of the Prophet. Rather the language turns suddenly against the Ephraimites who contemned the quiet fountain of Shiloah, i. e. David’s kingdom, and rejoiced in communion with Rezin and the son of Remaliah (Isaiah 9:6).
Therefore the floods of the Euphrates, which the Prophet himself explains as meaning the king of Assyria, shall overflow Ephraim (Isaiah 9:7), but of course Judah also, the land of Immanuel (Isaiah 9:8). The mention of Rezin and Pekah, the calling Judah land of Immanuel, and the threatening of overflow by Assyria, prove that these words belong to the same period as the preceding chief prophecies. And as the expression “Immanuel” presupposes the transactions narrated Isaiah 7:10, the insertion of this section at this place is completely explained.
2. The Lord——Remaliah’s son.Isaiah 9:5-6. Most authorities agree that the fountain of Shiloah or Siloam is on the south side of Jerusalem; vid.’SPalestine, Vol. I. p. 501–505. The name (written ωִׁ ?μֹּ ?ηַ ,ωִׁ ?μֹ ?ηַ and ωִׁ ?ιμֹ ?ηַ) means emissio, or emissus (comp. δִ ?ξְ ?ωַׁ ?μֵּ ?ηξַ ?ςְ ?ιָ ?πִ ?ιν, “He sendeth the springs,” Psalms 104:10; hence ἀπεσταλμένος “sent” John 9:7; comp. EWALD § 156 a).
It occurs only here, John 9:7 and Luke 13:4, in which last place is told of the tower of Siloam (so LXX and New Testament, AQU. and SYMM., THEOD. spell the name Σιλωά: VULG.:Siloe). Yet the name ωֶׁ ?μַ ?δ which the αְּ ?ψֵ ?αַ ?ϊδωֶּׁ ?μַ ?η “pool of Siloah,” Nehemiah 3:15, bears is very probably identical with our Shiloah. The descent between the fountain of Mary above and the fountain of Siloam is very little, therefore the flow is very gentle and soft.
The weak brooklet, welling up at the foot of Moriah and Zion, represents the unobservable nature of the kingdom of God in the period of its earthly humility. It recalls the form of a servant which the Lord assumed, and the “I am meek and lowly in heart” (Matthew 11:29). This feature is prominent in all the stages of the history of salvation. Outwardly Israel was the least of all nations (Deuteronomy 7:7); Bethlehem was the least of the cities of Judah (Micah 5:1); David was the youngest among his brothers, and his father supposed he must be of no account at the election of a king (1 Samuel 16:11 sqq.). So, too, at the time of our present history, the kingdom of David was very small and weak amid the world-powers. If now and then it arose to greater power, that makes but one resemblance more to the intermittent fountain of Shiloah.
And rejoice,etc. The passage is easily explained if one only notices that the Prophet does not till Isaiah 9:8 represent the swelling stream as overflowing also the territory of Judah. Then “upon them” Isaiah 9:7 means those whom the Assyrian stream, that comes in from the north, overflows first. That is evidently the Ephraimites. Therefore by the people Isaiah 9:6, to whom “upon them” refers back, must, at least primarily, be understood the nation of the Ten Tribes. The nation Israel, then, i. e.
Ephraim looks down contemptuously on the kingdom of Judah as on a weak flowing brooklet, and meanwhile with proud self-complacency rejoices in its own king and in the alliance with the Syrian king that added to his strength. This haughtiness shall not escape the avenging Nemesis. From the Euphrates shall mighty floods of water overflow first Ephraim and then Judah. [“To understand this it is necessary to remark that the Euphrates annually overflows its banks.”—BARNES]. That by this is meant the king of Assyria with all his glorious army, Isaiah himself proceeds to explain. It is a proof that the Prophet before this had the territory of Israel in mind, that here he makes so prominent the trespassing of the waters into Judah’s territory, the spreading beyond its borders. In Isaiah 9:8 b, the Prophet by a glorious figure compares the volumes of water to a bird spreading out its wings, to which he is evidently moved by the fact that the floods of water mean army hordes.
Accordingly he designates the wings of the army as the wings of the extended flood. Because the space covered by the expanded wings coincides with the breadth of the land, so it may be said that the stretching out of the wings is at the same time the filling up of the land. It is very significant that the Prophet closes his address so emphatically with the word “Immanuel.” He signifies thus that the land is Immanuel’s, and that consequently the violence is done to Immanuel. It is plain that Immanuel is written as a proper name, from the suffix in ΰψφκ. Yet most editions separate the words, and several versions too, as LXX. and ARAM., translate accordingly. The occasion for this is the, of course, correct notion that in the word there is an intimation of comfort that is to be the stay of Israel in that great tribulation.
But evidently the Prophet has immediately in mind a person, whom he addresses. He turns to Him who is predicted in the birth of that child Isaiah 7:14. Although He is a person of the future, still the Prophet knows Him as one already present. How else could he turn to Him with this lamentation? Herein, then, lies a preparation for what the Prophet says of the promised one in the predicates of Isa 9:5 (6).
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
2. AGAINST THOSE THAT AGAINST JUDAH, AND AGAINST THOSE THAT FEAR THESE
Isaiah 8:9-15.
9 yourselves, O ye people, 1and ye shall be broken in pieces;
And give ear, all ye of far countries:
Gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces:
Gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces.
10 Take counsel together, and it shall come to nought;
Speak the word, and it shall not stand:
For God is with us.
11 For the LORD spake thus to me cwith a strong hand,
And instructed me that I should not walk in the way of this people, saying,
12 Say ye not, A confederacy,
To all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy;
Neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid.
13 Sanctify the LORD of Hosts himself;
And let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.
14 And he shall be for a sanctuary;
But for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence
To both the houses of Israel,
For a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
15 And many among them shall stumble,
And fall, and be broken,
And be snared, and be taken.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 8:9. ψֹ ?ςεּ. The forms and meanings of the roots ψες ,ψςς and ιψς cross each other in a peculiar manner. ψֹ ?ςεּ can only come from the root ψָ ?ςַ ?ς; but to this root has been transferred the meaning, too, of ψεּ ?ςַ. Although originally ψεּ ?ςַ has the meaning malum esse, as appears from the imperf. Niph. ιֵ ?ψεֹ ?ςַ (Proverbs 11:15; Proverbs 13:20) which can only be derived from a root ςεΧ, yet this root never occurs in Kal., but all Kal forms that mean “to be evil” are to be derived from a root ψָ ?ςַ ?ς (comp. ψָ ?ς Numbers 11:10, then the adjective ψςַ, and perhaps, too, the forms ψָ ?ςָ ?δ Deuteronomy 15:9; 2 Samuel 19:8 and infin. ψֹ ?ςַ Ecclesiastes 7:3). On the other hand ψςς has undoubtedly the meaning “to break” (Psalms 2:9; Jeremiah 11:16; Jeremiah 15:12, etc.). We must therefore choose here between the meanings “be evil” and “break.” With and others, I prefer the latter, because “be wicked” and “break in pieces” involve no contradiction; for where fore may not what is wicked also break in pieces? [“ in his latest lexicons gives this verb its usual sense of being evil, malignant, which is also expressed by LUTHER (seid bِ ?se, ihr Vِ ?lker).
It is here equivalent to do your worst.” J. A. .].—ξֶ ?ψְ ?ηָ ?χ frequent in Isaiah (Isaiah 10:3; Isaiah 13:5; Isaiah 17:13; Isaiah 30:27; Isaiah 46:11; plural ξַ ?ψְ ?ηַ ?χִּ ?ιν Isaiah 33:17).—The double imperative δϊΰζψεεηϊε sustain an adverbial relation to one another: break up yet break in pieces yourselves; gird ye yourselves, and spite of it break in pieces. Comp. GESEN., § 130, 2. The former word seems to me not to mean bellum parare, for the war is far progressed; but in accord with the proper vis vocabult, the girding the loins, bracing oneself up as men are wont to do in the midst of an attack.
On Isaiah 8:10. ςεּ ?υ only here and Judges 19:30. On ςֵ ?φָ ?δ comp. on Isaiah 5:19.——Pual ϊτψ only here in Isaiah (Jeremiah 33:21; Zechariah 11:11).——Other forms of τψψ; Isaiah 14:27; Isaiah 24:5; Isaiah 24:19; Isaiah 33:8; Isaiah 44:25.
On Isaiah 8:11. ηֶ ?ζְ ?χָ ?δ wherever else it occurs (2 Chronicles 12:1; 2 Chronicles 26:16; Daniel 11:2) means “the being strong,” and is used everywhere of the fortified power of a potentate. ηζχϊδιγ is therefore “the hand being strong.” It is the hand of God that comes over the prophets (Ezekiel 1:3; Ezekiel 3:22; Ezekiel 8:1; Ezekiel 33:22; Ezekiel 37:1; Ezekiel 40:1) and in fact our expression signifies the condition that Ezekiel describes with the words εְַ ?ιγιΧςַָ ?μιηָ ?ζָֽ ?χָ ?δ Isaiah 3:14.——εְ ?ιִ ?ρְּ ?ψֵ ?πִ ?ι cannot be the perf., or it must read ιִ ?ρְ ?ψַ ?πִ ?ι. But the imperf stands as jussive with the Vav. consec. (Comp. EWALD, § 347 a). ειρψπι is, then, not co-ordinate with λδΰξψ as KNOBEL and even EWALD would have it; but it continues and declares the object of αηζχϊδιγ, co-ordinate with the latter, subordinate to the former (. As regards the form, the imperf. ιִ ?ρֹּ ?ψ underlies it, which Hosea 10:10 is used in the first person.—The preposition ξο is to be treated as dependent on the notion of “holding back, restraining,” contained in ιρψπι (constructio praegnans).
On Isaiah 8:12. μְ ?λֹ ?μεβε does not designate the object that is given a name. For then the second member must read: ιִ ?ΰξψδςνδζδμεχωׁ ?ψ. But, as justly remarks, μְ before λֹּ ?μ = darauf hin, bei, “at,” “with,” and λֹּ ?μ has the meaning cunque (compare ΰֶ ?μΞαָּ ?μΞΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ Proverbs 17:8, “whither-so-ever”). Not so often as those, not incessantly shall they say χωׁ ?ψ, as if there were nothing in the world to fear but this. ξεψΰ only here in Isaiah.—δςψιυ Hiph. in Isaiah also Isaiah 8:13; Isaiah 29:23. Kal. Isaiah 2:19; Isaiah 2:21; Isaiah 47:12. From Isaiah 29:23 it is seen that Isaiah uses the word in the sense of “timere aliquid;” in our passage it means “to fear” and Isaiah 9:13 “to affright.” Thus it appears that Isaiah uses the Hiph. sometimes as indirect, sometimes as direct causative, and then uses the latter in a transitive sense.
On Isaiah 8:13. In ξψΰαν Isaiah has evidently in mind Genesis 9:2; Deuteronomy 11:25.
On Isaiah 8:14. ξχγωׁ (again in Isaiah 16:12; Isaiah 60:13; Isaiah 63:18) means sanctuary generally, here evidently with the additional notion of asylum (comp. 1 Kings 1:50 sq.; 1 Kings 2:28 sqq.). εּ before μְ ?ΰֶ ?αֶ ?ο is adversative.—πֶ ?βֶ ?σ only here in Isaiah and moreover ΰαοπβσἅπ. λεγ.—ξαωׁ ?μ “that over which one stumbles,” (again Isaiah 57:14; φεψξλωׁ ?μ only here).—τη (παγίς, “cord,” vid. Isaiah 24:17 sq.). ξεχωׁ “loop-snare” of the bird-catcher, only here in Isaiah.
On Isaiah 8:15. The operation of ξαωׁ ?εμ and τη are in Isaiah 8:15 represented by five verbs, of which the first three relate to πβσ and ξαωׁ ?μ, and the last to τη and ξεχωׁ.—Many, e. g., , HITZIG, UMBREIT, refer αָּ ?ν to the two notions of stone and snare. But as KNOBEL justly remarks, it is a “chief thought of Isaiah that the judgments overtake the sinners; the pious are left as a remnant: Isaiah 1:25; Isaiah 1:28; Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 28:18 sq.; Isaiah 29:20 sq.; Isaiah 33:14.”—λָּ ?ωַׁ ?μ comp. Isaiah 3:8. Niph. πωׁ ?αψ Isaiah 14:29; Isaiah 24:10; Isaiah 27:11; Isaiah 28:13; Isaiah 41:1.—ιχωׁ Isaiah 29:21; Isaiah 28:13, in which last cited passage the verbs here employed are repeated excepting πτμε.—μαγ again in Isaiah only Isaiah 20:1; Isaiah 24:18.
AND 1. Having reproved the perverse policy of the earthly-minded Israel, the Prophet proclaims to the nations conspiring against Judah that they, the breakers-in-pieces, shall themselves be broken in pieces (Isaiah 9:9-10). Then he says—turning to the spiritually-minded Israel—the LORD has emphatically warned them against the ways of the fleshly-minded (Isaiah 9:11) and forbidden them to regard the conspiracy of the enemies as most to be dreaded (Isaiah 9:12). Jehovah ought to be feared (Isaiah 9:13). He is to the one a sanctuary (asylum), to the others, a stone of stumbling and a snare (Isaiah 9:14-15).
2. Associate—God is with us.Isaiah 9:9-10. These words are addressed to the ςַ ?ξִּ ?ιν “peoples;” Isaiah 9:5-8 were addressed to “this people,” Isaiah 9:6. Evidently then “peoples,” Isaiah 9:9, is contrasted with “this people,” Isaiah 9:6. The Prophet plainly addresses nations, that arm themselves against the land of Immanuel, devise plans, issue commands. Nothing shall come of all this.
Comparing Isaiah 7:7, it is seen that Syria and Ephraim must be meant here. A remarkable contrast is put, when he that has broken others to pieces himself breaks to pieces. Syria and Ephraim had already done Judah considerable harm (comp. on Isaiah 7:1-2); Isaiah 9:9, they are challenged to prepare still more, but spite of the breaking already accomplished, and these first attempts, they shall themselves be broken to pieces. The Prophet moreover summons distant nations to take notice of this for their own warning. The clause: “give ear—countries” is a parenthesis. As the Prophet repeats the words of Isa 7:7 “and it shall not stand,” with little alteration, he intimates that he has the same matter in his mind.
And in fact Isaiah 7:5 sq., speaks of “evil counsel” on the part of Syria and Ephraim against Judah, the land of Immanuel, as here of “taking counsel together,” and “speaking a word.” By this arises the conspiracy (χֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ) spoken of Isa 9:12, which can mean nothing but the alliance of the two states named. αιςξβεΰμ. For the third and last time we have the words Immanuel. They must certainly be read separate here as a clause. They express the idea of the name as an independent judgment. The world-power must shiver on the rock Israel, for it is thereby the strong rock in that God is with it. But this strong rock is not the ’Ισραὴλσαρκικός, but the ’Ισραὴλπνευματικός [not the fleshly Israel, but the spiritual Israel].
Comp. Psalms 2.
3. For the Lord——your dread.Isaiah 9:11-13. Judah is safe from the breaker-in-pieces, for God is with it (Isaiah 9:10). That is, in a certain sense, not unconditionally. For the LORD will be an asylum only to those who fear and sanctify Him; but to others, who fear men more than Him, He will be their fall. “For the LORD spake thus,” etc.: “for,” relates to the thought contained in the words Immanuel, “God is with us.” This thought is both established and limited by what follows. For God is with that part of the people only that fears Him above all things, loves and trusts Him alone.
Therefore the Prophet says that this word of the LORD was directed to him. But he is representative of the believing Israel. Therefore Isaiah 9:12 continues with “say ye not,” and those addressed are expressly distinguished from “this people,” Isaiah 9:11.
“Ye shall not say conspiracy.”
Isaiah 9:12. It is impossible that the Prophet can mean to say: “Ye shall not call everything conspiracy that people call conspiracy!” For what sort of confederations did they incorrectly call conspiracies? May, perhaps, Pekah’s alliance with Rezin be justified here? Or is some conspiracy of the Prophet and his followers against Ahaz (ROORDA) approved of? Or, are the believing Israelites warned against taking part in conspiracies , which does not the least lie in the words? According to Isaiah 7:2, the heart of Ahaz, and his people quaked like trees before the wind, when intelligence came to Jerusalem of the union of Syria with Ephraim.
At that time, assuredly, the political wiseacres might be seen in every corner putting their heads together, and anxiously whispering: χֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ψχֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, “conspiracy, conspiracy.” They called the alliance of Pekah with Rezin a χֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ and saw therein, of course with some justice, the chief danger of Judah. Thus, the Prophet adds, “and what they fear shall not ye fear.” It must therefore have been a conspiracy that was the subject of fear to the mass of the nation of Judah. The meaning then is that men ought not to say “conspiracy” so often, not so incessantly to have this word in their months, and make the conspiracy the matter of greatest concern.
4. Sanctify——be taken.Isaiah 9:13-15. Here begins the antithesis, that says what ought to be. They ought to sanctify Jehovah, (comp. Isaiah 29:23, the only other instance of this Hiph.); He ought to be the object of fear, the terror-maker. In such a case He will be for man a safe, sheltering, holy asylum (comp. Psalms 15:1; Psalms 18:3; Psalms 23:6; Psalms 84:5). But He will be a stone of stumbling to those that fear Him not. Therefore the two houses of Israel, Judah and Ephraim, shall be destroyed just by the LORD. It would have been better for this fleshly Israel, had it never known the LORD. Jerusalem is mentioned expressly, because, as capital city, its example had great influence. To it the LORD will be a snare.
[J. A. on Isaiah 9:12-14. χֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, according to etymology and usage, is a treasonable combination or conspiracy. It is elsewhere commonly applied to such a combination on the part of subjects against their rulers (2 Kings 11:14; 2 Kings 12:21; 2 Kings 14:19; 2 Kings 15:30). It is not strictly applicable, therefore, to the confederacy of Syria and Israel against Judah (, , ,etc.), nor to that of Ahaz with the king of Assyria (BARNES,etc.). It would be more appropriate to the factious combinations among the Jews themselves (ABEN EZRA, KIMCHI), if there were any trace of these in history. The correct view seems to be: that the opposition of the Prophet and his followers to seeking foreign aid, viz.: Assyrian, as a violation of duty to Jehovah, like the conduct of Jeremiah during the Babylonian siege, was regarded by the king and his adherents as a treasonable combination to betray them to their enemies. But God commands not to regard the cry of treason or conspiracy, nor to share the real or pretended terrors of the unbelievers.”
On Isaiah 9:14. ξִ ?χγָּ ?ωׁ. “Although the temples of the gods were regarded as asylums by the Greeks and Romans, no such usage seems to have prevailed among the Christians till the time of Constantine (BINGHAM’S,Orig. Ecclesiastes 8:11; Ecclesiastes 8:1). As to the Jews, the only case which has been cited to establish such a practice seems to prove the contrary. So far was the altar from protecting Joab, that he was not even dragged away, but killed on the spot. [The same obtains with 1 Kings 1:50 sq., cited by .—TR.]. The word was meant to bear the same relation to ϊχγιωε (in Isaiah 9:13) that ξεψΰ bears to ϊιψΰε and ξςψιυ to ξςψιφε. God was the only proper object to be dreaded, feared and sanctified, i. e., regarded as a holy being in the widest and the most emphatic sense.
Thus explained ξδγωׁ corresponds almost exactly to the Greek τὸἅγιον, the term applied to Christ by the angel who announced His birth (Luke 1:35). In 1 Peter 2:7, where this very passage is applied to Christ, ἡτιμή seems to be employed as an equivalent to ξχγωׁ as here used. To others he is a stone of stumbling, but to you who believe He is ἡτιμή, something precious, something honored, something looked upon as holy. The same application of the words is made by Paul, Romans 9:33. These quotations seem to show that the Prophet’s words have an extensive import, and are not to be restricted either to his own times or to the times of Christ. The doctrine of the text is, that even the most glorious exhibitions of God’s holiness, i. e., of His infinite perfection, may occasion the destruction of the unbeliever.”]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
3. THE OF THE PROPHET TO HIS
CHAPTER Isaiah 8:16 to Isaiah 9:6a) Prayer and Exhortation merging into prophetic visionCHAPTER Isaiah 8:16-22. (Isaiah 9:1)
16 BIND up the testimony,
Seal the law among my disciples.
17 And I will wait upon the LORD,
That hideth his face from the house of Jacob,
And I will look for him.
18 Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me
Are for signs and for wonders in Israel
From the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth in Mount Zion.
19 And when they shall say unto you,
Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards
That peep, and that mutter:
Should not a people seek unto their God?
For the living to the dead?
20 To the law and to the testimony:
If they speak not according to this word,
It is because there is no light in them,
21 And they shall pass through it, hardly bestead and hungry:
And it shall come to pass, that when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves,
And curse their king and their God,
And look upward.
22 And they shall look unto the earth;
And behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish;
And they shall be driven to darkness.
Isaiah 9:1 (23). Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation,
When at the first he lightly afflicted
The land of Zebulon and the land of Naphtali,
And afterward did more grievously afflict
Her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in kGalilee of the nations.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 8:16. ϊςεγδ beside here and Isaiah 8:20 occurs only Rth 4:7. The meaning is “testifying;” in the passive sense, “that which is testified,” which then may be taken in various senses. The divine will which the prophets testify to men (Exodus 19:21; Exodus 19:23; Deuteronomy 8:19; 1 Samuel 8:9; Jeremiah 11:7; Jeremiah 42:19; Amos 3:13, etc.) has for contents both what men ought to do and what God has resolved to do. φεֹ ?ψ imper. from φָ ?ψַ ?ψ constringere, colligare (Isaiah 11:13); ηָ ?ϊַ ?ν (in Isaiah again only Isaiah 29:11) is “to seal.”—μξֻּ ?γ occurs only Isaiah 1:4; Isaiah 54:13 and Jeremiah 2:24; Jeremiah 13:23. It means doctus, eruditus; and is used both of spiritual and of physical relations.
On Isaiah 8:17-18. According to our construction it might be expected that there would be εַ ?ΰֲ ?πִ ?ι before ηִ ?λִּ ?ιϊִ ?ι. But this εΰπι follows in Isaiah 8:18; for δπδΰπλι does not mean “behold, I am here,” but, “behold I.” I do not deny that in itself it may mean the former. But I believe that were this the Prophet’s meaning he would have expressed it in a less mistakable form by writing δִ ?πְ ?πִ ?ι before ΰπλι or (Genesis 49:16) δִ ?πֶ ?πִ ?εּ. I think δπδΰπλι, then, is epexegetical of the subject of ηλιϊι. Then is explained why this subject is not more distinctly marked by εַ ?ΰֲ ?πִ ?ι.
The Prophet obtains a more emphatic prominence for it in the δπδΰπλι.—ΰεֹ ?δ and ξεֹ ?τֶ ?η are combined as in Deuteronomy (Deuteronomy 4:34; Deuteronomy 6:22; Deuteronomy 7:19; Deuteronomy 13:3; Deuteronomy 26:8; Deuteronomy 28:46; Deuteronomy 29:2; Deuteronomy 34:11. Comp. Isaiah 20:3.—ξֵ ?ςִ ?νεπε depends on ΰϊεϊεξετϊιν. This addition is, in relation to ΰωׁ ?ψπϊοΞμιιΧ, not superfluous.
On Isaiah 8:19. ΰεα means an inflated leather bottle (occurs only Job 32:19, and as a proper name Numbers 21:10; Numbers 33:43), then the distended body of the ventriloquist, and then, not only the ventriloquist himself, (1 Samuel 28:3; 1 Samuel 28:9; 2 Kings 23:24; Isaiah 19:3; and the passage previously cited) but the pretended spirit of the dead that spoke by him (1 Samuel 28:7-8; Isaiah 29:4; 1 Chronicles 10:13). In many of these passages it is indeed doubtful which of these two meanings the word may have; or if it does not have both. Elsewhere the word seems to mean the secret art, necromancy, divination itself (2 Kings 21:6; 2 Chronicles 33:6). The plural is always ΰֹ ?αεֹ ?ϊ. Because this plural occurs also Job 32:19, it cannot for that reason be concluded that only women were possessed of this necromancy (αςμϊΰεα, 1 Samuel 28:7, the witch of Endor). Still it is surprising that αςμΰεα (mase.) is found only in the Talmud (vid.
GESEN. Thes. p. 35). ιִ ?γְּ ?ςֹ ?πִ ?ι never occurs alone, but always joined with ΰεֹ ?α. It means “the knowing one, wise one, or wizard.” , very much to the point, compares δαίμων according to Plato = δαίμων, “the much knowing being.”—φִ ?τְ ?φֵ ?σ Pilpel, found only in Isaiah. The word primarily is used of the chirping of birds (Isaiah 10:14; Isaiah 38:14), then of the voice proceeding out of the ground (Isaiah 29:4).—δָ ?βָ ?δ is likewise a word that imitates a sound (comp. ach. δchsen). As φτφσ represents a high, shrill sound, so ηβδ does a low one; for it is used for the growling of a lion (Isaiah 31:4), of the rolling of the thunder (Job 37:2), of the low murmuring of the dove (Isaiah 38:14; Isaiah 59:11). It occurs again in Isaiah 16:7; Isaiah 33:18; Isaiah 59:3; Isaiah 59:13.
In classic antiquity, too, we find a gentle, chirping, whispering voice ascribed to the dead. Comp. Iliad XXIII. 101, where it is said of the soul of Patroclos “ᾤχετοτετριγυῖα;” Odyss. Isaiah 24:5-9, where τρίζειν stridere is equally ascribed to the souls of the dead suitors and to the whirring of the bats in the dark caves. Other examples see in , in loc. In our passage the necromancers are said to hiss and mutter, because they imitated the voice of the dead in this fashion.—γָּ ?ψַ ?ωׁ with ΰֶ ?μ (elsewhere it is construed with μְ Ezekiel 14:7, or with αְּ 1 Samuel 28:7, 2 Kings 1:2) by reason of Deu 12:30; Deuteronomy 18:11, occurs in Isaiah three times; here, Isaiah 11:10; Isaiah 19:3; comp.
Job 5:8. The preposition is perhaps to be treated as depending on the notion of “penetrating” that is contained in that of investigation.
On Isaiah 8:20. μϊεψδεΧ is an exclamation, a sort of shout of command. But if one must have a grammatical construction, the μְ may be taken as dependent on γִּ ?ψְ ?ωׁ ?εּ or ϊִּ ?τְ ?πεּ (comp. Leviticus 19:31; Leviticus 20:6), whereby the remark of (Thes. p. 728) obtains, that “ΰֶ ?μ praemittitur homini, μְ rei locoque.” compares Judges 7:18. μַ ?ιְ ?ηεָ ?δεּ ?μְ ?βִ ?γְ ?ςεֹ ?ο, but it is doubtful whether ηֶ ?ψֶ ?λ is not to be supplied there according to Isaiah 8:20.
Expositors differ extraordinarily about ΰρΞμֹ ?ΰ. The explanation is grammatically quite incorrect that makes ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ begin the apodosis, and construes it as a particle of asseveration or of the apodosis ( = λִּ ?ι) , , , etc.). Others take ΰρΞμΰ as a form of adjuration: “they will say truly.” But this involves an evident contradiction. For how can he who turns to the law and testimony curse his king and God in time of need? Others take it as an interrogative particle, referring it back to δֲ ?μֹ ?ΰ Isaiah 8:19 : “Or will not they accord in this word that are without dawn?” But from the context it appears that this is just what they will not do. I construe ΰρΞμΰ simply = nisi, and begin the apodosis with εςαψ Isaiah 9:21 (so, too, DIESTEL).—ωַׁ ?ηַ ?ψ (comp. Isaiah 19:12) occurs Isaiah 47:11; Isaiah 58:8, as figure of the dawning revelation of salvation.
On Isaiah 8:21. αָּ ?δּ is referred by , MAURER, , etc., to ΰψυ understood as a matter of course, Isaiah 8:22. But this ΰψυ is not so a matter of course, because it first appears after; and ςָ ?αַ ?ψ cannot be said only in relation to the notion “land.” ROORDA, refer it more correctly to the condition intimated by πִ ?χְ ?ωֶׁ ?δ—.ΰιομΰωׁ ?ηψ is the ἅπ. λεγ. If χָ ?ωָׁ ?δ means durum esse, “to be hard, heavy,” then πִ ?χְ ?ωֶׁ ?δ is “treated hard, grieved, oppressed.”—ψָ ?ςֵ ?α (Isaiah 9:19; Isaiah 29:8; Isaiah 32:6; Isaiah 44:12; Isaiah 58:7; Isaiah 58:10) adds to the notion of outward pressure that of incapacity to bear, that is occasioned by hunger. The full (Deuteronomy 32:15; Psalms 78:29; Proverbs 30:9) has easily too much, the hungry too little strength.—Hithp. δϊχφσ only here Kal. Isaiah 47:6; Isaiah 54:9; Isaiah 57:16-17; Isaiah 64:4; Isaiah 64:8.—χμμ I construe with αְּ in the sense of “curse against one.” Elsewhere it is construed with the accusative, and the following αְּ signifies the higher power by which one swears, i.e., by whose mediation one imprecates evil on the object of his wrath (1 Samuel 17:43; 2 Kings 2:24). But with that construction there would be wanting here an object of the cursing (DIESTEL).
And it is much more natural that one enraged should curse the cause of his sufferings than the sufferings themselves. χμμ may be construed with αְּ after the analogy of verbs that mean striving (Isaiah 19:2; Isaiah 30:32, etc.) and being angry (Deuteronomy 3:26; Psalms 78:62; Genesis 30:2; Genesis 44:18, etc.).—On Isaiah 8:22. δִ ?αִּ ?ιθ Hiph. Isaiah 18:4; Isaiah 22:11; Isaiah 42:18; Isaiah 51:1-2; Isaiah 51:6, etc. φψδεηωׁ ?λδ, “distress and darkness,” vid. comment. on Isaiah 8:30.—ξָ ?ςεּ ?σ caligo “obscurity,” ἄπ. λεγ.—φεχδ found again Isaiah 30:6; Proverbs 1:27.—ΰֲ ?τֵ ?μָ ?δ (again Isaiah 58:10; Isaiah 59:9) is used for thick darkness, e. g., Exodus 10:22.—ξְ ?πֻ ?γַּ ?η some take in the sense of “scared away,” so that the transition would begin here. “As to this time the nation will have been rejected, so from now on shall misfortune, as it were, be exiled” . But the words ΰτΧξΧ are so completely co-ordinate with both the foregoing members of the sentence, and on the other hand the transition is so utterly without anything to indicate it, that this meaning cannot be satisfactory. Others explain after the analogy of Jer 23:12, as if it read εּ ?αָֽ ?ΰֲ ?τֵ ?μָ ?δδεּ ?ΰξְ ?πֻ ?γַּ ?η, or εְ ?δִ ?πּ ?εֹ αָּֽ ?ΰֲ ?τΧξΧ. But this also seems too artificial. The omission of the subject, when it is especially looked for on account of its generic difference from the subjects of both the foregoing members, must raise a doubt.
But πָ ?γַ ?η has by no means only the signification “to scatter, disperse.” In Deuteronomy 20:19 it means impellers (securim), 2 Samuel 15:14, propellere, immittere (miseriam) Proverbs 7:21 depellere, “drive away; seduce.” Why then may not ΰτּ ?μδξπγη mean tenebrae immissae, whereby, because the notion dispellere undoubtedly lies in the word, it may be taken in the sense of ab omni parte immissae, longe lateque diffusae? So substantially SAADIA, KOCHER. As regards the incongruity of gender, it need give no surprise. The predicate is to be construed as neuter: tenebrae immissum, expansum aliquid. It is apparent that in the three members of Isa 8:22 b reigns the law of unity in manifoldness. For evidently these three members are so far alike that in all of them the words are in pairs, and the notion of darkness recurs as the chief one.
But in the first member occurs hendiadys (distress and darkness = obscuring distress, or distressing obscurity), in the second both are merged into one notion, dimness of anguish; in the third the predicate is added in an adjective, i. e., participial form.
On Isaiah 8:23 (Isaiah 9:1). I construe the words ΰνμΰ Isaiah 8:20 on to ξπγη Isaiah 8:22 as a parenthesis, and refer λιμΰξεςσεβεΧ to μϊεψδεμϊςεγδ Isaiah 9:20. Where law and testimony live in men’s souls, there, spite of distress (ξεּ ?φָ ?χ only here in Isaiah; comp. Job 36:16; Job 37:10), is no darkness. μֹ ?ΰξεּ ?ςָ ?σἄπ. λεγ. notice in Mu-aph a reverse vowel pointing from Ma-uph, Isaiah 8:22, a play of words that reflects the contrast of thought.—μָ ?δּ anticipates the idea of “land” contained in next clause.— λְּ ?—.λָּ ?ςֵ ?ϊεβε is not a conjunction “as,” but a preposition, and signifies the coincidence (Isaiah 9:2; Genesis 18:1; Genesis 18:10; Genesis 18:14; Genesis 39:18; Judges 2:4, etc.) = “about the first time.” This “first time” evidently extends to the dawn of the new time that begins with the Messiah; and ςϊδΰηψεο “last time” coincides therefore with ΰηψιϊδιξιν (Isaiah 2:2).—χַ ?μ means levem, tenuem, exilem esse (Genesis 8:11; Job 7:6; Nahum 1:14; Jeremiah 4:13, etc.,) therefore the Hiph. (again in Isaiah only, Isaiah 23:9) levem, exilem reddere.—ΰַ ?ψְ ?φָ ?δ a poetic form of ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ (comp. Job 34:13; Job 37:12).—εδΰηψεο is best construed as accusative of time. It might, indeed, be taken as nominative, but elegance is against it.
The same regions, that in the first clause of the verse are described as the object of the δֵ ?χַ ?μ “degrading,” are now, in the second clause, by other divisions and names, said to be the object of δλαιγ, “glorifying.” [“The English version supposes a contrast that requires δֵ ?χַ ?μ to be taken in the sense of lightly afflicting, as distinguished from δִ ?λְ ?αִּ ?ιγ to afflict more grievously. But this distinction is unauthorized by usage.”—J. A. ].
AND 1. I cannot help thinking that in this section we have a farewell address of the Prophet; as it were, his spiritual will. That it speaks of “disciples,” whereas there is no mention of them elsewhere, is a hint that here lies before us a written archive specially meant for them. What, then, could the Prophet have given his disciples in this written form, but something that must be valuable to them for the time, when he could no longer communicate with them by word of mouth as he could at that moment? Then, too, the prayer to the LORD, to seal in the disciples’ law and testimony, the emphatic reference to the pledges of faith given in the persons of himself and his sons, the warning against future seductions, and the reference to that which could give light and comfort in the troublous days to be expected,—all this brings me to the conviction that here we have actually the spiritual testament of Isaiah to his disciples.
2. Bind up—my disciples.Isaiah 8:16. The opening words of this will connect appropriately with the LORD’S words of exhortation Isaiah 8:13. I have no doubt that the words Isaiah 8:16, are addressed to Jehovah. For only the LORD can do this binding up and sealing. The prophets might seal a book roll, or declare that the meaning of a prophecy is to be shut up till a certain time (vid.Daniel 8:26; Daniel 12:4; Daniel 12:9; Isaiah 10:4; Isaiah 22:10; Isaiah 29:11; Jeremiah 51:60 sqq. and my comment); but they cannot seal the divine revelation in the hearts of men.
Moreover, in all the following verses the Prophet is the speaker, and the change from the words of God to the words of the Prophet must certainly have been more distinctly marked than by the simple εְ before ηλιϊι. The mention of binding up and sealing in a spiritual sense was perhaps occasioned by the actions appropriate to the real documents (vid.Jeremiah 32:9 sqq.). Having so disposed of the writing that contained his own will, the Prophet prayed the LORD to do still better, and enclose and seal up his testament in the hearts of his disciples. For the propriety of the metaphor, vid.Proverbs 3:3; Proverbs 7:3; Jeremiah 31:33. They are the same as “are written to life,” Isaiah 4:3. As primarily “the law” means the Mosaic law, which was the basis and norm of all prophetic announcements (Deuteronomy 13:1 sqq.; Deuteronomy 18:18 sqq.), and which the Prophets ever and again had to reimpress (Jeremiah 29:19), so Isaiah must mean by “the testimony” all additional prophetic testimony, especially all threatenings and promises that referred to the future.
In the prayer he makes for his disciples, he does not intend the preservation of the divine testimony unto the proper time for its revelation, but he would thereby give to themselves the only true support and comfort for the evil days to come. As, according to Isaiah 8:17, his faith in the word of God was his own sole comfort, so (Isaiah 8:20) he directs his disciples to the law and testimony, warning them against every false comfort (Isaiah 8:19). Though Isaiah had primarily disciples and scholars in mind, we need not suppose he was at the head of a school of prophets. What he would teach them was religious truth, not to prophesy. And thus about this group of scholars, as about a nucleus, would gather all in Jerusalem and Judah that had any heart for the spiritual jewels of Israel.
3. I will wait—in mount Zion.Isaiah 8:17-18. This affords a touching insight into the personal life of the Prophet. He enforces the prayer just made by confessing that he holds fast to the LORD, and waits (vid.Isaiah 5:4; Isaiah 25:9; Isaiah 26:8; Isaiah 33:2; Isaiah 51:5; Isaiah 59:9; Isaiah 59:11; Isaiah 60:9; Isaiah 64:2), notwithstanding the LORD seems to have forsaken the house of Jacob (he evidently means “this people,” the fleshly Israel) and hidden His face (comp. Isaiah 50:6; Isaiah 53:3; Isaiah 54:8; Isaiah 59:2; Isaiah 64:6). But he does not hope alone.
His children hope with him. This is significant. We know, indeed, nothing about the age of the children. That our passage follows close on Isaiah 8:1-4, is no proof that it originated in that period. Isaiah would hardly at that time have designated his children (plural) as companions of his faith. For Maher-shalal was hardly yet born, and this circumstance speaks rather for later composition.
Isaiah knows that his children are not only children of his body, but of his spirit too. They are miraculous children, products, not only of nature, but of the divine effective power. (Romans 9:7 sqq.: Galatians 4:28 sq.). Therefore, not only are his and their names prophetic, but their birth, too, is such; at least that of Maher-shalal. Thus they are by their existence as by their names ΰϊεϊ, signa, τύποιτοῦμέλλοντος (Romans 5:14) “finger boards,” and ξετϊιν, miraculous pledges of miracles. “Which Jehovah has given me;” by these words Isaiah points to the support of his hope. For why should not we hope in God who has done such wonders? Our passage, moreover, recalls the words of Jos 24:15 : “I and my house will serve the LORD”
4. And when they shall say—to the dead.Isaiah 8:19. The Prophet now adds a warning against seduction to idolatrous necromancy. And does not this warning give the impression of proceeding from a man who is on the point of leaving his own, and who, before his departure, seeks to protect them against impending danger? “And when they shall say,” presents the superstition as at hand and to be dreaded. From Isaiah 2:6; Isaiah 3:2 sq., we see that various sorts of superstitious divination were practised among the Jews at that time. Such were expressly forbidden in the law.
Comp. Leviticus 19:31; Leviticus 20:6; Leviticus 20:27; Deuteronomy 18:10-11. In all these passages ΰαεϊ “familiar spirits” and ιγςπιν “wizards” are named together, and Deuteronomy 18:11 the words γּ ?ψֵ ?ωׁ ΰֶ ?μΞδַ ?ξֵּ ?ϊִ ?ιν “necromancer” are expressly added: so that Isaiah seems to have had this passage in mind.
The second clause of the verse, “should not,” etc., is usually regarded as the reply of the believing disciples to those who tempted them [J. A. ]. But this seems to me unnecessary. It is primarily the answer that Isaiah himself gives, and it is to be understood that the disciples are to reply to the same effect. According to the Prophet, those seductive temptations are to be met by two arguments. First, he urges that every nation must inquire of its god as the chief disposer of its destiny.
Therefore Israel onght to turn to Jehovah. It appears from this that the Prophet assumes the position that Jehovah is the national god of Israel, without challenging the existence of other gods, and that he assumes that those tempters recognize Jehovah as the proper national god. (God of the fathers). The second argument Isaiah takes from the representation of the ancients of the relation of the dead to the living. Only he that lives in the body lives really. By death he sinks deep down. Comp.
FRIEDR., ,Homer. Theol. VII. § 14 sqq. Nachhomer. Theol. VII. § 14 sqq.
But how nearly Hebrew representations approach those of classic antiquity, may be seen from passages like Isaiah 14:9 sqq.; Ezekiel 26:20 sq,; Ezekiel 31:14 sqq.; Ezekiel 32:17 sqq.; Ezekiel 38:18 eq.; Psalms 6:6; Psalms 88:4 sqq.; Job 14:10 sqq. It is therefore folly, nonsense, to seek any help for the living among those gone down deep. Thus the words αςγεβε are to be construed interrogatively: “For the living (shall one inquire of) the dead?”
4. To the law—Galilee of the nations.Isaiah 8:20-21 (Isaiah 9:1). Now Isaiah refers his disciples to the divine source of light and comfort, which alone can keep them upright in the impending evil days. Whoever does not find these his support, will undoubtedly be destroyed. Who shall say: “To the law and the testimony?” All that have no dawn. They are such as nowhere see in any outward relations a ray of light, that announces the day of salvation.
When such see no inward comfort and support by means of God’s word, they wander oppressed and hungry, etc. As hunger smarts, it readily happens that such fall into a bitter rage and curse their king and God, thus both the heavenly and earthly government, as being to blame for their sufferings. Most expositors understand by ξμλε “his king” that a divinity is meant; and only differ as to whether, according to Psalms 5:3; Psalms 68:25, Jehovah is meant, [so J. A. and BARNES] or, according to Amos 5:26; Zephaniah 1:5, the idols; agreeing that “king” and “God” mean the same person. But against this speaks: 1. αְּ occurring twice; 2. the following “he looks upward and to the earth he looks.” Similar blasphemy is described as a symptom of the anti-Christian time Revelation 16:9; Revelation 16:11; Revelation 16:21.
Wherever the wretched look, above or to earth, everywhere presents itself only the mournful sight of dark distress.
About the first time,etc.Isaiah 8:23 (Isaiah 9:1). The Prophet now intimates what sort of light shall arise to the believing from the law and testimony. He shall know from the prophecy, which the Prophet with these very words gives to his own (to which however, others still are added later), that the North of Palestine, which heretofore was little regarded compared with the South, shall attain to great honor, and become a place of great blessing to the whole land. He evidently refers to the Messianic time, and intimates that the glory of it will illuminate in an eminent way that northern region of Palestine. More particularly as to the how? and when? the Prophet does not know. If it is asked why he predicts this just here, we may see the ground for it in the fact that at that time, it was just from that northern quarter of the Ten Tribes, that great danger threatened Judah.
The war with Syria and Ephraim was the occasion of this whole series of prophecies. The gaze of the Prophet is emphatically fastened on the North. What wonder if on this occasion he not only predicts the impending judgment of this northern land, but also the glory in store for it!
Zebulon was bounded on the North by Naphtali, eastward by the sea of Galilee, westward by Asher and Ph�nicia (comp. Joshua 19:10 sqq.). Naphtali possessed the north-east of Canaan west of Jordan, for it touched the base of Antilebanon, was bounded on the east by the sea of Galilee, on the south by Zebulon, and on the west by Asher. (Joshua 19:32 sqq.). As “the way of the sea,” according to the context, must be a land inhabited by Israelites, it cannot be the coast of the Mediterranean, as some have supposed; for Ph�nicians dwelt there. It can only be the coast of the ιַ ?νλִּ ?πֶּ ?ψֶ ?ϊ “the sea of Chinnereth” (Numbers 34:11; Joshua 12:3; Joshua 13:27)—ςαψδιψγּ ?ζ “bank of Jordan,” is East Jordan land. The expression, with and without “the sun-rising,” is extremely common (Genesis 1:10 sq.; Numbers 35:14; Deuteronomy 1:1; Deuteronomy 1:5; Joshua 1:14 sq.; Isaiah 2:10, etc.).
The region named here βμιμδβειν “Galilee of the nations,” (ἄπ. λεγ.), was originally called δַ ?βָּ ?μִ ?ιμ, “the Galilee,” (the bent, the circuit, circulus, annulus, comp. λִּ ?λָּ ?ψ) and was a part of Naphtali. Comp. Joshua 20:7; Joshua 21:32; 1 Chronicles 6:61; 1Ma 2:63. The region is called also ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υδַ ?βָּ ?μִ ?ιμ (1 Kings 9:11), and δַ ?βָּ ?μֶ ?ιμָ ?δ (2 Kings 15:29).
In Judges 1:30-33 we are told that, as elsewhere, the Canaanites were not exterminated from this region. From the nature of things, in a region so distant from the national sanctuary, the heathen element would increase more than elsewhere. The continual intercourse with neighboring heathen in war and peace, moreover, the depriving the land of its Israelite inhabitants by Tiglath-Pileser (2 Kings 15:29) may have gradually given the heathen element a preponderance. From the New Testament, we know that the Jews looked down on the Galileans with a certain contempt (John 1:46; John 7:41; John 7:52; Acts 2:7). When, John 7:41 the Jews questioned whether the Messiah would come out of Galilee, when they, John 9:52, asserted, too, that not even a Prophet was to come out of Galilee, it is the more remarkable that, as quotes, Talmud and Midrasch say: that “the Messiah shall be revealed in Galilee, and from out Tiberias shall the redemption dawn.” But Matthew sees in the fact that Jesus “came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim” a fulfilment of our prophecy, and justly (vid.Matthew 4:13 sqq.). For that the Prophet notices such special traits of the Messianic picture of the future as the ante-nuptial conception, and the going forth from Galilee will not surprise those who reflect that these special matters are no trifles, but of greatest importance, and thus in a high degree worthy of prophetic notice. For they belong essentially to that fundamental character of the plan of redemption, whereby the Redeemer and His kingdom shall rise out of the depth of humility and ignominy to honor and glory.
[J. A. with , and others regard the words Isaiah 9:16 as spoken to the Prophet “by God, or, as some suppose, by the Messiah, the ξִּ ?χְ ?γָּ ?ωׁ mentioned in the foregoing verse; and likewise Isaiah 9:17-18, because there is no intimation of a change in the speaker, and because Hebrews 2:13, 5:17 is quoted as the words of the Messiah, not as an illustration, but as a proof that Christ partook of the same nature with the persons called His children. and v. HOFMANN (vid. their comment on Hebrews 2:13), who agree in treating these words of Isa 8:16-18 as the Prophet’s, and yet recognize a typical and prophetic reference to Christ, explain the use made of this in Heb. l. c. by the canon: “it admits of no doubt that the writers of the New Testament, allow themselves to quote utterances of typical Old Testament personages concerning themselves as utterances, and words of Christ.” .—TR.].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
b) The light of the future proceeding from a child that is to be born of the race of DavidIsa_9:1-6. (Isaiah 9:2-7).
2 (1) THE people that walked in darkness, have seen a great light:
They that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.
(2) 3Thou hast multiplied the nation,
And not increased the joy:
They joy before thee according to the joy in harvest,
And as men rejoice when they divide the spoil.
(3) 4For thou hast broken the yoke of his burden,
And the staff of his shoulder,
The rod of his oppressor,
As in the day of Midian.
5 (4) Fora every battle of the warrior is with confused noise,
And garments rolled in blood;
bBut this shall be with burning and fuel of fire.
(5) 6For unto us a child is born,
Unto us a son is given:
And the government shall be upon his shoulder:
And his name shall be called
Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God,
The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
(6) 7Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end,
Upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom;
To order it, and to establish it
With judgment and with justice, from henceforth even for ever.
The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this,
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 9:1. φַ ?μְ ?ξָ ?εֶ ?ϊ is regarded by almost all later authorities as modified from φַ ?μְ ?ξεּ ?ϊ (root φμν “to be dark”). But I rather side with (De inferis, § 190 sq., 285, and Neue exeg. Krit. Aehrenl. II., p. 124), who, referring to ςַ ?ζְ ?ξָ ?εֶ ?ϊ (name of a person, 2 Samuel 23:31; 1 Chronicles 27:25, and of a place, Nehemiah 7:28; Nehemiah 12:29; Ezra 2:24; comp. Son 8:6) explains it as a superlative expression. The word often stands parallel with ηωֶׁ ?κְ and other kindred expressions (Job 3:5; Job 10:21; Job 28:3; Psalms 107:10; Psalms 107:14, etc.). It is a poetic term and intensive of ηωׁ ?κ, being related to it as the night of death to common night. The word does not again occur in Isaiah.—πָ ?βַ ?δּ Kal. only here in Isaiah; Hiph. Isaiah 13:10.
On Isaiah 9:2. Had the Prophet meant the heathen, he would have written δַ ?βּ ?εֹ ?ι .πειν is evidently a distinct and single people.—In what follows, the most important inquiry is whether K’thibh or K’ri presents the correct reading. Of the old versions TARG., JON. and SYRUS decidedly read μεֹ; the LXX., too, so expresses itself that this reading is detected. But JEROME and read μֹ ?ΰ. But many as have been the attempts, no one has yet been able to obtain a satisfactory sense from the latter. I therefore take μֹ ?ε for the correct reading (as do KNOBEL, , [J. A. ] among the later authorities). It stands in front as in Jeremiah 7:7-9; Jeremiah 7:14; Jeremiah 7:33; Proverbs 24:8, because an emphasis rests on it.
On Isaiah 9:3. ςֹ ?μρֻ ?αֳּ ?μεֹ, “the yoke of his burden.” Of the noun ραμ only this form occurs, and that, in this verse, Isaiah 10:27; Isaiah 14:25. How the primary form is to be pointed is thus undecided. But we are justified in assuming ρֹ ?αֶ ?μ ( = ρֵ ?αֶ ?μ 1 Kings 11:28) after analogy of βֻּ ?γְ ?με (Psalms 150:2) from βֹּ ?γֶ ?μ (Isaiah 9:8; Isaiah 10:12, etc.) as with ρֻ ?αֲּ ?λεֹ (Jeremiah 4:7), χֻ ?ξְ ?φεֹ (Leviticus 2:2; Leviticus 5:12; Leviticus 6:8). βֻּ ?ωְׁ ?ξָ ?δּ Ezekiel 22:24. Comp. EWALD, § 255 b.—The goad of the neck is explained by “the goad of the driver.” ξַ ?θֶּ ?δ and ωֵׁ ?αֶ ?θ occur not seldom together in Isaiah 10:5; Isaiah 10:15; Isaiah 10:34; Isaiah 14:5; Isaiah 28:27; Isaiah 30:31 sq.—δַ ?πֹּ ?βֵ ?ωׂ αּ ?εֹ is evidently an allusion to Exodus 5:6, where Pharaoh’s task-masters are called πֹ ?βְ ?ωִׂ ?ιναָּ ?ςָ ?ν. Only in these two passages does πָ ?βַ ?ωׂ occur with αְּ (after analogy of verbs that mean a physical holding to, holding fast, penetrating into: γָּ ?αַ ?χ ,πָ ?βַ ?ς ,δֶֽ ?ηֱ ?ζִ ?ιχ ,ΰָ ?ηַ ?ζ, etc., comp. πֹ ?δֵ ?βαָּ ?ν Isaiah 11:6).
On Isaiah 9:4. The λִּ ?ι at the beginning seems to me to be not co-ordinate with, but subordinated to the λִּ ?ι that begins ver 3.—The words ρΰεγνΰοαΧ are very difficult. The ancient versions all vary, and it is evident the word was unknown to all. JOSEPH KIMCHI first cited the Syriac ρְ ?ΰεּ ?πֹ ?ΰ ,ξְ ?ρֹ ?ο ,ξְ ?ρֹ ?πֹ ?ΰ ,ρְ ?ΰεּ ?ο = calceus, ocrea, caliga, as also to the like meaning Chaldaic ρֵ ?ιπָ ?ΰ and ξְ ?ρָ ?πָ ?ΰ (comp. Aetheop. ΰֲ ?ρָ ?ΰο). To this explanation assent, among modern authorities, , . , EWALD, , , , DIESTEL.
I side with these, and give to ρְ ?ΰεֹ ?ο the meaning “boot,” and ρֹ ?ΰֵ ?ο, as particip. of the verbi denom. ρָ ?ΰַ ?ο “to boot, to stride in boots.”—ψַ ?ςַ ?ωׁ is understood by many of the noise of battle, according to Jeremiah 10:22 (, [J. A. ] etc.). But the expression is not too strong for the heavy tramp of the booted foot, as says it is, since, Psalms 72:16. it is even used of the rustling of the standing grain. Besides, the Prophet would depict here the wild noise of the impetuous advance, as afterwards the shocking look of the blood-stained garments. has shown from PLIN. Hist. Nat.
IX. 18, that soldiers’ boots were stuck with nails (clavi caligares). He also cites JOSEP. De bello jud. VI. 1, 8, where it is told of a centurion who had τὰὑποδήματαπεπαρμέναπυκνοῖςκαὶὀξέσινἥλοις, and JUVEN. Sat. III. 247 sq., where one cast down in the tumult says: “Planta mox undique magna calcor et in digito clavus mihi militis haerit.” ξβμμδ part.
Pual, from βָ ?μַ ?μ, which Isaiah uses again only in the Niph. (Isaiah 34:4).—The Vav before διϊδ is that paratactic ε which we must render by a relative pronoun “that, this.”—The phrase διδμωׂ ?ψτδ is found only here and Isaiah 64:10.—ξΰλμϊ only here and Isaiah 9:18.
On Isaiah 9:5. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ means both the new-born child (Exodus 1:17; Exodus 2:3; Exodus 2:6), and also the grown boy (Genesis 42:22, etc.). Isaiah uses the word pretty often: Isaiah 2:6; Isaiah 8:18; Isaiah 11:7; Isaiah 29:23; Isaiah 57:4-5. The following αֵּ ?ο defines the sex. In 1 Chronicles 22:9, where the birth of Solomon is promised to David, it is said: δִ ?πֵּ ?δβεֹ ?μַ ?γμָ ?κְ. It is not impossible that the source whence the chronicler drew suggested the Prophet’s words here—εַ ?ϊְּ ?δִ ?ι is praeter. propheticum. For the Prophet sees the entire life of the Messiah child as actually before him.—The noun ξִ ?ωׂ ?ψָ ?δ, principatus, principatum, is found only here and Isaiah 9:6.
The root ωָׂ ?ψָ ?δ, kindred to ωָׂ ?ψַ ?ψ, whence ωַׂ ?ψ. ωָׂ ?ψָ ?δis not used in Hebrew in the sense of dominari, principatum tenere.—ςμωׁ ?λξε, “The shoulders are mentioned here as Isaiah 9:3; Isaiah 10:27, in as much as they bear and carry (Genesis 49:15; Psalms 81:7), the office bearer having the office, as it were, on his shoulders.” HENGST. ιχψΰ must be taken impersonally, as often: Genesis 11:9; Genesis 16:14; Numbers 11:34; Joshua 7:26; Judges 15:19. The TARGUM , translates on the assumption that only ωׂ ?ψΞωׁ ?μεν is the name of the child, and that all that precedes is the name of him that bestows the name, for it renders thus: “et appellabitur nomen ab admirabili consilii, Deo forti, qui manet in aeternum, Messias, cujus diebus pax super nobis multiplicabitur. The most Rabbis follow this view, referring the predicates, “everlasting Father, Prince of peace,” to Hezekiah. Even the Masorets would have only these predicates just named regarded as the name of the child, as may be seen from the Sakeph over βִּ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ψ. But every one looks for the name of the one to be named after ωׂ ?ξε, and not for that of the one giving the name. As the expressions ΰμβαεψ ,ΰαιΞςγ ,ωׂ ?ψΞωׁ ?μεν form pairs, symmetry requires that τμΰιεςυ be regarded as a pair.
If we construe it as two words, we have five names, which does not harmonize with the duality underlying the passage. Beside it has an analogy in τֶ ?ψֶ ?ΰΰָ ?γָ ?ν (Genesis 16:12) which is predicated of Ishmael. In this the man is properly subject and the notion “wild ass” is attribute. It might read ΰγντψΰ: but the expression would not be so strong. Ishmael is not said to be a man that might be called a wild ass; but he is called directly a wild ass, that is at the same time a man accordingly, a human (two-legged) wild ass. So too is τμΰιεςυ stronger than ιεςυτμΰ; for the latter would be the counsellor of a wonderful thing, or, that is a wonder, whereas the former presents the subject as a personal wonder, i. e., a wonderful one that gives counsel.
Comp. the expressions ιָ ?ξִ ?ινξִ ?ρְ ?τָּ ?ψ ,ΰֲ ?πָ ?ωִׁ ?ινξְ ?ςַ ?θ, which are stronger than if the words were reversed. τֶ ?μֶ ?ΰ may be either St. constructus or absolutus, but the latter gives the more intensive sense.—ΰμβαεψ cannot be “strong hero” (GESEN., DE W., MAUR.) because (as KNOB. says) ΰֵ ?μ does not occur as an adjective and because it does not read βִּ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ψΰֵ ?μ. Like most words of this formation, βαεψ is a substantive, but it is no abstract noun, and the boundary of nomina concreta substantiva and adjectiva is fluctuating (comp. ιִ ?μּ ?εֹ ?γ 2 Samuel 5:14). So δַ ?βִּ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ψ stands as attribute of ΰֵ ?μ in the midst of adjectives, Deuteronomy 10:17; Jeremiah 32:18 : and Isaiah 10:21 ΰμβαιψ is undoubted predicate of the absolute Godhead.—ΰαιςγ. Names compounded of ΰֲ ?αִ ?ι are frequent. In many it means pater meus (thus is properly pointed ΰָ ?αִ ?ι), e. g. in ΰֲ ?αִ ?ιָּ ?δ ,ΰֲ ?αִ ?ιΰֵ ?μΰֲ ?αִ ?ιδεּ ?ΰ: for pater Dei, Jehovae is a dogmatic, and pater illius (for ΰαιδεΰ) is a grammatical impossibility. In the names where ΰֲ ?αִ ?ι is st. constructus, e. g., ΰֲ ?αִ ?ιςֶ ?ζֶ ?ψΰֲ ?αִ ?ιηַ ?ιִ ?μ ,ΰֲ ?αִ ?ιωָׁ ?μεֹ ?ν ,ΰֲ ?αִ ?ιωׁ ?εּ ?ς etc., it may be doubtful whether it is genitivus auctoris or attributivus.
But in ΰαιςγ the genitive of the author is inconceivable: eternity has no author. We must take it then as genitive of the attribute = Father whose predicate is eternity.
On Isaiah 9:6. ξַ ?ψְ ?αֶּ ?δ (formed like ξַֽ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ ,ξַ ?ωְׁ ?χֶ ?δ ,ξַ ?ψְ ?ΰδ), means multiplicatio, “increase,” and occurs again only Isaiah 33:23. ELIAS LEVITA conjectures that originally the text read μָ ?νψַ ?αָּ ?δ (eis multiplicatur imperium), which is little probable. We might rather conjecture that it originally read μְ ?δֵ ?ψְ ?αַּ ?δ, to which also the LXX. would agree, which ends Isaiah 9:5 with αὐτᾡ and begins Isaiah 9:6 with μεγάληήἀρχὴαὐτοῦ; from which it may be inferred they read ψַ ?αָּ ?δδַ ?ξִּ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?δ (μεֹ =) μֹ ?δ. The unusual construction would facilitate the change to μνψαδ. [On the ν clausum see J. A. in loc.]—ΰιοχυ vid. Isaiah 2:7. would have μξψαδεβε depend on ΰιοχυ.
Grammatically this is admissible. But then μξψαδ would be superfluous. One would only expect μξωׂ ?ψδ. Evidently ξψαδ corresponds to ΰιοχυ and stands in the same relation to ξωׂ ?ψδ as ΰιοχυ to ςμλρΰ—.ωׁ ?μεν and ςμξξμλϊε relate to the subject and not to the object of the increase and peace-making.—The infinitives μδλιο and μρςγδ I hold to be gerundive infinitives: thus is avoided the tautological relation to μξψαδεβε, i. e., the repetition of the aim.—χβΰδ is a two-edged word. It involves both the notion of the negative zeal consuming all that is opposed to it, and the notion of the positive zeal that provides and furthers all that serves the purpose. The same words occur again Isaiah 37:32.
Beside that, χβΰδ is found Isaiah 11:13; Isaiah 26:11; Isaiah 42:13; Isaiah 59:17; Isaiah 63:15.
AND 1. The progress at the close of Isaiah 8 to this first part of Isaiah 9 is like that from early dawn to sunrise. “No dawn,” Isaiah 8:20, “No darkness,” Isaiah 8:23 (Isaiah 9:1), “Light is risen upon them,” Isaiah 9:1, represent the stages in which the successive unfolding of the light contained in the Law and Testimony takes place. The light becomes not only clearer and brighter, but wider extended Isaiah 9:1-4 (2–5). All this blessing proceeds from a child, a son that is born to the people. It is a wonderful child; that is proved by his might and his names, that point to an origin above the earth. The child is a son of David, and will raise up the kingdom of David on the foundation of justice and righteousness. All this shall appear as accomplished by the zeal of Jehovah Isaiah 9:6 (7).
2. The people—divide the spoil.Isaiah 9:1-2. The people that walk in darkness is certainly the same as Isaiah 8:23 (Isaiah 9:1). So Matthew 4:16 understands the passage. But if the great light first rises on this part of the Israelitish nation, it will still not be confined to them. How could such great salvation be the portion of one member and not of the whole organism?
The imagery is like Isaiah 50:10; Isaiah 60:1 sq. The distresses referred to Isaiah 8:21 must necessarily have had a hurtful effect on the population numerically. Hence increase of the nation necessarily belongs to the new dawning day of happiness and prosperity. This benedictio vere theocratica is elsewhere, too, promised as the physical basis of the period of Messianic prosperity. Comp. Isaiah 49:18-21; Isaiah 54:1-3; Jeremiah 3:16 (and my comment in loc.); Isaiah 23:3 sq.
We assume that “the people” means Israel, not the heathen (see above, Text. and Gram.).
The nation, dwindled down to a remnant, is without joy; but, as no blessing comes singly, the nation, again become numerous, has great joy. This joy is so great because it is a joy before the Lord (Psalms 42:3; Psalms 95:2; Psalms 100:2). For substance comp. Judges 5:30; Psalms 4:8; Psalms 68:13; Psalms 126:5 sq.; Isaiah 33:23.
3. For thou hast broken—fuel of fire.Isaiah 9:3-4. These verses mention a twofold negative cause of joy: 1, the deliverance from the burden of oppression; 2, the cessation of war. The deliverance from oppression is mentioned first. But in order to give assurance that its recurrence is not to be apprehended, it is added that all arming for war, with its consequences, is for ever done away. Israel does not free itself by its own power from the yoke and goad of the driver.
The Lord has done it like once He destroyed Midian by a little band that was not even armed (Judges 7, especially Isaiah 9:2). The overthrow of the Midianites is mentioned Isaiah 10:26 in the same sense as here. The deliverance from bondage is especially described as everlasting, in that, Isaiah 9:4, the absolute end of all warlike occupation is announced. For as long as there is war, there are the conquered and slaves. Only when there is no more war does slavery cease, to which no one submits except by compulsion. Comp. for substance Psalms 46:9-10; Ezekiel 39:9-10; Zechariah 9:10. recalls the fact, that there exist coins of Vespasian and Domitian on which Peace is represented as kindling with a torch a heap of the implements of war.
4. For unto us a child—will perform this.Isaiah 9:5-6. A third λִּ ?ι “for” refers the totality of all the blessings before named to a personal cause, to a child that is bestowed as a gift to Israel and all mankind. Herein lies the reason why the prophetic testament of Isaiah is inserted at this place. For, from Isaiah 7 on, the Prophet has represented the Messianic salvation as proceeding from the race of David in a genuine human way by means of conception, pregnancy and birth. Thus the statement fits this place very well, that one day there will be a birth, the fruit of which will be a child, which, fashioned wonderfully and infinitely higher than all other human children, will establish the kingdom of David, his ancestor, not only on the firmest foundations, but shall raise it up to the point of eternal power and peace.
There is no need of a definite subject for ειχψΰ “and one shall call,” as the present has nothing to do with an actual name for use and calling. The name-giving is only ideal, not real, i. e., it is not the end, but means to the end, viz., the characteristic. The Prophet invents the names only in order by this means to characterize the child briefly, thus to say what he is, not how he shall actually be called by name. It is in this respect like ιִ ?δεָֹ ?δφִ ?γְ ?χֵ ?πεּ. “Jehovah our righteousness” (Jeremiah 23:6) and many other similar designations (comp. Isaiah 1:26; Isaiah 60:14; Jeremiah 11:16; Ezekiel 48:35, etc.). A wonder-counsellor is one (δִ ?λְּ ?μִ ?ιΰςֵ ?φָ ?δ28:29) “wonderful in counsel,” who forms wonderful, unfathomably deep purposes, into which “the angels desire to look” (1 Peter 1:12). “Mighty God” being added, intimates that He has the power to accomplish His purposes.
In this expression “God” is the chief word, and “mighty” is the attribute (see above, Text. and Gram.). Therefore the child is expressly called ΰֵ ?μ, “God,” and that, too, God, who is at the same time Hero.
The question arises: can this name ΰֵ ?μ “God” be applied to a creature, and in what sense? Psalms 82:1; Psalms 82:6, comp. John 10:34 sq., are cited, where princes are called ΰμδιν “gods.” When the Jews would have stoned Jesus “for blasphemy and because, being a man, he made himself God,” Jesus replied by referring to the Psalm: “Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?” Evidently He would say that it is not under all circumstances blasphemy to predicate divinity of a man, because otherwise the Psalm could not possibly have spoken so of men. He therefore does not deny that he had called Himself God, but He challenged the right of the Jews to charge Him on that account with blasphemy, because it was possible He may have called Himself God in that sense that was allowable from their standpoint. It appears therefore that the notion ΰμδιν certainly can be used in various senses, and in some circumstances may be said of a creature, and without blasphemy. But there is a difference between ΰֵ ?μ and ΰֱ ?μδִ ?ιν.
For the former is never used in the wide sense in which we see the latter used. ΰֵ ?μ always means the Godhead in a specific or absolute sense, even in passages like Genesis 31:29; Deuteronomy 28:32; Micah 2:1; Proverbs 3:27. In Ezekiel 31:11ΰֵ ?μ=ΰֵ ?ιμ, comp. Kin loc. and Ezekiel 32:21. We must, of course, admit that for the Prophet himself there hovered a certain obscurity about this expression. For it is impossible for us to ascribe to him the full, clear insight into the being of the person of Christ and of His Homoousia with the Father. It was the New Testament fulfilment, and especially the Resurrection of the Lord, that first brought full light in this respect.
The term “mighty God” must be contemplated from a double standpoint. From that of the Old Testament the expression appears to be a term of indefinite extent. It is possible that it designates the absolute Godhead, but it is far from clear in what sense. But if we contemplate the expression from the New Testament point of view, and in the light of its fulfilment, i. e., in the light of the Resurrection and Ascension, then it is plain not only that it may be taken as the predicate of the absolute Godhead, but that it must be so taken. For there is no son of David that can be regarded as the fulfiller of this prophecy except Jesus of Nazareth. But He is “declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead,” Romans 1:4.
But in what sense is eternal fatherhood (ΰλιςγ) ascribed to the child (ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ) in our passage? From the fact that the Son is called “Everlasting Father,” we know at once that it does not mean the Father that from eternity begot the Son. But we must here, too, distinguish between the Old Testament and the New Testament points of view, and must say that from the former the entire comprehensiveness of the expression is not appreciable. When Isaiah 63:16; Isaiah 64:7 calls Jehovah the true Father of Israel, this passage may be taken as saying that the Son is the eternal Mediator of this love. But from 1 Corinthians 15 we learn that the Son will be the Second Adam, Mediator of incorruptibility and immortality (9:53) for His own. Finally the child is called “Prince of Peace,” because, according to Isaiah 9:6, He stands at the head of a kingdom to which is assured eternal peace.
This assurance is founded on the fact that this King will be David and Solomon in one person: David in so far as He casts down every enemy; Solomon in so far as he reaps peace from this sowing of war (Psalms 72:3; Psalms 72:7; Jeremiah 33:6; Micah 5:4, etc.).—Of the increase,etc. The Prophet sees the promised Son enthroned with highly significant titles that He may be a true semper Augustus, ever an augmenter of the kingdom and institutor of eternal peace. To this end the child is set on David’s throne and over David’s kingdom. The expected Son is Davidic. It is the Son that is promised to David 2 Samuel 7, the real Solomon; for his kingdom of peace shall have no end. That quantitative and qualitative influence of the augmentatio and pacificatio is only possible by founding the kingdom on judgment and justice (comp. on Isaiah 1:21), and by carrying out every single act of administration in this spirit.
And upon his kingdom to order it is taken from 2 Samuel 7:12, where it is said: “I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish His kingdom” (εַ ?δֲ ?λִ ?ιπֹ ?ϊִ ?ιΰֶ ?ϊΞξַ ?ξְ ?μַ ?λְ ?ϊּ ?εֹ). Comp. Isaiah 9:13; Isaiah 9:16; 1 Chronicles 17:11; 1 Chronicles 22:10; 1 Chronicles 28:7; Proverbs 20:28.
[J. A. on Isaiah 9:6. “The word χπΰδ, “zeal,” expresses the complex idea of strong affection comprehending or attended by a jealous preference of one above another. It is used to signify God’s disposition to protect and favor His people at the expense of others. Sometimes, moreover, it includes the idea of a jealous care of His own honor, or a readiness to take offence at anything opposed to it, and a determination to avenge it when insulted. The expressions are derived from the dialect of human passion, but describe something absolutely right on God’s part for the very reasons which demonstrate its absurdity and wickedness on man’s. These two ideas of God’s jealous partiality for His own people and His jealous sensibility respecting His own honour are promiscuously blended in the usage of the word, and are perhaps both included in the case before us, or rather the two motives are identical; that is to say, the one includes the other.
The mention of God’s jealousy or zeal as the procuring cause of this result affords a sure foundation for the hopes of all believers. His zeal is not a passion, but a principle of powerful and certain operation. The astonishing effects produced by feeble means in the promotion, preservation, and extension of Christ’s kingdom can only be explained upon the principle that the zeal of the Lord of Hosts effected it.”
”Is not this the reign of Christ? Does it not answer all the requisite conditions? The Evangelists take pains to prove by formal genealogies His lineal descent from David; and His reign, unlike all others, still continues and is constantly enlarging. and other modern German writers have objected that this prophecy is not applied to Christ in the New Testament. But we have seen already that the first verse of the chapter and the one before it are interpreted by Matthew as a prophecy of Christ’s appearing as a public teacher first in Galilee, and, no one has denied that this is part of the same context. Nor is this all. The expressions of the verse before us were applied to Christ, before His birth, by Gabriel, when he said to Mary (Luke 1:32-34), ”He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest, and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David, and He shall reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there shall be no end.” The historical allusions in these words show clearly that the person spoken of was expected, or, in other words, a subject of prophecy; and though the terms are not precisely those used by Isaiah, they agree with them more closely than with any other passage.
Indeed the variations may be perfectly accounted for upon the supposition that the angel’s message was intended to describe the birth of Christ as a fulfilment, not of this passage only, but of several others also which are parallel with this, and that the language was so framed as to suggest them all, but none of them so prominently as the one before us, and the earlier promise upon which it was founded. Comp. 2 Samuel 7:11-12; Daniel 7:14; Daniel 7:27; Micah 4:7, etc.”]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
B.— OF TO BE BY MEANS OF ASSYRIA, TO ISRAEL OF THE TEN TRIBES
Isaiah 9:8 (Isaiah 9:7).– Isaiah 10:4.
To the prophecies that denounce impending judgment against Judah, of which Assyria was to be the agent, is joined a prophecy, that announces the same fate for the kingdom of the Ten Tribes. For, that the latter are the subject of this prophecy appears, 1) because, in the whole passage, only Israel or Jacob (Isaiah 9:7; Isaiah 9:11; Isaiah 9:13), the “Ephraimites and inhabitants of Samaria” (Isaiah 9:8) appear as those addressed; never Judah. For Isaiah 9:8 shows plainly that we must so understand Jacob and Israel (Isaiah 9:7), because those receiving the word spoken of in Isaiah 9:7 are designated as “the whole people,” and they in turn in the second clause of Isa 9:8 are specified, not as Judah and Israel, but as Ephraim and the inhabitants of Samaria: 2) because Isaiah 9:20 we notice that the totality who are there reproached with ruinous dissensions are divided into Ephraim and Manasseh. These are opposed to one another; if they unite it is for the purpose of attacking Judah. If Judah were included in the totality addressed there, it must read: “Ephraim Judah, Judah Ephraim.” But Ephraim and Manasseh are designated as the mutually contending members; Judah as one outside of the community and the common object of their hatred. We will show below that Isaiah 9:11 a does not conflict with this interpretation.
As to the period to which this prophecy belongs, we may ascertain it from Isaiah 9:9. It appears there that at this time pieces must have been rent away from the kingdom of the Ten Tribes. We know of only one such diminution of their territory occurring in that period. It is that related 2 Kings 15:29. According to that account Tiglath-Pileser, who had been invoked by Ahaz, depopulated a great part of the eastern and northern region of that kingdom. At that time the Ephraimites must have boasted that it would be easy to repair the damage they had suffered.
Isaiah felt that he must meet this foolish notion, which took the damage done by Tiglath-Pileser for the conclusion of their visitation, with the announcement that that visitation was only the beginning, only the first of many following degrees. If, then, the foregoing prophecies (7–9:6) fall in the time before the introduction of the Assyrians, then our present passage belongs to the period immediately after. And if chapters 7–9:6, are attributed to the beginning of the three years, when both Pekah and Ahaz were living, say about 743 B. C., then the present prophecy belongs to the close of this period, say about 740–39 B. C. (Comp. on Isaiah 7:15-17)
The form of our passage is artistic, yet simple. Proceeding from the underlying thought that what the Ephraimites took for the end, was only the first stage, the Prophet builds up his prophecy in three stages, each of which points to the succeeding one with the refrain: “for all this His anger is not turned away, but His hand is stretched out still.” Even the last concludes with these words to show that the judgment on Israel continues still beyond the immediate horizon of the prophetic view. This extreme visible horizon is the exile (Isaiah 10:4). Beyond that the Israel of the Ten Tribes has disappeared to the present day. They experienced no restoration like Judah did. But to “the day of visitation and desolation” (Isaiah 10:3) the punishments increase as the inward corruption grows.
After that visitation to which the audacious words Isaiah 9:9 refer, Israel, instead of recovering and growing strong, is renewedly hard pressed on the East and the West. But still more comes (Isaiah 9:11 b). Still the people are not converted to Him that smites them. Therefore the punishment falls first of all on the leaders of the people, who have proved themselves betrayers, whose sins must be expiated by the betrayed down to the young men, the widows and the orphans (Isaiah 9:13-16). But still more comes. For the people are as a forest on fire: for the flames of discord spread on all sides with devouring and desolation (Isaiah 9:17-20).
Injustice and violence, according to the constant Old Testament sentiment, the chief cause of the ruin of states, bring the people to the verge of the abyss. Then no seeking for aid from foreign nations will avail. Nothing remains but to submit to the horrors of exile. But still more comes. For even the carrying away into exile is not yet the end of God’s judgments on Israel (Isaiah 10:1-4).
Thus we have four sections, of which the first two have each five verses, the last two four verses. They may be set forth as follows:
1. The supposed end is the beginning of the judgment (Isaiah 9:7-11).
2. The deceivers the bane of the deceived (Isaiah 9:12-16).
3. Israel devouring itself by the flames of discord (Isaiah 9:17-20).
4. Injustice and violence fill up the measure and precipitate Israel into the horrors of exile (Isaiah 10:1-4).
____________________________
1. THE END IS THE OF THE
CHAPTER Isaiah 9:8-12. (Isaiah 9:7-11)
8 (7) THE LORD sent a word into Jacob,
And it hath lighted upon Israel.
(8) 9And all the people shall know,
Even Ephraim and the inhabitant of Samaria,
That say in the pride and stoutness of heart,
(9) 10The bricks are fallen down, but we will build with hewn stones:
The sycamores are cut down, but we will change them into cedars.
11 (10) Therefore the LORD shall set up the adversaries of Rezin against him,
And ajoin his enemies together;
(11) 12The Syrians before, and the Philistines behind;
And they shall devour Israel with bopen mouth.
For all this his anger is not turned away,
But his hand is stretched out still.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 9:8. βΰεδ according to Isaiah 13:3; Isaiah 13:11; Isaiah 16:6; Isaiah 25:11.—βγμμλλ again only Isaiah 10:12.—μΰξψ does not depend on ειγςε, but on βΰεδ and βγμμαα to which it relates as quotation marks, in as much as it introduces the speech that manifests that haughtiness.
On Isaiah 9:9. βζιϊ, properly ΰַ ?αְ ?πֵ ?ιβָ ?ζִ ?ιϊ, 1 Kings 5:31; Ezekiel 40:42; lapides caesurae, i. e., caesi, only here in Isa.—That αָּ ?πָ ?δ means not simply exstruere, construere, “build up,” “construct,” but also simply struere “to pile,” “pile up,” appears from passages like 1 Kings 18:32; Exodus 20:25.—ωׁ ?χξιρ only here. βγς Isaiah 10:33; Isaiah 14:12; Isaiah 22:25; Isaiah 45:2 (from these examples it appears that it is wont to be joined with πλּ ?μ); but the context shows that not cutting down trees is meant, as supposes, but breaking down wooden buildings. ημσ (see on Isaiah 8:8) is “to exchange.” Hiph. is—“let come in as exchange, reparation;” comp. Isaiah 40:31; Isaiah 41:1.
On Isaiah 9:10. ειωׂ ?βα and also ειΰλμε, Isaiah 9:11, are praeter. propheticum. The ε involves at the same time adverbial meaning. remarks that ωׂ ?βλ Pi. has always the meaning “to make high, unattainable, place higher, defendere, munire.” But then it is construed with ξο (Psalms 59:2; Psalms 107:41). That ςμιο stands here proves that the word is taken in an offensive sense, which it may very well have. Moreover it is to be noticed that ωִׂ ?βֵ ?λ stands in contrast with the high structures which the Israelites purpose in Isaiah 9:9.—It is incomprehensible how EWALD can prefer ωָׂ ?ψֵ ?ι, the reading of some MSS. to φָ ?ψֵ ?ι of the text; or how CHEYNE can construe φψιψ as genitive of the subject, seeing that the same power that slew Rezin and conquered his land, not twenty years later actually made an end to the kingdom of Ephraim.—ρִ ?λְ ?ρֵ ?οְ is found only here and Isaiah 19:2. The verb ρָ ?λַ ?οְ, with all its derivatives (ρֻ ?λָּ ?δ, ρִ ?λּ ?εּ ?ϊ, ξָ ?ρָ ?οְ, ρֹ ?οְ) has the sense of “covering.” Now there is a word ωֵׂ ?οְ, spina (Num. 33:65) and ωֻׂ ?λָּ ?δ telum acutum (Job 40:31). As regards the exchange of ρ for ωׂ compare ωָׂ ?λַ ?οְ Exodus 33:22.
Seeing the meaning “to cover” in the sense usual with the Hebrews, i. e., “to protect,” does not at all suit here (comp. Isaiah 9:11), and “to cover,” = “to cover with arms, to arm,” cannot be supported, I prefer, with TARG., SYR., SAAD., (Thes.), , [J. A. ], to take ρִ ?λְ ?ρֵ ?οְ in the sense of “to set on,” stimulate, concitare.On Isaiah 9:11. The formula αλμΞζΰϊεβε beside here and Isaiah 9:16; Isaiah 9:20; Isaiah 10:4, is found only Isaiah 9:25.
AND 1. The Lord sent—cedars.Isaiah 9:8-10 (Isaiah 9:7-9). It seems to me that the words, “A word has the LORD sent,” etc., “is fallen,” etc., must be judged of according to passages like Job 4:12; Job 35:4; Psalms 62:12. As in those, a single little word, tossed to them, as it were, from the mouth of the Lord as from a judging and destroying power, is opposed to human pride and haughtiness, so the Prophet here opposes a single, brief word of the LORD to the Ephraimites which, as it were, falls by the way, but which suffices to humble that foolish pride. “The word” (γָּ ?λָ ?ψִ) therefore, stands first with emphasis, as if the Prophet would say: only a word, nothing more has the LORD sent. And this word has, as it were, fallen in Israel by accident. I prefer to compare Rth 3:18, for the meaning of πָ ?λַּ ?μ “to fall,” rather than Daniel 4:28, because there, too, is the underlying idea of (at least seeming) accident.
This mode of expression, by which the Prophet represents the following language as something accidental and by the way, has its reason, likely, in this, that Isaiah is a Prophet primarily for Judah, and not for Israel. He therefore steps beyond the sphere of his own proper activity with these words, which fall like a morsel from the table prepared for the children.
Jacob stands only poetically for Israel. It can mean the whole nation, and the people of the Ten Tribes just as well as the name Israel (comp. Isaiah 2:3; Isaiah 2:5-6; Isaiah 8:17). Only the context decides in what sense the name is to be taken where it occurs. In the introduction to this section, we have showed that both Jacob and Israel mean the kingdom of the Ten Tribes. This antithesis of Jacob and Israel in parallelism occurs here for the first time.
It is found again as designation of the entire Israel, Isaiah 10:20; Isaiah 14:1; Isaiah 27:6; Isaiah 29:23; Isaiah 40:27; Isaiah 41:8; Isaiah 41:14; Isaiah 42:24; Isaiah 43:1; Isaiah 43:22; Isaiah 43:28; Isaiah 44:1, (2), 5, 21, 23; Isaiah 45:4; Isaiah 46:3; Isaiah 48:1; Isaiah 48:12; Isaiah 49:5-6. This antithesis is found first in Hosea 12:13 (of the Patriarch): then in Micah, and relatively the oftenest in him: Micah 1:5; Micah 2:12; Micah 3:1; Micah 3:8-9. In Nahum 2:3. In Jeremiah 2:4; Jeremiah 30:10; Jeremiah 31:7; Jeremiah 46:27. Ezekiel 39:25. From this it appears that the form of expression is pre-eminently characteristic of Isaiah.
If it is asked; what kind of word the LORD sent? I would refer for answer neither to Isaiah 5:25 nor to Isaiah 7:14 sqq. For both are remote. Those are right that take Isaiah 9:8, or say Isaiah 9:10 sq., as the word referred to in Isaiah 9:7. Nothing is more natural; any word more remote must be more exactly designated. The word “they shall know it,” Isaiah 9:8, favors this.
For what should the Ephraimites know? Certainly, the very word of which Isaiah 9:7 speaks. At the same time the context makes it clear, that they should learn how ill the plan of Jehovah (according to Isaiah 9:10) will suit their proud plans. Therefore, “the word,” Isaiah 9:7, is identical with the object of “they shall know,” Isaiah 9:8, and we are justified in translating “and shall know it.””Ephraim and the inhabitants of Samaria” are contrasted here just as “the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem,” Isaiah 5:3, comp. Isaiah 1:1, Isaiah 2:1. The Ephraimites and Samaritans, then, shall come to a certain knowledge, as persons that are in a state of pride and height of courage, for which just that knowledge commends itself as the best remedy.
Wherein the pride consists is said Isaiah 9:9.
The haughty language consists of two simple, easily understood contrasts. Wood and stone are the chief materials for building. Bricks are poorer than hewn stones, and sycamores than cedars. “Sycamore trees are common in Palestine,” as Tin loc. says. Flourishing in low places, (signum camporum sunt sycamori,) says the JERUS. GEMARA, comp. 1 Chronicles 27:28); they are prized as wood for building, but not compared with the cedar. (Comp. under Text. and Gram.) The sense of the figurative language is plain. They acknowledge that Ephraim has suffered, but they hope abundantly to repair all these damages.
2. Therefore the Lord——stretched out still.Isaiah 9:11-12 (Isaiah 9:10-11). Jehovah’s doing Isaiah 9:10 sq. brings to nought the proud hopes of Isa 9:9, and is announced here as the contents of “the word” of Isaiah 9:7. They would rise high, but the LORD raises above even their high house, the oppressors of Rezin. These oppressors are the Assyrians. They had proved themselves such even at that time.
They are called oppressors of Rezin, because Israel’s strength at that time, lay in the alliance with Rezin. The same power that killed Rezin, and conquered his kingdom, actually made an end of Ephraim not twenty years later. Syria itself, compelled by Assyria, is represented as marching against Ephraim. Because of the words, “the Philistines behind,” supposes that the Prophet, from Isaiah 9:11 on, extends his view and has in mind all Israel, since the northern kingdom never had to suffer from the Philistines, whereas (acc. to 2 Chronicles 28:16-19) an invasion by the Philistines in Judah is expressly mentioned as belonging to the judgments of Ahaz’s time. But if this were so, Isaiah 9:12 (11) would need to be more distinctly disconnected from Isaiah 9:11 (10). For, as they stand, the words “the Syrians—behind” must be taken as dependent on ιρλρψ “will set on,” and the nations named here as specifications of “the enemies” Isaiah 9:11 (10).
But then those attacked by Syria and the Philistines are identical with Ephraim to whom “him” and “his” (the suffixes in ΰιαιε and ςμιε (Isaiah 9:10) refer. But Isaiah 9:12 a (11) is not to be taken in a literal sense. Syria and the Philistines represent East and West. Isaiah 2:6; Isaiah 11:14 puts the Philistines as representatives of the West as opposed to (χֶ ?γֶ ?ν) the East. Moreover we must not take “eating with a full mouth” as meaning a complete destruction. On the contrary, we see from Isaiah 9:12 b (11), that recurs afterwards three times, that the Prophet would say: ye hold the damage that ye hope easily to repair, to be the end of your calamity.
But I say to you: you are destined to have your oppressors come on you from every side in superior power, and yet even this will be but the beginning of the end.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
2. THE THE BANE OF THE
Isaiah 9:13-17 (Isaiah 9:12-16)
13 (12) FOR the people turneth not unto him that smiteth them,
Neither do they seek the LORD of hosts.
14 (13) Therefore the LORD will cut off from Israel head and tail,
Branch and rush, in one day.
15 (14) The ancient and honourable, he is the head;
And the prophet that teacheth lies, he is the tail.
16 (15) For the leaders of this people cause them to err:
And they that are led of them are 3destroyed.
17 (16) Therefore the LORD shall have no joy in their young men,
Neither shall have mercy on their fatherless and widows:
For every one is an hypocrite and an evil-doer,
And every mouth speaketh folly.
For all this his anger is not turned away,
But his hand is stretched out still.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 9:12. By εְ before δςν the thought of this verse is paratactically co-ordinated with the foregoing, where as it ought properly to be subordinated in the form of assigning a reason. For had the people been converted by the chastisement, then had the wrath of Jehovah been turned away. We have here therefore one of those frequent instances where the εְ demands definition, which however the reader must supply.—μֹ ?ΰΞωָׁ ?α sounds like an echo of the same words in the foregoing verse.—ςַ ?ψ, especially after ωׁ ?εּ ?α, not seldom stands for ΰֵ ?μ: Deuteronomy 4:30; Deuteronomy 30:2; Joe 2:12; Amos 4:6-11; Isaiah 19:22, etc. It appears that all these prophetic passages just cited rest on the original passage in Deuteronomy also cited. The expression γָּ ?ψָ ?ωׁ ?εּ recalls Deuteronomy 4:29.—The article before ξַ ?λֵּ ?ηεּ is against the rule. The exception is to be explained by the pronominal force of the article according to which it refers back to Isaiah 9:11 b.—ειλψϊ and ειδιε, Isaiah 9:15, must be taken as pract. propheticum. with which accord the fut. imperf. ιωׂ ?ξη and ιψην Isaiah 9:16.
On Isaiah 9:13. λִּ ?λָּ ?δ found only here, Isaiah 19:15 and Job 15:32.——ΰπξεεfound again only Isaiah 19:15. Isaiah 58:5, what grows in ΰֲ ?πַ ?ν “the swamp.”—πωׂ ?εΰτπιν comp. on Isaiah 3:3.—ξεֹ ?ψֶ ?δ in Isaiah again only Isaiah 30:20.
On Isaiah 9:15. ξΰωׁ ?ψι comp. on Isaiah 3:12. Notice the paronomasia of the last two words.
On Isaiah 9:16. ηָ ?πֵ ?σ properly, “unclean, spotted,” pollutus, immundus: Isaiah 10:6; Isaiah 24:5; Isaiah 33:14.—ξֵ ?ψָ ?ς pausal form of ξֵ ?ψֵ ?ςַ, unless it is = ἐκτοῦπονηροῦ as KNOBEL translates.
AND For the people——he is the tail.Isaiah 9:12 (13)–14 (15). The four expressions, head and tail, palm-branch and rush, are to be found in the same order Isaiah 19:15. Many expositors (since KOPPE’SAnmm. zum Lowthschen Iesaias, 1799, sqq. the most of them) have misunderstood the figures. They have taken head and tail, as well as palm-branch and rush, as a figurative expression for “honorable and insignificant,” and, because Isaiah 9:14 does not suit this construction, they have declared it to be not genuine. But just that Isaiah 9:14 ought to have convinced the expositors that head and tail did not mean superior and inferior, but two sorts of leaders, the genuine and the bad, i.e. those who as the elders and as men of high standing had a natural right to be leaders, and those that by lying prophecies presumed to leadership. KNOBEL says: “making the tail to mean a prophet that teaches lies is false, because the false prophets, too, were leaders of the people, and therefore belonged to the head.” But that is what the prophet means.
Only the irony has not been understood, with which Isaiah declares the false prophets to be such as have their place where the tail is. Thus he mocks them. He intimates thereby that the lying prophets are only seeming heads, but in fact representatives of the region of the tail, and that if men take them for heads and follow in the direction of their would be heads, then Israel will go directly backward instead of forward. Such is essentially the exposition of and UMBREIT. [“The false Prophets are called the tail, because they were morally the basest of the people, and because they were the servile adherents and supporters of wicked rulers. With respect both to the head which they followed and the body of which they were the vilest part, they might justly be called the tail. The Prophet does not make a like explanation of the palm-leaf and the rush, because they are not equally suited to express his contempt for the false Prophets.”—J.
A. ]. The palm-branch growing high up on the trunk, so named because of its resemblance to a hand (λַּ ?σ, Latin palma) means of course the elevated ones, the rush the lowly. Thus three of the figures represent the leaders, and only one, those that are led, the humble ones. “One day” (comp. Isaiah 10:17; Isaiah 47:9) expresses that the destruction comes with such might as to take off its victim with one blow.
2. For the leaders——destroyed.Isaiah 9:16 (15). As Isaiah intimates here the final destiny of leaders and led, the verse corresponds to “will cut off,” Isaiah 9:14 (13) being, as it were, the specification of the notion. The leaders are misleaders of the people, and are themselves given over to error and its peril; but those led astray are swallowed up (Isaiah 3:12), a figure that recalls the position of the rush in the water. For, if it is long submerged, it perishes.
3. Therefore——stretched out still.Isaiah 9:17 (16). It might be objected to the Prophet that among the led were many that were irresponsible; thus without their fault they were led astray. Does the Lord make no exception in their favor? The Prophet denies this, saying that inasmuch as all those led astray are swallowed up, it is to be understood that none are spared, not even the young men, children and widows. But are not the children required to follow their elders?
Are they not innocent then if led into error’s ways by them? Ought they not, spite of this, to remain the ornament, the bloom of the nation, and consequently the delight of the Lord? But it shall not be thus. The wish expressed Psalms 144:12 shall not be fulfilled. If the Lord, therefore, takes no more pleasure in the young, He leaves them indifferently to their fate. What it is may be imagined.
Widows and orphans, without the guidance of husband and father seem, too, to be innocent and thus deserving of compassion. But no. They are all contaminated and thoroughly penetrated with evil. They are corrupt, atrociously bad, and what they say is insane wickedness. Therefore there can be no sparing. In fact the last degree of their judgment is far from being attained.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
3. ISRAEL ITSELF BY THE FLAMES OF DISCORD
CHAPTER Isaiah 9:18-21 (Isaiah 9:17-20)
18 (17) FOR wickedness burneth as the fire:
It shall devour the briers and thorns,
And shall kindle in the thickets of the forest,
And they shall mount up like the lifting up of smoke.
19 (18) Through the wrath of the LORD of hosts is the land darkened,
And the people shall be as the fuel of the fire:
No man shall spare his brother.
20 (19) And he shall snatch on the right hand, and be hungry;
And he shall eat on the left hand, and they shall not be satisfied:
They shall eat every man the flesh of his own arm:
21 (20) Manasseh, Ephraim; and Ephraim, Manasseh;
And they together shall be against Judah.
For all this his anger is not turned away,
But his hand is stretched out still.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 9:17. ψִ ?ωׁ ?ςָ ?δ, in the older writings found only in Deuteronomy 9:4-5; Deuteronomy 25:2; in Isaiah only here; beside this only in post Isaiah writings; so that the expression seems to be a reminiscence of Deuteronomy.—αςψδλΰωׁ perhaps a reminiscence of Num 11:3.—The form ιφϊ occurs only once more in Isaiah 33:12, and there it is undoubtedly passive. Consider in addition that here the preposition αְּ occasions surprise if thereby the object of the kindling is expressed (GESEN. would take this αְּ in a partitive sense, Thes., p. 172, sub. A. 2), whereas δִ ?φִּ ?ϊΰֵ ?ωׁ αְּ occurs often (Amos 1:14; Jeremiah 17:27; Jeremiah 21:14; Jeremiah 43:13, etc.) thus it seems to me more probable that ϊִּ ?φַּ ?ϊ is to be taken as passive of δִ ?φִּ ?ιϊΰֵ ?ωׁ. As to the form, see EWALD, § 197, a.—δϊΰαγּ is ἄπ. λεγ. The root ΰαγ seems related to ητγ whereby the meaning is approximated “to turn one’s-self, to roll, whirl” (comp. Judges 7:13): “they whirled up in height of the smoke.” The construction is analogous to ςָ ?μָ ?δωָׁ ?ξִ ?ιψεָ ?ωַׁ ?ιִ ?ϊ Isaiah 5:6;Isaiah 34:13; Proverbs 24:31.—πΰεϊ must be regarded as accusative, and of that species that follows verbs of fulness. The expression πΰεϊςωׁ ?ε recalls πֵ ?ΰεּ ?ϊδַ ?ιָ ?ν Psalms 89:10.
On Isaiah 9:18. πςϊνἅπ. λεγ. “burnt up, charred.” ηξμ often with ςַ ?μ; Exodus 2:6; 1 Samuel 15:3; 1 Samuel 15:9; 1 Samuel 15:15; 1 Samuel 23:21, etc. Here ςַ ?μ stands for ΰֶ ?μ as Jeremiah 50:14; Jeremiah 51:3.
On Isaiah 9:19. πָּ ?ζַ ?ψ means secuit, and is used of cutting through the middle a living body (1 Kings 3:25 sq.) or a dead one (2 Kings 6:4), comp. ξַ ?πְ ?ζֵ ?ψָ ?δ “a cutting implement,” 2 Samuel 12:31. It is better then to translate it, “to hew,” than “to bite.”
On Isaiah 9:20. The accusatives ΰϊΞξπωׁ ?δ ,ΰϊΞΰτψιν depend on ιΰλμε, whereas ςμΞιδεγδ depends on the notion of the hostile onslaught that lies in Isaiah 9:19 a. AND 1. This strophe plainly divides into two parts. In the first (Isaiah 9:17-18 a.), the dissension is described figuratively. In the following, the Prophet himself explains the figure.
2. For wickedness——fuel of the fire.Isaiah 9:18-19 (Isaiah 9:17-18). The λִּ ?ι “for” appears to introduce the proof not only for ver. (16b), but also for (16a). For the impregnation with badness, that is declared of the whole people, ver. (16), displays itself as real, if its condition may be compared to an all-devouring conflagration. The badness burns like fire; not as a fire that devours only thorns and thistles (comp., on Isaiah 9:6) the lowlier products of the open field, but also the thickets (the standing timber, Isaiah 10:34), of the forests, consequently seizes on the entire vegetation of the land, high and low. The fire of Isa 9:17 is the fire of sin, consequently a fire hateful to God, and which therefore bears no blessing in it, but a curse.
The Prophet therefore can say that the effect of this fire is at the same time an effect of divine wrath. This effect is that the land looks burnt up, charred, while the people dwelling in it are become food of the fire. So far the figure.
4. No man shall spare——stretched out still.Isaiah 9:19-21 (Isaiah 9:18-20). With these words the Prophet explains the figure. It is plain that he means the fire of dissension. This he first characterizes negatively by saying, that one behaves himself pitilessly, unsparingly against the other; then positively by describing how the rough, selfish men direct their attacks now on the right, now on the left. But these attacks do no good: for those attacking get no blessing thereby; they remain hungry after as well as before.
They do harm in fact. For it appears that those men of violence have raged against themselves, and (comp. Jeremiah 19:9) have, so to speak, devoured their own flesh. In what sense he means this, the Prophet explains Isaiah 9:20 (21) a: The tribes of the northern kingdom were divided among themselves, but united for hostility against Judah. It is to be noticed that he does not say; Israel and Judah were mutually hostile; but names only Ephraim and Manasseh as embroiled in mutual strife. Judah, however, appears outside of their communion and the object of their common hatred, while, moreover, there is no reference to a hostility of Judah against Israel.
Thus it appears that the Prophet represents the flames of discord as raging only in the bounds of the Ten Tribes. This is another proof that the entire passage, Isaiah 9:7 to Isaiah 10:4 is directed only against the northern kingdom. Manasseh and Ephraim are mentioned because these two tribes were descendants of uterine brothers, the sons of Joseph. From of old there was jealousy between these tribes (comp. 1 Samuel 10:27; 2 Samuel 20:1; 1 Kings 12:16; 1 Kings 15:27 sqq.; 1 Kings 16:21 sqq.; 2 Kings 9:14, etc.). From the first the Ten Tribes were little inclined to David’s dynasty (2 Samuel 2:8 sqq.); but their own history is a continued alternation of conspiracy and murder. It may be said that the Israelites did themselves more harm than all foreign foes could ever have done.
Thus dissension was the destruction of Israel. And still even this is not the last stage of the divine judgment.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
4. AND FILL UP THE MEASURE AND ISRAEL INTO THE HORRORS OF EXILE
Isaiah 10:1-41 Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees,
And that write grievousness which they have prescribed;
2 To turn aside the needy from judgment,
And to take away the right from the poor of my people,
That widows may be their prey,
And that they may rob the fatherless!
3 And what will ye do in the day of visitation,
And in the desolation which shall come from far?
To whom will ye flee for help?
And where will ye leave your glory?
4 Without me they shall bow down under the prisoners,
And they shall fall cunder the slain.
For all this his anger is not turned away,
But his hand is stretched out still.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 10:1. δει comp. on Isaiah 1:4. Because of this δει, which seems to correspond to that in Isaiah 10:5, this last section has been incorporated in the chap. 10—ηָ ?χַ ?χ is “to hoe, hoe into, hew into, dig into” (Isaiah 30:8; Isaiah 49:16), then (mediately, through the notion of digging or graving in decrees into the tables of the laws) “to establish, decree” (Isaiah 33:22). The participle δֹ ?χֵ ?χ occurs again Isaiah 22:16 and Judges 5:9—ηֲ ?χָ ?χִ ?ιν (again only Judges 5:15) means the same as ηֻ ?χִּ ?ιν. As to the form, see Ewald, § 186 sq.—ΰָ ?εֶ ?ζ frequent in Isaiah 1:13; Isaiah 29:20; Isaiah 31:2; Isaiah 58:9; Isaiah 59:6-7, etc.——The second clause of Isa 10:1 can be variously construed: Either, “And writing harm they write,” or: “And (woe to) the writers that write harm.” I prefer the former [which Aben Ezra and J. A. Alexander adopt because the accents require ςξμ to be governed by ξλϊαιν]. 1) Because the quick return to the temp. finitum is a peculiarity of Hebrew (comp. the second clause of Isa 10:2 b); 2) because, otherwise, one might expect εְ ?δַ ?ξְּ ?λַ ?ϊְּ ?αִ ?ιν.
Moreover, according to this explanation, δεֹ ?ι relates equally to the second clause of the verse: only it is to be subordinated to the first. λִּ ?ϊֵּ ?α Piel, which is found only here, is evidently intensive, meaning an occupation of writing significant for quality as well as quantity. We might conjecture that we have here a trace of mischievous, bureaucratic clerical administration.
On Isaiah 10:2. δθεϊξγιε only here; it is commoner to say δַ ?θּ ?εֹ ?ϊξִ ?ωְׁ ?λָּ ?θ Exodus 23:6; Deuteronomy 16:19, etc., δθΧΰָ ?ψְ ηεֹ ?ϊξΧ Proverbs 17:23 δθΧφַ ?γִּ ?ιχαξΧ Proverbs 18:5, or simply δθΧφγιχ Amos 5:12; comp. Isaiah 29:21—πָּ ?ζַ ?μ only here in Isaiah.—ςπιιςν again Isaiah 14:32.
On Isaiah 10:3. The εְ before ξַ ?δ has evidently an adversative sense: ye are shrewd and busy in violence and robbery (comp. Piel λִּ ?ϊֵּ ?α above) but what will ye do, etc.—μְ before ιεֹ ?ν has more than a temporal sense. The inquiry is evidently what sort of action will they develop to ward off the day of visitation and impending ruin. λּ ?χδ found again Isaiah 15:7; Isaiah 60:17.—ωׁ ?εֹ ?ΰָ ?δ is procella, tempestas, and is found again Isaiah 47:11. The word is usually joined with αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ, Proverbs 1:26; Proverbs 3:25; Ezekiel 38:9—ςμΞξι for ΰֶ ?μΞξִ ?ι, a usage very frequent in Jeremiah (comp. Isaiah 10:1) and not unusual in Isa. (comp. Isaiah 10:25; Isaiah 11:8; Isaiah 22:15; Isaiah 24:22; Isaiah 29:11-12; Isaiah 36:12).
On Isaiah 10:4 αμϊι (found again Isaiah 14:6; Isaiah 48:9) after a foregoing negation, which must be supplied here as a negative reply to ξδϊςωׂ ?ε Isaiah 10:3, is equivalent to praeter, nisi, “except” (Genesis 21:26; Genesis 47:18 Exodus 22:19, etc., Ewald, § 356.—λָּ ?ψַ ?ς impersonal, “one bows himself” (comp. Isaiah 6:10).—The phrase δψΧπτμϊηη cannot mean either: “lie among the fallen,” nor, “fall under one slain,” for the latter is hardly conceivable. It must mean “fall among the slain.” One knocked dead may precipitate himself on one still living, and, when this happens wholesale, the situation of those alive under the slain is frightful. In this trait, too, there seems to me presented a contrast with the former glory (Isaiah 10:3) and power (Isaiah 10:1-2) of those addressed.
AND 1. Woe unto them——the fatherless.Isaiah 10:1-2. We might suppose that we have here a trace of mischievous, bureaucratic clerical administration. See above in Text. and Gramm.Isaiah 10:2 names the object that bureaucratic administration pursues. It is a negative and a positive. First they aim at excluding the lowly from justice as much as possible, or to rob them of the benefits of justice that are their rights. This negative proceeding has the further aim of making themselves possessors of the property of widows and orphans. For substance comp. Isaiah 1:21 sq.; Isaiah 3:13 sq.
2. And what will ye do——stretched out still.Isaiah 10:3-4. The storm is described as coming from a distance, because the Prophet, as Isaiah 10:4 shows, means by this figure the exile, whose agent will be a people that comes from far (Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 6:11 sq.; Jeremiah 5:15, etc.). “To whom will ye flee,” is an allusion to the disposition so often reproved by the Prophet to seek aid from foreign nations. λαεγ, according to the context, can only mean what those addressed, i.e., the powerful among the people, regard as their “glory,” i.e., the ornament and adornment of their life, viz., their treasures, valuables, etc. The description is drastic: the hostile storm bursts, the panic-stricken flee, their valuables they seek to leave behind in a secure place. The reply to the question “what will ye do?” etc. is given ironically in Isaiah 10:4. Ye can do nothing, says the Prophet, except, etc.
The lot of those addressed here will be worse than that of the other captives and slain. Whether in prison or in the train of those led away, the other captives will tread them under foot. Once they were honorable and powerful. Then they were dreaded (Isaiah 10:1-2). Now the first that comes, in whose way they stand, treads them under foot. Others of them fall in war, and the slain fall on them and cover them with their bodies.
Though in some sense the exile is the greatest theocratic punishment, still that catastrophe is in itself not the extreme. For the question arises: how long will the exile last? To Judah restoration is promised after 70 years (Jeremiah 25:11). In the case of Israel there is no certain mention of the sort.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
Footnotes:And writing evil they write.Or, to the writers that write grievousness.(Nothing) except to bow among.among.Or, Woe to the Assyrian.
C.—ASSYRIA’S THE OF ISRAEL
Isaiah 10:5 to Isaiah 12:1 This address is related to the two that precede as bright day to dark night. After Israel is compelled to hear that the same Assyria to which Judah’s king had appealed for help shall be the instrument of his severe chastisement, now Assyria must hear that the Lord will destroy His instrument, because it fulfilled its mission, not in the mind of God, but in the sense of its own brutal lusts, and with proud boasting about its own might. Out of the toils of the world-power, whose totality Assyria represents here, shall redeemed Israel return home. Out of the almost dried up root of the race of David shall a sprout grow up that shall set up a kingdom which shall pervade and rule all nations with the spirit of peace.
As regards the time of the composition of this prophecy, it must be noticed, first of all, that Isaiah 10:5-34 did not originate at the same time with chapters 11 and 12 Concerning Isaiah 10:5-34, every thing depends on whether the passage Isaiah 10:9-11 is understood in the sense of an ideal or an actual time past. Vitringa, Caspari, Drechsler, Delitzsch take the view that the destruction of Samaria, that took place in the sixth year of Hezekiah, appears as a past event in our passage only in the contemplation of the Prophet. I cannot join in this view. The reasoning of the Prophet must have been without meaning and effect to his hearers if the conquest of the cities Carchemish, Calno, Arpad, Hamath, Damascus and Samaria were not at that time an accomplished fact and well known to all contemporaries. In addition, the messengers of Sennacherib, according to Isaiah 36:18 sq.; Isaiah 37:11 sq., really boasted thus. Nowhere in chap. 10 is Ephraim spoken of as one that is to be conquered.
Only the conquest of Jerusalem is lacking in order to let the destroying work of Jehovah on the people of His choice appear complete (Isaiah 10:12). Of course one may say that our passage then belongs in the neighborhood of chapters 36 and 37. But those chapters, as they stand, are a historical report complete in themselves; whereas an essential piece, forming a consolatory conclusion, is lacking to the cycle of prophecies affecting Assyria, which begins chap. 7, if Isaiah 10:5 sq. does not belong to it. As long as we have no proof that the passage Isaiah 10:9-11 is not to be understood of things historically past, I can only assume that the Prophet combined the later address with the earlier, in order to give to that earlier the suitable conclusion. Concerning chap. 11 we have a datum for determining the period of its composition in the short prophecy against Philistia, Isaiah 14:28-32. This short passage lives in the sphere of ideas of chap. 11.
In fact, without chap. 11. it is not at all intelligible. On the contrary, we learn from Isaiah 14:28 that Isaiah recognized in Hezekiah in a certain sense “the root” (ωֹׁ ?ψֶ ?ωׁ) or “branch” (πֵ ?φֶ ?ψ)—through which the kingdom of David was to spring up with new life. The passage Isaiah 14:28-32 was written in the year of Ahaz’s death (728). The young king Hezekiah is described there as “the basilisk” (φֶ ?λַּ ?ς) that shall proceed from “the root of the serpent” (ωׂ ?ψֶ ?ωׁ πָ ?ηָ ?ωׁ). It is known that Messianic hopes were connected with Hezekiah (comp. Delitzsch on Isaiah 7:14 sq and Isaiah 9:6); how far Isaiah shared them we know not.
At all events chap. 11. was written after the death of Ahaz, and just as the hopeful Hezekiah ascended the throne (728 B. C.). Chap. 12 is a doxology that certainly belongs to that period in which the whole prophetic cycle, chaps, 7–12. were put together.
In accordance with this combination, the discourse plainly subdivides into three principal parts, and each principal part again into three subdivisions, so that three forms the underlying number. In the first part is Assyria, in the second Israel, in the third the Messiah, the chief subject. The chief traits of the discourse may be represented in the following scheme:—
Assyria’s Destruction The Salvation Of Israel (Isaiah 10:5 to Isaiah 12:6)I. Woe against Assyria (Isaiah 10:5-19).
1. Woe to the instrument that does not execute the will of God according to the mind of God (Isaiah 10:5-11).
2. Woe to the instrument that knew not that it was an instrument (Isaiah 10:12-15).
3. The execution of the woe (Isaiah 10:16-19).
II. Israel’s redemption in general (Isaiah 10:20-34).
1. The believing remnant of Israel returns out of the shattered world-power (Isaiah 10:20-23).
2. The condemned world-power is also not to be feared in the present (Isaiah 10:24-27).
3. The impetuous onset of the condemned world-power in the light of its final ruin (Isaiah 10:28-34).
III. Israel’s redemption in relation to the Messiah (Isaiah 11:1 to Isaiah 12:6).
1. From the apparently dried up root of the house of David shall go forth a sprout that shall found a kingdom of most glorious peace (Isaiah 11:1-9).
2. The return of Israel takes place only when the Messiah has appeared and the heathen have gathered to Him (Isaiah 11:10-16).
3. Israel’s song of praise for the wrath and the grace of his God (Isaiah 12:1-6).
I. WOE AGAINST ASSYRIA Isaiah 10:5-191. WOE TO THE THAT DOES NOT EXECUTE THE WILL OF GOD TO THE MIND OF GOD
Isaiah 10:5-115 O Assyrian, the rod of mine anger,
And the staff in their hand is mine indignation.
6 I will send him against an hypocritical nation,
And against the people of my wrath will I give him a charge,
To take the spoil, and to take the prey,
And to tread them down like the mire of the streets.
7 Howbeit he meaneth not so,
Neither doth his heart think so;
But it is in his heart to destroy
And cut off nations not a few.
8 For he saith,
Are not my princes altogether kings?
9 Is not Calno as Carchemish?
Is not Hamath as Arpad?
Is not Samaria as Damascus?
10 As my hand hath found the kingdoms of the idols,
And whose graven images did excel them of Jerusalem and of Samaria;
11 Shall I not, as I have done unto Samaria and her idols,
So do to Jerusalem and her idols?
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 10:5. As remarked at Isaiah 10:1, this δεֹ ?ι occasioned the existing arrangement of the chapter. What we have said concerning the origin of Isa 9:7 to Isaiah 10:4, and Isaiah 10:5-12, shows that this coincidence of the δεֹ ?ι is accidental. The expression ωׁ ?αθΰτε is clear. It is found only here. Analogous is ωֵׁ ?αֶ ?θςֶ ?αְ ?ψָ ?ϊεֹ Proverbs 22:8; Lamentations 3:1; comp.
Proverbs 22:15; Job 9:34; Job 21:9.—The second clause is difficult. The translation: “The staff which in their hand, is the staff of my anger” (Gesenius) is grammatically incorrect. For then ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ must not be wanting before δεּ ?ΰ. Quite as grammatically impossible is that of Hendewerk and Knobel, who point ξַ ?θֵּ ?δ and connect it, across δεΰαιγν as a parenthesis, with ζςξι: “and the staff of my anger, it is in their hand.” To treat δεΰαιγν as a gloss, like Hitzig, Ewald, I. Edit and Diestel do, is violence. Only that rendering is grammatically possible that takes ζςֹ ?ξι as subject, and what precedes as predicate.
Then δεΰ only serves to mark ξַ ?θֶּ ?δ as predicate. For, were it not there, it would not be known which of the two words ξַ ?θδ and ζςξι is subject, and which predicate. Comp. e.g. δַ ?γָּ ?νδεּ ?ΰδַ ?πֶּ ?λֶּ ?ωׁ Deuteronomy 12:23.—ζַ ?ςַ ?ν beside here, is found Isaiah 10:25; Isaiah 13:5; Isaiah 26:20; Isaiah 30:27.
On Isaiah 10:6. ηπσ comp. on Isaiah 9:16.—φִ ?εָּ ?δ like Jeremiah 14:14; Jeremiah 23:32, with ΰֵ ?μ Isaiah 27:4.
On Isaiah 10:7. Piel γִּ ?ξָּ ?δ is found also Isaiah 14:24; Isaiah 40:18; Isaiah 40:25; Isaiah 46:5; but is used in the last three texts in the sense of “to make like, compare,” in which sense Hithp. (“to make one’s-self like”) is used Isaiah 14:14.
On Isaiah 10:10. ξָ ?φָ ?ΰ with μְ like Isaiah 10:14; Psalms 21:9; comp. 1 Samuel 23:17. λְּ ?ρִ ?ιμιν are “carved images;” comp. 1 Samuel 21:9; 1 Samuel 30:22; 1 Samuel 12:8. Before ιψεωμιν is to be supplied ξִ ?λְּ ?ριμֵ ?ι comp. Isaiah 5:29; Isaiah 13:4.
On Isaiah 10:11. The ςφαιν (in Isaiah again only Isaiah 46:1) are not essentially different from αְּ ?ρִ ?ιμִ ?ιν. For as the underlying meaning of αָּ ?ρַ ?μ is caedere, caedendo fingere (Exodus 34:1; Exodus 34:4; Deuteronomy 10:1-2; 1 Kings 5:32), so, too, ςָ ?φַ ?α, (kindred to χָ ?φַ ?α ,ηָ ?φַ ?α) originally meant caedere, secare, “to cut out, to shape by hewing” (Job 10:8; Jeremiah 44:19).
AND 1. The Lord denounces woe against Assyria that is to be the instrument of His judgments (Isaiah 10:5). For He sent him against Israel (Isaiah 10:6), but Assyria did not execute the mission in the spirit in which he was commissioned, but in the spirit of his brutal and insatiable greed of conquest (Isaiah 10:7). This his sentiment appears in the grounds he assigns for his confidence that he will make conquest of Jerusalem: 1) his princes are all of them kings, which gives a measure of the extent of his might; 2) a row of conquests of great cities proves his invincibility. Having conquered kingdoms whose idols excel those of Samaria and Jerusalem, he will be able to treat Jerusalem as Samaria (8–11).
2. Woe unto Assyria——not a few.Isaiah 10:5-7. The pivot on which the whole of the following announcement turns, is that the Lord denounces woe against the instrument of His wrath. In Isaiah 10:5 (see Text. and Gram.), the Prophet expresses the thought that not only is Assyria the rod of God’s anger, but that the anger of God is also the staff, as it were, the magician’s staff (comp. Isaiah 10:24; Isaiah 10:26, where allusion is evidently to the rod of Moses) in the hand of Assyria. This turn of the image need give no surprise in our artistic Prophet.
How far Assyria is used as a rod is explained, Isaiah 10:6. He is to be commissioned against the impure people, that on account of this impurity are objects of divine wrath, as it were on an official mission, to rob and trample down Israel, that they may become as the mire of the streets (Isaiah 7:25), comp. Jeremiah 51:20 sqq. Assyria will indeed trample down Israel, and as many other nations as possible, but not in order to execute the purpose of Jehovah on them, but only to gratify his own lust for world-conquest.
3. For he said—her idols.Isaiah 10:8-11. Assyria confides only in his own strength. He has no suspicion that he is Jehovah’s instrument, the rod of His anger. Hence he enumerates the facts that justify his hope of easily subduing Israel. First, his princes are kings (comp. 2 Kings 25:28).
When such have only second rank in the army of the great king of Assyria (Isaiah 36:4) how wide must be his dominion. His second ground of confidence is past great successes. Three pairs of conquered cities are named. The conquest of one is premised as an event that made sure that the next one named must in turn succumb. “Is not Calno like Carchemish?” Carchemish was a city on an island in the Euphrates at the mouth of the Chaboras, called by the Romans Circesium, Circessum, Circusium,Jeremiah 46:2-12; 2 Chronicles 35:20, and appears from the text to have been subdued earlier than Calno. The latter is called λַּ ?μְ ?πֵ ?δGenesis 10:10; and λַּ ?μπֶ ?δAmos 6:2 : perhaps the λַּ ?πֵּ ?δ of Ezekiel 27:23 is the same city. It lay North-east twenty hours from Babylon on the East bank of the Tigris opposite Seleucia, and belonged to Babylon.
Rebuilt at a later day by the Persian king Pacorus (90 b. c.), it received the name Ctesiphon. Thus Carchemish and Calno were two cities of Mesopotamia. Did Calno become as Carchemish, it appears that the conquest of the latter was not merely a happy chance, but the proof of the existence of a real power, which in every like case will conquer in like manner. Arpad is mentioned Isaiah 36:19; Isaiah 37:13; Jeremiah 49:23; 2 Kings 18:34; 2 Kings 19:13. The classics do not mention the city. According to the Arabian geographer Marassid, (comp.Knobelin loc.), an Arphad lay in the Pashalik Haleb (Aleppo) North-west from the latter place.
According to Kiepert (D. M. G. XXV. p. 655) Arpad lay 3 German miles north of Haleb on the spot where is found at present the ruins of Tel Erfad. In every passage where Arpad is mentioned, Hamath is found too. But, beside that, Hamath is often mentioned in the Old Testament.
According to Numbers 34:8 the northern border of the land to be possessed by the Israelites, was to extend to Hamath, which, according to 2 Kings 14:25; 2 Kings 14:28; comp. 2 Chronicles 8:4, was actually the case at times. Comp., beside Amos 6:2; Amos 6:14. The city lay on the Orontes and was called later Epiphania. Arpad and Hamath were thus Syrian cities lying nearer the Holy Land.
Damascus and Samaria lay still nearer Judah. After naming three pairs of names of conquered cities as proof of the irresistibleness of Assyria, the Prophet could simply proceed; so will Jerusalem, too, be unable to resist. But three thoughts suggest themselves, which he would express before that conclusion. First, that the idols of the conquered heathen cities surpassed the (supposed) idols of Jerusalem and Samaria. Second, the point that Samaria is already conquered; and third, the thought that Samaria and Jerusalem, may just as well be set in a pair as Carchemish and Calno, Arpad and Hamath, Damascus and Samaria. Now the Prophet might, of course, have said: as I have conquered the heathen kingdoms, whose idols surpass those of Samaria and Jerusalem, and as I have subdued Samaria itself, shall I not be able just so to subdue Jerusalem?
But then Samaria would belong to the premise, and Jerusalem would alone form the apodosis, and there would be lacking conformity to the pairs before named. Hence he combines Samaria and Jerusalem together in the apodosis, beginning with δֲ ?μֹ ?ΰ “shall I not,” Isaiah 10:11, but forms again within this apodosis, another protasis and apodosis, whereby, of course, the construction becomes abnormal; but still the thought is expressed that Samaria and Jerusalem should join as a fourth comparison, to the foregoing three. It is to be noticed that our passage assumes the conquest of Samaria, by the Assyrians (722 b. c.). According to 2 Kings 16:9, Tiglath-Pileser subdued Damascus. Samaria fell by Shalmaneser, according to 2 Kings 17:5 sq., but according to the Assyrian monuments by Sargon, in the third year of the siege. It was long after, that Rabshakeh actually used the language against Judah (Isaiah 36:18 sqq.; Isaiah 37:10 sqq.). that Isaiah here prophetically puts into the mouth of the Assyrian.
Perhaps Isaiah had here in mind, what Amos (Isaiah 6:1 sqq.), at an earlier period held up to the people, though it must remain in doubt, whether Isaiah means the same conquest of Hamath and Arpad, that Amos refers to. Moreover, nothing more is known of the conquest of the cities Carchemish, Calno, Hamath and Arpad, by the Assyrians. But comp. on Isaiah 36:19. That the Assyrian speaks of ξξμλεϊδΰμιμ (ΰμιμ as collective in the singular) “the kingdoms of the idols” is a Judaism. The Prophet presents the Assyrian as making a distinction between idolatrous kingdoms and Israel, the monotheistic: whereas, the Assyrian knows nothing of monotheism, and afterwards speaks of the idols and images of Samaria and Jerusalem. Moreover the Prophet describes them as “nothings” (comp.
Isaiah 2:8; Isaiah 2:18; Isaiah 2:20; Isaiah 19:3; Isaiah 31:7) whereas the Assyrian by no means regarded them so; for he held them all to be superterrestrial powers; only he maintained a distinction among them in respect to power. Thus we see how Isaiah suffered here some mixing of his point of view with that of the Assyrian.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
Footnotes:Heb. Asshur.Or, though.And in whose hand my fury is a staff.unclean.To plunder plunder, and to prey prey.Heb. to lay them a treading.And yet their graven images excelled them, etc.carver images.
2. WOE TO THE THAT KNEW NOT THAT IT WAS AN
Isaiah 10:12-1512 Wherefore it shall come to pass,
That when the Lord hath performed his whole work
Upon Mount Zion and on Jerusalem,
I will punish the fruit of the stout heart of the king of Assyria,
And the glory of his high looks.
13 For he saith,
By the strength of my hand I have done it,
And by my wisdom; for I am prudent:
And I have removed the bounds of the people,
And have robbed their treasures,
And I have put down the inhabitants like a valiant man:14 And my hand hath found as a nest the riches of the people:
And as one gathereth eggs that are left,
Have I gathered all the earth;
And there is none that moved the wing, or opened the mouth, or peeped.
15 Shall the ax boast itself against him that heweth therewith?
Or shall the saw magnify itself against him that shaketh it?As if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up,
Or as if the staff should lift up itself, as if it were no wood.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 10:12. αָּ ?φַ ?ς is scindere, abscindere; hence “to make an end, complete.” It is found once more in Isaiah 38:12, and in the sense abscindere. There is ground for rendering αφς as fut. exactum: for ΰτχγ, etc. will take place only when Assyria shall have executed his task. There is no doubt but that the Hebrew imperfect can have the meaning of the fut. exact.; comp. e.g. Genesis 44:10; Genesis 44:23; 1 Kings 8:35. But it makes a difference whether the fut. exact. is expressed by the perfect or imperfect. In the latter case the original imperfect meaning will still cling to it.
The transaction spoken of will not be represented as real and accomplished, but only as possibly and ideally present. So, too, here. There lies therefore in the imperfect a certain element of comfort, as well becomes this comforting passage. ψεּ ?ν, comp. Isaiah 2:11; Isaiah 2:17.
On Isaiah 10:13. The imperfects εְ ?ΰεֹ ?ψִ ?ιγ ,εְ ?ΰָ ?ρִ ?ιψ belong to those isolated cases where the simple Vav. copul. is used with the verbal ending unabbreviated (according to circumstances) as a weakening (of course not normally) of the Vav. consec. with the abbreviated verbal ending. These cases occur especially in poetry, in the 1st pers. sing., and in periods comprising several clauses. Comp. Isaiah 43:28; Isaiah 44:19; Isaiah 48:3; Isaiah 51:2; Isaiah 57:17; Isaiah 63:3-6; Psalms 104:32; Ewald, 233 a.—K’thibh ςϊεγ paratum, opes paratae, only here; K’ri ςϊιγ Deuteronomy 32:35; Job 3:8.—ωׁ ?εֹ ?ρֵ ?ϊִ ?ι is the sole example of Poel of a verb μδΧ; as regards meaning = ωׁ ?εֹ ?ρֵ ?ϊִ ?ι Isaiah 17:14; Isaiah 42:22.—λΰαιγ is λּ ?ΰַ ?αִּ ?ιγ, K’ri must be pronounced ΰַ ?αִּ ?ιψ .λַּ ?αִּ ?ιψ is secondary form of ΰָ ?αִ ?ιψ “the strong one” (Isaiah 1:24; Isaiah 49:26; Isaiah 60:16); λַּ ?λִּ ?ιψ also means validus, potens, Isaiah 16:14; Isaiah 17:12; Isaiah 28:2. There exists here no reason for departing from K’thibh.
To construe λΰαιψ as adjunct of the subject is flat, and λִּ then seems strange. To take it as adverbial definition of εωׁ ?αιν (bull-like sitting on thrones, stiergleich Thronende, Delitzsch) gives an extraordinary and displeasing figure. If, with Drechsler, we render ιεωαιν simply “inhabitants,” then εΰεψιψ seems strangely used. It seems to me best, therefore, to take λΰαιψ as adjunct to the object: “I cast down the enthroned as the strong one” (i.e., the bull, comp. Isaiah 34:7; Psalms 22:13; Psalms 50:13). Because they are to be cast down they must be sitting high.
But they shall be cast down like the bull, i.e., like one lays low a bull by a blow on the forehead. [J. A. Alexander retains the K’thibh, and connects λΰαιψ with the subject meaning “mighty man” = “like a mighty man or hero that I am,” and adds: “there is no necessity for departing from the less poetical but more familiar sense, inhabitants, and bringing down, i.e., subduing”].
On Isaiah 10:14. ϊξφΰ comp. Isaiah 10:10.—λַּ ?χֵּ ?ε for λְּ ?μֵ ?χִּ ?ε a familiar usage. ξφτφσ see Isaiah 8:19.
On Isaiah 10:15. ηϊπγμ Hithp. only here in Isa.—ξַ ?ωּׂ ?εֹ ?ψ “a saw” is ἅπ. λεγ. The plural in ξψιξιε is explained by the collective construction of ωֵׁ ?αֶ ?θ.—δֵ ?πִ ?ισ comp. Isaiah 11:15; Isaiah 13:2; Isaiah 19:16; Isaiah 30:23, and Isaiah 10:32.—μΰΞςυ (comp. Isaiah 31:8; Deuteronomy 32:21) is a bold antiphrase.
AND 1. Wherefore it shall——high looks.Isaiah 10:12. In the foregoing strophe the Prophet’s view-point was before the execution of judgment on Jerusalem. In this he takes his view-point after it. As before Assyria boasted what he would do, here he boasts what he has done. For what he boastfully promised to do (Isaiah 10:8-11) he actually accomplished.
But when he has done, then comes his hour. For then will the Lord bring about that fall that is wont to attend a haughty spirit. It is to be noted that what Assyria is to execute on Zion is called the work of Jehovah. But as only that work of which Assyria is the instrument is meant, “all his work” cannot be intended in an absolute sense, as comprehending the work of salvation.—“The fruit of haughtiness of heart” is not so much the boasting and blasphemy, but the works that haughtiness has done. Comp. Daniel 4:27 (30), “Is not this great Babylon that I have built for the house of the kingdom?” etc.
The destruction of city and kingdom is the destruction of the fruit of the haughtiness of the ruler.
The massing of the nouns admirably paints the spouting, puffed-up nature of haughtiness (comp. Isaiah 28:1; Isaiah 21:17). “The loftiness of the eyes,” i.e., self-complacency, reflected in the eyes, lends a certain refulgence (ϊλּ ?ΰψϊ) to the manner of a man. But even this illusive gleam will the Lord strip off.
2. For he saith——peeped.Isaiah 10:13-14. The Prophet cannot reproduce to his hearers and readers the actual fruits and that proud gleam of haughtiness. But he can let that haughtiness express itself in words by which it may be estimated. These words state that Assyria now maintains that, as he purposed, so he had also actually accomplished all by his own might. He boasts his strength and his prudence.
The power of this world is wise. According to Daniel 7:8; Daniel 7:20; Daniel 8:25 the horn of the fourth beast has eyes like the eyes of a man, the symbol of prudence (Comp. Auberlen,Der Prophet Daniel , 2 Aufl. p. 50). The children of this world are wiser in their way than the children of light (Luke 16:8). The borders of the nations he abolished by incorporating all in his kingdom; he robbed their treasures. Isaiah 10:14 portrays the facility with which Assyria does his work.
The unskilful and inexperienced find a bird’s nest at best by chance. The knowing and experienced, however, find them as easily as surely. But the Assyrian compares his conquests not to the easy work of seeking nests, but to the much easier one of gathering eggs from forsaken nests. He has so gathered everything that came under his hand as he went through the land (Habakkuk 2:5). In a nest not forsaken, the little owner makes a defence; he strikes with his wings, he opens his beak and hisses at his assailant. But his enemies had not dared even to make a bird’s defence.
3. Shall the axe——no wood.Isaiah 10:15. To this senseless boasting the Lord replies in words that set the matter in a just light. The answer presents two pairs of parallels that represent a gradation. Without men axe and saw can do nothing. Yet they are indispensable to men, and that may give their self-praise some apparent justification.
But that rod or staff should lift those that have hold of them presents the extreme of absurd presumption. Yet this is the extent of Assyria’s blind presumption, that he not only conceives that he executed judgment on the nations without the Lord, but that divinity was constrained to serve him. There lies thus in the second pair of comparisons a climax, and λְּ before δָ ?πִ ?ισ does not compare this second pair with the first, but with the higher degree of stupid blindness intimated in Isaiah 10:14. The staff can lift nothing, neither wood nor not-wood. Of not-wood it cannot even lift what is not man, e.g. a stone. If Isaiah, as the context shows, by not-wood means men, it is on the supposition that the reader of himself will recognize the true contrast (not-wood but much greater) and the (even phonetic) allusion to μֹ ?ΰΞΰֵ ?μ.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
Footnotes:Heb. visit upon the fruit of the, greatness of the heart.Have felled those enthroned as a bull.Or, like many people.Or, As if a rod should shake them that lift it up.Or, that which is not wood.
3. THE OF THE WOE
Isaiah 10:16-1916 Therefore shall the Lord, the Lord of hosts, send
Among his fat ones leanness;
And under his glory he shall kindle a burning
Like the burning of a fire.
17 And the light Israel shall be for a fire,
And his Holy One for a flame:
And it shall burn and devour his thorns
And his briers in one day;
18 And shall consume the glory of his forest, and of his fruitful field,Both soul and body:
And they shall be as when a standard-bearer fainteth.
19 And the rest of the trees of his forest shall be few,
That a child may write them.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 10:16. δΰγεε comp. Isaiah 10:33; Isaiah 1:24; Isaiah 3:1; Isaiah 19:4.—ΰγπιφαΰεϊ are found thus combined only here. Elsewhere it is always ΰγπιιδεδφαΰεϊ, Isaiah 10:23-24; Isaiah 3:15; Isaiah 22:5; Isaiah 22:12; Isaiah 22:14-15; Isaiah 28:22; Jeremiah 2:19; Jeremiah 46:10; Jeremiah 49:5; Jeremiah 50:25; Jeremiah 50:31.—ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?πִּ ?Χν are properly “the fat parts” (comp. Genesis 27:28; Genesis 27:39), then (abstr. pro concr. Psalms 78:31); “the fat men,” by whom Isaiah understands all that have a share in Assyria’s greatness. Comp.
Isaiah 27:4, where alone the word occurs again in Isaiah.—ψζεε, from ψָ ?ζδ attenuare, maciare, Niph. contabescere (Isaiah 17:4) occurs only here in Isaiah (comp. ψָ ?εִ ?ι Isaiah 24:16). It means macies, tabies, “consumption, phthisis.”—ιָ ?χַ ?γ verb, comp. Isaiah 30:14; Isaiah 65:5, ιְ ?χψֹ only here. Note the paronomasia which evidently aims at an artistic sound imitation.
On Isaiah 10:17. αιενΰηγ comp. on Isaiah 9:13.—λψξμ, “the fruitful, cultivated garden and field,” is also elsewhere opposed to forest (Isaiah 29:17), while again in other places ιςψ is mentioned as part of the λψξμ (Isaiah 37:24; 2 Kings 19:23). This is no contradiction, the notions of the two words occurring sometimes in a broader, sometimes in a narrower sense.
On Isaiah 10:18. πֹ ?ρֵ ?ν, ἅπ. λεγ. Comp. πָ ?ωׁ, Syr. nesiso, νοσεῖν, “to be sick.”—ξְ ?ρֹ ?ν infin. from ξָ ?ρַ ?ν Isaiah 13:7; Isaiah 19:1; Isaiah 34:3, “to pine away.”—ξρτψ like Jeremiah 44:28; Ezekiel 12:16, etc. AND 2. Therefore——write them.Isaiah 10:16-19. “Therefore” introduces the consequences that follow the double guilt of Assyria portrayed above. That necessary consequence is punishment. The, not personal, glory of Assyria shall be burnt so as if the Lord kindled a fire under it.
The comparison of the consumption which is not meant literally, and the λְּ before ιְ ?χεֹ ?γ show that no real fire is meant. It is the fire of God’s holy wrath that is the correlative of His love. The latter is the light of Israel in whom God takes pleasure (2 Samuel 22:29; Psalms 27:1; Micah 7:8), but a consuming fire for all that is against God and His kingdom (Deuteronomy 4:24; Deuteronomy 9:3; Isaiah 30:33; Isaiah 33:14). Like Isaiah 9:17, thorns and thistles are contrasted with the nobler representatives of vegetation. The comparison does not refer to the army of Assyria with its various grades of rank and file, but to the nation with all its glory. Thorns and thistles mean all lowly and inferior persons, forest and fruitful field those of elevation and splendor.
The expression “from soul to body” (ξπαּ ?ωׁ εςγαωׂ ?ψ is found only here). It is to be compared with Isaiah 1:6, “from the sole of the foot to the head.” As the latter signifies the entire outward, visible surface of the body, so the latter the entire organism generally. Not only the outward, but the inward shall be anihilated. “For body and soul are the entire man (Psalms 16:9; Psalms 78:26; Psalms 84:3.”)—Knobel. I except to this only that the expression is restricted to men. Have not the beast and the plant a soul too? Comp.
Genesis 2:19. And is it not said in our very passage that forest and field shall be anihilated from the soul to the flesh? Thus in some sense soul and flesh, i.e., body are attributed to plants. From his exhaustless store the Prophet produces another figure, and calls Assyria a weakling, who pining dies away.
Yet a remnant shall remain, but a very feeble one. Of the lordly forest there shall be left only a clump that may be counted; so far from numerous that a boy can count and write a list of them. And truly, what was left of Assyria after its destruction may be compared to the little forest or grove of cedars that the traveller now finds on Lebanon. But I mean not merely the overthrow of Sennacherib, but Nineveh’s destruction by the Babylonians and Medes. For the Prophet’s vision comprehends the whole future both of Israel and of Assyria.
The figure of the boy writing down the trees, seems to me remarkable in respect to the history of culture. We hear in this place of a boy that can write, the like of which we find even Judges 8:14, and that counts the trunks of the trees. Is the figure pure invention of the Prophet? or was he brought to use it from observation?
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
Footnotes:Heb. from the soul, and even to the flesh.a weakly person pines away.Heb. number.
II. ISRAEL’S IN GENERAL Isaiah 10:20-241. THE REMNANT OF ISRAEL RETURNS OUT OF WORLD-POWER
Isaiah 10:20-2320 And it shall come to pass in that day,
That the remnant of Israel,
And such as are escaped of the house of Jacob,
Shall no more again stay upon him that smote them;
But shall stay upon the Lord,The Holy One of Israel in truth.
21 The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob,
Unto the mighty God.
22 For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea,
Yet a remnant of them shall return:
The consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness.
23 For the Lord God of hosts shall make a consumption, even determined,
In the midst of all the land.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 10:22-23. αּ ?εֹ after ιָ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?α is partitive, as is often the case. Comp. Isaiah 6:13; Deuteronomy 1:35; Psalms 139:16, and especially passages where this αְּ stands after words meaning “to remain over,” Exodus 14:28; Leviticus 26:36; 1 Samuel 11:11. [Like the Engl. “one in ten”].—λּ ?μιεοεβεΧ. These words are difficult. λֵּ ?μָּ ?ιεֹ ?ο is found again only Deuteronomy 28:65, in the expression λִ ?μְ ?ιεֹ ?οςֵ ?ιπַ ?ιִ ?ν, which, after λָּ ?μεּ ςֵ ?ιπַ ?ι (Psalms 69:4; Psalms 119:82; Psalms 119:123; Lamentations 2:11) must be rendered oculorum consumtio, “consumption, failure of the power of vision.” So we must take it here in the sense of “wearing off, consuming, desolating.”—ηָ ?ψεּ ?υ is part. pass, from ηָ ?ψַ ?υ, incidere, decidere, definere, decernere (comp. 1 Kings 20:40). In Isa. it is found again only as a qualifying adjective to the threshing roller (Isaiah 41:15) or as name for the roller itself, (Isaiah 28:27). It is so named because an implement furnished with sharp corners and edges. λμιεοηψευ can only mean, therefore: “destruction is limited, determined, concluded.”—In ωׁ ?θσ is easily discerned an antithesis to ηψευ: for as in the latter there is the notion of something sharply marked off, so in the former there is the notion of flooding over (Isaiah 8:8; Isaiah 28:2; Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:17-18; Isaiah 30:28; Isaiah 43:2; Isaiah 46:12).
We thus obtain the figure of something determined, sharply defined, but which in a certain sense extends itself, and withal, too, overflowing with a certain effect, as it were, settling it (ωׁ ?θσ with the accusat. of abundance). That which is fixed, determined, is called λμιεο, what is widespread is said to be φγχδ. According to the foregoing λμιεο can only designate the fate of those Israelites that do not belong to “the remnant.”—But what is φγχδ? Many suppose it signifies the righteous state of the whole community, which they have attained to by reason of the judgments (Drechsler according to Isaiah 48:18; Amos 5:24). But the following verse seems to me to conflict with this, which seems to be wholly an explanation of the words λָּ ?μָ ?δ .λμιεοηΧωׁ ?ΧφΧ evidently corresponds to πηψφδ ,λμιεο to ηψευ. Therefore λִּ ?ι is expletive.
The obscure expression Isaiah 10:22 b, which is probably a citation, for it contrasts strangely with its surroundings, is used in a form suited to common understanding. Thus the word λָּ ?μָ ?δ (in Isa. only again Isaiah 28:22, where the whole style of address recurs; frequent beside in the combination ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δλָ ?μָ ?δ, especially in Jeremiah 4:27; Jeremiah 5:10; Jeremiah 5:18, etc.)—“utter ruin” stands for λμιεο; πηψφδ for ηψευ, the fem. ending being used out of regard for the word-pair. This latter word, too, is found only Isaiah 28:22, and also in Daniel 9:27; Daniel 11:36, where the words are repeated out of Isaiah.—But we must take λμηεπηΧ as object of ςωֶֹׁ ?δ; for ςωδαχψαλּ ?μΞΰψυ is explanation of ωׁ ?θσεΧ. Precisely thereby we see that ωׁ ?θσ states nothing more than that wide over all the earth shall be known and manifest what λμιּ ?εοηψευ is, viz., a proof of the righteousness of God. Were φγχδ to mean the conformity of human condition to God’s righteousness, then this thought could not be rendered by the simple ςωׂ ?δαλμδΰΧ.
AND And it shall come to pass——all the land.
Isaiah 10:20-23. The Prophet turns again to his own nation. Assyria’s fall is Israel’s salvation. “In that day,” i.e., when the destruction of Assyria shall have taken place (Isaiah 10:16-19), Israel will indeed still exist, but only as a remnant (ωְׁ ?ΰָ ?ψ7:3; Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 11:16; Isaiah 28:5), and as those escaped (τְּ ?μֵ ?θָ ?δ comp. on Isaiah 4:2). But this remnant will at last have learned what ministers to their peace. It will no more lean on Assyria as Ahaz has done. It is plainly seen from this, that the present passage was composed at a period when the Assyrian alliance (2 Kings 16:7 sqq.), was already an historical fact.
By the single word ξַ ?λֵּ ?δεּ, which points back to Isaiah 10:5, the Prophet indicates how foolish and ruinous that alliance was. Israel’s remnant will rather lean on Jehovah, the holy God (comp. on Isaiah 1:4), who is Israel’s ξִ ?χְ ?γָּ ?ωׁ, rock and refuge (Isaiah 8:4). What is meant by αΰξϊ “in truth” may be best seen from Jeremiah 4:1-4, who speaks of sincere, and entire return to Jehovah, of swearing in His name, “in truth, judgment and righteousness,” of reformation that “breaks up the fallow ground and does not sow among thorns,” of circumcision of the heart, and not of the flesh. So here, leaning on the Lord “in truth,” is such wherein the heart is no longer divided between Jehovah and the creature, but belongs to Him wholly and alone. The expression is found again in Isaiah 16:5; Isaiah 38:3; Isaiah 48:1; Isaiah 61:8; comp. Jeremiah 32:40 sq.
That it may not be thought that he has used the expression “remnant of Israel” with no special significance, the Prophet repeats it in Isaiah 10:21, with great emphasis, at the same time defining it more exactly. No false support is offered in these words, which would ill-agree with the promise that Israel shall lean on the Lord “in truth.” True, the Israel “according to the flesh” fancied that where Abraham’s seed was, there salvation and life were guaranteed. But to them apply the words of John Baptist: “Begin not to say within yourselves, we have Abraham to our father; for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: every tree, therefore, which bringeth not forth good fruit, is hewn down and cast into the fire.” Luke 3:8-9. From this we see that not all that remain after the great judgments belong to “the remnant,” but only those that bear genuine fruits of repentance. Paul confirms this Romans 11:4 sq., when, to the question “hath God cast away his people?” he replies by referring to the seven thousand that did not bow the knee to Baal (1 Kings 19:18), and then continues: “even so then at this present time also, there is a remnant according to the election of grace.” We may say, therefore; Isaiah’s remnant is the “election” (ἐκλογή) of Paul. “The election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.” Romans 11:7.
This is confirmed, too, by the way that Isaiah defines the aim of the return. Jer. says Isaiah 4:1 : “If thou wilt return, O Israel, return to me.” A false returning, therefore, is possible (vid. my com. on Jeremiah 4:1 sqq.). Precisely on this account Isaiah says in our passage the remnant will return to ΰμβαεψ, “God Almighty.” It is not the fleshly descent from Abraham that is the criterion of belonging to “the remnant,” but the return to God Almighty. It is plain that Jehovah the God of Israel is meant. But that Isaiah should call Him here just by this name, arises from this, that the Prophet has in mind his words in Isaiah 9:5. The return to El-gibbor-Jehovah will, in its time, be possible only in the form of the return to El-gibbor-Messiah.
Therefore Isaiah does not promise an unconditional, universal return of all that may be called Israelite, and that descends from Abraham, but he makes a most displeasing and threatening restriction. And if in the time to which he points, the time when the world-power will be judged, Israel were numerous as the sand by the sea—a condition which is even a fulfilment of promise and a theocratic state of blessedness (comp., on Isaiah 9:2; Genesis 22:17)—Jehovah still can bring Himself not to make all these Israelites according to the flesh partakers of the promised blessing. This is the thought that Paul carries out in Romans 9, and in this sense he cites our passage in Isaiah 10:27-28. “They are not all Israel, which are of Israel,” he says Isaiah 10:6. “Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but in Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is: They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted for the seed,” Isaiah 10:7-8. Therefore the Lord prepares an election of which the criterion is birth from God, regeneration, faith. As proof the Apostle cites, as already said, our passage among other Old Testament statements.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
Footnotes:Heb. in, or among.
Destruction is determined, extending wide righteousness.
Or, in.
2. THE WORLD—POWER IS NOT TO BE FEARED EVEN IN THE PRESENT
Isaiah 10:24-2724 Therefore thus saith the Lord God of hosts,
O my people that dwellest in Zion, be not afraid of the Assyrian:
He shall smite thee with a rod,
And shall lift up his staff against thee, after the manner of Egypt.
25 For yet a very little while, and the indignation shall cease,
And mine anger in their destruction.
26 And the Lord of hosts shall stir up a scourge for him
According to the slaughter of Midian at the rock of Oreb:
And as his rod was upon the sea,
So shall he lift it up after the manner of Egypt.
27 And it shall come to pass in that day,
That his burden shall be taken away from off thy shoulder,
And his yoke from off thy neck,
And the yoke shall be destroyed because of the anointing.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 10:25. ξִ ?ζְ ?ςָ ?ψ another form for ξִ ?φְ ?ςָ ?ψ (Genesis 19:20; Isaiah 63:18, etc.) = parvitas, paucitas, beside here is found only Isaiah 29:17; Isaiah 16:14; Isaiah 24:6. It is thus a word peculiar to the first part of Isaiah.—The expression λμδζςν occurs only here and Daniel 11:36, which is taken from our passage. Comp. ιַ ?ςֲ ?αֹ ?ψζςν Isaiah 26:20. It is needless to change the reading εΰτιεβεΧ. Supply δָ ?ιָ ?δ after εΰτι (comp. e.g. Isaiah 9:20) and construe in a pregnant sense = “directs, turns itself.”—ςַ ?μ is employed then just as Isaiah 10:3.——ϊַּ ?αְ ?μִ ?ιϊ (from αָּ ?μָ ?δ tritum, consumtum esse) is ἅπ. λεγ. It means consumtio, i.e., of the Assyrians. Thus the words form a fitting transition to Isaiah 10:26.
On Isaiah 10:26. ςεֹ ?ψֵ ?ψ used of “wielding” a scourge only here: it is used 2 Samuel 23:18; 1 Chronicles 11:11; 1 Chronicles 11:20 of brandishing a spear. Notice the paronomasia ςεֹ ?ψֵ ?ψ and ςεֹ ?ψֵ ?α.——ωׁ ?εֹ ?θ again in Isaiah only Isaiah 28:15, K’ri——εξθδε must be conceived as dependent on ςεψψ.
On Isaiah 10:27. The last clause is obscure. It defines the manner of releasing from the yoke. ηֻ ?αַּ ?μ Pual occurs only here and Job 17:1. The original meaning of ηָ ?αַ ?μ is “to twist” (thence δֶ ?αֶ ?μ “a rope”) “to bind” ligare, pignore obligare. Piel, cum tormentis eniti, parere, but also “to twist round and round, to turn the bottommost to the topmost” (French bouleverser); Isaiah 13:5; Isaiah 54:16; Micah 2:10; Son 2:15; Ecclesiastes 5:5. In Isaiah 32:7 there seems beside to lie in the word the meaning of “ensnaring.” So there seems here, beside the notion of destruction, to be that of a reference to a rope or cord.
Delitzsch represents, on the authority of statements of Schegg, that to this day in the Orient the yoke is fastened to the pole by a cord about the neck. Thus the Prophet would evidently say that, because of the fat (ξτπι causal as it often is, Isaiah 2:10; Isaiah 7:2, etc.) which grows on the well-fed Israel, the rope breaks, and thus the yoke apparatus falls off. On this account it seems to me probable that δֻ ?αַּ ?μ, (though otherwise δֶ ?αֶ ?μ comes from δָ ?αַ ?μ and not the reverse), is still here to be regarded as a Pual denominativum and privativum coined ad hoc (comp. on ρֵ ?ςֵ ?σ Isaiah 10:33).——The figure in ιρεψραμε is drawn from beasts of burden. In Isaiah 9:3, ςֹ ?μρֻ ?αֳּ ?μεֹ the two words are combined; but separated here as Isaiah 14:25.
AND Therefore thus saith—of the anointing (fat).
Isaiah 10:24-27. If all that is true that the Prophet, from Isaiah 10:5 on, has said of Assyria as the momentary instrument of God’s chastening,—and how shall God’s word not be sure?—then Israel need not fear Assyria even in present impending danger. Assyria will, indeed, execute chastisement on Israel, but only a discipline with a staff and rods (Isaiah 10:5), not with the sword, i.e. only a transitory one, not such as ends in destruction. The Prophet intimates that the captivity by the northern world-power will be, as it were, a continuation of that suffered from the southern. Assyria therefore will tread in the footsteps of Egypt. He will raise the staff over Israel in the way (Isaiah 10:26, Amos 4:10), i.e. in the manner of Egypt.
For as Egypt could not attain his object of extirpating the Israelite by killing the male children that were born and by hard labor, just as little should Assyria succeed. For only a very little, and the wrath would cease. The Prophet, therefore, conceives of the wrath as in progress, but presents its speedy end in prospect.
The Lord will brandish the scourge over Assyria as He smote Midian at the rock of Oreb (comp. Isaiah 9:3). That was one of the most glorious victories of the Israelites; but the glory of it belonged neither to Gideon nor to his army, but to the Lord (Judges 7:2 sqq., 25). The second clause of Isa 10:26 contains a magnificent figure full of art. First from Assyria’s hand is taken the staff that he is to raise over Israel and put into the hand of Jehovah. This appears from the relation of Isa 10:26 b. to the last clause of Isa 10:24.
Then this staff in the hand of Jehovah is transformed to the likeness of the rod with which Moses in Egypt prepared the Red Sea for a way of escape for Israel (Isaiah 11:16). The sea here is that which spreads out before Israel in the distress occasioned by Assyria. The raising up of the rod here (πωׂ ?ΰε) corresponds to that raising it over Israel (ιִ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ Isaiah 10:24) for which Assyria used it. A twofold raising of the rod took place in Egypt: one over Israel, the other over the sea. Both are repeated now. Neither the rod flourished over Israel for chastisement shall be wanting, nor the rod of God, which, as there, shall open a way through the deep sea of trouble.
As is familiarly known, the passage through the Red Sea is often mentioned and turned to account in a variety of ways: comp. Isaiah 43:16; Isaiah 51:2; Isaiah 51:10; Isaiah 63:11; Psalms 66:6; Psalms 74:13; Psalms 77:20; Psalms 77:13; Psalms 114:3, etc.At the time referred to Israel shall be freed from the yoke of Assyria (Isaiah 9:3; Isaiah 14:25), which is signified first by the figure of the load of a beast of burden, second by that of the yoke.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
Footnotes:Lord Jehovah of hosts.
Or, But he shall lift up his staff for thee.
(turns) to.
Heb. shall remove.
unlaced because of fat.
3. THE ONSET OF THE WORLD—POWER IN THE LIGHT OF ITS FINAL RUIN
Isaiah 10:28-3428 He is come to Aiath, he is passed to Migron;
At Michmash he hath laid up his carriages:
29 They are gone over the passage:
They have taken up their lodging at Geba;
Ramah is afraid;
Gibeah of Saul is fled.
30 Lift up thy voice, O daughter of Gallim:
Cause it to be heard unto Laish,
O poor Anathoth.
31 Madmenah is removed;
The inhabitants of Gebim gather themselves to flee.
32 As yet shall he remain at Nob that day:
He shall shake his hand against the mount of the daughter of Zion,
The hill of Jerusalem.
33 Behold, the Lord, the Lord of hosts,
Shall lop the bough with terror:
And the high ones of stature shall be hewn down,
And the haughty shall be humbled.
34 And he shall cut down the thickets of the forest with iron,
And Lebanon shall fall by a mighty one.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 10:28. αָּ ?ΰ with ςַ ?μֹ like Judges 18:27, it means “the falling over on.”—δτχιγ, commisit, mandavit, deposuit, Jeremiah 36:20; Jeremiah 40:7; Jeremiah 40:10.
On Isaiah 10:32. ιπτσ Pilel, only here; Hiph. with similar meaning, Isaiah 11:15; Isaiah 13:2; Isaiah 19:16 : 2 Kings 5:11. The swinging of the hand is the gesture of one threatening.—δψεβεΧ stands in accus. localis; K’thibh has αּ ?ιϊΞφιεο, which is found nowhere else, and probably results from a confounding with δַ ?ψαֵּ ?ιϊιδεδ.
On Isaiah 10:33. ρֵ ?ςֵ ?σ (comp. ρָ ?ςִ ?ισ Isaiah 17:6; Isaiah 27:10), Pi. denominativum and privativum like the German aesten from Ast, Koepfen from Kopf (comp. ζֵ ?πֵּ ?α “to cut off the tail,” Joshua 10:19; ωֵׁ ?ψֵ ?ωׁ “to eradicate,” Psalms 52:7; ρִ ?χֵּ ?μ “to remove stones,” Isaiah 5:2. [Like in English one says “to stone,” i.e., take the stones out]. This ρςσ is ἅπ. λεγ.——τֻּ ?ΰψָ ?δἅπ. λεγ., as regards meaning is certainly identical with τֹ ?ΰψָ ?δ, Ezekiel 17:6; Ezekiel 31:5-6; Ezekiel 31:8; Ezekiel 31:12-13. It appears to be a poetic expression for the grand, luxurious branch and leafy growth of the tree (τΰψ original meaning splendere, nitere, comp. ϊִּ ?τְ ?ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?ϊ ,τְ ?ΰֵ ?ψ.—ξςψφδ, ἅπ. λεγ. is “terror” in an active sense = perterrefactio.—χεֹ ?ξָ ?δ “that which is standing, the trunks, the standing timber” (comp. Isaiah 37:24).
On Isaiah 10:34. πִ ?χַּ ?σ only here in Isaiah may be either Niph. or Piel.
AND 1. The foregoing disposes the reader to look for an immediate portrayal of the destruction of Assyria. But to his surprise the Prophet translates him back into the commencement of the hostilities of Assyria, against Israel (Isaiah 10:28-32). This first onslaught of Assyria was so impetuous, that it seemed as if Jerusalem could not resist. But it only appeared so. How little dangerous that onslaught was appears from the brief description of the inevitable, impending ruin of the world-power, that immediately follows (Isaiah 10:33-34).
A contrast is hereby presented that gives a most striking effect, which is still more enhanced by the masterly, dramatic representation of the march of the Assyrians against Jerusalem. So that this little passage proves to be a master-piece of Art, both by its arrangement as a whole and its execution in detail.
2. He comes—the hill of Jerusalem.
Isaiah 10:28-32. These verses describe the last part of the march to Jerusalem. For, no doubt, Aiath is the same as Ai that lay North-east of Jerusalem (ςַ ?ι or δָ ?ςַ ?ι “the stone heap,” Joshua 7:2 sqq., ςַ ?ιָּ ?ΰNehemiah 11:31, ςַ ?ιָּ ?δ [false reading ςַ ?ζָּ ?δ]; 1 Chronicles 7:28), which is probably identical with ςַ ?εִּ ?ιν (Joshua 18:23) comp. Fayin loc.). Finn, Van de Velde, Arnold, Knobel, identify Aiath in Tell-el-Hadschar that lies less than an hour South-east of Beitin (Bethel). On the other hand Delitzsch, following Schegg who personally investigated the spot, locates Aiath about six hours north of Jerusalem in Tejjibe, that is situated on a hill with an extended prospect, in whose neighborhood there is still found a small village, Churbet Ai.
It will perhaps depend on whether the locality of Tejjibe corresponds with Joshua 8:11; Joshua 8:13, according to which there was a valley North of the city. [Concerning the location of all the places named in the text consult “Robinson and Smith’sBib. Res. in Palestine, Vol. II.].
Migron, which is mentioned beside only 1 Samuel 14:2 (but in all probability this passage is corrupt: Arnold in Herz.R. Encycl. XIV. p. 755) appears to have been quite insignificant. Delitzsch regards it as identical with Burg-Magran, a cluster of ruins eight minutes from Bethel. But, then, would they not have marched backwards? Michmash, a city of Benjamin as all the rest named here, plays an important part in the history of Saul and Jonathan, 1 Samuel 13, 14 It still exists as a small deserted village with the name Muchmas one hour North of Geba (now Dscheba), three hours and a half North of Jerusalem (Robinson and S.
II. comp. Ruetschi, Herz.R. Encycl. IX. p. 526). There the Assyrians left their baggage in order to press on quicker. “The passage of Michmash” is mentioned 1 Samuel 13, 14. It is the Wady-es-Suweinit (according to others es-Suweikeh—comp.
Ruetschi,l. c.)—a deep, rough ravine, forty-eight minutes wide, immediately below Michmash. As it runs from East to West, they must cross it obliquely to approach Jerusalem. The ravine is difficult to traverse. It is hardly credible that the proper highway from Shechem or Nabulus (comp. Arnold in Herz.R. Encycl.
XV. p. 163 sq. Art. “Strassen in Palaestina,”) passed through it. The Prophet’s description is ideal. He depicts not what is past but what is future, and that, not in the manner of historical accuracy, but as became his prophetic interests. He would depict how the enemy presses forward with utmost speed, by the shortest way, deterred by no obstacles. On the arduous way they cheer one another with the cry: “Geba give us lodging.” Thus they promise themselves good quarters in Geba, that lay so charmingly on an elevated plateau (comp.
Schegg in Delitzsch). Geba cannot be the same as Gebea of Saul, as appears evident from our text. For if it were the same, why is it mentioned twice with a difference in the form of the name, and with the name of another city coming between? Rama, now er-Ram, the city of Benjamin, made notorious by Saul (1 Samuel 1:19; 1 Samuel 2:11, etc.), seems to have lain aside from their route though near by. For it looks with trembling on the passers by; but Gebea of Saul opposite, lying perhaps still nearer, fled outright, It lay on the summit of Tuleil-el-Tul (the Bean mountain, see Arnold, Herz.Real. Encycl. p. 744) which commands a view of the whole neighborhood.
In a direct line the expedition encounters Gallim, (1 Samuel 25:44) which Valentiner (Ztschr. d. D. M. G. XII. p. 169) thinks he has discovered in the hill Chirbet el-Dschisr that lies South of the Bean mountain. Because immediately threatened, Gallim shall shriek out (χεμκ accus.).
Laishah, by no means identical with μַ ?ιִ ?ωׁ ?Judges 18:29, cannot be located. But Knobel is likely correct in finding evidence of its being a place near Gallim in 1 Samuel 25:44, where is mentioned Phaltiel son of Laish from Gallim (comp. 2 Samuel 3:15). ςπιδςπϊεϊ, “O poor Anathoth,” is evidently a play on words. By this and the emotion of the orator is to be explained the order of the words, which is not quite normal (comp. Isaiah 54:11). Anathoth, now Anata, is only three-fourths of an hour distant from Jerusalem—Madmenah (Dung-heaps) and Gebim (fountains, Jeremiah 14:3) are not mentioned elsewhere, nor are any traces of the places discovered as yet. Both are directly threatened; so nothing remains but to flee and save their goods. “Saving their goods” seems to be indicated by δςιζε (comp.
Exodus 9:19); yet it may very well be construed as synonymous with πָֹ ?γְ ?γָ ?δ according to Jeremiah 4:6; Jeremiah 6:1. “To-day still in Nob, to make a halt,” is likewise the enemies’ shout to one another. The thing is to pass on to Nob to-day, but there make a preliminary halt in order to make the necessary dispositions for the attack on Jerusalem. Nob (comp. 2 Samuel 21:16; 2 Samuel 21:18; Nehemiah 11:32) without doubt quite near Jerusalem, is to the present not certainly identified. Schegg contends very decidedly that it may be Isawije that lies South-west of Anata fifty-five minutes North of Jerusalem.
3. Behold the Lord—a mighty one.
Isaiah 10:33-34. The proud expedition of the Assyrian falls like trees felled by the axe. Like the tempest tears away the branches, so the terror that goes forth from Jehovah breaks the power of the Assyrian. “The high ones of stature (of the standing wood)” shall be cut down (Isaiah 9:9) the lofty ones must bow. The entire forest thicket (Isaiah 9:17) shall be cut down with the iron; but Lebanon (notice how the Prophet before distinguished branches, trunks and thicket, but at last combines all in the common, all comprehending name Lebanon) shall fall by a Mighty One. Who this Mighty One will be the Prophet does not say. That it is the Lord Himself as the remote cause, who Isaiah 33:21, comp.
Psalms 93:4, is called ΰַ ?γִּ ?ιψ “glorious, mighty,” is of course. But it may convey also an allusion at the same time to that one among the Lord’s ministers, that was the principal instrument in annihilating the Assyrian army before Jerusalem (Isaiah 37:36). For the ministers of the Lord, too, are called ΰγִּ ?ιψְ ?ιν “the excellent or mighty,” (Psalms 16:3).
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
Footnotes:baggage.
Heb. Cry shrill with thy voice.
Hark Laish.
takes flight.
yet to-day in Nob to halt.
leafy coronal.
the giants of the standing wood are felled.
he fells.
Or, mightily.
III. ISRAEL’S IN TO THE MESSIAH Isaiah 11:1 to Isaiah 12:61. FROM THE DRIED UP ROOT OF THE HOUSE OF DAVID SHALL GO FORTH A SPROUT THAT SHALL FOUND A KINGDOM OF MOST PEACE
Isaiah 11:1-91 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse,
And a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
2 And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him,
The spirit of wisdom and understanding,
The spirit of counsel and might,
The spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord;3 And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord:And he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes,
Neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:
4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor,
And reprove with equity for the meek of earth:
And he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth,
And with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
5 And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins,
And faithfulness the girdle of his reins.
6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb,
And the leopard shall lie down with the kid;
And the calf and the young lion and the fatling together;
And a little child shall lead them.
7 And the cow and the bear shall feed;
Their young ones shall lie down together:
And the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp,
And the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice’ den.
9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain:
For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord,As the waters cover the sea.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 11:1. βֶּ ?ζַ ?ς occurs again only Isaiah 40:24; Job 14:8. The root βָּ ?ζַ ?ς is not found. The meaning is that of βָּ ?γַ ?ς (Isaiah 10:33). caedere “to cut down.” In the three places that it occurs βζς is “the hewn, cut up stem that still sticks in the ground.” Hence βζςιωׁ ?ι and not βζςγָּ ?εִ ?γ.—ηֹ ?θֶ ?ψ again only Proverbs 14:3, meaning: “rod, pliant twig.”—πֵ ?φֶ ?ψ, Isaiah 14:19; Isaiah 60:21; Daniel 11:7 (from πָ ?φַ ?ψ unused root, splendere, nitere), “a hardy, fresh young branch.”—ξωׁ ?ψωׁ ?ιε, though the accents are against it, must be connected with πφψ. For what does it mean that the shoot right from the root on shall bear fruit? Is something unnatural and impossible said of this shoot? Or was not Christ a Tree when He bore fruit?
The thought is rather that from the extinct trunk and shoot a sprout shall proceed that shall give evidence of adequate vital power, and grow up to be a fruit-bearing tree. Hence it is quite unjustifiable to impose upon the verb ιτψδ the meaning of ιִ ?τְ ?ψַ ?η (Hitzig, Umbreit).
On Isaiah 11:3. It is natural to regard δψιδε as antithesis of the objective communication of the Spirit spoken of, Isaiah 11:2. For first, δֵ ?ψִ ?ιηַ means “smell anything with pleasure” (Leviticus 26:31; Amos 5:21). But if αιψΰϊιΧ should be the object of δψιηε, then it ceases to be predicate, and then the sentence is without predicate; or if it is construed as predicate, then the emphatic use of αְּ after verbs of sensation cannot be appealed to, because then αְּ no longer depends on the notion of smelling, but on a modification of the notion of being (happens in the fear of Jehovah, is directed to the fear of Jehovah), which must be supplied to accommodate the subject to the predicate. Second: What means the one sided emphasis of smelling? If smelling may be construed in the wider sense as inhaling and exhaling air through the nose, so that it coincides with breathing, that would suit.
I construe it in this wider sense as do others (Clericus, Hendewerk, Ewald, Meier). [See Comment of J. A. Alexander, added, p. 162, top.] Then δψιη is to be construed as direct causative Hiphil, in the sense of “to make ψεּ ?ηַ,” as one says ύύύύύύηֶ ?ΰְְ ?ζִ ?ιο “to make ears” = to “hear,” δִ ?μְ ?ωִׁ ?ιο “to make a tongue,” zόngeln, “to blaspheme.” ψεּ ?ξַ then = “breath, life’s breath,” Genesis 6:17; Genesis 7:15; Genesis 7:22, etc. But still much depends on whether bodily or spiritual breath is meant. The context decides for the latter. For our δψιηεαιψΰϊιΧ stands in evident antithesis to ψεηιψΰϊιΧ, Isaiah 11:2.
The latter designates the objective communication of the Spirit, the former the subjective reception.—μְ secundum, comp. μְ ?φֶ ?γֶ ?χ Isaiah 32:1 : μָ ?αֶ ?θַ ?η, etc.—δελιη with μְ like Isaiah 2:4.
On Isaiah 11:4. ξִ ?ιωׁ ?εֹ ?ψ comp. Isaiah 40:4; Isaiah 42:16.
On Isaiah 11:5. Gesenius makes the remark here that the repetition of ΰֵ ?ζεֹ ?ψ (instead of using once ηβεψ) can give no surprise in Isaiah, because he often uses the same word in parallel clauses: Isaiah 14:4; Isaiah 15:1; Isaiah 15:8; Isaiah 16:7; Isaiah 17:12-13; Isaiah 19:7; Isaiah 31:8; Isaiah 32:17; Isaiah 42:19; Isaiah 44:3; Isaiah 54:13; Isaiah 55:4; Isaiah 55:13; Isaiah 59:10. But in saying this Gesenius, as Drechsler remarks, forgot that he denies Isaiah’s authorship of chaps. 40–66On Isaiah 11:6. ζְ ?ΰֵ ?α is found in Isaiah only here and Isaiah 65:25, that resembles this.—λֶּ ?αֶ ?ωׂ is “the lamb;” comp. Isaiah 1:11; Isaiah 5:17. πָ ?ξֵ ?ψ = “the striped” is “the panther” (Jeremiah 5:6; Jeremiah 13:23). Isaiah has it only here.—πδβ with αְּ like 1 Chronicles 13:7; comp. on πֹ ?βֵ ?ωׂ αּ ?εֹ Isaiah 9:3.
On Isaiah 11:7. ΰψιδ Isaiah 35:9.—ϊֶּ ?αֶ ?ο again only Isaiah 65:25.
On Isaiah 11:8. ωׁ ?ςωׁ ?ς Pilpel from ωׁ ?ςς delimre, mulcere, comp. the pass. Isaiah 66:12.—ηֻ ?ψ Isaiah 42:22—τϊο only here in Isaiah.—ξְ ?ΰεּ ?ψָ ?ϊ is ἅπ. λεγ. ξָ ?ΰεֹ ?ψ is “light,” i.e., “an illuminating body” (Genesis 1:16); ξְ ?ΰεּ ?ψָ ?δ would then be a “light opening,” and we might understand under that term both the entrance of the cave and the sparkling eye of the animal gleaming like a precious stone (so the Targ. Aben Ezra, Kimchi, etc.). But the parallelism with ηֻ ?ψ prompts the conjecture, that originally ξְ ?ςεּ ?ψָ ?δ, which otherwise never occurs, = ξְ ?ςָ ?ψָ ?δ “cave,” stood in the text (Gesenius). What is correct is hard to make out.—δָ ?γָ ?δ doubtless kindred to ιָ ?γָ ?δ, immittere is ἅπ. λεγ.—The φִ ?τְ ?ςεֹ ?πִ ?ι (Isaiah 59:5) is likely identical with φֶ ?τַ ?ς (Isaiah 14:29). The root φָ ?τַ ?ς means halare, sibilare.
Doubtless a very poisonous serpent is meant, perhaps the basilisk, which is said to have been called sibilus. Comp. Gesenius, Thes. p. 1182.
On Isaiah 11:9. That the beasts are subject of ιψςε (comp. Isaiah 65:25) the context puts beyond doubt.—ιָ ?ν is here manifestly the sea-bed, the bottom of the sea; (comp. Psalms 104:6). The prefix μְ before ιָ ?ν is explained by the causative sense in which Piel is used here, as it is often.—λִּ ?ρָּ ?δ means “covering,” make covering, like δִ ?φִּ ?ιμ “provide rescue,” δεֹ ?λִ ?ιηַ “provide justice,” δֶ ?ΰֱ ?ψִ ?ικְ “make length,” etc., and is accordingly, like the verbs named, construed with the dative. So, too, is λִּ ?ρָּ ?δςַ ?μ “to make a cover, to spread as a cover over something” (Numbers 16:33; Job 36:32; Habakkuk 2:14, where our text is reproduced.—[J.
A. Alexander on verse 3. “And his sense of smelling (i.e., his power of perception, with a seeming reference to the pleasure it affords him) shall be exercised in (or upon) the fear of Jehovah (as an attribute of others”). The only sense of δψιηε confirmed by usage is to smell. This, as a figure, comprehends discernment or discrimination between false and true religion, and the act of taking pleasure as the sense does in a grateful odor. In ύύύύαιψΰϊιΧ the αְּ is a connective which the verb δψιη commonly takes after it, and adds no more to the meaning of the phrase than the English prepositions when we speak of smelling to or of a thing, instead of simply smelling it.”
Ibid. On Isaiah 11:9. “They shall not hurt nor destroy,” etc. The absence of the copulative shows that this is not so much a direct continuation of the previous description as a summary explanation of it. The true construction, therefore, is indefinite, and the verbs do not agree with the nouns (animals) of Isaiah 11:8.”]
AND 1. The destruction of the proud, towering forest, which, meaning primarily Assyria, comprehends also the world-powers generally, is followed by a contrasted picture in the renewed flourishing of the house of David and of his kingdom. That house of David will be reduced to a stunted and inconsiderable root-stock, when the world-power shall be at the summit of its prosperity. But from this root-stock, that is regarded as dead, a sprout shall still go forth (Isaiah 11:1). On it the Spirit of the Lord shall rest in the fulness of His manifold powers (Isaiah 11:2). This sprout will take delight in the fear of Jehovah; He will practise justice not after the deceptive sight of the eyes (Isaiah 11:3); on the contrary He will so do it that the poor and humble shall be helped, but the wicked not merely outwardly, but also inwardly subdued (Isaiah 11:4).
For He shall stand firm in righteousnesss and truth (Isaiah 11:5). Thus His kingdom shall be one of peace in such a degree that even the impersonal creatures shall be filled with this spirit of peace (Isaiah 11:6-7), 8. For even the wildest beasts shall be no more wild, and no longer do harm on Jehovah’s holy mountain. The whole shall be full of the liveliest and deepest knowledge of Jehovah, like the bottom of the sea is covered with water (Isaiah 11:9).
2. And there shall come—his roots.
Isaiah 11:1. Without a hint as to the time when, the Prophet announced that a revirescence of David’s house shall be the correlative of destruction of the world-power that was compared to the forest of Lebanon. He says stock of Jesse, not stock of David, for he would intimate that David’s stock will be reduced to its rank previous to David, when it was only the stock of the obscure citizen of Bethlehem. This explanation seems to me more correct than the other that understands that by this term is intimated that the Messiah shall be the second David, for He is such not alongside of, but after and out of the first David. The Messiah is in fact the Son of David (2 Samuel 7). If this stock, dead and mutilated, only exists as a stump, (but we know when and how that happened,) then shall a slender twig emerge from His roots, thus out of that part concealed under ground and still fresh, a hardy shoot that shall not perish, but bear fruit, and therefore (as included in the statement) develop to a new tree.
He is called “branch” Isaiah 4:2; Jeremiah 23:5; Jeremiah 33:15; Zechariah 3:8; Zechariah 6:12. At the beginning of 53. (Isaiah 11:2) is found a representation of the Messiah closely resembling our verse: “and He raised Himself before Him like the tender plant and like the root out of dry ground.” Ezek. too, (Ezekiel 17:22-24) speaks of the shoot of the cedar (ιεֹ ?πֵ ?χ) that the Lord will plant on the high mountain of Israel (Isaiah 2) to show how He is able “to bring down the high tree, exalt the low tree, dry up the green tree, and make flourish the dry tree.”
3. And the spirit—fear of the LordIsa_11:2. The Prophet immediately forsakes the figurative language. He speaks of the sprout as of a person. For on Him shall settle down (Isaiah 7:2; Isaiah 7:19; Numbers 11:25; 2 Kings 2:15) the spirit of Jehovah. This is a generic designation.
For in what follows a threefold species of this genus is named, each of which is represented in two modifications. The candlestick of the sanctuary has rightly been regarded as symbol of the spirit of Jehovah. The stem corresponds to what we have called the genus, the six branches to what we have called the species (Exodus 25:31 sqq.; Isaiah 37:17 sqq.). The first species comprehends (ηλξδ and αιπδ) “wisdom and understanding.” It is not easy to determine wherein consists the difference between these. In not a few passages they are placed opposite to one another in the parallelism of the clauses: Proverbs 2:2 sqq.; Proverbs 4:5; Proverbs 4:7; Proverbs 9:10; Job 28:12; Job 28:20; Job 28:28; 2 Chronicles 2:12, etc. In all these passages is observed, first of all, a formal distinction, a certain distinction of rank. “Wisdom” is the great all-comprehending chief name of all right knowledge.
As the notion wisdom rises to personality, in fact to the dignity of divine personality (Proverbs 8:32 sqq.) the word becomes almost a proper name. “Understanding” (αιπδ with γַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ ,ϊְּ ?αεּ ?πָ ?δ, etc.) takes up a subordinate position. It signifies always only an element, although a very essential one of “wisdom” (comp. Proverbs 8:14). Many find in ηλξδ the fundamental meaning of firmitas solida, of πυκνότης, though the word is rather allied to αֵּ ?κְ ?plaatum, and thus, as in sapientia, σοφία “sapor” “taste” (comp. θςν) is the fundamental notion. In any case ηλξδ “wisdom” has more a positive meaning, whereas αιπδ “understanding” (comp. αֵּ ?ιο and the meaning of the root words in the dialects) carries more the negative notion of διάκρισις, the art of distinguishing between true and false, good and bad.—ςφδ and βαεψδ “counsel” and “might” (Isaiah 36:5) are easily distinguished as proofs of practical wisdom in forming and executing good counsel. A third pair is (γַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ, stat. const. and(ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰַ ?ϊιι) “knowledge and fear of the Lord:” for the first two pairs comprise those effects of the spirit that relate to the earthly life.
The third pair appear to reach out beyond this earthly life. It names a knowledge and a fear whose object is Jehovah Himself. If the fear of God is named last here, whereas according to Proverbs 1:7; Proverbs 9:10; Psalms 111:10 it is the beginning of all wisdom, that has its reason herein, that what is the deepest foundation may at the same time be designated as the loftiest height, like the great mountains form the inmost nucleus and the highest summits of the earth’s body. The entire enumeration progresses therefore from the bottom upwards. Moreover the view of the seven spirits of God, that is found Revelation 1:4; Revelation 3:1; Revelation 4:5; Revelation 5:6, rests on our text. On the anointing of the Messiah with the Spirit of God, comp.
Isaiah 42:1; Isaiah 61:1; Matthew 12:18; Luke 4:18; John 3:34.
4. And shall make—his reins.
Isaiah 11:3-5. On δψιηε see Text and Gram. He has not only received the spirit from without; He receives it also within Him, so that He continually breathes in this spiritual air of life—this alone and no other. He has received (objectively) the spirit in absolute fulness. There appears to me to lie in these words, too, an allusion to Genesis 2:7. There it is said that God breathed in men His spirit as the principle of life.
But this principle of life performs its functions no matter in what element the man may find himself. Even in the godless it is constantly active. Yet how unsatisfying, how mournful is that breathing of the spirit in a sphere infected by sin. The Messiah lives wholly in “the fear of God.” He therefore breathes in an atmosphere homogeneous to Him. He therefore brings into use for mankind the right breathing by bringing them back into the pure element of spirit. He is the second Adam.
As king, the Messiah must display the divinity of His disposition pre-eminently in the perfectly adequate administration of justice. He will therefore never let His judgment depend on outward appearance, never on that which pleases the outward sense, but He will only suffer that to pass for right that is right. He will not, therefore, look on the person, but help the poor and lowly to their rights (comp. Isaiah 1:26 sqq.; Isaiah 3:13 sqq.). But the unjust He will punish. This is the meaning of Isa 11:4 b.
For the earth (ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ) that He smites with the rod of His mouth, (Revelation 1:16) and that is put parallel with ψָ ?ωָׁ ?ς “the wicked” can only be regarded as the territory of the world that is hostile to God. “The wicked” ψָ ?ωָׁ ?ς is by the Chaldee, and since that by many expositors, construed not only as a collective = ψωׁ ?ςιν, but at the same time, (or even exclusively e.g.Delitzsch) in the sense of 2 Thessalonians 2:8, as designation of an eschatological person, in whom enmity against God shall reach its climax. The staff of His mouth is the word that goes forth out of His mouth, and the breath of His lips is the same. For His word is in fact what His lips (spiritually) breathe out. Thus He proves Himself to be the one that can destroy in the same way as He created. By His word were things made; by His word they pass away. Comp.
Psalms 104:29. In this righteousness, however, consists His proper strength, and the guaranty for the eternal continuance of His kingdom. The powers of the world must pass away on account of unrighteousness (Proverbs 14:34).
The girdle is the symbol of vigorous, unimpeded development of strength, because the ancients could run, wrestle, and work only when the girdle confined their wide garments (comp. Job 12:18; Job 38:3; Job 40:2; Jeremiah 1:17; Ephesians 6:14; 1 Peter 1:13). Let the loins be girt with righteousness and truth, and the girded man stands strong and firm in righteousness and truth. He is strong by both. Therefore He does not further His cause by unrighteousness and lies, but by the contrary.
5. The wolf also——the sea.
Isaiah 11:6-9. The Prophet’s vision penetrates to the remotest time: he comprises the near and far in one look. The Assyria of the present, with its destruction in the near future, the Messiah in the inception of His appearance, and the latest fruits of His work of peace—all this he sees at once in a grand picture before him. When the Redeemer, as Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:5) shall have done away with all violence, and put justice on the throne, then will peace be in the earth, and that, not only among men, but also among beasts. The Prophet, it is true, does not explain how the beasts are to be made accessible to this peaceful disposition. But it seems to me certain that only stupendous changes in nature, violent revolutions, world-ruin and resurrection, thus the slaying of the old Adam, and the regeneration of nature can bring forth these effects, (Revelation 20 sq.). “Behold I make all things new,” (Revelation 21:5) says He, that sits upon the throne.
But we see from passages like 35; Isaiah 43:18 sqq., that Isaiah himself had a presentiment of this grand, and all-comprehending world-renewal. I do not mean by this to defend a literal fulfilment of the word which the church fathers rejected as Judaizing, but only themselves to fall into the opposite extreme of spiritualizing and allegorizing. (Jerome appeals to Ephesians 1:3). The point is to find the happy medium. That, however, is not found by saying that Isaiah meant what he said in a real sense, only he deceived himself, but by recognizing that Isaiah, as organ of the Spirit of God, beheld stupendous, spirit-corporeal reality, but paints this reality with human, earthly, even national and temporal colors. In short there will be “a new creation,” (2 Corinthians 5:17) and this new creation will be at the same time a restitution of that oldest creation, that original one of Paradise, but on a higher plane. But how in the picture of the Prophet, to draw the boundary between absolute and relative reality, i.e., whether to exclude only single traits as not literal, or whether to divest the whole of its local and temporal construction, is difficult to say.
Yet I decide for the latter. For all the traits of the picture painted by Isaiah bear the stamp of the existing earthly corporality. But in this sphere the prophecy cannot be realized. We must suppose a new basis of spiritual, glorified corporality made for this fulfilment. On this basis then the Prophet’s word will, mutatis mutandis, certainly be fulfilled.
The young lion (λτιψ Isaiah 5:29) will lie quietly between the calf and the fattened ox, hitherto his favorite food; and a small boy will suffice to keep this entire, extraordinary, mixed up herd. Cow and bear graze, and their young rest by one another, while the old male-lion will devour chopped straw. Poisonous serpents will change their nature; the sucking child will play at the hole (vid. Text. and Gram.) of the adder. The holy mountain of Jehovah (comp. on Isaiah 2:2 sqq.), will not indeed physically comprise the earth, but it will rule the earth, and so far the Prophet can say, there shall no more harm be done, nor destruction devised on the holy mountain. The whole earth, in fact, is only the slope of the mount of God.
But the reason why there is no more harm, is that the whole earth (notice how in the second clause “earth” is substituted for “holy mountain”) will be full of the knowledge of the Lord. No doubt the Prophet means here, not merely a dead knowing, which even the devils have (James 2:17); he means a living, experimental, practical knowledge of God, as is possible also to the impersonal creature. Therefore the whole earth, not merely man, shall know God living, and thus on the holy mountain shall no harm or destruction be devised. By the glorious picture of that knowledge filling the earth like the water the bottom of the sea, the Prophet signifies that he conceives of all creatures as filled with this living knowledge of God.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
Footnotes:stump.
shoot.
bear fruit.
And his breathing will be done in the fear of the Lord.Heb. scent, or smell.
administer judgment.
Or, argue.
righten.
panther.
grass.
Or, adders.
2. THE RETURN OF ISRAEL TAKES PLACE ONLY WHEN THE MESSIAH HAS AND THE HEATHEN HAVE TO HIM
Isaiah 11:10-1610 And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse,
Which shall stand for an ensign of the people;
To it shall the Gentiles seek:
And his rest shall be glorious.
11 And it shall come to pass in that day,
That the Lord shall set his hand again the second time
To recover the remnant of his people,
Which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt,
And from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam,
And from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations,
And shall assemble the outcasts of Israel,
And gather together the dispersed of Judah
From the four corners of the earth.
13 The envy also of Ephraim shall depart,
And the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off:
Ephraim shall not envy Judah,
And Judah shall not vex Ephraim.
14 But they shall fly upon the shoulders of the Philistines toward the west;
They shall spoil them of the east together:
They shall lay their hand upon Edom and Moab;
And the children of Ammon shall obey them.
15 And the Lord shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea;
And with his mighty wind shall he shake his hand over the river,
And shall smite it in the seven streams,
And make men go over dry-shod.
16 And there-shall be an highway for the remnant of his people,
Which shall be left, from Assyria;
Like as it was to Israel
In the day that he came up out of the land of Egypt.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 11:10. γψωׁ ΰֵ ?μ comp. on Isaiah 8:19, but it has more emphasis than there.
On Isaiah 11:11. δερισιγ is only found here. Many would connect ιָ ?γεֹ with what follows as accus. instr. But the position conflicts with that. Others supply μωְׁ ?μֹ ?ηַ; but that is not something that may be left to be understood. It is better with Drechsler to take δερισιγ as an expression equivalent to πָ ?ϊַ ?οιָ ?γ (Exodus 7:4): manum addere corresponding to manum dare. If the latter means “to lay the hand on one,” then our expression means “repeatedly to lay hands on one.”
On Isaiah 11:12. πγηιν and πτεφεϊ, by this simple means the Prophet expresses the thought that the promised gathering shall extend to both sexes, men and women. ΰψαςλπτεϊ is only found here in Isaiah. The words are taken from Deuteronomy 22:12, and are found beside Ezekiel 7:2.
On Isaiah 11:14 λָּ ?ϊֵ ?σ .εςτεαλϊσεβεΧ is without doubt here used in a double sense. Every shoulder-shaped elevation is called λϊσ. Thus we find λϊσιρΞλπψσ Numbers 34:11; λϊσδιαερι Joshua 15:8; Joshua 18:16; λΧδψΞιςψιν ibid. Joshua 11:10. λΧιψιηε Joshua 18:12; λΧμεζδ Joshua 18:13. So, too, Joshua 15:11 speaks of a λֶּ ?ϊֶ ?σςֶ ?χְ ?ψεֹ ?ο. Therefore the shoulder-like watershed of the coast of Philistia toward the sea may be called λϊσ.
But from the verb ςτε it is seen that the Prophet has in mind at the same time the figure of a bird of prey that flies on a man’s shoulder in order to belabor his head. But is λָּ ?ϊֵ ?σ st. const. or absolutus. Delitzsch is of the opinion that, on account of the following τ in τμωׁ ?ϊιν, the stat. absol. is used in the sense of stat. constructus. It were possible that the Masorets might have punctuated in this way for the reason assigned, yet this kind of punctuation ought to occur oftener. But Delitzsch can only appeal to the accent not being drawn backwards in ηָ ?φֵֽ ?ααּ ?εֹ Isaiah 5:2, and δφֵֽ ?ααּ ?ε Isaiah 10:15, where no st. constructus exists. I agree, therefore, with Drechsler who takes τμωׁ ?ϊιν to be in apposition with λϊσ: “they fly on to the shoulder, the (so named) Philistine land;” ιָ ?ξָּֽ ?δ, however, refers to the whole, and is contrasted, not with an eastern λϊσ (λΧιγιηε Joshua 18:12), but with απιχγν.—ιαζε comp.
Isaiah 10:2.—ξִ ?ωְׁ ?μֹ ?εηַ .ξωׂ ?μεηιγ. occurs again only Esther 9:19; Esther 9:22 in the sense of missio (donorum). On the other hand ξִ ?ωְׁ ?μַ ?ηιָ ?γ occurs five times in Deut. (Deuteronomy 12:7; Deuteronomy 15:10; Deuteronomy 23:21; Deuteronomy 28:8; Deuteronomy 28:20) in the sense of “something coming under the hand,” which is said of food, business, etc. Here it is what the master, the conqueror, the oppressor lays his hand on in order to hold it down; Psalms 32:4; Psalms 38:3; Psalms 55:21; Psalms 106:26; Psalms 106:42; Psalms 138:7, etc. In this the abstract stands for the concrete as in ξωׁ ?ξςϊ, which means audientia (audience) both in the sense of confidential hearing, as a title of honor (1 Samuel 22:14; 2 Samuel 23:23) and in the sense of obedientia (= obedientes, subditi).
On Isaiah 11:15. δηψινεβε. There exists no necessity for reading δηψια. For, as Delitzsch remarks, δηψιν is only a strengthened βָ ?ςַ ?ψ “to reproach,” Psalms 106:9; Nahum 1:4.—δπισιγε comp. on Isaiah 10:32.—ςֲ ?ιָ ?ν is ἅπ.λεγ. Expositors differ about it very much. To me it seems best with Delitzsch to derive the word from ηָ ?ξַ ?ν ,ηεּ ?ν = ςεּ ?ν (from which ηεּ ?ν niger, “the burned black,” Genesis 30:32 sqq.).
AND The Prophet now declares the relation of the last, glorious return of Israel to the appearance of the Messiah. In Isaiah 11:10, he puts in front the fact that the heathen will inquire after the root of Jesse, and that in this respect the place where the Messiah rests shall partake of great glory. By this he intimates plainly that the heathen shall turn to the Messiah before Israel, and that therefore the promised return of Israel shall only be afterwards. Then he speaks of this return very fully. As underlying thought, he represents that, as the Lord after the Egyptian bondage would reject His people by a more extended captivity, so He would cause a second return out of this captivity. With this thought begins, and closes the section Isaiah 11:11-16.
The remnant of the nation shall be gathered out of all lands (Isaiah 11:11-12). The inward dissension between Ephraim, and Judah shall cease (Isaiah 11:13). They shall unitedly conquer, and subjugate their enemies of the past, both East and West (Isaiah 11:14). The Red sea shall be dried up, the Euphrates shall be divided into seven channels, so that both bodies of water that separated the holy land from the scenes of the first and second captivities may be easily crossed over, (Isaiah 11:15). Thus from the second captivity there shall be prepared as glorious a road for the remnant, as there was for the nation to return out of the first bondage. (16).
2. And in that day—glorious.
Isaiah 11:10. We must conceive of the subject matter of this description and of Isa 11:11-16 as falling between the sections Isaiah 11:1-9. For doubtless the human world must be first penetrated by the peace of God. Only after that can peace extend to the inferior creatures (comp. Genesis 1:26 sqq.). But the Prophet has here combined the beginning and the end, because he thought he could characterize the Messianic dominion most clearly, by its consequences.
In a similar way Jeremiah (3 and 4), proceeds from the description of the (ωׁ ?εּ ?λ) return in the past to the description of the return in the far future, in order finally to join on after that the summons to return in the present. The Prophet’s naming the Messiah Himself “root of Jesse” after calling him, Isaiah 11:1, “a shoot out of the root of Jesse,” has a double reason. The first seems to me to be the mere formal one, viz.: that for brevity’s sake the Prophet would avoid repeating πֵ ?φֶ ?ψξִ ?ο “a shoot from.” But he could justly omit this because the Messiah formed the most prominent ingredient of the root of Jesse. He was in this root like He was in the loins of Abraham (Hebrews 7:10). But for Him, the root of Jesse had been a common root as any other. We have here therefore, not only a formal-rhetorical synecdoche, but also one justified in its substance.
For the expression is in any case a synecdoche (comp. the so frequent synecdochical use of the word “seed”). As root he could not be a standard of the heathen. He could be so only as a trunk or stem that has grown out of the root. In this sense he is called “root of David,” Revelation 5:5; but with omission of the synecdoche, he is called “root and offspring of David,” Revelation 22:16. Paul cites our passage Romans 15:12 according to the LXX. The Messiah is a standard to the heathen so far as He will be an appearance that will be observable to all, and mightily draw the attention of all to Himself.
On the subject matter comp. Isaiah 2:2; Isaiah 66:18 sqq.; Haggai 2:7; Zech. 2:15. The standard “stands” (comp. Isaiah 3:13) for it is fastened to an upright pole (Numbers 21:8, where the pole itself is called πֵ ?ρ. Comp. Isaiah 5:26).
Bat it is not said who has planted the standard. It just stands there (comp. κεῖται, Luke 2:34). It sets itself by its own inward, divine power. ωׁ ?ψωׁ “a root” stands first with emphasis. ΰμιε “unto Him” resumes the subject. “Unto Him shall seek,” conveys the notion of longing desire. It is clear that by “nations” (βּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν) are meant the heathen. For though βּ ?εֹ ?ι “nation,” in the singular, is used for Israel (comp. Isaiah 1:4), it is never so in the plural.
Israel did not receive the Lord when He came to His own (John 1:11). It is the same thought that Paul expresses Romans 10:20, in words taken from Isaiah 65:1-2 (according to LXX.). “I was found of them, that sought me not; I was manifest (πִ ?γְ ?ψַ ?ωְׁ ?ϊִּ ?ι) unto them that asked not after me.” Paul ascribes to partial blindness the exceeding remarkable fact, that after the appearance of the Messiah the heathen entered into the kingdom of God before Israel, (Romans 11:25)—ξπεηδ “a rest,” the place of rest where moving herds or caravans settle down, (Isaiah 28:12; Isaiah 32:18; Isaiah 66:1, and Numbers 10:33). The place where the Messiah sits down to rest is identical with the place where He reveals the fulness of His might and glory, it is His body, the church (Ephesians 1:23). Still at the present time the church is a gentile church, and yet it is a glory (λָּ ?αεֹ ?γabstr. pro concr.), i.e., a realization of the idea of glory, (comp. Psalms 45:14) even though only a preliminary and relative glory.
3. And it shall come to pass——of the earth.Isaiah 11:11-12. The Prophet now turns to Israel. Israel must first be broken up, and its separate parts be scattered into all lands, if it is to accept Him that is promised to Israel for salvation. Only out of a state of banishment and dispersion, and only after the heathen have previously joined themselves to Him, does Israel know and lay hold on its Redeemer. But when it shall have known Him, then will the dispersion cease, then shall Israel be gathered and be brought back into its land.
The first exile was the Egyptian. Wonderfully was Israel redeemed out of it. A second exile is in prospect. The Prophet assumes it. He has already announced it Isaiah 6:11 sqq.; Isaiah 10:5 sqq. What had already occurred at that time under Tiglath-Pileser (2 Kings 15:29) was as much only a faint beginning of the exile, as the return under Zerubbabel and Ezra, was only a faint beginning of the redemption.
The Roman exile, which is but a part of the second exile, though the completion of it, must first have accomplished itself, before the second redemption can accomplish itself.
The Lord has acquired Israel (χְ ?πεֹ ?ϊ), He let it cost Him something, He expended great care upon it, therefore the nation is His property (His ρְ ?βֻ ?μָּ ?δ “peculiar treasure,” Exodus 19:5, etc.). χָ ?πָ ?δ “purchased,” is found in this sense even in Exodus 15:16, the song of triumph of Moses, to which Isaiah seems here to allude.
The Prophet does not say αְּ ?ΰωεψ, etc., “in Assyria,” but “from A,” etc., (vid.Exodus 10:5), for he would not so much intimate the locality where the banished are found, as rather designate a remnant, not yet quite exterminated by the nation in the midst of which they are found. He then names eight nations, Assyria in advance, for that is the world power that he sees immediately before him, and that represents all following powers, i.e., the world-power in general. Next he names Egypt, for this is not only to be the actual scene of future exile, but is also a prototype of such exile. Then follow two names that belong to Egypt, then three that belong to Assyria, finally a name belonging to a region more distant still.
Pathros (Egyptian Patherres, i.e., the southern Pather in distinction from other places sacred to Hathor, of this name, vid.Eber’s,Egypt. und die Bόcher Mose’s, I. p. 115 sqq. On its relation to ξִ ?φְ ?ψַ ?ιִ ?ν comp. the remarks at Isaiah 19:1), is Upper-Egypt (Jeremiah 44:15); “Cush” (Ethiopia) is a name “that acquired an extension from the south of India to the interior of Africa” (Pressel). Elam (Elymais Isaiah 21:2; Isaiah 22:6) is southern Media; Shinar, southern Mesopotamia (Genesis 10:10); on Hamath comp. on Isaiah 10:9; the islands of the sea are the western islands and coasts of the Mediterranean sea (Isaiah 24:15; Isaiah 40:15; Isaiah 41:1; Isaiah 41:5, etc.). When it is said that the Lord will raise a standard to the nations, it is not meant that this signal shall concern the heathen nations, for Isaiah 11:10 spoke of the calling of the Gentiles; but in the direction of these various abodes of the nations, the sign shall be given to the Israelites.
4. The envy also—land of Egypt.Isaiah 11:13-16. It might be supposed that, having told of the gathering of the remnant, the Prophet would proceed at once to describe the return. But he does this only at Isaiah 11:15-16. First, the idea of gathering and re-union brings up that of inward unity. He announces that the old enmity between Judah and Ephraim will cease, and that henceforth, both, strong from unity, shall conquer their outward foes.
Are “the enemies of Judah” the Ephraimites (the Prophet would say, did the oppressors of Judah appear even among Ephraim, they would be exterminated) then the “envy of Ephraim,” is not the jealousy that Ephraim has, but that of which it is the object. But as the Prophet ascribes to Judah oppression in the second half, after referring to him in the first half as the one oppressed, so in the second half he ascribes envy to Ephraim, after having in the first part described him as the object of envy. There is therefore, an artistic crossing of notions. Israel, harmonious at last, shall at once be superior in strength to all its neighbors. It is very evident here, how the Prophet paints the remotest future with the colors of the present. Still in the period of the reign of peace (comp. too, Isaiah 2:4) he makes Israel take vengeance on his enemies, and subdue them quite in the fashion that, in the Prophet’s time, would be the heart’s desire of a true Theocrat.
The “tongue of the Egyptian sea,” is the Arabian gulf or Reed-gulf, ιַ ?νΞρεּ ?σ (Exodus 10:19, etc.). “Tongue” μָ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?ο of an arm of the sea, like Joshua 15:2; Joshua 15:5; Joshua 18:19. The Euphrates in the second return is to correspond to the Jordan which was so miraculously crossed in the journey out of Egypt (Josh.). The Lord shall wave His hand against it, as it were, adjuring it, and at the same time smite it with the breath of His mouth as with a glowing hot wind, that will dry it up, so that it will separate into seven shallow brooklets, which Israel may walk through in sandals. Thereby, a “fenced way,” (via munitaξְ ?ρִ ?μָּ ?δ19:23; Isaiah 40:3; Isaiah 62:10, etc., comp. Isaiah 7:3) will be prepared for the remnant of Israel out of the Assyrian exile, that will be as glorious as the ξρμδ on which Israel returned out of Egypt. As for “the remnant,” it must be understood with the same restriction explained Isaiah 10:21 sqq.
[J. A. Alexander, on Isaiah 11:13. A consideration of the history of the enmity of Ephraim against Judah, of the nature of the schism they wrought and maintained in Israel, “explains why the Prophet lays so much more stress upon the envy of Ephraim than upon the enmity of Judah, viz.: because the latter was only the indulgence of an unhallowed feeling, to which, in the other case was superadded open rebellion and apostacy from God. Hence, the first three members of the verse before us speak of Ephraim’s enmity to Judah, and only the fourth of Judah’s enmity to Ephraim; as if it occurred to the Prophet that, although it was Ephraim whose disposition needed chiefly to be changed, yet Judah also had a change to undergo, which is therefore intimated in the last clause, as a kind of after-thought. The envy of Ephraim against Judah shall depart—the enemies of Judah (in the kingdom of the ten tribes) shall be cut off—Ephraim shall no more envy Judah—yes, and Judah in its turn shall cease to vex Ephraim.
Ibid. On Isaiah 11:16. ξρμδ is a highway as explained by Junius (agger) and Hend. (causey), an artificial road formed by casting up the earth, (from ρָ ?μַ ?μ to raise) and thus distinguished from a path worn by the feet (γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ or πְ ?ϊִ ?ιαָ ?δ)].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations.
There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation.
But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent.
But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith.
For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
Footnotes:Heb. glory.
acquire.
Heb. wings.
borders.
against.
viz., the Philistines, Seaward.
Heb. the children of the east.
Heb. Edom, and Moab shall be the laying on of their hand.
Heb. The children of Ammon their obedience.
their subjects.
banish.
with the glowing puff of his breath.
into seven brooklets.
Heb. in shoes.
3. ISRAEL’S SONG OF PRAISE FOR THE WRATH AND GRACE OF HIS GOD
Isaiah 12:1-61 And in that day thou shalt say,
O Lord, I will praise thee:
Though thou was angry with me, thine anger is turned away,
And thou comfortedst me.
2 Behold, God is my salvation;
I will trust, and not be afraid:
For the Lord JEHOVAH is my strength and my song;
He also is become my salvation.
3 Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation. 4And in that day shall ye say,
Praise the Lord,Call upon his name,
Declare his doings among the people,
Make mention that his name is exalted.
5 Sing unto the Lord; for he hath done excellent things:
This is known in all the earth.
6 Cry out and shout, thou inhabitant of Zion:
For great is the Holy One of Israel in the midst of thee.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 12:1. ιָ ?ωֹׁ ?αεβε. I do not think that this period can be construed paratactically; for then it must read εַ ?ϊָּֽ ?ωָׁ ?αεַ ?ϊְּ ?πַ ? ? ? ? ?ֽ ?ηֲ ?ξֵ ?πִ ?ι.——Isaiah never uses ΰָ ?πַ ?σ. This word is probably an allusion to 1 Kings 8:46, where Solomon in his prayer of dedication says: “If they sin against thee, and thou be angry with them, εְ ?ΰָ ?πַ ?τϊָּ αָ ?ν.” Comp. Psalms 60:3.
On Isaiah 12:2. ιωׁ ?εςϊι is very frequent both in Isa. (Isaiah 25:9; Isaiah 26:1; Isaiah 33:2; Isaiah 49:6; Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 51:8; Isaiah 56:1, etc.), and in the Psalms (Psalms 62:2; Psalms 88:2; Psalms 89:27, etc. It occurs three times in our chapter, Isaiah 12:2, bis, and Isaiah 12:3.—ΰαθη and ΰτδψ form a paronomasia.——μΰΰτηγ recalls Psalms 27:1 (ιιΧξָ ?ςεֹ ?ζΞηַ ?ιַּ ?ιξִ ?ξִּ ?ιΰֶ ?τְ ?ηַ ?γ). The entire second clause of Isa 12:2 is borrowed from the triumphal song of Moses, of which we were reminded before by χְ ?πεֹ ?ϊ Isaiah 11:1. Comp. Psalms 118:14. Only it may be noticed that in our passage, as if to excel the original (Delitzsch), the two divine names ιδιηεδ stand in the form of a climax ascendens.——ιδָּ is an abbreviation of ιδεδ peculiar to poetry.
It occurs first Exodus 15:2; Exodus 17:16. Beside the text, it occurs Isaiah 26:4, as here joined with ιδεδ and Isaiah 38:11, where ιδ is put double. Beside these instances the word is found only in the Psalms and in Son 8:6.——ζִ ?ξְ ?ψָ ?ϊ abbreviated instead of ζξψϊι would not be Hebrew. The suffix in ςζι applies also to ζξψϊ; both appear thereby as one notion. Comp. Ewald, § 339 b.On Isaiah 12:3. ωׂ ?ωׂ ?εο Isaiah 22:13; Isaiah 35:10; Isaiah 51:3; Isaiah 51:11; Isaiah 61:1.—ξςιπεϊ Isaiah 41:18.
On Isaiah 12:4. The words δεγε to ςμιμϊιε occur word for word, Psalms 105:1; 1 Chronicles 16:8.—πωׂ ?βαωׁ ?ξε. Comp. Psalms 148:13 : λִּ ?ιπִ ?ωְׂ ?βָּ ?αωְׁ ?ξεֹ μְ ?αֵ ?γּ ?εֹ which words appear to have arisen from a combination of our passage and Isaiah 2:11; Isaiah 2:17.
On Isaiah 12:5. ζξψε, too, is an expression borrowed from the poetry of the Pss. where alone it occurs sometimes with μְ sometimes as here with the accus.; Psalms 47:7; Psalms 68:5; Psalms 68:33. βΰεϊ is an expression of Isaiah; comp. Isaiah 9:17.——K’thibh ξְ ?ιֻ ?γַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ, K’ri ξεּ ?γַ ?ςַ ?ϊ. The Pual participle is found only in the plural with suffixes, meaning: “acquaintance,” amicus (Ps. 55:14; 88:9, 19; 31:12; Job 19:14; 2 Kings 10:11). As our chapter evinces so much borrowing from the language of the Psalms, I prefer K’thibh. In respect, to sense, there is no difference. ϊְּ ?δִ ?ι is a verb easily supplied after ξιγςϊ. The feminine may refer to βΰεϊ or be construed neuter, and so more generally. The latter is perhaps the better.
AND 1. The Prophet concludes his grand prophecy against Assyria with a short doxology. It has two subdivisions, both of which begin with the words: “and thou shalt (Isaiah 12:4 : ye shall) say in that day.” Both are joined by a brief prophetic middle term (Isaiah 12:3). The first comprises six, the second seven members. In the first part Israel speaks in the singular (corresponding to “thou wilt say”), “I will thank the Lord,” etc. (Isaiah 12:1). After this expression of a proper sentiment, and, as it were, in response to the hope expressed in Isaiah 12:2, the promise of Isa 12:3 is given.
After this interpretation comes the second summons, expressed in the plural. Corresponding to this Israel speaks in the plural, manifesting not merely its subjective disposition, but summoning to a general participation in it. Hence follow only imperatives, seven members, in elevated strain. And this little passage, so full of sentiment and art, according to Ewald, cannot be Isaiah’s genuine writing! Fortunately he is quite alone in the opinion.
2. And in that day——my salvation.Isaiah 12:1-2. “In that day” points to the future—when all that has been foretold shall have been fulfilled (comp. Isaiah 11:10-11). Then shall Israel say “I will praise thee” (ΰεγκιιΧ) that is an original expression of David’s, and thereafter of frequent occurrence in the Psalms; 2 Samuel 22:50; Psalms 18:50; 30:13; Psalms 35:18; 43:4; 52:11, etc. But the first thing for which Israel is to return thanks is that the Lord was angry with him—that He has punished him.—[See on the construction Text. and Gram. J.
A. Alexander remarks here: “The apparent incongruity of thanking God because He was angry is removed by considering that the subject of the thanksgiving is the whole complex idea expressed in the remainder of the verse, of which God’s being angry is only one element. It was not simply because God was angry that the people praise Him, but because He was angry and His anger ceased. The same mode of expression is used by Paul in Greek, when he says (Romans 5:17): “But God be thanked that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have from the heart obeyed,” etc. The particle but seems to be necessary to rendering our text into English.—Tr.] The holy anger of God is but a manifestation of His love, and he is as much to be thanked for His anger as for His love.
When, too, the turning of this wrath takes place, Israel may pray for the lasting continuance of favor and grace. That the Masorets also construed as we do (vid Text. and Gram.) appears from the Athnach.
3. Therefore ye shall——of salvation.Isaiah 12:3. These words appear to be a response to the expression of believing trust that we find in Isaiah 12:2. That is, richly and endlessly ye shall partake of salvation. At the Feast of the Tabernacles water was drawn from the fountain of Siloam for a drink-offering. From the priest that so brought it with solemnity into the temple, another took it, and, while doing so, used the words of our text. Comp. in a Bib. Dict. art. Feast of Tabernacles. [This ceremony originated at a period long after Isaiah’s time.—Tr.]
4. And in that day——midst of thee.Isaiah 12:4-6. The second stage of the song. “Ye shall draw” leads the Prophet to proceed in the plural number. Excepting the change of number the words are the same as Isaiah 12:1. Thus, too, the verbs of the following two verses are in the plural. Notice, at the same time, that they are imperatives. From this it is seen that Israel no longer makes a subjective confession like Isaiah 12:1, but demands a participation in his faith: Jehovah shall be proclaimed to all the world.
The last ver. (6) is distinguished from the foregoing by the verbs being no longer in the plural, but “the returned” of Israel are addressed in the singular. This, too, doubtless, is no accident. In Isaiah 12:4-5 the word goes out to the wide world: all nations must be taught; the majestic deeds of Jehovah must be made known to the whole earth. It seems to me that the Prophet would wish not to conclude with this look into the measureless expanse, but would rather fix his eyes, to conclude, on the beloved form of the inhabitant [fem. Germ. Bόrgerin] of Zion (the expression only here in Isaiah).
All honor and all salvation of Zion rest in this, that it has the Lord in the midst of it as its living and personal shield and fountain of life.
Footnotes:That.let thine anger, etc.Or, Proclaim his name.Heb. inhabitress. AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc.
When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations. There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not (Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ (Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away (Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc.
A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation. But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God.
Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent. But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous.
We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith. For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God.
We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.
But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use.
For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, so, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, (Genesis 24:14).
It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection (Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition (Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.
5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity.
In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ (Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners (John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement (2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit (John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion (John 10:16).
The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.
8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt (1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him.
For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces (Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them.
But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.Chap. 9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap. 8 was νομικὴκαὶἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) so, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap. 9 is εὐαγγελικὴκαὶπαραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light.
Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” (John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).
13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so (Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.
14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child.
He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss (1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7).
For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham (Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given (Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His act, works and office.” Luther.16.
On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. ιֶ ?μֶ ?γ: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”
“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. όber das Ev. Esaj., Halle, 1724.
On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob (Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, (Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful.
This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil (Hebrews 2:14); in that He, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell (Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.17.
On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.
Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap. 10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.
19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.20.
On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum est, homines ministerium tantum praebent.
Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II. 4, 4.
22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq., he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah).
It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present (Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant.
But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.
25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, so-called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians 2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isa 11:4 of our chapter.
Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church.
He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.
Chap. 12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” (Psalms 147:1). Cramer.27. On Chap. 12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ!
How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Son, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr.
Jes. 1875.
SECOND AGAINST FOREIGN NATIONSIsaiah 13-27A.—THE AGAINST NATIONS
Isaiah 13-23The people of God do not stand insulated and historically severed from the rest of the human race, but form an integral part of it, and contribute to the great web of the history of humanity. Therefore the Prophet of the Lord must necessarily direct his gaze to the Gentile world, and, as historiographer, set forth their relations to the Kingdom of God, whether hostile or friendly. It is true that, in those prophecies that deal with the theocracy as a whole, or with individual theocratic relations or persons, the prophet has always to set their relations to the outward world in the light of God’s word. But he has often occasion to make some heathen nation or other the primary subject of direct prophecy. Isaiah, too, has such occasion: and his prophecies that come under this category we now find collected here.
Amos, also, put together his utterances against foreign nations (chap. 1). But this grouping is so interwoven in the plan of his work, that, like an eagle first circles around his prey, and then swoops down on it, so he first passes through the nations dwelling around the Holy Land, then settles down on the chief nation, Israel, dwelling in the middle. Isaiah has brought the independent prophecies against foreign nations into a less intimate connection with his utterances that relate directly to the theocracy, by incorporating them into his book as a special ρֵ ?τֶ ?ψ (or volume). Zephaniah has joined Isaiah in this as to material and form; except that the latter appears less marked because of the smallness of his book (Isaiah 2). But Jeremiah (chap. 46–51) and Ezekiel (chap. 25–32) have, just like Isaiah, devoted independent divisions of their books to the utterances against foreign nations. The order in which Isaiah gives his prophecies against the heathen nations is not arbitrary.
It makes four subdivisions. First, in chaps. 13, 14, comes a prophecy against Babylon. It stands here for a double reason:1) because it begins with a general contemplation of the day of Jehovah, which evidently is meant for a foundation for all the following denunciations of judgment; 2) because Isaiah, after he had lived to see the judgment of God on Assyria under the walls of Jerusalem, knows well that the world-power culminates, not in Assyria, but in Babylon, and that not Assyria but Babylon is to execute the judgment of God on the centre of the theocracy.
But it is quite natural that Assyria should not be unrepresented in the list of the nations against which the Prophet turns his direct utterances. This is the less allowable because the following utterances have all of them for subject the relations to Assyria of the nations mentioned. For all that the Prophet has to say from Isaiah 14:28 to Isaiah 20:6, and then again in chap. 21 (from Isaiah 13:11 on), 22 and 23 stands in relations more or less near to the great Assyrian deluge that Isaiah saw was breaking in on Palestine and the neighboring lands. Thus the second division begins with the brief word against Assyria, Isaiah 14:24-27. To this are joined prophecies against Philistia, Moab, Syria, Ephraim, Cush and Egypt. The third division forms a singular little ρֵ ?τֶ ?ψ—It might be named libellus emblematicus.
For it contains a second prophecy against Babylon, then a similar one against Syria, against the Arabians, and against Jerusalem, the last with a supplement directed against the steward Shebna. These four prophecies in chap. 21 and 22 stand together because they all of them have emblematical superscriptions. Out of regard to this the prophecy against Babylon (Isaiah 21:1-10) stands here, although in respect to its contents it belongs rather to 13 and 14 Even the prophecy against “the valley of vision” with its supplement stands here out of regard to its superscription, although it is directed against no heathen nation, but against Jerusalem; so that we must say that chaps. 13–23 contain prophecies against the heathen nations, not exclusively, but with one exception that has its special reasons.
Chap. 23 forms the fourth division. It contains a prophecy against Tyre, which, indeed, presupposes the Assyrian invasion, but expressly names the Chaldeans as executors of the judgment on Tyre. On account of this remarkable, and, in a certain respect, solitary instance of such a sight of things distant, this prophecy is put alone and at the end.
Thus the chapters 13–23 are divided as follows:—
I. The first prophecy against Babylon, Isaiah 13:1-22.
II. Prophecies relating to Assyria, and the nations threatened by Assyria, Philistia, Moab, Syria, Ephraim, Cush, Egypt, Isaiah 14:24–20:26.
III. The libellus emblematicus, containing prophecies against Babylon, Edom, Arabia and Jerusalem, the last with a supplement directed against the steward Shebnah. 21, 22.
IV. Prophecy against Tyre. 23.
____________________
I.—THE FIRST AGAINST BABYLON Isaiah 13:1 to Isaiah 14:23 There yawns a tremendous chasm between the preceding prophecies that originated in the time of Ahaz and the present. We at once recognize Isaiah again in 13, 14 It is his spirit, his power, his poetry, his wit. They are his fundamental views, but it is no longer the old form. His way of speaking is quieter, softer, clearer; he no longer bursts on us like a roaring mountain stream. He is grown older. But he has progressed, too, in his prophetic knowledge.
Now he knows that it is not Assyria that is the theocracy’s most dangerous enemy. For him Assyria is a thing of the past. In proportion as it came to the front before, it now and henceforth retires. Isaiah had seen Assyria’s humiliating overthrow before the gates of Jerusalem. Now he knows that another power, that Babylon shall destroy the theocracy and stand as the sole governing world-power. But he knows, too, that Babylon’s day will come as well as Nineveh’s.
For how could Jehovah’s Prophet ever doubt that his Lord and his nation will triumph, and that the world-power will be overthrown? But the judgment of Babylon is for him only a part of the great judgment of the world, of that “day of the Lord,” that does not come on one day, but realizes itself in many successive stages. He sees in Babylon the summit of the world-power, by whose disintegration Israel mast be made free. Therefore he makes the great day of Jehovah’s judgment break before our eyes (Isaiah 13:1-13), but describes immediately only the judgment upon Babylon. On both these accounts this prophecy stands at the head of all Isaiah’s prophecies against the nations. For it seemed fitting to put in the front a general and comprehensive word about the great judgment day which immediately introduced the denunciation of judgment against the head of all the nations of the world-power.
Some have maintained that it was impossible that Isaiah could have recognized Babylon as the enemy of the theocracy: and that it was still more impossible that he could have predicted the deliverance of Israel out of the captivity of Babylon. But both these chapters are Isaiah’s, both in form and contents, as we have declared above and shall prove in detail below. Beside, there is the consideration that our chapter has undoubtedly been used by Jeremiah (50, 51), by Ezekiel in various passages (Ezekiel 7:17, comp. Isaiah 13:7–7:28, comp. Isaiah 13:11 to Isaiah 19:11, comp. Isaiah 14:5 to Isaiah 38:6; Isaiah 38:15 to Isaiah 39:2, comp.
Isaiah 14:13), and by Zephaniah (Zephaniah 3:11, comp. Isaiah 13:3), as shall be shown when dealing with the passages concerned. Therefore it seems to me to be beyond doubt that Isaiah wrote our chapters. But how Isaiah could know all that is here given to the world under his name (Isaiah 13:1) as prophecy, that is certainly a problem. That is the problem that science should propose to itself for solution. It ought not to deny accredited facts in order not to be compelled to recognize prophecy as a problem, i.e. as possible.
For to deny premises in order to avoid a conclusion that one will not draw, is just as unscientific as it is to invent premises in order to gain a conclusion that one wants to draw.
The discourse divides into a general part and a particular. The former (Isaiah 13:1-13) is, as has been said, at the same time the introduction to the totality of the prophecies against the heathen nations. The particular part again presents two halves: the first (Isaiah 13:14-22) portrays the judgment on Babylon, the second, after a short reference to the redemption and return home of Israel (Isaiah 14:1-2) contains a satirical song on the ruler of Babylon conceived in abstracto (Isaiah 14:3-23).
____________________
a) The preface: introduction in general to the prophecies of the day of the Lord Isaiah 13:1-131 The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see.
2 Lift ye up a banner upon the high mountain,
Exalt the voice unto them, shake the hand,
That they may go into the gates of the nobles.
3 I have commanded my sanctified ones,
I have also called my mighty ones for mine anger,
Even them that rejoice in my highness.
4 The noise of a multitude in the mountains, like as of a great people:
A tumultuous noise of the kingdoms of nations gathered together:
The Lord of hosts mustereth the host of the battle.
5 They come from a far country,
From the end of heaven,
Even the Lord, and the weapons of his indignation,
To destroy the whole land.
6 Howl ye; for the day of the Lord is at hand;
It shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.
7 Therefore shall all hands be faint,
And every man’s heart shall melt:
8 And they shall be afraid:
Pangs and sorrows shall take hold of them;
They shall be in pain as a woman that travaileth:
They shall be amazed one at another;
Their faces shall be as flames.
9 Behold, the day of the Lord cometh,
Cruel both with wrath and fierce anger,
To lay the land desolate:
And he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.
10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof
Shall not give their light:
The sun shall be darkened in his going forth,
And the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
11 And I will punish the world for their evil,
And the wicked for their iniquity;
And I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease,
And will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.
12 I will make a man more precious than fine gold;
Even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir.
13 Therefore I will shake the heavens,
And the earth shall remove out of her place,
In the wrath of the Lord of hosts,
And in the day of his fierce anger.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 13:1. ξַ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ from πָ ?ωָׂ ?ΰ is elatum, “something borne, that which is proposed,” therefore as much onus as effatum. On account of this ambiguity it is almost exclusively used of such divine utterances as impose on men the burden of judicial visitation. From Jeremiah 23:33 sqq. we learn that the word, being abused by mockers on account of this ambiguity, was prohibited by Jehovah as designation of prophetic utterances. In Isaiah the word occurs twelve times in the sense of “judicial sentence;” and, excepting Isaiah 36:6, it so occurs only in chapters 13–23, and here again, with the exception of Isa 22:1 (for the particular reasons see the comment in loc.), solely in utterances against foreign nations. This last circumstance is easily to be explained by the unfavorable meaning that underlies the word, which was pressed by the mockers, Jeremiah 23:33 sqq. A ξַ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ simply and only is never directed against the theocracy. But it cannot be inferred from the absence of this in passages that relate to the theocracy that the word is foreign to Isaiah (Knobel).
On Isaiah 13:2. πִ ?ωְׁ ?τֶ ?δ occurs only here; comp. ωְׁ ?τִ ?ι Isaiah 41:18; Jeremiah 3:2, etc.——πωׂ ?ΰπρ is an expression peculiar to Isaiah. Comp. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 11:12; Isaiah 18:3.——μָ ?δֶ ?ν after χεֹ ?μ is to be referred to the nations called.——πγιαιντϊηι designates the goal of the movement to which the nations are summoned. Both words belong to Isaiah 3:26; Isaiah 32:5; Isaiah 32:8.——πָ ?γִ ?ια is “the free, the noble” (comp. at Isaiah 32:5; and Proverbs 19:6; Proverbs 25:7, etc.).
On Isaiah 13:3. ςμιζιβΰεϊι are “Those rejoicing at my highness” (gen. obj.). Both words are entirely characteristic of Isaiah. The ςμιζι is found only Isaiah 22:2; Isaiah 23:7; Isaiah 24:8; Isaiah 32:13, and in the borrowed passage Zephaniah 3:11. Hence it is incomprehensible how the passage last named can be explained to be the original. Moreover Isaiah is almost the only one of the prophets that uses βΰεδ. For beside Isaiah 9:8; Isaiah 13:11; Isaiah 16:6; Isaiah 25:11, and the borrowed passage Zephaniah 3:11, it occurs only Jeremiah 48:29, where Jeremiah, for the sake of a play on words, heaps together all substantive derivatives from βΰδ.
On Isaiah 13:4. γξεϊ occurs again in Isaiah only Isaiah 40:18. It is found oftenest in Ezekiel, and in an adverbial sense as here = λִּ ?γְ ?ξεּ ?ϊ (Ezekiel 23:15). Also ωָׁ ?ΰεֹ ?ο is a word of Isaiah’s. It occurs only seventeen times in the Old Testament; of these, eight times in Isaiah 5:14; Isaiah 13:4; Isaiah 17:12; (bis), Isaiah 17:13; Isaiah 24:8; Isaiah 25:5; Isaiah 66:6. The expression φαΰξμηξδ, beside the present, occurs only Numbers 31:14, and 1 Chronicles 7:4; 1 Chronicles 12:37. There is evidently a contrast intended between φαΰ and φαΰεϊ: the Lord of the heavenly hosts now musters His army hordes on earth.
On Isaiah 13:5. Shall we regard αָּ ?ΰִ ?ιν at the beginning of the verse as dependent on ξτχγ, Isaiah 13:4, and as apposition with φαΰξμηξδ? It is against this that the second half of Isa 13:5 must then be construed as a rhetorical exclamation, which in this connection and form seems strange. It is in favor of this that otherwise αָּ ?ΰִ ?ιν must be construed as predicate. But then it would be said of Jehovah that He comes from a far country. But may not this be said in the present connection?
It has just been said that Jehovah summons the war hordes and musters them. He is therefore their leader. Need it seem strange then that He is described as approaching at their head? Therefore αָּ ?ΰִ ?ιν is the predicate of Isa 13:5 b, placed at the beginning. ξΰψυξψηχ occurs again only Isaiah 46:11; other turns of expression Isaiah 8:9; Isaiah 10:3; Isaiah 17:13; Isaiah 30:27; Isaiah 33:17. λμιζςξε occurs again only Jeremiah 50:25; on ζςν comp. on Isaiah 10:5. ηַ ?αֵּ ?μ comp. on Isaiah 10:27; Isaiah 32:7; Isaiah 54:16.
On Isaiah 13:6. λωׁ ?γ, note the play on words; λְּ is the so-called Kaph veritatis. Isaiah often uses ωֹׁ ?γ, Isaiah 16:4; Isaiah 22:4; Isaiah 51:19, etc.; ωַׁ ?γַּ ?ι he uses only this once.
On Isaiah 13:7. ϊψλּ ?ιπδλּ ?μΞιγιν, the expression occurs in Isaiah only here, and is borrowed by Ezekiel 7:17 from this place.
On Isaiah 13:8. παδμ in Isaiah again only Isaiah 21:3 in a similar connection.——φιψιν occurs again only Isaiah 21:3 (bis) in the sense of constrictiones, cruciatus, cramps.—ηαμιν Isaiah uses (Isaiah 5:18; Isaiah 33:20; Isaiah 33:23) in the sense of “cords,” and in the kindred “cries of a woman in travail” (Isaiah 26:17; Isaiah 66:7).——ηεμ used not seldom of a travailing woman, and as a figure of feeling terror; Isaiah 23:4-5; Isaiah 26:17-18; Isaiah 45:10; Isaiah 54:1; Isaiah 66:7-8.——ϊξδ stupere occurs again only Isaiah 29:9. Note the constructio pracgnans.On Isaiah 13:9. ΰλζψι only here in Isaiah: it is adjective. The two substantives are, co-ordinate with ΰλζψι, apposition with ιεֹ ?ρ, doubtless because adjectives cannot be formed from these substantive notions, as can be done from ΰַ ?λְ ?ζָ ?ψ. Therefore, according to frequent usage, we are to construe ςαψδ and ηψεοΰσ as abstract nouns used in a concrete sense. ςαψδ frequent in Isaiah 9:18; Isaiah 10:6; Isaiah 13:13; Isaiah 14:6; Isaiah 16:6. ηψεοΰσ excepting Isaiah 13:13 does not occur again in Isaiah. The expression is frequent in the Pentateuch: Exodus 32:12; Numbers 25:4; Numbers 32:14; Deuteronomy 13:18.——By the words μωׂ ?ενεβεΧ the Prophet designates the object of the day of judgment.——The expression ωׂ ?ενμωׁ ?ξδ only here in Isaiah. Perhaps it is borrowed from Joe 1:7. διδμωׁ ?ξδ Isaiah 5:9. ωַׁ ?ξָּ ?δ alone Isaiah 24:12.——That δΰψυ means “the earth,” see “Exeget. and Crit.” on Isaiah 13:5.——δωׁ ?ξιγ Isaiah 10:7; Isaiah 14:23; Isaiah 26:14.—δθΰιν Isaiah 1:28; Isaiah 33:14.
On Isaiah 13:10. λִּ ?ι is not causative, but explicative. That the day of the Lord is dreadful, and nothing but burning wrath will be evident in that the stars become dark.——If λελαιν and λριμιν are distinguished, the explanation cannot be that the latter are not also λελαιν, but that they are only a pre-eminent species of stars. The Vav. is therefore the Vave augmentative: “the stars of heaven and even its Orions.” The latter are the most luminous stars, whose brightness, because of the first magnitude, more easily than all others penetrates whatever hinderances there may be. The plural of λριμ is, any way, a generalizing one, i.e., that elevates the individual to the rank of a species. Otherwise we know of only one λְּ ?ρִ ?ιμ as a star. But as 1 Samuel 17:43, Goliath says to David: “thou comest to me with the starves,” although David had only one staff; or as Jeremiah 28:12, after telling of the breaking of one yoke, continues; “wooden yokes hast thou broken,” therefore here as elsewhere the plural of the individual is conceived as equivalent to the genus.
Compare Cicerones, Scipiones, les Voltaire, les Mirabeau; and perhaps λּ ?εֹ ?λְ ?αֵ ?ιαֹ ?χֶ ?ψ Job 38:7 belongs to the same category.—δֵ ?δֵ ?μ, Hiph. from δμμ, a verb that elsewhere expresses clearness of sound, occurs only Job 31:26; Job 41:10, and in both places in connection with ΰεֹ ?ψ.——On ηωׁ ?κδωׁ ?ξωׁ comp. Isaiah 5:30.—Of πβϊּ there is only one other form in Isaiah, and that Kal. in just one passage, Isaiah 9:1.
On Isaiah 13:11. δΰψυ is more expressly defined as ϊֵּ ?αֵ ?μ This word is very frequent in the first part of Isa 14:17; Isaiah 14:21; Isaiah 18:3; Isaiah 24:4; Isaiah 26:9; Isaiah 26:18; Isaiah 27:6; Isaiah 34:1. It never means a single land, but is always either the οἰκουμε̇νη as terra fertilis contrasted with the desert (Isaiah 14:17) or the οἰκουμἐνη as a whole contrasted with the single parts. Delitzsch well remarks that it never has the article, and thus in a measure appears as a proper noun.—τχγ with ςμ of the person and accusative of the thing like Jeremiah 23:2; Jeremiah 25:12; Hosea 1:4. βָּ ?ΰεֹ ?ο a frequent word in Isaiah 2:10; Isaiah 2:19; Isaiah 2:21; Isaiah 4:2, etc.; Isaiah 60:15; Ezekiel 7:24 seems to have had in mind our passage.—ζֵ ?γִ ?ιν only here in Isaiah, whereas βΰεδ (comp. at Isaiah 13:3) and ςψιυ (Isaiah 25:3-5; Isaiah 29:5; Isaiah 29:20; Isaiah 49:25) occur not seldom.
On Isaiah 13:12. ΰεχιψ which makes a paronomasia with ΰετιψ (a genuine Isaianic word) occurs only here (Kal. Isaiah 43:4).—On ΰֱ ?πεֹ ?ωׁ and ΰγν comp. on Isaiah 8:1.—τַ ?ζ (only here in Isaiah; comp. Psalms 19:11; Psalms 21:4) is purified gold; λֶּ ?ϊֶ ?ν is absconditum, jewel, ornament generally: not found again in Isaiah.—λϊνΰετιψ is found again Psalms 45:10; Job 28:16.
On Isaiah 13:13. ςμΞλο cannot be construed “for this reason.” For it cannot be said that the Lord will shake heaven and earth because He punishes the earth and makes men scarce on it. Rather the reverse of this must be assumed: God shakes heaven and earth in order to punish men. Thus ςμΞλο = “therefore, hence,” but in the sense of intention (to this end, Job 34:27). Here, too, there evidently floats before the mind of the Prophet a passage from Job 9:6, where it reads: δַ ?ξַּ ?ψְ ?βִּ ?ιζΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υξִ ?ξְּ ?χεֹ ?ξָ ?δּ. The thought that the earth shall be crowded out of its place, which is peculiar to both of these passages, is something so specific, added to which the juxtaposition of δִ ?ψְ ?βִּ ?ιο and δָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υξִ ?ξְּ ?χֹ ?ξָ ?δּ is so striking, that it is impossible to regard this relation of the two passages as accidental. If we ask where the words are original, we must decide in favor of Job, because there the thought is founded in the context.
For in Isaiah 13:5 it is said: “which removeth the mountains, and they know not; which overturneth them in his anger.” On this follows naturally: “Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.”—ψςωׁ in Isaiah again Isaiah 24:18; Isaiah 14:16. Comp. moreover 2 Samuel 22:8 (Psalms 18:8); Joel 4:16.—The words αςαψϊ to ΰτε are the Prophet’s. αְּ is taken by some as determining the time (Knobel), by others as assigning a reason (Delitzsch), But both may be combined: the revelation of the divine wrath coincides with the day of His anger, and so much so that ιεֹ ?ν, the day, may be taken as concrete for the abstract notion of the manifestation, coming to the light. Comp. Isaiah 10:3; Isaiah 17:6.
AND 1. The Prophet opens his prophecy against the nations with a denunciation of judgment against Babylon. This prophecy must have originated at a period when the Prophet had come to the knowledge that Babylon was the real centre of the world-power, and Assyria only a front step. But Isaiah opens his prophecy against Babylon with an introduction from which we learn that he regards the judgment against Babylon as the germ-like beginning of “the day of the Lord” in general. First, by means of a banner planted on a high mountain, visible far and wide, there goes forth a summons to order men of war to an expedition against a city (Isaiah 13:2). Then (Isaiah 13:3) the Lord says, more plainly, Himself taking up the word, that it is He that assembles the men of war and that He assembles them for a holy war.
The command gathers in vast numbers and Jehovah musters them (Isaiah 13:4). They come then from the ends of the earth, as it were led by Jehovah, brought together in order to accomplish the work of destruction (Isaiah 13:5). Now those threatened hear proclaimed: the day of the Lord is here (Isaiah 13:6). Thereupon all are in fear and terror (Isaiah 13:7-8). And in fact the day of the Lord draws near (Isaiah 13:9). The stars turn dark (Isaiah 13:10).
The Lord Himself declares that the object of His coming is to lay low everything in the world that lifts itself up proudly (Isaiah 13:11), so that men shall become scarce as fine gold (Isaiah 13:12). By this manifestation of divine wrath, however, heaven and earth must be shaken (Isaiah 13:13).
2. The burden—did see.
Isaiah 13:1. One sees a sentence of judgment when, by means of prophetic gaze, one learns to know its contents, which may be presented to the spiritual eye by visible images (comp. on Isaiah 1:1). That Isaiah is named here, and by his entire name, son of Amoz, is doubtless to be explained in that this superscription, which corresponds to the prophecy Isaiah 13:1 to Isaiah 14:23, was at the same time regarded as superscription of the entire cycle 13 to 23 and that this cycle, as an independent whole, was incorporated in the entire collection.
3. Lift ye up a banner—my highness.
Isaiah 13:2-3.
Isaiah 13:2 speaks in general. Without saying to whom the summons is directed or from whom it proceeds; there is only a summons to raise the standard of war for the purpose of assembling warriors. On a bare mountain, devoid of forest, shall the signal be raised, that it may be clearly seen on all sides. But with the voice, too, (Isaiah 37:23, Isaiah 40:9, Isaiah 58:1) and with hand-beckoning (Isaiah 10:32, Isaiah 11:15) shall the nations be called to march forth. The gates of the nobles can only mean the main gates of the hostile city, which alone (in contrast with the small side gates, figuratively called “needle-eyes” Matthew 19:24) serve for the entree of princes in pomp, in the present case for the victors. Still the expression occasions surprise. Ought we perhaps to read τְּ ?ϊָ ?ηַ ?ι: “that they come willingly into my gates?” I do not venture to decide.
Isaiah 13:3 makes us know who is the origin of the summons. It is the Lord who calls His warriors who are consecrated to Him and joyfully obey Him. The warriors are called consecrated, holy, because the war is a holy one. Comp. Joel 4:9, Jeremiah 6:4; Jeremiah 22:7; Jeremiah 51:27. Precisely for this the Prophet immediately after uses the bold expression: “I have called them for mine anger,” i.e. that they may be executors of my purpose of wrath (comp. Isaiah 10:5).
4. The noise of a multitude——the whole land.
Isaiah 13:4-5. Those summoned heard the call. They are heard approaching in troops. The interjection χεֹ ?μ [“hark”Naegelsb.] is frequent in the second half of Isa 40:3; Isaiah 40:6; Isaiah 52:3; Isaiah 66:6. Jeremiah, too, imitates the language: Jeremiah 48:8; Jeremiah 50:22; Jeremiah 50:28; Jeremiah 51:54. The expression χεֹ ?μδָ ?ξεֹ ?ο [“Hark, a tumultuous noise,” Naegelsb.] “noise of a multitude,” occurs 1 Samuel 4:14, 1 Kings 18:41; 1 Kings 20:13; 1 Kings 20:28.
In Isaiah again Isaiah 33:3. Then in Ezekiel 23:42, Daniel 10:6. I do not believe that by “the mountains” is meant the Zagros mountains that separated Media from Babylon. [Zagrus mons, now represented by the middle and southern portion of the mountains of Kurdistan.—Tr.]. For here the prophecy bears still quite a general character. Only by degrees does the special judgment upon Babylon appear out of the cloud of the universal judgment. The enemies, according to Isaiah 13:5, come “from a far country, from the end of heaven.” Did the Prophet mean particularly the Zagros, why did he not designate it more distinctly?
The mountains are, doubtless, no certain, concrete mountains, but ideal mountains, a poetic embellishment. Added to this, it is likely Joel 2 is in the Prophet’s mind. There, too, as here (Isaiah 13:6; Isaiah 13:9) the day of the Lord is at hand. But there the grasshoppers are the enemies to be expected. These, too, come like chariots, that leap upon the mountains like the blush of dawn spread upon the mountains. Especially the order of the words αֶּ ?δָ ?ψִ ?ινγְּ ?ξεּ ?ϊςַ ?ρΞψַ ?α, “in the mountains like as of a great people,” seems to me to recall Joe 2:2ςַ ?μΞδֶ ?δָ ?ψִ ?ινςַ ?νψַ ?α “upon the mountains a great people,” a form of expression that in Joel, too, belongs to the poetic drapery.
That Isaiah had in mind the words of Joel is the more probable, in as much as the expression ςνψα is used by him only here, and beside Joe 2:2, is found only in Ezekiel 17:9; Ezekiel 17:15; Ezekiel 26:7.
The army, then, which Jehovah musters, consists of people that have come from a far land, and from the end of heaven, i.e. from the place where the heavenly expanse is bounded by the earth. The expression “from the end of heaven” is characteristic of Deuteronomy. For, except the present passage, it occurs only Deuteronomy 4:32 (bis), Isaiah 30:4 (with the borrowed expression Nehemiah 1:9), and Psalms 19:7. That Isaiah by these expressions would designate the Medes is quite improbable. As in their cities, according to 2 Kings 17:6, Israelite exiles dwelt at that time, how could he locate them in the uttermost borders of the earth’s surface, where otherwise he locates, say, Ophir (Isaiah 13:12) or Sinim (Isaiah 49:12)? The undefined, universal, and if I may so say, the superlative mode of expression, proves that it is to be taken in an ideal sense.
The end that the Lord will accomplish by means of “the weapons of His indignation” is: to overturn the whole earth. “The whole earth!” For this judgment on Babylon belongs to “the day of the Lord.” It is thus an integral part of the world’s judgment. Just as Isaiah, so Ezekiel uses traits of Joel’s prophecy of the world’s judgment in order to let the judgment that he had to announce to Egypt, appear as a part of the world’s judgment (Isaiah 30:2 sqq.).
5. Howl ye—their faces as flames.
Isaiah 13:6-8. Here it is seen plainly how the Prophet would represent the judgment on Babylon as a part of the world’s judgment. For the traits that now follow are entirely taken from the descriptions of the world’s judgments as we meet them already in the older Prophets, and as, on the other hand, the later New Testament descriptions of the great day of judgment connect with our present one. Especially Isaiah has Joel in his mind. “Howl ye,” is taken from διμιμεJoe 1:5; Joe 1:11; Joe 1:13. Ezek. too, uses the word Isaiah 30:2, and Matthew 24:30, in the eschatological discourse of Christ. The words: “for the day of the Lord is at hand,” are taken word for word from Joe 1:15.
From χψεα “at hand,” it is seen that the Prophet would portray here the impression that the approach of the day will make on men; for, as is known, the moments that precede any great catastrophe have terrors quite peculiarly their own. In Isaiah 13:9, he describes the judgment as taking place. When men notice that the destruction comes from God Almighty, they abandon all opposition as useless. The sign of this is that they let their hands fall limp, and that their hearts become like water (comp. Deuteronomy 20:8; Joshua 7:5; Isaiah 19:1).
For the image of the travailing woman, and of the terror depicted in the countenances, the Prophet is indebted to Joe 2:6. That terror and anguish not only make one pale, but also agitate the blood, and thereby produce heat and sweat is well known. Only the latter does the Prophet make prominent. He was likely moved to this because in Joel (Isaiah 1:19, Isaiah 2:3; Isaiah 2:5), which is in his thought, the expression μηα, “a flame,” occurs thrice.
6. Behold the day—light to shine.
Isaiah 13:9-10. The day is not only near; it is here. (Comp. under Text. and Gram. above). What constellation is meant by the name λְּ ?ρִ ?ιμ is not settled. The LXX., here and Job 38:31 translate ὁ̓Ωρίων. Likewise the Vulg.Amos 5:8 and Job 9:9. Others (Saadia, Abulwalid,etc.), take it to be Canopus, the Antarctic Polar star in the southern steering-oar of Argo.
Niebuhr (Beschr. v. Arabien, p. 113), following the Jews of Sana, supposes it is Sirius. But the passage in Job 38:31 (“or wilt thou loose the bands” [Dillmann:traces] of λριμ?) corresponds very well to the representation that Orion (Syr. gaboro, Arab. gebbar) is the giant chained to the sky. Comp. Herzog,Real-Encycl. Art.
Gestirnkunde, vonLeyrer, XIX. p. 565. [According to Hitzig and Knobel, the darkening of the stars is mentioned first, because the Hebrews reckoned the day from sunset.—J. A. A.].
When the rising sun is without rays, and moon and stars lose their shining, then both day and night are robbed of their lights. The language of the Prophet seems not only to be drawn from Job, but also from Joe 3:4, and Amos 5:8, as on the other hand Christ’s discourse, Matthew 24:29, borrows from our passage.
7. And I will punish——his fierce anger.
Isaiah 13:11-13. The Prophet lets the Lord speak here, partly, to confirm what the Prophet had said, partly to set it forth more exactly. But unmarked, the subject of the discourse changes again (Isaiah 13:13 b) by the Prophet resuming and continuing the discourse of the Lord. What was said, Isaiah 13:9, in brief words; “and He shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it,” is in Isaiah 13:11, more distinctly expressed by the Lord. The Lord says, then, that He will punish the whole earth for their wickedness, and the wicked (according to his righteousness) for their guilt. The means by which men incur guilt is their injustice in the sense of violent oppression, according to the view common to the Old Testament in general, and to Isaiah in particular (comp. on Isaiah 1:17; Isaiah 1:21 sqq.).
Therefore the Almighty Judge announces here that a time shall come when He will take in hand the mighty of the earth who abuse their power, and will humble them. The thought of this verse recalls Isaiah 2:10 sqq.
In consequence of this visitation, human kind shall become rare in the earth as the noblest gold. From this passage it appears that the Prophet, though he speaks of a judgment on the whole habitable world (οἰκουμένη, ϊֵּ ?αֵ ?μ), has still by no means the idea of its total destruction, say, by fire (2 Peter 3:7; 2 Peter 3:10). The locality of Ophir is still an open question. The other instances of its occurrence in Scripture are Genesis 10:29 (1 Chronicles 1:23), 1 Kings 9:28; 1 Kings 10:11; 1 Kings 22:49; 1 Chronicles 29:4; 2 Chronicles 8:18; 2 Chronicles 9:10; Job 22:24. Four places are proposed; South Arabia, East Africa, Abhira between the Indus Delta and the Gulf of Cambay, and southern lands in general, for which Ophir may be only a collective name. The best authorities, as Lassen, Ritter (Erdkunde XIV. p. 348 sqq.),Delitzsch, decide in favor of East India. But Crawford, “hardly less learned regarding India than Lassen,” in his “Descriptive Dictionary of the Indian Islands,” asserts, on the contrary, “that there is not a shadow of possibility for locating Ophir in any part of India.”
The African traveller Carl Mauch gives considerable weight to the scale in favor of East Africa; he thinks that he has discovered the ancient Ophir in the port Sofala or Sofara on the East coast of South Africa in latitude 20° 14′ ?.
Isaiah 13:13. See under Text. and Gram. above.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 13:2-13. The prophecy concerning the day of the Lord has its history. It appears first in the form of the announcement of a scourge of locusts (Joel); then it becomes an announcement of human war-expeditions and sieges of cities. Finally it becomes a message that proclaims the destruction of the earth and of its companions in space. But from the first onward, the last particular is not wanting: only at first it appears faintly.
In Joe 2:10, one does not know whether the discourse is concerning an obscuration of the heavenly bodies occasioned only by the grasshoppers or by higher powers. But soon (Joe 3:4; Joe 3:20) this particular comes out more definitely. In the present passage of Isaiah it presses to the foreground. In the New Testament (Matthew 24:29; Mark 13:24 sq.; Luke 21:25) it takes the first and central place. We observe clearly that the judgment on the world is accomplished in many acts, and is yet one whole; and as on the other hand nature, too, is itself one whole, so, according to the saying: “whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it” (1 Corinthians 12:26), the catastrophes on earth have their echo in the regions above earth.
2. On Isaiah 13:4 sqq. “God cannot do otherwise than punish accumulated wickedness. But He overthrows violence and crime, and metes out to tyrants the measure they have given to others, for He gives to them a master that the heathen shall know that they too are men (Ps. 9:21; Psalms 11:5).”—Cramer.[On 13 Isa 13:3. “It cannot be supposed that the Medes and Persians really exulted, or rejoiced in God or in His plans.—But they would exult as if it were their own plan, though it would be really the glorious plan of God. Wicked, men often exult in their success: they glory in the execution of their purposes; but they are really accomplishing the plans of God, and executing His great designs.”—Barnes.]
[On Isaiah 13:9. “The moral causes of the ruin threatened are significantly intimated by the Prophet’s calling the people of the earth or land its sinners. As the national offences here referred to, Vitringa enumerates pride (Isaiah 13:11; Isaiah 14:11; Isaiah 47:7-8), idolatry (Jeremiah 50:38), tyranny in general (Isaiah 14:12; Isaiah 14:17), and oppression of God’s people in particular (Isaiah 47:6).”—J. A. Alexander.]
3. On Isaiah 13:19 sqq. Imperiti animi, etc. “Unlearned minds when they happen on allegories, can hold no certain sense of Scripture. And unless this Papal business had kept me to the simple text of the Bible, I had become an idle trifler in allegories like Jerome and Origen. For that figurative speech has certain allurements by which minds seek to dispose of difficulties. … The true allegory of this passage is concerning the victory of conscience over death. For, the law is Cyrus, the Turk, the cruel and mighty enemy that rises up against the proud conscience of justitiaries who confide in their own merits.
These are the real Babylon, and this is the glory of Babylon, that it walks in the confidence of its own works. When, therefore, the law comes and occupies the heart with its terrors, it condemns all our works in which we have trusted, as polluted and very dung. Once the law has laid bare this filthiness of our hearts and works, there follows confusion, writhing, and pains of parturition; men become ashamed, and that confidence of works ceases and they do those things which we see now-a-days: he that heretofore has lived by confidence of righteousnesss in a monastery, deserts the monkish life, casts away to ashes all glory of works, and looks to the gratuitous righteousness and merit of Christ, and that is the desolation of Babylon. The ostriches and hairy creatures that remain are Eck, Cochleus and others, who do not pertain to that part of law. They screech, they do not speak with human voice, they are unable to arouse and console any afflicted conscience with their doctrine. My allegories, which I approve, are of this sort, viz., which shadow forth the nature of law and gospel.” Luther.4.
On Isaiah 13:21 sqq. “There the Holy Spirit paints for thee the house of thy heart as a deserted, desolate Babylon, as a loathsome cesspool, and devil’s hole, full of thorns, nettles, thistles, dragons, spukes, kobolds, maggots, owls, porcupines, etc., all of which is nothing else than the thousandfold devastation of thy nature, in as much as into every heart the kingdom of Satan, and all his properties have pressed in, and all and every sin, as a fascinating serpent-brood, have been sown and sunk into each one, although not all sins together become evident and actual in every one’s outward life.”—Joh. Arndt’s Informatorium biblicum, § 7.
5. On Isaiah 14:1-2. “Although it seems to me to be just impossible that I could be delivered from death or sin, yet it will come to pass through Christ. For God here gives us an example; He will not forsake His saints though they were in the midst of Babylon.”—Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.6. On Isaiah 14:4 sqq. “Magna imperia fere nihil sunt quam magnae injuriae.Ad generum Cereris sine caede et sanguine pauci
Descendunt reges et sicca mente tyranni.—Luther.Impune quidvis facere id est regem esse.”—Sallust.Among the Dialogi mortuorum of Lucian of Samosata the thirteenth is between Diogenes and Alexander the Great. This dialogue begins with the words: “Τίτοῦτο, ὦἈλέξανδρε, τέθνηκαςκαὶσὺ, ὥσπερἡμεῖσἅπαντες;” thereupon the contrast is ironically set forth between what Alexander was, as one given out to be a son of the gods, and so recognized by men, and possessor of all highest human glories, and what he is at present. It is, as is well known, doubtful whether Lucian really was acquainted with the Scriptures. See Planck, Lucian and Christianity in Stud. u. Krit., 1851, IV. p. 826 sqq. Comp. also Schrader, die Hφllenfahrt der Istar., 1874.
7. On Isaiah 14:4 sqq. ”Omni genera figurarum utitur ad confirmandos et consolandos suos, ut simul sit conjuncta summa theologia cum summa rhetorica.”—Luther.8. On Isaiah 14:12 sqq. As early as the LXX. this passage seems to have been understood of Satan. It points that way that they change the second person into the third; πῶςἐξέπεσεν, etc. At least they were so understood.
See Jerome, who thereby makes the fine remark: “Unde ille cecidit per superbiam, vos ascendatis per humilitatem.” But Luther says: “Debet nobis insignis error totius papatus, qui hunc textum de casu angelorum accepit, studia literarum et artium deccndi commendare tamquam res theologo maxime necessarias ad tractationem sacrarum literarum.”9. On Isaiah 14:13-14. “The Assyrian monarch was a thorough Eastern despot … rather adored as a god than feared as a man.” Layard’s Discoveries amongst the ruins of Nineveh and Babylon, 1853, New York, p. 632. “In the heathen period the pre-eminence of the German kings depended on their descent from the gods, as among the Greeks” (Gervinus, Einleit. in d. Gesch. d. 19 Iahrh., 1853, p. 14). Christian Thomasius, in his Instit. jurispr. divinae, dissert. pro�mialis, p. 16, calls the princes “the Gods on earth.” In a letter from Luxemburg, after the departure of the Emperor Joseph II., it is said (in a description of the journey, of which a sheet lies before me): “we have had the good fortune to see our earthly god.” Belani, Russian Court Narratives, New Series, III. Vol., p. Isaiah 125: “The Russian historian Korampzin says in the section where he describes the Russian self-rule: “The Autocrat became an earthly god for the Russians, who set the whole world in astonishment by a submissiveness to the will of their monarch which transcends all bounds.”
Footnotes:Sentence.a bald mountain.Heb. the likeness of.Or, fall down.shall writhe.Heb. wonder every man at his neighbor.Heb. faces of the flames.their Orions.will visit on the world its wickedness, and on the wicked their iniquity.shake.
b) The particular part: The prophecy against Babylon Isaiah 13:14 to Isaiah 14:231. THE ON THE CITY AND STATE OF BABYLON
Isaiah 13:14-2214 And it shall be as the chased roe,
And as a sheep that no man taketh up:
They shall every man turn to his own people,
And flee every one into his own land.
15 Every one that is found shall be thrust through;
And every one that Isaiah 12 joined unto them shall fall by the sword
16 Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes;
Their houses shall be spoiled and their wives ravished.
17 Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them,
Which shall not regard silver;
And as for gold, they shall not delight in it.
18 Their bows also shall dash the young men to pieces;
And they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb;
Their eye shall not spare children,
19 And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms,
The beauty of the Chaldees’ excellency,
Shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.
20 It shall never be inhabited,
Neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation:
Neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there;
Neither shall the shepherds make their fold there.
21 But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there;
And their houses shall be full of doleful creatures;
And owls shall dwell there,
And satyrs shall dance there.
22 And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses,
And dragons in their pleasant palaces:
And her time is near to come,
And her days shall not be prolonged.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 13:14. εδιδ is to be construed neuter = “it shall be, it turns out, such are the circumstances.” The Hoph. particip. ξγη only here; beside this in Isaiah the Niph. and Pual participles, Isaiah 8:22; Isaiah 16:3-4.—φְ ?αִ ?ι with the meaning “gazelle,” occurs only here in Isaiah. It seems that the Prophet by εδιδλφαι here and εδιϊδααμφαιεβε Isaiah 13:19, intended a contrast. Babylon φαι in the sense of decus, is at the same time φαι in the sense of dorcas.—εΰιοξχαυ occurs again Nahum 3:18; Jeremiah 49:5.
On Isaiah 13:15. πξφΰ comp. Isaiah 22:3; Isaiah 37:4. γχψ only here in Isaiah. πρτδ from ρτδ “to snatch, seize.”—ψθωׁ that occurs only in Piel and Pual, is used exclusively of dashing to pieces human bodies: Hosea 10:14; Hosea 14:1; Nahum 3:10; 2 Kings 8:12; in Isa. the word occurs only here and Isaiah 13:18. ωָׁ ?ρַ ?ν (kindred to ωׁ ?ωׂ ?δ ,ωׁ ?ρδ, Isaiah 10:13; Isaiah 17:14; Isaiah 42:22) only here in Isa. Comp. Zechariah 14:2.—Niph. πωׁ ?βμ (Kal. Deuteronomy 28:30; Pual Jeremiah 3:2) occurs only here and Zechariah 14.
On Isaiah 13:19. φαι comp. on Isaiah 4:2, where also Isaiah has βΰεο and ϊτΰψϊ though not in a genitive relation, a combination that occurs in no other place.—λξδτλϊ comp. on Isaiah 1:7. The original passage is Deuteronomy 29:22. The substantive like infinitives has retained the verbal force.
On Isaiah 13:20. The intransitive use of ιωׁ ?α and ωׁ ?λο (= “to be a habitation”) occurs first in Joel 4:20. It does not occur later in Isaiah; whereas in Jeremiah it is frequent (Jeremiah 17:6; Jeremiah 17:25; Jeremiah 30:18; Jeremiah 46:26; Jeremiah 50:13; Jeremiah 50:39): in Ezekiel 29:11 also, and in Zechariah 2:8; Zechariah 9:5. The expression ςγγεψεγεψ, occurs only here in Isaiah. γּ ?εֹ ?ψ occurs in various connections, Isaiah 34:10; Isaiah 34:17; Isaiah 51:8; Isaiah 58:12; Isaiah 60:15; Isaiah 61:4.—ςֲ ?ψָ ?αִ ?ι. So still Jeremiah 3:2; comp. Jeremiah 25:24, otherwise in later books ςַ ?ψְ ?αִ ?ι 2 Chronicles 21:16; 2 Chronicles 22:1; Nehemiah 2:19; Nehemiah 4:1; Nehemiah 6:1.
Because of the following ψֹ ?ςִ ?ιν, this cannot be understood to mean nomadic shepherds in general. But the word signifies the Arabian proper, because in fact “Babylon lay near enough to Arabia for Arabians proper to come thither with their flocks” (Gesenius).—ιַ ?δֵ ?μ for ιְ ?ΰַ ?δֵ ?μ, like ξַ ?μְּ ?τֵ ?πεּ Job 35:11, for ξְ ?ΰַ ?μְּ ?τֵ ?πεּ. The form occurs only here The verb ΰָ ?δַ ?μ (Kal. Genesis 13:12; Genesis 13:18) is denominativum.—δִ ?ψְ ?αִּ ?ιυ is to make ψֵ ?αֶ ?υ: thus it is direct causative. Hiph. (Isaiah 54:11).
On Isaiah 13:21. φִ ?ιִּ ?ιν (from φִ ?ι unused, from which φִ ?ιָּ ?δ terra arida) are dwellers in the desert; whether men or beasts is undetermined. Yet analogy favors the latter; for in what follows only beasts are mentioned. The word occurs in Isaiah again Isaiah 23:13; Isaiah 34:14; comp. Jeremiah 50:39. Ewald, (Lehrb. § 146, g. Anm.) derives φιιν, and ΰιιν with the meaning “criers, howlers,” from Arabic roots, as it seems to me, without necessity.—ΰηινἅπάξλεγ.
The LXX., evidently following a kindred sound, translate καὶπλησθήσονταιοἰκίαιἤχου. But the parallelism demands rather some species of beast. Jerome translates dracones. Aurivillius proposed first ulula, “owls,” “horn owls.”—αַּ ?ϊιַ ?ςֲ ?πָ ?δ (Leviticus 11:16; Deuteronomy 14:15) is “the ostrich.” The masculine form ιְ ?ςֵ ?πִ ?ιν found only Lamentations 4:3. According to some, the name means “the mourning daughter of the desert,” (Meier, Wurzelw. p. 49); according to others, the word is related to the Syr. jaeno, “greedy, ravenous.” The feminine designation has essentially a poetic reason, comp. αַּ ?ϊβְּ ?γεּ ?γ Mic. 4:14 with αְּ ?πֵ ?ιβְּ ?γεּ ?γ 2 Chronicles 25:13. αַּ ?ϊΞΰֲ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?ψִ ?ιν ,αַּ ?ϊΞςַ ?ιִ ?ο (Ezekiel 27:6). The word occurs in Isaiah again Isaiah 34:13; Isaiah 43:20; comp.
Jeremiah 50:39; Micah 1:8; Job 30:20.—ωּׂ ?ςιψιν are hirsuti, pilosi, “goats,” i.e., goat-shaped demons.—ψִ ?χֵּ ?γ Piel only here in Isaiah; comp. Job 21:11; Joe 2:5; Nahum 3:2.
Isaiah 13:22 ΰִ ?ιִּ ?ια are “jackals.” The singular ΰִ ?ι seems abbreviated from ΰֱ ?εִ ?ι from an unused ΰָ ?εָ ?δ, ululavit. In Arabic the jackal still is called ibn-awa. The word is found only here and Isaiah 34:14, and Jeremiah 50:39.—ΰμξπεϊ only here for ΰψξπεϊ (perhaps with reference to their widowhood). Comp. Isaiah 23:13; Isaiah 25:2; Isaiah 32:14; Isaiah 34:13.—ϊַּ ?πִּ ?ιν are also “jackals” (comp. Gesen. Thesaur. p. 39, 1457; 1511). The word in Isaiah again Isaiah 34:13; Isaiah 35:7; Isaiah 43:20.
AND 1. The Prophet turns from the universal judgment that comprehends all the several acts of judgment against the world-power from first to last, to portray the special judgment to be accomplished on Babylon as the climax of the world-power in its first stage, or as the head of the first world-monarchy. He begins by describing the flight out of the world’s metropolis of men that had flowed thither out of all lands (Isaiah 13:14). This flight has sufficient cause—for whoever is taken perishes (Isaiah 13:15). Children are dashed in pieces, houses plundered, women ravished (Isaiah 13:16). The Lord particularly names the people charged with executing the judgment: they are the Medes, a people that do not regard silver and gold (Isaiah 13:17), but also as little the children, and even the fruit of the womb (Isaiah 13:18).
Then shall Babylon, hitherto the ornament and crown of the Chaldean kingdom, be overthrown like Sodom and Gomorrah (Isaiah 13:19). It will come to be a dwelling-place for men (Isaiah 13:20). Only beasts of the desert and dismal hobgoblins shall revel in the spots where once luxury reigned,—and in fact the time of the judgment is near, and a respite not to be hoped for.
2. And it shall be—ravished.
Isaiah 13:14-16. It is said that rats forsake a vessel that is going to be shipwrecked. When ruin impends over a community, whoever is not bound to it by ties of piety or of possession flees out of it. Thus first of all the foreigners flee. The crowd of such in Babylon will scatter like scared gazelles, like a herd panic-stricken. Babylon was the world’s capital, and consequently a resort for people of all nations.
All these, therefore, will seek safety in flight. The words: “every man—own land” are found word for word in Jeremiah 50:16 (comp. Jeremiah 46:16; Jeremiah 51:9; Jeremiah 51:44). A comparison with the context proves that these words are original with Isaiah. With Isaiah the thought is the natural consequence of the preceding image of the frightened gazelles and sheep. In Jeremiah we read: “Cut off the sower from Babylon, and him that handleth the sickle in the time of harvest.” To these words the thought: “they shall turn every one to his people,” would be joined on without natural connection, did not the inserted: “for fear of the oppressing sword,” (artfully) bridge over the gap.
3. Behold, I will stir up—not spare children.
Isaiah 13:17-18. The Prophet proceeds artistically from the general to the particular. First he describes quite in general the vast, I might say the cosmical, apparatus of war that the Lord sets in motion. To Isaiah 13:14 the earth in general seems to be the objective point of this military expedition. And it is, too, only not all at once. For, from the description immediately following, taken with the totality of eschatological imagery that prophecy offers, it appears that that general prophecy is realized only by degrees.
From Isaiah 13:14 on we notice that a great centre of the world-power is the object of the execution. At Isaiah 13:17 we are made aware who are to be the executors, but still are in ignorance against whom they are to turn. Not till Isaiah 13:19 is Babylon named. Of course the superscription, Isaiah 13:1, is not to be urged against this statement of the order of thought.
The Medes are first named Genesis 10:2; but after that the present is the next mention; afterwards Isaiah 21:2; Jeremiah 25:25; Jeremiah 51:11; Jeremiah 51:28; 2 Kings 17:6; 2 Kings 18:11. Not till the books of Daniel and Ezra are they mentioned often. In Genesis 10:2 they are named as descendants of Japheth. This corresponds accurately with their Arian derivation. Herodotus (Genesis 7:62), who unhistorically derives the name Μῆδοι from Medea, says that from ancient times they were named generally Arians. Medea was bounded on the East by Parthia and Hyrcania, on the South by Susiana and Persis, on the West by Armenia and Assyria, and on the North by the Caspian Sea.
Comp. Lassen and Spiegel,Keilinschriften;Arnold in Herzog’sReal-Encycl. IX. 231 sq. It must be particularly noted here that Isaiah makes the Medes and not the Persians the executors of judgment on Babylon. Jeremiah also, who relies on Isaiah’s prophecies against Babylon, does this (Jeremiah 51:11; Jeremiah 51:28). In my work: “The Prophet Jeremiah and Babylon” I have pointed out what a strong proof lies in this fact against the view that the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah against Babylon were composed during the exile.
Verily, in the time of the exile, and after the event, no one forging a prophecy against Babylon that would pretend to credibility, would have named the Medes as its destroyer. Any forger must have named the Persians. But if, about the time when the Medes in a mighty uprising freed themselves from the bondage of five centuries to the Assyrians, the Prophet of Jehovah sees in this nation instantly the future conquerors of Babylon, there is a prophetic look which, justified by the present, loses none of its correctness, because, in fact, not the Medes alone, but the Medo-Persians, accomplished the deed that was predicted. When Isaiah 21:2 names the Elamites along with the Medes, it does not militate against what has just been said. For the Elamites are not identical with the Persians. See on Isaiah 21:2.
And when, too, in Greek writers, the Persians often appear under the name “Medes” (comp. πόλεμοςμηδικός, στράτευμαμηδικόν, μηδίζειν, Vitringain loc.), still it does not happen exclusively, but so that the Persians are named along with them, and for a special reason, viz., because the Medes were recognized as the ἀρχηγέται by the Greeks. In short, with the Greeks that designation proceeds from exact knowledge. In Isaiah and Jeremiah, the way in which the Medes are mentioned makes the impression that of the Persians they knew nothing, and of the Medes not much.
By saying that the Medes regard not silver and gold, the Prophet would intimate that they are impelled by higher motives than common love of booty. What those higher motives may be, he does not say. They might have their reason in a thirst for revenge (Delitzsch); but they might also have their source in an impulse to fulfil some mission of which they were unconscious. At all events, it is strange that Jeremiah 51:11; Jeremiah 51:28 sq., where he mentions the Medes, gives prominence both times to this thought. For he says there: “The Lord hath raised up (δֵ ?ςִ ?ιψ as in our ver. ξֵ ?ςιψ) the spirits of the kings of the Medes; for his device is against Babylon to destroy it; because it is the vengeance of the Lord, the vengeance of His temple.” And thus, too, Jeremiah 51:29 : “for every purpose of the Lord shall be performed against Babylon.” Bows shall dash the young men to pieces (Isaiah 13:18)!—An extraordinary expression. One might suppose that ψθωׁ means here simply to cast down, to strike to the ground, were it not (comp. on Isaiah 13:16 Text. and Gram.) that Piel and Pual of ψθωׁ are constantly used of dashing to pieces human bodies.
But in view of this, and moreover that bows and not the bowmen are named, one must understand an effect of crowds is meant, and an indirect dashing to pieces by precipitating those struck, say from the walls. Besides the Medes, Elamites, Persians, and later the Parthians, were celebrated in all antiquity as bowmen. Comp. Isaiah 22:6; Jeremiah 49:35; Herod. 7, 61 sq; Cyrop. II. 1, 6 sq. The fruit of the womb being named along with children, makes it likely that children unborn are meant.
Comp. 2 Kings 8:12; 2 Kings 15:16; Hosea 14:1; Amos 1:13. Their eye shall not spare.—By synecdoche the eye that expresses pity is taken for the efficient source. The expression is from the Pentateuch (Genesis 45:20; Deuteronomy 7:16; Deuteronomy 19:13; Deuteronomy 19:21 and often; Ezra 5:11 and often).
4. And Babylon—not be prolonged.
Isaiah 13:19-22. The entire first half of Isa 13:20 occurs as a quotation, Jeremiah 50:39. Babylon shall be uninhabited forever. It shall not even be used as a temporary stopping place. Not even the nomadic Arabian, nor a wandering shepherd of another race, shall camp there and rest his flocks. Goats = “satyrs.” Perhaps here is the source of that representation of the devil as a being furnished with horns and goat’s feet. Comp. Geseniusin loc.
When the Prophet at the last declares the judgment on Babylon to be near, that is only in consequence of his having said generally (Isaiah 13:6; Isaiah 13:9) that the day of the Lord is at hand. Moreover the notion “near” is a relative one. Here also from the Prophetic view-point that is represented as near, which, according to common human reckoning, is still far off. As regards the fulfilment of this prophecy, it is sufficiently proved that it has been accomplished, not at once, but gradually in the course of the centuries. We have thus here again an example of that prophetic gaze which, as it were, sees in one plain what in reality is extended through many successive stages of time. Comp. what Vitringa has compiled on this subject with great learning, under the title, “Implementum prophetiae literale;”Gesenius and Delitzsch in their commentaries; my work: “Der Prophet Jeremia und Babylon.” p. 135 sq.; and especially Ritter,Erdkunde XI. p. 865 sq.; “Die Ruinengruppe des alten Babylon.”Ritter describes the impression made by the vast extent of Babylon’s ruins: “When one mounts one of these elevations, he beholds in the external, solemn stillness of this world of ruins the bright mirror of the Euphrates flowing far away, that wanders full of majesty through that solitude like a royal pilgrim roaming amid the silent ruins of his desolated kingdom.”
[J. A. Alexander on Isaiah 13:20-21. “The endless discussions as to the identity of the species of animals here named, however laudable as tending to promote exact lexicography and natural history, have little or no bearing on the interpretation of the passage. Nothing more will be here attempted than to settle one or two points of comparative importance. Many interpreters regard the whole verse as an enumeration of particular animals. This has arisen from the assumption of a perfect parallelism in the clause.
It is altogether natural, however, to suppose that the writer would first make use of general expressions, and afterwards descend to particulars. This supposition is confirmed by the etymology and usage of φιιν, both which determine it to mean those belonging to or dwelling in the desert. In this sense it is sometimes applied to men (Psalms 72:9; Psalms 74:14), but as these are here excluded by the preceding verse, nothing more was needed to restrict it to wild animals, to which it is also applied in Isaiah 34:14 and Jeremiah 50:39. This is now commonly agreed to be the meaning, even by those who give to ΰδιν a specific sense. The same writers admit that ΰδιν properly denotes the howls or cries of certain animals, and only make it mean the animals themselves, because such are mentioned in the other clauses. But if φιιν has the generic sense which all now give it, the very parallelism of the clauses favors the explanation of ΰηιν in its original and proper sense of howls or yells, viz., those uttered by the φιιν.—The history of the interpretation ωׂ ?ςιψιν is so curious as to justify more fulness of detail than usual.
It has never been disputed that its original and proper sense is hairy, and its usual specific sense he-goats. In two places (Leviticus 17:7; 2 Chronicles 11:15) it is used to denote objects of idolatrous worship, probably images of goats, which, according to Herodotus, were worshipped in Egypt. In these places the LXX. render it ματαίοις, vain things, i.e., false gods. But the Targum on Leviticus explains it to mean demons (ωׁ ?γιο), and the same interpretation is given in the case before us by the LXX. (δαιμόνια), Targum and Peshito. The Vulg. in Lev. translates the word daemonibus, but here pilosi. The interpretation given by the other three versions is adopted also by the Rabbins, Aben Ezra, Jarchi, Kimchi,etc.
It appears likewise in the Talmud and early Jewish books. From this traditional interpretation of ωׂ ?ςιψιν here and Isaiah 34:14 appears to have arisen, at an early period, a popular belief among the Jews that demons or evil spirits were accustomed to haunt desert places in the shape of goats or other animals. And this belief is said to be actually cherished by the natives near the site of Babylon at the present day. Let us now compare this Jewish exposition of the passage with its treatment among Christians. To Jerome the combination of the two meanings—goats and demons—seems to have suggested the Pans, Fauns and Satyrs of the classical mythology, imaginary beings represented as a mixture of the human form with that of goats, and supposed to frequent forests and other lonely places. This idea is carried out by Calvin, who adopts the word satyri in his version, and explains the passage as relating to actual appearances of Satan under such disguises.
Luther, in like manner, renders it Feldgeister.Vitringa takes another step, and understands the language as a mere concession or allusion to the popular belief, equivalent to saying, the solitude of Babylon shall be as awful as if occupied by Fauns and Satyrs—there if anywhere such beings may be looked for. Forerius and J. D. Michaelis understand the animals themselves to be here meant. The latter uses in his version the word Waldteufel (wood-devils, forest-demons), but is careful to apprise the reader in a note that it is the German name for a species of ape or monkey, and that the Hebrew contains no allusion to the devil. The same word is used by Gesenius and others in its proper sense.
Saadias, Cocceius, Clericus and Henderson return to the original meaning of the Hebrew word—viz.: wild goats. But the great majority of modern writers tenaciously adhere to the old tradition. This is done, not only by the German neologists, who lose no opportunity of finding a mythology in Scripture, but by Lowth, Barnes, and Stuart in his exposition of Rev 11:12 and his Excursus on the Angelology of Scripture (Apocal. II. 403).
The result apppears to be, that if the question is determined by tradition and authority, ωׂ ?ςιψιν denotes demons; if by the context and the usage of the word, it signifies wild goats, or more generically hairy, shaggy animals. According to the principles of modern exegesis, the latter is clearly entitled to the preference. But even if the former be adopted, the language of the text should be regarded, not as ‘a touch from the popular pneumatology’ (as Revelation 18:2 is described by Stuartin loc.), but as the prediction of a real fact, which, though it should not be assumed without necessity, is altogether possible, and therefore, if alleged in Scripture, altogether credible.”
Ib. Isaiah 13:22. As ΰιιν, according to its etymology, denotes an animal remarkable for its cry, it might be rendered hyenas, thereby avoiding the improbable assumption that precisely the same animal is mentioned in both clauses.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 13:2-13. The prophecy concerning the day of the Lord has its history. It appears first in the form of the announcement of a scourge of locusts (Joel); then it becomes an announcement of human war-expeditions and sieges of cities. Finally it becomes a message that proclaims the destruction of the earth and of its companions in space. But from the first onward, the last particular is not wanting: only at first it appears faintly.
In Joe 2:10, one does not know whether the discourse is concerning an obscuration of the heavenly bodies occasioned only by the grasshoppers or by higher powers. But soon (Joe 3:4; Joe 3:20) this particular comes out more definitely. In the present passage of Isaiah it presses to the foreground. In the New Testament (Matthew 24:29; Mark 13:24 sq.; Luke 21:25) it takes the first and central place. We observe clearly that the judgment on the world is accomplished in many acts, and is yet one whole; and as on the other hand nature, too, is itself one whole, so, according to the saying: “whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it” (1 Corinthians 12:26), the catastrophes on earth have their echo in the regions above earth.
2. On Isaiah 13:4 sqq. “God cannot do otherwise than punish accumulated wickedness. But He overthrows violence and crime, and metes out to tyrants the measure they have given to others, for He gives to them a master that the heathen shall know that they too are men (Ps. 9:21; Psalms 11:5).”—Cramer.[On 13 Isa 13:3. “It cannot be supposed that the Medes and Persians really exulted, or rejoiced in God or in His plans.—But they would exult as if it were their own plan, though it would be really the glorious plan of God. Wicked, men often exult in their success: they glory in the execution of their purposes; but they are really accomplishing the plans of God, and executing His great designs.”—Barnes.]
[On Isaiah 13:9. “The moral causes of the ruin threatened are significantly intimated by the Prophet’s calling the people of the earth or land its sinners. As the national offences here referred to, Vitringa enumerates pride (Isaiah 13:11; Isaiah 14:11; Isaiah 47:7-8), idolatry (Jeremiah 50:38), tyranny in general (Isaiah 14:12; Isaiah 14:17), and oppression of God’s people in particular (Isaiah 47:6).”—J. A. Alexander.]
3. On Isaiah 13:19 sqq. Imperiti animi, etc. “Unlearned minds when they happen on allegories, can hold no certain sense of Scripture. And unless this Papal business had kept me to the simple text of the Bible, I had become an idle trifler in allegories like Jerome and Origen. For that figurative speech has certain allurements by which minds seek to dispose of difficulties. … The true allegory of this passage is concerning the victory of conscience over death. For, the law is Cyrus, the Turk, the cruel and mighty enemy that rises up against the proud conscience of justitiaries who confide in their own merits.
These are the real Babylon, and this is the glory of Babylon, that it walks in the confidence of its own works. When, therefore, the law comes and occupies the heart with its terrors, it condemns all our works in which we have trusted, as polluted and very dung. Once the law has laid bare this filthiness of our hearts and works, there follows confusion, writhing, and pains of parturition; men become ashamed, and that confidence of works ceases and they do those things which we see now-a-days: he that heretofore has lived by confidence of righteousnesss in a monastery, deserts the monkish life, casts away to ashes all glory of works, and looks to the gratuitous righteousness and merit of Christ, and that is the desolation of Babylon. The ostriches and hairy creatures that remain are Eck, Cochleus and others, who do not pertain to that part of law. They screech, they do not speak with human voice, they are unable to arouse and console any afflicted conscience with their doctrine. My allegories, which I approve, are of this sort, viz., which shadow forth the nature of law and gospel.” Luther.4.
On Isaiah 13:21 sqq. “There the Holy Spirit paints for thee the house of thy heart as a deserted, desolate Babylon, as a loathsome cesspool, and devil’s hole, full of thorns, nettles, thistles, dragons, spukes, kobolds, maggots, owls, porcupines, etc., all of which is nothing else than the thousandfold devastation of thy nature, in as much as into every heart the kingdom of Satan, and all his properties have pressed in, and all and every sin, as a fascinating serpent-brood, have been sown and sunk into each one, although not all sins together become evident and actual in every one’s outward life.”—Joh. Arndt’s Informatorium biblicum, § 7.
5. On Isaiah 14:1-2. “Although it seems to me to be just impossible that I could be delivered from death or sin, yet it will come to pass through Christ. For God here gives us an example; He will not forsake His saints though they were in the midst of Babylon.”—Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.6. On Isaiah 14:4 sqq. “Magna imperia fere nihil sunt quam magnae injuriae.Ad generum Cereris sine caede et sanguine pauci
Descendunt reges et sicca mente tyranni.—Luther.Impune quidvis facere id est regem esse.”—Sallust.Among the Dialogi mortuorum of Lucian of Samosata the thirteenth is between Diogenes and Alexander the Great. This dialogue begins with the words: “Τίτοῦτο, ὦἈλέξανδρε, τέθνηκαςκαὶσὺ, ὥσπερἡμεῖσἅπαντες;” thereupon the contrast is ironically set forth between what Alexander was, as one given out to be a son of the gods, and so recognized by men, and possessor of all highest human glories, and what he is at present. It is, as is well known, doubtful whether Lucian really was acquainted with the Scriptures. See Planck, Lucian and Christianity in Stud. u. Krit., 1851, IV. p. 826 sqq. Comp. also Schrader, die Hφllenfahrt der Istar., 1874.
7. On Isaiah 14:4 sqq. ”Omni genera figurarum utitur ad confirmandos et consolandos suos, ut simul sit conjuncta summa theologia cum summa rhetorica.”—Luther.8. On Isaiah 14:12 sqq. As early as the LXX. this passage seems to have been understood of Satan. It points that way that they change the second person into the third; πῶςἐξέπεσεν, etc. At least they were so understood.
See Jerome, who thereby makes the fine remark: “Unde ille cecidit per superbiam, vos ascendatis per humilitatem.” But Luther says: “Debet nobis insignis error totius papatus, qui hunc textum de casu angelorum accepit, studia literarum et artium deccndi commendare tamquam res theologo maxime necessarias ad tractationem sacrarum literarum.”9. On Isaiah 14:13-14. “The Assyrian monarch was a thorough Eastern despot … rather adored as a god than feared as a man.” Layard’s Discoveries amongst the ruins of Nineveh and Babylon, 1853, New York, p. 632. “In the heathen period the pre-eminence of the German kings depended on their descent from the gods, as among the Greeks” (Gervinus, Einleit. in d. Gesch. d. 19 Iahrh., 1853, p. 14). Christian Thomasius, in his Instit. jurispr. divinae, dissert. pro�mialis, p. 16, calls the princes “the Gods on earth.” In a letter from Luxemburg, after the departure of the Emperor Joseph II., it is said (in a description of the journey, of which a sheet lies before me): “we have had the good fortune to see our earthly god.” Belani, Russian Court Narratives, New Series, III. Vol., p. Isaiah 125: “The Russian historian Korampzin says in the section where he describes the Russian self-rule: “The Autocrat became an earthly god for the Russians, who set the whole world in astonishment by a submissiveness to the will of their monarch which transcends all bounds.”
Footnotes:a flock that no one collects.
is caught.
Heb. the overthrowing.
Heb. Ziim.
Heb. Ochim.
horned owls, or, yells.
Or, ostriches.
Heb. daughters of the owl.
Heb. Iim.
Or, palaces.
2. THE OF ISRAEL
Isaiah 14:1-21 For the Lord will have mercy on Jacob,
And will yet choose Israel,
And set them in their own land:
And the strangers shall be joined with them,
And they shall cleave to the house of Jacob.
2 And the people shall take them, and bring them to their place:
And the house of Israel shall possess them in the land of the Lord
For servants and handmaids:
And they shall take them captives, whose captives they were;
And they shall rule over their oppressors.
AND Isa_14:1. δִ ?πִּ ?ιηַ. comp. Isaiah 28:2; Isaiah 46:7. πμεδ as to sense and construction like Isaiah 56:3; Isaiah 56:6, where alone the word occurs again in this sense.—Niph. πρτη only here. Comp. Hithp. 1 Samuel 26:19 and on Isaiah 37:30.
Isaiah 14:2. Hithp. δϊπημ in Isa. only here.—The accusative depends on the transitive notion that is latent in the reflexive form. Comp. Numbers 33:54 and often. The expression ΰγξϊιΧ occurs only here. But comp. Isaiah 14:25; Joe 1:6; 4:2; Jeremiah 2:7, etc.—ωׁ ?αιν. Comp. 1 Kings 8:46-50.—ψָ ?γָ ?δ in Isa. only here, Isaiah 14:6; Isaiah 41:2 (Hiph.).—πֹ ?βְ ?ωִׂ ?ιν. Comp. Isaiah 3:12; Isaiah 9:3; Isaiah 60:17.
AND 1. The reason for the destruction of Babylon described in Isaiah 13:14-22 is here indicated by the Prophet to be the intention of Jehovah to have mercy again on His people, and bring them back into their land. That shall take place by the glad consent and even active co-operation of the heathen nations. These will join themselves to Israel—in fact lead Israel into their own land (Isaiah 14:1). Israel will then have them for servants and maids, and will hold those in prison who before devoted them to such a fate (Isaiah 14:2).
2. For the Lord—their oppressors.
Isaiah 14:1-2. Though Israel’s deliverance is not the sole motive of the Lord in destroying Babylon, it is yet a chief motive. Isaiah in the second part, and Jeremiah in the denunciations of judgments (Jeremiah 50, 51) that connect so closely with the present and the later prophecies of Isaiah on this subject, frequently declare that Babylon’s fall is to be Israel’s deliverance (e.g., Jeremiah 50:4 sqq., Jeremiah 50:8 sqq., Jeremiah 50:28; Jeremiah 51:6, Jeremiah 50:36 sqq., Jeremiah 50:45 sqq.). The adhesion of strangers, who would be witnesses of the mighty deeds of Jehovah in judging and delivering, is a trait that the second return from bondage will have in common with the first (Exodus 12:19; Exodus 12:38; Numbers 11:4, etc.). And the people shall take them, etc.—It is more exactly explained that this adhesion of strangers will not be to seek protection, but to form an honorable and serviceable attendance as friends and admirers. This is a thought that often recurs in the second part of Isa 44:5; Isaiah 49:22 sq.; Isaiah 55:5; Isaiah 60:4-9 sq., This notion that strangers should amicably attend Israel and then be enslaved for it occasions offence.
But the heathen will only display this friendliness constrained thereto by the mighty deeds of Jehovah. And even if the Old Testament knows of a conversion of the heathen to Jehovah (Hosea 2:23; Isaiah 65:1; comp. Romans 9:24 sqq.; Isaiah 10:18 sqq.)—yet, from the Old Testament view-point, there remains ever such a chasm between Israel and even the converted heathen that for the latter no other position was conceivable than that of those strangers who went along to Canaan out of Egypt or the desert, or of the Canaanites that remained (1 Kings 9:20 sq). This is a consequence of that fleshly consciousness of nobility of which Israel was full. Only by Christ could that chasm be bridged over, in whom there is neither circumcision nor uncircumcision (Galatians 5:6; Galatians 3:28; Romans 10:12). [“The simple meaning of this promise seems to be that the church or chosen people and the other nations should change places, the oppressed becoming the oppressor, and the slave the master. This of course admits both an external and internal fulfilment.
In a lower sense and on a smaller scale it was accomplished in the restoration of the Jews from exile; but its full accomplishment is yet to come, not with respect to the Jews as a people, for their pre-eminence has ceased forever, but with respect to the church, including Jews and Gentiles, which has succeeded to the rights and privileges, promises and actual possessions of God’s ancient people. The true principle of exposition is adopted even by the Rabbins. Jarchi refers the promise to the future, to the period of complete redemption. Kimchi more explicitly declares that its fulfilment is to be sought partly in the restoration from Babylon, and partly in the days of the Messiah.” J. A. Alex.in loc.]
Footnotes:Or, nations.
Or, they shall be captors of their captors.
Heb. that had taken them captives.
3. THE ON THE KING OF BABYLON
Isaiah 14:3-233 And it shall come to pass in the day that the Lord shall give thee rest
From thy sorrow, and from thy fear,
And from the hard bondage
Wherein thou wast made to serve,
4 That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say,
How hath the oppressor ceased!
The golden city ceased!
5The Lord hath broken the staff of the wicked,
And the sceptre of the rulers.
6He who smote the people in wrath
With a continual stroke,
He that ruled the nations in anger,
Is persecuted, and none hindereth.
7The whole earth is at rest, and is quiet:
They break forth into singing.
8Yea, the fir trees rejoice at thee,
And the cedars of Lebanon, saying,
Since thou art laid down,
No feller is come up against us.
9Hell from beneath is moved for thee
To meet thee at thy coming:
It stirreth up the dead for thee,
Even all the chief ones of the earth;
It hath raised up from their thrones
All the kings of the nations.
10All they shall speak and say unto thee,
Art thou also become weak as we?
kArt thou become like unto us?
11Thy pomp is brought down to the grave,
And the noise of thy viols:
The worm is spread under thee, and the worms 1cover thee.
12How art thou fallen from heaven,
O Lucifer, son of the morning!
How art thou cut down to the ground,
Which didst weaken the nations!
13For thou hast said in thine heart,
I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God.
I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will be like the Most High.
15Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell,
To the sides of the pit.
16They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying,
Is this the man that made the earth to tremble,
That did shake kingdoms;
17That made the world as a wilderness,
And destroyed the cities thereof;
That opened not the house of his prisoners?
18All the kings of the nations, even all of them,
Lie in glory, every one in his own house.
19But thou art cast out of thy grave
Like an abominable branch,
And as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword,
That go down to the stones of the pit;
As a carcase trodden under feet.
20Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial,
Because thou hast destroyed thy land,
And slain thy people:
The seed of evil doers shall never be renowned.
21Prepare slaughter for his children
For the iniquity of their fathers;
That they do not rise, nor possess the land,
Nor nil the face of the world with cities.
22 For I will rise up against them,
Saith the Lord of hosts,
And cut off from Babylon the name and remnant,
And son, and nephew, saith the Lord.23 I will also make it a possession for the bittern, and pools of water:
And I will sweep it with the besom of destruction, saith the Lord of hosts.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_14:3. αιενδπιηεβε calls to mind Deuteronomy 25:19.—ςֹ ?φֶ ?α in the sense of dolor, labor, only here in Isaiah. It is not to be confounded with ςֹ ?φֶ ?α idolum (Isaiah 48:5).—Also ψֹ ?βֶ ?ζ, which often occurs in Job, does not again occur in Isaiah.—ΰωׁ ?ψςαγ does not stand for ‘ΰςֻ ?αְּ ?γָ ?δ as Gesenius supposes. And ΰωׁ ?ψ is not to be rendered by the ablative, but it is accusative according to the well-known construction of the Passive with the accusative of the nearer object (comp. Isaiah 21:2; Genesis 35:26).
Isaiah 14:4. Whatever may be the fundamental meaning of ξָ ?ωַׁ ?μ, and whether ξָ ?ωַׁ ?μ, to rule, and ξָ ?ωַׁ ?μ, to compare, come from one or from two roots (Gesen. Winer, Delitzsch assume constitit erectus as the common radical meaning; comp. Del. Commentary and Zur Geschichte d. jud. Poesie, p 196), the word any way signifies a dictum in terse language, distinguished from a merely prosaic statement, let the dictum be fable, parable, allegory, aphorism, proverb, riddle, didactic poem, or satire.
It is here used in the last named sense, i.e., sarcastic address, as in Habakkuk 2:6; Micah 2:4; comp. Deuteronomy 28:37; Jeremiah 24:9; Psalms 69:12; 1 Kings 9:7. [“Its most general sense seems to be that of tropical or figurative language. Here it may have a special reference to the bold poetic fiction following.”—J. A. A.]. The word does not again occur in Isaiah.—ξγδαδ is ἅπ. λεγ.
The LXX., translates ἔπισπουδαστής, which means the driver, inciter. It is thus synonymous with πֹ ?βֵ ?ωׂ. Vulg. tributum, according to which the word is derived either from ζָ ?δָ ?α = γְּ ?δַ ?α. gold, or from ψָ ?δָ ?α insistere, opprimere, so that the notion oppress would be taken in the sense of collecting tribute. In the latter sense the meaning as regards etymology would coinclde with the Greek ἐπισπουδαστής. For, according to the sense, the Greek translation seems to signify rather the driver who urges prisoners or slaves to make haste. The Peschito also, which translates operis exactor, and the Targ.
Jonathan which translates fortitudo peccatoris appear to have read ξַ ?ψְ ?δֵ ?λָ ?δ. So, too, perhaps Saadia (timiditas). As Aquila translates λιμός, he must either have taken ξַ ?ψְ ?ςֵ ?λָ ?δ = ξַ ?ψְ ?δֵ ?αָ ?δ, or ξַ ?γְ ?ΰֵ ?αָ ?δ = ξַ ?γְ ?δֵ ?αָ ?δ, from γָּ ?ΰַ ?λ, languere. Delitzsch sides with the last meaning, construing ξ as Mem loci, and translates, place of torture. Yet it seems to me that locus languendi, even if one overlooks the permutation of ΰ and δ, is still a vocabulum satis languidum for place of torture. I would like therefore, with J.
D. Michaelis, Gesenius, Knobel, Meier and others, to assume that ξγδαδ is an error of transcribing for ξψδαδ, as also an old edition (Thessalon, 1,600) actually reads. It favors this, too, that ψָ ?δַ ?α (superbire, opprimire) and πָ ?βַ ?ωׂ also correspond in parallelism, Isaiah 3:5.
Isaiah 14:5. ωׁ ?αθξωׁ ?μιν (comp. Ezekiel 19:11), as epexegesis of ξθδψωׁ ?ςιν is any way to be understood as a tyrant’s sceptre. This is confirmed by the statement of Isa 14:6.
Isaiah 14:6. The expression αμϊιρψδ occurs only here: ρψδ in Isaiah 1:5; Isaiah 31:6; Isaiah 59:13, in the sense of revolt. On αμϊι see at Isaiah 10:4. The conjecture of Doederlein, that instead of ξֻ ?ψְ ?γָ ?σ we should read ξִ ?ψְ ?γַּ ?ϊ has, according to the analogy of ξַ ?λַּ ?ϊ, much plausibility. The confounding of σ and ϊ might easily happen in the unpointed text. Neither ξִ ?ψְ ?γָּ ?δ nor ξֻ ?ψְ ?γָּ ?σ occur elsewhere. ξγγσ is nom. passivum: the being pursued, being hounded on, like ξֻ ?πָ ?γ being scared off, cast away, 2 Samuel 23:6. ξֻ ?φָּ ?α stations, Isaiah 29:3. ξֻ ?ψְ ?αֶּ ?λֶ ?ϊ, stirred in, Leviticus 6:14, etc.—ηωׂ ?κ occurs again Isaiah 54:2; Isaiah 58:1.—αμι kindred to αμϊι (comp. Ewald, 322, a.), is poetic negation. It occurs in Isaiah, again only Isaiah 32:10. See on αַּ ?μ Isaiah 14:21.
Isaiah 14:7. τφηψπδ is an expression peculiar to the second part of Isa. (Isaiah 44:23; Isaiah 49:13; Isaiah 52:9; Isaiah 54:1; Isaiah 55:12) and does not occur elsewhere.
Isaiah 14:8. ωָׂ ?ξַ ?η with μְ involves the notion of rejoicing at misfortune: Psalms 30:2; Psalms 35:19; Psalms 35:24; Psalms 38:17; Micah 7:8; Obadiah 1:12.
Isaiah 14:9. μְ ?κָ after ψβζδ is constructio praegnans. (comp. Micah 7:14), μχψΰϊαεΰκ however is the nearer qualification of the μְ ?κָ: hell gets into uproar toward thee, that is in order to welcome thee as an arrival.—ςεֹ ?ψֵ ?ψ Isaiah 10:26; Isaiah 23:13.—ωְׁ ?ΰεֹ ?μ is, in the first half of the verse, like Isaiah 5:14, construed as feminine. But when the discourse continues with the masculine form ςεֹ ?ψֵ ?ψ, the reason can hardly be because ωׁ ?ΰεμ elsewhere (Job 26:6) is used as masculine. For the question still arises, why does the Prophet vary the gender? I think the Prophet in the first clause has the totality in mind, whereas in ςεֹ ?ψֵ ?ψεβεΧ he means that special dominant will that he ascribes to Sheol as to a person. The former, as with all collectives, he conceives as feminine: but this person, as a ruler he conceives of as masculine. [“Hitzig explains this on the ground that in the first clause Sheol is passive, in the second active: Maurer, with more success, upon the ground that the nearest verb takes the feminine or proper gender of the noun, while the more remote one, by a common license, retains the masculine or radical form, as in Isaiah 33:9, (see Gesenius, § 141, Rem. 1).”—J.
A. A.]
Isaiah 14:10. ιςπε is employed according to well-known usage, whereby, not only the discourse responsive to other discourse, but discourse responsive to action is designated as answer (Isaiah 21:9; Deuteronomy 21:7; Deuteronomy 26:5; Job 3:2; Matthew 11:25; Matthew 22:1, etc.).—The Pual δֻ ?μֵּ ?ιϊָ only here. Comp. passages like Isaiah 53:10; Isaiah 57:10; Genesis 48:1, etc.; Deuteronomy 29:21, etc., and the meaning cannot be ambiguous: tu quoque debilitatus es. Also ΰμιπεπξωׁ ?μϊ is a pregnant phrase: thou art made like us and brought to us. [Of this constr. praegn. J. A. A., says: “this supposition is entirely gratuitous.”]
Isaiah 14:11. δֶ ?ξְ ?ιָ ?δ from δָ ?ξָ ?δ strepere, synonymous with δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο (Isaiah 13:4), is ἅπ. λεγ. Concerning πֶ ?λֶ ?μ comp. at Isaiah 5:12.—ψִ ?ξָּ ?δ only here in Isaiah.—ϊּ ?εֹ ?μֵ ?ςָ ?δ, Isaiah 41:14; Isaiah 66:24.
Isaiah 14:12. δֵ ?ιμֵ ?μ is by some expositors (Jerome, Aquila, Rosenmueller, Gesenius) taken as imperative from δֵ ?ιμִ ?ιμ = howl, in which sense, in fact, the word occurs Ezekiel 21:17; Zechariah 11:2. But this meaning is forced and mars the context. Only that meaning will correspond with the context which takes this word in the sense of bright star, from δָ ?μַ ?μ to shine (Job 29:3, etc.). The form δֵ ?ιμֵ ?μ can be formed after analogy of ωֵׁ ?ιμָ ?μ ,δֵ ?ιγָ ?γ (Micah 1:8 K’thibh). It is, however, possible, too, that δֵ ?ιμֵ ?μ is derived from δִ ?μֵּ ?μ, although there is no analogy for this, for ΰֵ ?ωֶׁ ?ϊ ,ξֵ ?ΰֵ ?κ are not analogous, and i before strong consonants always lengthens to i as substitute for doubling (Ewald, § 84 a.). It must only be that at the same time a sort of attraction took place, and thus the Tsere of the final syllable conformed to the vowel of the preceding syllable.
Then helel could be identical with the name Hillel (Judges 12:13; Judges 12:15); to which the remark may be added, that Rabbi Hillel the younger (in the 4th Cent., after Christ) is named Ἑλλήλ by Epiphanius (Adv. Haer. II. p. 127. Ed. Paris.). Also Buxtorf (Lex.
Chald. talm. et Rabb. p. 617) writes: δִ ?ιμֵּ ?μ Hillel, olim Hellel ut Emmanuel et Immanuel, de qua scriptione vide Drus. Observ. L. IX. 100:1. ” That this bright star is the morning star appears from the addition αοΞωׁ ?ηψ.—ηָ ?μַ ?ωׁ with Accus. Exodus 17:13 : with ςַ ?μ only in this place, which seems to depend on the latent notion of lording it, like ψָ ?γַ ?σηָ ?αַ ?ωׁ ,ψָ ?τָ ?ΰ, are construed with the Accus., and μְ.
Isaiah 14:15. The adversative thought is introduced by ΰַ ?κְ. The restrictive fundamental meaning (“only,” which receives adversative force in such a connection = nisi rectius dixeris i.e. sed. comp. Jeremiah 5:5) seems to involve here a certain irony: but pity, that thou must own to Orkus.—ιψλϊιαεψ stands opposed to ιΧφτεο. The deepest corner of the deep grave. αεψ properly, pit, grave, but the underworld, is, so to speak, the deepening and extending of the grave Isaiah 38:18 and often.—The imperf. ϊεψγ, according to Delitzsch, comes unsuitably both from the mouth of the dwellers in Hades, and from Israel that sings this Maschal; it is therefore to be construed as resumption of the discourse by the Prophet, who has before his mind as future, what the Maschal recites as past (comp. δεψγ Isaiah 14:11). But this departure from the role is improbable.
Moreover it is grammatically unnecessary to take ϊεψγ as future. It is present. It describes the descent into Hades as something now taking place, a movement not yet concluded. Thus Joshua (Isaiah 9:8) questions the emissaries of the Gibeonites ξֵ ?ΰַ ?ιִ ?οϊָּ ?αֹ ?ΰεּ; but Joseph his brethren (Genesis 42:7) ξֵ ?ΰַ ?ιִ ?οαָּ ?ΰϊֶ ?ν. The former regarded those questioned as arrivals, as it were still in the act of coming; the latter as ones who had arrived.
Isaiah 14:16. ωָׁ ?βַ ?η (only here in Isaiah; beside this in Psalms 33:14; Son 2:9), with ΰμ in connection with ψΰιν evidently means attentively gazing. The same thought is still more strongly emphasized by ιϊαεππε. The word occurs in Isaiah again Isaiah 1:3; Isaiah 43:18; Isaiah 52:15. With ΰֵ ?μ or ςַ ?μ it signifies an intent, scrutinizing contemplation (1 Kings 3:21; Psalms 37:10; Job 31:1).—ξψβιζ comp. on Isaiah 13:13, where it is associated with ψςωׁ.
Isaiah 14:17. The masculine suffixes in ςψιε and ΰριψιε refer to a latent masculine notion in ϊαμ, probably to ΰψυ, which Isaiah is wont to use as parallel with ϊαμ (Isaiah 18:3; Isaiah 26:18), and uses as masculine oftener than all other Old Testament writers (Isaiah 9:18; Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 26:18; Isaiah 66:8, beside these only Genesis 13:6). This is favored, also, by ΰριψιε, for there is no ΰριψιϊαμ, but ΰριψιΰψυ occurs (Lamentations 3:34). [“The anomaly of gender may be done away by referring both the pronouns to the King himself, who might just as well be said to have destroyed his own cities, as his own land and his own people (Isaiah 14:20), the rather as his sway is supposed to have been universal.—J. A. A.].—Concerning the pregnant construction τϊηαιϊδ comp. Jeremiah 50:33.—
Isaiah 14:19. πφψ is an exclusively Isaianic word. It occurs, beside the present, only Isaiah 11:1, Isaiah 60:21, except where Daniel 11:7 quotes Isaiah 11:1.—πϊςα, in Isaiah only here, is probably chosen for the sake of the alliteration.—μְ ?αεּ ?ωׁ in Isaiah again Isaiah 63:12.——ξθςο only here.—λְּ in λτβψ is Kaph veritatis (comp. on Isaiah 13:6) and what has been said figuratively is now said without figure.—τֶ ?βֶ ?ψ occurs again Isaiah 34:3; Isaiah 37:36; Isaiah 66:24. Part. ξεαν only here; other forms of αεּ ?ν Isaiah 14:25; Isaiah 63:6; Isaiah 63:18.
Isaiah 14:20. ϊηγ from ιηγ only here in Isaiah. Comp. Genesis 19:6. Isaiah 14:21. αַּ ?μ poetic = ΰַ ?μ; occurs again Isaiah 26:10-11; Isaiah 26:14; Isaiah 26:18; Isaiah 33:20-21; Isaiah 33:23-24; Isaiah 35:9; Isaiah 40:24; Isaiah 43:17; Isaiah 44:8-9; comp. on Isaiah 26:8.
Isaiah 14:22. Of the pairs of alliterated words ωׁ ?ΰψ is a current word with Isaiah (comp. at Isaiah 7:13; Isaiah 10:19), πιοεπλγ stand together in the three passages where they recur: Genesis 21:23; Job 18:19 and here.
[“The specific meaning son and nephew (i.e., nepos, grandson), given in the Engl. Version, and most of the early writers, and retained by Umbreit, is derived from the Chaldee Paraphrase (αψεαψαψ). Aben Ezra makes the language still more definite by explaining ωׁ ?ν to be a man himself, ωׁ ?ΰψ a father, πιο a son, and πλγ a grandson.——But the more general meaning of the terms now held to be correct, is given in the LXX. (ὄνομακαὶκατάλειμμακαὶσπέρμα) and the Vulgate (nomen et reliquias et germen et progeniem.)”—J. A. A.]
Isaiah 14:23. θִ ?ΰְ ?θֵ ?ΰϊִ ?ι is Pilp., of a root θָ ?ΰ (θεּ ?ΰ) pellere, protrudere, that occurs only here, from which also the substantive ξַ ?θְ ?ΰֲ ?θֵ ?ΰ is formed. Some have justly found in this word a reference to θִ ?ιθ clay, out of which the brick-builded Babylon emerged. But the broom, of which Jehovah makes use, is δַ ?ωְׁ ?λֵ ?γ (infin. nomin.), destruction. AND 1. In that day wherein the Lord will grant Israel the deliverance described in Isaiah 14:1-2, Israel shall sing a song of derision about the king of Babylon (Isaiah 14:3-4 a). The Prophet has no particular king in mind, but the king of Babylon in abstracto.
With wonderful poetic vigor and beauty he shows how the proud possessor of the world-power, who in titanic arrogance would mount to equality with the very Godhead, shall be cast down to the lowest degradation and wretchedness by the omnipotence of the true God. He begins with a joyful exclamation that the scourge of the nations is broken (Isaiah 14:4 b –6). The earth now has rest; the very cypresses and cedars rejoice that they are no more felled (Isaiah 14:7-8). On the other hand, the under-world, the kingdom of the dead, rises in commotion at the new arrival. Spectres hurry to meet him—the princes under them rise off their seats (Isaiah 14:9). “Thou, too, comest to us,” they call to him (Isaiah 14:10). Then the Prophet takes up the discourse again, personating Israel, into whose mouth he puts the words, and brings out the contrast in the history of the Babylonian: Thy pomp is cast down to hell, the sound of revel in thy palaces is hushed, and thy body moulders in the grave, a star cast down from heaven (Isaiah 14:10-12).
Thou wouldst raise thyself to the level of the Godhead, and now descendest into the deepest depth of the lower world (Isaiah 14:13-15). Also the subjects of the dead king express their thoughts at the spectacle of the unburied, cast-away corpse, seeing in this present wretchedness the punishment of past wrong-doing: Is this the man that shook and desolated the earth (Isaiah 14:16-17)? While the bodies of other kings lie quiet in their graves, his corpse, without a grave, is cast away as a despised and trampled carcase (Isaiah 14:18-19). This is the punishment for his having ruined land and nation. Therefore shall his generation be exterminated (Isaiah 14:20-21). Finally Jehovah Himself confirms the announcement of destruction, extending the warning of punishment to Babylon entire, and presents to it the prospect of desolation in the same manner as occurs chap. 13.
Isaiah 14:21 sq. (Isaiah 14:22-23).
2. And it shall come to pass——hindereth.Isaiah 14:3; Isaiah 14:6. A song of derision about the representative of the Babylonish world-power cannot be appropriate while one is in its power. When one is out of reach of his arm, then the long pent-up resentment may find expression. The service (ςֲ ?αֹ ?γָ ?δ. comp. Isaiah 28:21; Isaiah 32:17) is also called “hard” (χָ ?ωָׁ ?δ, Exodus 1:6; Exodus 6:9; Deuteronomy 26:6) in the description of the Egyptian bondage. Thus we have a reminder of the resemblance between the first and the second exile.
3. The whole earth——against us.Isaiah 14:7-8. But not merely the world of mankind, the impersonal creatures were disquieted by this world-despot, who knew no law but his own passions, and they, too, rejoice, jubilant at the repose. Representative of all others, the elevated giants of the forest high up on Lebanon speak, to utter their joy that, since the end of the tyrant, they are no more felled. Cypress (Isaiah 37:24; Isaiah 41:19; Isaiah 55:13; Isaiah 60:13), a hard and lasting wood, was used, not only for house and ship-building (1 Kings 5:8; 1 Kings 5:10; Ezekiel 27:5), but also in the manufacture of lances (Nahum 2:4) and musical instruments (2 Samuel 6:5; comp. Isaiah 14:11). [“According to J.
D. Michaelis, Antilibanus is clothed with firs as Libanus or Lebanon proper is with cedars, and both are here introduced as joining in the general triumph. J. A. A.]
4. Hell from beneath——like unto us.Isaiah 14:9-10. On Sheol see Isaiah 14:14. [“The English word Hell, though now appropriated to the condition or place of future torments, corresponds in etymology and early usage to the Hebrew word in question. Gesenius derives it, with the German Hφlle, from Hφhle, “hollow;” but the English etymologists from the Anglo-Saxon helan, “to cover,” which amounts to the same thing,—the ideas of a hollow and a covered place being equally appropriate. As Sheol, retained by Henderson, and the Greek word Hades, introduced by Lowth and Barnes, require explanation also, the strong and homely Saxon form will be preferred by every unsophisticated taste. Ewald and Umbreit [and Naegelsbach] have the good taste to restore the old word Hφlle in their versions.
J. A. A.] As the Prophet has before personified the trees of Lebanon, so here he personifies the world of the dead. He presents it as governed by a common will. This will, so to speak, the will of the ruler, roused by the appearance of the king of Babylon, electrifies the entire kingdom, so that it gets into unusual commotion and turns to the approaching king in wonder (comp. Isaiah 14:16).
Especially the kings already there in the kingdom of the dead, the colleagues of the Babylonian, are in commotion. ψτΰιν (Isaiah 26:14; Isaiah 26:19) are the lax, nerveless, powerless, who have no body, and thus no life-power more, who are only outlines, shades. The word is without article, likely because not all ψτΰιν, but only a part of them, i.e., all ςϊεγιν (the strong ones, or he-goats) shall be made to rise. These are called he-goats (Isaiah 1:11; Isaiah 34:6), not only because on earth they were the leader-goats of the nation-flocks (Zechariah 10:3; Psalms 68:31; Jeremiah 50:8), but because they are still such. It seems to me that there underlies here the representation of Psa 49:15 (14) : “Like sheep they are laid in the grave; death shall pasture them” [feed on them, Eng. Version.]. Therefore, perhaps it reads ΰψυ, earth, and not the earth, for the latter would be the earth as abode of the living.
In the kingdom of the dead the dead are like a great flock—death pastures them: but those that were he-goats on earth are such also in the under-world. For the latter has no independent life. It only reflects in outline what life accomplished in complete, corporeal existence. Only to the end of Isa 14:10 do the words of the shades extend. For, on the one hand, much discourse does not become them (Knobel), and, on the other, much of what follows does not become the mouths of shades, viz.: the derision of the Babylonian that would retort on themselves, and because Isaiah 14:16 a and 20a they would speak of themselves in the third person. Therefore from Isaiah 14:11 on the author of the Maschal again speaks. [“The ancient versions and all the early writers understand ψτΰιν to mean giants.
Its application to the dead admits of several explanations equally plausible with that of Gesenius (who in the earlier editions of his Lexicon and in his Commentary on Isaiah derives it from ψτΰ, but in the last edition of his Lexicon derives it from ψτδ, to be still or quiet, a supposititious meaning founded on an Arabic analogy); and entitled to the preference according to the modern laws of lexicography, because instead of multiplying, they reduce the number of distinct significations. The shades or spectres of the dead might naturally be conceived as actually larger than the living man, since that which is shadowy and indistinct is commonly exaggerated by the fancy. Or there may be an allusion to the Canaanitish giants who were exterminated by divine command, and might be chosen to represent the whole class of departed sinners. Or, in this case, we may suppose the kings and great ones of the earth to be distinguished from the vulgar dead as giants or gigantic forms. Either of these hypotheses precludes the necessity of finding a new root for a common word, or of denying its plain use elsewhere. As to mere poetical effect, so often made a test of truth, there can be no comparison between the description of the dead as weak or quiet ones, and the sublime conception of gigantic shades or phantoms.” Some comment on the text as if it were “not a mere prosopop�ia or poetical creation of the highest order, but a chapter from the popular belief of the Jews as to the locality, contents and transactions of the unseen world.
Thus Gesenius, in his Lexicon and Commentary, gives a minute topographical description of Sheol, as the Hebrews believed it to exist. With equal truth a diligent compiler might construct a map of hell, as conceived by the English Puritans, from the descriptive portions of Paradise Lost. This kind of exposition is chargeable with a rhetorical incongruity in lauding the creative genius of the poet, and yet making all his grand creations commonplace articles of popular belief. The true view of the matter, as determined both by piety and taste, appears to he that the passage now before us comprehends two elements, and only two: religious verities or certain facts, and poetical embellishments. It may not he easy to distinguish clearly between these—but it is only between these that we are able or have any occasion to distinguish. The admission of a tertium quid in the shape of superstitious fables is as false in rhetoric as in theology.” J.
A. A.]
5. Thy pomp——of the pit.Isaiah 14:11-15. The contrasts between what the Babylonian would be and what he now is are here set forth. The pomp he prepared for his eyes to see, and the glorious sounds he let his ears hear are swallowed up by hell. His body, once so dearly cared for and couched, has now maggots for a couch and worms for a covering. Passages from Job (Job 7:5; Job 21:26) seem here to present themselves to the Prophet’s mind.
Shining and high was he once, like the morning star; now he is fallen from heaven. δֵ ?ιμֵ ?μ, shining star, is called “son of the morning,” because it seems to emerge out of the morning dawn (comes et alumnus aurorae). “In the southern heavens, when mirrored in the waves of the sea, this planet has a brighter gleam than with us” (Leyrer in Herz.R. Encycl. XIX. p. 563). Tertullian, Gregory the Great, and latterly Stier, with reference to Luke 10:18, have taken the star fallen from heaven for Satan. Hence originates the name Lucifer (Vulgate—although ξַ ?ζָּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ, Job 38:32, is also so rendered), ἑωςφόρος (LXX.). Once he was mighty over the nations—but now he is himself broken and cast to the earth (Isaiah 22:25).
The following And thou hast said,etc. (Isaiah 14:13) seems at first sight to stand in antithesis to what precedes (Isaiah 14:12). But examination shows that Isaiah 14:13-15 belong together. For the ϊεψγ, “thou art brought down,” Isaiah 14:15, corresponds to the ΰςμδ, “I will ascend,” of Isaiah 14:13-14, and Isaiah 14:12 is complete in itself, each clause of it containing a complete antithesis; the lofty star is fallen, the conqueror lies prostrate on the ground. Thus the εְ before ΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δ is not adversative, but simply the copulative: and thou who thoughtst to mount to the heavens must go down to hell. The world-power is by its very nature inimical to God: its aim is to supplant God and put itself in His place. This tendency is indwelling in the world-power derived from its transcendental author, Satan, and is realized in every particular representative.
Thus, then, here the Babylonian expresses his purpose of assuming the highest place, not simply on earth among the lords of the world, but in heaven itself, and that above the stars, which seem here to be conceived of as the residences of the spirits of God, the φαΰεϊ, Job 38:7, and the spheres of their manifestation, according to heathen notions, which very well suit in the mouth of the Babylonian. Let him be enthroned above the stars, and he, too, is “god of hosts.” Let the throne of the potentate be above the stars; then he shall stand on the pinnacle of the sacred mountain of the gods, about which the constellations circle, and which the heathen notions of the Orient represent as in the North. This mountain is variously named by the different nations. It is called Meru (Kailasa, in the direction beyond the Himalaia) by those in India, Alburg by the others; nor does the Olympus of the Greeks stand wholly disconnected herewith. Comp. Rhode,Heil.
Saga des Zendvolkes, p. 229 sq.; Gesenius,Jes. II. p. 516 sqq.; Lassen,Ind. Alterthumskunde I. p. 34 sq.; Movers,Phφn. II. 1, p. 414; Kohut,Jόd. Angelol. u. Daemonol. in den Abhh. f. d.
Kunde des Morgenl., 1866, p. 57.
Many expositors down to Fuerst (Conc. p. 501) and Shegg [J. A. A. states both views without deciding; so also substantially Birks] have been led by the expression δַ ?ψֹ ξεֹ ?ςֵ ?γ to hold that the mountain meant in the text is Zion, as the gathering place of the Israelites, for which they appeal especially to Psalms 48:3. But Zion lay neither to the north of Palestine nor to the north of Jerusalem, nor does the mention of Zion in this sense become the lips of the possessor of the world-power. ιַ ?ψְ ?λָּ ?ϊַ ?ιִ ?ν (remotest corners, Eng. Vers.sides), are the thighs, which (considered from within outwardly), form the extremest boundaries, as well as (regarded in their junction), the extremest points. Thus the word stands for the inmost corner (e.g., of a cave, 1 Samuel 24:4) as well as for the extremest boundary of a land.
Thus Jeremiah 6:22; Jeremiah 25:32 says ιψλϊιΰψυ (sides, coasts of the earth); and here Isa. (and after him Ezekiel 38:6; Ezekiel 38:15; Ezekiel 39:2) says φτιοιΧ (extremest, highest North). The expressions “above the stars of God” and “mount of the congregation” signify the loftiest height intensively, “the heights of the clouds” (αξεϊιςα—an expression found only here), in an extensive sense. For as far as the clouds extend (Psalms 35:6; Psalms 57:11; Psalms 108:5) the dominion of the true God reaches, and everywhere the clouds are His air chariots and air thrones (Isaiah 19:1; Psalms 97:2; Psalms 104:3; Daniel 7:13). If, then, the Babylonian reigns in the loftiest heights and every where, he has become like the highest God. But thereby he has supplanted the highest God: for two cannot at once occupy the highest place. And this, as remarked above, is the aim of Satan and of his earthly sphere of power, the world-power, which culminates in Antichrist (Daniel 11:36; 2 Thessalonians 2:3 sq.).
This tendency of the world-power explains how, not only heathen, but now and then also Jewish and Christian princes, have laid claim to divine honors, or at least have suffered such to be paid them. Curtius (VIII. 5) praises the Persians because: non pie solum, sed etiam prudenter reges suos inter Deos colunt. In inscriptions Persian kings are explicitly called ἔκγονοιθεῶν, ἐκγένουςθεῶν, and even θεοί. Comp. Hengstenberg,Introd. to the O. Test.
I. [p. 124 sqq. of the German Ed.]. This is well known in regard to the Roman Emperors. Such deification had its extremest illustration in the case of Diocletian, who made himself an object of divine worship as a representative of the highest God. Comp. Alb. Vogel,Prof., Der Kaiser Diocletian, ein Vortrag, Gotha, 1857.
Herod let himself be called God, and had to suffer dearly for that assumption of honor such as belongs to God alone (Acts 12:21 sqq.). In Christian Europe, too, there have not been wanting instances of such heathenish adulation of princes. See under Doctrinal and Ethical remarks below.
Isaiah 14:15 expresses, in contrast with the pretensions of the Babylonian, what his actual fate shall be. [See above in Text. and Gram.]
6. They that see——with cities.Isaiah 14:16-21. “They that see” are not the denizens of hell, for they have before them the dead as an unburied corpse. The underlying thought of the passage is, however, that the sins of the deceased are enumerated (Isaiah 14:16-17), and his fate is designated as their merited punishment. Thus it says, “they that see thee,” i.e. they that see thee lying an unburied corpse look upon thee. Because he destroyed the rest of countries, he himself now finds no rest in the grave. Because he made a desert of the fruitful land (ϊαμ to be taken in this sense here in contrast with ξγαψ, comp. on Isaiah 13:11), he lies himself a deserted carcase; because he showed no pity to prisoners, he is himself pitilessly dealt with.
I do not think it probable that the following words are to be ascribed to others than the ψΰιν, those seeing thee, Isaiah 14:16, e.g. to the Prophet. The internal connection with Isaiah 14:16-17 is too close. “Is this the man,” says Isaiah 14:16? What kind of man? Why just that one who, according to Isaiah 14:19, lies as a trampled carcase. Then Isaiah 14:22, what the Prophet says in the name of the Lord, comes in all the more emphatically as confirming this. It is then the subjects of the king that remark, that whereas all other kings lie in state in the tombs of their ancestors (comp. 2 Kings 21:18, 2 Chronicles 33:20) their king is cast away far from his grave (ξִ ?ο=procul, Jeremiah 48:45; Lamentations 4:9).
But he is cast away as a despised branch. When trees are felled, or pruned, many a small branch, which compared to the whole tree is worthless, is cast aside and trampled in the mud.
Most expositors in explaining the following words take μְ ?αֻ ?ωׁ as part. pass. But it seems to me that then the two following participles appear very superfluous. For what does it amount to to describe the Chaldean as covered with the slain that are thrust through and carried down to the pit? It is otherwise if, with Aqu., Theod., Luther, Fuerst (conc.), and others, we take μְ ?αֻ ?ωׁ as substantive. Then it is said that the corpse of the Chaldean is cast away, not only as a despised branch, but also as the garment of the slain who were thrust through with the sword and buried. For were they thrust through with a sword, then, too, the garment would be cut into holes, and at least spotted with blood, and if they are buried, it is explained how their garment comes into the hands of others.
When the dead are buried on the field of battle, their clothes are taken off them, but those that are torn and cut in holes and smeared with blood, are cast away, while those unharmed are retained as valuable booty. “The stones of the pit” cannot be the stones of a grave on the top of the earth. For neither the rock-hewn grave, nor a walled-up tomb, nor a grave covered with stones to avoid the trouble of shoveling up a mound, has any meaning in this connection; though it may be said by the way, that heaping up stones is no less troublesome than shoveling up a mound. Buried in general is the chief thing. But there is only one αּ ?εֹ ?ψ, pit, that has stones under all circumstances. It is the widening and deepening of the grave (ωְׁ ?ΰεֹ ?μ see Isaiah 14:15), that is on the surface. This is in the interior of the earth.
This interior is any way closed about by the ςַ ?ξּ ?εּ ?ψִ ?ιν, pillars, (Job 9:6), ξְ ?λεֹ ?πִ ?ινfoundations, (Psalms 104:5) of the earth; but these are the mountains (comp. Proverbs 7:25) which are thence called “strong foundations of the earth” Micah 6:2. But that the foundations or the roots of the earth consist of rock was known to the ancients as well as to us. The king, as an unburied, thrown away corpse, shall not be reunited in the grave with those other dead which, according to Isaiah 14:19, are buried.—The king destroyed his land by despotism and wars, and sacrificed his subjects in masses. Thus, not only himself, but his entire dynasty shall be destroyed. The name of his race shall become extinct as godless.
To this end his seed must be slain. The people themselves demand it. They resolve that this generation shall not be raised up to possess the land and fill it with cities. Building cities contributes to security, the establishment of dominion, the interests of trade, and the cultivation of the ground. A builder of cities must ever be a mighty man. There is no need, therefore, to change ςָ ?ψִ ?ιν, as some would do, to ςָ ?ψִ ?φִ ?ιν (Ewald), ςִ ?ιִּ ?ιν (Hitzig), ςָ ?γִ ?ιν (Meier).
On the other hand one must be careful not to press all the particular traits of this prophecy. What we said above concerning the ideal coloring of prophecy is appropriate also here.
7. For I will——saith the Lord of hosts.Isaiah 14:22-23. These are words of the Prophet which he speaks in the name of Jehovah. Therefore the word of God constitutes the, formal conclusion of the prophecy, the Prophet resuming the thread of discourse and keeping it to the end. He confirms thereby the words of the people by giving them a general and more comprehensive direction. What they had said only against the royal race is changed to a denunciation of punishment against the kingdom of Babylon in general.
Its cities shall become the possession (Job 17:11; Obadiah 1:17) of the porcupine (Isaiah 34:11; Zephaniah 2:14), and, (in consequence of the ruin of the embankments of the Euphrates), swampy marshes (Isaiah 35:7; Isaiah 41:18; Isaiah 42:15). By the porcupine appears to be meant the echinus aquatica, which was found of unusual size (according to Strabo, Isaiah 16:1) on the islands of the Euphrates. Comp. Bochart,Hieroz. II., p. 454 sqq.
Footnotes:labor.
unrest.
which was wrought by thee.
raise.
Or, taunting speech.
upon.
Or, exactress of gold.
oppression.
Heb. a stroke without removing.
trod down.
by persecution without sparing.
Or, The grave.
spectres, or giants.
Heb. leaders.
Or, great goats.
answer.
Thou art.
Or, O day star.
subdue.
And yet.
saidst.
Only.
art.
remotest corners.
Or, did not let his prisoners loose homewards.
in state.
despised.
named.
And.
issue and offspring.
porcupine.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 13:2-13. The prophecy concerning the day of the Lord has its history. It appears first in the form of the announcement of a scourge of locusts (Joel); then it becomes an announcement of human war-expeditions and sieges of cities. Finally it becomes a message that proclaims the destruction of the earth and of its companions in space. But from the first onward, the last particular is not wanting: only at first it appears faintly.
In Joe 2:10, one does not know whether the discourse is concerning an obscuration of the heavenly bodies occasioned only by the grasshoppers or by higher powers. But soon (Joe 3:4; Joe 3:20) this particular comes out more definitely. In the present passage of Isaiah it presses to the foreground. In the New Testament (Matthew 24:29; Mark 13:24 sq.; Luke 21:25) it takes the first and central place. We observe clearly that the judgment on the world is accomplished in many acts, and is yet one whole; and as on the other hand nature, too, is itself one whole, so, according to the saying: “whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it” (1 Corinthians 12:26), the catastrophes on earth have their echo in the regions above earth.
2. On Isaiah 13:4 sqq. “God cannot do otherwise than punish accumulated wickedness. But He overthrows violence and crime, and metes out to tyrants the measure they have given to others, for He gives to them a master that the heathen shall know that they too are men (Ps. 9:21; Psalms 11:5).”—Cramer.[On 13 Isa 13:3. “It cannot be supposed that the Medes and Persians really exulted, or rejoiced in God or in His plans.—But they would exult as if it were their own plan, though it would be really the glorious plan of God. Wicked, men often exult in their success: they glory in the execution of their purposes; but they are really accomplishing the plans of God, and executing His great designs.”—Barnes.]
[On Isaiah 13:9. “The moral causes of the ruin threatened are significantly intimated by the Prophet’s calling the people of the earth or land its sinners. As the national offences here referred to, Vitringa enumerates pride (Isaiah 13:11; Isaiah 14:11; Isaiah 47:7-8), idolatry (Jeremiah 50:38), tyranny in general (Isaiah 14:12; Isaiah 14:17), and oppression of God’s people in particular (Isaiah 47:6).”—J. A. Alexander.]
3. On Isaiah 13:19 sqq. Imperiti animi, etc. “Unlearned minds when they happen on allegories, can hold no certain sense of Scripture. And unless this Papal business had kept me to the simple text of the Bible, I had become an idle trifler in allegories like Jerome and Origen. For that figurative speech has certain allurements by which minds seek to dispose of difficulties. … The true allegory of this passage is concerning the victory of conscience over death. For, the law is Cyrus, the Turk, the cruel and mighty enemy that rises up against the proud conscience of justitiaries who confide in their own merits.
These are the real Babylon, and this is the glory of Babylon, that it walks in the confidence of its own works. When, therefore, the law comes and occupies the heart with its terrors, it condemns all our works in which we have trusted, as polluted and very dung. Once the law has laid bare this filthiness of our hearts and works, there follows confusion, writhing, and pains of parturition; men become ashamed, and that confidence of works ceases and they do those things which we see now-a-days: he that heretofore has lived by confidence of righteousnesss in a monastery, deserts the monkish life, casts away to ashes all glory of works, and looks to the gratuitous righteousness and merit of Christ, and that is the desolation of Babylon. The ostriches and hairy creatures that remain are Eck, Cochleus and others, who do not pertain to that part of law. They screech, they do not speak with human voice, they are unable to arouse and console any afflicted conscience with their doctrine. My allegories, which I approve, are of this sort, viz., which shadow forth the nature of law and gospel.” Luther.4.
On Isaiah 13:21 sqq. “There the Holy Spirit paints for thee the house of thy heart as a deserted, desolate Babylon, as a loathsome cesspool, and devil’s hole, full of thorns, nettles, thistles, dragons, spukes, kobolds, maggots, owls, porcupines, etc., all of which is nothing else than the thousandfold devastation of thy nature, in as much as into every heart the kingdom of Satan, and all his properties have pressed in, and all and every sin, as a fascinating serpent-brood, have been sown and sunk into each one, although not all sins together become evident and actual in every one’s outward life.”—Joh. Arndt’s Informatorium biblicum, § 7.
5. On Isaiah 14:1-2. “Although it seems to me to be just impossible that I could be delivered from death or sin, yet it will come to pass through Christ. For God here gives us an example; He will not forsake His saints though they were in the midst of Babylon.”—Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.6. On Isaiah 14:4 sqq. “Magna imperia fere nihil sunt quam magnae injuriae.Ad generum Cereris sine caede et sanguine pauci
Descendunt reges et sicca mente tyranni.—Luther.Impune quidvis facere id est regem esse.”—Sallust.Among the Dialogi mortuorum of Lucian of Samosata the thirteenth is between Diogenes and Alexander the Great. This dialogue begins with the words: “Τίτοῦτο, ὦἈλέξανδρε, τέθνηκαςκαὶσὺ, ὥσπερἡμεῖσἅπαντες;” thereupon the contrast is ironically set forth between what Alexander was, as one given out to be a son of the gods, and so recognized by men, and possessor of all highest human glories, and what he is at present. It is, as is well known, doubtful whether Lucian really was acquainted with the Scriptures. See Planck, Lucian and Christianity in Stud. u. Krit., 1851, IV. p. 826 sqq. Comp. also Schrader, die Hφllenfahrt der Istar., 1874.
7. On Isaiah 14:4 sqq. ”Omni genera figurarum utitur ad confirmandos et consolandos suos, ut simul sit conjuncta summa theologia cum summa rhetorica.”—Luther.8. On Isaiah 14:12 sqq. As early as the LXX. this passage seems to have been understood of Satan. It points that way that they change the second person into the third; πῶςἐξέπεσεν, etc. At least they were so understood.
See Jerome, who thereby makes the fine remark: “Unde ille cecidit per superbiam, vos ascendatis per humilitatem.” But Luther says: “Debet nobis insignis error totius papatus, qui hunc textum de casu angelorum accepit, studia literarum et artium deccndi commendare tamquam res theologo maxime necessarias ad tractationem sacrarum literarum.”9. On Isaiah 14:13-14. “The Assyrian monarch was a thorough Eastern despot … rather adored as a god than feared as a man.” Layard’s Discoveries amongst the ruins of Nineveh and Babylon, 1853, New York, p. 632. “In the heathen period the pre-eminence of the German kings depended on their descent from the gods, as among the Greeks” (Gervinus, Einleit. in d. Gesch. d. 19 Iahrh., 1853, p. 14). Christian Thomasius, in his Instit. jurispr. divinae, dissert. pro�mialis, p. 16, calls the princes “the Gods on earth.” In a letter from Luxemburg, after the departure of the Emperor Joseph II., it is said (in a description of the journey, of which a sheet lies before me): “we have had the good fortune to see our earthly god.” Belani, Russian Court Narratives, New Series, III. Vol., p. Isaiah 125: “The Russian historian Korampzin says in the section where he describes the Russian self-rule: “The Autocrat became an earthly god for the Russians, who set the whole world in astonishment by a submissiveness to the will of their monarch which transcends all bounds.”
II. TO ASSYRIA AND TO THE NATIONS BY ASSYRIA, , MOAB, SYRIA, AND ARAM-EPHRAIM, AND EGYPT Isaiah 14:24 to Isaiah 20:6a) Prophecy against Assyria Isaiah 14:24-27 We have explained above why the prophecy against Assyria occupies the second place and after the one against Babylon. A prophecy against Assyria could not be omitted. It was necessary as a background to the prophecies that follow. But it needed only to be a short one. For the Prophet is sensible that the power of Assyria is shattered by the overthrow of Sennacherib—therefore fore that, in a prophetic sense, it is in principle a thing done away.
But to Assyria and the other nations named in the superscription above, the Prophet does not proclaim merely temporal destruction. He sets before all more or less plainly the prospect of partaking of the Messianic salvation of the future.
____________________
24 The Lord of hosts hath sworn, saying,
Surely as I have thought, so shall it come to pass;
And as I have purposed, so shall it stand:
25 That I will break the Assyrian in my land,
And upon my mountains tread him under foot:
Then shall his yoke depart from off them,
And his burden depart from off their shoulders.
26 This is the purpose that is purposed upon the whole earth:
And this is the hand that is stretched out upon all the nations.
27 For the Lord of hosts hath purposed, and who shall disannul it?And his hand is stretched out, and who shall turn it back?
TEXTUAL AND Isa_14:24. γִּ ?ξָּ ?δ in the sense of animo componere, “to dispose in thought,” only again Isaiah 10:7; moreover the Prophet seems to have had in mind in this place, Numbers 33:56.——The Perfect διϊδ expresses the coincidence of the realization with the thought. No sooner said than done, i.e., as God conceives a thought, it is also (as to principle) realized. The following imperf. ϊχεν has then the meaning that what is, as to principle, realized, must arise, set up as actual, outward circumstance. Before ϊχεν the λּ ?ο is not repeated, but διΰ is used, evidently for the sake of variety. The thought is essentially the same. It is a sort of Anacoluthon——διδ and χεν are used as in Isaiah 7:7; Isaiah 8:10.
Isaiah 14:25. The infin. μωׁ ?αψ depends on the oath-clause Isaiah 14:24 b; what is determined shall be fulfilled frangendo Assyrios, etc. μωׁ ?αψ is therefore inf. modalis or gerundivus.——With ΰαερπε (comp. Isaiah 14:19; Isaiah 63:6; Isaiah 63:18) the language returns from the infinitive construction to the verbum fin., according to a frequent Hebrew usage.——The suffixes in ξςμιδν and ωׁ ?λξε have nothing to which they can relate in the words of Isa 14:24-25.—Moreover from Isaiah 14:4 onwards, Israel is not referred to. True, in Isaiah 14:1-2, Israel is likewise spoken of in the third person, and with quite similar suffixes (ςμιην Isaiah 14:1, ωׁ ?αιδν ,πβωׂ ?ιδν Isaiah 14:2); but then Isaiah 14:3 intervenes, in which Israel is spoken of in the second person. It must, therefore, be assumed that the suffixes Isaiah 14:25 refer back, not only over the entire Maschal (4–23), but also away over Isaiah 14:3 to Isaiah 14:1-2, and that these verses originated, not at the same time with the rest of the prophecy against Babylon, but much earlier. All this is very improbable. I cannot therefore agree with Vitringa and Drechsler, but must side with the view, that the present verses are a fragment of a greater prophecy for Israel of a comforting nature, which, however, cannot be identical with 7–12 because in these Assyria is regarded in a totally different light from that which appears in the present verses.
Isaiah 14:27. ιָ ?τֵ ?ψ comp. Isaiah 8:10. [“This has been variously translated “scatter” (LXX.), “weaken” (Vulg.), “avert” (Luth.), “dissolve” (Calvin), “change” (J. D. “Michaelis”), “hinder” (Gesen.), break (Ewald [Naegelsb.]); but its true sense is that given in the Eng. Version and by De Wette (vereiteln) [see Fuerst Lex.]. The meaning of the last clause is not simply that his hand is stretched out, as most writers give it, but that the hand stretched out is his, as appears from the article prefixed to the participle πθειδ. (See Gesen. § 108, 3. Ewald, § 560.—J. A. A.].
AND 1. Whoever reads the prophecies of Isaiah against the heathen nations with attention, must feel surprise that in them, there is relatively little more said about Assyria. After occupying in 7–12 the foreground, it retreats in 13 and onward into the background. On the other hand Babylon now stands front and the Prophet recognizes in it the representative of the perfectly developed world-power that has attained to the exclusive possession of dominion. Now the question arises: how are Assyria and Babylon related? What becomes of Assyria if now Babylon is called the world-power?
How is it to be explained that according to Isaiah 10:24-27 Israel at the end of days is delivered out of bondage to Assyria, if at that end-period not Assyria but Babylon stands at the summit of the world-power? These questions are solved by the short section before us, Isaiah 14:24-27. It appears therein that in the immediate future Assyria must be destroyed, that, therefore, Israel may expect deliverance from the yoke of Assyria in a brief season, but that therewith Israel is neither delivered forever, nor is the world-power for ever broken up. But Babylon walks in the footsteps of Assyria; and if in 7–12 the world-power appeared solely under the name of Assyria, it happened only because the Prophet could not then distinguish that which followed Assyria from Assyria itself, and therefore comprehended it under one name.
2. The Lord of hosts——turn it back.Isaiah 14:24-27. Drechsler attaches great weight to the fact that the phrase “the Lord of hosts hath sworn,” is preceded by a thrice repeated “saith the Lord of hosts,” Isaiah 14:22-23. He says the former is only a climax of these latter. He lays stress, too, on the fact that the thrice repeated “Lord of hosts” of Isaiah 14:22-23 has its correlative in the double use of the same in Isaiah 14:24; Isaiah 14:27, and that the same words which in Isaiah 14:23 “conclude the proper body of the discourse, in Isaiah 14:24 begin the appendix.” He, therefore, regards Isaiah 14:24-27 as an integral part of the discourse that extends through Isaiah 13:1 to Isaiah 14:27, and therefore as having originated at the same time. But that is impossible.
The words Isaiah 14:24-27 must be older than, the catastrophe of Sennacherib before Jerusalem, for they foretell it. But the prophecy against Babylon Isaiah 13:1 to Isaiah 14:23 must be much more recent, for it is the product of a much higher and, therefore, of a much later prophetic knowledge [? Tr.]. If, too, in the points named there appears a certain correspondence, yet it remains very much a question whether that is intentional. The expressions in question, so far as they correspond, occur exceedingly often in all sorts of connections.
The expression “the Lord hath sworn” is especially frequent in Deuteronomy, but always with the Dative of the person whom the oath concerns (Deuteronomy 1:8; Deuteronomy 2:14; Deuteronomy 4:31, etc.). In Isaiah it occurs again, Isaiah 45:23; Isaiah 54:9; Isaiah 62:8.—The contents of the oath is: “as I have thought … so shall it stand.”
[“From the distant view of the destruction of Babylon, the Prophet suddenly reverts to that of the Assyrian host, either for the purpose of making one of these events accredit the prediction of the other, or for the purpose of assuring true believers, that while God had decreed the deliverance of the people from remoter dangers, He would also protect them from those at hand.—On the formula of swearing vide supra, v. 9.—Kimchi explains διϊδ to be a preterite used for a future, and this construction is adopted in most versions, ancient and modern. It is, however, altogether arbitrary and in violation of the only safe rule as to the use of tenses, viz., that they should have their proper and distinctive force, unless forbidden by the context, or the nature of the subject; which is very far from being the case here.——The true force of the preterite and future forms, as here employed, is recognized by Aben Ezra, who explains the clause to mean that according to God’s purpose, it has come to pass and will come to pass hereafter. The antithesis is rendered still more prominent by Jarchi, by whom this verse is paraphrased as follows—‘Thou hast seen, oh Nebuchadnezzar, how the words of the prophets of Israel have been fulfilled in Sennacherib, to break Assyria in my land, and by this thou mayest know that what I have purposed against thee shall also come to pass’ (comp. Ezekiel 31:3-18).—The only objection to this view is that the next verse goes on to speak of the Assyrian overthrow, which would seem to imply that the last clause of this verse (24) as well as the first relates to that event. Another method of expounding the verse, therefore, is to apply διϊδ and ϊχεν to the same events, but in a somewhat different sense,—‘As I intended it has come to pass, and as I purposed, it shall continue.’ The Assyrian power is already broken, and shall never be restored. This strict interpretation of the preterite does not necessarily imply that the prophecy was actually uttered after the destruction of Sennacherib’s army.
Such would indeed be the natural inference from this verse alone: but for reasons which will be explained below, [viz., in comment on Isaiah 14:26.—Tr.] it is more probable that the Prophet merely takes his stand in vision at a point of time between the two events of which he speaks, so that both verbs are really prophetic, the one of a remote the other of a proximate futurity, but for that very reason their distinctive forms should be retained and recognized. Yet the only modern writers who appear to do so in translation are Calvin and Cocceius, who have factum est, and J. D. Michaelis, who has ist geschehen.—J. J. A.
So also substantially Barnes.]
In my land and on my mountain the Lord says. Therefore not in his own land or some other land, but in Palestine the annihilating blow shall fall on Assyria. This evidently points to the overthrow of Sennacherib before Jerusalem (2 Kings 19:35; Isaiah 37:36). Though even after this overthrow Assyria’s power did not at once appear broken, still it was such inwardly and in principle. As much as Nebuchadnezzar after his victory at Carchemish was ruler of the world, though outwardly he had not that appearance (Jeremiah 25), so Assyria, after the Lord had smitten him in his territory, from the view-point of God, and according to inward and divine reality, was broken to pieces and trodden down.—The consequence of that overthrow of Assyria is that Israel shall be freed from his dominion.
The words his yoke shall depart,etc. sound essentially the same as Isaiah 10:27. Other resemblances are of Isa 14:24 to Isaiah 7:5; Isaiah 7:7; Isaiah 8:10; Isaiah 10:7; Isaiah 14:25 to Isaiah 9:3; Isaiah 10:27; Isaiah 14:26 to Isaiah 9:11; Isaiah 9:16; Isaiah 9:20; Isaiah 10:4; Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 14:27 to Isaiah 8:10. But much as Isaiah 14:24-27 remind one of chapts. 7–12, there is still this essential difference, that in the last named chapters there is no where a prophecy of an overthrow of Assyria in the holy land itself. In general the gaze of the Prophet in those chapters is directed to a much more remote distance. There he looks on Assyria still as representative of the world-power generally, and thus, too, Assyria’s overthrow coincides for him with the overthrow of the world-power in general by the Messiah. Here we encounter a look into the immediate future.
It must belong to the time before the defeat of Sennacherib. Therefore our verses cannot belong originally to the prophecy against Babylon. [See above in Text. and Gram.].
When the Prophet (Isaiah 14:26) declares that the catastrophe predicted for Assyria is significant for the whole earth, and for all nations, he does it by reason of the connection that exists between all acts of the Godhead. That defeat of Sennacherib, too, is an integral moment of the decree that the Lord has determined concerning the whole earth, and all nations. This counsel of God stands so firm that no power of the world can hinder its execution; the hand which the Lord has stretched out to do this execution nothing can turn aside from its doing.
AND ETHICAL1. How grand is the Prophet’s contemplation of history! How the mighty Assyria shrivels up, which in chapters 7–12, played so great a part! Only a line or so is devoted to it here, “Das macht, es ist gericht, eir Wφrtlein bann es fδllen.” The Prophet knows that Sennacherib’s defeat before Jerusalem is at once the overthrow of the Assyrian world-power, and the deliverance of Israel from his yoke, although Assyria stood yet a hundred years and did harm enough to Judah still (2 Chronicles 33:11). But God always sees the essence of things. What He wills, comes to pass; and when it has happened, perhaps no one knows what that which has come to pass means: only the future makes it plain.
The fruit germ frosted in the blossom, may remain green for days. Only by degrees it becomes yellow, then black, and evidently dead.
[“By this assurance (Isaiah 14:24-27) God designed to comfort His people, when they should be in Babylon in a long and dreary captivity. Comp. Psalms 137. And by the same consideration His people may be comforted in all times. His plans shall stand. None can disannul them. No arm has power to resist Him. None of the schemes formed against Him shall ever prosper. Whatever ills, therefore, may befall His people; however thick, gloomy, and sad their calamities may be; and however dark His dispensations may appear, yet they may have the assurance that all His plans are wise, and that they all shall stand.”—Barnes].
Footnotes:it has come to pass.To break.And his is the hand that is stretched out.
b) Prophecies relating to the nations threatened by Assyria, viz.: Philistia, Moab, Syria and Ephraim, Ethiopia and Egypt Isaiah 14:28 to Isaiah 20:61. AGAINST
Isaiah 14:28-32 This short piece was occasioned by an embassy that the Philistines sent to Jerusalem in hypocritical courtesy, after the death of king Ahaz. It contains the most manifold correspondences to chap. 11, so that there can be no doubt about its having a contemporaneous origin. Yet chap. 11, originated before this piece, for the latter evidently leans on the former. It is seen that the young king Hezekiah, immediately on ascending the throne awakened great expectations. That the present piece comes just here, has, may be, its explanation in this, that Isaiah would begin with these western neighbors as the least dangerous. He then passes on to the East to the mightier Moabites, from them he ascends north to the still mightier Syro-Ephraimites, to conclude with the mightiest of all, the Egyptians and Ethiopians of the South. Jeremiah, chap. 47, goes from the Philistines to the Moabites, and then by a round-about to Damascus.
____________________
28 In The Year That King Ahaz Died Was This Burden.
29 Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina,
Because the rod of him that smote thee is broken:
For out of the serpent’s root shall come forth a cockatrice,
And his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent.
30 And the first born of the poor shall feed,
And the needy shall lie down in safety:
And I will kill thy root with famine,
And he shall slay thy remnant.
31 Howl, O gate; cry, O city;
Thou, awhole Palestina, art dissolved:
For there shall come from the north a smoke,
And none shall be alone in his appointed times.
32 What shall one then answer the messengers of the nation?
That the Lord hath founded Zion,
And the poor of His people shall trust in it.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_14:28. ξַ ?ωָׂ ?ΰ see Isaiah 13:1.
Isaiah 14:30. αλεψιγμιν is, so to speak, a superlative of αְּ ?πֵ ?ιγΧ = those on whom the essence of poverty and lowliness is impressed in full, unmitigated power.—To take the basilisk as the subject of ιδψβ (Delitzsch) does too much violence. I [thus, too J. A. A.] take simply ψςα, which is gen. masc., as subject.
Isaiah 14:31. ωַׁ ?ςַ ?ψ metonymy for those assembled in the gates, the ιωְׁ ?αֵ ?ιωַׁ ?ςַ ?ψ Psalms 69:13; hence the feminine construction: comp. ιεֹ ?γֵ ?ςַ λָ ?μΞωַׁ ?ςַ ?ψςַ ?ξִּ ?ι Rth 3:11.—Niph. πξεβ occurs in Isaiah only here. The form is to be regarded here as Inf. absol. Regarding the form comp. Isaiah 59:13; Ewald, § 240, c.——ξεֹ ?ςָ ?γ, (the hordes united at their rendezvous, ξεֹ ?ςֵ ?γ Joel 8:14) is ἄπ. λεγ.——αּ ?εֹ ?γֵ ?γ in Isaiah only here; comp, Hosea 8:8; Psalms 102:8.
Isaiah 14:32. ςָ ?πָ ?δ is according to rule construed with a double Accusative (comp. 1 Samuel 20:10; Micah 6:5; Jeremiah 23:37, etc.). The third pers. sing stands impersonally as is often the case (comp. Isaiah 6:10; Isaiah 7:24; Isaiah 8:4; Isaiah 10:4, etc.).—ηρδ stands often with αְּ of the place whither one flees for refuge (Isaiah 30:2; Psalms 36:8; Judges 9:15, etc.).
AND 1. Philistia is warned against rejoicing at the death of Ahaz. If Ahaz was a serpent, then out of his root (Isaiah 11:1—notice the Messianic reference!) shall proceed a basilisk and flying dragon (Isaiah 14:29). Israel shall pasture in peace; Philistia perish by poverty and care (Isaiah 14:30). From the northern quarter the enemy shall invade the land, scathing and burning (Isaiah 14:31). But to the embassy, in regard to the matters they sought to spy out, the short, haughty answer shall be given: Zion is Jehovah’s foundation, and in this the needy of His people find a sure refuge (Isaiah 14:32).
2. In the year——thy remnant.Isaiah 14:28-30. The year of Ahaz’s death Isaiah 728 B. C. The Philistines, according to 2 Chronicles 28:18, had possessed themselves of territory belonging to Israel. They had made a conquest in the low country (ωְׁ ?τֵ ?μָ ?δ) and in the south-land (πֶ ?βֶ ?α) of the cities Bethshemesh, Ajalon, Gederoth, Shocho, Timna and Gimzo, and dwelt in them. But of Hezekiah it is related (2 Kings 18:8): “He smote the Philistines, even unto Gaza, and the borders thereof, from the tower of the watchmen to the fenced city.” He had, therefore, at last conquered back the lost territory. This is all that the historical books offer to us concerning the times of Ahaz and Hezekiah.
From Isaiah 14:32 it is seen that after the death of Ahaz the Philistines sent ambassadors to Jerusalem. Perhaps the ostensible object of this embassage was neighborly consideration: they would offer condolence. But in reality they were to sound the state of affairs. [See below comment of J. A. A., etc., at Isaiah 14:32.--Tr.] Isaiah knows this very well, and gives them an answer that, on the one hand, befitted their perfidy, and, on the other, the standpoint of a genuine representative of the Theocracy. That is not saying that Isaiah gave this answer in the name of the government.
He gave it as Prophet, i.e., he uttered it like he published his other prophecies; whether publicly or to the ears of the embassy, or before a few witnesses, is a matter of indifference. His words concern primarily the rulers themselves. He says to them how, as the representatives of the people of God, they ought to reply. At any rate, he knew that his words would go to the right address, i.e., as well to the government in Jerusalem as to the Philistine ambassadors.
The introductory words (Isaiah 14:28) are the same as Isaiah 6:1. In our passage they have evidently the sense that Ahaz had already died. This appears from what follows. Rejoice notetc.—These words recall 2 Samuel 1:20, the lament of David over the death of Saul and his sons. For there it reads: “Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Askelon; lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice, lest the daughters of the uncircumcised triumph” (comp. Micah 1:10).
Ahaz was as little as Saul a king after God’s heart. That did not hinder the Philistines from rejoicing at the death of either of their kings. To either event that occasioned sorrow to Israel there was attached joyful hope for them. Though so far as we know, Ahaz did them no harm, but was rather conquered by them; yet they might hope that under his young successor their interests would be still more fostered. Therefore Isaiah warns them against overflowing with too much joy—joy that would fill all Philistia. He describes the subject of the joy to be: because the rod of him that smote thee is broken.—As Ahaz did not smite the Philistines, but was much more smitten by them, we must not regard him as the rod that smote, but the kingdom of Judah in general.
David broke their power (2 Samuel 5:17 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1; Isaiah 21:15 sqq.). Although from that period they were still dangerous enemies, yet the time of their superiority was past. It is related of Solomon (1 Kings 4:21) and of Jehoshaphat (2 Chronicles 17:11) that the Philistines were tributary to them. Uzziah leveled the walls of Gath, Jabneh and Ashdod (2 Chronicles 26:6). The government of Ahaz was weak even toward the Philistines. Might they not hope that one still weaker would succeed Ahaz, and that thus the staff that had once smitten them would be entirely broken?
For this reason we take ωׁ ?αθξλκ (comp. Isaiah 9:12; Isaiah 10:20) to be rather: “the staff that smote thee” than “the staff of him that smote thee.” Ahaz, though having no staff that smote, was, as king of Judah, a part of that staff that had smitten them.
But the Prophet destroys the hope of the Philistines. He says in advance, that out of the root of the serpent shall proceed a basilisk and a conquering dragon. The expression ωׁ ?ψωׁ, root, applied to the serpent is strange. But it is to be explained as an allusion to the “root of Jesse” (Isaiah 11:1; Isaiah 11:10). Perhaps there lies in the πָ ?ηָ ?ωׁ even an allusion to the name ΰηζ, and at the same time a reminder of the serpent that Dan was to be, according to Genesis 49:17, and whose realization we find in Samson. φֶ ?τַ ?ς, basilisk (which occurs only here) evidently means the same as φִ ?τְ ?ςִֹ ?πι which Isaiah 11:8, uses in the same discourse of which the expression “root” has reminded us. The expression must any way be meant as something stronger compared with “serpent,” as, on the other hand, ωׂ ?ψσξςετσ “flying dragon” (found again only Isaiah 30:6; comp.
Herod, 2:75; 3:109 and Gesen.in loc.) is meant to express something stronger than φֶ ?τַ ?ς. By the “basilisk,” the Prophet any way means Hezekiah; very likely by the “flying dragon,” he means the Messiah. For what is said Isaiah 14:30 of the happy circumstances of Israel, plainly recalls the representation of the Messianic salvation Isaiah 11:4 sqq.——But if the Prophet compares the typical and anti-typical king of Judah to serpents, we must consider that they must be serpents only for the hated enemies. God says of Himself that He will be the plague and destruction of death (Hosea 13:14).
First-born of the lowly it says Isaiah 14:30; not the first-born.” I do not think that the αλψιγμιν here are the Jews. The Prophet lives quite in the sphere of the ideas of chap. 11. There it is said (Isaiah 14:4 sqq.), that the Messiah shall judge the lowly (γμιν) with righteousness, and that wild and tame beasts shall pasture peacefully together. In our passage the Prophet unites both these thoughts, in that he draws from the one his subject and from the other his predicate. But, according to Isaiah 11:4, he means the lowly and poor in an individual sense. He is not thinking of political lowliness of the nation.
It shall be a sign of the glory and blessedness of His kingdom, that people, that otherwise were poor and wretched, shall move in rich pasture and rest there securely. He means of course Jewish poor, but not the Jews as the poorest people. It appears to me, moreover, that Isaiah has before his mind a passage from Job (Job 18:12-13) where it says: “Be hunger his power, and destruction stand ready at his side; devour the members of his skin, devour his members the first-born of death.”
In contrast with the rich pasture that the poor of Israel shall find under their king, the Messiah, and in contrast with the glorious fruit that the root of the royal house of David shall produce, the Philistines shall be destroyed to the root of their existence by hunger and want, yea, the last remnant of them shall be strangled by this grim enemy.
3. Howl, O gate——trust in it.Isaiah 14:31-32. The Prophet describes in Isaiah 14:31, how Philistia will suffer and feel the destruction, which, according to 29b and 30b, is in prospect. The gates shall howl (comp. Isaiah 13:6; Jeremiah 48:20) and the entire population of the cities shall cry (comp. Ezekiel 21:17) the whole land shall dissolve in anguish and fear, i.e., shall be without courage, counsel, defence (comp.
Exodus 15:15; Joshua 2:9; Joshua 2:24; ?????Joshua 10:18; Joshua 13:7). The reason for these utterances is assigned: for there shall come from the north a smoke.—It is plain enough that neither clouds of dust nor fire borne in advance of troops can be intended here. For neither of these would occasion terror like the smoke of towns already set on fire. Most expositors understand the Assyrian to be meant by the approaching enemy. But that is much too narrow a construction. According to Isaiah 14:29 b. and 30b. the Lord announces Himself, and His anointed as the enemy that will destroy Philistia.
And if Isaiah 14:30 a. Messianic salvation is proclaimed to Israel, then the reverse of this for the Philistines is naturally Messianic destruction. But Philistia will have, too, its part to endure in the great judgments that the Lord will bring on the world of nations, and by which He will redeem His people. In Isaiah 11:14, which is so nearly allied to our passage, the Philistines are, in fact, expressly named among the nations out of whose power the Lord will deliver His people. Therefore, the Prophet means here the final judgment on Philistia, though, of course, this does not exclude that this final judgment has its preliminary stages, and that one of these, too, may be an Assyrian invasion, to which, in fact, “from the north” refers. The army of the enemy will be a compact and powerful body—no one runs away, no one strays off (comp.
Isaiah 5:27).
The Prophet having said to the Philistines in general, what the reality of the future will be in contrast with the hopes of their malicious rejoicing, comes at last (Isaiah 14:32) to speak of the special fact that prompted him to this prophetic declaration. Ambassadors had come who ostensibly would manifest friendly sympathy, but, in fact, spy out how matters stood in Jerusalem. The Prophet knows that. It is important to give them an answer that is worthy of the Theocracy. Whether or not the powers that were were competent and willing to do this we know not. Any way the Prophet of Jehovah considered it as belonging to his office to express what, from the genuine theocratic point of view, ought to be said to these ambassadors.—–ξּ ?μֹ ?ΰλι– ,βει, messengers of a nation, stands significantly without article. βει, nation, designates here very expressly a heathen people.
He says therefore: what sort of answer have messengers of a heathen people to get, who come with such a purpose as these Philistines now do? None other than the curt: Jehovah founded Zion, (Isaiah 28:16) and therefore the wretched of His people (Isaiah 10:2) can hide themselves with confidence in this divine foundation. [“The very absence of the article (i.e., with βει) implies that the expression (“messengers of a nation”) is indefinite, and that the whole sense meant to be conveyed is this, that such may be the answer given to the inquiries made from any quarter.”—J. A. A. This judicious remark may suffice to call attention to the very slender foundation there is for the conjecture which yet gives much of the coloring to the foregoing comment. If no special Philistine delegation is meant by Isaiah, then all that is said about pretended condolence, malicious satisfaction, spying, etc., is misplaced fancy.
Much as we may desire to detect the historic facts connected with prophecy, we must be content without them if they are not supplied. The tendency of modern exposition is as much to license in conjecturing the historical basis of prophecy, as formerly it was to license in detecting the fulfilment of it. On Isaiah 14:29, J. A. A., comments: “All interpreters agree that the Philistines are here spoken of, as having recently escaped from the ascendancy of some superior power, but at the same time threatened with a more complete subjection.” Everything historically specific, beyond this obviously sure statement, is conjecture with no broader foundation than that pointed out above. Another commentater (Dr.
B. Neteler,Das Buch Isaias—mit Berόcksichtigung—der auf seinen Inhalt sick bezieenden assyrischen Inschriften erklδrt, Mόnster, 1876), who reads the text in the light of recent interpretations of Assyrian inscriptions identifies the reference of the symbols as follows: “The staff that repeatedly smote the Philistines very seriously was Sargon. The basilisk proceeding out of the root of the serpent is Sennacherib, who, in his third expedition, conquered various Philistine cities. The flying dragon is Esarhaddon, who, in the beginning of his reign, undertook an expedition toward the sea coasts, and whose war against Egypt was doubtless a considerable burden for Philistia.” “The messengers of the nation (Isaiah 14:32) that came on like a devastating fire, and overcame the nation of Philistines with little trouble, must acknow ledge that worldly-power comes to grief against Zion. Sargon and Sennacherib had that experience." Birks makes the rod = the serpent = Tiglath-Pileser, etc.—Tr.].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 14:32. It is to be remarked here that Isaiah holds out as a shield, the truth that the Lord has founded Zion. But when the Jews founded on this truth a wicked hope, in that they saw therein a passport for every sort of godless-ness, then it is said: “Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of the Lord, are these.” Jeremiah 7:4.
Footnotes:all Philistia.the rod that smote.Or, adder.
basilisk.comes.Or, he shall not be alone.
no straggler in his armies.Or, assemblies.Or, betake themselves unto it.
2. AGAINST MOAB
Isaiah 15, 16Concerning the relation of Moab to the Israelites, comp. the remarks prefixed to Jeremiah 48. The present prophecy is a double address. For it consists of an older discourse (Isaiah 15:1 to Isaiah 16:12), which, as appears, was not published immediate ly on its origination, but was given publicity by Isaiah only when he could announce definitely that the beginning of its fulfilment would occur after three years. Some have therefore conceived the notion that the older address is not Isaianic. Koppe, Augusti, Bauer, Berthold, have regarded Jeremiah as the Author, which is quite impossible. Hitzig (comp. his Des Propheten Jonas Orakel iiber Moab, Heidelberg, 1831,) even holds that Jonah is the author, and has found followers (Knobel, Maureb, etc.,) in this singular view, whereas Hendewebk decidedly controverts him.
It is regarded as decisive for the view that this is not Isaianic, that it betrays a tender-hearted sympathy for an otherwise hated foreign nation. But this sympathy is not as tender-hearted as it appears. It rather serves as a measure by which to estimate the fearfulness of the judgment. Further appeal is made to a number of " peculiar, and in a measure, singular thoughts and turns.” Some of these are that mourning garments are put on in the street (Isaiah 15:3)—yet Hezekiah went into the temple clothed in sackcloth, and a deputation from him to Isaiah went in sackcloth (2 Kings 19:1-2)—; further that crying encircled the land (comp. my comment), Sibma’s vine spread itself over whole regions—-only a bold figure worthy of Isaiah (see the comment)—; its branches make drunk, (which the Prophet does not say, see the comment on Isaiah 16:8), the heart cries for Moab and Hounds like a harp, the tears of the writer bedew Heshbon (also figures quite agreeing with Isaiah’s style). Moreover a number of unexampled phrases are pointed to with doubtful suspicion: ιψγααλι, “ to weep bitterly " (but the expression means something quite different), ξινξωׁ ?ξιϊ, “waters are deserts,” (it means rather: places of springs are loca arida), ωׁ ?ιϊςμ “to set shadows," (it means rather to make the shadow like the night), etc.; further appeal is made to words, forms, meanings, and references that are peculiar to the author of this passage.
All these things rest on misunderstandings; partly they are ἄ ?̔ ?̔παξλεγόμενα, the like of which are to be found in nearly every chapter of Isaiah; partly the Prophet intentionally imitates Moabite forms of speech. At all events, the little peculiarities, which in no case witness directly against Isaiah, and which are natural to such originality as his, are not to be considered in comparison with the great mass of decidedly Isaianic modes of expression which we shall prove in particular below. I therefore hold decidedly that Isaiah is the author.
As regards the time of the composition of Isa 15:1 to Isaiah 16:12, the text seems to me to present two points of limitation. According to these chapters not only Dibon, but also Jahas, Heshbon, Elealeh, Sibmah, Medeba are in the hand of the Moabites. But according to 2 Kings 15:29; 1 Chronicles 5:26, these regions were only depopulated by Tiglath-Pileser, and thus only afterward occupied by the Moabites. That expedition of Tiglath-Pileser, according to universal opinion, occurred in the year 741, thus in the third year of the reign of Ahaz. From Isaiah 16:1 it further appears that at that time the Edomites were still subject to the Jews. This relation was changed under Ahaz.
For, according to 2 Chronicles 28:17, the Edomites during his reign made an incursion into Judah. It is not conceivable that after this time Isaiah gave the Moabites counsel to send tribute from Seba to Jerusalem. For the Edomites would not allow that, and the Moabites who looked for refuge to Edom would never have dared to do so. Unfortunately we are not informed as to the time when that incursion of the Edomites took place. But it occurred in the time of Ahaz, and thus this prophecy Isaiah 15:1 to Isaiah 16:12 must be referred to the period of this king’s reign, and that between the two events 2 Kings 15:29 (1 Chronicles 5:20) and 2 Chronicles 28:17. Unfortunately we do not know which Assyrian king accomplished (or began to accomplish”) Isaiah’s prophecy to the Moabites.
Therefore we cannot know when he subjoined the two concluding verses and published the entire oracle.
The prophecy evidently subdivides into four parts. Thus the old, first prophecy easily subdivides into three sections, of which the first (Isaiah 15:1-9) announces Moab’s terror and flight, the second (Isaiah 16:1-5) the condition of deliverance, the third (Isaiah 16:6-12) Moab’s haughty refusal to fulfil these conditions and his consequent entire ruin. Finally, the later supplement determines definitely the beginning period of the fulfilment (Isaiah 16:13-14).
α) THE OLDER Isaiah 15:1 to Isaiah 16:12a) Moab’s Terror and Flight Isaiah 15:1-91 The Burden of Moab.
Because in the night Ar of Moab is laid waste, and brought to silence;
Because in the night Kir of Moab is laid waste, and 1brouht to silence;
2 He is gone up to Bajith, and to Dibon, the high places, to weep.
Moab shall howl over Nebo, and over Medeba:
On all their heads shall be baldness,
And every beard cut off.
3 In their streets they shall gird themselves with sackcloth:
On the tops of their houses, and in their streets, every one shall howl,
Weeping abundantly.
4 And Heshbon shall cry, and Elealeh:
Their voice shall be heard even unto Jahaz:
Therefore the armed soldiers of Moab shall cry out;
His life shall be grievous unto him.
5 My heart eshall cry out for Moab;
His fugitives shall flee unto Zoar, an heifer of three years old:
For by the mounting up of Luhith with weeping shall they go it up;
For in the way of Horonaim they shall raise up a cry of destruction.
6 For the waters of Nimrim shall be desolate:
For the hay is withered away, the igrass faileth,
There is no green thing.
7 Therefore the abundance they have gotten, and that which they have laid up,
Shall they carry away to the brook of the willows.
8 For the cry is gone around about the borders of Moab;
The howling thereof unto Eglaim,
And the howling thereof unto Beer-elim.
9 For the waters of Dimon shall be full of blood:
For I will bring more upon Dimon,
Lions upon him that escapeth of Moab,
And upon the remnant of the land.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_15:1. λִּ ?ι may of course be made to relate to ξωׂ ?ΰξΧ, and one may find in the latter phrase the sense that is elsewhere expressed by δεֹ ?ι or ΰεֹ ?ιֹ (comp. Isaiah 6:5). But this does not suffice. For ξωׂ ?ΰξΧ is everywhere else nothing but superscription, and is nowhere connected with the beginning of the discourse. As in chaps, 15, 16 there is made a surprisingly frequent use of the particle λִּ ?ι—it occurs nine times in 15, and five times in 16—so, too, the λִּ ?ι of Isaiah 15:1 is surely to be interpreted according to this usage. No where else is Isa. wont to multiply this particle in a surprising way.
It seems to me that he had here a particular aim. Perhaps he imitates Moabite language. The same is the case with μֵ ?ιμ. It must occasion surprise that of the five times that Isaiah uses μֵ ?ιμ (except these he uses μַ ?ιְ ?μָ ?δ) three belong to the chapters on Moab (comp. Isaiah 16:3). In Isaiah 21:11 μֵ ?ιμ occurs, and probably for the sake of variety in the parallelism, perhaps, too, as mimicking the dialect of Edom and as reminiscence of Exo 12:42.
But Isaiah 30:29, the form μֵ ?ιμ occurs as st. constr., and also with allusion to Exodus 12:42. On the monument of king Mesa, in line 15, the night is actually called μֵ ?μָ ?δ (comp. Schlottm. in Stud. and Krit. 1871, Heft. IV., p. 596) from which it appears that the pronunciation with e is Moabitic. It is needless, with Drechsler and others, to take μֵ ?ιμ here as st. constr. This, as Delitzsch says, would give an illogical thought, “in as much as ωֻׁ ?γַּ ?γ and πִ ?γְ ?ξָ ?δ, comp.
Jeremiah 47:5, nearly coincide as to meaning.”—ωֻׁ ?γַּ ?γ, Pual, occurs again Isaiah 23:1; Isaiah 23:14 (comp. Isaiah 16:4; Isaiah 21:2; Isaiah 33:1).—ςָ ?ψ is without doubt the Moabitic word for ςִ ?ιψ (comp. Schlottmann, l. c., p. 607). For it is used only of the capital of Moab and of the territory immediately belonging to it. It is, indeed, used in the latter sense alone (Numbers 21:15; Deuteronomy 2:9; Deuteronomy 2:18; Deuteronomy 2:29, comp. Schlott., p. 608); but in the former sense in the connection ςָ ?ψξεֹ ?ΰָ ?α (Numbers 21:8 and here).—πִ ?γְ ?ξָ ?δ is subjoined ἀσυνδέτως, with an emphasis that makes an impression of shuddering, (comp.
Isaiah 33:9; Jeremiah 9:9; Jeremiah 1:3). The word occurs in Isaiah again Isaiah 6:5. The repetition, too, of the phrase in the second clause (anadiplosis) is a rhetorical device that serves to make the impression stronger. Isaiah often resorts to this: Isaiah 15:8; Isaiah 8:9; Isaiah 17:12 sq.; Isaiah 21:11. Comp. on Isaiah 40:1.—χִ ?ιψ means in Hebrew “the wall” (Isaiah 22:5; Psalms 62:4; Ezekiel 13:12 sqq., and oft). But in Moabitic it stands for χִ ?ψְ ?ιָ ?δ.
In the inscription of Mesa χִ ?ψ occurs four times in the sense of “city”: Line 11, 12, 24 bis.—ςָ ?ψξι and χִ ?ιψξΧ although names of cities, are construed as masculines. The reason of this appears to me to be, that in the Prophet’s representation the notion Moab predominated, and the names of nations are prevalently used as masculine.
Isaiah 15:2. ςָ ?μָ ?δ is used impersonally, “there goes up,” or “one goes up” (comp. Isaiah 14:30; Isaiah 14:32).—ξεΰα after ξιγαΰ is genitive to the latter, and not nom. to ιιμιμ. Medba-Moab is a combination that does not occur elsewhere, but which the Prophet perhaps made because he thought he saw in ξֵ ?ιγְ ?αָ ?ΰ, Moabitic ξֹ ?δγְ ?αָ ?ΰ, a kindred notion to ξεֹ ?ΰָ ?α (ξֵ ?ιΰָ ?α) and an allusion to the origin of the nation (Genesis 19:30 sqq.).—ιιμιμ, comp. Isaiah 15:3; Isaiah 52:5; Isaiah 65:14.—The words αλμΞψΰωׁ ?ιεχψηδ are quoted from Amos 8:10, where we read ςַ ?μΞλָּ ?μΞψֹ ?ΰωׁ χָ ?ψְ ?ηָ ?δ (comp. Jeremiah 48:37; Ezekiel 7:18; Ezekiel 29:18). The pointing ψֹ ?ΰωָׁ ?ιε instead of ψָֹ ?ΰωָׁ ?ιε, for which some Codices read ψֹ ?ΰωָׁ ?ν ,ψֹ ?ΰωׁ ?εֹ ,ψֹ ?ΰωׁ, is found only here.
It is possible that in the mind of the Prophet, citing from memory, the sound, which the word has in the original passage, had its effect.—χָ ?ψְ ?ηָ ?δ, does not elsewhere occur as the name of a city. Isaiah uses it again as appellative, Isaiah 3:24; Isaiah 22:12. There lies in it an allusion which the inscription of Mesa suggests to us. For, according to lines 21–26, this one built Korcha (χָ ?ψְ ?ηָ ?δ) i.e., “a cleared place at or in Dibon (according to line 24) that had as yet no wall” (Diestel, Die Moabitische Gedenktafel, Iahrb. f. deutsche Theol., 1871, Heft. II. p. 237), and transferred thither the royal residence (line 23).—By quoting the words of Amos, the Prophet seems to intend derision: if all heads are bald, then, of course, baldness (χָ ?ψְ ?δָ ?δ) reigns over Moab.—βγεςδ comp. Isaiah 9:9; Isaiah 10:33; Isaiah 14:12; Isaiah 22:25; Isaiah 45:2.—Jeremiah 48:37 has βψεςδ, as, according to Gesenius and Delitzs�ch, the Masora and many Codd. and older editions read in the present passage, whereas in Jeremiah only 10 Codd. have βγεςδ—βψς. designates regular shearing, βγς irregular hewing or cutting off in haste (clipping).
The difference in the reading corresponds to the character of both prophets, whence in neither of the two passages perhaps, is the received reading to be altered.
Isaiah 15:3. Notice here the interchange of gender and number according as Moab comes before the Prophet’s mind as a nation or land, as a whole, or as a totality of individuals.—λֻּ ?μֹּ ?δ, which occurs again in Isa. only Isaiah 16:7, seems likewise to be a mimicry of Moabitic form of speech. For in the inscription of Mesa is found the suffix form Ξֹ ?δ—exclusively (about 12 times). The name Nebo also is written πְ ?αֹ ?δ, not as in Hebrew ύπְ ?αεֹ.—ιֹ ?ψְ ?γαַּ ?αֶּֽ ?λִ ?ι in the sense of “flowing down, dissolving in tears” would be, as Knobel, too, confesses, without example in the Old Testament. The simple Accusative would be required for that as Jeremiah 9:17; Jeremiah 13:17; Lamentations 1:16; Lamentations 3:48, and often.
Isaiah 15:4. ιψιςε comp. Isaiah 42:13; Isaiah 44:23.—The Praet. ιָ ?ψַ ?ς occurs only here. Many expositors (Gesen., Knobel, Delitzsch), on account of the word ιְ ?ψִ ?ιςָ ?δ, tremulum, “curtain,” take this word to mean “to tremble, shake.” But it is not to be overlooked why the Perfect should not be taken here in the same sense in which otherwise the Imperfect is used, i.e., in the sense of malum., miserum., afflictum esse. The Prophet intends a play on the word ιψιςε, therefore he employs the otherwise unused perfect, without meaning to use it in any other sense than that in which imperfect occurs, which has besides passed over to the service of the kindred root ψςς. Therefore πτωׁ ?ζιψςδμֹ ?ζ has the same meaning as ιֵ ?ψַ ?ςμְ ?αָ ?αεֹ 1 Samuel 1:8; Deuteronomy 15:10; compare εַ ?ιִּ ?ψָ ?ςμְ ?ξωֶׁ ?δ Psalms 106:32.
Isaiah 15:5. ςβμϊωׁ ?μιωׁ ?ιδ is construed like ωְׁ ?πַ ?ϊδָ ?ψְ ?αִ ?ιςιϊ Jeremiah 46:2; Jeremiah 51:59, i. e., annus quarti scil, numeri; ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τַ ?θΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ Leviticus 24:22, ΰֲ ?γεֹ ?οΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ 2 Kings 12:10. But is it designative of a locality or appositive to such? Maurer, Ewald, Knobel, Drechsler, Dietrich (Zur bibl. Geogr. in Merx’ Archiv I., p. 342 sqq.) see in it a “third Egla,” in proof of whose existence they appeal to Josephus Ant. XIV. 1, 4, where, beside Zoar, Oronai and other places, an Ἄγαλλα is mentioned. But how uncertain is this assumption of a “third Egla,” since we do not otherwise hear of a single one, not to speak of three, for that Ἄλαλλα of Josephus can just as well be ΰֶ ?πְ ?μַ ?ιִ ?ν (Isaiah 15:8)!
Doederlein and Koster (Stud. and Krit. 1862 I., p. 113 sqq.) take Zoar, Horonaim and Egla to have been a Tripolis whose chief name was Egla. But of such a city, which must, too, have had a considerable circumference, there is to be found no trace. We must therefore take ςβΧωׁ ?Χ as appositive. It cannot be referred to Moab on account of its position in the sentence. It must then be referred to φֹ ?ςַ ?ψ, and that in a sense in which it may be joined also to the city Horonaim as predicate, as is done Jeremiah 48:31. But we must take ςβΧωׁ ?Χ as having the same meaning with ςֶ ?βְ ?μָ ?δξְ ?ωֻׁ ?μֶּ ?ωֶׁ ?ϊ Genesis 15:9. along with which are named a ςֵ ?ζξְ ?ωֻׁ ?μֶּ ?ωֶׁ ?ϊ and a ΰַ ?ιִ ?μξְ ?ωֻׁ ?μָּ ?ωׁ.
Now these, as is acknowledged, are three years old, as it were beasts raised to the third degree, viz., degree of years.—γψκ is acc. loci = “on the road.”—ιְ ?ςֹ ?ςֵ ?ψε is Pilpel contracted from ιְ ?ςַ ?ψְ ?ςֵ ?γεּ, like λּ ?εֹ ?λָ ?α from λַּ ?αְ ?λָּ ?α. The expression ζςχϊΞωαγ only here.
Isaiah 15:6. ξְ ?ωַׁ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ϊ only here in Isaiah. The λִּ ?ι here, as in Isaiah 15:8 sq. (comp. on Isaiah 15:1), makes the impression of being an intentional redundancy.
Isaiah 15:7. ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δ represents an impersonal relative phrase = “what are made, acquired,” unless we assume a very abrupt change of person in the following ιωׂ ?ΰε ,τχγϊν. The impersonal construction is comparatively frequent in our passage (Isaiah 15:2; Isaiah 15:5).—ςγαιν can mean only “Arabians” or “willows.” It cannot mean “deserts,” which is ςֲ ?ψָ ?αεֹ ?ϊ (Jeremiah 5:6). As only the situation of the brook, not the meaning of its name, is of importance here, it is no matter which one prefers. Still, as in the Old Testament, the word in the plural, ςψαιν, never occurs meaning Arabians, whereas it is often used to mean “willows” (Isaiah 44:4; Leviticus 23:40; Job 40:22; Psalms 137:2), I prefer the meaning “willow-brook,” leaving undetermined whether or not πημδςψαδ, Amos 6:14 is identical with this. Comp. Herzog’s R.
Encycl. XI. p. 14.
Isaiah 15:8. δχιτδ does not mean here “outwardly encircled;” but it is = “make the round,” as in Leviticus 19:27; Job 1:5, where there is a difference as to form, but an essential analogy.—ιְ ?μָ ?μָ ?δ occurs only here in Isa.: elsewhere Jeremiah 25:36; Zephaniah 1:10; Zechariah 11:3.
Isaiah 15:9. In the first clause of this verse the Prophet accumulates the sound of m; hence Dimon for Dibon, which change might happen the more easily as Jerome informs us that “usque hodie indifferenter et Dimon et Dibon hoc oppidum dicitur.”—So far as I can see, all expositors refer λִּ ?ιΰָ ?ωִׂ ?ιϊεβεΧ to what follows, which they think justified especially by περτεϊ additamenta. But in that case εְ and not λִּ ?ι must stand before ΰωׂ ?ιϊ. By λִּ ?ι the phrase is connected with the foregoing. ωִׁ ?ιϊ with ςַ ?μ like Rth 3:15; Exodus 21:22; Numbers 12:11.—περτεϊ occurs only here in this sense.
AND 1. The Prophet portrays the desolation of the territory of Moab, pointing out the fate of many particular localities, and what the inhabitants experience, say and do (Isaiah 15:1-4). Therewith he does not conceal his own sympathy (Isaiah 15:5 a), and signifies that the Moabites shall be driven out of their land, and be crowded out over their borders on every side (Isaiah 15:5 b–8). But alas, flight will not help them much, for a mournful fate will overtake also those that escape, who will either become a prey to wild beasts, or lie unburied on the bare ground (Isaiah 15:9).
2. The burden—silence.
Isaiah 15:1. The superscription is like Isaiah 13:1, which see. In the night: i.e., at an unfavorable hour. For night adds increased terrors to the storming of a city. The city Ar-Moab, according to most recent investigations (comp. Schlottmann, l. c. p. 608 and Dietrich in Merx’ Archiv.
III. 320 sqq.), lay close by, indeed (according to Numbers 22:36; Joshua 13:9; Joshua 13:16) partly in Arnon. In the last named passages it is also by the Hebrew writers called ςִ ?ιψ, “a city.” From the Moabitic Ar comes the Greek name Ἀρεόπολις (Jerome, in loc., in the L. V. p. 184 sq. Ed. Vallars.). The name Rabbat-Moab does not occur in the Old Testament.
It may be that this designation, which was not a name but an official title, was transferred to the later Rabbah, which lies several [German] miles south of Arnon, and was a bishop’s residence in the 5th and 6th centuries (comp. Ritter, Erdk. XIV. p. 115 sq.; XV. p. 1210 sqq.)—Kir-Moab (to distinguish it from the Assyrian Kir, Isaiah 22:6) is mentioned by Isaiah under this name only here. Yet Kir-Haresh or Kir-Haresheth (Isaiah 16:11; Isaiah 16:7) are identical with it. The place was a strong fortress, on a high, steep mountain, visible from Jerusalem. It lay about three hours south of Rabbat-Moab, and about the same distance from the Dead sea.
In the Chaldee it is called λְּ ?ψַ ?λָּ ?ΰγְ ?ξεֹ ?ΰָ ?α, i.e., “castle, wall of Moab.” The Greeks called the city Χαράξ (so probably 2Ma 12:17), Χαράκωμα (Ptol. Isaiah 5:17; Isaiah 5:5), Χαρακμῶβα, Χαραχμῶβα, (Steph., Byz., and Theodoret in loc., who moreover appears to identify Ar-Moab and Kir-Moab). The name is preserved in the form Kerek until the present day.
3. He is gone up—grievous unto him.Isaiah 15:2-4. In Isaiah 15:1 Moab entire is indicated in its two halves, represented by a northern and a southern city. From Isaiah 15:2 on follow specifications. For on the desolation of Moab, the great theme, are rung manifold changes: by most numerous facts the truth of it is exhibited. In Joshua 13:17 Dibon and Bamoth-Baal (αָּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊαַּ ?ςַ ?μ, the high places of Baal) are mentioned together, and the latter is mentioned Numbers 22:41.
Jeremiah 48:35 speaks of ξַֽ ?ςֲ ?μֵ ?δαָּ ?ξָ ?δ, “the ascent of the elevation;” and in the inscription of Mesa, line 27, it reads: ΰָֹ ?πλִ ?ιαָּ ?πִ ?ϊִ ?ιαֵ ?ϊαָ ?ξֹ ?ϊλִּ ?ιδָ ?ψֻ ?νδֻ ?ΰ. [I built Beth-Bamath (a house on high) because it was elevated.]. Therefore Dibon and another locality, which in full was called Beth-Bamoth-Baal, appear to have been elevated places of worship. Dibon lay to the north of Arnon and not very far distant. It was king Mesa’s birth-place, for he calls himself in his inscription δַ ?γִּ ?ιαֹ ?πִ ?ι, the Dibonite. The city is elsewhere mentioned Numbers 21:30; Numbers 32:2; Numbers 32:34; Joshua 13:9; Joshua 13:17; Jeremiah 48:18; Jeremiah 48:22; Nehemiah 11:25.—μαλι “for to weep,” in order to lament to the gods with tears the distress of the land (Isaiah 22:12).—ςַ ?μ before Nebo and Medeba is to be construed locally, for before and after there is only the description how each place gives expression to its grief. Moreover Nebo and Medeba are elevated spots.
Of Nebo this is in itself probable. For if it even does not mean the mountain, it does the city that was situated on top of, or on that mountain: as in Numbers 32:3; Numbers 32:38; Jeremiah 48:1, and in the inscription of Mesa line 14. That Medeba was situated on a hill is testified by the site of ruins which Burkhardt (2:625) found a little distance southeast of Heshbon. Medeba is also mentioned in the inscription of Mesa, line 8, under the name ξֹ ?δγְ ?αָ ?ΰ, Mo-Debah, as a city conquered by Omri.
Isaiah 15:3. Wearing sacks or sackcloth as a badge of mourning and distress is often mentioned by Isaiah 3:24; Isaiah 20:2; Isaiah 22:12; Isaiah 37:1 sq.; Isaiah 50:3; Isaiah 58:5. It has been overlooked that ιψγααλι, descending with weeping [see in Text, and Gram.] should form an antithesis to ςμδμαλι, “goeth up to weep,” Isaiah 15:2. They went up on the high places at Dibon and Beth-Bamoth to weep; they howled on the high places of Nebo and Medebah; but they came down also from these high places with weeping; they weep because imploring the gods with tears availed nothing. [See Margin of Eng. Bib.: Also J. A. A., has the same rendering as Dr. N.]. This construction is the more necessary because immediately after, Isaiah 15:5, αִּ ?λְ ?λִ ?ι,” is undoubtedly used in the sense: “with weeping.”
Isaiah 15:4. And Heshbon, etc. Ar-Moab and Kir-Moab are chief city, and chief fortress; Dibon and Beth-Bamoth are especially holy places of worship, Nebo and Medebah, too, belong to the latter, for there also the weeping was meant to propitiate the gods. Now that the centres of the power and of the national religion are shaken to pieces, and men flee from these in despair, so, naturally, dreadful terror seizes on the cities of inferior rank. Thus Heshbon (Numbers 21:23 sqq.), cries, and Elealeh (Numbers 32:37; Jeremiah 48:34), the two sister cities, the second of which is never mentioned without the first. They lay only a Roman mile distant from one another on limestone elevations in a fruitful plain.
Their united cry of woe is heard as far as Jahaz. This fact is not opposed to the assumption that Jahaz is identical with ιָ ?δְֽ ?φָ ?δ (Numbers 21:23; Deuteronomy 2:32; Judges 11:2 in pausa), ιַ ?δְ ?φָ ?δ (Joshua 13:18 out of pause), (Hitzig, Keil). For Jahaz need not on this account, like Elealeh, have lain in the closest neighborhood. But the ancient rampart that lay on the east border toward the desert, where of old Sihon, king of the Amorites, opposed Israel, is named for this reason because the Prophet would indicate that the terrific intelligence shook the very bulwarks of the kingdom. If now all the strong cities of Moab so raise the cry of despair, how shall the men at arms of the nation not chime in? The choice of the expression ημφιξΧ, “armed men of Moab,” seems to me to be explained by the idea that the information concerning the occupation of the land east of Jordan (Numbers 32 and Deuteronomy 3:16 sqq.), comes before the Prophet.
For in these chapters just cited, the expression ημειο occurs relatively the oftenest in the entire Old Testament, i.e., six times: Numbers 32:21; Numbers 32:27; Numbers 32:29-30; Numbers 32:32; Deuteronomy 3:18.
4. My heart—no green thing.
Isaiah 15:4-6. The Prophet hitherto had in mind northern Moab, the territory that the Amorites took from the Moabites, then the Israelites from the Moabites, and finally the Moabites from the Israelites, after the inhabitants had been carried into Assyrian captivity (2 Kings 15:29). Almost all the cities that have been named in the foregoing passages were, according to Numbers 32:34 sqq., built by the Gadites and Reubenites, or at least rebuilt with a change of name (Numbers 15:38). In what follows the Prophet turns his regards chiefly to the south. But in making this turn, he feels the need of giving expression to the impression made. The cry he has heard, though that of an enemy, has found in his heart an echo of compassion.
Therefore he cries out from his innermost bosom (μִ ?αִּ ?ι) and turning himself toward Moab (Isaiah 16:11; Isaiah 14:8-9). Thus “shall cry” of Isaiah 15:5, corresponds to “shall cry” Isaiah 15:4. But his cry of terror is at the same time a watchman’s alarm to southern Moab. We see this in the anxious flight in which southern Moab is represented to be by the following context. αψιηδ is taken by most expositors to be the same as αָּ ?ψִ ?ιηֶ ?δָ “fugitives” (Isaiah 43:14, comp. Isaiah 27:1; Job 26:13). Delitzsch alone decides in favor of vectes, bars.
But the thought that the bars, i.e., the fortresses of the land extend to Zoar finds nothing in the context to suggest it: whereas the thought that the Moabites flee from the enemy advancing from the north till they find shelter in a strong fortress, corresponds very well with the context.
A heifer of three years, (see in Text, and Gram.), is one not yet brought under the yoke, whose strength is still entirely intact. Gesenius cites Pliny, Isaiah 8:4, Isaiah 5 : damitura bonum in trimatu, postea sera, antea praematura. Columella de re rest. Isaiah 7:2. It is therefore “a bullock unaccustomed to the yoke.” ςֵ ?πֶ ?μμֹ ?ΰμֻ ?ξַּ ?γ Jeremiah 31:18, the contrary of which is ςֶ ?βְ ?μָ ?δξְ ?μֻ ?ξָּ ?γָ ?δ “a heifer that is taught” Hosea 10:11. Comp.
Isaiah 10:11; Jeremiah 46:20; Jeremiah 1:11. Now Zoar was a fortified place. Jerome says: “praesidium in ea positum est militum romanorum.” Eusebius calls it a φρούριονστρατιωτῶν, Steph. Byzantinus a κώμημεγάληἥφρούριον. It was perhaps, in Isaiah’s time a city that had never been captured, what we call eine jungfrδuliche Festung (a virgin fortress), and if in ωμιωׁ ?ιδ the notion of indomitum, jugo non assuetum esse prevails, then this would explain why Zoar is so named, and why the flight of the Moabites tends thither. They thought themselves secure in the strong fortress that had never been taken. [For an extensive comparison of views on the foregoing point see J.
A. A., in loc.]. That Zoar is the point to which men flee is evident because the ways leading thither are full of fugitives. Regarding the site of Zoar opinions differ, varying between the southern point of the Dead sea to the mouthing of the Wadi Kerek on the east side. But wherever it was, Luhith and Horonaim were certainly localities that lay in the road that led from the north thither. Luhith (from μεּ ?ηָ “tablet, board,”) which according to Eusebius and Jerome, lay between Ar-Moab and Zoar, is mentioned only here, and Jeremiah 48:5. ξַ ?ςֲ ?μֶ ?δ, “a stair, declivity of a mountain which the road traverses,” is found in connection with many names: Numbers 34:4; Joshua 10:10; Joshua 18:7; Judges 1:36; 2 Samuel 15:30, etc.—Horonaim is mentioned only here and Jeremiah 48:3; Jeremiah 48:5; Jeremiah 48:34.
In Joshua 10:10, we read “the Lord—chased them along the way that goeth up to Bethhoron.” Did this passage perhaps come into the Prophet’s mind? A third matter that explains the flight of the Moabites, the Prophet makes to be the stopping up and drying up of the waters of Nimri. It is to be noticed that stopping up the fountains is described (2 Kings 3:19; 2 Kings 3:25) as a form of hostility practised by the Israelites against Moab. If by “the waters of Nimrim” we understand that Bet-Nimra, that is mentioned (Numbers 32:3; Numbers 32:36; Joshua 13:27) as a Gadite locality with a brook emptying into the Jordan, then the Prophet would suddenly transport us out of the south into the extremest north.
Therefore Knobel very fittingly has called attention to the fact that the more recent travelers, Burkhardt, de Saulcy, Seetzen, mention a Wadi Nemeyra, and a spring brook Mojet Nimmθry (i.e. little waters of Nimri) near the southern border of Moab, and that the Onomasticon names under Νεβηρίμ a place Βηνναμαρήμ, Benamerium, north of Zoar. This locality suits our context very well. In three short sentences the Prophet sets forth why he calls the waters of Nimrim desolations. ηָֽ ?φִ ?ιγ is grass proper; γֶּ ?ωֶׁ ?ΰ sward in general; ιֶ ?ψֶ ?χ all green things. The discourse thus contains a climax, it proceeds from what withers most easily (Psalms 90:5; Psalms 103:15) to the totality of all vegetation.
5. Therefore—of the land.
Isaiah 15:7-9. The fugitives of Moab have concentrated in the south of the land. But there, too, they do not feel safe: for the enemy presses incontinently after. Therefore they flee with their valuables across the Willow-brook that formed the boundary between Moab and Edom into the latter country. ιִ ?ϊְ ?ψָ ?δ, which occurs only here and in Jeremiah 48:36 that borrows from this, is “provision on hand not yet used up” (Psalms 17:14). τְ ?χֻ ?γָּ ?δ is more: it is the costly possession that is cherished as the treasure of the house: the word occurs only here in this sense. The thought of the Prophet is evidently, that Moab, when no longer safe in its extreme southern strongholds, flees across the border. It is therefore certainly more agreeable to the context to understand the stream referred to by πημδςψαιּ ?ν to mean the southernmost boundary brook of Moab, rather than some stream farther north.
Delitzsch understands the Willow-brook to be the northern branch of the Seil-el-Kerek, that actually bears the name of Wadi Safsβf, i.e. Willow-brook. But that does not hinder that in Isaiah’s time the southern boundary brook was also called Willow-brook, especially since among its various names (Wβdi el-Karβhi, el-Achri, el-Hφssa, el-Hossan, likely Sared too), is found the name es-Sβfijeh. (See under Text, and Gram.).
In Isaiah 15:8 the need of fleeing over the border is renewedly set forth by the statement that the cry (Isaiah 15:4 sqq.) has gone about on the entire border of Moab. Eglaim is likely identical with the Eneglaim, Ezekiel 47:10, which according to Jerome, lay “in principio maris mortui,” i.e. at the south end of the Dead Sea. It is doubtful if it be the same with Ἀγαλλείμ (Αἰγαλείμ) which Eusebius describes as πρὸςΝότονἈρεοπόλεωςδιαστῶσασημείοις, i.e. eight Roman miles, somewhat more than three hours. Comp. Herz. R.
Encycl. XIV., p. 741.—If Beerelim is the same fountain mentioned, Numbers 21:16-18, that the princes opened up, and that thereafter was called Heroes’ fountain (for so, or Terebinth fountain the word may be translated), then the locality lay in the northeast of Moab, and thus directly opposite to the southwestern Eglaim (comp. Numbers 21:13 sqq.). Accordingly the cry is gone around, etc., would express that the cry went out on all sides along the borders of Moab, because the inhabitants fled on all sides. If they dispersed on every side to the periphery of their land, that sufficiently indicates that the centre had suffered a heavy blow. Such a centre was Dibon, moreover, it is represented as a city in Isaiah 15:2 and in the inscription of Mesa, as being at that time a city of importance.
The waters of Dibon are full of blood, therefore there is fearful, murderous work there.—As Dibon lies not far from Arnon, “the waters of Dibon” can, of course, indirectly mean the Arnon, like “the waters of Megiddo,” Judges 5:19, mean the Kishon (Rosenmueller, Hendewerk), but directly must still be meant the tributaries that lead out from Dibon to Arnon; for otherwise the latter could not receive blood shed in Dibon. The fearful blood-bath at Dibon shows that it is fated to receive full measure, poured, shaken down and running over. Perhaps the Prophet has in mind God’s threat in Leviticus 26:18; Leviticus 26:21, that if the first chastisement failed of its effect on Israel He would add to it “seven times more for their sins.” Moab’s great and repeated transgression had also such additions as its consequence. If we are not referred by the second clause of Isa 15:9 a to what follows, then we are not necessitated to regard what is contained in 9 b, as the aggravation indicated by περτεϊ = additamenta, “things superadded” (See Text. and Gram.). Then Isaiah 15:9 b has reference to a part of Moab not coincident with that before mentioned. It is fugitives that succeeded in escaping the sword of the enemy.
Shall these be rescued? No. These escaped ones shall become a prey to lions, and as many as escape these shall at last have nothing more than the bare ground, whereon to leave their unburied bodies. The thought is therefore similar to Isaiah 24:18, comp. Amos 5:19. And how should the remnant of the nation be called ωׁ ?ΰψιϊΰγξδ?
The expression is unexampled. We would look for ωְׁ ?ΰֵ ?ψִ ?ιϊδָ ?ςָ ?ν, or at least δָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 15:1. “Although the Prophets belonged to the Jewish people, and were sent especially for the sake of the Jewish people, yet as God would that all men should come to repentance and the knowledge of the truth, therefore at times also the Prophets were called on to go out of these limits, and preach to other nations for a sign against them, that they might have nothing whereby to excuse themselves.”—Cramer.2. On Isaiah 15:2 sqq. “Against the wrath of God, neither much money and land, nor a well equipped nation, nor great and strong cities, nor flight from one place to another avail anything, but true repentance (Psalms 33:16 sq.). Whoever forsakes God in good days, He will forsake again in misfortune, and then they can find nowhere rest or refuge (Proverbs 1:24 sqq.).—Starke.3. On Isaiah 15:7. “What a man unjustly makes, that another unjustly takes.”—Starke.4. On Isaiah 15:8 sq. “God is wont, in His judgments, to proceed by degrees, to begin with lesser punishments, and proceed to the sorer (Leviticus 26:18; Leviticus 26:21; Leviticus 26:24; Leviticus 26:28).
Although the godless escape one misfortune yet they soon fall into another.”—Starke.5. On Isaiah 16:1 sqq. “God can quickly bring it about that the people that once gave us sheltering entertainment must in turn, look to us for entertainment and a lurking place. For in the famine, Naomi and her husband and sons were pilgrims in the land of Moab (Rth 1:1). David procured a refuge for his parents among the Moabites (1 Samuel 22:3). Now their affairs are in so bad a case that they, who were able to afford shelter to others, must themselves go wandering among others; for human fortune is unstable.”—Cramer.6. On Isaiah 16:4. “God therefore threatens the Moabites, at the same time winning them to repentance, for He seeks not the death of the sinner (Ezekiel 18:32).
Thus it was still a season for repentance. For had the Moabites once again used hospitality, then again had mercy been extended to them.”—Cramer.7. On Isaiah 16:5. “Light arises to the pious in the darkness from the Gracious, Merciful and Just One. His heart is of good courage and fears not, till he sees his desire on his enemies (Psalms 112:4; Psalms 112:8). And as it went well with Jerusalem, while it went ill with the Moabites, thus shall Christ’s kingdom stand, and the enemies go down. For it is an everlasting kingdom, and the set up tabernacle of David shall surely remain (Amos 9:11)”—Cramer.8.
On Isaiah 16:6 sqq. “Moab was a haughty nation, for it was rich and had everything abundant. For it commonly goes thus, that where one is full, there the heart is lifted up, and the legs must be strong that can bear good days.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 16:9 sqq. “Such must be the disposition of teachers and preachers, that for the sake of their office, they should and must castigate injustice for God’s sake, but with those that suffer the punishment they must be pitiful in heart. And therefore they must be the sin’s enemy, and the persons’ friend. Example: Micah announces the punishment to Jerusalem yet howls over it, testifies also his innermost condolence by change of clothing (Micah 1:8). Samuel announces destruction to Saul and has sorrow for him (1 Samuel 15:26; 1 Samuel 16:1).
Likewise Christ announces every sort of evil to the Jews, and yet weeps bitterly (Luke 19:41). Paul preaches the frightful rejection of the Jews, and yet wishes it were possible to purchase their salvation by His eternal hurt (Romans 9:3).”—Cramer.10. On Isaiah 16:14. “Exceeding, and very great is the grace and friendliness of God, that in the midst of the punishments that He directs against the Moabites, He yet thinks on His mercy. For the Lord is good unto all and has compulsion on all His works (Psalms 145:9).”—Cramer.11. On Isaiah 16:12. Hypocritae, ubi, etc. “Hypocrites, whose souls are filled with impious notions of God, are much more vehement in their exercises than the truly pious in the true worship of God.
And this is the first retribution of the impious, that they are wasted by their own labor which they undertake of their own accord. Another is that those exercises are vain in time of need and profit nothing. Therefore their evils are born with the greatest uneasiness, nor do they see any hope of aid. On the contrary true piety, because it knows that it is the servant of Christ, suffers indeed externally, yet conquers the cross by the confidence which it has in Christ.”—Luther.12. On Isaiah 16. Genuineness. [Barnes in loc. forcibly presents the argument for the gennineness of these prophecies afforded by the numerous mention of localities and the prediction of the desolations that would overtake them.
In doing so he quotes also the language of Prof. Shedd. (Bib. Repos. Vol. VII., pp. 108 sq.). Barnes says: “That evidence is found in the particularity with which places are mentioned; and in the fact that impostors would not specify places, any further than was unavoidable.
Mistakes, we all know, are liable to be made by those who attempt to describe the geography of places which they have not seen. Yet here is a description of a land and its numerous towns, made nearly three thousand years ago, and in its particulars it is sustained by all the travellers of modern times. The ruins of the same towns are still seen; their places in general can be designated; and there is a moral certainty, therefore, that this prophecy was made by one who knew the locality of those places, and that, therefore, the prophecy is ancient and genuine.”—”Every successive traveller who visits Moab, Idumea or Palestine, does something to confirm the accuracy of Isaiah. Towns bearing the same name, or the ruins of towns, are located in the same relative position in which he said they were and the ruins of once splendid cities, broken columns, dilapidated walls, trodden down vineyards, and half demolished temples proclaim to the world that those cities are what he said they would be, and that he was under the inspiration of God.” See Keith on Prophecy, whose whole book is but the amplification of this argument. The modern traveller, who explores those regions with Isaiah in one hand and Robinson’s Researches or Murray’s Guide in the other, has a demonstration that Isaiah was as surely written with the accurate knowledge of those regions in their day of prosperity and populous cities, as that the accounts of Robinson, Tristram or Murray’s Guide were written by those who only had a knowledge of their ruins and desolations.—Tr.].
Footnotes:Or, cut off.They go up to the house.they howl on Nebo and Medeba-Moab.In his streets they gird.their (public) squares.Heb. Descending into weeping, or, coming down with weeping.cries.soul.Or, To the borders thereof, even as an heifer.raise.Heb. breaking.Heb. desolations.grass.omit shall.Or, valley of the Arabians.Heb. additions.And to the remnant the ground.
β) THE OF Isaiah 16:1-51 Send ye the lamb to the ruler of the land
From Sela to the wilderness,
Unto the mount of the daughter of Zion.
2 For it shall be, that, as a wandering bird
Cast out of the nest,
So the daughters of Moab shall be
At the fords of Arnon.
3 Take counsel, execute judgment;
Make thy shadow as the night in the midst of the noon day;
Hide the outcasts;
Bewray not him that wandereth.
4 Let mine outcasts dwell with thee, Moab;
Be thou a covert to them from the face of the spoiler;
For the extortioner is at an end,
The spoiler ceaseth,
The oppressors are consumed out of the land.
5 And in mercy shall bthe throne be established:
And he shall sit upon it in truth in the tabernacle of David,
Judging, and seeking judgment, and hasting righteousness.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_16:1. λָּ ?ψ is “the fat lamb.” It never occurs in the stat. absol. sing.; it is found only here in the stat. constr. sing.; and occurs again in Isaiah in the plural only Isaiah 34:6. Comp. Deuteronomy 32:14.—The expression δַ ?ψαַּ ?ϊφΧ occurs again only Isaiah 10:32 K’ri.
Isaiah 16:2. On ςεσΞπεγγ comp. Isaiah 10:14; Proverbs 27:8.—ξְ ?ωֻׁ ?μָּ ?η comp. Isaiah 27:10.—ξςαψεϊ, wherever the word occurs (Joshua 2:7; 1 Samuel 14:4; Judges 3:28; Judges 12:5 sq.; Jeremiah 51:32) are “the fords.” The word stands here as the accus. localis. Moreover, according to rule the expression means “fords of the Arnon,” not, the “fords of the Arnon.”
Isaiah 16:3-4 a. The expression δαιΰςφδ occurs only here. It reminds one of δָ ?αεּ ςֵ ?φָ ?δ 2 Samuel 16:20. The alteration of δαιΰε and ςωׂ ?ε to δαιΰι and ςωׂ ?ι which the K’ri offers for the sake of conformity with the following verbal forms, is unnecessary. τְ ?μִ ?ιμָ ?δ, judicium, occurs only here: τְּ ?μִ ?ιμִ ?ιָ ?δ Isaiah 28:7.—πִ ?γָּ ?ηִ ?ιν (Isaiah 27:13), πεֹ ?γֵ ?γ (Isaiah 10:14; Isaiah 21:14), βεּ ?ψ (Isaiah 11:6; Isaiah 23:7; Isaiah 33:14), ωׁ ?εֹ ?γֵ ?γ (Isaiah 21:2; Isaiah 33:1), ρֵ ?ϊֶ ?ψ (Isaiah 28:17; Isaiah 32:2) are Isaianic expressions.—ξεΰα, Isaiah 16:4 a, ought, according to the accents, to be connected with what follows. And nothing stands in the way of this. Delitzsch, who construes Isaiah 16:3 sq. as the language of Moab to Israel must take ξεΰα Isaiah 16:4 as casus absolutus, which is harsh.
The form δֱ ?εִ ?ι (comp. δֲ ?ιִ ?ι Genesis 24:60) occurs only here. It, too, is perhaps Moabitic. But the inscription of Mesa offers no analogy for it.—ξֵ ?ο “the presser” (from ξεּ ?υ like ζִ ?γִ ,μֵ ?υ ,ξֵ ?ϊ; comp. ξִ ?ιυ Proverbs 30:33, “the pressing out”) is ἅπ. λεγ. ΰָ ?τֵ ?ν is an Isaianic word, as the entire thought is also Isaianic. comp. Isaiah 29:20 :—ωֹׁ ?γ comp. on Isaiah 13:6.—ψֹ ?ξֵ ?ν only here; but other forms of the verb are frequent in Isaiah 1:12; Isaiah 26:6; Isaiah 28:3; Isaiah 41:25; Isaiah 63:3.
Isaiah 16:5. δֵ ?λִ ?ιο “to make firm,” stabihre, 1 Samuel 13:13; 2 Samuel 5:12; Isaiah 30:33.—ηֶ ?ρֶ ?γ is not “grace,” which is not the opposite of ωֹׁ ?γ ,ξִ ?ιυ and ξִ ?ψְ ?ξָ ?ν (Isaiah 10:6) but “gentleness,” clementia. Comp. ξַ ?μְ ?λֵ ?ιηֶ ?ρֶ ?γ 1 Kings 20:31, and Proverbs 20:28.—ΰδμγεγ, comp. ρֻ ?λַּ ?ϊγειγ Amos 9:11, and as contrast ΰֹ ?δֶ ?μιεֹ ?ρֵ ?σ Psalms 78:67.—It is an expression of modesty, comp. the contrast between αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊ and ΰֹ ?δֶ ?μ 2 Samuel 7:6.—The expression γψωׁ ξωׁ ?τθ is wholly Isaianic. It occurs only Isaiah 1:17 and here. ξδιψφγχ (comp. Psalms 45:2; Proverbs 22:29) occurs only here.
AND 1. These words connect closely with what precedes, in that they assume that the fugitives of Moab that fled over the border (Isaiah 15:7) have arrived in Sela, the chief city of Edom (“from Sela,” Isaiah 16:1). The chief thought is that Moab is counselled to seek help and protection from Judah (Isaiah 16:1-2), and therefore eventually itself to afford protection and help to Judah (Isaiah 16:3-4 a). When then the time comes wherein all unrighteousness on earth shall have an end (Isaiah 16:4 b), and the righteous ruler shall sit on the throne of David (Isaiah 16:5), then—this is the necessary consequence—Moab, too, shall share this salvation.
2. Send ye——Arnon.
Isaiah 16:1-2. No one but the Prophet can speak these words, as well as all that follows, because he only was able to give the prophecy contained in Isaiah 16:4 b, 5. In the summons to send lambs to Jerusalem there is evidently an allusion to the fact that the Moabite king Mesa, according to 2 Kings 3:4, was obliged to send the wool of 100,000 lambs (λָּ ?ψִ ?ιν) and of 100,000 rams (ΰֵ ?ιμִ ?ιν) as tribute to the king of Israel. “The lambs of the ruler” is evidently the tribute of lambs that belongs to the ruler of the land. But the king of Judah is called ξεωׁ ?μΰψυ “ruler of the land,” in distinction from the ξμκξεΰα, “the king of Moab,” who was tributary to the former. They are to send the tribute to Jerusalem from Sela, the capital city of Edom (called Petra by the Romans; its ruins were discovered by Burkhardt in Wadi Musa, comp. Isaiah 42:11).
We account for this by representing to ourselves that according to Isaiah 15:7 the Moabites have arrived in Sela as fugitives. Unto the wilderness—which is more exactly defined by “unto the mount of the daughter of Zion”—corresponds exactly to the description that Strabo gives of the region of Petra. He says: χώραἔρημοςἡπλείστηκαὶμάλισταἡπρὸςἸουδαίαν (Knobel). On the subject matter comp. Isaiah 18:7. But the fugitives are not in Sela only.
According to Isaiah 15:8, they dispersed on every side. Therefore fleeing crowds appear also at Arnon, the northern border river of Moab. These are called “daughters of Moab.” Does not the feminine stamp the timid fugitives as those that have turned into women and lost all masculine courage? Comp. e.g. Isaiah 3:1.
3. Take counsel——the spoiler.
Isaiah 16:3-4 a. These are not the words of the Moabites, but of the Prophet, who directs this petition to the Moabites in the name of his people. They are not only to put themselves in subjection to Judah, and purchase protection for themselves by tribute, but they are also on their part to afford protection. By the likeness of their contents, Isaiah 16:3-4 a belong together. The Prophet hereby assumes that there shall come upon Judah also such a visitation as 15, 16. he proclaims to Moab. This was fulfilled by Nebuchadnezzar, and in Jeremiah 40:11 Moab is expressly named among the lands into which scattered Judah (πִ ?γְּ ?ηεּ, Jeremiah 40:12) had fled.—The Prophet cannot mean that the Moabites shall bring about justice between the Israelites and their oppressors, for they lack power and force to do this.
But they are to do what is right in that they receive to their protection those oppressed and driven out. This demand for protecting shelter is expressed by means of an admirable figure of speech. Moab shall make its shadow at clear midday dark as at midnight, so that he who is concealed in this shadow shall be hid as completely as if the darkness of night enclosed him.
4. For the extortioner——righteousness.
Isaiah 16:4 b, 5. The Prophet now gives the reasons why Moab should seek shelter from Judah and likewise afford shelter to the fugitives of Judea. This reason is one eminently prophetic. That is to say, Isaiah sees in spirit the end of the world-power, therefore the cessation of all violent oppression and the dominion of the kingdom of God under a great one of the line of David. Would Moab share in this glory of the people of God, then it must now display such conduct as the Prophet imputes to it, Isaiah 16:1-4 a. This is the same thought, the correlative of which is expressed Isaiah 60:12 (comp.
Zechariah 14:16 sqq.) in the words: “For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish.”—δΰψυ, “the land,” according to the context, signifies the whole earth. For the world-power that is characterized in the preceding words dominates not a single land, but the whole earth. In contrast with the violent, unjust world-power another throne shall be set up by mildness (ηργ, see Text and Gram.). On this throne, which stands in the tabernacle of David (an expression of modesty, see Text and Gram.), shall one sit in truth, i.e., one who is truthful and reliable, and he will do nothing arbitrarily; but he will keep to the forms of law (ωֹׁ ?τֵ ?θ). But not only this—he will also interest himself to find out the (substantial) right (γּ ?ψֵ ?ωׁ ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τָ ?θ)—and when he has found it, he will promptly execute it (ξְ ?δִ ?ιψφֶ ?γֶ ?χ). That the Prophet has in mind here the great Son of David, whose friendliness and righteousness he had already celebrated, Isaiah 9:5 sq.; Isaiah 11:1 sq., cannot be doubted.
Where ceasing from violence and injustice and a kingdom of righteousness and of loving mildness are spoken of, the Messianic kingdom is meant.
Footnotes:tribute lamb.Or, Petra.Heb. a rock.Or, a nest forsaken.omit the.Heb. Bring.Heb. wringer.Oppression.Heb. the treaders down.Or, prepared.one sits.prompt in equity.γ) MOAB’S PRIDE AND RUIN Isaiah 16:6-126 We have heard of the pride of Moab; he is very proud:
Even of his haughtiness, and his pride, and his wrath;
But his lies shall not be so.
7 Therefore shall Moab howl for Moab,
Every one shall howl;
For the foundations of Kir-hareseth shall ye mourn;
Surely they are stricken.
8 For the fields of Heshbon languish,
And the vine of Sibmah: the lords of the heathen have broken down the principal plants thereof,
They are come even unto Jazer, they wandered through the wilderness:
Her branches are stretched out, they are gone over the sea.
9 Therefore I will bewail with the weeping of Jazer the vine of Sibmah:
I will water thee with my tears, O, Heshbon, and Elealeh:
For the shouting for thy summer fruits and for thy harvest is fallen.
10 And gladness is taken away, and joy out of the plentiful field;
And in the vineyards there shall be no singing, neither shall there be shouting:
The treaders shall tread out no wine in their presses;
I have made their vintage shouting to cease.
11 Wherefore my bowels shall sound like an harp for Moab,
And mine inward parts for Kir-haresh.
12 And it shall come to pass, when it is seen
That Moab is weary on the high place,
That he shall come to his sanctuary to pray;
But he shall not prevail.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_16:6. The plural ωׁ ?ξςπε intimates that this haughtiness of Moab is generally known.—βֵ ?ΰ, contracted from βֵ ?ΰֶ ?δ (Isaiah 2:12) occurs only here; (comp. Ew. § 155 e). Regarding the construction, it belongs to βΰεο and not to ξεΰα, for the Prophet had not experienced that the very proud Moab is proud, but that the pride of Moab is very intense, or that his pride mounts up very high.—βָ ?ΰεֹ ?ο (comp. Isaiah 2:10; Isaiah 4:2; Isaiah 13:11; Isaiah 13:19; and often) and βַֽ ?ΰֲ ?εָ ?δ (Isaiah 9:8; Isaiah 13:3; Isaiah 13:11; Isaiah 25:11) are Isaianic words. ςֶ ?αְ ?γָ ?δ is “excess,” and in this sense is more frequently used of wrath, but is used also of overweening pride (comp. ςֶ ?αְ ?γַ ?ϊζָ ?γεֹ ?ο Proverbs 21:24). In Isaiah the word occurs in the latter sense only here; in the former he uses it often: Isaiah 9:18; Isaiah 10:6; Isaiah 13:9; Isaiah 13:13; Isaiah 14:6—In the expression μΰΞλο = “the not right, incorrect, wrong,” the two elements are fused into a unity of notion (comp. μֹ ?ΰΞςֵ ?υ Isaiah 10:15). It is used adverbially (2 Samuel 18:14) as well as substantively (2 Kings 7:9; 2 Kings 17:9; Proverbs 15:7; Jeremiah 8:6; Jeremiah 23:10; Jeremiah 48:30, bis).—αַּ ?γִּ ?ιν from αָּ ?γָ ?ΰ = αָּ ?γַ ?γ (comp. αָּ ?θָ ?ΰ and αָּ ?θָ ?δ “inconsiderate speaking,” Leviticus 5:4; Numbers 30:7; Numbers 30:9) “to invent, think out” = commenticia, ficticia, “conceited, vain babbling” (Job 11:3; Jeremiah 48:30); personally “a braggart, fop” (Isaiah 44:25; Jeremiah 50:36).
Isaiah 16:7. ΰֲ ?ωִׁ ?ιωָׁ ?δ, “cakes,” 2 Samuel 6:19; 1 Chronicles 16:3; plural ΰωׁ ωׁ ?εϊ Son 2:5, and ΰωׁ ?ιωׁ ?ιν Hosea 3:1, where it speaks of ΰωׁ ?ιωׁ ?ιςֲ ?πָ ?αִ ?ιν—ΰκְ ?Ξπλΰιν is in apposition with the subject of ϊδβε—ΰַ ?κְ = “only;” “who is only troubled, nothing but troubled.”—πָ ?λָ ?ΰ is ἅπ. λεγ.; comp. πָ ?λֶ ?δ Isaiah 66:2 and πָ ?λֵ ?ΰ Proverbs 15:13.
Isaiah 16:8. ωְׁ ?γֵ ?ξָ ?δ Isaiah 37:27, plural ωְׁ ?γֵ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ Habakkuk 3:17, st. constr., ωַׁ ?γֵ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ Deuteronomy 32:32; 2 Kings 23:4.—Isaiah uses not unfrequently forms of ΰֻ ?ξְ ?μַ ?μ, Isaiah 19:8; Isaiah 24:4; Isaiah 24:7; Isaiah 33:9.—δָ ?μַ ?ν is tundere, percutere, “to smite.” It occurs again Isaiah 28:1, where, to be sure, it speaks of δֲ ?μεּ ?ξֵ ?ιιַ ?ιִ ?ο.—The plural of ωָׂ ?ψֹ ?χ, meaning the same as ωׂ ?ψֵ ?χ, Isaiah 5:2, occurs only here.—πִ ?θַּ ?ωׁ Niph. Isaiah 33:23, “spread themselves.”—ωׁ ?μηεϊἅπ. λεγ., “the sprouts” of the vine.
Isaiah 16:9. ΰψιεκ Piel of ψָ ?εָ ?δ, with the second and third radicals transposed, Isaiah 34:5; Isaiah 34:7.—δֵ ?ιγָ ?γ is the shout with which the torcularii cheered their labor, and probably beat time, Isaiah 16:10; Jeremiah 25:30; Jeremiah 51:14; δֵ ?ιγָ ?γμֹ ?ΰδֵ ?ιγָ ?γ Jeremiah 48:33.—It is certain that the Prophet for the sake of similarity in sound wrote χφιψκ instead of αφιψκ, the latter means the grape harvest. But χָ ?φִ ?ιψ must not be taken as = αָּ ?φִ ?ιψ. For why should not the grain harvest also have suffered under the trampling feet of the warrior wine treaders?
Isaiah 16:10. ωׂ ?ξδδεβιμ from Joe 1:16.—λψξμ a very frequent word with Isaiah 10:18; Isaiah 29:17; Isaiah 32:15 sq.; Isaiah 35:2; Isaiah 37:24. Here, too, λψξμ and λψξιν are distinguished, a proof that we may take χָ ?φִ ?ιψ in its proper sense.—ψπο and ψςς are also associated on account of the similarity of sound. The former occurs, beside passages like Isaiah 24:14; Isaiah 26:19; Isaiah 35:2; Isaiah 42:11, etc., also in Isaiah 12:6; the latter Isaiah 15:4. Neither occurs again in the Passive conjugation used here.
Isaiah 16:11. Mark the assonance in χִ ?ψְ ?αִּ ?ι and χִ ?ιψηָֽ ?ψֶ ?ωׂ. Likely it is purely out of regard for such assonance that the name of this single city is here repeated. This passage generally, especially from Isaiah 16:6 on, is extraordinarily rich in such assonances.
Isaiah 16:12. On δαξδ comp. on δַ ?αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊ Isaiah 15:2, and ξַֽ ?ςֲ ?μֵ ?δαָ ?ξָ ?δ Jeremiah 48:35.—πִ ?μְ ?ΰָ ?δ Isaiah 1:14; Isaiah 47:13.—δϊτμμ occurs not seldom in Isaiah 37:15; Isaiah 37:21; Isaiah 38:2; Isaiah 44:17; Isaiah 45:14; Isaiah 45:20.—ιָ ?λμ without expressed object, with the meaning “to put through, accomplish,” occurs only here in Isaiah. Of another sort are the instances Isaiah 1:13; Isaiah 7:1; Isaiah 29:11, and often. On the contrary this usage is frequent in Jeremiah 3:5; Jeremiah 5:22; Jeremiah 20:7. Comp. 1 Kings 22:22.
AND 1. By the words Isaiah 16:1-5 the Prophet had indicated to Moab the way by which it might escape destruction. Unhappily he must verify that Moab has no mind to follow this way of deliverance. It is much too proud for that: its old haughtiness is exhibited in a ruinous manner (Isaiah 16:6). Therefore the judgments run their course: lamentation fills the whole land. But three localities become especially prominent in the general chorus of those that lament, which hitherto had been just the places of most joyous pleasure: Kir-hareseth with its grape confections (Isaiah 16:7), Heshbon with its fruitful meadows, Sib-ma with its vine culture (Isaiah 16:8).
The misery is so great that the Prophet, as feeling the contagion, must not only outwardly join in the lament of the places named (Isaiah 16:9-10), but also feels himself moved in his inmost by the universal distress (Isaiah 16:11). And though now Moab turns to his idols with fervent entreaty, yet, of course, that is of no avail (Isaiah 16:12).
2. We have heard—not be so.
Isaiah 16:6. What the Prophet urged Isaiah 16:1-5, is made nugatory by the pride of Moab. Jeremiah 48:11 compares Moab to wine not drawn off from vessel to vessel, but ever settled on its lees. That means: Moab has always remained in his land: never gone into exile. Thereby has been developed in him a strong sense of strength and security (comp. Isaiah 25:11; Jeremiah 48:14; Jeremiah 48:17-18; Jeremiah 48:25-26; Jeremiah 48:29; Zephaniah 2:8; Zephaniah 2:10).
3. Therefore—the sea.Isaiah 16:7-8. The Prophet now describes the consequences of this haughtiness. Moab must then howl for it. Moab howls to Moab, i.e. as the Prophet (Isaiah 15:3, “all of it shall howl,”) himself declares every thing howls, and thus the cry of lament from one locality meets that of the next. For not for its neighbor does each locality lament, but for itself; but this howling is heard from one place to the other. [“It is better to adhere to the common interpretation of μξεΰα as denoting the subject or occasion of the lamentation:—the simplest supposition is that Moab for Moab means Moab for itself.—J. A. A.].
In what follows, several localities present themselves to the view of the Prophet elevated above the general level of universal lament, and these are such localities that hitherto had produced the most precious gifts of field or vineyard, and thus had been the places of most joyous pleasures. Kir-hareseth, (comp. Isaiah 16:11, Jeremiah 48:11; Jeremiah 48:31; Jeremiah 48:36; 2 Kings 3:25), since Vitringa, has been recognized as identical with Kir-Moab Isaiah 16:1, and perhaps so named on account of its brick walls. It sighs for its grape cakes; and as a further reason for the mourning it is said that the meadows of Heshbon (Isaiah 15:4) are withered and dry. The Essebonitis (Josephus Antiq. xii, 4, 11) was very fruitful. Thence came the celebrated grain of Minnith, Ezekiel 27:17. “The traveller Legh brought so-called Heshbon wheat to England with stalks 5΄ 1΄΄ long and having 84 grains in the ear, which weighed four times as much as an English ear of wheat (Leyrer in Herz.
R. Encycl. VI., p. 21).—Sibmah (Numbers 32:3 ωְׂ ?αָ ?ν, comp. Numbers 16:38; Joshua 13:19) according to Jerome on Jeremiah 48:32, say only 500 paces from Heshbon. The vines of Sibmah are cut down by the lords of the nations, i.e. the leaders of the heathen host. If these words were understood to mean that the vines by the power of their wine overcame the lords of the nations, then nothing would be said of the calamity that overtook the vines themselves. [Of the exposition here objected to, J.
A. A. says: “This ingenious exposition (scil. of Cocceius) is adopted by Vitringa, Lowth, Hitzig, Maurer, Hendewerk, De Wette, Knobel, on the ground of its agreement with the subsequent praises of the vine of Sibmah. Gesenius objects that there is then no mention of the wasting of the vineyards by the enemy unless this can be supposed to be included in ΰξμμ “languish.” Besides Gesenius, Rosenmueller, Ewald, Umbreit, and most of the older writers make ωׂ ?ψεχιδ the object of the verb δμν instead of its subject.” See Text. and Gram.]. In order to make a due impression of the damage done by cutting down the vines of Sibmah, the Prophet presents a picture of the extent of their culture. It reached to Jazer northward, and eastward to the desert they wandered, i.e. the vines extended in wild growth. Jazer (Numbers 32:1; Numbers 32:3; Numbers 32:35; Joshua 13:25, and often) now a cluster of ruins of Siev, according to the Onomasticon, lay 15 Roman miles north of Heshbon.
The vigorous growth of the vine is, even in our colder climate, something extraordinary. It is quite possible that in that warm and fruitful land the vine, by root-sprouts, spread itself, extending beyond the limits of cultivation, till it was stopped by the sand of the desert. But to the sea also it spread. What sea is this? Jer. (Jeremiah 48:32) understands thereby “the sea of Jazer.” That can be nothing but a pool or basin (comp. “the sea,” in the temple, 1 Kings 7:23 sqq.). But our context demands that we look rather for a sea lying to the south or west; for the extension of the vines northward and eastward has already been mentioned.
If it is to be described as an extension on every side, there is only wanting the southern and western direction, or, as combining both, the south-western. Southwest of Sibmah lay the Dead Sea. This the Prophet means (comp. 2 Chronicles 20:2). But I would not, with Delitzsch, take ςָֽ ?αְ ?ψεּ, “they passed over,” as a hyperbolical expression for “extended close to it.” We may without ado understand the expression in its full and proper sense. Did not Engedi, celebrated for its vine culture (Son 1:14), lie on the west shore of the Dead Sea in a corner, splendidly watered by a spring? And there, only a few hours further westward, lay Hebron, also renowned for its wine (Numbers 13:24, Herz.
R. Encycl. XVII., p. 611). It is only a bold poetic view when the Prophet treats the vines that grow on the western shore of the Dead Sea as runners from those that grow so gloriously on the east shore in Moab.
4. Therefore I will——shouting to cease.
Isaiah 16:9-10. The Prophet cannot restrain himself from joining in the heart-rending lament that he hears proceeding from Moab. One may know by that how fearful it must be. For if even the enemy feels compassion the misery must have reached the acme. [“The emphasis does not lie merely in the Prophet’s feeling for a foreign nation, but in his feeling for a guilty race, on whom he was inspired to denounce the wrath of God.”—J. A. A.]. αִּ ?αְ ?λִ ?ι is not = λִּ ?αְ ?αִ ?ι; and therefore the Prophet does not say that he weeps “as bitterly as Jazer,” but that among the voices of the people of Jazer, his too is to be heard.
He mingles with those who are most troubled about the ruin of the vines of Sibmah because they are most particularly affected by it. For neither the desert, whither the vines “wander,” nor the region west of the Dead Sea can be so concerned about the destruction of the grape culture in the central point Sibmah, as the neighboring Jazer. The Prophet will moisten with his tears the fields of Heshbon and Elealeh (Isaiah 15:4). These withered fields (Isaiah 16:8) may well stand in need of such moistening, for on the fruit and grain harvests there has fallen the shout (see Text and Gram.) of the harvesters or rather of the wine-treaders, an expression that can only be chosen in bitter irony. For it is the devastating feet of the enemy that have so trampled the fruitful meadows and pressed the sap out of every living plant, so that they now lie there withered. In consequence of this wine treading, joy and jubilee are (thus and together) wrested away from the cultivated fields.
5. Wherefore——not prevail.
Isaiah 16:11-12. The “therefore” of Isaiah 16:11, stands parallel with the “therefore” of Isaiah 16:9. Moab’s misery described Isaiah 16:7-8, has a double effect on the Prophet: first it constrains him to outward expression of sympathy, to weep along with them: he feels, so to speak, the contagion of the universal weeping: second, he feels himself really moved inwardly. He feels this emotion in his bowels, for the motions of the affection find their echo in the noble organs of the body. The expression δָ ?ξָ ?δ “to sound,” is often used of the bowels; indeed in relation to God Himself: Isaiah 63:15; Jeremiah 31:20; comp. Lamentations 1:20; Lamentations 2:11; Jeremiah 4:19.
But the greatest misfortune of all in the whole affair is that Moab does not know the true source of all consolation. Would it only know that, then would its sorrow and the sorrow on account of Moab not be so great. But Moab appears on the high place consecrated to his god Chemosh, and torments himself to weariness. Examples of such self-tormenting, and sore sacrifices for the sake of obtaining what is prayed for, are presented by every sort of false religion, comp. 1 Kings 18:28, and by Moabite history itself in the offering of his own son by Mesa (Mesha) 2 Kings 3:27.—But all that shall be of no avail.
Footnotes:as very proud.omit even of.the vanity of his pretension.to.grape cakes.Or, mutter.sigh.wholly stricken.are withered.Omit the.choice.reached.to.Or, plucked up.vintage shout is fallen on, etc.Or, the alarm is fallen upon, etc.moisten.shall not tread wine.when Moab appears, when it afflicts itself on, etc., when it come to, etc:so he shall not.b) The later prophecy: more exact determination of the period of its fulfilment Isaiah 16:13-1413 This is the word that the Lord hath spoken concerning Moab since that time.
14 But now the Lord hath spoken, saying,
Within three years, as the years of an hireling,
And the glory of Moab shall be contemned,
With all that great multitude;
And the remnant shall be very small and feeble.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_16:14. αְּ before λμδξεοδψα is construed by some as designative of the part in which Moab suffers diminution, by others as the αְּ of association. The former construction does not answer because it restricts the diminution of Moab to a falling off of the dense population solely. Therefore I prefer with Delitzsch the second explanation according to which it is affirmed that Moab’s glory, i.e., power and riches together with the crowded population shall be destroyed.—δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο, comp. Isaiah 13:4; Isaiah 17:12; Isaiah 29:5, and often.—ξςθξζςψ stand together as in Isaiah 10:25. The expression λַּ ?αִּ ?ιψ occurs only in Job and Isaiah, comp. Isaiah 10:13; Isaiah 17:12; Isaiah 28:2. It seems as if in this place the Prophet has in mind Job 36:5, where it reads: δֶ ?οΞΰֵ ?μλַּ ?αִּ ?ιψεְ ?μֹ ?ΰιִ ?ξְ ?ΰַ ?ν.
TEXTUAL AND 1. Isaiah felt himself moved to repeat a prophecy against Moab, which was imparted to him at an earlier period, and to fix accurately the term of its fulfilment. For in precisely three years it will be all over with the glory of Moab, and only an inferior remnant of it will be left.
2. This is the word——feeble.
Isaiah 16:13-14. There are instances elsewhere of a Prophet, receiving command not to publish a prophecy at once, but to treasure it up with a view to later publication (comp. Jeremiah 8:1 sqq., Jeremiah 30:8; Jeremiah 51:60 sqq.) Here we have the reverse of this procedure. Isa., receives command now to publish a revelation that was imparted to him at an earlier date, with more particular designation of the term of its fulfilment that was before left undetermined. If the prophecy was not imparted to him but to another, why should he not name this other? Would Isaiah deck himself in the plumage of another?
No one needed this less than he. Nor was it unnecessary to mention the name. For a nameless prophecy lacks all authority. At most it could be said Isaiah recognized the word as genuine word of prophecy, and published it under the seal of his name and authority, like Isaiah 2:2-4, he takes a prophecy of Micah for a foundation. But against this is the fact that this passage bears on the face of it too undeniably the stamp of the spirit, and language of Isaiah. Therefore, ξΰζ, “aforetime,” must only mean that some time before he had received this revelation.
By ξֵ ?ΰָ ?ζ is not indicated a definite measure of time. It is also elsewhere found opposed to the ςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ, “now,” Isaiah 48:7.——Why the Prophet chose just that season for publishing designated by “now,” and what season this might be, we have not the means of knowing. In no case was the prophecy fulfilled in one act. Here too, as so often, the fulfilment is dispersed through many stages, which the Prophet himself does not distinguish. The end of the three years needed only to coincide with a fact which bore with it in principle the fall of Moab, to assure the relative fulfilment of the prophecy, for to the absolute fulfilment belongs of course the entire time following. It is quite possible that the Prophet received the prompting to the first prophecy against Moab (Isaiah 15:1 to Isaiah 16:12) from the event of the Moabites occupying the east Jordan territory of Gad and Reuben which was depopulated by Pul and Tiglath-Pileser (1 Chronicles 5:6; 1 Chronicles 5:26; 2 Kings 15:29), although in our chapters there occurs no express reference to such an act of enmity against Israel (comp.
VaihingerinHerz.R. Encycl. IX. p. 662). Isaiah published this prophecy later when the first act of the judgment was in prospect, that was to make a definitive end of the state of Moab. But we are not able to say wherein this first act consisted. Yet that it was only a first act, appears from the fact that more than a hundred years later, Jeremiah once again prophesied the judgment of destruction against Moab (Jeremiah 48).—In three years, that should be reckoned like the years of an hireling, i.e., close, without abbreviation to his advantage, and without extension to his hurt (the expression occurs again Isaiah 21:16), in three years, therefore, Moab’s glory was to be made insignificant (Isaiah 3:5).
Footnotes:at one time.Ana.Or, not many. AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 15:1. “Although the Prophets belonged to the Jewish people, and were sent especially for the sake of the Jewish people, yet as God would that all men should come to repentance and the knowledge of the truth, therefore at times also the Prophets were called on to go out of these limits, and preach to other nations for a sign against them, that they might have nothing whereby to excuse themselves.”—Cramer.2. On Isaiah 15:2 sqq. “Against the wrath of God, neither much money and land, nor a well equipped nation, nor great and strong cities, nor flight from one place to another avail anything, but true repentance (Psalms 33:16 sq.). Whoever forsakes God in good days, He will forsake again in misfortune, and then they can find nowhere rest or refuge (Proverbs 1:24 sqq.).—Starke.3. On Isaiah 15:7. “What a man unjustly makes, that another unjustly takes.”—Starke.4.
On Isaiah 15:8 sq. “God is wont, in His judgments, to proceed by degrees, to begin with lesser punishments, and proceed to the sorer (Leviticus 26:18; Leviticus 26:21; Leviticus 26:24; Leviticus 26:28). Although the godless escape one misfortune yet they soon fall into another.”—Starke.5. On Isaiah 16:1 sqq. “God can quickly bring it about that the people that once gave us sheltering entertainment must in turn, look to us for entertainment and a lurking place. For in the famine, Naomi and her husband and sons were pilgrims in the land of Moab (Rth 1:1). David procured a refuge for his parents among the Moabites (1 Samuel 22:3). Now their affairs are in so bad a case that they, who were able to afford shelter to others, must themselves go wandering among others; for human fortune is unstable.”—Cramer.6.
On Isaiah 16:4. “God therefore threatens the Moabites, at the same time winning them to repentance, for He seeks not the death of the sinner (Ezekiel 18:32). Thus it was still a season for repentance. For had the Moabites once again used hospitality, then again had mercy been extended to them.”—Cramer.7. On Isaiah 16:5. “Light arises to the pious in the darkness from the Gracious, Merciful and Just One. His heart is of good courage and fears not, till he sees his desire on his enemies (Psalms 112:4; Psalms 112:8). And as it went well with Jerusalem, while it went ill with the Moabites, thus shall Christ’s kingdom stand, and the enemies go down.
For it is an everlasting kingdom, and the set up tabernacle of David shall surely remain (Amos 9:11)”—Cramer.8. On Isaiah 16:6 sqq. “Moab was a haughty nation, for it was rich and had everything abundant. For it commonly goes thus, that where one is full, there the heart is lifted up, and the legs must be strong that can bear good days.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 16:9 sqq. “Such must be the disposition of teachers and preachers, that for the sake of their office, they should and must castigate injustice for God’s sake, but with those that suffer the punishment they must be pitiful in heart. And therefore they must be the sin’s enemy, and the persons’ friend. Example: Micah announces the punishment to Jerusalem yet howls over it, testifies also his innermost condolence by change of clothing (Micah 1:8).
Samuel announces destruction to Saul and has sorrow for him (1 Samuel 15:26; 1 Samuel 16:1). Likewise Christ announces every sort of evil to the Jews, and yet weeps bitterly (Luke 19:41). Paul preaches the frightful rejection of the Jews, and yet wishes it were possible to purchase their salvation by His eternal hurt (Romans 9:3).”—Cramer.10. On Isaiah 16:14. “Exceeding, and very great is the grace and friendliness of God, that in the midst of the punishments that He directs against the Moabites, He yet thinks on His mercy. For the Lord is good unto all and has compulsion on all His works (Psalms 145:9).”—Cramer.11. On Isaiah 16:12.
Hypocritae, ubi, etc. “Hypocrites, whose souls are filled with impious notions of God, are much more vehement in their exercises than the truly pious in the true worship of God. And this is the first retribution of the impious, that they are wasted by their own labor which they undertake of their own accord. Another is that those exercises are vain in time of need and profit nothing. Therefore their evils are born with the greatest uneasiness, nor do they see any hope of aid. On the contrary true piety, because it knows that it is the servant of Christ, suffers indeed externally, yet conquers the cross by the confidence which it has in Christ.”—Luther.12. On Isaiah 16.
Genuineness. [Barnes in loc. forcibly presents the argument for the gennineness of these prophecies afforded by the numerous mention of localities and the prediction of the desolations that would overtake them. In doing so he quotes also the language of Prof. Shedd. (Bib. Repos. Vol. VII., pp. 108 sq.).
Barnes says: “That evidence is found in the particularity with which places are mentioned; and in the fact that impostors would not specify places, any further than was unavoidable. Mistakes, we all know, are liable to be made by those who attempt to describe the geography of places which they have not seen. Yet here is a description of a land and its numerous towns, made nearly three thousand years ago, and in its particulars it is sustained by all the travellers of modern times. The ruins of the same towns are still seen; their places in general can be designated; and there is a moral certainty, therefore, that this prophecy was made by one who knew the locality of those places, and that, therefore, the prophecy is ancient and genuine.”—”Every successive traveller who visits Moab, Idumea or Palestine, does something to confirm the accuracy of Isaiah. Towns bearing the same name, or the ruins of towns, are located in the same relative position in which he said they were and the ruins of once splendid cities, broken columns, dilapidated walls, trodden down vineyards, and half demolished temples proclaim to the world that those cities are what he said they would be, and that he was under the inspiration of God.” See Keith on Prophecy, whose whole book is but the amplification of this argument. The modern traveller, who explores those regions with Isaiah in one hand and Robinson’s Researches or Murray’s Guide in the other, has a demonstration that Isaiah was as surely written with the accurate knowledge of those regions in their day of prosperity and populous cities, as that the accounts of Robinson, Tristram or Murray’s Guide were written by those who only had a knowledge of their ruins and desolations.—Tr.].
HINTS1. On Isaiah 16:5. This text can be used on the Reformation Feast, at Synods, Missionary Anniversaries and similar occasions. The Throne of the Lord Jesus Christ. I. Its Foundation: Grace. II. The Substance of which it is made: Truth. III. The Place where it stands: The Tabernacle of David. IV. The Object, for whose attainment it is set up: Justice and Righteousness.
2. On Isaiah 16:6-14. Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is the people’s destruction (Proverbs 14:34). Therefore the salvation of a people, rests on their knowing and serving the Lord. The example of Moab proves this. We learn from it: What a People must shun and do that salvation may be its portion. I. It must shun, a) pride (Isaiah 16:6); b) false and external worship (Isaiah 16:12). II. It must serve the Lord, who is a) a true, b) an almighty, c) a holy and just God.
3. AGAINST SYRIA-EPHRAIM AND -EGYPT
Isaiah 17-20The prophecies contained in Isaiah 17-20. have this much in common, that they are directed against two double nations. For as here Syria and Ephraim belong together, so there Ethiopia and Egypt. Thus in the north and south the gaze of the Prophet falls on a double nation, and in each case the remoter nation is the more heterogeneous. Then all these prophecies point to the future of Assyria. But they do so in a very different sense. In Isaiah 17, Assyria appears as instrument for accomplishing the judgment on the neighboring enemy of Judah, Syria and Israel.
But immediately thereafter (Isaiah 17:12-14) destruction is announced against Assyria itself, so that 17 can conclude with the words: “This is the portion of them that spoil us and the lot of them that rob us.” But Assyria threatened not merely Judah and its next neighbors. The terror of it went further: it extended into distant lands. To these belonged also Ethiopia. Therefore on this account the Prophet announces to Ethiopia, too, the impending danger proceeding from Assyria. And this announcement could so much the more find a place here as the Prophet at the same time had to announce the putting aside of this danger by the same overthrow of the Assyrians that (Isaiah 17:12-14) he holds up to view as the delivering event for Judah. Thus the Prophet in so far points away to a future of Assyria which is to it fatal, and on that account for Judah full of comfort.
Hence these chapters involve the warning to fear neither Syria-Ephraim nor Assyria. We can say therefore, that the contents of Isaiah 17. correspond to the contents of the first and third part of the prophetic-cycle 7–12. For we find here everything that is set forth in extenso Isaiah 7:1 to Isaiah 9:6, and then again Isaiah 10:5 to Isaiah 11:16, given compactly in the brief space of one chapter. Regarding the period of their composition, we must ascribe 17 and 18 to the same time. For in both Assyria is spoken of in the same sense, i.e., the overthrow of Assyria is held up to view in both, and not the victory as in 19 and 20. But then in both passages this overthrow is spoken of in such a way that one sees the lines of perspective of both pictures of the future meet in the historical event that is described Isaiah 37:36 sqq.
To this is added what Drechsler calls attention to, that chapter 18. has no superscription, but appears with its δει, “woe,” to join on to the “woe” of Isaiah 17:12. Drechsler, indeed, urges the unity too strongly (in his Commentary, and Stud. u. Krit., 1847, p. 857 sqq.). Yet one don’t see why the Prophet should have set just Ethiopia parallel with Judah. This is only conceivable if chapter 18 was not conceived ad hoc, but was put here only as a parallel actually existing and, according to the reference of Isa 17:5-6, a fitting parallel. But, as already said, the two passages, as regards their origin, belong to one period.
And inasmuch as, according to Isaiah 17:1-3, Damascus and Ephraim still stood intact, we must ascribe both chapters 17, 18, to the beginning of the reign of Ahaz, the time to which chapters Isaiah 7:1 to Isaiah 9:6 owe their origin. We would then have in our chapters a proof that Isaiah, at that time not only foresaw the significance of Assyria as an instrument of punishment, but also its destruction.
Chapters 19 and 20, also treat of the future of Assyria, but in the opposite sense: for chapter 19, holds up to the view of Egypt its destruction. Who will be the instrument of this destruction is not said. It is known only from Isaiah 17:16, 17 that it is the God of Israel that causes the ruin to fall on Egypt. But when, now, Isaiah 17:23 sqq., the view is displayed in the still more remote future of the most intimate friendship between Egypt and Assyria, and great salvation for both, so it results, by force of the contrast implied, that Assyria must previously have been the enemy and destroyer of Egypt. And this, then, is said in express words in chapter 20, which is related to chapter 19, as an explanatory sequel. Evidently, therefore, chapters 19, 20, involve for Judah the warning that confederacy with Egypt is of no avail against Assyria.
The Lord has given Egypt inevitably into the hand of Assyria in the immediate future. From this we recognize that these chapters must have been written at a time when Judah needed such a warning against false reliance on the protection of Egypt against the danger that threatened on the side of Assyria. Such was the case in the time of Hezekiah. We learn from 28–32, that an “Egyptian policy” was the great theocratic error of the reign of Hezekiah. Moreover the date given Isaiah 20:1 (see comment in loc.), according to the Assyrian monuments, refers us to the year 711, the 17th year of Hezekiah, for the beginning, and Isaiah 20:3 to the year 708, as the period of the conclusion, and of the prophetic indication of that typical transaction. According to that, chapter 20 cannot have been written before the year 708 b. c., and the words, “and fought against Ashdod and took it,” Isaiah 17:1 b are, relatively, indeed, but not absolutely considered, an historical anticipation.
But our chapters have still a further peculiarity in common. That is to say, with exception of chapter 20, they are all of them comprehensive surveys, while chapter 20, as already said, only more nearly determines a chief point left indistinct in chapter 19. For the Prophet comprehends here, as in one look, the entire future of all the nations mentioned in these chapters, down into the remotest Messianic time, where all shall belong to the kingdom of peace that the Messiah shall found. Israel (and by implication Syria, comp. on “as the glory,” etc. Isaiah 17:3, and “a man,” Isaiah 17:7), Judah, Ethiopia, Egypt, Assyria, all of them shall with one accord serve the Lord, and in equal measure enjoy His blessing. Connected therewith is the fact that these chapters (20 excepted, for the reason given) form a total by themselves, in that they sketch, prophetic fashion, in grand brevity, a panorama of the future history of the nations in question.
But as regards the relation of this second element, the Messianic to the first, the Assyrian, it must be observed that the former in chapters 18, 19, forms quite normally the conclusion. But in 17, the Assyrian element forms the conclusion, and indeed it is joined on in a loose and unconnected way. In Isaiah 17:9-11, the cause of the fall described Isaiah 17:4-6 is assigned in only an incidental way, so that the Messianic element (Isaiah 17:7-8) has, so to speak, a subsequent endorser in this reason assigned. Yet this style of adding the reason after describing the event has many examples. But the words Isaiah 17:12-14 certainly give the impression of being a later addition, yet one that in any case proceeds from the Prophet himself. Without this addition there would be wanting to 17, one of the two elements that characterize chapters 17–20.
With it, chapter 17 not only becomes homogeneous with the following chapters, but also it becomes complete in itself (comp. Isaiah 17:14 b), and receives a bridge that unites it with chap. 18.
We may group the four chapters in the following fashion:—
a) Prophecies that give warning not to be afraid either of Syria-Ephraim, or Assyria (17, 18).
α. Damascus and Ephraim mow and in time to come (18).
β. Ethiopia now and in time to come (18).
b) Prophecies that give warning not to trust to false help against Assyria (19, 20).
α. Egypt now and in time to come (19).
β. The Assyrian captivity of Egypt (20).
__________________
a) Prophecies that give warning not to be afraid either of Syria-Ephraim or AssyriaIsa 17, 18α) AND EPHRAIM NOW AND IN TIME TO COME 17ΰ) The destruction of Damascus and Ephraim Isaiah 17:1-31 The Burden of Damascus.
Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city,
And it shall be a ruinous heap.
2 The cities of Aroer are forsaken:
They shall be for flocks,
Which shall lie down and none shall make them afraid.
3 The fortress also shall cease from Ephraim,
And the kingdom from Damascus, and the remnant of Syria:
They shall be as the glory of the children of Israel,
Saith the Lord of hosts.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_17:1. In this verse the m sound predominates in a way not to be mistaken.—The participle ξεּ ?ρָ ?ψ occurs again 1 Samuel 21:7.—The construction with ξִ ?ο as e.g. εַ ?ιִּ ?ξְ ?ΰָ ? ?ֽ ?ρְ ?κָ ξִ ?ξֶּ ?μֶ ?κְ 1 Samuel 15:23.—ξְ ?ςִ ?ι is chosen for the sake of the paronomasia with ξֵ ?ςִ ?ιψ. It stands only here for the elsewhere usual ςִ ?ι. [Imitated in Naegelsbach’s translation by: “verworfen als Stadt und wird eine Trummers tatat.—Tr.].—Also ξַ ?τָּ ?μָ ?δ (of the same meaning as ξַ ?τֵּ ?μָ ?δ Isaiah 23:13; Isaiah 25:2; and partly ξַ ?τֶּ ?μֶ ?ϊ Ezekiel 26:15; Ezekiel 26:18, and often) occurs only here.
Isaiah 17:2, In this verse there occurs no m sound excepting ξ in the last word. On the other hand the r, hissing and dental sounds predominate.—It is debatable whether ςψις ?Χ ? is equivalent to αְּ ?πεֹ ?ϊςΧ (compare ςָ ?ψֵ ?ιηֶ ?ωְׁ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ο Joshua 13:17) or is to be construed as appositional genitive. I would not against the former of these explanations oppose what Gesenius (Thes. pag, 1074, comp. 1005) cites against himself, that Aroer was no metropolis. For even if it were not the capital of a land, it might still be the central point of a number of smaller cities or villages.—ςζαεϊ is = derelictae, desertae (Isaiah 17:9; Isaiah 6:12; Jeremiah 4:29).—ψαυεΰιοξηψιγ is a form of speech borrowed from Job (Job 11:19) and reproduced later by Zephaniah (Isaiah 3:13).
Isaiah 17:3. Notice the alliteration of the first half of the verse. As ωְׁ ?ΰָ ?ψ is not ceteri, but reliqui, I regard it as more accurate to connect εωׁ ?ΰψΰψν with what follows than with what precedes.
AND 1. The Prophet makes the Syrian capital his starting point, announcing to it first that it will be reduced to a place of ruin (Isaiah 17:1). From there he turns to the territory of Israel, and traverses first east Jordan Israel to its extremest point (Isaiah 17:2), then passes over to west Jordan, and thence returns back to Damascus (Isaiah 17:3). Thus he describes a circuit, carries the destruction over Gilead to Ephraim and thence back to Damascus so that thus Ephraim becomes as Damascus and Damascus as Ephraim; thus both, as they are politically closely united, appear joined in a common ruin.
2. The burden of Damascus—heap.Isaiah 17:1. ξַ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰγξωׂ ?χ, “Burden of Damascus,” is in so far an inexact expression as chap. 17 does not merely treat of a judgment against Damascus, but of a judgment upon Ephraim and Assyria. But the expression seems to be chosen for the sake of conformity with the other sections of the collection, chapters 13–23. But it must not here be construed in the sense of giving the contents; it is a simple nota, a mere designation to distinguish and mark a beginning. As regards the fulfilment, we see from Isaiah 8:4 that Isaiah sees the time near at hand when the plunder of Damascus shall be carried before the king of Assyria, and according to Isaiah 10:9 this capture has already resulted. Schrader (Die Keilinschriften und das A.
T., p. 150 sq. u. 152 sq.) imparts from Layard’s inscriptions (London, 1851, Fol.), an inscription that is unfortunately somewhat obliterated, but is still plain enough to make known that Tiglath-Pileser, by means of an expedition lasting two years (according to Schrader, they were the years 733 and 732 B. C.; according to the list of regents, the thirteenth and fourteenth year of this king), destroyed the kingdom of Damascus. The inscription reads: “. … whose number cannot be numbered. … I caused to be beheaded;. … of (Bin) hadar, the palace of the father of Rezin (Ra-sun-ni, Ra-sun-nu) of Damascus, (situated on) inaccessible mountains. … I besieged, captured; 8000 inhabitants together with their property; Mitinti of Ascalon. … I led forth into captivity; five hundred (and eighteen, according to Smith) cities from sixteen districts of the Damascus land I desolated like a heap of rubbish.” But it is of course to be noticed that this catastrophe was only a temporary one. For Jeremiah 49:23-27 and Ezekiel 27:18 knew Damascus again as a city existing in their time. On the whole Damascus is almost the only one of all the cities of biblical antiquity that flourishes still down to the present day.
3. The cities of Aroer—afraid.Isaiah 17:2. Three cities of Old Testament mention are called by the name Aroer: 1) a city in Judah (1 Samuel 30:28) which cannot by any means be meant here; 2) a city in the tribe of Gad, which according to Joshua 13:25 (comp. Judges 11:33) lay “before Rabbah; 3) a city in the tribe of Reuben, situated on the north bank of the Arnon (Deuteronomy 2:36; Joshua 12:2; Joshua 13:9; Joshua 13:16; Judges 11:26; 2 Kings 10:33, and often). But if the Prophet meant only one of the two Aroers, then we miss an element that is of importance in the connection of thought of our passage. Are both Aroers meant, then the Southern one, on the bank of Arnon, must be one of them.
But in that case the words “cities of Arnon” involve the sense: the entire east Jordan territory. But also the etymological primary sense (ςַ ?ψְ ?ςָ ?ψ = nudus, “bare,” ςֲ ?ψִ ?ιψִ ?ι inops, “poor”) recommended the mention of the name of these cities. So that it thus seems to have been chosen for a threefold reason (see Text. and Gram.). From Damascus the judgment of God moves southward like a tempest or a hail cloud through Gilead to rebound from the mountain chain of Abarim and be deflected thereby westward across the Jordan into the territory of Ephraim. Thus all Gilead becomes unfitted for human habitation. Only herds of animals stop there, that can repose without fear of disturbance.—The occupation of a region by herds is also in other places named as the sign of a desert condition: Isaiah 17:10; Zephaniah 2:14, and often.
[In regard to “cities of Aroer,” J. A. A. says: “It is now commonly agreed that the place meant is the northern Aroer, east of Jordan, and that its cities are the towns around it, and perhaps dependent on it.”]
4. The fortress—of hosts.Isaiah 17:3. The Prophet now takes Ephraim and Syria together. Of the former shall be done away all ξִ ?αְ ?φָ ?ψ (collective, “all defense”). Thereby the cities of Ephraim also cease to be cities (Isaiah 17:1). For in that no longer patriarchal but warlike time and region, whatever was without wall was a village.
Comp. ςִ ?ιψξִ ?αְ ?φָ ?ψ “fenced cities,” opposed to λָּ ?τָ ?ψ or λֹּ ?τֶ ?ψ “hamlet, village,” 1 Samuel 6:18, and often. As, therefore, “The fortress ceases from Ephraim,” ( ? ?πωׁ ?αϊξΧξΰΧ, recalls ξερψξςιψ “rejected as city,” Isaiah 17:1), the end returns to the beginning, and with the following words “the kingdom of Damascus,” the Prophet actually arrives back in Damascus, whence he started out, so that he has thus described a circuit. With what art the Prophet intimates that not only Ephraim becomes as Damascus (by the πωׁ ?αϊξαφψ), but also Damascus as Ephraim! Are the cities of Ephraim and Damascus become villages, then Damascus can neither maintain its ancient rank as a royal city, nor the cities of Ephraim their ancient glory Both must fall and go to ruin. “As the glory of the children of Israel” must, of course, be intended in the first place ironically. Ephraim had joined itself closely with Syria to the great terror of Judah (Isaiah 7:2; Isaiah 8:12). Isaiah shows here how this close political coalition will turn to their destruction, engulfing them in one common ruin.
But when Isaiah 17:4 sqq. it is seen what will be the fate of the glory of Jacob, viz.: that it will return from the fallen estate of remoteness from God to the glory of nearness to God, then it will not appear an error if in “the remnant of Syria” is seen an allusion to “the remnant of Israel,” and in the likeness of name an intimation of a likeness of destiny that is to be hoped for: Comp. on ΰָ ?γָ ?ν “a man,” Isaiah 17:7.
[In regard to the ironical and sarcastic meaning attached to the expression “the glory of Israel,” a notion as old as Jerome, J. A. A. says “it seems to mean simply what is left of their former glory.”]
Footnotes:And they shall lie down and there shall be no one making them afraid.
α) Ephraim (and Damascus) small and again great Isaiah 17:4-84 And in that day it shall come to pass, that the glory of Jacob shall be made thin,
And the fatness of his flesh shall wax lean.
5 And it shall be as when the harvestman gathereth the corn,
And reapeth the ears with his arm;
And it shall be as he that gathereth ears in the valley of Rephaim.
6 Yet gleaning grapes shall be left in it, as the shaking of an olive tree,
Two or three berries in the top of the uppermost bough,
Four or five in the outmost fruitful branches thereof,
Saith the Lord God of Israel.
7 At that day shall a man look to his Maker,
And his eyes shall have respect to the Holy One of Israel.
8 And he shall not look to the altars, the work of his hands,
Neither shall respect that which his fingers have made,
Either the groves or the images.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_17:4. ξωׁ ?ξο again only Isaiah 10:16.—ψζδ Niph. emaciari only here; comp. Isaiah 10:18.
Isaiah 17:5. χָ ?ξָ ?δ Isaiah 37:27.—εְ ?δָ ?ιδָ “and it goes,” comp. Isaiah 13:14.—χָ ?φִ ?ιψ is difficult. The connection leads us first to expect the meaning “reaper,” and many take it so, letting χָ ?φִ ?ιψ be said metonymically for χεֹ ?φֵ ?ψ or ΰַ ?πְ ?ωֵׁ ?ιχφιψ (Gesen.). Others take χָ ?ξָ ?δ in apposition with χָ ?φִ ?ιψ, or χָ ?φִ ?ιψ = “harvest time” (when the harvest time takes away the stalks. Ewald). χָ ?φִ ?ιψ may also be treated as accusative of time: “As one gathers stalks of grain in the harvest.” All of these explanations have a certain harshness. Against Delitzsch, who makes χφιψ=χεֹ ?φֵ ?ψ it may be objected: why does Isaiah use this very common word in a sense that it never has elsewhere, and for which sense there offered another word (χεֹ ?φֵ ?ψ Psalms 29:7; Amos 9:13; Jeremiah 9:21, and often) equally current?
The same may be objected also to Gesenius and Ewald. To take χξδ as apposition is harsh for the reason that then one of the two words would be superfluous. I therefore prefer to take χφιψ as accusative of time, and to regard the word as a substantive treated adverbially like other marks of time (αֹּ ?χֶ ?ψ, μַ ?ιְ ?μָ ?δ, ιεν, etc., comp. Ewald, § 204 b).—Then the suffix of ζψςε relates to the notion of reaper ideally present in χφιψ.
Ver 6. πֹ ?χֶ ?σ again only Isaiah 14:13.—βψβψ isἅπ. λεγ.—ΰξιψ only here and Isaiah 17:9.—ρָ ?ςִ ?ισ “branch.” again only Isaiah 27:10. The suffix in ρςιτιδ relates to ;ζַ ?ιִ ?ϊτֹּ ?ψִ ?ιָּ ?δ is in apposition with the suffix (in ramis ejus fecundae) with the signification of an adversative clause.
Isaiah 17:8. The ΰֲ ?ωֵׁ ?ψִ ?ιν (ΰֲ ?ωֵׁ ?ψεֹ ?ϊonly in Judges 3:7; 2 Chronicles 19:3; 2 Chronicles 33:3) are in any case the images or symbols of Astarte, of the female principle, which had the form of στῆλαι, pillars set upright (from ΰָ ?ωַׁ ?ψ rectum, erectum esse, according to Movers; perhaps, according to a statement of Herodotus II. 106, γυναικὸςαἰδοῖα were visible).
AND 1. Like one ties two threads into one knot, so the Prophet, Isaiah 17:3, has entwined in one another the of destiny of Damascus and Ephraim. It is true that in what follows there is nothing more said of Syria. But when it was said, Isaiah 17:3, that “the remnant of Syria” shall be like “the glory of Jacob,” and if now, Isaiah 17:4-8, the course of development of “the glory of Jacob” is portrayed as a prospective sinking to a minimum and then again as a mounting up to the most glorious nearness to God, is not the same course of life by implication prophesied of Syria? Therefore, Ephraim shall be reduced to almost nothing. The Prophet declares this in a threefold image.
First he compares the destruction of Israel to the growing leanness of a fat man (Isaiah 17:4), second to the grain harvest, where the reaper with full arm, cuts and gathers the ears (Isaiah 17:5); third to the olive harvest where the fruits are beaten off the trees. But with this third figure he lets appear already in perspective a better time. The Prophet only indirectly intimates that the tree will be robbed of the chief part of its fruits. He lays the chief stress here on the gleaning: there remain hanging in the top and on the boughs some scattered fruit, that shall be beaten off by subsequent effort (Isaiah 17:6). Thus a remnant is left to Israel, and this remnant shall be converted: Shear-Jashub (Isaiah 10:20 sqq.). Notice with what art this address also is arranged.
There is a crescendo and decrescendo of shadow, which gradually merges into light. In the first figure (Isaiah 17:4) the shadow still appears faint; in the second (Isaiah 17:5) it reaches its full extent; in the third (Isaiah 17:6) it yields unnoticed to the light. This light the Prophet depicts here in the first place from its subjective side, as a turning of the heart to God (Isaiah 17:7) and a turning away from idols (Isaiah 17:8). The objective salvation first appears in the fourth turn of his discourse (Isaiah 17:12-14).
2. And in that day—God of Israel.Isaiah 17:4-6. “In that day” Isaiah 17:4, here refers to the time of judgment announced in Isaiah 17:2-3. “The glory of Jacob,” also refers back to Isaiah 17:3, where the same expression is employed with only the difference of Israel for Jacob, which seems to have a rhetorical reason (comp. Isaiah 9:7). Moreover the Prophet speaks here of Israel-Ephraim in a sense that declares what it has in common with Judah. For the grand outlines of that picture of the future that Isaiah draws here, comprehend equally the history of Judah and Ephraim. Moreover it must not be supposed that Isaiah has in mind only the political ruin that ensued, say after the shining reign of Jeroboam II.
This growing lean embraces the entire time in which the Ten Tribes exist as a remnant. It therefore lasts still at the present time.
The second figure describes the same matter only in greater extent. It is presented in a measure as having three degrees. First, is called to mind how the reaper gathers the standing grain stalks; second, how then the other arm cuts off the ears; third, how the ears are gathered, and that in the valley of Rephaim, the fruitful plain that extends in a south-west direction from Jerusalem. Such a rich harvest shall the enemies hold in Ephraim; so thoroughly, therefore, shall Ephraim be emptied out, plundered. The “gathering of ears” mentioned in the second half of Isa 17:5, may mean the gathering proper for binding into sheaves (Genesis 37:7); but it could mean, too, the gleaning of the ears left lying, as by the poor (Rth 2:2 sqq.). The former better suits the context, in as much as the latter notion appears in the following verse.
In Isaiah 17:5 the whole work of the enemies is described, and that in two stages, that are indicated by the “and it shall be” prefixed, just as the battle and the booty form the two sharply distinguished occupations of the warrior,—The valley of Rephaim is mentioned in the Old Testament, Joshua 15:8; Joshua 18:16; 2 Samuel 15:18; 2 Samuel 15:22; 2 Samuel 23:13. Most persons conclude from our present passage that it was fruitful. Only Ewald [and Aben Ezra, J. A. A.], finds in the passage the notion of a “dry valley,” as he also takes ξμχθ in the sense of gleaning. At present, indeed, the valley is desert (comp.
Knobel in loc.). Further statements see in Arnold’s article “Thδler in Palδstina,” Herz. R. Encycl. xv. p. 614. [“Robinson speaks of it en passant, as the cultivated valley or plain of Rephaim (Palestine I. 323).” J. A. A.].—But (Isaiah 17:6) there is left on him, i.e., on Jacob (we would say “of him,” comp.
Isaiah 10:22) a gleaning secundum percussionem or ad similitudinem percussionis oleae, that is two or three berries in the highest top. Four or five are beaten off with a stick from the branches, because they had not been brought down by the shaking. In the boughs, of course, more remain hanging, because they have greater extent than the tree-top. That is, it is declared, that although the tree is fruitful, yet only a few berries hang on it. Spite of its fruitfulness, it is now so empty that only a little is left for the gleaner. Thus, too, Israel, though now richly blessed, will be reduced to a minimum.
3. At that day—the images.Isaiah 17:7-8). The little gleaning is the small remnant of Israel that plays so great a part in the divine economy of salvation, Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 10:21; Romans 9:27; Romans 11:4 sq. In that day, i.e., when Israel shall be reduced to the small remnant, will the man look (Isaiah 22:4; Isaiah 31:1) to his Maker, the Holy One of Israel (comp. on Isaiah 1:4), but he will cast not one more look of fear and trust toward the idols. At last he sees that they are only the work of his own, of human hands (Isaiah 44:9 sqq.).—δָ ?ΰָ ?γָ ?ν “the man,” is never anywhere else specially used of Israel. The general expression is doubtless chosen because the Prophet declares what concerns not Israel alone, but essentially all mankind, and what especially is applicable to Syria, too, which all along is conceived of as united with Israel.
Two idols are mentioned by name, as those that were particularly worshipped by the idolatrous Israelites: ΰωׁ ?ψιν and ηξπιν. (Isaiah 27:9). [“groves” and “images” Eng. Bib. Tr.].—Regarding the latter it has been ascertained, that thereby are meant the images of αַּ ?ςַ ?μηַ ?ξָּ ?ζ Baal-Hamon, Son 8:11, the Sun-god, the superior male god of the Ph�nicians. The word, beside the present text, and Isaiah 27:9, occurs Leviticus 26:30; Ezekiel 6:4; Ezekiel 6:6; 2 Chronicles 14:4; 2 Chronicles 34:4; 2 Chronicles 34:7. See further under Text. and Gram.—It is only doubtful whether ΰωׁ ?ψδ signifies only the Astarte pillars, or the goddess herself, and the groves consecrated to her (Deuteronomy 16:21, comp. Gesenius, Thes. pag. 162 with Otto Strauss, Nahumi de Nin. vat.
Prolegg. pag. 24). Moreover it is undecided whether Astarte (ΰַ ?ωְׁ ?ϊֹּ ?ψֵ ?ϊ kindred to ΰֶ ?ρְ ?ϊֵּ ?ψ, ἀστήρ, “star”) signifies only the moon, or Vinus, the star of good fortune, or the entire heaven of night as distinguished from the domain of Baal, the heaven of day (comp. P. Cassel on Judges 2:13; “Moon and stars, the luminaries of the heavens by night, are mingled in Astaroth; they are the sum total of the entire host of heaven.”)
Footnotes:be reduced.as one in harvest gathereth corn, and his arm reapeth the ears.as one gleaning ears.And gleanings shall, etc.in its, the fruit trees boughs.the man turn.look to.turn to.look to what his.Ashtaroth.Or, sun images.
β) The Cause of Ephraim’s Destruction Isaiah 17:9-119 In that day shall his strong cities be as a forsaken bough,
And an uppermost branch,
Which they left because of the children of Israel:
And there shall be desolation.
10 Because thou hast forgotten the God of thy salvation,
And hast not been mindful of the rock of thy strength,
Therefore shalt thou plant pleasant plants,
And shalt set it with strange slips:
11 In the day shalt thou make thy plant to grow,
And in the morning shalt thou make thy seed to flourish:
But the harvest shall be a heap in the day of grief
And of desperate sorrow.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_17:9. ςζεαδ comp. Isaiah 6:12.—ηֹ ?ψֶ ?ωׁ is saltus, “forest.” David dwelt αַּ ?ηֹ ?ψְ ?ωָׁ ?δ 1 Samuel 23:15-16; 1 Samuel 23:18. Jotham, according to 2 Chronicles 27:4, built castles and towers αֶּ ? ?ֽ ?ηֳ ?ψָ ?ωִׁ ?ιν. Comp. Ezekiel 31:3.—ΰָ ?ξִ ?ιψ, beside the present and Isaiah 17:6, does not occur again. The employment of this rare and ancient word here must be explained partly by the fact of its previous use, Isaiah 17:6, partly by the fact that in old times not only the tops of trees, but probably also the tops of mountains were so called.
For the conjecture of Simon, sanctioned by Gesenius, that the Amorites were named the montani, from an old ΰֱ ?ξֹ ?ψ mons (comp. δִ ?ϊְ ?ΰַ ?ξֵּ ?ψ se efferre Psalms 94:4) has certainly much in its favor. The LXX. also found in ΰξιψ the name of that ancient race, and hence translated οῖἈμοῤῥαῖοικαὶοἳΕὐαῖοι.—The subject of εδιϊδ is any way the ideal notion ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ contained in what precedes. This notion is likely the occasion also of the change in gender that we observe in what follows (comp. ωׁ ?ληϊ, ιωׁ ?ςκ etc., with ξςζε, Isaiah 17:9). That a land may be personified, i.e., identified with the nation is proved by passages like Jeremiah 6:19; Jeremiah 22:29, etc.Isaiah 17:10. ιֵ ?ωַׁ ?ς occurs only here in the first part of Isa.; on the other hand four ties in the second part: Isaiah 45:8; Isaiah 51:5; Isaiah 61:10; Isaiah 62:11. The expression ΰμδιιωׁ ?ςι “God of my salvation,” is frequent in the Psalms 18:47; Psalms 25:5; Psalms 27:9; Psalms 62:8; Psalms 65:6, etc., comp. Micah 7:7; Habakkuk 3:18.—φεּ ?ψξַ ?ςεֹ ?ζ Psalms 31:3, comp.
Psalms 62:8.—πςξο = πָ ?ςִ ?ιν occurs only here.—ζξψδ only here in Isaiah. The suffix -ςֶ ?πּ ?εּ relates to the ideal unity ascribed in thought to the garden arrangements.
Isaiah 17:11. ωִׂ ?βְ ?ωֵׂ ?β, Pilp, from ωׂ ?εּ ?β (comp. ρεּ ?β, ωׂ ?κְ, ξְ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?λָּ ?δ Isaiah 5:5) sepire, “to fence in,” occurs only here.—Hiph. of τψη occurs in Isaiah only here; Kal. often: Isaiah 27:6; Isaiah 35:1-2; Isaiah 66:14—The words πγχφιψεβε are difficult. True, it is clear in general that the Prophet contrasts the notions of planting, sowing, fencing round, bringing to bloom and that of the harvest. But the question is does he speak of a disappearance of the hoped for harvest, or of the approach of a harvest not hoped for, and unwelcome. The former is maintained by those that take πֵ ?γ = πָ ?γ in the sense of effugit. But the verb πεּ ?γ where in its inflection has Zere as vowel of the second root syllable. Moreover πָ ?γ would not be the right word for the notion of vanishing.
One would expect ΰָ ?αַ ?γ or a similar word. For πεּ ?γ is moveri, agitari, vagari, errare; it designates, therefore, the state of instability, fluctuation, but not that of non-existence. We stand, therefore, by the usual meaning of πֵ ?γ, acervus, cumulus: “as a heap, heaped up is the harvest in the day of grief.”—πַֽ ?ηֲ ?μָ ?δ cannot be understood of taking possession, for the word means possession. Moreover, since several Codices and ancient translations read πַ ?ηְ ?μָ ?δ the latter is to be retained. πַ ?ηְ ?μָ ?δ, indeed, occurs elsewhere only in connection with ξַ ?λָּ ?δ (Jeremiah 10:19; Jeremiah 14:17; Jeremiah 30:12; Nehemiah 3:19) or in the sense of aegrotus (Ezekiel 34:4; Ezekiel 34:21); but the day of the sick (Fem. to correspond to the preceding suffixes) is the day of being sick, as e.g., the time of the one leading is the time of leading (Jeremiah 2:17).—λְּ ?ΰֵ ?α, “pain,” again only Isaiah 65:14.—ΰπεֹ ?ω occurs in Isaiah only here: often in Jeremiah 17:16; Jeremiah 30:12; Jeremiah 30:15, etc. AND 1. This strophe is distinguished from the preceding in this, that it assigns the reason for the destruction threatened against Ephraim.
Therefore, after words that refer to both the strophes that precede, and that describe the impending ruin (Isaiah 17:9), the cause of the same is now named. It consists in this, that Israel has forsaken the God of its salvation. This has its consequence that it cherishes with delight untheocratic, idolatrous existence, like one lays out a pleasure garden and adorns it with exotics (Isaiah 17:10). Measures are not wanting which should surround that garden as a protecting hedge, and speedily bring it to a certain bloom; but the harvest? True enough there will be harvest in heaps; but not a day of joy. This harvest will be a day of deepest sorrow (Isaiah 17:11).
2. In that day—desolation.Isaiah 17:9. “In that day” refers back to Isaiah 17:4; “his strong cities” to “the cities Aroer,” Isaiah 17:2, and “the fortress,” Isaiah 17:3; λςζεαϊ, “like forsaken places,” to “forsaken,” Isaiah 17:2; δΰξιψ, “the summits,” to ΰξιψ “the summits (of the olive trees),” Isaiah 17:6. By these correspondences the Prophet gives us to understand that he speaks of the same subject as above, But he modifies his manner in two respects. First, he does not speak of the subject in figurative language as Isaiah 17:4-6, but boldly; second, he proves that the judgment was made necessary by the conduct of Israel. In as much as, therefore, “in that day” refers to Isaiah 17:4 (not to Isaiah 17:7, as the contents plainly show), the Prophet explains the figures used there by a reference to a fact well known to all Israel. In the forests and on elevated spots they had all seen the ruins of very ancient strong buildings that were evidence of the presence of a power long since overcome and vanished away.
They were the ruins of castles which the Canaanities forsook, voluntarily or by compulsion, when the Israelites conquered the land (comp. Knobel, in loc.). A time will come when “the strong cities” of Israel shall lie like these castles. It is plain that this reference to that evidence of fact, besides the figurative language of Isa 17:4-6, was fitted to produce a deep impression.
3. Because thou hast—sorrow.Isaiah 17:10-11. The evil conduct of Israel that was the cause of that judgment was twofold: 1) the negative reason was the not regarding, forgetting Jehovah: 2) the positive reason was the inclination to an idolatrous existence. In regard to the positive reason, I understand the Prophet to mean not merely the worship of strange gods, but also the political union with foreign powers that was most intimately connected with it, and the inclination to foreign ways in general (comp. Isaiah 2:6 sqq.). This culture of idolatry is compared to the culture of charming gardens (literally, plantations of lovely things).
Israel itself, according to Isaiah 5:1 sqq. 7, was for Jehovah πְ ?θַ ?ςωַֽׁ ?ςֲ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?ςָ ?ιε, “his pleasant plant.” But the recreant nation, instead of cultivating the service of Jehovah, set up other enclosures that appealed more to their fleshly inclinations, which they sowed with foreign grape vines (properly grape vines of the foreigner), i.e. in which they cultivated foreign grape vines (comp. Jeremiah 2:12) from seed. By these foreign vines must be understood everything untheocratic, all that was connected with heathen life to whose culture Israel devoted itself. The Imperfects express the continuance of the present. For at the time that the Prophet wrote this under Ahaz, this tendency to idolatrous living continued operative. The people provided also a protecting fence (comp.
Isaiah 5:5). By the fencing the Prophet seems to me to understand everything that was undertaken for the purpose of giving security to the idolatrous efforts. That may have been partly positive measures (efforts in favor of idolatry of every sort), and partly negative protection against whatever was done on the part of true Israelites against the worship of idols, persecution of such, comp. e.g. 1 Kings 18:4; 1 Kings 18:19. The pains of planting and fencing were quickly rewarded: the heathen life bloomed only too soon. The whole history preceding the exile furnishes the proof of this. “In the morning” means the very next morning after the planting; therefore very quickly. We adhere to the usual meaning of πֵ ?γ acervus, cumulus: “as a heap, heaped up is a harvest in the day of grief.” See Text. and Gram.
For I would not construe it, with Delitzsch, in the sense: “a harvest heap unto the day of judgment,” after Romans 2:5. For it does not read μְ ?ιεֹ ?ν, “to the day,” and in fact the day of the harvest is not distinguished from the day of judgment, which must be assumed by those that explain that the product of the harvesting heaps up for the day of judgment. But the Prophet says: in the day of judgment (αιεν “in the day,” refers back to αιεν in the first member of the verse), which is itself just at the same time the day of harvest, the produce of harvest is there in heaps. But this harvest day is “a day of grief and of desperate sorrow.” Being such, the harvest is a bad one, and the heaps signify heaped up misfortune. Therefore the Prophet says that the fruit of that planting shall be a harvest that shall come in on the day of grief and incurable pain, thus itself shall have the form of grief and incurable pain.
Footnotes:like forsaken places in the forests and summits.thou plantest pleasant gardens and sowest them with foreign seed.In the day of thy planting thou settest a fence.But there is a heaped-up harvest in the day, etc.Or, removed in the day of inheritance, and there shall be deadly sorrow.
γ) The World-Power (Assyria) Rises and Falls Isaiah 17:12-1412 Woe to the multitude of many people,
Which make a noise like the noise of the seas;
And to the rushing of nations,
That make a rushing like the rushing of mighty waters!
13 The nations shall rush like the rushing of mighty waters:
But God shall rebuke them, and they shall flee far off,
And shall be chased as the chaff of the mountains before the wind,
And like a rolling thing before the whirlwind.
14 And behold at eveningtide trouble;
And before the morning he is not.
This is the portion of them that spoil us,
And the lot of them that rob us.
TEXTUAL AND All expositors notice how suitably the Prophet here fits the sound to the subject. “And it waves and seethes and roars and hisses,”—one not only sees, one hears, too, the nation-waves rolling in.
Isaiah 17:12. δָ ?ξָ ?δ, comp. Isaiah 16:11; Isaiah 51:15.—δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο, comp. Isaiah 13:4; Isaiah 33:3; Isaiah 60:5.—ωָׁ ?ΰָ ?δ Niph. only here. ωָׁ ?ΰεֹ ?ζ comp. on Isaiah 13:4; Isaiah 24:8; Isaiah 25:5; Isaiah 66:6.—λַּ ?αִּ ?ιψ comp. Isaiah 10:13; Isaiah 16:14; Isaiah 28:2.
Isaiah 17:13. On βςψαε comp. Isaiah 5:26. βָּ ?ςַ ?ψ in Isa. again only Isaiah 54:9.—The construction with αְּ (as of a verb. dimicandi) like Genesis 37:10; Nahum 1:4, and often.—ξξψηχ “far away;” like ξִ ?χֶּ ?γֶ ?ν “eastward,” Genesis 11:2.—Pual ψֻ ?γַּ ?σ occurs only here, as also the noun ξֻ ?ψְ ?γָּ ?σ derived from the Hophal is found only in Isaiah 14:6.
Isaiah 17:14. εְ before δπδ, [“nothing is more common in Hebrew idiom than the use of and after specifications of time (see Gesen., § 152 a)—J. A. A., Green, § 287, 3].—αμδδ in Isaiah only here.—ωָׁ ?ρָ ?δ, Isaiah 10:13; Isaiah 42:22. ωֹׁ ?ρִ ?ιν, as Drechsler remarks, is, so to speak, term. techincus for the oppressors of the Theocracy: Judges 2:14; Jeremiah 50:11; 2 Kings 17:20, and often.—βεψμ with μְ is the lot assigned to the αεζζιν (Isaiah 42:22; Isaiah 42:24).
AND 1. The Prophet sees and hears in spirit the tumult of approaching nations, which he compares to the roar of mighty waters. But at the chiding of the Lord they vanish like chaff or whirlwinds of dust before the wind (Isaiah 17:12-13). The evening when that tumult approaches is one of terror; but only the next morning and all has vanished without a trace left. This, he says, shall be the lot of those that come to rob us (Isaiah 17:14).
2. Woe—rob us.Isaiah 17:12-14. δει (comp. on Isaiah 1:4), “woe,” need not be taken in any other sense than the usual one. For the crowding on of countless hordes of nations might well, in the first moment, occasion a cry of woe, even if it is afterwards changed into a cry of joy. It is evident that the Prophet by this swelling billow of nations means the nations led by the Assyrian world-power.—The expression “the chaff before the wind” recalls Psalms 35:5.—But the phrase “chaff of the mountains,” is not found elsewhere. The chaff which is blown away from an elevation exposed to the wind (threshing floors were made on elevations for the sake of the stronger breeze: comp. Herz.
R. Encycl. III p. 504 sq.). βμβμ is not merely a wheel (Isaiah 17:28), or the whirlwind, but also that which is whirled upwards by the wind (Psalms 83:14). At evening time, as night comes on, the invasion of the enemy is more dangerous and terrible than by day. But the evening of terror is quickly changed into a morning of joy. That became literally true by the sudden destruction of the power of Sennacherib in one night, 2 Kings 19:35.
In conclusion the Prophet generalizes the thought just expressed: finally it ever happens so to the enemies of the Lord and of His people. It cannot be doubted that “our plunderers”, and “our spoilers” include also the Syrians and Ephraimites. We learn from this, from what point of view we must contemplate the connection of Isa 17:12-14 with what precedes. The Prophet would show that all enemies of the kingdom of God must finally succumb, that there is therefore no reason to fear them.
Isaiah 17:12-14 stand in no clearly marked connection with what precedes, and the Isaiah 17:1-11 form in themselves a disconnected whole, like the following prophecies, Isaiah 18:1-7 and Isaiah 19:1-25. Thus the conjecture presents itself that these Isaiah 17:12-14, are a supplement added later that has the double object: 1) to make Isaiah 17 conform to the two following by the mention of Assyria; 2) to restore a closer connection with Isaiah 18 and to prepare for the understanding of the passage Isaiah 18:5-6. For without these verses Isaiah 18:6 would apparently connect with nothing. At the same time—and this is an additional gain, accompanying the two main objects— Isaiah 17 is completed by the mention of Assyria. For Syria, Ephraim, Assyria were then the chief enemies of Judah. Only the mention of Assyria made it possible for the Prophet to conclude with the generalization of. Isaiah 17:14 b.Footnotes:Woe! a tumult of many nations! they make, etc.Or, noise.And a rushing of peoples! they are rushing like, etc.Or, many.Peoples are rushing like, etc.But he rebukes it, and it flees, etc, and is chased, etc.Or, thistle-down.whirling dust before the storm.At evening time behold horror.
β) NOW AND IN TIME TO COMEIsaiah 18ΰ) The danger that threatens in the present Isaiah 18:1-31 Woe to the land shadowing with wings,
Which is beyond the rivers of Ethiopia:
2 That sendeth ambassadors by the sea,
Even in vessels of bulrushes upon the waters,
Saying, Go, ye swift messengers, to a nation scattered and peeled,
To a people terrible from their beginning hitherto;
A nation meted out and trodden down,
Whose land the rivers have spoiled!
3 All ye inhabitants of the world, and dwellers on the earth,
See ye, when he lifteth up an ensign on the mountains;
And when he bloweth a trumpet, hear ye.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_18:1. δει like Isaiah 17:12.—φְ ?μָ ?φַ ?μ occurs only here in Isaiah. Beside this: in Deuteronomy 28:42, with the meaning “cricket, cicada;” Job 40:31 meaning “harpoon” (so Called from the clinking); 2 Samuel 6:5 and Psalms 150:5, we find the plural meaning “cymbals.” Older expositors have taken the word in the sense of the simple φֵ ?μ “shadow,” or also, because of the reduplication = “double shadow,” with supposed reference to the double shadow of the tropics (ἀμφίσκιος, Strabo). Both are impossible. The word can only mean “stridor, clinking, whizzing, buzz,” because this is the underlying sense of every shade of its use.—But what are the λְּ ?πָ ?τַ ?ιִ ?ν? Some have thought of the wings of an army, referring for proof to Isaiah 8:8. But what would this afford as a characteristic?
The same objection lies against the construction “grasshopper wings,” or “sails” (LXX.). It is a hardy conjecture to refer this to the wings of the sun, Mal. 3:20 (Malachi 4:2) comp. Tac. Germ. 45; Juven. Sat. 14, 279; the Egyptian Sistrum [a kind of cymbal] with two rims or wings, is too insignificant as a characteristic, and cannot be shown to belong to Ethiopia. On the other hand it is quite suitable to call a land that is warm and that abounds with water and rushes, and hence also with winged insects, the land “of the whirring wings.” The conjecture is very enticing, that the expression φμφμλπτιν is chosen with reference to the Tzaltzala, or Tsetse-fly, which was first described by the Englishman Francis Galton (“Exploring expedition in tropical South-Africa, London, Murray, 1854).
It is “a little fly, in size and form nearly like our house fly, but somewhat lighter colored, of which the natives say that a single bite is sufficient to kill a horse, an ox or a dog; whereas asses and goats suffer no harm from it.” But it is not satisfactorily made out whether this resemblance is to be traced to a radical relation or whether it is only an accidental similarity in sound. Comp. in the Ausland 1868, No. 8, p. 192.
Isaiah 18:2. δωׁ ?μδ is to be referred to ΰψυ. The masculine is explained in that while Isaiah 18:1 ΰψυ means the land proper, in Isaiah 18:2 it represents more particularly the notion of people: for the messengers are sent by men. Comp. on Isaiah 15:1.—ιָ ?ν like Isaiah 19:5; Isaiah 27:1; Nahum 3:8.—φִ ?ιψ, in the sense of “messenger,” again in Isaiah 57:9.—ξְ ?ξֻ ?ωָׁ ?κְ part. Pual from ξָ ?ωַׁ ?κְ trahere, protrahere, extrahere, used again only Proverbs 13:12, of the ϊּ ?εֹ ?λֶ ?μֶ ?ϊξְ ?ξֻ ?ωָּׁ ?λָ ?δ, “the long-drawn out expectation.” Therefore the word here, too, can mean nothing but “long-drawn, long-stretched, procerus, ιlancι.” The Sabeans, too, are called, Isaiah 45:14, ΰַ ?πְ ?ωֵׁ ?ιξִ ?γָּ ?δ [“men of extension.” Eng. Bib. “men of stature”].—ξָ ?ψַ ?θ is “to make smooth, bright.” It is used of the sword that is not only sharpened, but polished till it flashes (Ezekiel 21:14-16); also of pulling out the hair till the crown is smooth and shining (Leviticus 13:40 sq.). Comp. moreover 1 Kings 7:45; Ezekiel 29:18.
In Isaiah the word occurs only once more, Isaiah 50:6, of the pulling out of the hair. The form ξεֹ ?ψָ ?θ stands for ξְ ?ξεψָ ?θ, comp. Ezekiel 21:15 sq.——πεψΰξοΞδεΰεδμΰδ; the construction is the same as ξִ ?ξְּ ?κָ εָ ?δָֽ ?μְ ?ΰָ ?δ 1 Samuel 20:22; 1 Samuel 10:3, and ξֵּ ?ςַ ?ϊָּ ?δεְ ?ςַ ?γςεֹ ?μָ ?ν .ξִ ?χָּ ?θεֹ ?οεְ ?ςַ ?γΞβָּ ?γεֹ ?μ. Only we are surprised that it does not read ξִ ?ξֶּ ?πּ ?εּ. But the pron. sep. is used for the sake of emphasis (comp. Genesis 27:34; 1 Samuel 19:23. etc.).
And wherefore may it not stand instead of the suffix? The Prophet wishes to mark the point of departure and support of the Ethiopian power, thus he does not write ξִ ?ξֶּ ?πּ ?εּ. Analogous is ξִ ?ιξֵ ?ιδִ ?ιΰ Nahum 2:9 (8) (a closed up water pool was Nineveh since its existence; but now the pool runs out, the people of Nineveh flee on all sides). There, too, ξִ ?ιָּ ?ξֶ ?ιδָ might have been used. When Stade remarks that it must properly read here ξֵ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψδεּ ?ΰ, he is correct. But ξִ ?οδεּ ?ΰ can be used also.
On the other hand, according to his explanation, i.e., if δεּ ?ΰ should be referred to Israel, it must of necessity read ξִ ?ζֶּ ?δ. Or if ξִ ?οδεּ ?ΰ is to be understood of time, who in the world would know that δεּ ?ΰ should point to the period of time, “quo Aethiopes Aegyptiorum jugo excusso aliis populis et imprimis Aegyptiis bella inferre coeperunt?”——ξִ ?οδεּ ?ΰ, in a temporal sense, could only mean: ex quo est. But in order to express this Isaiah would likely have written ξִ ?ιξֵ ?ιδεּ ?ΰ, not to mention that it is not credible that the Ethiopians were a widely feared people from the moment of their existence onwards. It is my opinion therefore that ξִ ?οδεּ ?ΰ stands in a local sense, brief and pregnant for ξִ ?οΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψδεּ ?ΰ or ξοΰֲ ?ωֵׁ ?ψδεּ ?ΰωָׁ ?ν.—The meaning of χεΞχε must be measured by Isaiah 28:10; Isaiah 28:13, for no other passage exists so nearly like this text. There, too, the word appears repeated, χεμχε. It means originally “measuring line,” and occurs in Isaiah, beside the above mentioned places, Isaiah 28:17; Isaiah 34:11; Isaiah 34:17; Isaiah 44:13.
From the meaning “measuring line” is developed “norm, prescription rule,” Isaiah 28:10; Isaiah 28:13. So we must take it here; and the choice of the short, abruptly spoken word, which moreover is repeated, is not to be regarded as accidental and undesigned. For this reason (see also Exegct. Comm. below) we take χεΞχε = “command, command.” There was much commanding, but short and sharp.—ξαερδ (again only Isaiah 18:7; Isaiah 22:5) is “conculcatio, treading down,” comp. ΰִ ?ιωׁ ϊּ ?εֹ ?λָ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ Proverbs 29:1; αִּ ?οΞδַ ?λּ ?εֹ ?ϊ Deuteronomy 25:2.—αָּ ?ζָ ?ζ = αָּ ?ζָ ?ΰ, like ωַׁ ?ρַ ?ν = ωָׁ ?ΰַ ?ν ,ωָׁ ?ρַ ?ν = ωָׁ ?ρָ ?δ (Ewald, § 112 g; 114 b; 151 b).
Isaiah 18:3. ωׁ ?λπιΰψυ only here.——λְּ designates the coincidence, as in cases of time when. We have here the Inf. Constr. after a Prepos. forming a phrase with the subject latent.——δָ ?ψִ ?ιν is accusative of place.
AND 1. The Prophet sends a cry of alarm to the remote Ethiopians, because they too are threatened by the Assyrians. He characterizes the land by the use of predicates suggested by the abundance of its insects, and its situation on great rivers (Isaiah 18:1). In this land the messengers fly away in swift skiffs over the waters. Therefore the Prophet summons these swift messengers to command the people, at the same time describing them as a people of lofty stature, and shining color of skin, as a nation dreaded far beyond its borders, as a nation among whom reigns strict command and ruthless use of power, that is yet exposed to the power of mighty streams that carry off its land (Isaiah 18:2). This nation is commanded: it will arm itself for this strife.
Between it and the Assyrian there shall come to pass a terrible collision. When it is announced by visible and audible signals, all nations must give good heed: for all are in the highest degree interested in it.
2. Woe——hear ye.Isaiah 18:1-3. Cush is Ethiopia, the land that bounds Egypt on the south, which began at Syene below the first cataract of the Nile (comp. Ezekiel 29:10; Ezekiel 30:6), and had Meroe for its capital (Herod. 2:29). The Egyptians, also, call Ethiopia Kus′ ? or Kes′ ? (comp. Eber’s Egypten und die Bucher Mosis, I. p. 57; Lepsius in Herz.
R. Encycl. I., p. 148). I do not believe, as Stade maintains (De Is. vatt. aeth., p. 16), that the assumption of Mesopotamian Cushites rests merely on the erroneous identifying of the κίσσιοι (Her. III. 91) or κοσσαῖοι (Strabo XI. p. 524, XIV. 744) with the biblical Cushites. The streams of Ethiopia are the White Nile (Bahr-el-Abjad) and its tributaries, the Atbara, the Blue Nile (Bahr-el-Asrak), the Sobat, the Bahr-el-Ghasal, etc.
In describing the land of whirring-wings as beyond the rivers of Ethiopia (comp. Zephaniah 3:10), this form of expression arises from the mighty waters occupying the foreground in the mental vision of the Prophet, thus the land lies for him beyond them.—βֹּ ?ξֶ ?ΰ (Isaiah 35:7; Exodus 2:3) is the papyrus-reed. Light and fleet boats were made of it, as is abundantly testified by the ancients and by the monuments (comp. Gesen. in loc., Wilkinson, The ancient Egyptians, V., p. 119). Papyrus, once very abundant in Egypt, is no longer found there; but is found in Abyssinia (comp. Champollion-Figeac, L’Egypte ancienne, p. 24, sq. 195) and Sicily (Herz.
R. Encycl. I., p. 140 sq.).
Go ye swift messengers, to a nation, etc., is understood by most expositors as if the Prophet sent the messengers home, because Jehovah Himself would undertake Himself the destruction of the enemy. But then the Prophet would not have used μְ ?λεּ, but rather ωׁ ?εּ ?αεּ. Besides one can’t understand why, if the Ethiopians were not to fight, their warlike qualities are depicted in such strong colors. I therefore take μְ ?λεּ in its proper sense; “go ye.” The Ethiopians are to be bidden to the contest, and actually to fight; but they must know that it is the Lord that gives them the victory.
To a nation grown high: see under Text. and Gram. It is, moreover, not impossible that, as Jos. Friedr. Schelling conjectured, there lies in the expression an allusion to the longevity of the Ethiopians which was an accepted notion of the ancients. The Ethiopians are called smooth and shining, not, we may suppose, because they deprived the body of hair, but because they had a way of making the skin smooth and shining. This is known from what Herodotus relates of the scouts of Cambyses (Isaiah 3:23).
When these wondered at the long life of the Ethiopians, they were led to a spring: “by washing in which they became very shining as if it were of oil.” By the constant use of this spring, the Ethiopians became, it was said, μακρόβιοι, “long-lived.” It is seen from this that to the Ethiopians was ascribed a skin shining as if oiled. In general the Ethiopians, according to Herodotus, were accounted “the largest and comeliest of all men.” On the upper Nile there yet live men whom this description suits. For example the Schilluks, that were reached by the British Consul, John Petherick, after eight days’ journey on the White Nile, from Chartum, are described by him as “a large, powerful, finely formed race, with countenances of noble mould” (Ausland, 1861, No. 24). Comp. Ernst Morno (in Peterman’s Geogr. Mitheilungen, 1872, 12 Heft., p. 452 sqq.) on the ethnological relations in Upper-Sennar, and especially on the Hammedach and their neighbors.
That is dreaded far away; so the Prophet names the people because they are feared from their borders and far away. See Text. and Gram. We know with certainty, at least with reference to Egypt, that Ethiopia at that time had dominion beyond its own territory. The Ethiopian dynasty seems to have put an end to a condition of great disorder in Egypt. The first king of it, Sabakon, must have been a powerful and wise regent. Champollion-Figeac, l. c., p. 363, says of him: “The internal disorders involved the ruin of the public establishments, and when order was revived by the presence of a wise and prudent monarch, his first thought ought to be to repair them.
After his invasion of Egypt this duty devolved on the conqueror, and Sabakon did not neglect it.” To the third king, Tirhaka, are ascribed great military expeditions—as far as the Pillars of Hercules,—and conquests (ibid., p. 364). One may well suppose that the strict discipline and order, which naturally at times ran to the excess of ruthless oppression, was a characteristic peculiarity of those Ethiopic princes. We therefore take χεΞχε = “command, command:” there was much commanding, but short and sharp. The meaning “power, strength,” which some assume only for our text, after Arabian analogy, is not satisfactorily established. We do perfectly well with the meaning nearest at hand. Egypt, as is well known, is a gift of the Nile (comp.
Eber’s Egypten n. d. Bόcher Mosis, I. p. 21. Fraas, Aus dem Orient, geologische Beobachtungen am Nil, auf der Sinai-Halbinsel u. in Syrien, 1867. p. 207). But what the Nile gives to Egypt it has stolen in Ethiopia. Therefore the expression “whose land rivers carry away” corresponds exactly with the fact. It appears in a measure as a Nemesis accomplished by nature that Ethiopia, in return for “the down treading” practised by it, should succumb to the spoiling done by the rivers flowing through it.
The nation of Ethiopia therefore is summoned to the strife. A collision impends. It must be attended with important consequences. All inhabitants of the world (comp. Isaiah 26:9; Isaiah 26:18), especially the dwellers of the territory concerned, must be on the look-out when the signals for the combat are given; for something of moment will happen.
Footnotes:of whirring wings.And in boats of papyrus on the face of the waters.Or, out spread and polished.grown high and gleaming.feared far away.A nation of stem command and rough tread.Or, that meteth out, and treadeth down.Heb. of line, line, and treading under foot.Or, Whose land the rivers despise.land.one lifts up.one blows.
α) The Deliverance of Ethiopia in the Near Future Isaiah 18:4-64 For so the Lord said unto me, I will take my rest,
And I will consider in my dwelling-place
Like a clear heat upon herbs,
And like a cloud of dew in the heat of harvest.
5 For afore the harvest, when the bud is perfect,
And the sour grape is ripening in the flower,
He shall both cut off the sprigs with pruning hooks,
And take away and cut down the branches.
6 They shall be left together unto the fowls of the mountains,
And to the beasts of the earth,
And the fowls shall summer upon them,
And all the beasts of the earth shall winter upon them.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_18:4. According to K’thibh ΰֶ ?ωְׁ ?χεֹ ?θָ ?δ is to be read; according to K’ri ΰֶ ?ωְׁ ?χֳ ?θָ ?δ (comp. ΰֶ ?ωְׁ ?χֽ ?εֹ ?μָ ?δ Ezra 8:25. Ewald, § 40 b; 41 c; 68 b). The form written plene with the accent drawn back, is of course not normal. Precisely for this reason the Masorets chose the other. But Hitzig may not be wrong when he says, that the double checking of the voice with twice raising it between depressions fittingly depicts the agreeable re pose in equipoise. ωָׁ ?χַ ?θ Isaiah 14:7; Isaiah 62:1—ξָ ?λεֹ ?ο principally used of the divine throne, comp. on Isaiah 4:5; Psalms 33:13.——I take λְּ before ηֹ ?ν in the sense of comparison, and not in that of coincidence as in Isaiah 18:3; Isaiah 18:5; see under Exegetical.
For what “clear heat,” etc., and “a dew-cloud” is for harvest, such is Jehovah’s quiet waiting for the Assyrian.—ηֹ ?ν is “warmth, heat;” only here in Isaiah.——φַ ?η (comp. Isaiah 32:4) is “bright, clear.” ςμιΰεψ is = “by daylight” (comp. Amos 8:9; Habakkuk 3:4, etc.). ςμ is taken here in the cumulative sense, which it often has (Genesis 32:12; Exodus 35:22; 1 Samuel 14:32, etc.). Thus it is properly: “heat added to daylight;” for it can be cold during daylight.——ςָ ?αθַ ?μ “dew-cloud,” is the light cloud that at night dissolves in dew (comp. ςָ ?αθַ ?μְ ?χεֹ ?ωׁ Proverbs 16:15, whereas ςַ ?α Exodus 19:9 = ςֲ ?αִ ?ι.)
Isaiah 18:5. λְּ ?ϊָ ?νΞτֶּ ?ψַ ?η (λְּ like Isaiah 18:3; ???Isaiah 5:24) is followed by a phrase in which, Hebrew fashion, the discourse relapses into the verb. finit.——αֹּ ?ρֶ ?ψ (only here in Isaiah; comp. Jeremiah 31:29 sq.; Ezekiel 18:2) is the unripe grape.——βָּ ?ξַ ?μ, which elsewhere means “disaccustom, wean,” (Isaiah 11:8; Isaiah 28:9) is used here in a sense derived from that. The mother, that weans her child, has brought it to a certain degree of maturity. But, beside the present, the word occurs in the sense of “ripeness” only Num. 17:23; it must be noted beside that βָּ ?ξַ ?μ is to be taken in a transitive sense. For in Num. 17:23 this is undoubtedly the case, and Genesis 40:10 it reads in the same sense δִ ?αְ ?ωִׁ ?ιμεּ ΰַ ?ωְׁ ?λְּ ?μֹ ?ϊֶ ?ιδָ ςֲ ?πָ ?αִ ?ιν, “their grape-stalks cooked grapes;” αּ ?ρֶ ?ψ is accordingly meant for a degree of development of the vine that produces ripe grapes.——It appears as if the Prophet had in mind Genesis 40:10; for both λְּ ?τֹ ?ψַ ?ηַ ?ϊ and πִ ?φָּ ?δ and the words already quoted recall our passage.—πִ ?φָּ ?δ “the flower, blossom,” occurs only here in Isaiah; beside this, Job 15:33. πִ ?φָּ ?δ, moreover, is subject; thus the predicate is put emphatically in advance.——With εְ ?λָ ?ψַ ?ϊ begins the apodosis. Jehovah need not be taken as subject, and therewith the substitution of the Prophet as speaker.
The subject is indefinite. We express it by “one” (Isaiah 6:10; Isaiah 10:4; Isaiah 14:32).——ζμζμιν (ἅπ. λεγ.) are “the branches” of the vine; ιπθιωׁ ?εϊ “the shoots, sprouts” that develop from it (only here in Isaiah, Jeremiah 5:10; Jeremiah 48:32).——δֵ ?ϊַ ?ζ, ἅπ. λεγ.
Isaiah 18:6. ςַ ?ιִ ?θ, beside here, only Isaiah 46:11.——χָ ?υ, “summering,” and ιֶֽ ?ηֱ ?ψַ ?σ, “wintering,” are both denominatives from χַ ?ιִ ?υ and ηֹ ?ψֶ ?σ, and are ἅπαξλεγόμενα.
AND 1. The Prophet has intimated that something great impends (Isaiah 18:3)—he now declares wherein it consists. He can say it because Jehovah revealed it to him. That is the Lord has announced to him, that He would keep altogether quiet as a mere observer. Like warmth and dew ripen the harvest, so, by the favor of His non-intervention, the power of the Assyrians will be brought almost to the greatest prosperity (Isaiah 18:4). Almost! For before this highest point is attained, the Assyrian power shall be destroyed, like one destroys a vine, by cutting off, not merely the grapes, but the grape branches and the sprouts (Isaiah 18:5). So terrible will this overthrow be, that the beasts of prey shall all through summer and winter find abundant to devour on the field of battle (Isaiah 18:6).
2. For so——winter upon them.Isaiah 18:4-6. The Lord purposely abstains from interfering. He quietly allows matters to take their own course, He waits patiently till His time comes. This quiet, observant waiting the Prophet compares to that weather which is most favorable for maturing the harvest: warm days and dewy nights. The ancients conceived of the dew as originating like the rain.
This appears, e.g., from Job 38:28, where the ΰֶ ?βְ ?μֵ ?ιθַ ?μ “drops of dew,” are the receptacula roris (Cod. Alex. συνοχαὶδρόσου. The summer heat, the nightly dew, is an extraordinary benefit to vegetation. Therefore dew is so often used as the figure for blessing: Genesis 27:28; Deuteronomy 33:13; Deuteronomy 33:28; Hosea 14:6; Micah 5:6; Proverbs 19:12. The causal λִּ ?ι, “for,” at the beginning of Isa 18:5 connects two thoughts that are impliedly contained in Isaiah 18:4-5 : the Lord observes this expectant conduct, because only immediately before maturity of events will He interfere. “Harvest” is evidently to be taken in the wide sense that includes also the wine harvest. By an emphatic asyndeton wherein the second word (δϊζ, “to cut down”) explains the first (δριψ, “to take away”), it is now affirmed that the enemy, that is, Assyria, shall be thoroughly destroyed.
For there will not be merely a gleaning of grapes (comp. Isaiah 63:1 sqq.), but from the vine shall be cut off the very branches that yield fruit. The meaning of what has been said, becomes evident from the literal language of Isa 18:6. It means a terrible overthrow of the Assyrian army. Its dead bodies lie in such vast numbers that birds I and beasts of prey for a summer and a winter, shall find abundance of food on the field of battle. “Beasts of the earth,” comp. Deuteronomy 28:26, of which passage, moreover, our whole verse serves to remind one.
Footnotes:I will rest or be quiet.Or. regard my set dwelling.look on.Or, after rain.by daylight.the bloom.And the flower becomes a ripening grape.One.
β) THE THAT ETHIPIA EXPECTS IN THE DISTANT FUTURE Isaiah 18:77 In that time shall the present be brought unto the Lord of hosts
Of a people scattered and peeled,
And from a people terrible from their beginning hitherto;
A nation meted out and trodden under foot,
Whose land the rivers have spoiled,
To the place of the name of the Lord of hosts, the mount Zion.
TEXTUAL AND Only ςַ ?ν and ξֵ ?ςָ ?ν present difficulty.——It is ungrammatical to supply the preposition before ςַ ?ν from ξֵ ?ςַ ?ν. To amend the text by prefixing the ξ is needless violence.——δεּ ?αַ ?μ in Isaiah again Isaiah 53:7; Isaiah 55:12.——ωַׁ ?ι, of uncertain derivation, is found again only Psalms 68:30; Psalms 76:12.—The expression ξְ ?χεֹ ?νωֵׁ ?νιΧ occurs only here: yet comp. Leviticus 14:13; Isaiah 60:13; Isaiah 66:1.
AND 1. The gaze of the Prophet embraces the immediate and the most remote future, while he overleaps all time spaces that lie between as unessential. The consequence of that mighty overthrow will be this, that Ethiopia presents itself as a sacrificial gift to the Lord, and that out of this people will be sent sacrificial gifts to the spot where men call on the name of the Lord.2. In that time——mount Zion.Isaiah 18:7. By the “in that time” the Prophet joins what follows close on to what precedes. Although what Isaiah 18:7 affirms belongs to the remote future, yet the Prophet sees it as the great chief effect immediately after the cause, Isaiah 18:5-6.——By ςν and ξςν the Prophet would say that the entire nation shall be brought to the Lord as present, tribute, or sacrificial gift; that is it will bring itself—a thought, that is familiar: Isaiah 66:20; Psalms 68:32,—that also, in consequence thereof, presents out of the nation will be brought to the place of the worship of Jehovah.
For that is two different things; in order to bring itself, the nation does not need to leave its own place; but in order to bring presents to the sanctuary of the Lord, there must be a motion from one place to another. Therefore a double definition appears, for “there shall be brought a present:” 1) “to the Lord of hosts a people,” 2) “from the people dreaded,” etc. “to the place,” etc.——The passage Zephaniah 3:10 is a reminiscence of our text.
Footnotes:a gift.omit of.Or, outspread and polished.grown high and shining.from far away.of stern command and rough tread.
b) Prophecies that give Warning not to Trust in False Help Against AssyriaIsaiah 19, 20α) EGYPT NOW IN TIME TO COMEIsaiah 19Various expositors from Eichhorn to Hitzig have attacked the genuineness of this chapter in whole or in part. But one may judge in advance how little valid the alleged reasons for this are, by the fact that Knobel rejects them all, and is decided in his recognition of Isaiah, as its author. We may therefore spare ourselves the investigation of these doubts, and so much the more as in our exposition of particulars, it will appear how very much the thoughts and expressions correspond to Isaiah’s way of thinking and speaking. The chapter is very artistically arranged. It evidently divides into three parts of which the first (Isaiah 19:1-15) shows how the Lord by His judgments reveals His arm to the Egyptians (Isaiah 52:10; Isaiah 53:1); the second (Isaiah 19:16-17), as a transition, sets forth how Egypt fears before Jehovah; finally the third (Isaiah 19:18-25) presents the prospect that Egypt will fear the Lord as third in the confederation with Assyria and Israel.
_________________
ΰ) How the LORD reveals His arm to the Egyptians by severe judgmentsIsa_19:1-151 The Burden of Egypt.Behold, the Lord rideth upon a swift cloud,
And shall come into Egypt:
And the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence,
And the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it.
2 And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians:
And they shall fight every one against his brother,
And every one against his neighbor;
City against city,
And kingdom against kingdom.
3 And the spirit of Egypt shall fail in the midst thereof;
And I will destroy the counsel thereof:
And they shall seek to the idols, and to the charmers,
And to them that have familiar spirits, and to the wizzards.
4 And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord;
And a fierce king shall rule over them,
Saith the Lord, the Lord of hosts.
5 And the waters shall fail from the sea,
And the river shall be wasted and dried up.
6 And they shall turn the rivers far away;
And the brooks of defence shall be emptied and dried up:
The reeds and flags shall wither.
7 The paper reeds by the brooks, by the mouth of the brooks,
And everything sown by the brooks,
Shall wither, be driven away, and be no more.8 The fishers also shall mourn,
And all they that cast angle into the brooks shall lament,
And they that spread nets upon the waters shall languish..
9 Moreover they that work in fine flax,
And they that weave networks, shall be confounded.
10 And they shall be broken in the purposes thereof:
All that make sluices and ponds for fish.
11 Surely the princes of Zoan are fools,
The counsel of the wise counsellors of Pharaoh is become brutish:
How say ye unto Pharaoh,
I am the son of the wise,
The son of ancient kings?
12 Where are they? where are thy wise men?And let them tell thee now, and let them know
What the Lord of hosts hath purposed upon Egypt.
13 The princes of Zoan are become fools,
The princes of Noph are deceived;
They have also seduced Egypt, even they that are the stay of the tribes thereof.
14 The Lord hath mingled a perverse spirit in the midst thereof:
And they have caused Egypt to err in every work thereof,
As a drunken man staggereth in his vomit.
15 Neither shall there be any work for Egypt,
Which the head or tail, branch or rush may do.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_19:1. πες is one of the words that occur only in the first part of Isa 6:4; Isaiah 7:2; Isaiah 24:20; Isaiah 37:22.—χֶ ?ψֶ ?α, in some sense as the enclosure that contains the μֵ ?α or ψεּ ?ηַ, frequent: Isaiah 26:9; Isaiah 63:11; Psalms 39:4; Psalms 51:12; Psalms 55:5, etc.——ΰμιμιν, see on Isaiah 2:8.——εμαξΧιξν, see on Isaiah 13:7.
Isaiah 19:2. On ρִ ?λְ ?ρֵ ?κְ comp. at Isaiah 9:10.
Isaiah 19:3. παχδ comp. Green Gr., § 141, 1; Isaiah 24:1; Isaiah 24:3.——ΰִ ?θִּ ?ιν, ἅπ. λεγ., probably kindred to μְ ?ΰַ ?θ, which is used of the soft murmuring of a brook, Isaiah 8:6, and of soft, slow, gentle stepping or acting, Genesis 33:14; 2 Samuel 18:5, etc.——ΰֹ ?αεֹ ?ϊ and ιִ ?γְּ ?ςֹ ?πִ ?ιν, compare on Isaiah 8:19.
Isaiah 19:4. ΰֲ ?γֹ ?πִ ?ιν, Plural, with the abstract notion of dominion, comp. Genesis 39:20; Genesis 42:30; Genesis 42:33; in Isa. again only Isaiah 26:13.——ςַ ?ζ Isaiah 25:3; Isaiah 43:16; Isaiah 56:11.——ρλψ, properly “to shut up,” only here in Isaiah.
Isaiah 19:5. The form πִ ?ωְּׁ ?ϊεּ, as also πָ ?ωָֽׁ ?ϊָּ ?δ Isaiah 41:17, and πָֽ ?ωְׁ ?ϊָ ?δ Jeremiah 51:30 can be referred to ωָׁ ?ϊַ ?ϊ (comp. Psalms 73:9; Psalms 88:7), as is done by Hitzig, if the meaning “to seat oneself,” desidere suited our passage and Isaiah 41:17. But in both places (also Isaiah 19:5 on account of the ξִ ?ο before δַ ?ιָּ ?ν) it is too evident that the meaning “exaruit, to become dry,” is demanded by the context. Moreover the whole of verse 5 is with little alteration taken from Job 14:11. For there it reads:—ΰָ ? ?ֽ ?ζְ ?μεּ ξַ ?ιִ ?νξִ ?πִּ ?ιΞιָ ?νεְ ?πָ ?δָ ?ψιֶֽ ?ηֱ ?ψַ ?αεְ ?ιָ ?αֵ ?ωׁ.
It is seen that the expressions differ somewhat in the first clause, while in the second clause they are literally alike. Job employs the language as the figure for growing old and dying off, without any reference to the Nile. Isaiah applies it to the Nile particularly, and hence exchanges ΰζμε (diffluunt) for πωׁ ?ϊε.
Isaiah 19:6. There is no substantive ΰֶ ?ζְ ?πַ ?η; so δֶֽ ?ΰֶ ?ζְ ?πִ ?ιηַ may not be taken as denominativum, though even Ewald (§ 126 b) adopts the view. Olshausen (§ 255 b) explains the form as simply a blunder; ηִ ?ζְ ?πִ ?ιηεּ is to be restored. The meaning must be “to produce, to spread a stench.”——The plural πδψεϊ occurs only here in the first part of Isaiah; in the second part: Isaiah 41:18; Isaiah 42:15; Isaiah 43:2; Isaiah 43:19-20; Isaiah 44:27; Isaiah 47:2; Isaiah 50:2. πδψιν Isaiah 18:1-2; Isaiah 18:7; Isaiah 33:21.——γָּ ?μַ ?μ comp. Isaiah 38:14; Isaiah 17:4.——On ξָ ?φεֹ ?ψ see Exeg. Com. on Isaiah 19:1.——ιְ ?ΰεֹ ?ψ is an Egyptian word.
According to Ebers (1. c. I. p. 338) the sacred name of the Nile in the hieroglyphic text is Hapi, the profane name, on the other hand, Aur. Along with the latter name often stands aa, i, e., “great,” therefore, Aur-aa = great river. The ancient hieratic form Aur became, in the mouth of the people, iar or ial (r and l are exchanged according to fancy in Egyptian, Ebers, p. 96). From Aur-aa came iaro. So the word sounds also in Koptic.
The plural ιΰψιν occurs Isaiah 33:21, of water ditches, used for defence; Job 28:1 of the shafts that the miner digs. Otherwise the word is used only of the canals of the Nile: Exodus 7:19; Exodus 8:1, etc. Comp. Isaiah 7:18; Isaiah 37:25; 2 Kings 19:24.——χָ ?πֶ ?δ “cane,” hence κανών, canalis, Isaiah 35:7; Isaiah 36:6; Isaiah 42:3; Isaiah 43:24; Isaiah 46:6.——ρεּ ?σ “a reed,” Exodus 2:3; Exodus 2:5; only here in Isaiah. χָ ?ξֵ ?μ (χָ ?ξַ ?μ kindred to ΰָ ?ξַ ?μ) “marcescere, to languish,” occurs again only Isaiah 33:9.
Isaiah 19:7. ςָ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ (from ςָ ?ψָ ?δ, nudum esse, loca nuda), occurs only in this place. These ςψεϊ evidently correspond to the Egyptian ΰָ ? ?ֽ ?ηεּ (Genesis 41:2; Job 8:11), the Nile, or reed, or rush-meadow on the bank of the Nile. Comp. Ebers l. c. p. 338.——τιιΰεψ can hardly signify “the mouthing.” For wherefore should only the meadows at the mouthing of the Nile wither? Rather (comp. Psalms 133:2) the mouth of the Nile here is the same as the lips of the Nile elsewhere (ωְׂ ?τַ ?ϊηַ ?ιְ ?ΰֹ ?ψ Genesis 41:3, hieroglyphic sept., Ebers, l. c. p. 339.——ξִ ?ζְ ?ψָ ?ς, ἅπ. λεγ. can mean here only “the place of sowing, the sowed field” (comp. ζֶ ?ψַ ?ςωִׁ ?δֹ ?ψ Isaiah 23:3).——πγσ, dispellere, dissipare, occurs again only Isaiah 41:2.——εΰιππε a form of expression that occurs relatively the oftenest in Job 3:21; Job 23:8; Job 24:24; Job 27:19.
Comp. beside Psalms 37:10; Psalms 103:16; Proverbs 23:5, etc.Isaiah 19:8. ΰָ ?πεּ comp. Isaiah 3:26.——ηַ ?λָּ ?δ and ξλξψϊ are found only here in Isaiah; on the former compare Job 40:25; on the latter, Habakkuk 1:15.——ΰֻ ?ξְ ?μָ ?μεּ comp. on Isaiah 16:8.
Isaiah 19:9. τωׁ ?ϊινωׂ ?ψιχεϊ are lina pectinata, i.e., linen stuff made of hackeled, pure, fine flax. ωׂ ?ψιχεϊ is ἅπ. λεγ.; so also is ηεֹ ?ψַ ?ι. The root of the latter ηָ ?εַ ?ψ (Isaiah 29:22) means candidum, then nobilem, splendidum esse. We encounter this meaning again in δֹ ?ψ nobilis, δֹ ?ψִ ?ι “fine, white bread,” (Genesis 40:16), probably, too, in the proper names ηεּ ?ψָ ?ν (ingenuus) ηִ ?ιψָ ?δ (nobilitas). Accordingly δֹ ?ψַ ?ι would be “a fine white garment.” Whether the stuff was linen or cotton is not to be determined from the word itself. The distinction from τִ ?ωְׁ ?ϊִּ ?ιν rather favors the opinion that it was cotton. The ending γj is an old singular ending; comp.
Ewald, § 164, c; 177 a.Isaiah 19:10. The word ωָׁ ?ϊεֹ ?ϊ occurs again only Psalms 11:3; and there means undoubtedly “pillars, posts.” This meaning suits perfectly in this place also. Only verse 10 is not to be connected with what precedes, but is to be construed as the theme for what follows, yet in the sense that the following verses specify exclusively the notion ωׁ ?ϊεϊ. Only at the end of Isa 19:15 the underlying thought of Isa 19:10 recurs. For “head and tail, palm branch and rush” is only another expression for that which is called “foundation pillars and hired laborers.”——ωֶׂ ?λֶ ?ψ (compare ωָׂ ?λִ ?ιψ, mercenarius) means “merces, pay,” and occurs again only Proverbs 11:18. They are, therefore, “qu�stum facientes, hired laborers;” a comprehensive designation of the lower classes.——The expression ΰβξιπτωׂ recalls ΰַ ?βְ ?ξֵ ?ιξַ ?ιִ ?ν Isaiah 14:23.
The meaning “troubled,” which some give to ΰβξι in our text, would form a solitary instance. Everywhere else the word means “stagnum, palus” (Isaiah 35:7; Isaiah 41:18; Isaiah 42:15), or “arundinetum” (Jeremiah 51:32). The word is used for the pools, puddles, swamps made by the Nile (Exodus 7:19; Exodus 8:1).
Isaiah 19:11. αָּ ?ςַ ?ψ is verb. denom. from αָּ ?ςַ ?ψ, brutus, stolidus. The Niph. only here in Isaiah; comp. Jeremiah 10:14; Jeremiah 10:21.——ΰֲ ?πִ ?ι, this is said because the prophet has in mind a single priest: he thinks, perhaps, of the ʼ ?αρχιερεύς, “the chief of the entire priesthood,” (Ebers, l. c. p. 344).
Isaiah 19:13. πεΰμε, “infatuated,” only here in Isa; comp. Numbers 12:11; Jeremiah 5:4; Jeremiah 50:36.——πִ ?ωָּׁ ?ΰ, “betrayed;” Niph. only here; Hiph. Isaiah 36:14; Isaiah 37:10.——πֹ ?σ is = ξֹ ?σ. Memphis (comp. Delitzsch and Brugsch Hist. d’Egyptc).——τִ ?πָּ ?δ “the corner;” then by metonymy for ΰֶ ?αֶ ?ιּֽ ?τΧ “the corner-stone,” Job 38:6; comp. Isaiah 28:15; Jeremiah 51:26; Psalms 118:22.
Isaiah 19:14. ςִ ?εְ ?ςִ ?ιν, “perverseness,” ἅπ. λεγ., compare ψεּ ?ηַ ωֶׁ ?χֶ ?ψ 1 Kings 22:22 sq.——αχψαδ see on Isaiah 19:1. ξָּ ?ρַ ?κְ, Isaiah 5:22.
Isaiah 19:15. εְ before ζπα and ΰβξεο is here equivalent to “or” (comp Ewald, § 352, a; Jeremiah 44:28)
AND 1. Jehovah draws near to the judgment against Egypt: the idols flee, the nation is dispirited (Isaiah 19:1). This is the theme of the discourse. In what follows the Prophet lets the Lord Himself set forth how He means to carry out in detail what is announced in Isaiah 19:1. The Egyptians shall war on one another (Isaiah 19:2); bereft of all prudent deliberation, they shall seek counsel from the idols and wizards (Isaiah 19:3). But it is of no use.
Egypt is subjected to a harsh rule (Isaiah 19:4). The Nile dries up; its rushes and canes wither (Isaiah 19:5-6), and also the meadows and fields on its banks (Isaiah 19:7); its fisheries come to a miserable end (Isaiah 19:8); the preparation of linen and cotton stuff ceases (Isaiah 19:9). The highest as well as the lowest classes are ruined (Isaiah 19:10); the priests and the wise men that boast an ancient royal descent are at an end with their wisdom; they know not what the Lord has determined concerning Egypt (Isaiah 19:11-12); they are altogether perplexed in their thoughts, so that they only lead Egypt about in a maze (Isaiah 19:13-14). Neither for the highest nor the lowest does labor for the general benefit succeed any more (Isaiah 19:15).
2. The burden——midst of it.Isaiah 19:1. Mizraim, is not the native name for the land of Egypt. The ancient Egyptians never used it. It is neither to be found in the hieroglyphic inscriptions, nor can it be explained from the Koptic language. The Egyptians called their land (the Nile valley) Cham; Koptic, Keme, Kemi, Chemi (i.e. “black”).
Mizraim is the name given to the land by its eastern, Semitic neighbors. Ebers (l. c., p. 71 sqq.) proceeds from ξָ ?φεֹ ?ψ, which means coarctatio, and then munimentum, “fortification” (Psalms 31:22; Psalms 60:11; Micah 7:12; Habakkuk 2:1, etc.). Egypt is so named, Isaiah 19:6; Isaiah 37:25; 2 Kings 19:24; Micah 7:12. Ebers maintains that the eastern neighbors so named Lower Egypt primarily, from the circumvallation that extended through the entire Isthmus, from Sues of Pelusium to the Red Sea, and thus completely shut off Lower Egypt from the East; so that it was an ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υξָ ?φεֹ ?ψ, “a land shut off by fortification” for those eastern neighbors. But when the Hyksos had forced an entrance into the land, they learned for the first that it was far larger than they had supposed, viz., that it extended beyond the southern extremity of the fortification far up the Nile to the cataracts: in other words they learned that there was a Lower and an Upper Egypt. Hence the dual ξִ ?φψַ ?ιν.
Although the normal dual of ξָ ?φεֹ ?ψ would sound differently, yet Ebers is right in saying that the inflection of proper names often takes its own peculiar form (l. c., p. 86). It is debatable whether the original distinction between ξָ ?φεֹ ?ψ and ξִ ?φְ ?ψַ ?ιִ ?ν was afterwards strictly adhered to. In Isaiah 11:11, ξφψιν is evidently used in the narrower sense in which ξφεψ was originally used. [“ξִ ?φְ ?ψַ ?ιִ ?ν is here the name of the ancestor (Genesis 10:6), put for his descendants.” J. A. A.—“Mizraim, or Misrim, the name given to Egypt in the Scriptures, is in the plural form, and is the Hebrew mode of expressing the ‘two regions of Egypt’ (so commonly met with in the hieroglyphics), or the ‘two Miser,’ a name still used by the Arabs, who call Egypt, as well as Cairo, Musk, or Misr.” Wilkinson’s Mann. and Cust. of Anc. Egypt, I. 2, quoted by Barnes in loc., who adds: “The origin of the name ‘Egypt’ is unknown.
Egyptus is said by some to have been an ancient king of the country”].
Jehovah sets out for Egypt to hold an assize there. He rides swiftly thither on light clouds (Psalms 18:11; Psalms 68:34). Egypt’s idols flee before Him. They recognize in Him their lord and master, Luke 4:34. The people are dispirited; their courage sinks. One is involuntarily reminded of the visitation Egypt once before experienced on the part of Jehovah (Exodus 12:12). Idols and people of Egypt have once before felt the power of Jehovah: just for this reason they flee and tremble before Him (comp. Jeremiah 46:25; Ezekiel 30:13; 1 Samuel 5:3).
3. And I will set——Lord of hosts.Isaiah 19:2-4. Duncker (Gesch. des Alterth., I. p. 602) says: “It cannot be determined whether this passage refers to the anarchy that followed the expulsion of the Ethiopians (Diodor., I. 66) about the year 695, or the contests that preceded Psammetichus’ ascending the throne (between 678–670).” But it appears that the anarchy after the withdrawal of the Ethiopians was not considerable. Herodotus (II. 147) especially praises the beautiful harmony of the Dodecarche. And if misunderstandings did arise, they might be taken into the Prophet’s comprehensive glance as essentially of the same sort with those that soon after preceded the sole dominion of Psammetichus. Such periods of internal discord, any way, occurred often in Egypt.
Thus a papyrus discovered by Harris in 1855, and belonging to the time of Ramses III., leaf 75 sqq. informs us: “The land of Egypt fell into a decline: every one did as he pleased, long years there was no sovereign for them, that had the supreme power over the rest of things. The land of Egypt belonged to the princes in the districts. One killed another in jealousy.” Comp. Eisenlohr, The great Harris Papyrus; a lecture, Leipzig, 1872. Thus even the disturbances with which Egypt was visited in consequence of the irruption of the Ethiopian king Pianchi Meramen may be included, which Stade (De Is. vatt. aeth., p. 30 sqq.) holds to be intended by the cruel lord and fierce king Isaiah 19:4. For when Isaiah wrote, if the date given above is correct, the events under Pianchi Meramen belonged to the past and not to the future.
By the aid of Ionian and Karian pirates (Herod. II. 152) Psammetichus subdued his opponents, after an eight years’ contest, in the decisive battle of Momemphis.
What the Prophet says (Isaiah 19:3) of the emptying out of the spirit of Egypt and swallowing up its counsel (comp. Isaiah 3:12) indicates the impotence of the rulers to help the situation with such means as shall be at their command. In their extremity they will apply to their idols, their interpreters, i.e. “the mutterers.” But in vain. Egypt is handed over to a harsh rule and a stern king. It cannot be denied that these terms apply very well to Psammetichus and the subsequent kings of his race, Necho and Hophra, for they called in foreign help to the support of their dominion, and gave thereby a blow to the old Egyptian existence from which it never recovered. We are told by Diodorus (I. 67) and Herodotus (II. 30) that, in consequence of the favor that Psammetichus showed to foreigners, more than 200,000 Egyptians of the military caste emigrated to Ethiopia during the reign of that king.
Under Necho, of the laborers on the canal that was to connect the Nile with the Red Sea, 120,000 perished (Her. II. 158). Hophra or Apries was dethroned because an expedition against Cyrene, for which he had employed an army composed only of Egyptians, ended in severe defeat. For his conduct was construed to be an intentional devotion of the Egyptians to destruction (Herod. II. 161–169; IV. 159). These and other historical events may be regarded as belonging to the fulfilment of our prophecy.
But they do not exhaust it. Nothing was less in Isaiah’s mind than to make those transactions the subject of special prediction. How would we in that case apply what follows, where he speaks of the Nile drying up and vegetation ceasing? Can this, too, be meant literally? By both declarations the Prophet means only to announce to Egypt a judgment by which, on both sides of its life, the historical and the natural, it shall be reduced to extremities. This judgment has not been realized by only one or a few definite events.
It is realized by every thing that precedes the conversion of Egypt to Jehovah (Isaiah 19:21 sqq.) and contributes to it; and to that belongs, above all, its oppression by a foe from without, that is by Assyria. This moment, it is true, does not appear especially in chapt. 19, but to the presentation of this the complementary chapt. 20 is exclusively devoted.
4. And the waters——confounded.Isaiah 19:5-9. The Nile is called a sea (comp. Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 27:1; Nahum 3:8; Micah 7:12?), not merely because of its normal breadth within its own banks, but also because it really spreads out like a sea at the time of overflow, which to suit the context, must be regarded as the special allusion here. Hence Herodotus (II. 97) calls it “the sea of Egypt.” Comp. Plin.
Hist. nat., 35, 11. “The water of the Nile resembles a sea.” Seneca Quaest. nat. IV. 2. “At first it abates, then by continued accession of waters it spreads out into the appearance of a broad and turbid sea,” Gesen. in loc. If ιָ ?ν, “sea” designates the Nile in its overflow, then πδψ means the stream within its normal bed, and the πδψεϊ, “streams” and ιΰψιν “ditches,” mean the arms and canals of the Nile. With the drying up of the Nile and its branches perishes, of course, the vegetation that depends on them, and thus also the fisheries and the important manufacture of linen and cotton. On the extraordinary, productive fisheries of the Nile, comp. Wilkinson, l. c.
I. and II. Linen garments were especially worn by the priests. In the temples they were allowed to wear only linen garments. All mummy bandages also were required to be of linen. On the manufacture of linen and cotton in Egypt, see Wilkinson II.
5. And they shall be broken——rush, may do.Isaiah 19:10-15. In these verses the Prophet portrays the ruin of Egypt in another aspect of its national life, viz.: the division into castes, in which he especially sets forth the highest class as overtaken by the ruin. By ωׁ ?ϊεϊ (see under Text. and Gram.), is not to be understood the lower classes (Hendewerk and Ewald) nor weaving (with a reference to ωִׁ ?ιϊωַׁ ?ιִ ?ϊ, Roorda, Rosenmueller and others). They are the upper classes, the highest castes (comp. Isaiah 3:1).
These shall be ξγλΰιν i.e., “cast down, crumbled to ruins” (comp. Isaiah 53:5; Isaiah 53:10; Isaiah 3:15; Isaiah 57:15), what is thus predicated corresponding to the figurative meaning of the subject, in which I see an allusion to the ruins. For already in Isaiah’s time there were buildings in Egypt whose origin dated back more than a thousand years.
Is it not fitting that the Prophet compares the humiliation of the grandees of Egypt to the ruins of its ancient buildings, and the sorely visited lower classes to swamps of its Nile? (See Text, and Gram. on Isaiah 19:10).
In what follows he depicts further the coming to nought of the grandees, setting forth especially the bankruptcy of their wisdom, so celebrated of old (Acts 7:22; Herod. IV. 6, 77, 160). The princes of Zoan are only fools. (Zoan = Tanis, the royal residence of Lower Egypt, situated in the Delta of the Nile, comp. Ebers, l. c., I. p. 272 sqq.; identical with Ramses, according to Brugsch, address before the Oriental Congress, London, 1874). “The sages among the counsellors of Pharaoh,” are properly those of the counsellors who alone deserve the predicate “wise.” The expression recalls ηַ ?λְ ?ξεֹ ?ϊωָׂ ?ψεֹ ?ϊֶ ?ιδָ “her wise ladies” in the song of Deborah (Judges 5:29) which must also be translated: “the wisest among her princesses.” On the ηֲ ?λָ ?ξִ ?ιν, the priestly counsellors of Pharaoh, see Ebers, l. c. I. p. 341 sqq.
As to the name Pharaoh, it reads in the hieroglyphic and hieratic writing “Peraa” or “Perβ,” which means literally “great house” (comp. sublime Porte). Comp. Ebers, p. 263 sqq. The word designates also simply the king’s palace (Ebers, ibid.).
The Prophet assumes that the Egyptian priests base their claim to wisdom on two circumstances: 1) on their antiquity, 2) on their high, royal origin. If the ancient kings were of a priestly race, which is correctly assumed, and if the wisdom of the priests was traditional, then the counsel which they gave the king originated from a source which must enjoy the highest consideration in his eyes. How lamentably, says Isaiah, must this counsel, proceeding from such high authority, come to confusion. Did they know what God had determined against Egypt, they could then take measures against it (Isaiah 19:12). As it is they are in a maze. They are themselves infatuated, and deceived; hence the “corner-stone of its tribes” (i.e., the tribe, viz.: the class on which the whole Egyptian body politic rests; the priestly class) leads the whole land astray (Isaiah 19:13).
The Lord has, in fact, as it were, mingled a spirit of perverseness in the inward part of Egypt, so that by the very ones in whom, so to speak, the understanding of the land concentrated, the land is led astray in the most shameful manner. This shameful leading astray he expresses by a very revolting figure: he compares Egypt to a drunken man rolling about hither and thither in his own vomitings (Isaiah 19:14). Comp. Isaiah 28:8; Jeremiah 48:26 uses the same figure of Moab.——Thus Egypt becomes poor in deeds. All it does is nothing done. Neither head nor tail; neither palm-branch nor rush, i.e., neither the highest nor the lowest (comp. on Isaiah 9:13) will accomplish anything.
With this the Prophet returns back to the thought from which (Isaiah 19:9) he started out.
Footnotes:cometh.move, or flee.melts.Heb. mingle.Egypt against Egypt.of stern command and rough tread.Heb. shall be emptied.Heb. swallow up.mutterers.the necromancers.Egypt.Or, shut up.harsh dominion.stern.the rivers shall stink.of Egypt.Reed and rush.meadows.on the bank of the.all the sown ground of.Heb. and shall not be.Or, white works.her pillars shall be ruins, all laborers for hire soul-swamps.Heb. foundations.Or, of living things.Only fools are the.The wise among the counsellors of Pharaoh, their counsel is.infatuated.And the corner-stone of its castes has led Egypt astray.Or, governors.Heb. corners.Heb. a spirit of perverseness.
α) The Transition: Egypt fears the LORD Isaiah 19:16-1716 In that day shall Egypt be like unto women:
And it shall be afraid and fear
Because of the shaking of the hand of the Lord of hosts,
Which he shaketh over it.
17 And the land of Judah shall be a terror unto Egypt,
Every one that maketh mention thereof shall be afraid in himself,
Because of the counsel of the Lord of hosts,
Which he hath determined against it.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_19:16. ηψγ comp. Isaiah 10:29; Isaiah 32:16; Isaiah 41:5.——τηγ Isaiah 12:2; Isaiah 33:14; Isaiah 44:8; Isaiah 44:11; Isaiah 60:5.——The verb δֵ ?πִ ?ισ we have already read of the hand lifted up in threatening: Isaiah 11:15, comp. Isaiah 10:15; Isaiah 10:32; Isaiah 13:2; Isaiah 30:28.——ϊπετδ, frequent in the Pentateuch, occurs in Isaiah only here and Isaiah 30:32.——Regarding the expression ΰγξϊιδεγδ it is to be remarked that, apart from the frequent ΰγξϊιωׂ ?ψΰμ in Ezekiel, ΰγξδ never occurs in connection with the name of a nation except here and Genesis 47:20; Genesis 47:26, in the expression ΰγξϊξφψιν——ηָ ?βָּ ?ΰ (from ηָ ?βַ ?β, circulare, tripudiare), “the revolving movement of dizziness,” is ἅπ. λεγ.——The expression λֹּ ?μΰֲ ?ωֶ ?ψεβεΧ, is a resolving of the otherwise usual participial construction, on which comp. Ewald, § 337, c, sq.—The Hiph. δִ ?ζְ ?λִּ ?ιψ is frequent in Isaiah 12:4; Isaiah 26:13; Isaiah 3:22; Isaiah 43:26; Isaiah 48:1; Isaiah 62:6, etc. AND 1. The discourse is artistically arranged: according to the foregoing, Egypt still thinks it may be saved by its own wisdom.
Now it has surrendered this hope. It trembles before the threatening gesture of Jehovah’s hand (Isaiah 19:16). In fact, whenever the land of Judah is thought of, Egypt quakes with fear lest the decree of Jehovah may be accomplished (Isaiah 19:17).
2. The expression of Isaiah “in that day” which is peculiar to the first part (in the second it occurs only Isaiah 52:6) appears with more frequency in the present chapter, than in any other passage: viz.: Isaiah 19:16; Isaiah 19:18-19; Isaiah 19:21; Isaiah 19:23-24. Comp. the remark at Isaiah 2:12. As often as one utters the name Judah, men turn affrighted to him, for they know but too well the power of the God of Judah. The counsel of Jehovah, then, of which Isaiah 19:12 speaks, must have been partly accomplished. Men fear its further and complete fulfilment.
β) EGYPT BY DEGREES WHOLLY TO THE LORD, AND THE THIRD IN THE WITH ASSYRIA AND ISRAEL Isaiah 19:18-2518 In that day shall five cities in the land of Egypt
Speak the language of Canaan,
And swear to the Lord of hosts;
One shall be called, The city of destruction.
19 In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord
In the midst of the land of Egypt,
And a pillar at the border thereof to the Lord.20 And it shall be for a sign and for a witness
Unto the Lord of hosts in the land of Egypt:
For they shall cry unto the Lord because of the oppressors,
And he shall send them a Saviour, and a great one,
And he shall deliver them.
21 And the Lord shall be known to Egypt,
And the Egyptians shall know the Lord in that day,
And shall do sacrifice and oblation;
Yea, they shall vow a vow unto the Lord, and perform it.22 And the Lord shall smite Egypt: he shall smite and heal it:And they shall return even to the Lord,And he shall be intreated of them, and shall heal them.
23 In that day shall there be a highway out of Egypt to Assyria,
And the Assyrian shall come into Egypt,
And the Egyptian into Assyria,
And the Egyptians shall serve with the Assyrians.
24 In that day shall Israel be the third
With Egypt and Assyria.
25 Even a blessing in the midst of the land: whom the Lord of hosts shall bless, saying:
Blessed be Egypt my people,
And Assyria the work of my hands,
And Israel mine inheritance.
AND Isa_19:18. The expression ωְׂ ?τַ ?ϊλΧ occurs only here.—πִ ?ωְׁ ?αַּ ?ς with μְ must be distinguished from its use with αְּ. The latter is “to swear by one” (Isaiah 62:8; Amos 6:8; Amos 8:7, etc.); the former is “to swear, to oblige one’s self to another by oath,” (Zephaniah 1:5; Genesis 24:7; Genesis 50:24; Exodus 13:5; Psalms 132:2, etc.). δַ ?δֶ ?ψֶ ?ν or δַ ?ηֶ ?ψֶ ?ν. Sixteen Codd. have the latter reading, also several editions. The LXX. indeed reads ἀσεδέκ, which is evidently a designed alteration resulting from the application of Isa 1:26 to the Egyptian city. But Symm., the Vulg. (civitas solis), Saadia, the Talmud (Menachot Fol. 110, A), also translate “city of the sun.” On the other hand the majority of codices and editions have δֶ ?ψֶ ?ν, and among the ancient versions at least the Syriac decidedly so reads (for Ἀρές, which Aqc. and Theod. read, could stand also for ηֶ ?ψֶ ?ν).
Thus critically the reading δֶ ?ψֶ ?ν is the best supported. The authority of the Masora is for it. But the reading ηֶ ?ψֶ ?ν is, any way, very ancient Symmachus, Jerome, the Targumist met with it. And it must have enjoyed equal authority with the other reading. Else the Targumist would not have combined both readings when he writes: χַ ?ψְ ?ϊָּ ?ΰαֵ ?ιϊΞωֶׁ ?ξֶ ?ωׁ γַּֽ ?ςֲ ?ϊִ ?ιγָ ?ΰμְ ?ξֶֽ ?ηֱ ?ψַ ?α, i.e., the city “Beth-Shemes quae futura est ad evertendum, i.e., quae evertetur.” And the fact that the treatise Menachot reads ηֶ ?ψֶ ?ν is certainly proof that weighty authorities supported this reading. Add to this that δψν by no means affords a satisfactory sense.
For the meaning “lion,” which some assume from the Arabic (haris “the render”) is very doubtful, first from the fact that it rests only on Arabic etymology. Yet more uncertain is the meaning liberatio, salus, amor, be it derived from the Syriac (which, as Gesen. in loc. demonstrates, rests on pure misunderstanding) or, with Maurer, from the Hebrew, by taking δֶ ?ψֶ ?ν = “tearing loose,” whereas it can only mean “rending in pieces, destroying.” And in this latter sense many expositors take the word. But how can a word of such mischievous import suit in a context so full of joy and comfort? Caspari (Zeitschr. fόr Luth. Theol. 1841, III.), whom Drechsler and Delitzsch follow, is therefore of the opinion that the Prophet, by a slight change wrote δψν instead of ηψν, but will have this word δψν understood in the sense of “destroying the idolatry,” like Jeremiah 43:13 prophesies the “breaking in pieces of the obelisks in the temple of the sun in the land of Egypt.” But against this view is the fact that such twisting of words occurs always only in a bad sense. Thus Ezekiel 30:17 calls the city ΰεֹ ?ο by the name ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο; Hosea 4:15; Hosea 5:8 (comp.
Amos 5:5) calls αֵּ ?ιϊΞΰֵ ?μ by the name αֵּ ?ιϊΞΰָ ?εֶ ?ο (for which moreover an actual and neighboring αֵּ ?ιϊΞΰָ ?εֶ ?ο Joshua 7:2 gave the handle); Isaiah 7:6 changes the name θָֽ ?αְ ?ΰֵ ?μ into θָֽ ?αְּ ?ΰַ ?μ, although he uses it in pausa; and Isaiah 21:11 he introduces Edom under the name of γּ ?εּ ?ξָ ?δ (“silence of the dead”) and, finally the Talmud in the treatise Aboda sara (Fol. 46 a, in the German translation of Ewald, Nuremberg, 1856, p. 324) gives the following examples as prescribing the rule for changing the names of cities that have an idolatrous meaning: “Has such a city had the name αֵּ ?ιϊβַּ ?μְ ?ιָ ?ΰ, “house of revelation,” it should be called αֵּ ?ιϊλַּ ?ψְ ?ιָ ?ΰ “house of concealment” (or fossae, latrinae); has the city been called αֵּ ?ιϊξֶ ?μֶ ?κְ, “house of the king,” it should be called αֵּ ?ιϊλֶּ ?μֶ ?α “house of the dog;” instead of ςֵ ?ιολֹּ ?μ “the all-seeing eye,” call it ςֵ ?ιοχεֹ ?υ “the eye of thorns.”—Further examples of the kind see in Buxtorff, Lex., Chald., Talmud, et rabb., p. 1086 sq., s. v., λַּ ?ψιָ ?ΰ——Thus we see that δψν as a twisting of ηψν must either be opposed to the context or to the usus loquendi. I therefore hold ηֶ ?ψֶ ?ν to be the original correct reading. But ηψν means “the sun” (Judges 1:35, where it is remarkable that a little before, Isaiah 19:23, a αֵּ ?ιϊΞωֶׁ ?ξֶ ?ωׁ is mentioned——, Isaiah 8:13; Isaiah 14:18; Job 9:7). I think, as older expositors (comp. Gesen. in loc.) and latterly Pressel (Herz. R.
Encycl. X., p. 612) have conjectured, that it is not impossible that this name ςιψΞδηψν in our verse was the occasion for seeking a locality near Heliopolis for the temple of Onias. The reason why it was not built immediately in or at Heliopolis was that a suitable site (ἐπιτηδειότατοντόπον) for building was found at Leontopolis, which was yet in the Nome of Heliopolis. That Onias in his petition to Philometor and Cleopatra evidently appealed in a special way to verse 19 proves nothing against the assumption that Isaiah 19:18 also had a significance for him. He even says expressly, after having quoted the contents of Isa 19:19 : “καὶπολλὰδὲπροεφήτευσενἄλλᾳτοιαῦταδιὰτὸντόπον.” But if the Egyptian temple, which, according to Josephus (Bell. Judges 7, 10, 4), stood 343 years (it ought rather to say 243), was a great offence to the Hebrew Jews, it could easily happen that ηψν of our verse was changed by them to δψν.
There are in fact six MSS. that read expressly ςִ ?ιψδַ ?ηֵ ?ψֶ ?ν “city of the curse;” and the Ἀσεδέκ of the LXX. is manifestly an intentional alteration in the opposite sense.——Therefore intentional changes pro et contra have undeniably been perpetrated. Thus is explained not only the duplicate reading in general, but especially, too, the tradition of δψν as the orthodox reading, and the fixing of the same by the Masorets.—Comp. moreover, Reinke in the Tόb. theol. Quart. Schrift. 1870, Heft I., on the imputed changes of the Masoretic text in Isaiah 19:18, and the remarks of the same writer in his Beitrδgen zur Eklr. des A. T. Giesen 1872, Band VIII., p. 87 sqq.
Isaiah 19:20. The combination μΰεϊεμςψ occurs only here. Of more frequent occurrence is ΰֹ ?εϊεּ ?ξεֹ ?λֶּ ?ϊ, Deuteronomy 13:2; Deuteronomy 28:46; Isaiah 20:3.——ψָ ?λ particip. = “contestant, champion,” comp. Isaiah 45:9; Jeremiah 51:36; not an uncommon use of the word in Judges 6:31; Judges 11:25; Judges 21:22.
Isaiah 19:21. ςָ ?λַ ?ψ with latent transitive notion; Exodus 10:26; comp. Genesis 30:29.
Isaiah 19:22. The reason why Isaiah uses the word πָ ?βַ ?σ is probably because this word is repeatedly used of the plagues of Egypt: Exod. 7:27; Exodus 12:13; Exodus 12:23; Exodus 12:27; Joshua 24:5—πςϊψ, audientem se praestitit alicui; only here in Isaiah; comp. Genesis 25:21; 2 Samuel 21:14; 2 Samuel 24:25.
Isaiah 19:23. ξְ ?ρִ ?μָּ ?δ see Isaiah 7:3.——ςαψε can only be understood as the abbreviation of the statement that occurs entire immediately before with application there to Egypt alone. The same service (ςαψ) shall Egypt perform in union with Assyria. The Prophet could so much the more readily express himself thus, in as much as ςָ ?αψ is used also elsewhere (Job 36:11) in the same absolute way.
Isaiah 19:24. ωׁ ?μιωׁ ?ιδ is in itself tertia; yet not merely pars, but size, degree generally, designated by “three.” Compare ςβμϊωׁ ?μιωׁ ?ιδ Isaiah 15:5. Here it is the third element, the third factor that must be added in order to make the harmony complete.
Isaiah 19:25. ΰωׁ ?ψ cannot be construed as simple relative pronoun. For then the suffix in αψλε must be referred to δΰψυ which will hardly do. It is therefore construed = “so that,” or “since,” and the suffix named is referred to the individual that each of the three forms by itself (comp. Isaiah 17:10; Isaiah 17:13). Therefore ΰωׁ ?ψ here is a conjunction (Green (Gr., § 239, 1).
AND 1. Egypt will gradually be altogether converted to the Lord. At first, indeed, only five cities will serve Him (Isaiah 19:18), but soon the Lord will have an altar in Egypt, and a pillar dedicated to Him on the border (Isaiah 19:19) will at once announce to the approaching traveller that Egypt is a land that pays worship to Jehovah. Then, when they cry to the Lord, He will deliver them from oppression as He did Israel of old in the days of the judges (Isaiah 19:20). He will reveal Himself to them, and they will know Him and offer Him divine service in due form (Isaiah 19:21). He will, indeed, smite them like His own people, but then He will heal them again: but they will turn to Him, and He will let Himself be entreated of them (Isaiah 19:22).
But not only Egypt—Assyria too will then be converted to the Lord. And between Egypt and Assyria there will be busy intercourse, and they will no more be enemies of one another, but serve the Lord in common (Isaiah 19:23). And Israel will be the third in the confederation, and that will be a great blessing from the Lord for the whole earth (Isaiah 19:24), who then will call Egypt His people, Assyria the work of His hand, but Israel always still His special inheritance.
2. In that day——destruction.Isaiah 19:18. The fifth is the half of ten. It appears to me to be neither a small nor a great number (Corn. a Lapide). But if in the ten there lies the idea of completeness, wholeness, then five is not any sort of fraction of the whole, but the half, which added to itself forms the whole. By the five the ten is assured.
There does not, therefore, lie in the five the idea of the mustard seed, but rather the idea of being already half attained. From passages like Genesis 45:22; Exodus 22:1; Numbers 7:17; Numbers 7:23; Matthew 25:2; Matthew 25:20; 1 Corinthians 14:19, it is not erroneously concluded that the five has a certain symbolical meaning. Besides this, in respect to the division of the year into seven months (of freedom from water) and five months (of the overflow) the five was a sacred number to the Egyptians. Comp. Ebers, l. c., p. Isaiah 359: “Seven and five present themselves as especially sacred numbers.” To think, as Hitzig does, of five particular cities (Heliopolis, Leontopolis, Migdol, Daphne, Memphis), is opposed to the character of the prophecy.
Five cities, therefore, shall speak the language of Canaan, the sacred language, the language of the law. That is, they shall found a place in the midst of them for the worship of Jehovah.
[“The construction of Calvin (who understands five out of six to be intended) is to be preferred, because the others arbitrarily assume a standard of comparison (twenty thousand, ten thousand, ten, etc.); whereas this hypothesis finds it in the verse itself, five professing the true religion to one rejecting it. Most of the other interpretations understand the one to be included in the five, as if he had said one of them. As μΰηϊ admits either of these senses, or rather applications, the question must depend upon the meaning given to the rest of the clause. Even on Calvin’s hypothesis, however, the proportion indicated need not be taken with mathematical precision. What appears to be meant is that five-sixths, i.e., a very large proportion, shall profess the true religion, while the remaining sixth persists in unbelief.” “It shall be said to one, i.e., one shall be addressed as follows, or called by the following name. This periphrasis is common in Isaiah, but is never applied, as Gesenius observes, to the actual appellation, but always to a description or symbolical title (see Isaiah 4:3; Isaiah 61:6; Isaiah 62:4).
This may be urged as an argument against the explanation of δַ ?δֶ ?ψֶ ?ν as a proper name.” “All the interpretations which have now been mentioned [the one Dr. Naegelsbach favors being included in the number—Tr.] either depart from the common text or explain it by some forced or foreign analogy. If, however, we proceed upon the only safe principle of adhering to the common text, and to Hebrew usage, without the strongest reasons for abandoning either or both, no explanation of the name can be so satisfactory as that given by Calvin (civitas desolationis) and the Eng. Version (‘city of destruction’).” J. A. A.]
The city of destruction.—Isaiah often expresses the future existence of a person or matter by a name, of which he says it shall be applied to the person in question (Isaiah 1:26; Isaiah 4:3; Isaiah 61:6; Isaiah 62:4). Here there seems to be intended, not so much a characteristic of the nature, as a mark that shall serve as a means for recognizing the fulfilment. For why does the Prophet give the name of only one city? Why does he not give the five cities a name in common? It seems to me that the Prophet saw five points that shone forth out of the obscurity that concealed the future of Egypt from his eyes. They are the five cities in which the worship of Jehovah shall find a place.
But only one of these cities, doubtless the greatest and most considerable, does he see so clearly that he even knows its name. This name he gives—and thus is given a mark whereby to identify the time of the fulfilment. For if in the future there comes about a condition of things in Egypt corresponding to our prophecy, and if a city under those circumstances bears the name the Prophet gives here, then it is a sure sign that said condition is the fulfilment of the present prophecy. Now, from the dispersion of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar on, Egypt became, to a great part of the Israelites, a second home; in fact it became the place of a second Jehovah-Temple; later it even became a wholly Christian land.
That Jehovah-Temple was built by Onias IV. (according to another calculation II.) under Ptolomζus Philometor (180–145) at Leontopolis in the Nome of Heliopolis (Josephus Antiq. 12, 9, 7; 13, 3, 1–3; 20, 10; Bell. Judges 7, 10, 2-4), or rather was a ruined Egyptian temple restored. Built upon a foundation sixty feet high, and constructed like a tower, this temple, of course, did not in its outward form resemble that at Jerusalem. But the altar was accurately patterned after the one in Jerusalem. Onias (and probably in opposition to his fellow-countrymen) appealed to our passage. For the building, strictly interpreted, was of course unlawful.
And it was steadily opposed by the Hebrew Jews with greater or less determination. But the Egyptian Jews, as said, thought themselves authorized in the undertaking by our passage, especially Isaiah 19:19. It is not impossible that the choice of the locality was conditioned by the fact that our passage originally read ςιψδַ ?ηֶ ?ψֶ ?ν (see under Text. and Gram.) which was translated “city of the sun” and was referred to Heliopolis, the ancient On, the celebrated priestly city (Genesis 41:45; Genesis 41:50; Genesis 46:20). [Would it not be a juster interpretation of the fulfilment of this prophecy in regard to the foregoing application to repeat, mutatis mutandis, Dr. Naegelsbach’s own remark in the exegetical comment on Isaiah 19:2-4 above, p. 224. “Nothing was less in Isaiah’s mind than to make those transactions the subject of a special prediction. Else how then is what follows to be applied, where it speaks of a Jehovah-altar in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar or obelisk dedicated to the Lord on the border of it? Can this be meant literally?
If not, then neither can Isaiah 19:18 be understood literally.” Dr. Naegelsbach admits above that, “strictly interpreted,” the building of such a temple “was of course unlawful;” and the altar must be included in this statement. But in a matter appertaining to a legal and ceremonial worship a “strict interpretation,” which must mean “strictly legal,” is the only admissible interpretation. Deeds of formal worship that are unlawful by that interpretation cannot be right by any other interpretation, seeing that no other applies to them. How could Isaiah refer prophetically to such a matter as the mimic temple of Jehovah at Leontopolis in such language as we have in our verses 18, 19?—Tr.]
3. In that day——heal them.Isaiah 19:19-22. What was only hinted in Isaiah 19:18, is in Isaiah 19:19 expressly affirmed: The Lord shall have an altar in Egypt. How this was fulfilled we have indicated already above. Egypt became not only a second home to the people of Israel. [But it must be remembered that this never received the token of God’s approval, who said Hosea 11:5, “He shall not return into the land of Egypt.”—Tr.]. It became also the birth-place of a most significant form of development of the Jewish spirit.
It became moreover a Christian land, and as such had played a prominent part in the history of the Christian church. Call to mind only Origen and Athanasius. If thus the prophecy of the altar of Jehovah in Egypt was literally fulfilled, so the prophecy of the ξַ ?φֵּ ?αָ ?δ, “pillar,” was fulfilled in a way not so literally, but not therefore in a less real sense. The word means statua, “standing image,” cippus, “monument.” Jer. 43:14 so designates the numerous obelisks that were in Heliopolis. Often idol pillars are so designated (1 Kings 14:23; 2 Kings 3:2; 2 Kings 10:27, etc.), the raising of which was expressly forbidden in the law (Leviticus 26:1; Deuteronomy 16:22). When it is announced here that a ξφαδ dedicated to Jehovah would be raised up, it is not meant that this would be for the purpose of divine service.
Rather we see from “at the border” and also from Isaiah 19:20 that the pillar (the obelisk) should serve merely for a sign and mark by which any one crossing the border could know at once that he treads a land that is exclusively consecrated to the service of Jehovah. Altar and pillar, each in its place,—the pillar first and preparatory, the altar afterwards in the midst of the land and definitive—shall be sign and witness of it.
When we said above that this word was fulfilled not literally, yet not therefore less really, we mean it thus: that Egypt, when it ceased to be a heathen land certainly presented just as plainly to the eye of every one entering it the traces of its confession to the true religion, as we now a days observe more or less distinctly on entering a land, how it is with religion and religiousness there. [J. A. A., on verse 19. “A just view of this passage is that it predicts the prevalence of the true religion, and the practice of its rites in language borrowed from the Mosaic or rather from the patriarchal institutions. As we might now speak of a missionary pitching his tent at Hebron—without intending to describe the precise form of his habitation, so the Prophet represents the converts to the true faith as erecting an altar and a pillar to the Lord in Egypt, as Abraham and Jacob did of old in Canaan. [So for substance also Barnes.—Tr.]. Those explanations of the verse which suppose the altar and the pillar, or the centre and the border of the land to be contrasted, are equally at variance with good taste and the usage of the language, which continually separates in parallel clauses, words and things which the reader is expected to combine. See an example of this usage Isaiah 18:6. As the wintering of the beasts, and the summering of the birds are there intended to denote the presence of both beasts and birds throughout the year, so here the altar in the midst of the land, and the pillar at its border denote altars and pillars through its whole extent.”].
In what follows we observe the effort to show that the Lord will treat Egypt just like Israel. There will be therefore a certain reciprocity: Egypt conducts itself toward the Lord like Israel, therefore will the Lord conduct Himself toward Egypt as He has done toward Israel. Thus the second half of Isa 19:20 reminds one of that “crying of the children of Israel to Jehovah” that is so often mentioned in the book of Judges (Isaiah 3:9; Isaiah 3:15; Isaiah 4:3; Isaiah 6:6, etc.). In that survey of the times of the judges contained in Judges 2:11 sqq. (at Isaiah 19:18 comp. Judges 1:34; Judges 6:9) the oppressors of Israel are called μֹ ?ηֲ ?φִ ?ιν just as here, and Judges 2:16; Judges 2:18 the performance of the judges whom God sent to the people, is designated δεֹ ?ωִׁ ?ιςַ, and the judges are on that account expressly called ξεֹ ?ωִׁ ?ιςַ “deliverers, saviours,” (Judges 3:9; Judges 3:15; Judges 6:36; Judges 12:3). δִ ?φִּ ?μ, too, occurs in this sense in Judges 6:9; Judges 8:34; Judges 9:17, etc.—In consequence of these manifold mutual relations Jehovah shall become known to the Egyptians. The expression “shall be known,” etc., recalls the celebrated passage Exodus 6:3. “But by my name Jehovah, was I not known to them.” There the Lord reveals Himself to those that were held in bondage by the Egyptians; here is seen the remarkable advance that the Lord reveals Himself to the Egyptians themselves as Jehovah, that they, too, really know Him as such; serving Him in accordance with His law, they present sacrifice and oblation, i.e., bloody and unbloody offerings, and make vows to Him which they scrupulously perform as recognition of His divine majesty and grace (comp.
Leviticus 27; Numbers 30; Deuteronomy 12:6; Deuteronomy 23:21 sqq.; Jeremiah 44:25; Ps. 61:9; Psalms 66:13; Psalms 116:14; Psalms 116:18, etc.). Egypt is like Israel moreover in this, that the Lord now and then chastises it as not yet sinless, but still heals again. The second half of Isa 19:22 is related to the first as particularizing the latter. In the first half it is merely said: Jehovah will smite and heal Egypt. But in the second half it is put as the condition of healing after the smiting that “they shall return,” etc. Thereby is affirmed that the Egyptians shall find grace only on this condition; and also that they will fulfil this condition.
The contrast of smiting and healing reminds one of Deu 32:39, comp. Job 5:18; Hosea 6:1 sqq.
4. In that day——mine inheritance.Isaiah 19:23-25. It is observed in verses 19–22, that the climax of the discourse is not quite attained, for Egypt alone is spoken of, and an Egypt that needed to be disciplined. But now the Prophet rises to the contemplation of a glorious picture of the future that is extensively and intensively complete. Israel’s situation between the northern and southern world-powers had ever been to it the source of the greatest distress inwardly and outwardly. But precisely this middle position had also its advantage.
Israel breaks forth on the right hand and on the left. The spirit of Israel penetrates gradually Egypt and Assyria, and thus binds together these two opponents into one, and that something higher. This the Prophet expresses by saying there will be a laid out road, a highway, leading from Egypt to Assyria and from Assyria to Egypt. Such a road must, naturally, traverse the land of Israel, in fact, according to all that precedes, we must assume that this road properly goes out from Israel in both directions. For it is the Lord that makes Himself known to Assyria as well as to Egypt (Isaiah 19:21), and both these unite in the service of the Lord. For it is clear that the concluding clause of Isa 19:23, does not mean that Egypt shall be subject to Assyria (see ςαψε in Text. and Gram.).
Then Israel will no longer be the unfortunate sacrifice to the enmity of its two mighty neighbors, but their peer and the third member of their union. Thus a harmony will be established, and the threefold accord will be a blessing in the midst of the whole earth and for them, because the Lord will bless them. For Israel as the earthly home of the kingdom of God, and Assyria and Egypt as the natural world-powers represent the entire earth. From them the blessing must come forth upon all. But they must be so blest that the predicates, that hitherto Israel had alone, will be applied to all three. Egypt is called ςַ ?ξִּ ?ι “my people” (comp.
Isaiah 3:12; Isaiah 10:2; Isaiah 10:24, and often), Assyria ξςωׂ ?διψι “work of my hands,” (comp. Isaiah 60:21; Isaiah 64:7 and often), but Israel retains the name of honor πημϊι, “mine inheritance,” for thereby it is characterized as the actual son of the house and head of the family.
Footnotes:From before the lifting of the hand, etc., which He lifteth against it.recall itShall be.
Speaking.
Heb. the lip.
swearing.
Ir Ha-heres.
Or, Heres, or the sun.
champion.
And shall, etc.Egypt.
And.
Assyria.
EgyptEgypt.
Assyria.
earth.
since.
blesses them.
β) THE OF EGYPTIsaiah 20This chapter, whose date is exactly determined by the historical notices of Isa 20:1 in connection with Isaiah 20:3 (comp. the introduction to chapters 17–20), is related to chap. 19, with which it is manifestly contemporaneous, as a completion. Thus chap. 19 speaks chiefly of the visitations that shall overtake Egypt, by means of catastrophes of its inward political and natural life. But to that conversion of Egypt spoken of Isa 19:18 sqq., outward distresses also must contribute. These, according to the political relations that prevailed in the period when chapters Isaiah 19:20 originated, can proceed only from Assyria. At the same time this weighty lesson resulted from these things, that Judah in its then relation to Assyria and Egypt must not rely on Egypt for protection against Assyria.
____________________
1 In the year that Tartan came unto Ashdod, (when Sargon the king of Assyria sent him), and fought against Ashdod, and took it; 2at the same time spake the Lord by Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, Go and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from thy foot, And he did so, walking naked and 3barefoot. And the Lord said, Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three years for a sign and wonder upon Egypt and dupon Ethiopia; 4so shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, even with their buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt. 5And they shall be afraid and ashamed of Ethiopia their expectation, and of Egypt their glory. 6And the inhabitant of this isle shall say in that day, Behold, such is our expectation, whither we flee for help to be delivered from the king of Assyria: and how shall we escape?
TEXTUAL AND Isa_20:2. One must carefully note that what follows immediately on the formula of announcement, γαψιΧαιγΞιωׁ ?Χμΰξψ is not something that Jehovah spake by Isaiah, but something that He spake to him (μֵ ?κְ εβε). For αְּ ?ιψַ never has the meaning “in conspcctu,” as some would assume in order to obviate the incongruity between αιψ and μֵ ?κְ; it has not this meaning even in 1 Samuel 21:14, and Job 15:23. μֵ ?ΰξֹ ?ψ, therefore, as to form connects primarily with the μֵ ?κְ immediately following, but in regard to matter it relates to all that follows. ειΰξψιΧ in the beginning of Isa 20:3 like μΰξψ, is subordinate to the more intensive ψִּ ?αֶּ ?ψ, and introduces the second stage of the revelation announced by ψִּ ?αֶּ ?ψεβε. The expression αְּ ?ιψַ for the human organ of the divine revelation occurs in Isaiah only here. In Jeremiah, too, it occurs only Isaiah 37:2; Isaiah 50:1.——Note the constr. praegn. in τϊηϊηωׂ ?χξςμεΧwhere the preposition must be connected with a verb understood. Compare Green., § 273, 3.
Isaiah 20:3. ωׁ ?μωׁ ωׁ ?πιξ occasions difficulty. The interpretation is altogether ungrammatical that takes these words in the sense: “in three years shall be fulfilled what this symbolical act signifies.” The words can only be made to relate to δμκ, or, according to the accents, to what follows; but in either case must be taken in the sense “for three years.” Regarding the words only grammatically, the nearest meaning that offers is: “like my servant Isaiah has gone three years.” etc. For were it said: “like my servant goes for three years,” why then does it not read δֹ ?μֵ ?κְ ?? Or if the meaning were: “like my servant will go,” why then does it not read ιֵ ?μֵ ?κְ ?? Although the Hebrew perfect indicates directly only that something actually occurs objectively without reference to the time, still the fact must belong to some time; and if neither an internal nor external sign points to the present nor future, then we are obliged to take the verbal form that designates facta just in the sense of factum, i.e., in the sense of come to pass, done, in respect to time. However some construe δָ ?μַ ?κְ as perfect, but refer ωׁ ?μωׁ ωׁ ?πιν to ΰεϊεξτϊ, so that the sense is: “like my servant has gone naked and barefoot for a type of three years long” (tribus annis completis in exilium ducta erit Aegyptus atque Aethiopia; usque ad illud tempus, quod Isajas semel nudus et discalceatus incessit, typus est,” Stade, l. c. p. 67; thus, too, the Masorets, Jerome, Hitzig, Hendewerk, Knobel).
But to this there is a twofold objection [for the second see under the following Exeg. and Crit. in loc.). First: If it were to be expressly said that Isaiah did not for three years go naked, but only that he was to be a sign for three years by once (Stade) or several times repeated going naked, or more exactly, if the typical transaction itself did not last through three years, but was only to obtain as the sign for the continuance of three years, if therefore ωׁ ?μωׁ ωׁ ?πιν is to depend not on δμψ but on ΰεϊεξετּ ?ϊ, then must the dependence be indicated corresponding to the sense. The mere Accusative then durst not be used. If Isaiah was for three years long a type, then must he three years long go naked. But did he go naked only once or a few times, and were only the typical significance of this going naked to extend to three years, then it must read μְ ?ωָׁ ?μωׁ ωָׁ ?πִ ?ιν or ΰεֹ ?ϊεּ ?ξεֹ ?τֵ ?ϊωָׁ ?μωׁ ωָׁ ?πִ ?ιν. The latter construction would not be incorrect, as Stade (p. 68) seems to assume, in as much as ΰεϊεξετϊ, as to sense, form only one notion (comp.
Ezekiel 31:16).
Isaiah 20:4. ηֲ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?τַ ?ι is held by Ewald (§ 211, c, Anm. Isaiah 2 : [comp. Green, § 199 c] to be a change from ηֲ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?τֵּ ?ι fixed by the Masorets. Thus, too, ωָׂ ?ψַ ?ι Judges 5:15. Others (Delitzsch, Dietrich) hold this form, like (ηεֹ ?ψַ ?ι Isaiah 19:8), ηַ ?μּ ?εֹ ?πַ ?ι (Jeremiah 22:14), βεֹ ?αַ ?ι (Amos 7:1; Nahum 3:17), ωַׁ ?ψַּ ?ι (Exodus 6:3), for a singular form with a collective signification. Hitzig and Stade regard our word as an archaic ending of the Construct State, of which the punctuators had availed themselves “in order to avoid the disagreeable sound that would be occasioned by the following ωֵׁ ?ϊ.” But then they would often have had to resort to this change.
It appears to me of course probable that the pointing Ξַ ?ι is to be charged to the Masorets. But ωֵׁ ?ϊ did not prompt them to this; it was the foregoing singulars ςָ ?ψεֹ ?νεְ ?ιָ ?ηֵ ?σ. They supposed they must punctuate ηωׂ ?ετι as singular to correspond with these. Therefore I believe that ηωׂ ?ετι is to be regarded as a singular like the δֹ ?ψַ ?ι, etc., named above, but that it is set in the place of the original ηֲ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?τֵ ?ι by tradition only. But ςψνειησ is partly conditioned by Isaiah 20:3, partly it is to be treated as an ideal number (Isaiah 24:22).——ςψεϊξΧ is in apposition with ηωׂ ?ετιωׁ ?Χ.
Isaiah 20:5-6. ξַ ?αָּ ?θ, that to which one looks (hoping and trusting) occurs in Isaiah only in these two verses. Beside this in Zechariah 9:5.——μςζψδ comp. Isaiah 10:3; Isaiah 31:1.
AND 1. In the year when the Tartan, i.e. commander-in-chief of king Sargon of Assyria, came against Ashdod to besiege the city—which he also took after a comparatively short siege,—Isaiah received commandment from the Lord to take off his garment made of bad sack linen and his sandals, and to go about naked and barefoot (Isaiah 20:1-2). For the incredible thing shall happen that the Egyptians and Ethiopians, shall be compelled to go into captivity naked and barefoot, like Isaiah goes about, (Isaiah 20:3-4). Thereupon all inhabitants of the sea-board of Palestine, will, with terror and shame, be sensible how wrong they were to confide in the power and glory of Ethiopia and Egypt (Isaiah 20:5). They will say: Thus it has gone with the power from whom we expected protection; how now shall it go with us? (Isaiah 20:6).
2. In the year——barefoot.Isaiah 20:1-2. According to the testimony of Assyrian monuments, Tartan is not a proper name, but an appellative. It is the “Assyrian official name for the commander-in-chief.” In Assyrian the word sounds tur-ta-nu, and is, to the present, of unknown derivation. On the Assyrian list of regents that is communicated by Schrader (Die Keilinschriften u. das A. T., Giessen, 1872, p. 323 sqq.) it reads (obverse 9): “Murdukiluya, Tartan, to the city Gozan (obv. 38); Samsulu, Tartan, to Armenia (obv. 48); Samsulu, Tartan, to the city Surat (overse 19); Samsulu, Tartan, in the land (Rev. 32); Nabudaninanni, Tartan, to the city Arpad.” Thus the ordering of these high officers to their various posts of administration is designated.
The word “Tartan” occurs again in the Old Testament, only 2 Kings 18:17.——As regards Sargon, it is now settled by documentary proof that Salmanassar and Sargon are not one person. The Assyrian canon of regents, which the great work of inscriptions by Rawlinson, Vol. III., communicates in amended form (comp. Schrader, l. c., p. 317) contains as fifth Eponyme of that administration that followed Tuklat-habal-asar, i.e., Tiglath-Pileser, the name Sal-ma-nu-βsir (another form Sal-man-βsir): and Rawlinson (Athenaeum, 1867, No. 2080, p. 304, comp. Schrader in Stud. and Krit., 1872, IV. p. 737) remarks on this: “Salmanassar IV., (for there were three older Salmanassars) ascended the throne in the year 727 B. C., for which year there was already an Eponyme established, so that he could only enter on his Archonship in 723.” But Sargon came to the administration in the course of the year 722 B.
C. He is mentioned in the Old Testament only in our passage—whereas the monuments offer just about his reign the richest results. His name in Assyrian is Sarrukin, which by the Assyrians themselves, is construed partly as Sarrukin, i.e. “mighty the king,” or “the right king,” partly as Sarruakin, i.e. “He (God) appointed the king” (comp. ιְ ?δεֹ ?ιָ ?αִ ?ιο). Sargon is the builder of North Nineveh or Dur-Sarrukin, now Khorsabad, whose monuments, with their inscriptions of the most various sorts, are a most valuable source of historical information (comp. Schrader, Keilinschriften, p. 256 sqq.). The following is the account of the conquest of Ashdod as the Khorsabad inscription gives it according to Schrader’s (l. c., p. 259 sqq.) translation. “Azuri, king of Ashdod, hardened his heart to pay no tribute and sent demands to the princes of his neighborhood to revolt from Assyria.
Accordingly I did vengeance and changed his government over the inhabitants of his territory. Achimit, his brother, I set over them in the government in his place. The Syrians, that meditated revolt, despised his dominion and raised up Iaman over themselves, who had no claim to the throne, and who, like those, refused to own the dominion. In the burning wrath of my heart I did not assemble my whole power, took no concern for baggage. With my men of war, who separated not themselves from me behind the raising of my arms, I advanced on Ashdod. That Iaman, when he perceived the approach of my army from far, fled to a region (?) of Egypt, which lay on the borders of Meroe; not a trace of him was to be seen.
Ashdod, Gimt-Asdudim (?) I besieged, took it; his gods, his wife, his sons, the treasures, possessions, valuables of his palace, along with the inhabitants of his land I appointed to captivity. Those cities I restored; I colonized there the inhabitants of the lands that my hands had conquered, that are in the midst of the East; I made them like the Assyrians; they rendered obedience. The king of Meroe, who in the midst. … of a desert region, on a path. … whose fathers since remote times down to (this time) had not sent their ambassadors to my royal ancestors, to entreat peace for himself: the might of Merodach (overpowered him), a mighty fear came over him, fear seized him. In bonds … iron chains he laid him (Iaman); he directed his steps toward Assyria and appeared before me.” If we compare the annals of Sargon, which register year by year the deeds of this king, we find that in the year of his beginning to reign (722), which is not reckoned as his first year, he conquered Samaria; in the second year (720) he conquered king Sevech of Egypt in the battle of Raphia and took prisoner king Hanno of Gaza; in the eleventh year (711) he made war on Azuri of Ashdod and conquered the city, after which the king of Ethiopia sued for peace (Schrader, l. c., p. 264 sq.). In all, Sargon reigned seventeen years (until 705). The monuments and the Prophet mutually complete one another.
If from the former we see the occasion, the nearer circumstances and the time of the expedition against Ashdod, the Prophet, on the other hand, informs us that it was not Sargon himself that conducted the undertaking, as might appear from the monuments. It was the constant usage of those Asiatic potentates, to which there are only a few exceptions, to register the deeds of the leaders of their armies as their own on the monuments. Comp. Schrader, Stud. u. Krit, 1872, IV. p. 743. Moreover from the contents of the Khorsabad inscription it is seen that Ashdod was not at that time visited for the first by the Assyrians, as also on the other hand it appears that Egypt had already experienced emphatically the might of the Assyrian arm.
For without any campaign, merely out of fear of that arm, the Egyptian-Ethiopian king surrendered the fugitive Iaman. As regards the time, our prophecy, according to the inscription, falls in the year 711, thus in the eleventh year of king Sargon’s reign. The siege of Ashdod, for which later Psammetichus required twenty-five years (Herod. 2, 157), appears not to have lasted long at that time. The capture followed, according to the inscriptions (see above), in the same year. Perhaps the divided state of the inhabitants of Ashdod was to blame for this speedy capture. That there was an Assyrian party among them appears from the inscription communicated above.
The phrase εַ ?ιִּ ?μָּֽ ?ηֶ ?νεβε, and he fought against, etc., is parenthetical. As to the sense, it is in so far an historical anticipation that the taking did not follow after what is related in Isaiah 20:2. But in relation to Isaiah 20:3, that phrase is no anticipation. For the meaning of the typical action, if my interpretation of “three years” is correct, can only have been signified three years later. Consequently the entire chapter can not have been written earlier than three years after the “coming of the Tartan” mentioned in Isaiah 20:1. In as much as this “coming of the Tartan” is taken as the point of departure for the course of events, while the conquest is only mentioned in parenthesis, as a side affair, the Prophet likely received the command of Isa 20:2, about the time of that “coming,” therefore before the capture.
By implication, therefore, there lay in the command at the same time a prediction of that conquest of Ashdod. For the conquest of Egypt presupposes the taking of the outworks. Therefore the point of the prophecy also is directed against Egypt.
At the same time is related to “In the year that the Tartan came” as a wider sphere, as certainly as the notion ςֵ ?ϊ is more comprehensive than the notion ωָׁ ?πָ ?δ. The following contains indeed, information concerning two facts: first concerning the command to go naked, and second, concerning the interpretation that followed after three years. To these refer those two dates, the narrower and the broader, as a matter of course, the first date corresponding to the first fact and the second to the second fact. Therewith is closely connected that the sentence “spake the Lord … saying,” introduces the entire revelation contained in what follows. (See under Text. and Gram.).
It is not accidental that Isaiah is called here by his complete name, Isaiah the son of Amoz. For this happens, beside the present, only Isaiah 1:1 and Isaiah 2:1, therefore only in the first and second introduction; then Isaiah 13:1 (in the beginning of the prophecies against the nations) and Isaiah 37:21, where is related the comforting reply that Isaiah was the means of giving to Hezekiah after the threatening of Sennacherib. By the designation of the Prophet as “the son of Amoz” is signified, as appears to me, that there exists a contrast between this name and what is related of Isaiah in this chapter. It is likely no error to assume that a “son of Amoz” was a man of importance. And this man of noble descent must for three years, when he let himself be seen publicly, go about like a wretched prisoner in the utmost scanty clothing. For that Isaiah went wholly naked is not conceivable.
Anciently, indeed, one was regarded as naked who took off the upper garment (comp. nudus ara, sere nudus in Virgil, Georg. I. 299; Petron. 92; John 21:7; Herz. R. Ency. VII., p. 725). We observe from this passage that Isaiah constantly wore a sack, as chief and upper garment, i.e. a sack-like garment and made of sackcloth.
The sack-garment was sign of deep mourning and repentance generally (Isaiah 3:24; Isaiah 15:3; Genesis 37:34; Daniel 9:3; Matthew 11:21, and often. It was variously worn: partly next to the skin (1 Kings 21:27), partly over the under-garment, the λְּ ?ϊֹ ?πֶ ?ϊ “tunic,” as was the case, e.g. with Isaiah, and as appears generally to have been a prophet’s costume. For, according to 2 Kings 1:8, Elijah wore a hairy garment with a leather girdle, which clothing, Zechariah 13:4, is described as a prophet’s costume generally. John the Baptist, too, wore it, certainly in special imitation of Elijah (Matthew 3:4; comp. Hebrews 11:37; Revelation 11:3). Now when Isaiah received command to take off the sack garment and his sandals, it was that he should make himself a living symbol of the extremest ignominy, and of the deepest misery.
Not to Judah, however, but to Egypt is this sorrowful fate announced. Judah is only to draw from it the lesson that it must not lean on Egypt for support. For this was the great and ruinous error of the time of Hezekiah, that men supposed they could only find protection against Assyria in Egypt. Against this the Prophet strives earnestly in chapters 28–32.
3. And the LORD said——we escape.Isaiah 20:3-6. [On the construction of “three years,” see under Text. and Gram.; also for a grammatical objection to the sense: “like my servant has gone naked and barefoot as a three years sign,” etc. A further objection is as follows.—Tr.] If the typical meaning of the sign was to remain in force only three years, then, too, the fulfilment must actually follow after three years, or the prophecy prove to be false. For what can this mean: the going naked of the Prophet shall be three years long a sign? Only this: after three years the type ceases to be type, and becomes fulfilment. If that does not come to pass, then the sign was an erroneous one and misleading.
It is no use here to regard the number three as a round number that is only to be understood “summatim” (Stade, p. 67). For the measures of time of fulfilment, in consequence of the imperfection of our human knowledge about the real length of historical periods, or because of the difficulty of knowing the points of beginning and ending, may very well be represented as only an approximation. But a measure of time which is named as an earnest pledge of a future transaction, must not prove to be incorrect, if the earnest itself is not to be found treacherous. But Egypt was not conquered by the Assyrians three years after the siege of Ashdod, but much later, as will be seen immediately. Therefore the Prophet cannot have proposed a three years validity of that sign. But he went three years naked and barefoot, in order to set before the eyes of his people very emphatically and impressively the image of how wretched Egypt had become.
And only after three years followed the interpretation for the same reason. For three years the men of Judah and Jerusalem were to meditate and inquire: why does the Prophet go about in scanty and wretched garb? When at length after three years they learned: this happened for the purpose of parading before your eyes the misery of Egypt conquered by Assyria,—then they could measure the worth and importance of the warning that the Prophet gave them by what it cost him to give it. For the Egyptian policy was the fundamental error of the reign of Hezekiah through its whole extent (comp. the Introduction to chapters 28–33). The siege of Ashdod, that key to the land of Egypt, was assuredly a fitting event, for letting this warning sign begin. And if about the year 708 the interpretation followed, that was the time, too, when Sargon’s rule drew near its end and that of Sennacherib drew near.
It was the time when the alliance with Egypt more and more ripened, and when the warning of the Prophet must become ever more pressing.
Sign and wonder is a sort of Hendiadys, in as much as to the first notion a second is co-ordinated, that properly is only something subordinate to that first: sign and portent for portentous sign. In as far as the nakedness of the Prophet represented the misery of the Egyptians generally, it is a sign of it; but in as far as it represented this misery in advance as something future it is a portentous sign.
To the present, nothing definite is known of any invasion of Egypt by the Assyrians. The Assyrian monuments, however, tell us that the kings Esarhaddon and Asurbanipal (Sardanapalus) conquered Egypt. The first on a brick inscription (Schrader, l. c. p. 210) calls himself: “king of the kings” of Egypt; and his son Asurbanipal says in his cylinder inscription (Schrader l. c. 212) “Esarhaddon—my progenitor went down and penetrated into the midst of Egypt. He gave Tirhaka king of Ethiopia a defeat, destroyed his military power. Egypt and Ethiopia he conquered; countless prisoners he led forth,” etc. Asurbanipal himself seems to have prepared a still worse fate for the Egyptians under Tirhaka’s successor, Rud-Amon.
For he relates the following in one of his inscriptions (Schrader, l. c. 288): “Trusting in Asur, Sin and the great gods, my lords, they (my troops) brought on him in a broad plain a defeat and smote his troop forces. Undamana (Rud-Amon) fled alone, and went to No, his royal city (Thebes). In a march of a month and ten days they moved after him over pathless ways, took that city in its entire circuit, purged it away like chaff. Gold, silver, the dust of their land, drawn off metal, precious stones, the treasure of his palace, garments of Berom (?) and Kum, great horses, men and women, … pagi and ukupi the yield of their mountains in countless quantity, they bore forth out of it, appointed them to captivity; to Nineveh, my seat of dominion they brought them in peace, and they kissed my feet.” Comp. too, ibid. p. 290. As, according to the Apisstelen Tirhaka died in the year 664, Schrader fixes the date of this conquest of Thebes about the year 663 b. c. This monumental notice is of great importance for the understanding of Nah 3:8-11, and partly, too, for Isaiah 19 and for our passage.
From this, as also from the other Assyrian communications cited above, we learn that our prophecy, given in the year 708 received a double fulfilment: one in the time of Asarhaddon, who reigned from 681 to 668, the other by means of Asurbanipal about the year 663. Therefore, not after three years, but in the course of the fourth and fifth decade after its publication was it fulfilled
Egypt’s shame [see under Text. and Gram.). Did not the Prophet, who for his own person assuredly wore only the lightest Israelitish costume, have here in mind, perhaps, those costumes of the common Egyptians, that allowed the form to appear prominent, which, seen in foreign lands, were well fitted to provoke scorn for Egypt? Comp. e.g. the illustrations in Wilkinson’s, The ancient Egyptians.It is plain that in Isaiah 20:6 the Prophet means the Israelites and their neighbors. It is a sign of displeasure and discontent when one addresses a person that is present in the third person. The expression δָ ?ΰִ ?ι “the isle” in Isaiah 20:6 is to be noted. The expression (comp. the singular Isaiah 23:2; Isaiah 23:6) is nowhere else used of the Holy land.
But the Prophet also means, not merely this, but the entire coast of Palestine, which, because ΰִ ?ι is not a proper name, but appellative, he can very well call ΰִ ?ι. For, as the conquest of Ashdod itself and the preceding events (comp. the Sargon Inscription, Schrader, p. 76) testify, the Ph�nicians also, and the Philistines, who shared with Israel in the possession of the coast, were become a prey to the Assyrian power.
When the strong power of Egypt and Ethiopia had proved too weak to bear the onset of Assyria, then, indeed, might the anxious thought arise in the hearts of the smaller nations that had joined themselves to Egypt: how is it now possible that we can be saved? Stade is of the opinion that ΰִ ?ι, “the isle, or coast” means merely the city Ashdod, and that Isaiah 20:6 contains the words of the fugitive inhabitants of Ashdod, especially of Iaman. After the overthrow of Egypt the exclamation is put in the mouth of these: “quomodo nos effugere poteramus,” (p. 43). But the assumption that the conquered inhabitants of the ΰִ ?ι could not say: “how shall we be saved” is erroneous. They were indeed conquered; but as long as, still dwelling in their land, they saw trains of captives led past them, they are still in possession of their land, and can hope for a favorable turn of fortune, and the shaking off of the foreign yoke. Only the captive carried into exile is finally without hope. Only this final and greatest degree of misfortune do the inhabitants of the ΰִ ?ι have in mind when they exclaim, “how shall we escape?”
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 17:1-3. “There are no makers of breaches in city and wall stronger than the sins of the inhabitants. When these strengthen and multiply themselves, then entire cities, well built fall over them, and become heaps of stones; as is to be seen in the case of Jericho, Nineveh, Babylon and Jerusalem itself. Therefore let no one put his trust in fortifications.”—Cramer.2. On Isaiah 17:7-8. “Potuit hic,” etc. “It may be objected here, are not the ark of the covenant and the temple in Jerusalem also work of men’s hands? But the theological canon here is, that in every work regard must be had whether there is a word of God for it or not.
Therefore such works as are done by God’s command, those God does by means of us as by instruments. Thus those are called works of the law that are done by the law’s command. But such works as are done by no command of God are works of our own hands, and because they are without the word of God, they are impious and condemned, especially if the notion of righteousness attaches to them, on which account, also, they are reproved here.”—Luther.3. On Isaiah 17:8 (δΰωׁ ?ψιν); Vitringa proposes the conjecture that Osiris is to be derived from ΰωׁ ?ψ, which the Egyptians may have pronounced Oser or Osir. And indeed he would have us take as the fundamental meaning of the word, either “beatus,” (ΰָ ?ωֵׁ ?ψ), or combine it with ωׁ ?εּ ?ψ “to look,” so that Osiris would be as Sun-god, the all seeing, sharp looking (πολυόφδαλμος). ΰωׁ ?ψδ then, as feminine of ΰωׁ ?ψ, would be Isis!
4. On Isaiah 17:10. “Si hanc,” etc. “If so fearful a punishment followed this fault, thou seest what we have to hope for Germany, which not only forgets God, but despises, provokes, persecutes and abominates Him.”—Luther.5. On Isaiah 17:14. “Although the evening is long for us, we must still have patience, and believe assuredly, sorrow is a forerunner of joy, disgust a forerunner of delight, death a forerunner of life.” Cramer.6. On 18 Boettcher (Neue exegetische kritische Aehrenl. II., p. 129) calls this chapter, “exceeding difficult, perhaps the most difficult in the entire Old Testament.” And in fact from the earliest to the most recent times expositors go asunder in the most remarkable manner in regard to the object and sense of the prophecy. Jerome and Cyril referred the prophecy to Egypt.
Others, but in different senses, referred it to Judea. Eusebius of Cesarea held the view that, as Jerome says on our passage, “prophecy in the present chapter is directed against the Jews and Jerusalem, because in the beginning of Christian faith they sent letters to all nations lest they might accept the sufferings of Christ.” “Cocceius teaches that Judah is that land shadowed with wings, which (for he refers ΰωׁ ?ψ to wings) are beyond the rivers of Ethiopia” (Vitringa). Raschi and Kimchi, likewise, refer the prophecy to the Jews, but they see in Isaiah 20:6 the overthrow of Gog and Magog, and understand the promised deliverance to refer to that greatest of all that would take place by means of the Messiah. Also Von Hofmann (Schriftbew. II., 2 p. 215 sqq.) explains the passage to refer to “the return of the departed Israel from the remotest regions and by the service of nations of the world themselves, after that they shall have learned that great act of Jehovah and therewith the worth of His people and of His holy places.” Others like Pellican think of the Roman Empire. Arius Montanus even casts his eyes over “to the new world converted to Christ by the preaching of the gospel and by the arms of Spain” (Vitringa).
7. On Isaiah 19:1 b. “The passage recalls the myth concerning Typhon, which represents the Hyksos, who formerly coming from Asia subdued Egypt. The Egyptian gods were afraid (according to a later Greek tradition, which explained the Egyptian heads of beasts as masks, comp. Diestel in the Zeitschrift f. histor. Theol., 1860, 2, p. 178) of Typhon and hid themselves (Plut. De Isid. et Osir., cap. 72); they resigned the wreaths when Typhon had received the kingdom (Athen. 15:25, p 680); they assumed animal forms (Apollos I. 6, 3; Ovid Metam. V. 325 sqq.; Hygin. Fab. 196). According to Manetho in Josephus (c. Apion I. 26) king Amenophis, who was threatened by Palestinians, carefully concealed the gods.
Other prophets, just as Isaiah does, announce destruction against the Egyptian idols from Jahve (Jeremiah 43:13; Jeremiah 46:25; Ezekiel 30:13; comp. Exodus 12:12; Numbers 33:4)” Knobel.8. On Isaiah 19:5 sqq. If nature and history have one Lord, who turns hearts like water courses (Proverbs 21:1) and the water courses like hearts (Psalms 33), then we need not wonder if both act in harmony, if, therefore, nature accompanies history as, so to speak, a musical instrument accompanies a song.
9. On Isaiah 19:11. “This was the first argument of the impious in the world against the pious, and will be also the last: for the minds of the ungodly are inflated with these two things, the notion of wisdom and the glory of antiquity. So the diatribe of Erasmus is nothing else than what is written here: I am the son of the ancients. For he names the authority of the Fathers. The prophets contended against this pride, and we to-day protest against it.” Luther.10. On Isaiah 19:13 sqq. “Where one will not let the outward judgments of God tend to his improvement, there is added the judgment of reprobation, in such a way that even natural prudence and boldness are taken away from those that are the most prudent and courageous.
All this does the anger of the Lord of Hosts bring about.”—Tόbingen Bibel bei Starke.11. On Isaiah 19:16-17. The servile fear of those that have hitherto not at all known God may become a bridge to that fear which is child-like. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,” Psalms 111:10.
12. On Isaiah 19:19-22. The Prophet here casts a penetrating and clear look into the future of Egypt. Although the several forms that he depicts make the impression of those forms which, standing in the midst of a sea of mist, rise on an elevated site above the mist, whose absolute distance cannot be exactly made out, still particular traits are remarkably fitting and exact.
13. On Isaiah 19:23-25. One sees here plainly that the Prophet regards Egypt, Israel and Assyria as the chief lands of the earth, whose precedence is so unconditionally the measure of all the rest that they do not even need to be mentioned. Such is in general the prophetic manner of contemplating history. It sees only the prominent and decisive points, so as to overleap great regions of territory and periods of time. Comp. Daniel’s Weltreiche ii. 31 sqq.; Isaiah 7:3 sqq.
14. On 20 The office of prophet was hard and severe. Such a servant of God must renounce every thing, yield himself to every thing, put up with every thing, let any thing be done with him. He must spare himself no indignity, no pain, no trouble. He must fear nothing, hope nothing, have and enjoy nothing. With all that he was and had he must be at the service of the Lord, unconcerned as to what men might think or approve. Comp. Jeremiah 15:19 sqq.; Jeremiah 16:2; Jeremiah 20:7 sqq.; Ezek. 4:24, 15 sqq.
Footnotes:of the Tartans coming.in Sargon’s, etc., sending him.he fought.Heb. by the hand of Isaiah.concerning.Heb. the captivity of Egypt.the exiles of Ethiopia.omit to.Heb. nakedness.Or, country.coast or sea board.
III. : AGAINST BABYLON, EDOM, ARABIA AND . TO THIS LAST THERE IS ADDED A ONE AGAINST SHEBNA THE STEWARD OF THE PALACE
Isaiah 21, 22These two chapters contain prophecies against Babylon, Edom, the Arabians, Jerusalem. The last of them has an appendix relating to an individual, namely, Shebna, the steward of the palace. The reason of the juxtaposition of these prophecies is seen in their peculiar inscriptions, which are all of an emblematic character. The countries spoken of are not designated by their real names, but Babylon is called the desert of the sea; Edom, Dumah, i.e. silence; Jerusalem, valley of vision. Arabia retains its own name, but that name is seen to be used in a double signification. For the context shows that ςֲ ?ψַ ?α is intended to stand not only for Arabia, but also for evening.
We have, moreover, to remark, that in three of these prophecies (Isaiah 21:1; Isaiah 21:13; Isaiah 22:1) the inscription is an expression taken from the prophecy over which it is placed. In arranging these prophecies so much weight was attached to the analogous character of their inscriptions, that from a regard to it even chapter 22 although directed against Jerusalem, has been taken into the series of prophecies against heathen nations (13–23) The four prophecies here placed together have yet other points of contact. The first and second exhibit the prophet very prominently in his character as a watcher on his high tower: the fourth presents the antithesis between false and true seeing. In the first Elam and Madai appear as enemies of Babylon; in the fourth, Elam and Kir as enemies of Jerusalem. Moreover, the mode of attack is twice described in the same manner. (Comp. Isaiah 21:7 with Isaiah 22:6).
Worthy of observation too, are the frequent points of agreement with the book of Job which both these chapters contain. Comp. Isaiah 21:3 b, and Isaiah 21:4 a with Job 21:6; Job 18:11, etc.; Isaiah 22:2 with Job 36:29; Job 39:7; Isaiah 22:4 with Job 7:19; Job 14:6; Isaiah 22:22 with Job 12:14; Isaiah 22:24 (φΰφΰιν) with Job 5:25, etc. (See the exposition).
The genuineness of Isa 21:1-10 is contested by the rationalistic interpreters. The chief reason is that they hold such a prophecy to be an impossibility. But as the form and contents of the piece are so decidedly after Isaiah’s manner that, as Delitzsch says, “a prophecy constructed more exactly in the style of Isaiah than this, is inconceivable,” it would follow that we have primarily and properly only to consider the question as a problem which is presented to us: How is it possible that Isaiah could foreknow the fall of Babylon by nations that he calls Elam and Madai? A thing is here held to be impossible, whose impossibility is by no means scientifically established. For it is not demonstrated that there is not a personal God.
It is very difficult to make any definite statement respecting the time of the composition of this prophecy against Babylon. The only thing on which we can base an opinion seems to be the identity of expressions in Isaiah 21:3; Isaiah 13:8. This suggests the inference that the prophecy Isaiah 21:1-10 and the related chapters 13 and 14 were composed at the same time. On the question respecting the time of the composition of the three other prophecies, consult the introductions to them and the exposition that follow.
__________________
A.—Against BabylonIsa_21:1-101 The burden of the desert of the sea.
As whirlwinds in the south pass through;
So it cometh from the desert,
From a terrible land.
2 A grievous vision is declared unto me:
The treacherous dealer dealeth treacherously,
And the spoiler spoileth.
Go up, O Elam; besiege O Media;
All the sighing thereof have I made to cease.
3 Therefore are my loins filled with pain;
Pangs have taken hold upon me,
As the pangs of a woman that travaileth:
I was bowed down at the hearing of it;I was dismayed at the seeing of it.4 My heart panted, fearfulness affrighted me;
The night of my pleasure hath he turned into fear unto me.
5 Prepare the table,
Watch in the watch-tower,
Eat, drink;
Arise, ye princes, and anoint the shield.
6 For thus hath the Lord said unto me,
Go, set a watchman, let him declare what he seeth.
7 And he saw a chariot with a couple of horsemen,
A chariot of asses, and a chariot of camels;
And he hearkened diligently with much heed:
8 And he cried, A lion;
My lord, I stand continually upon the watch-tower in the day time,
And I am set in my ward whole nights.
9 And, behold, here cometh a chariot of men, with a couple of horsemen.
And he answered and said,
Babylon is fallen, is fallen;
And all the graven images of her gods he hath broken unto the ground.
10 O my threshing, and the corn of my floor:
That which I have heard of the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel,
Have I declared unto you.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_21:1. μημσ supply δָ ?ιεּ, conjugatio periphrastica, comp. Gesen., § 132, Anm. 1; Ewald, § 237, c. The design of this periphrastic construction seems to be to denote what is habitual: ut transire solent—a usage which marks chiefly the later books (2 Chronicles 26:5; Ezra 3:12) The construction is in every case a peculiar one.
Isaiah 21:2. ηζεϊχωׁ ?δ is the accusative depending on the transitive notion latent in the passive δֻ ?βַּ ?ψ. The δ in ΰπηϊδ (ΰֲ ?πָ ?ηָ ?δ, in Isaiah besides only Isaiah 35:10, 11) is marked by the Masorets as ψָ ?λָּ ?δ, although “the majority of the most correct codd. and editt.” (see Gesen. and De Rossi on our place) have the Mappiq in the δּ The sense is the same; for even the form with the quiescent δ denotes “gemitus ejus” for there is no absolute form ΰַ ?πְ ?ηָ ?ϊָ ?δ. Respecting the feminine suffix without Mappiq, comp. Ewald, § 247, d.Isaiah 21:6. The article before ξְ ?φַ ?τֶ ?δ (Micah 7:4) is the generic.
Isaiah 21:7. The primary signification of ψֶ ?λֶ ?α is vectura. This can mean 1) id quo vehitur, and that is a) and indeed predominantly the chariot, but also b) the horse. Here however we have to remark that ψλα is not the riding horse, but the chariot horse, and that it has this signification not immediately from the root ψָ ?λַ ?α, but per metonymiam from the derivative ψֶ ?λֶ ?α chariot, which also signifies the chariot with horses, and then (pars pro toto) the horses alone (comp. 2 Samuel 8:4; 2 Samuel 10:18); 2) vectura signifies also id quod vehitur, i.e., men riding or driving, whether singly (Ezekiel 39:20 ρεּ ?ρεָ ?ψֶ ?λֶ ?α equus et vector), or in numbers, as a band, a train (comp. in Arabic rakb a band of camel riders). In this latter signification the word is to be understood here and Isaiah 21:9; Isaiah 22:6. χωׁ ?α marks everywhere only the activity of the ear and not attentive observation in general. χֶ ?ωֶׁ ?α is the simple accusative of the object “et attendit attentionem magnam” (compare Deuteronomy 13:2 ηָ ?μַ ?νηְַ ?μεֹ ?ν, also Zechariah 1:15, and Psalms 14:5).
AND The first verse contains the theme: the Prophet beholds a violent tempest, which as a Simoon in the South, sweeps from a terrible land against Babylon. In Isaiah 21:2 the vision is more exactly defined, both as to the subjective and objective side. In the former relation it is characterized as a hard one, i.e. one which makes a deep and perturbing impression on him who sees it. Objectively the vision is seen to relate to a martial expedition against the perfidious and devastating Babylon. This expedition, in which Elam and Madai are the actors, will at the same time make an end to the sighing, i.e. to the bondage of Israel. In Isaiah 21:3-4 the feelings of the Prophet at the “hard” vision are more nearly described.
Pain seizes him as a travailing woman; he writhes and is terrified at what he hears and sees. His heart beats wildly from the horror which has taken hold of him; the twilight, hitherto so pleasant, as a time of rest, has become a time of dread. In Isaiah 21:5 there is a brief description of the way in which Babylon, the object of the announced invasion, behaves in view of it. They furnish the table for a banquet without thinking of any other defence than the appointment of watchmen; they eat and drink till suddenly, in the midst of the feast, the cry is heard: Arise, ye princes, anoint the shield! The following verses depict the issue. In order to observe it, the Prophet had been ordered by the Lord to set a sentry on the watch-tower (Isaiah 21:6).
The sentry beholds a mighty train of horses, asses and camels, and attends sharply to what it will do (Isaiah 21:7). Many days and nights the sentry keeps watch without marking anything (Isaiah 21:8). At last he calls with a loud voice; there comes a troop; it is but small, but it announces that Babylon is fallen, that its idols are overthrown (Isaiah 21:9). The Prophet in the words of the last verse (Isaiah 21:10) declares that he proclaims this as certain truth from the Lord to comfort his people threshed (crushed) in the captivity.
The burden——of the sea.Isaiah 21:1 a. The four prophecies which are placed together in chaps. 21 and 22, have inscriptions of an emblematical character. It is disputed whether ξγαψιν is a title derived from the text of this passage, or is an independent figurative designation of the country of Babylon. It is well-known that writings were denominated after their initial word, or, indeed, any word contained in them. Compare the Hebrew names of the Pentateuch, and of Proverbs and Lamentations; also χֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ϊ2 Samuel 1:18. [In the last passage the E. V. has “the use of the bow;” but the ellipsis is best supplied in the rendering “the song of the bow.” D.
M.]. On such titles the Commentary of Gesenius may be consulted. The ξωֹׂ ?ΰαςψα Isaiah 21:13 (comp. αςψα as the second word of the text) and the ξωׂ ?ΰπιΰηζιεο22:1 (comp. the same expression, Isaiah 22:5) seem to have been designated on the same principle. But although ξγαψ occurs in Isaiah 21:1, ιν is not found in the whole prophecy. Vitringa in a juvenile production (Observv Sacr. L.
I., diss. 2, op. 4) expressed the unwarranted opinion which he retracted in his commentary, that ιָ ?ν is substituted for πֶ ?βֶ ?α. But why should not ξγαψπֶ ?πֶ ?α be written? And although the sea lay to the south of Babylonia, that is no reason for calling the country “the desert of the sea.” There is just as little ground for taking ιν in the signification “West,” and giving this explanation of the whole expression, that Babylon is called ξγαψιν because it lay west of Media and Persia, and a desert intervened (Kimchi). I see no reason why we should not explain the expression ξγαψιν after the analogy of the expressions αςψα and βιΰηζιεο. The title ξγαψ is therefore taken from Isaiah 21:1. But ξγαψ by itself would be too obscure.
Another word had therefore to be supplied for nearer specification. Now Babylon was situated on the Euphrates. The Euphrates, with its canals, ponds and swamps, might as well be called a sea as the Nile, Isaiah 19:5, In Jeremiah 51:13 Babylon is thus addressed “O thou that dwellest on great waters.” See also Jeremiah 50:38; Jeremiah 51:32; Jeremiah 51:36. Interpreters refer to Herod. I. 184 where speaking of the Euphrates he says: “πρότερονδὲ (namely, previous to the erection of the dikes by Semiramis) ἐώθεεὁποταμὸςἀνὰτὸπεδίονπᾶνπελαγίζειν.” A passage from Abydenus is also cited (in Euseb.Praep. Evang.
IX. 41), where in reference to Mesopotamia which is watered by the Euphrates it is said: λέγετααιδὲπάνταμὲνἐξἀρχῆςῦδωρείναι, θάλασσανκαλεομένην.” Finally, it is of great weight that Babylonia is on the Assyrian monuments often designated simply as “sea, sea-country,” (tihamtu = ϊְּ ?δεֹ ?ν, in Assyrian the common word for “sea,” Schrader, p. 1 sq.). Tiglath-Pileser says in the pompous inscription proceeding from the last year of his reign (Schrader, p. 129 sq.), that he subdued Merodach-Baladan, son of Jakin, king of the sea (Sar tihamtiv). The same Merodach-Baladan is elsewhere called Sar Kardunias, i.e., king of Southern Chaldaea (Schrader, p. 214 note). Further, Asarhaddon states on a cylinder-inscription (Schrader, p. 227) that he made over “the Sea-country,” (mat tihamtiv) in its whole extent, to Nahid-Merodach, son of Merodach-Baladan. It is clear, therefore, that “sea, sea-country” was just an Assyro-Babylonian designation at least of Southern Chaldaea. If now we take into consideration that Babylon with its many and great waters was formerly a sea-country, and till the times of Asarhaddon was called “sea” (tihamtu) at least in its southern part, and that it still “swims as in the sea;” if, on the other hand, we bear in mind that the prophets depict the future desolation of Babylon with all possible colors, comparing it with Sodom and Gomorrah, places now covered with water, and speaking of its being turned into a lake of water, we might say that the expression “the desert of the sea” comprehends the past, present and future of the country in one conception.
But we perceive from the book of the Revelation 17:1; Revelation 17:3; Revelation 17:15 that our passage was understood in yet another sense [?] There Babylon, the great whore, sits on many waters (Isaiah 21:1) and at the same time in the desert (Isaiah 21:3). The waters, however, are (Isaiah 21:15) interpreted “peoples, and multitudes and nations and tongues” (comp. Isaiah 8:7; Jeremiah 47:2). The apostle appears, therefore, to have in his mind a wilderness of peoples, and the expression ξִ ?γְ ?αַּ ?ψςַ ?ξִּ ?ιν (Ezekiel 20:35; comp. Hosea 2:16) might also have been present to his view. We see, then, that the expression “the desert of the sea” is capable of a manifold interpretation.
Did the Prophet himself use it? I, for my part, find the choice of an expression capable of various explanations, as the inscription of a prophecy, to be quite in accordance with Isaiah’s manner (comp. Isaiah 21:11; Isaiah 21:13, Isaiah 22:1; Isaiah 30:6). [The Seer in the Apocalypse does not put the alleged arbitrary and erroneous construction on the inscription before us. The prototype of the figurative language in Revelation 17 is rather to be sought in Jeremiah 51. This chapter of Jeremiah was undoubtedly before the mind of John in depicting the mystic Babylon, and in it we have Babylon represented as dwelling on many waters (Jeremiah 51:13), and as destined to be a desert (Jeremiah 51:43). The sitting of the whore in the wilderness refers to her impending desolation, and does not exclude her sitting before that time on many waters.
John does not employ the expression “a wilderness of peoples.” In the whore sitting on many waters we have her condition at the time John wrote. Her appearance in the wilderness denotes her future solitude. It is plain, then, that the Apocalyptic Seer does not misinterpret the enigmatical title of this chapter of Isaiah, “the desert of the sea.”—D. M.].
3. As whirlwinds——land.Isaiah 21:1 b. According to the Masoretic punctuation this part of the verse consists of three members, of which the middle one is formed by the words ξξγαψαΰ. But against this division the objections lie, 1) that we cannot say the south in general, or for every land its south is the region of storms; 2) that the Prophet does not indicate by a single word that he means the countries situated south of Babylonia; 3) that it is not said “from the south.” The expression απβλ taken strictly does not involve the idea of a storm observed in the south by the Babylonians, but only the idea of a storm sweeping south of them: 4) that δַ ?πֶּ ?βֶ ?α has for the native of Palestine a quite definite signification; it is the south of Judah (Genesis 13:1; Numbers 21:1; Deuteronomy 34:3; Joshua 10:40; Joshua 11:16 et saepe) which is connected with the desert of Sinai called likewise κατ’ ἐξοχὴνδַ ?ξִּ ?γְ ?αָּ ?ψ (comp. Herz.R. Encycl.
XIVII. p. 304). The Prophet says therefore: as in the πֶ ?βֶ ?α of Palestine storms coming from Arabia Petraea (Hosea 13:15; Jeremiah 4:11; Jeremiah 13:24; Job 1:19; Zechariah 9:14) sweep along (ημσ properly “change,” thence transire, Isaiah 8:8) so it comes upon Babylonia from a terrible land.—αָּ ?ΰ is neuter and impersonal, a form of expression which we have already found frequently in Isaiah 6:10; Isaiah 10:4; Isaiah 14:32; Isaiah 15:2; Isaiah 18:5. A terrible land the country is called, because it is inhabited by a terrible people (Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 18:7). What country is meant by the Prophet we learn from Isaiah 21:2 b.4. A grievous vision——fear unto me.Isaiah 21:2-4. The vision (ηζεϊ in this meaning in Isaiah only here, and Isaiah 29:11; in another sense Isaiah 28:18; it is found besides only in Daniel 8:5-8) is first defined as to its subjective side, and in general as hard, i.e., hard to bear, causing perturbation (comp. similar inward experience of the Prophets at the incalculable greatness and importance of what they beheld, Daniel 7:15; Daniel 7:28; Daniel 10:16 sqq.; Hebrews 12:21).
To this general description of the subjective impression is added a more particular account of the objective nature of the vision. Here the first question is, whether the words δαִ ?εβγ to ωׁ ?εγγ refer to the Chaldeans or to the Persians. In the former case we should be told how the oppressive rule of the Babylonians, while in full swing, was rudely checked. In the latter case, the work of the enemy before approaching the city itself, would be described. Both explanations are grammatically possible. A worldly power in so far as it is opposed to the kingdom of God, can be reproached with acting perfidiously (comp.
Isaiah 24:16 and especially Isaiah 33:1, where also the two expressions αβγ and ωׁ ?γγ occur together. Comp. Isaiah 48:8), but why stress should be laid on this point as a prominent characteristic of the nation serving God as His instrument is inconceivable. αִֹּ ?ζִ ?ζ or ωֹׁ ?ρֶ ?δ (Isaiah 17:14) would be less strange. I hold therefore with Drechsler that the words δαεβγ to ωׁ ?εγγ denote the worldly power absolutely hostile to God, not that one which serves as His instrument. This view requires that we do not attach to απγ the sense of robbing. This signification has been assumed, as if supported by the places Isaiah 21:2; Isaiah 24:16; Isaiah 33:1.
And indeed no other sense than that of robbing suits the passage before us, if it be applied to the Persians. But this application is untenable, and in the other passages the context requires no other signification than that of acting perfidiously. While we refer these words to the Babylonians, we find in them a reason for their punishment. With dramatic liveliness the discourse is directed to those commissioned to execute the judgment. Elam (Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 22:6), and Media (Isaiah 13:17) are to go up (on ςμδ comp. on Isaiah 7:1) and besiege the city of Babylon (φεּ ?ψ in this sense only here in Isaiah; besides only Isaiah 29:3 where the signification is similar, but not the same). That the Prophet makes mention not of the Persians, but of the Elamites, a nation adjacent to the Persians on the west, is assuredly not favorable to the view that this part of Isaiah was composed during the exile (comp. on Isaiah 13:17).
An author living in the exile would certainly have named the Persians. That the Prophet under Elam includes Persia also, is in a certain sense possible. Not that Elymais formed a part of Persis. It was at a later period that Elam was incorporated in the Persian empire, though Susa, one of the three residences of the Persian kings, was (Daniel 8:2) in Elam. Elam was a land known to the Hebrews in the times of Isaiah (Genesis 14:1; Genesis 14:9), while the Persians were then still quite unknown. We might say that to the view of the Prophet Elam concealed Persia, and so, more or less consciously to him, involved it.
And thus this discourse has that character of dimness and obscurity, of oscillating between light and darkness, which befits the prophetic vision, and belongs to the marks of a genuine prophecy. The concluding words of Isa 21:2 are for those who were oppressed by Babylon, for those who were the victims of the αεβγ and ωׁ ?εγγ. The genitive in ΰπηϊδ, “her sighing,” is to be taken as the objective, the sighing over her. [We prefer to understand it of the sighing which she, Babylon, caused by her oppression.—D. M.]. In Isaiah 21:3-4 the Prophet justifies the expression χָ ?ωָׁ ?δ (Isaiah 21:2). From the variety and violence of the painful feelings which the Prophet experienced at the vision, we can infer the fearful nature of the things which he saw.
They give us, moreover, to know that the Prophet not only heard the command “Go up, Elam,” etc., but also beheld in spirit its execution. What he then saw is what was terrible; and therefore his loins are full of ημημδ (in Isaiah only here; besides Nahum 2:11; Ezekiel 30:4; Ezekiel 30:9),i.e., trepidatio, spasm in the loins. φιψιν (with ηְַ ?αָ ?μִ ?ιν the most common word for the pains of parturition Isaiah 13:8; it occurs in another signification, Isaiah 45:16; Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 57:9) have seized him as a travailing woman; he writhes from hearing (πςεδ the bowing downwards; in Isaiah besides only in Piel Isaiah 24:1) and trembles (Isaiah 13:8). Many interpreters take ξψΰεϊ ,ξωׁ ?ξες as marking a negative result: so that I do not hear, or see. But why should the hearing be hindered through bending, or seeing through terror? On the contrary, as we see from ηζεϊχωׁ ?δ, horror which seizes the inmost soul, proceeds from a seeing and hearing only too accurate. It is certainly not a matter of chance that almost all the expressions here employed occur in Isaiah 13:8, which passage also treats of Babylon, and that some of the words as φιψιν and παδμ are found only in these two places in Isaiah.
There is indeed this difference, that the Prophet here applies to himself what he there says of the Babylonians; but still a relation of the one place to the other indicating a contemporaneous origin is indisputable. ϊָּ ?ςָ ?δ is more frequently used of spiritual going astray, of aberration of heart, (Psalms 95:10, comp. Isaiah 29:24, et saepe), but stands here in the physical sense of the abnormal beating of the heart (palpitation). Also λּ ?μφεϊ (in Isaiah only here; besides Job 21:6; Psalms 55:6; Ezekiel 7:18) involves the notion of tottering, concussio (Job 9:6). αςϊ Piel, a word of special frequency in Job, is used by Isaiah only here. This passage, then, by the words λּ ?μφεϊ ,αςϊ and παδμ (comp. especially Job 21:6) reminds one strongly of the phraseology of the book of Job. αִּ ?ςֵ ?ϊ signifies in every place (even 1 Samuel 16:14) “to terrify, affright, disturb.” The twilight (Isaiah 5:11; Isaiah 59:10) at other times a welcome bringer of rest to the Prophet after his exciting work during the day (ηֵ ?ωֶׁ ?χdesiderium, deliciae, in Isaiah only here, comp. 1 Kings 9:1; 1 Kings 9:19), is to him now a source of new disquietude (ηψγδ substantive in Isaiah only here). We see from this that the Prophet had the vision in the night, either when awake or dreaming.
Prepare the table——the shield. Isaiah 21:5. The Prophet here paints the judgment falling on Babylon in few, quickly thrown off, but powerful strokes. He indicates by hints couched in brief, mysterious words, wherein that terrible thing consists, which according to Isaiah 21:2-4 he must see, and in what way Elam and Media fulfil their mission. These words, too, bear that character of prophetic indefiniteness which we have already noticed in Isaiah 21:2. The Prophet speaks as in a dream; he draws nebulous forms.
Only when we compare the fulfilment, do the images assume a distinct shape, and we are astonished at their accuracy. This is neither mantic prediction, nor vaticinium post eventum. The prophet does not understand his own words (comp. 1 Peter 1:11); he is the unconscious organ of a higher being who speaks through him. Comp. my remarks on Jeremiah 50:24; Jeremiah 51:31; Jeremiah 51:39. It is well known that Cyrus captured Babylon in a night when the Babylonians were celebrating a festival with merry carousals (Dan. v.; Herod. I. 191; Xenoph.Cyrop.
VII. 5, 15 sqq.). Isaiah certainly did not know this. He is, therefore, ignorant as to what the ςψκδωׁ ?μηο refers, why and how it was done. The infinitives absolute leave the action without indication of time or subject. This indefiniteness admirably suits the prophetic style. The expression ςψκδωׁ ?μηο is found also in Isaiah 65:11; Psalms 23:5; Psalms 78:19; Proverbs 9:2; Ezekiel 23:41.
That it is the Babylonians who prepare the table, is clear from the context. It is they who are surprised during the carousal. If we take the words φλּ ?δδφλּ ?ιϊ in their obvious meaning (watching, to look out) they seem inappropriate. Other meanings have therefore been sought out from all quarters; they kindle the lamps—they clarify the wine—they set the ranks in order—they prepare carpets, etc. But φָ ?τָּ ?δ means in Hebrew nothing else than speculari; and φτιϊ (which occurs only here, but with which φִ ?τִּ ?ιָ ?δ, Lamentations 4:17, and ξִ ?φְ ?τֶּ ?δ, Isaiah 21:8, may be compared) must accordingly denote specula, “watchtower, watch, looking out.” It seems to me that the Prophet does not wish us to suppose that in a city surrounded by the enemy, a merry carousal took place without the precaution of appointing guards. He means to say only that they were so reckless as to enjoy a banquet even though watches had been set.
How dangerous even that could be, is soon apparent when the cry reaches the revellers in the midst of their carousal: the foe is come, anoint the shield! So foolhardy are they that they do not abandon their revelry (which was proverbial and is mentioned in Scripture Isaiah 14:11; Isaiah 47:1; Jeremiah 51:7; Daniel 5:1, and elsewhere, e.g., in Curtius V. 6); but in the presence of the beleaguering foe indulge in banqueting, though they took the precaution of setting a watch. According to Xenophon as quoted above, § 25, there was really a guard in the castle, but they were (§ 27) intoxicated. The princes who are said only now to arise and anoint the shield, are the surprised Babylonians. The anointing of the leather shield (2 Samuel 1:21) was in order to make it more compact, firm, smooth and shining (comp. HerzogR.- Enc., and WinerReal-Lex.
Art. Schild). [In 2 Samuel 1:21 the Hebrew text must be consulted. The anointing which in the E. V. is made, by supplying an imaginary ellipsis, to refer to Saul, refers not to him, but to his shield.—D. M.]. It is a sign of great negligence that the Babylonians have not anointed their shields, notwithstanding the enemy is before the gates.
Now they must either fight with unanointed shields, or yield without a struggle.
6. For thus hath—broken unto the ground. Isaiah 21:6-9. λִּ ?ι in the beginning of Isa 21:6 seems to be explicative. In fact the Isaiah 21:6-9 are related to the preceding 2–5 as an explanation and more particular description. If we could already from verses 2–5 know in general that the ruin of Babylon through Elam and Media was decreed, and that it would be effected by an assault, we see (Isaiah 21:7) the army of the Elamites and Medians in march before our eyes, and (Isaiah 21:9) the complete success of the attack is announced. The train of thought is the following: Babylon is to be besieged by Elam and Media, and to be captured by a surprise.
For the Prophet sees a mighty army moving against Babylon, and soon after, another band coming from Babylon, which proclaims the downfall of the city and of its idols. The connecting of the two parts by the formula: “For thus said Jehovah,” reminds one of Isa 8:11. What the Prophet now beholds in vision is represented in what follows, as if a watchman appointed by the command of God had seen it, and communicated it to him. This style of costume is very effective (comp. 2 Samuel 18:24 sqq.; 2 Kings 9:17 sqq.). Elsewhere the Prophet himself is represented as a watchman on the pinnacle (Habakkuk 2:1; Zechariah 1:8 sqq.). And, indeed, here too Isaiah himself is the watchman, though another is made to take his place.
This is only a rhetorical artifice to heighten the effect. The very words “what he sees he will declare,” contain a praise of the watchman. For it is not said ιַ ?βֵּ ?γ. That would indicate only the duty of the watchman. But ιַ ?βִ ?ιγ gives us to understand that he will really fulfil this duty. The perfects εְ ?δִ ?χְ ?ωִׁ ?ιαεְ ?ψָ ?ΰָ ?δ Isaiah 21:7, cannot mean, “and he shall see, hearken.” For the watchman is not to be dictated to in regard to what he shall see.
Neither is it allowable with Drechsler to take the words as a conditional sentence, “and if he sees. … he shall hearken. ....” That the Prophet actually appointed the watchman, would properly be told immediately after issuing the command. But this point, as self-evident, is here passed over, as in other cases where a command given by the Lord to the Prophet is related (Isaiah 7:3 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sq., 3 sqq.). The watchman saw first a train of horsemen (φֶ ?ξֶ ?γ is a collective, besides in Isaiah only, Isaiah 5:10, in the signification jugum;τָּ ?ψָ ?ωׁ is eques, then sometimes equus, Isaiah 21:6-7; Isaiah 28:28; Isaiah 31:1; Isaiah 36:9) followed by a train of asses and camels. Interpreters have called attention to the fact that the Medes were renowned for their cavalry (Cyrop. I. 6, 10), which Cyrus was the first to introduce among the Persians (Cyrop. 4:3-4 sqq.; 6:1, 26 sqq.). We learn from this last place that Cyrus furnished his army with numerous and improved chariots of war.
To what a formidable arm Cyrus raised the Persian cavalry in a brief period, appears from his being able to march against Babylon with 40,000 horsemen (Cyrop. VII. 4, 16). The employment of asses and camels, not only for transport, but also in battle, is an established fact. In regard to asses, Strabo relates of the Caramanians, a nation dwelling next the Persians to the east, and subdued by them, that they “χρῶνταιὄνοιςοἱπολλοὶκαὶπρὸςπόλεμονσπάνειτῶνἴππων.” And Herodotus relates that the Scythians in fighting against the Persians under Darius Hystaspis, found no worse enemies than the asses, at whose strange appearance and braying the horses took fright ( 4:129). That Cyrus himself employed camels in battle is expressly related by Xenophon:Cyrop. 6:1, 30 : 7:1, 22, 27. The watchman sees then an army in march.
The Prophet does not mention that he saw infantry. Prominence is evidently given only to what is peculiar and characteristic. And, in fact, hardly another army could have been then found which presented such a diversity of animals used in war as the Persian host with its wonderful variety of races. The watchman not only saw, he also heard, or rather tried to hear; for he really heard nothing at first. The strange, long, martial train disappeared. The watchman then sees and hears nothing for a long time.
This surprises him. He becomes impatient. He is not aware that meanwhile a great work is accomplishing which requires time: the capture of Babylon. In his impatience, which does not, however, lessen his zeal, he calls now with a lion’s voice (properly as a lion, comp. Psalms 22:14; Isaiah 46:3, etc.;Revelation 10:3): I stand in vain night and day on the watch-tower. We see from this that that army in march, Isaiah 21:7, was a passing appearance, and that after it had vanished, there had been a pause, which the watchman could not explain.
He addresses his call to ΰְַ ?γֹ ?πָ ?ι, that is to Jehovah. At the same time the Prophet gives up the assumed character, and lets us see plainly that he himself is the watchman. Hitzig and Meier would read ΰְַ ?ψֹ ?πִ ?ι “my lord.” This would suit the connection better, but must the more readily be rejected as a correction, as the Prophet could quite easily drop the character which he personates. The watchman had hardly uttered these complaining words when that for which he had waited so long took place. He sees again something which gives information: a little band of men who ride in pairs, comes from Babylon. The εδπδΞζδ is to be regarded as spoken with emphasis.
For it stands in a certain contrast to what precedes; hitherto I have perceived nothing, but now, etc. We must, therefore, translate, “but, lo, there comes,” etc. Who is the subject of εַ ?ιַּ ?ςַ ?ο in Isaiah 21:9? Obviously the watchman. We might think of the troop of horsemen coming from Babylon. This would be possible.
But this alteration of the subject would need to be indicated in some way. The want of any indication of this kind is in favor of our assuming the same subject that had governed the whole preceding series of sentences. The watchman learned by inquiry or knew it from infallible signs: Babylon is fallen! A grand utterance! Hence the repetition of In πτμδ. Jeremiah 51:8 this place is quoted.
Also in Revelation 18:2. Jeremiah likewise emphatically sets forth the downfall of Babylon as a defeat of its gods (Jer. 1. 2, 38; Jeremiah 51:44; Jeremiah 51:47; Jeremiah 51:52). The subject of ωִׁ ?αַּ ?ψ can be Jehovah. It can also be he who was Jehovah’s instrument for this work, the conqueror of Babylon: Cyrus. This “he” who afterwards comes clearly and distinctly under his proper name into the Prophet’s field of vision, appears here still veiled as it were: ωׁ ?αψμΰψυ is a pregnant construction, comp. Isaiah 8:11; Isaiah 13:8; Isaiah 14:9-10; Isaiah 20:2.
Drechsler makes the not inappropriate remark that Isaiah has perhaps in his eye here “the well-known iconoclastic zeal of the Persians.”
7. O my threshing—unto you.Isaiah 21:10. These words intimate the proper immediate object of the prophecy. Judah is to be comforted by the prediction of the fall of the Babylonian fortress. The words seem aimless, if what precedes them is regarded as vaticinium post eventum. We have in Isaiah 21:10 a summary of chaps. 40–66ξְ ?γֻ ?ωָֹּׁ ?δ (for which other editions read ξְ ?γεּ ?ωָ ?δ) is ἅπ. λεγ.
It means what is crushed by threshing. Israel is so called as the object of the divine judgment which was executed on him by means of the exile. γּ ?εּ ?ωׁ is frequently employed in the sense of cleansing and sifting by divine judgments, Isaiah 25:10; Isaiah 28:27 sq.; Isaiah 41:15; Micah 4:13; Habakkuk 3:12. The expression αֶּ ?οΞβֹ ?ψζ reminds one of such expressions as αֶּ ?οΞδַ ?λּ ?εֹ ?ϊ ,λֶּ ?οΞιִ ?φְ ?δָ ?ψ. A son of the threshing-floor is one who lies on it, and is threshed, and that not merely briefly and accidentally, but for a long time, as it were habitually. For he belongs to the floor as a child to its mother. Accordingly αζΞβψζ is stronger than ξγωׁ ?δ.
Israel is so named because in the exile the threshing floor had become his home, his mother-country. It is the Prophet who speaks, but in the name, and as it were, out of the soul of God. Otherwise the second half of this verse would contain an intolerable transition. This threshed people, to whom the threshing-floor had become a home, is still the Prophet’s own beloved people. With sorrow he announces to them that they must be threshed in Babylon; with joy he declares that they will be delivered from the threshing-floor. Both events are certain.
And Israel may and ought to believe this. It is indeed inconceivable that the Prophet can make such an announcement. He himself does not understand even the connection. He therefore declares emphatically: I have not excogitated this; but I have heard it from Jehovah, and therefore declare I it to you as certain truth.
Footnotes:Heb. hard.Or, My mind wandered.the twilight, my joy.Heb. put.a troop of horsemen in pairs, a troop of asses, a troop of camels.Or, cried as a lion.Or, every night.a troop of men, horsemen in pairs.Heb. son.
B.—AGAINST EDOM
Isaiah 21:11-12 That under Dumah we are to understand Edom is conceded by almost all modern interpreters. In favor of this view there are the following reasons: 1) All other localities, which actually bear the name of Dumah, are either too near or too remote, and do not furnish any hold for the assumption that Isaiah made them the objects of a Massa (oracle). What would such a Massa mean as directed against the isolated city of Dumah, situated in the mountains of Judah (Joshua 15:52), or against that Ishmaelitish Dumah, of which mention is made in Genesis 25:14; 1 Chronicles 1:30, or against the three still more distant and insignificant places called Dumah, which are not once mentioned in the Old Testament, and which according to the Arabian geographers are situated in Irak, Mesopotamia and Syria (comp. Gesenius, Delitzsch, and Knobel on our place)? We could most readily think of the Ishmaelitish Dumah (Genesis 25:14). But how far-fetched is the assumption that the Simeonites, who, according to 1 Chronicles 4:42 sq., emigrated to Edom, settled just in Dumah!
And does not our Massa stand among prophecies directed against heathen nations? 2) The Prophet declares expressly that the cry came to him from Seir. But would he have uttered the taunting expression of Isa 21:12 against Israelites dwelling on mount Seir? 3) All the four prophecies in chaps. 21 and 23 have, as was already remarked, emblematic inscriptions. It accords, therefore, entirely with the manner of forming inscriptions observed in these chapters, if we assume that γεּ ?ξָ ?δ is intentionally formed from ΰֱ ?γεֹ ?ν. Consul Wetzstein indeed affirms in his Excursus on Isa. xxi. in Delitzsch’s Commentary, p. 692, that the putting of Dumah for Edom by a play upon the name, would necessarily be misunderstood. But this is by no means the case. For the character of the other inscriptions gives every reader an obvious hint how this one too is to be taken.
And then we have the words “out of Seir” immediately following.
That Isaiah is the author of this prophecy is disputed by some rationalistic interpreters (Paulus, Baur, Eichhorn, Rosenmueller), but is maintained by even Gesenius, Hitzig, Hendewerk, Ewald and Knobel. It most clearly bears the stamp of Isaiah’s style, which only the most obstinate prejudice can fail to see. It is difficult to say anything respecting the time of composition. If we should insist with Knobel that the question put by the Idumeans to the Prophet supposes a close relation between them and the Jews, and that such a relation existed only during the rule of Uzziah and Jotham over Judah, which lasted till 743, we should arrive at the conclusion that the prophecy was composed before 743. But the night here spoken of, if we have respect to the then existing state of affairs and to the analogy of all Isaiah’s prophecies, cannot possibly mean anything else than the misery threatened by the Assyrian power. If now the Edomites are represented as inquiring if this calamity will soon end, they must in that case have had some experience of it.
During the reign of Uzziah and Jotham, however, they had not yet suffered from the Assyrian dominion. The time when the Assyrians threatened the freedom of all nations as far as Egypt (Ewald, Gesch. des V. Isr. III. p. 670; comp. Hitzig, Gesch. des V. Isr. p. 221) was rather the period after the capture of Samaria, when the Assyrian king was engaged in war against Egypt, and was obliged to take care to secure his left flank, and his line of retreat against the warlike nations that occupied the country between Palestine and Egypt.
This was the time of Hezekiah (comp. remarks on Isaiah 20:1), or more exactly, the time between the capture of Samaria and the baffled attempt on Jerusalem by the army of Sennacherib (36 and 37). At that time the Assyrians frequently penetrated into the South of Palestine. Then, if ever, was the time when an inquiry, like that contained in this prophecy, could come from Edom to the Prophet of Jehovah in Jerusalem.
____________________
Isaiah 21:11-1211 The Burden of Dumah.
He calleth to me out of Seir,
Watchman, what of the night?
Watchman, what of the night?
12 The watchman said,
The morning cometh, and also the night;
If ye will enquire, enquire ye;
Return, come.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_21:11. The participle without specification of subject is often used for the finite verb (Exodus 5:16; Genesis 24:30; Genesis 32:7; Isaiah 11:6, etc.,). Here χֹ ?ψֵ ?ΰ stands for χָ ?ψָ ?ΰ and implies the impersonal or indefinite subject (Isaiah 9:5; Jeremiah 23:6; Jeremiah 33:16, et saepe). The form μֵ ?ιμ in the second question may have been chosen for the sake of variety, as μַ ?ιְ ?μָ ?δ had been employed in the first question. Moreover, it is not improbable that μֵ ?ιμ is the Idumean form of the word, as we have already in Isaiah 15:1 found it to be the form used by the Moabites.
Isaiah 21:12. ΰϊΰ is the Aramaean word for αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ, but occurs not unfrequently in Hebrew authors. Isaiah, in particular, uses the word often, Isaiah 21:14; Isaiah 41:5; Isaiah 41:23; Isaiah 41:25; Isaiah 44:7; Isaiah 45:11; Isaiah 56:9; Isaiah 56:12 (in the two last the imperative form ΰֵ ?ϊָ ?ιεּ also). But the ΰϊΰ (with ΰ as the last radical letter) is found only here and Deuteronomy 33:21.—αּ ?ςδ occurs in the Hebrew parts of the Old Testament only in three other places, viz., Isaiah 30:13; Isaiah 64:1 in the sense of tumescere, ebullire, and Obadiah 1:6 in the sense of searching, seeking out, studiose quaerere. In this latter signification the word is common in the Aramaean (Daniel 2:13; Daniel 2:16; Daniel 2:23; Daniel 6:5; Daniel 6:8, etc.).
AND 1. The Prophet hears a cry sounding forth from Seir putting to him as watchman the question: How much of the night is past? Thereupon the watchman answers: Morning comes, and also night i.e., first a ray of morning light, then immediately dark night again. And when it will have become night again, you can, if you please, again inquire. Quaerere licet. Whether you will receive a favorable answer is another question.
2. The burden—return, come.Isaiah 21:11-12. The appellative noun γּ ?εּ ?ξָ ?δ occurs only in two places of the Old Testament: Psalms 94:17; Psalms 115:17. In these places the word denotes that world of death where everlasting silence reigns. In the passage before us the word has manifestly a similar meaning. Dumah has, it is true, no etymological connection with Edom.
For the latter is derived from the root ΰγνrubrum, rufum esse in Genesis 25:30. But as the Prophet represents Babylon under the name of the “desert of the sea,” Jerusalem (Isaiah 22:1), under the name of “the valley of vision,” and further in Isaiah 21:13 takes ςψα in a double sense, alluding to its radical meaning as an appellative, so here by a slight modification of the name he calls Edom Dumah; and hereby he intimates that Edom is destined to become Dumah, i.e., silence, to sink into the silence of nonentity.—Seir is themountainous region which extends from the south of the Dead Sea to the Elanitic gulf, and which became the abode of Esau,(Genesis 32:3; Genesis 33:14; Genesis 33:16; Genesis 36:8) and of his descendants, who are thence called the children of Seir (2 Chronicles 25:11; 2 Chronicles 25:14). The word is found only here in Isaiah. Elsewhere the Prophet always uses Edom. It is natural for him to employ the name Seir here. For if the call is to sound forth from Edom to Jerusalem, it must proceed from the mountain-height, and not from the valley.
The Prophet is addressed as ωֹׁ ?ξֵ ?ψ, because he is regarded as standing on his watch. The word is of like import with ξְ ?φַ ?τֶּ ?δ Isaiah 21:6, and this affinity of signification is one reason for placing together the prophecies against Babylon (Isaiah 21:1-10) and Edom (Isaiah 21:11-12). ξִ ?ε before μιμδ is partitive. How much of the night (the night of tribulation, comp. Isaiah 5:30; Isaiah 8:20 sqq. Isaiah 47:5; Jeremiah 15:9; Micah 3:6, etc.), is past? As a sick man who cannot sleep or compose himself, so Edom in distress inquires if the night will not soon come to an end.
The repetition of the question indicates the intensity of the wish that the night may speedily be gone. The answer to the question is obscure, and seems to be designedly oracular, and at the same time ironical. The first part of the answer runs (Isaiah 21:12) morning is come, and also night. What does this mean? How can morning and night come together? Or, how can it be yet night if the morning is come?
If we compare the historical events to which the Prophet’s answer refers, we can understand these words which must have been unintelligible to the first hearers or readers of the oracle. For, in fact, a ray of morning light was then very soon to shine. The overthrow of Sennacherib before Jerusalem was at hand. That was morning twilight, the dawn. But the glory did not last long. For after the Assyrian power, the Babylonian quickly arises, and completes what the former began (Jeremiah 25:21; Jeremiah 27:3; Jeremiah 49:7 sqq.).
This change is frequently repeated: the Chaldaean time of judgment is followed by the Persian, the Persian by the Grecian, the Grecian by the Roman; ever for a brief interval a gleam of morning for Edom (think particularly of the time of the Herods), which was quickly lost in the returning night, till Edom was turned entirely into γּ ?εּ ?ξָ ?δ silence, and disappeared from history (Delitzsch). The second part of the answer is, if possible, still more enigmatical than the first. The Prophet in dismissing those who question him, by telling them that they may come again, manifestly intends to mock them. For of what advantage is it to be allowed to come again? They knew they might do so. But what will they hear if they come again?
What has the Prophet to announce to them as the final doom of their nation? The answer for him who can understand the hint is given by the word Dumah. The words for “come” and “inquire” belong rather to the Aramaean than to the Hebrew dialect, the word for “inquire” occurs farther in this sense, only in Daniel, and in the prophecy of Obadiah, of which Edom is the subject. Further, the singular verbal ending, which Isaiah here multiplies, making a sort of rhyme out of it, was probably current in the Idumean idiom. He mocks the inquirers, therefore, with Idumean sounds. “Return, come,” is a pleonasm employed for the sake of the rhyme in the Hebrew. If, then, in Isaiah 21:12 there is irony both in the style and sense, it is more than probable that an actual inquiry came to the Prophet from Edom, than that he invented such a question as suitable to the circumstances.
For why should he have taunted the Edomites for their questioning, if they had not really inquired of him? That would have been a mockery altogether unjust and uncalled for. But it is quite probable that such a question was really put to the Prophet.
The Edomites saw in Jehovah the national God of the Israelites, and conceded to Him the same real existence which they ascribed to their own false gods. From their point of view Jehovah could have prophets by whom He revealed His will and futurity; as their gods had their oracles and their organs in the goλtae. Such recognition on the part of the heathen of a divine power in the prophets of Israel is oftentimes met with. The king of Assyria, for example, sent Naaman to Samaria that Elisha might heal him (2 Kings 5:1 sqq.). The Syrian king believed that the same Elisha betrayed all his plans to the king of Israel (2 Kings 6:12 sqq.). The Syrian Benhadad sent Hazael to Elisha to inquire if he would recover from his sickness (2 Kings 8:7 sqq.).
The fame too of Isaiah, as a great Prophet of Jehovah, could have extended to Edom, and, though Edom was no longer in a state of dependence on Judah, the common distress could have occasioned the inquiry. But this question, as it did not proceed from the right believing state of heart, but from an essentially heathen way of thinking, drew from the Prophet an ironical rebuff. [May not those closing words, “if ye will inquire, inquire ye,” be intended to intimate that further disclosures would be afterwards made in regard to the future of Edom? The Prophet in the 34th chapter actually returns to this subject, and gives in plain terms the information which he here withholds. Other prophets, as Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Obadiah and Malachi foretell the judgment that would come upon Edom, and the solitude and desolation to which it should be reduced. All travellers who have visited the country, testify to the fulfilment of these predictions, and report that Edom has become a veritable Dumah, a land of silence.—D. M.]
C.—AGAINST ARABIA
Isaiah 21:13-1713 The burden upon arabia.
In the forest in Arabia shall ye lodge,
O ye travelling companies of Dedanim.
14 The inhabitants of the land of Tema
Brought water to him that was thirsty,
They prevented with their bread him that fled.
15 For they fled from the swords,
From the drawn sword, and from the bent bow,
And from the grievousness of war.
16 For thus hath the Lord said unto me,
Within a year, according to the years of an hireling,
And all the glory of Kedar shall fail:
17 And the residue of the number of archers,
The mighty men of the children of Kedar,
Shall be diminished:
For the Lord God of Israel hath spoken it.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_21:13. αςψα is ambiguous. Arabia is called ςְַ ?ψַ ?α; the pausal form is ςְַ ?ψָ ?α, which, except in pause, occurs only 2 Chronicles 9:14. The second αςψα is clearly the source of the first. In the same way “the desert of the sea,” Isaiah 21:1, and “the valley of vision,” Isaiah 22:2 (comp. Isaiah 21:5) have arisen. How else could we explain the prefix αְּ which in no other case stands after ξַ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ?
It is doubtful how the second αςψα was originally vocalized. The significations “in Arabia” and “in the evening,” are both suitable. The old versions give the latter. But the evening is never denoted by ςְַ ?ψַ ?α. Still it could be. The form would then come from ςַָ ?ψα, “to be dark,” after the analogy of βְּ ?αַ ?ψ (once for βֶּ ?αֶ ?ψ Psalms 18:26) etc..
The Prophet can have designedly employed the uncommon form instead of the usual ςֶ ?ψֶ ?α, in order to give the double sense of Arabia and evening, and perhaps to intimate that Arabia should be a land not of the rising, but of the setting sun.
Isaiah 21:14. δֵ ?ϊָ ?ιεּ can be either perfect or imperative. But it must be taken here as perfect, as the next verb χִ ?ψְּ ?ξεּ is certainly perfect.
Isaiah 21:16. Mark the triple alliteration in this verse. First, we have three words beginning with ΰ, then three beginning with ωׁ, then three (or four) whose first letter is a k sound.
Isaiah 21:17. Mark the accumulation of substantives dependent on a noun in the construct state. No less than five words in the construct state occur together.
AND 1. Even the free pastoral and martial tribes of the Arabian desert must succumb to a power that crushes all before it. The Prophet vividly describes the fate of those tribes in his own peculiar way by setting before our eyes one effect of the pressure of the great worldly power. The caravans proceeding to the various chief emporiums of trade in ancient times, such as Tyre, Sidon, Babylon, were wont to cross the desert without molestation from mighty foes. But now a force assails them, against which they are unable to defend themselves, as they could against the attacks of the separate plundering tribes of Bedouins (comp. Movers,Ph�n.
II., p. 409). They are forced to give way, and are scattered. The fugitives seek shelter where they can find it. They are fortunate if, far from the regular route, in one of the oδses, or on a mountain slope, they can reach a wood which will conceal them from the eyes of their pursuers, and in which they can find pasture and shade for their cattle. Out of this wood they dare not venture. In order, therefore, that they may obtain subsistence, the inhabitants of the neighboring places must bring them bread and water (Isaiah 21:13-14).
From this single circumstance it is easy to infer that the glory of the Arabians who bordered on Syria and Babylon, as whose representatives the Kedarenes are mentioned, is hastening to an end. Within the space of a year, says the Prophet, their power will be reduced to a minimum (Isaiah 21:16-17).
2. In the forest——of war.Isaiah 21:13-15. I do not think that we should, as Wetzstein supposes, take ιςψ in the sense of the Arabic war, i.e. a place covered with fragments of volcanic rock. For the Hebrew word never means anything else than forest. We are simply informed here that the caravans driven from their course sought shelter in some wood; and woods there actually are there, partly in the oδses, partly on the slopes of the western mountains. The forest conceals the fugitives, and at the same time furnishes shelter and pasture for the cattle.
If they lodge (pass the night) in such a forest, it is a matter of course that evening has arrived. But the remark that the forest was situated in Arabia would likewise be superfluous. For if the occurrence happened in the neighborhood of Tema, that sufficiently indicates that the locality is in Arabia. But the expression αςψα, as having the double meaning “in Arabia” and “in the evening,” is not superfluous. Dedan is according to Genesis 10:7 (1 Chronicles 1:9) a descendant of Cush; according to Genesis 25:3 (1 Chronicles 1:32) a grandson of Keturah also bears this name. In Jeremiah 25:23 Dedan is named along with Tema.
In Jeremiah 49:8 they appear as belonging to Edom. And so in Ezekiel 25:13. They are marked as a commercial people in Ezekiel 27:15; Ezekiel 27:20; Ezekiel 38:13. Wetzstein (in his excursus in Delitzsch’s Commentary) finds their abode on the Red Sea, “east of the Nile, including the desert to the brook of Egypt or the borders of Edom.” He calls them Cushite tribes. However this may be, they are clearly enough denoted in the Old Testament as merchants, a people carrying on the caravan trade, especially with Tyre. If such a caravan has found in a forest shelter and pasture for the cattle, only bread and water for the men would be needed.
At the dictate of hospitality the inhabitants of Tema bring these requisites to the fugitives in the forest. Wetzstein (as above) describes the situation of Tema (Jeremiah 25:23; Job 6:19) after careful personal investigations. It lies, according to him, two days’ journey by dromedary from Dumah north-east of Tebϋk, a station on the route for pilgrims from Damascus to Mecca. Dumah is marked by him as lying in the oδsis el-Gof, four days’ journey by dromedary to the southwest of Babylon. He maintains against Ritter that there are not two places called Tema. Isaiah 21:15 explains why the Dedanians must flee.
War in every form, and with all its terrors, has assailed them.
3. For thus hath——spoken it.Isaiah 21:16-17. What could be learned inferentially (Isaiah 21:13-15) from a single fact is now stated directly in general terms. Kedar’s might and glory must be destroyed. Kedar is, first of all, according to Genesis 25:13, a son of Ishmael. But the name stands here, as very frequently in the later rabbinical usage, for the Arabs, i.e., for the inhabitants of Western Arabia, who alone were known to the Jews.
In one year, exactly computed (comp. on Isaiah 16:14), the glory of Kedar shall have an end. As Isaiah beyond a doubt uttered this prediction, its fulfilment must have taken place while the might of Assyria flourished. We know generally that the Assyrians subdued the Arabians, for Sennacherib is called by Herodotus (II., 141) “King both of the Arabians and Assyrians,” and that while mention is made of his expedition against Egypt. This is not without significance. For when Herodotus states that Sennacherib as “King of the Arabians and Assyrians” attacked Egypt, he thereby gives us to understand that he marched against Egypt with an army composed of Arabians and Assyrians. And this fact tallies well with our remark on Isaiah 21:11-12, that the Assyrian in invading Egypt must have cared for the covering of his left flank and line of retreat.
This object could be secured only by placing himself free from danger from the inhabitants of Arabia Petraea and Deserta. Our prophecy was therefore delivered before Sennacherib’s invasion of Egypt, which according to the Assyrian monuments, must have occurred in the year 700 B. C. (comp. Schrader,The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the Old Testament, p. 196). In accordance with what we have before observed touching the way in which prophecy advances to its complete fulfilment, it is not at all needful that the predicted catastrophe should have come upon the Arabians as a single stroke, which was not afterwards repeated. It would be sufficient to justify our regarding the prophecy as fulfilled, if in the specified time an event occurred, which was a proper beginning of the fulfilment of the prophecy, and therefore guaranteed its complete realization.
We must confess that we cannot furnish direct evidence of such a particular event having taken place. The Kedarenes are here characterized as a warlike nation distinguished for the use of the bow. In this latter respect they walk in the footsteps of their ancestor, who is celebrated as an archer (Genesis 21:20).
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 21:2 “God punishes one villain by means of another, and a man is punished by the very sin which he himself commits (Wis 11:17). Thus God punished the Babylonians by the Persians, the Persians by the Greeks, the Greeks by the Romans, the Romans by the Goths, Longobardi, and Saracens.”—Cramer. [The Persians shall pay the Babylonians in their own coin; they that by fraud and violence, cheating and plundering, unrighteous wars and deceitful treaties, have made a prey of their neighbors, shall meet with their match, and by the same methods shall themselves be made a prey of. Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 21:3. “The Prophets do not rejoice at the loss suffered by their enemies; but have sympathy for them as for men made in the image of God. We ought not to cast off every humane feeling towards our foes (Matthew 5:34).”—Cramer.3. On Isaiah 21:5. “Invadunt urbem vino somnoque sepultam.” Virgil. “We see here how people commonly feel the more secure, the more they indulge their fleshly lusts, although they are drawing nearer their punishment. So was it with the antediluvian world, so is it now also in these last times when the coming of Christ is expected, as He says, Matthew 24:38.”—Renner. The Prophet Isaiah expounded, etc.—Stuttgart, 1865, p. 73.
4. On Isaiah 21:6 sqq. “It is a grand, infallible evidence of the prophetic Scriptures, and of their divine inspiration, that they do not speak in general uncertain terms, but describe future things so accurately, and exactly, as if we saw them before our eyes. This serves to establish the authority of the Holy Scriptures.”—Cramer.5. On Isaiah 21:10. Only what the Lord said to him, and all that the Lord said to him, the Prophet declares. Therefore he is sure and certain, even when he has incredible things to announce.
Therefore is he firm and courageous, though what he has to proclaim does not please the world. He conceals and keeps back nothing; neither does he add anything. He is a faithful declarer of the mind of God, and does not spare even himself. The proof, fulfilment and accomplishment he leaves to Him who spake through him.
6. On Isaiah 21:11. “He who sets the watch without God, watches in vain (Psalms 127:1). And when God Himself is approaching, then no care of the watchmen is of any use, whether it be day or night. For when the day of the Lord begins to burn, even the stars of heaven and his Orion, do not shine brightly. For God covers the heavens, and makes the stars thereof dark, and covers the sun with a cloud (Ezekiel 32:7). For when God the Creator of all things frowns on us, then all creatures also frown on us, and are terrible and offensive to us.”—Cramer. From this place Christian Friedr. Richter, has composed his fine morning hymn:—
Hόter, wird die Nacht der SόndenNicht verschwinden?[Comp. in English Bowring’s well-known hymn:—
Watchman, tell us of the night,
What its signs of promise are.—D. M.]
7. On Isaiah 21:14. “We ought not to forget to be hospitable towards the needy (Hebrews 13:1).”—Cramer.8. On Isaiah 21:16. “I regard as a true Prophet him who does not declare a matter upon mere imagination and conjecture, but measures the time so exactly that he fixes precisely when a thing shall happen.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 22:2 sqq. To see the enemy at the gates, and at the same time to regard him merely with curiosity, and to indulge in mirth and jollity, as if all were well, and this too at a time when God’s servants warn men with tears, as Isaiah did Jerusalem (Isaiah 22:4), this is blind presumption which God will punish. But when the calamity has burst upon them, and all expedients by which they try to avert it are of no avail, for men to despise then the only one who can help them, and to spend the brief remaining time in sensual pleasure, this is open-eyed defiance, and will lead to judicial blindness, and that sin which will not be forgiven (Matthew 12:32).
10. On Isaiah 22:13. This is the language of swine of the herd of Epicurus, comp. Isaiah 56:12; Wis 2:6 sqq.; 1 Corinthians 15:32.
11. On Isaiah 22:14. It is true, as Augustine says, that “no one should despair of the remission of his sin, seeing that even they who put Christ to death obtained forgiveness,” and “the blood of Jesus Christ was so shed for the forgiveness of all sins that it could wash away the sins of those by whom it was shed”—but that obstinacy, which refuses to see the needed help, excludes itself from grace and forgiveness.
12. On Isaiah 22:15 sqq. The mission which Isaiah here receives, reminds us strongly of that which Jeremiah had to discharge towards Jehoiakim (Jeremiah 22:1 sqq., esp. Isaiah 22:19), and also of what he was obliged to say to Pashur (Isaiah 20:6). A Prophet of the Lord must show no respect of persons. Isaiah indeed seems to have produced the desired effect; for we find 36 and 37. Shebna as Scribe and Eliakim as steward of the house. But Jeremiah received as recompense for the fulfilment of his mission bitter hatred and cruel persecution.
13. On Isaiah 22:17. The Vulgate translates here: Ecce Dominus asportari te faciet, sicut asportatur gallus gallinaceus. And Jerome in his exposition says: “Hebraeus, qui nos in lectione veteris Testamenti erudivit, gallum gallinaceum transtulit. Sicut inquit gallus gallinaceus humero portatoris de allo loco transfertur ad alium, sic te Dominus de loco tuo leviter asportabit.” The cock which is never mentioned in the Old Testament, and for which we have no genuine Hebrew word, is in fact called βֶּ ?αֶ ?ψ by the Talmudists. “Conscience, wanting the word of God, is as a ball rolling on the ground, and cannot rest.”—Luther.14. On Isaiah 22:19. “Service at court is not in itself to be condemned, and a good ruler and a worthy prime minister are the gift of God (Sir 4:8; Sir 4:11; Ch. 10).
Let him therefore who is called to such an office abide, as the Lord has called him (1 Corinthians 7:17), and beware of excessive pomp. For God can quickly depose the proud.”—Cramer.15. On Isaiah 22:21 sqq. The comparison of a magistrate in high position with a father is very appropriate. The whole extent, and the proper measure of a ruler’s power are involved in this similitude. The authority of a father and that of a ruler have a common root in love.
Eliakim in having the keys of the house of David laid on his shoulder that he might open and no one shut, and shut and no one open is (Revelation 3:7) viewed as a type of Christ, who is the administrator appointed by God over the house of David in the highest sense, i. e., over the kingdom of God. Christ has this power of the keys in unrestricted measure. The ministers of the Lord exercise the same only in virtue of the commission which they have from Him; and their exercise of it is only then sanctioned by the Lord, when it is in the Spirit which the Lord breathed into the disciples before He committed to them the power of the keys (John 20:22 sq.). [“The application of the same terms to Peter (Matthew 16:19) and to Christ Himself (Revelation 3:7) does not prove that they here refer to either, or that Eliakim was a type of Christ, but merely that the same words admit of different applications.” Alexander. “It is God that clothes rulers with their robes, and, therefore, we must submit ourselves to them for the Lord’s sake and with an eye to Him (1 Peter 2:13). And since it is He that commits the government into their hand,—they must administer it according to His will, for His glory. And they may depend on Him to furnish them for what He calls them to; according to the promise here. I will clothe him: and then there follows, I will strengthen him.” After Henry—D.
M.]
16. On Isaiah 22:25. “No one is so exalted or raised to such high dignity as to abide therein. But man’s prosperity, office and honor, and whatever else is esteemed great in the world are, like human life, on account of sin inconstant, vain and liable to pass away. This serves as an admonition against pride and security.” Cramer. HINTS ON 21–221. On Isaiah 21:1-4. God’s judgments are terrible, 1) for him on whom they fall; 2) for him who has to announce them.
2. On Isaiah 21:6-10. The faithful watchman. 1) He stands upon his watch day and night. 2) He announces only what he has seen and what he has heard from the Lord (Isaiah 22:9-10). 3) But he announces this as a lion, i. e. aloud and without fear.
3. On Isaiah 22:11-12. The spiritual night on earth. 1) It is a. a night of tribulation, b. a night of sin. 2) It awakens a longing for its end. 3) It does not entirely cease till the Lord “vouchsafes to us a happy end, and graciously takes us from this valley of weeping to Himself in heaven.”
4. On Isaiah 21:14 sq. We may fitly employ this text for a charity sermon on any occasion when an appeal is made to the benevolence of the congregation (especially for exiles, as those banished from the Salzburg territory for their Evangelical faith). What we ought to consider when our contributions are asked. 1) Our own situation (we dwell in the land of Tema, a quite fertile oasis). 2) The situation of those who come to us in their distress. 3) What we have to give them.
5. On Isaiah 22:1-7. Warning against thoughtlessness. Pride precedes a fall. Blind presumption is often changed into its opposite.
6. On Isaiah 22:8-14. Blind presumption is bad, but open-eyed obstinacy is still worse. The latter is when one clearly perceives the existing distress, and the insufficiency of our own powers and of the means at our command, and yet refuses to look to Him who alone can help, or to consider the fate which awaits those who die without God, and seeks before the impending catastrophe happens to snatch as much as possible of the enjoyments of this world.
7. On Isaiah 22:15-19. He who will fly high is in danger of falling low. God can easily cast him down. The waxen wings of lcarus. Shebna illustrates, 1 Peter 5:5.
8. On Isaiah 22:20-25. A mirror for those in office. Every one who has an office, ought 1) to be conscious that he has come into the office legally, and according to the will of God; 2) He ought to be a father to those over whom he is set; 3) He ought so to do everything which he does in his office, that its justice is apparent, and that no one can impugn it. 4) He ought not to be like a nail on which all the relations of his family strive to fasten their hope of success; for that is bad for himself and for those who would so abuse his influence.
Footnotes:in the evening.caravans.Or, Bring ye.Heb. from the face of.Heb. bows.
D.—AGAINST THE HAUGHTY AND DEFIANT SPIRIT OF AND ITS
Isaiah 22This chapter interrupts the series of prophecies against foreign nations. On account of its emblematic superscription, it is incorporated in the little book (ρֵ ?τֶ ?ψ) that is distinguished by such superscriptions (21 and 22). Hence its present place. It contains two parts of almost equal length. In both, presumption is rebuked; in Isaiah 22:1-7, the presumption of the secure and reckless Jerusalem; in Isaiah 22:8-14, its incorrigible obstinacy, which even a perception of danger cannot overcome. In the second part of the chapter (Isaiah 22:15-25) the Prophet declares the punishment of the haughtiness of Shebna, the steward of the palace, involving his deposition and the calling of a worthier successor, who, however, would be likewise in danger of abusing his high office.
Touching the time of the composition of the first part, we have to observe that it forms a whole. But in Isaiah 22:8-14 the Prophet sets the wicked obstinacy of the present time in opposition to the inconsideration of an earlier. The time referred to (Isaiah 22:8-12) is ascertained without difficulty from a study of these verses. It was the period of Hezekiah, and just when the Assyrians were threatening the city (xxxvi. and xxxvii.), which was by no means secured against all danger by the measures which Hezekiah took for its defence (2 Chronicles 32:2 sqq. 30). There must have been then in Jerusalem persons, who in opposition to the blind, thoughtless presumption of former times (Isaiah 22:1-7), saw clearly the danger, yet in their wicked obstinacy would not seek the Lord, but desired only to satisfy their low carnal passions. The second part of the chapter belongs to the same time.
It is directed against Shebna, the proud steward of the palace. In consequence of the divine displeasure here declared, he was actually deprived of his high office, and Eliakim, the person indicated by Isaiah, was appointed his successor. In chapters 36 and 37 we find Eliakim acting as steward of the palace and Shebna only a scribe. The latter had, it is clear, repented and submitted to the judgment of God. Therefore the punishment with which he was threatened was mitigated. But since Eliakim appears in 36 and 37 as already steward of the palace, this prophecy must belong to a somewhat earlier time.
____________________
1. AGAINST ’S BLIND AND IN SIGHT OF DANGER
Isaiah 22:1-14a) The punishment of blind presumption Isaiah 22:1-71 The burden of the valley of vision.
What aileth thee now,
That thou art wholly gone up to the housetops?
2 Thou that art full of stirs,
A tumultuous city,
A joyous city;
Thy slain men are not slain with the sword,
Nor dead in battle.
3 All thy rulers are fled together,
They are bound by the archers;
All that are found in thee are bound together,
Which have fled from far.
4 Therefore said I, Look away from me;
I will weep bitterly,
Labour not to comfort me,
Because of the spoiling of the daughter of my people.
5 For it is a day of trouble, and of treading down, and of perplexity
By the Lord God of hosts in the valley of vision,
Breaking down the walls,
And of crying to the mountains.
6 And Elam bare the quiver
With chariots of men and horsemen,
And Kir uncovered the shield.
7 And it shall come to pass,
That thy choicest valleys shall be full of chariots,
And the horsemen shall set themselves in array at the gate.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_22:1. The question ξδΞμγ (comp. Isaiah 22:16 and on Isaiah 3:15) is intensified by ΰֵ ?τεֹ ?ΰ (Isaiah 19:12). λֻּ ?μָּ ?γְ for λֻּ ?μֵּ ?γְ comp. Micah 2:12.
Isaiah 22:2. In ϊωׁ ?ΰιִ ?ϊξμΰδ (apposition to λμκ) the accusative stands first for the sake of emphasis.
Isaiah 22:3. On ξψηεχ, i.e., far off, comp. on Isaiah 17:13.
Isaiah 22:4. ΰξψψααλι properly: I will with weeping bring forth what is bitter. The Piel (in Isaiah only here, comp. Genesis 49:23; Exodus 1:14) is here, as often, employed like Hiphil in the causative sense. In this sense the Hiphil actually occurs Zechariah 12:10. δֵ ?ΰִ ?ιυ (comp. Genesis 19:15) insistere is found only here in Isaiah.
Isaiah 22:5. ξδεξδ, tumultus, perturbatio, Deuteronomy 7:23; Deuteronomy 28:20; in Isaiah only here. ξαερδ, conculcatio, besides only Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 18:7. ξαελδ implicatio, entangling, confusion, besides only Micah 7:4. Notice the assonance in these three words.——ξχψχψ is to be taken neither as verb. denominativum, nor as substantive (demolition) nor as apposition to ιεֹ ?ν. It is the participle Pilpel from χεּ ?ψ fodere, effodere, of which the Kal occurs Isaiah 37:25 and the perf. Pilpel, Numbers 24:17. As to its construction it is in apposition to μַ ?ΰγֹ ?πָ ?ιιΧ. Grammar does not require the repetition of the preposition. Notice here how the sound is an echo to the sense.——ωׁ ?εֹ ?ςַ is clamor, vociferatio, especially a cry for help. The word occurs only here.
Isaiah 22:6. ΰωׁ ?τδ quiver, in Isaiah besides Isaiah 49:2. The αְּ before ψλα is the αְּ of concomitance = with. ψλαΰγν are chariots equipped with men—manned chariots in opposition to wagons for lading (ςֲ ?βָ ?μεֹ ?ϊ). τψωׁ ?ιν (comp. on Isaiah 21:7) stands ἀσυνδέτως, but yet is governed by αְּ. The meaning, therefore, is: Elam has seized the quiver in the midst of chariots and horsemen, i. e., has furnished an army of bowmen together with chariots and horsemen.
Isaiah 22:7. ωִׁ ?ιϊ without object = aciem struere , Psalms 3:7. Comp. Isaiah 49:15. Notice, too, the alliteration.
AND 1. In this first half of the discourse directed to the whole of Jerusalem, the Prophet assails the presumption with which the inhabitants formerly witnessed the approach of the enemy on an occasion not more closely specified. He asks the meaning of their going up to the roofs of the houses. It was plainly in order to see the approaching foe, although the Prophet does not expressly say this (Isaiah 22:1). But the noise which prevailed in the streets, and the universal gaiety prove that the enemy was not regarded with apprehension, but with proud defiance (Isaiah 22:2). In contrast with this presumption stands the result which the Prophet proceeds to depict.
He sees the slain and prisoners of all ranks who fell into the hands of the enemy, not in manly conflict, but in cowardly flight (Isaiah 22:3). A second contrast to that insolent gaiety, is formed by the profound sorrow which the Prophet Himself now feels as he looks upon the ruin of the daughter of his people (Isaiah 22:4). For the Lord Himself brings the day of destruction on Jerusalem, while he employs as His instruments for this purpose distant nations terribly equipped for war, as whose representatives only Elam and Kir are named (Isaiah 22:6-7).
2. The burden—fled from far.Isaiah 22:1-3. The expression “the valley of vision” is taken from Isaiah 22:5. Consult the Commentary on that verse for further particulars. That the title is formed after the analogy of the superscriptions, Isaiah 21:1; Isaiah 21:11; Isaiah 21:13, and that the prophecy is placed here for that reason is self-evident. A hostile army advances against Jerusalem.
But the inhabitants of Jerusalem are not afraid of the enemy. They ascend the roofs of the houses to see the foe. This is in itself quite natural. But yet the Prophet asks in a tone of displeasure, What is the matter with thee that thou in a body goest upon the roofs? The party addressed is plainly the personified Jerusalem. It is no good sign that all Jerusalem goes up on the house-tops.
For this looks as if the coming of the enemy was regarded in Jerusalem as a spectacle for the amusement of all the people. It is yet worse that the accustomed noise prevails in the streets, and this noise is a joyous one. The city is called ςַ ?μִּ ?ιζָ ?δ which epithet includes the idea of haughtiness as well as joy, as we see from Isaiah 13:3; Zephaniah 3:11. (Comp. Isaiah 23:12; Psalms 94:3; Jeremiah 50:11; Jeremiah 51:39; 2 Samuel 1:20). It is uncertain to what particular occasion the Prophet here alludes. He cannot have in view what is related 2 Kings 16:5; Isaiah 7:1; for great despondency then reigned.
This can be said too of chapter 36; 2 Chronicles 28:20 is too doubtful. (Comp.Ewald,History III. p. 667 note). It was probably some event of less importance, perhaps the appearance of a predatory troop. The indignation of the Prophet would befit such an occurrence. The insolence at sight of a seemingly slight danger annoyed him, inasmuch as the appearance before Jerusalem of a single soldier belonging to the army of a power aiming at universal sovereignty, should have made them sensible of the danger threatening them from that quarter. This danger passes into fact before the Prophet’s eye. He sees a hostile army before the walls of Jerusalem.
It is of course a different one from that whose appearance so little discomposed the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Now things take quite another turn. Insolence is changed into its opposite, into base cowardice; security, into the greatest distress. The Prophet sees the ground covered with dead bodies of his people. They have perished miserably, have died an inglorious death. And those very rulers (χφιπιν comp.
Isaiah 1:10; Isaiah 3:6 sq.), who, on the occasion referred to in Isaiah 22:1-2, had doubtless set the example of proud defiance, are now found to be the most cowardly. They flee all together, and are, without the drawing of a bow on their part or on that of the enemy (on ξִ ?ο in the signification “without” see on Isaiah 14:19) taken and bound. But not only the chief men behaved with cowardice. All the Jews who fell into the power of the enemy (πξφΰικ “thy found ones” not “those found in thee) were taken in their flight. They fled afar, not from far (comp. Isaiah 17:13).
They had sought in their timidity to flee far away, for they thought themselves safe only at the farthest possible distance from their endangered home. We here readily call to mind what is related 2 Kings 25:4 sqq.; Jeremiah 39:4 sqq. Comp. Lamentations 4:17-20 of the flight of king Zedekiah and all his soldiers.
3. Therefore said I—my people.Isaiah 22:4. In opposition to that blind presumption (Isaiah 22:2) the Prophet, who clearly perceives what will be hereafter, experiences profound grief. His sorrow is unintelligible to the people. They seek to comfort him. He refuses to be comforted, and asks only to be permitted to give vent to his grief. “Look away from me,” recalls vividly to mind Job 7:19; Job 14:6; Ps. 39:14; but in these places the Lord is entreated to turn away His holy, and, therefore, judging eye from sinful men.
The expression, “the daughter of my people” first occurs here. It is not to be taken as the partitive genitive, but as the genitive of apposition, or more accurately, the genitive of identity. The daughter of my people is a daughter, i. e., a female who is my people in so far as she represents, or personifies my people. The expression, as the analogous one “daughter of Zion,” corresponds to our expressions, Germany, Prussia, Bavaria, etc. These expressions with us likewise denote the personified unity of a people under the representation of a female. Observe further how the Prophet depicts the punishment of their presumption in words which afterwards served as a model for the lamentation over Jerusalem’s destruction by the Chaldaeans (Lamentations 2:11; Lamentations 3:48).
4. For it is a day——the gate.Isaiah 22:5-7. The conduct of the Prophet is determined by the procedure of the Lord. As He has decreed a day of destruction on Jerusalem, the sorrow of the Prophet is not without a cause. The expression ιεֹ ?νμַ ?ΰγֹ ?πָ ?ι is peculiar to Isaiah. It occurs Isaiah 2:12 (Isaiah 34:8).
What it means is learnt from Isaiah 63:4 where it is called “a day of vengeance in my heart.” The expression in a somewhat modified form is used by Jeremiah (Isaiah 46:10) and Ezekiel (Isaiah 30:3). The scene of this act of judgment is to be “the valley of vision.” That Jerusalem is thus denoted is most clearly determined by the context. Knobel’s view that the expression does not mark the city itself, but only one of the valleys surrounding it, is very strange. Not to speak of other things, how would a judgment falling on only one of the valleys surrounding Jerusalem, correspond to the words of Isa 22:2? I believe that light is thrown on the expression “the valley of vision” by Joe 3:12 sqq. The expression “the day of the Lord” is found first in Joel.
While then Isaiah speaks of “a day of trouble, and of treading down, and of perplexity” which the Lord has, he is led to think on the place which, according to Joel, should be the scene of “the day of the Lord.” This place is “the valley of Jehoshaphat,” or, as it is termed a little after, (Joe 3:14) “the valley of decision.” The place of judgment is thus denoted in Joel by symbolical names. He speaks of the judgment on the heathen which does not touch Israel. Isaiah speaks of the judgment on Jerusalem alone, and therefore does not call the place of judgment “the valley of decision,” but chooses instead of it another symbolical name. He calls it “the valley of vision.” Too much stress has been laid on the representation of a “valley,” both here and in Joe 3:12; Joe 3:14. The valley of Jehoshaphat is not the valley of Kidron, which from this passage was afterwards called the valley of Jehoshaphat; but it is an ideal plain spread out at the foot of mount Zion, not called a valley from its lying between two mountains (compare also the valley, plain of Jezreel Joshua 17:16; Judges 6:33; Hosea 1:5), but in opposition to the lofty height from which Jehovah descends. We have then neither to think on the situation of Jerusalem between mountains (Psalms 125:2), nor on the low street in a valley in which the Prophet is supposed to have dwelt.
But Jerusalem is called a valley as being on this lower earth in opposition to the heavenly height from which the Judge comes. There are, besides, not wanting traces of the use of βιΰ in the wider signification of planities, plain. (Comp. 2 Samuel 8:13; Psalms 60:2; Numbers 21:2). But why “the valley of vision?” To me it seems that we must not overlook the fact, that in Isaiah 22:1-14 seeing is so much spoken of. The inhabitants of Jerusalem go up on the roofs to see (Isaiah 22:1). But they do not see as they ought. Then the Lord removes partially the covering from their eyes, and they look to their armory (Isaiah 22:8).
They look also to the breaches in their walls (Isaiah 22:9), and to the lower pool; but alas! they do not look to Him who formed all this long ago (Isaiah 22:11). The Prophet, on the other hand, whose eye the Lord had entirely opened, sees accurately (Isaiah 22:14). Might not then Jerusalem be called the valley of (prophetic) vision, because in it the true God-imparted seeing has its place, in opposition to the defective and often quite perverse seeing? The Prophet would therefore mean: In the place where the divine seeing has indeed its home, but on account of false human seeing is not regarded, the Lord will appear to hold judgment. The breaking down of the wall took place at the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldaeans (Jeremiah 39:2). Crying to the mountain.—It seems to me to suit the context better, if we (with Ewald, Drechsler) under δδψ understand not the neighboring mountain sides, but the mountain on which the Lord dwells, whence He, according to Joe 3:16 sq., roars and utters His judgment, and to which the prayers of the suppliants are directed (Psalms 2:6; Psalms 3:5; Psalms 99:9; Psalms 121:1; Isaiah 2:3; Isaiah 8:18; Isaiah 10:12; Isaiah 10:32; Isaiah 11:9, etc.).
Isaiah 22:6-7 explain what is said in Isaiah 22:5. The general, indefinite “and” before Elam involves in this connection the notion “and truly, namely.” (Comp. Gesen.Thes. p. 394 c). Elam (comp. Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 21:2) is the Persian Uvaja, i. e., the Susiana of the Greeks (Schrader,Cuneif. Inscr. p. 31).
That the Elamites were renowned as archers appears from Jeremiah 49:30 (comp. Herzog,R. Encycl. III. p. 748). Kir is described by Amos (Isaiah 9:7) as the earlier dwelling of the Syrians. He also predicts that the Syrians should be brought back thither (Isaiah 1:5), a prophecy whose fulfilment is attested 2 Kings 16:9.
It has been almost universally assumed since J. D. Michaelis (opposed to this view are Knobel,Voelkertafel (Ethnological Table) p. 151. Keil on 2 Kings 16:9; Vaihinger in Herzog,R. Encycl. XV., p. 394) that this Kir is the region near the river Κῦρος, a tributary of the Araxes, which falls into the Caspian Sea (comp.
Ewald,Hist. III., p. 638). Delitzsch properly observes that the river Κῦρος is written not with χ but with λ. The name has not yet been found in the Assyrian inscriptions. That the Prophet named Elam and Kir as representatives of the Assyrian host is certainly possible. Only we must understand the matter thus: For the Prophet who always beheld Assyria in the foreground of his field of vision, Assyria signifies the worldly power in general, for which reason he elsewhere includes even Babylon under the name of Assyria (Isaiah 7:20; Isaiah 8:7).
He mentions Elam and Kir, because they were remote and unknown nations. For the prophets frequently render their announcements of judgment more dreadful, by the threatening that distant people, entirely unknown, and therefore quite reckless and pitiless, should be the instrument of the judgment (comp. Deuteronomy 28:49; Isaiah 33:19; Jeremiah 5:15). The uncovering of the shield (comp. C�sar Bell. Gall., 11, 21) is proper for infantry, so that all the constituents of an army—archers, chariots of war, cavalry, infantry, will be represented.
In Isaiah 22:7 the exact rendering is “And it came to pass; thy best valleys were full,” etc. But the past tense is not to be understood absolutely. The Prophet does not pass suddenly from the description of future things to depict what had already taken place. He is to be understood relatively. He marks only a progress in the picture of the future which he beholds. He sees the chariots and horsemen (Isaiah 22:6) not merely at rest.
He sees them in motion, he marks how they fill the environs of Jerusalem. This movement which belongs to the future, he describes as if it took place before his eyes. Thy choicest valleys, lit., the choice of thy valleys, thy best, most fruitful valleys, chief of these the valley of Rephaim (Isaiah 17:5), are filled and overrun with chariots and horsemen, they are so numerous. But they not merely threaten from a distance. They approach close to Jerusalem. The horsemen have taken their stand right before the gate in order to make a dash the moment they are required.
Footnotes:Heb. of the bow.without bow.afar.Heb. I will be bitter in weeping.Heb. made naked.Heb. the choice of thy valleys.Or. toward.
b) The punishment of defiance in sight of danger Isaiah 22:8-148 And he discovered the covering of Judah,
And thou didst look in that day
To the armour of the house of the forest.
9 Ye have seen also the breaches of the city of David,
That they are many:
And ye gathered together the waters of the lower pool.
10 And ye have numbered the houses of Jerusalem,
And the houses have ye broken down to fortify the wall.
11 Ye made also a dicth between the two walls
For the water of the old pool:
But ye have not looked unto the maker thereof,
Neither had respect unto him that fashioned it long ago.
12 And in that day did the Lord God of hosts call
To weeping, and to mourning,
And to baldness, and to girding with sackcloth;
13 And behold, joy and gladness,
Slaying oxen, and killing sheep,
Eating flesh, and drinking wine;
Let us eat and drink,
For to-morrow we shall die.
14 And it was revealed in mine ears by the Lord of hosts,
Surely this iniquity shall not be purged from you till ye die,
Saith the Lord God of hosts.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_22:11. The feminine suffixes in ςִֹ ?ωֶ ?ιδָ (regarding the form comp. Ewald, § 256 b) and ιֹ ?φְ ?ψָ ?δּ are to be regarded as neuters. ιָ ?φַ ?ψ is the forming, shaping in idea, to which then ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δ comes as the execution. In analogous places ιφψ stands therefore before ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δ: Isaiah 43:7; Isaiah 45:18; Isaiah 46:11. However in Isaiah 37:26; Jeremiah 33:2, the order is as here. We could say that the succession of ideas is conceived in the one case analytically, in the other, synthetically.
Isaiah 22:13. On these infinitive constructions comp. Isaiah 5:5; Isaiah 21:5.——The abnormal form ωָׁ ?ϊεֹ ?ϊ is in imitation of ωָׁ ?ηֹ ?θ, comp. Hosea 10:4.
AND 1. The inhabitants of Jerusalem are now no longer inspired by thoughtless presumption. They see themselves compelled by this new emergency to consider seriously their means of defence. First, they inspect the store of weapons in the arsenal (Isaiah 22:8). They examine the fortifications, and collect water in the lower pool (Isaiah 22:9). They pull down houses in order to repair the walls (Isaiah 22:10), and they form a new reservoir.
But to Him who has caused this distress, and who alone can remove it, they do not turn their eyes (Isaiah 22:11). And when He brings upon them bitter misery (Isaiah 22:12), the only effect of it is that, with the recklessness of despair, they give themselves eagerly to pleasure, because all will soon be over (Isaiah 22:13). But this defiant spirit exhibited no longer in blindness, but in sight of danger, the Lord will not pardon. They must expiate it with their life (Isaiah 22:14).
2. And he discovered—long ago.Isaiah 22:8-11. This section is closely connected with the preceding one, as the construction shows.—And he discovered. The subject of the verb is the Lord God of hosts in Isaiah 22:5. But, though the connection of the two sections is so intimate, a considerable interval of time must lie between them, as the transition from that blind presumption to the defiance in sight of danger here described, was hardly quite sudden. But for this close grammatical connection of the two sections one might be tempted to refer the first part (Isaiah 22:1-7) as a separate prediction to an earlier time.
It would, in fact, have been possible for the Prophet to have combined in one prophecy this earlier prediction with a later one on account of a correspondence in subject-matter between the two. But it is most natural to regard the whole piece, Isaiah 22:1-14, as a single composition, and to suppose that the Prophet in the first part (Isaiah 22:1-7) transported himself back to an earlier juncture, because it served admirably as a foil to the later crisis which he describes (Isaiah 22:8-14). This later situation, which was the occasion of this whole prophecy before us, is here described by him as a basis for the complaints and denunciations of punishment which he utters, Isaiah 22:11 b and Isaiah 22:13 sq. We have therefore to understand the aorists, Isaiah 22:8 sqq., not as praeterita prophetica, but in their proper signification. We perceive from Isaiah 22:8 a, that the Lord at last took from the eyes of Judah the covering that caused blindness. βμδ is here applied not to that which is hidden, but to that which hides, as frequently. Comp.
Isaiah 47:2; Nahum 3:5; Job 41:5. Judah then saw the necessity of preparing for war. They proceed therefore to the armory built by Solomon, of cedars, called the house of the forest of Lebanon (1 Kings 7:2; 1 Kings 10:17; 1 Kings 10:21), which is probably identical with the αֵּ ?ιϊλֵּ ?μִ ?ιν39:2, in order to see how it stood with the apparatus bellicus. The primary meaning of πֶ ?ωֶׁ ?χ is tela. They next examine the fortifications of the city of David, and discover that there are many breaches in them. I do not think that under “the city of David” we are to understand the whole of Jerusalem, as Arnold appealing to Isaiah 29:1 maintains (HerzogR.
Enc. XVIII., p. 593). “The city of David” is always the South-western elevated part of Jerusalem; and if this part alone is mentioned here, this need not surprise us, as we cannot expect that the Prophet should give an enumeration historically complete. We learn, moreover, from 2 Chronicles 32:5, that Hezekiah fortified especially the proper city of David, or Zion. Another matter, which must be particularly attended to by those who defend a city, is to provide themselves with water, and to cut off the supply of it from the enemy. This is what the inhabitants of Jerusalem do. They collect, draw inwards the waters of the lower pool.
In the valley of Gihon which borders Jerusalem on the west there are still two old pools; the upper (now Birket-el-Mamilla) and the lower (now Birket es-Sultβn). Compare what is said on Isaiah 7:3. The account in 2 Chronicles 32:3 sq., and that in the place before us supplement one another. In the former, mention is made only of the stopping of the reservoirs. Here, prominence is given to the other necessary step, the turning into the city of the water cut off from the enemy. χִ ?αֵּ ?υ cannot here denote merely collecting in the pool by hindering it from flowing away. For, first, the water, without flowing off, would have risen and been soon remarked by the enemy.
Secondly, the water was needed in the city. I take, therefore, χִ ?αֵּ ?υ in the signification in which it is employed Joe 2:6; Nahum 2:11, where it is said that faces χִ ?αְּ ?φεּ τָ ?ΰψεּ ?ψ, i. e., draw in their brightness. Here, then, the meaning is that the inhabitants of Jerusalem drew the water into their city. In reference to Delitzsch’s remark that this must rather be expressed by ΰρσ, I call attention to the fact that Joel expresses, Joe 2:10 and Joel 4:15, by ΰρσ the same thought which he had in Joe 2:6 expressed by χαυ, whence it follows that in this place, too, χαυ can be used in the signification ΰρσ. It may occasion surprise that Isaiah 22:10 interrupts the account regarding the reservoirs. But the Prophet evidently proceeds from the easier to the more difficult.
The breaking down of the houses for the purpose of repairing the walls, was a greater work than drawing off the water of the lower pool into the wells or reservoirs already existing in the city. And the formation of a new pool between the walls, in order to empty the old one, might well appear the grandest work of all. The opinion of Drechsler, that the numbering of the houses was with a view to quartering the soldiers, is very strange. In Jeremiah 33:4 it is supposed that houses were demolished in order to repair the fortifications. The ξִ ?χְ ?εָ ?δ (only here, elsewhere ξִ ?χְ ?εֶ ?δ) which (Isaiah 22:11) was prepared for the waters of “the old pool,” is very probably still in existence in the Birket-el-Batrak (the pool of the patriarchs) which the Franks after this passage and 2 Kings 20:20; 2 Chronicles 32:30; Sir 48:19, call the pool of Hezekiah. It lies within the present wall of the city east of the Yafa (Joppa) gate.
It still receives its water from the Mamilla pool by means of a canal which enters the city south of the Yafa gate. (Comp. Arnold in Herz.,R. Enc. XVIII., p. 619, and especially C. W. Wilson’sOrdnance Survey of Jerusalem, 1865, and Warren’sRecovery of Jerusalem, 1872).
In opposition to the new pool, the pool whose waters it received was called “the old pool.” The former name of the old pool was “the upper pool,” which is twice mentioned by Isaiah (Isaiah 7:3; Isaiah 36:2). The expression ηֹ ?ξεֹ ?ϊַ ?ιִ ?ν occurs besides only in Jeremiah 39:4, and in the parallel passages Jeremiah 52:7; 2 Kings 25:4. In these places in the books of Jeremiah and Kings a double wall seems to be meant, which connected Zion and Ophel at the end of the Tyrop�on. This does not suit well the situation of the pool of Hezekiah as before mentioned. It is uncertain whether we are to understand in the place before us a corner of a wall between the north wall of Zion and the wall going north-eastwards round Akra (Delitzsch after Robinson), or a second double wall situated near the Yafa gate. This precaution was certainly not in itself wrong.
What was wrong in their conduct was that they fixed their eyes only on these measures of human prudence, and omitted to look with confidence to Him who had made all this, i. e., the whole situation, and had arranged it long ago. [The common view, which supposes God to be here described as the maker and fashioner of Jerusalem, has against it the analogy of Isa 37:26.—D. M.].
3. And in that day—of hosts.Isaiah 22:12-14. We may ask how the Lord then called the inhabitants of Jerusalem to weeping, and to mourning, and to baldness (Isaiah 3:24), and to girding with sackcloth (Isaiah 20:2). The language is probably taken from the proclamations by which a general fast, a day of humiliation and prayer was ordained (1 Kings 21:9; 1 Kings 21:12). Such proclamations proceed proximately from the rulers, but ultimately from the Lord, who by the course of His providence renders them necessary. It is now also the Lord who so “makes and forms” everything that Israel, if it would give heed, would be called thereby to repentance.
One thinks here very naturally of Isa 37:1 sqq., where it is related that Hezekiah, in consequence of the message of Rabshakeh, rent his clothes, covered himself with sackcloth, and sent deputies clothed with sackcloth to Isaiah. I would say that as Isaiah 22:8-11 recall to mind the defensive measures taken by Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 32:2 sqq.), so what is said in Isaiah 22:12 reminds us of Isa 37:1 sqq. Hezekiah was better than the majority of his people. His own father was Ahaz, and his son was Manasseh. He formed between the two only a short episode, which stemmed indeed for a short time the flood of corruption, but which rendered the inundation under Manasseh all the more impetuous. We can therefore reasonably assume that at the very time when Hezekiah and his immediate attendants were exhibiting these signs of penitence there were very many people in Jerusalem who were doing that wherewith the Prophet (Isaiah 22:13) reproaches the Jews.
They saw the danger. They were no longer blind as in Isaiah 22:1 sqq. They did not, however, let the perception of the danger move them to lay hold of the only hand that could save them, but in defiant resignation they refused this help. They made up their mind to go to destruction, but first they would enjoy life right heartily (Isaiah 22:13). The words ΰλεμεωׁ ?ϊε I prefer, with Drechsler, Knobel, and others, to take as words of the Jews, rather than with Delitzsch ascribe them to the Prophet. For, as words of the Prophet they are superfluous, while as words of the Jews they round off their speech.
Moreover the form ωָׁ ?ϊεֹ makes the impression of being an abbreviation borrowed from popular usage. Isaiah 22:14. The perfect επβμδ cannot be taken as the aorist. It marks rather, as Drechsler correctly observes, the revelation as an abiding one, continuing to echo in the inner ear of the Prophet. λִּ ?τֶּ ?ψ (comp. Isaiah 6:7; Isaiah 27:9) properly to cover. According to the way in which this covering takes place the word denotes forgive, or atone.
Here it seems to me to signify to forgive, for the mode of threatening excludes the thought of atonement. A recompense after death is not yet taught in the Old Testament. Punishments are inflicted in this life. If a man has to suffer punishment for guilt unpardoned, he has to bear the burden till it has destroyed him, till he is dead. ςγ till, declares, therefore, that up to death, all through life, they will have to bear the punishment of that sin. After death follows only Sheol in which there is no more life. [Isaiah himself seems clearly to teach the doctrine of a punishment after death, Isaiah 33:14; Isaiah 66:24. And in chapter 14 the Prophet represents the dwellers of Sheol as meeting the king of Babylon with taunts on his appearance among them.
This supposes that there is life there. Though the inhabitants of Sheol are prevented from taking part in the affairs of the present life on earth, as Scripture affectingly testifies, this does not hinder their possession of consciousness and activity in the invisible world.—D. M.].
Footnotes:uncovered, took away.reservoir.
1. AGAINST THE PRIDE OF SHEBNA THE STEWARD OF THE HOUSE
Isaiah 22:15-2515 Thus saith the Lord God of hosts;
Go, get thee unto this treasurer,
Even unto Shebna, which is over the house, and say,
16 What hast thou here, and whom hast thou here,
That thou hast hewed thee out a sepulchre here,
As he that heweth him out a sepulchre on high,
And that graveth an habitation for himself in a rock?
17 Behold, the Lord will carry thee away with a mighty captivity,
And will surely cover thee.
18 He will surely violently turn,
And toss thee like a ball into a large country;
There shalt thou die,
And there the chariots of thy glory
Shall be the shame of thy lord’s house.
19 And I will drive thee from thy station,
And from thy state shall he pull thee down.
20 And it shall come to pass in that day,
That I will call my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah;
21 And I will clothe him with thy robe,
And strengthen him with thy girdle,
And I will commit thy government into his hand;
And he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem,
And to the house of Judah.
22 And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder,
So he shall open, and none shall shut;
And he shall shut, and none shall open.
23 And I will fasten him as a nail in a sure place;
And he shall be for a glorious throne to his father’s house.
24 And they shall hang upon him all the glory of his father’s house,
The offspring and the issue, all vessels of small quantity,
From the vessels of cups, even to all the vessels of flagons.
25 In that day, saith the Lord of hosts,
Shall the nail that is fastened in the sure place be removed,
And be cut down, and fall;
And the burden that was upon it shall be cut off;
For the Lord hath spoken it.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_22:15. μֶ ?κְ ?Ξαּ ?ΰ comp. Isaiah 26:20; Ezekiel 3:4; Ezekiel 3:11; 2 Kings 5:5. The change of ΰֵ ?μ and ςַ ?μ without any perceptible difference of meaning, which is very common in Jeremiah (comp. on Jeremiah 10:3) occurs also in Isaiah not unfrequently (comp. on Isaiah 10:3).
Isaiah 22:16. ξψεν is accusative of the place.
Isaiah 22:17. Grammar forbids our considering θμθμδ (it and Pilp. θμθμ only here in Isaiah) as in the construct state. For in all cases where this anomaly appears to occur, the second word is in apposition. To take βαψ as a vocative (as after the Syriac version many do, also Cheyne and Diestel), is still harder than to regard it as in apposition to ιδεδ. For though a tolerable irony might lie in βαψ, yet there is no example of the word so standing alone as vocative. The subst. θμθμδ stands instead of the customary infinitive absolute.
I do not understand why it is said that ςθδ cannot have the signification “wrap up,” “inwrap,” for it signifies induere in 1 Samuel 28:14; Psalms 104:2; Psalms 71:13. Comp. Psalms 109:19; Psalms 109:29; Isaiah 59:17; Jeremiah 43:12; and this induere cannot be understood in many of these places as merely covering, but must denote an inwrapping or enveloping one’s self tightly. It might be said that ςָ ?θָ ?δ then signifies “to inwrap one’s self,” and stands with the accusative of the thing which is put on or in which a person wraps himself, while in the passage before us ςθδ is joined with the accusative of the person. But it is well known that the Hebrew verbal stems are by no means clearly discriminated in respect to transitive and intransitive use, and besides, Isaiah employs here only rare verbal forms. It appears to me that the Prophet by ςθδ indicates the laying together of the coverings on the person of Shebna. φπσ denotes the rolling together into a ball, θμθμ the casting forth. φπσ is to wrap round, obvolvere (the verb only here and Leviticus 16:4).
Thence comes φְ ?πֵ ?τָ ?δ, what is rolled or wound together (ἅπ. λεγ.). λַּ ?γּ ?εּ ?ψ is not γּ ?εּ ?ψ with the prefix, but λּ belongs to the stem. Comp. Isaiah 29:3 and λִּ ?ιγεֹ ?ψ Job 15:24. The signification is pila, sphaera, globus, ball. It is to be construed in apposition to φְ ?πֵ ?τָ ?δ. The word χָ ?μεִֹ ?ο is found only here in Isaiah. ξַ ?φָּ ?α ,δָ ?γַ ?σ and ξַֽ ?ςֲ ?ξָ ?γ only here in Isaiah; δָ ?ψַ ?ν is found besides Isaiah 14:17 and in Piel Isaiah 49:17.
Isaiah 22:21. ηִ ?ζֵּ ?χ (with double accusative after the analogy of verbs of clothing) is to make fast, strengthen (Nahum 2:2).
AND 1. The prophecy, which chastises the haughty and defiant spirit of the inhabitants of Jerusalem is followed by another which has for its subject the pride of a single person. Shebna, the steward of the palace, and first minister of the king, was a haughty, insolent man. He went so far in his arrogance that he caused a sepulchre to be hewn out for himself in a rock on high (probably on the height of Mount Zion). He was standing beside his new sepulchre, which was yet in course of construction, when Isaiah, by God’s command, came to him and asked him by what right and title he was hewing for himself here a sepulchre in the rock on the height (Isaiah 22:15-16)? Jehovah will cast him away as a ball into a distant, level country.
There shall he die, and the disgrace of the house of David will be there his funeral pomp. But before that, the Lord will remove him from his office (Isaiah 22:17-19). The Lord will call to his place as steward of the palace Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, who will prove a father to Jerusalem and Judah, and the key of authority over the realm shall be put into his hand (Isaiah 22:20-22). Eliakim will thereby raise his family also to high honors. As one hangs on a nail all vessels of the house, so will he elevate and bear all the descendants of his house; but this procedure will not remain unpunished—for the nail will break, and the vessels hanging on it will fall down and be dashed to pieces (Isaiah 22:23-25).
2. Thus saith—over the house.Isaiah 22:15. ρֹ ?λֵ ?ο occurs only here. The feminine ρֹ ?λֶ ?πֶ ?ϊ is applied as a predicate to the Shunammite Abishag (1 Kings 1:2; 1 Kings 1:4). A ρֹ ?λֶ ?πֶ ?ϊ [Margin of English BibleBHS: a cherisher] is there sought for the king and also found in the person of Abishag. That in this connection the signification: “intimate friend,” amica intima, familiarissima, suits, is obvious. The signification “intimate friend” is favored by the related root, ωׁ ?λο, to dwell, with the additional signification, to dwell together (σύγκοιτος.
Comp. Proverbs 8:12; Ges.Thes. p. 1408), and the Arabic sakan, friend, and the Hiphil. δִ ?ρְ ?λִּ ?ιο, to form acquaintance (Job 22:21), cognitum habere (Psalms 139:3) consuevisse (Numbers 22:30). That this was in the East a title of office is well known. (Comp. the Lexicons and Gesenius on this place). I therefore translate ρֹ ?λֵ ?ο by “privy counsellor.” The pronoun δַ ?ζֶּ ?δthis, involves, like the Latin iste, the idea of contempt. The name ωֶׁ ?αְ ?πָ ?ΰ (written ωֶׁ ?αְ ?πָ ?δ, 2 Kings 18:18; 2 Kings 18:26; comp. ibid. Isaiah 19:2; Isaiah 36:3; Isaiah 36:11; Isaiah 36:22; Isaiah 37:2) is in the O.
T. applied only to this one individual. From the circumstance that his genealogy is not given, some have been inclined to infer that he was a novus homo, an upstart, perhaps not even an Israelite. Neither conclusion seems to me to be justified. For, that Isaiah does not name the father of Shebna because he was a homo ignobilis, or quite unknown, is so unlikely, that we must rather on the contrary say, if the father of Shebna had been a man of base, or not even of Israelitish origin, or a person quite unknown, Isaiah would have given prominence to this circumstance, because it would serve to set the haughtiness of Shebna in the moreglaring light. It is therefore more probable that Isaiah, contrary to the approved custom of the East, omitted the name of the father, because he would not show this respect to the son. The fact that Shebna is further described as placed “over the house,” indicates that ρֹ ?λֵ ?ο was only a general title.
He belonged, in general, to the friends of the king, but he was, in particular, the highest among them, viz.: major domus, maire du palais. He filled at the same time the first office at court and in the state. Comp. 1 Kings 4:6; 1 Kings 16:9; 1 Kings 18:3; 2 Kings 10:5. From 2 Kings 15:5 we learn that even the son of the king and subsequently his successor on the throne filled this office.
3. What hast thou——pull thee down.Isaiah 22:16-19. The question “What hast thou here?” evidently means: What entities thee to make thy grave here? While the question “Whom hast thou here?” intimates that Shebna will not succeed in burying here even one of his kindred. The thrice-repeated τδ, here, intimates that the place was a select one, not standing open to every person. The following words ηφαιξψιν to the end of the verse, make on one the impression that they are a quotation from some poem unknown to us.
For 1) the third person does not suit the connection here; 2) the parallelism, consisting of two members, and the forms ηφαι and ηχχι indicate a poetic origin. What height is meant appears from the statement in many passages (1 Kings 2:10; 1 Kings 11:43, etc.;2 Chronicles 16:14, etc.) that the sepulchres of the kings were in the city of David, i. e., on Zion, and according to 2 Chronicles 32:33, on the height of Zion. [Eng. Ver. there runs “in the chiefest of the sepulchres of the sons of David;” but “height” should be substituted for “chiefest.”—D. M.]. In this quarter, although not in the proper sepulchres of the kings, those kings also were interred who did not appear worthy of the full honor of a kingly burial (2 Chronicles 24:16). Comp.
Herzog,R.- Enc. I., p. 773 sqq. In the neighborhood of the royal sepulchres on the height of Zion, Shebna also seems to have laid out for himself a tomb hewn in a rock. An honor which was voluntarily accorded to such a man as Jehoiada he arrogates to himself. The last member of verse 16 bears evidently the character of poetic parallelism, for it repeats for the sake of rhetorical effect the thought of the preceding clause, though somewhat modified (the grave is described as a habitation for the dead). Comp.
Obadiah 1:3; Habakkuk 2:19. Shebna believes that he is able to secure for himself and his family, even after death, a permanent dwelling for all times. But the Prophet announces to him that the Lord will cast him forth, will whirl him out with a whirl as a man, i. e., with the force of a strong man. Isaiah 22:18. We have here a pregnant construction. φπσ besides meaning to roll together, must have latent in it the idea of rolling forth, as it is connected with ΰֵ ?μ. φְ ?πֵ ?τָ ?δ is then not the act of rolling, but that which is rolled together. The expression ψηαϊιγιν, widely extended on both sides, is found further only in Genesis 34:21; Judges 18:10; 1 Chronicles 4:40; Nehemiah 7:4.
The Prophet evidently means by this large country Mesopotamia, which then still belonged to the Assyrian empire. It seems to me that there is also an antithesis in this expression. As being cast forth stands in opposition to the peaceful staying at home which Shebna hoped for, so the broad country is in contrast to the elevated rock-hewn sepulchre above the narrow valley. There, consequently, in a place which is the very opposite of the place where Shebna wished to build his grave, there shall he die, and there shall he be buried. But even the burial ceremonies will contrast strangely with those which Shebna had anticipated. Almost all interpreters take χμεοαΧΰΧ as vocative.
But then the sentence “and there the chariots, etc.,” would be without a predicate; or we must supply an unmeaning predicate such as crunt, venient, or an arbitrary one such as peribunt. The Vulgate and the Peshito have taken the words εωׁ ?ξδ to ΰγπικ together as subject and predicate. But when they translate “et ibi erit currus gloriae tuae ignominia domus domini tui” we must not think that they take currus as the subject; for this construction yields no tolerable sense. But ignominia, etc. (χμεοαΧΰΧ) is the subject. We have, indeed, so far as I know, no express statements respecting the use of chariots at the funerals of the Hebrews. Only in 2 Kings 23:30 we read that the dead body of king Josiah was brought in a chariot (comp. 2 Chronicles 35:24) from Megiddo to Jerusalem.
But the thing is in itself probable, and in the passage before us the mention of chariots would be well explained if we durst assume that Isaiah thought of the magnificent funeral with chariots which Shebna might expect. In this supposition I translate “and there will thy state-carriages be—the shame of the house of thy lord;” that is, the shame which the house of thy lord will suffer, and that, too, chiefly through thy fault, this shame will be the escort of thy dead body, it will serve thee instead of the chariots with which they would have furnished thy funeral here, suitably to thy dignity as placed over the palace, it will constitute thy obsequies and accompany thee to the grave. That in the expression “shame of thy lord’s house,” there is an allusion to the house of the king over which Shebna was placed, is self-evident. There is no hysteron proteron when the Prophet announces the deposition of Shebna from his office. For, in fact, this deposition is only the consequence of the judgment which was to come on Shebna on account of his presumption in building himself a vault. How can a man, against whom such a sentence has been published, remain steward of the palace?
He displeases the King of kings. How can the earthly king, if he will not draw on himself the wrath of the heavenly King, retain him? He must dismiss the man to whom Jehovah Himself has given notice of dismissal. Isaiah 22:19. The change of person in the two verbs is best explained, after what has been remarked, in this way: the first person refers to the Lord as the Supreme Ruler; the third person, to the human authority, by means of which the divine will is executed on Shebna. This third person is not mentioned by name, and is to be rendered by “he” or “one.” Shebna’s pride was certainly only one symptom of a spirit displeasing to God.
He was assuredly no “servant of the Lord;” he therefore did not employ his power to promote the cause of Jehovah, and he must give way to a better man.
4. And it shall come—hath spoken it.Isaiah 22:20-25. On the day when Shebna must quit his post, Eliakim the son of Hilkiah will occupy his place. We know of this Eliakim nothing except what we learn from the present passage and from 36 and 37. He was in all probability of the priestly race. For Hilkiah, as his father was called, was a common name of priests.
At all events, all persons called Hilkiah mentioned in the O. T. are, with a single doubtful exception (Jeremiah 29:3) of priestly, or at least of Levitical origin, Jeremiah 1:1; 2 Kings 22:4 sqq.; 1 Chron. 5:39; 6:30; 26:11; Ezra 7:1; Nehemiah 8:4; Nehemiah 11:11; Nehemiah 12:7. It seems to follow from Isaiah 22:21, that the steward of the house had an official dress, with the putting on of which his installation was connected. The λְֹ ?ϊπֶ ?ϊ, tunic was one of the principal parts of the dress of the priests. (Exodus 28:40; Exodus 29:5; Exodus 29:8, etc.). The girdle (ΰַ ?αְ ?πֵ ?θ) also belonged to the dress of the priests (Exodus 28:29; Leviticus 8). ξֶ ?ξְ ?ωֶׁ ?μֶ ?ϊ in the sense of sphere of rule, jurisdiction, in Isaiah besides only Isaiah 39:2. Where the paternal authority stands so high as among the Jews the expression, “to be a father to one” denotes a right to rule, which has no other limits than those which nature itself imposes on a father in relation to his child (Genesis 45:8; Judges 17:10; Judges 18:19).
The expression “the house of Judah” is found in Isaiah besides only Isaiah 37:31. It occurs first in Hosea (Hosea 1:7; Hosea 5:12; Hosea 5:14); and is especially frequent in the older parts of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 3:18; Jeremiah 5:11; Jeremiah 11:10; Jeremiah 11:17, etc.), and in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 4:6; Ezekiel 8:17; Ezekiel 9:9, etc.). Respecting the distinction between Judah and Jerusalem comp. on Isaiah 2:1; Isaiah 5:3. Isaiah 22:22. The power over the house is essentially a power of the keys. For the key opens the entrance to the house, to the apartments and to all that is in them.
He, therefore, who alone has this key, has alone also the highest power. The expression reminds us on the one hand of Isa 9:5 (“on his shoulder” is a symbolical representation of the office as a burden to be carried), on the other hand of Job 12:14. The Lord Himself is in Revelation 3:7 represented after the present passage as He who has “the key of David.” Eliakim is not only to possess the highest authority at court and in the State, he is also to use his position for advancing all his house to high honor. This will not happen without abuse of power and evil consequences. A double image is used to express what Eliakim will be to his house. First, he shall be fastened as a nail (ιָ ?ϊֵ ?γ Isaiah 33:20; Isaiah 54:2) in a sure place (i. e., in a place where it sticks fast).
I do not think that ιָ ?ϊֵ ?γ is here to be taken as a tent-peg; for that would not suit Isaiah 22:25. The figure is intended first of all to convey the idea that Eliakim’s influential position will be firmly established and secure. The word of the Lord has called him to it. In this secure and influential place Eliakim will be for his own family a throne of honor (1 Samuel 2:8; Jeremiah 14:21; Jeremiah 17:12), i. e., he will bear his whole family, it will honorably rest on him, as upon a throne. We see that the two figures come substantially to the same thing. But the figure of a nail is in itself a less honorable one than that of a throne.
For the nail is only a common article serving simply for the hanging up of vessels. It happens then to Eliakim that he is a nail to which all that belongs to the house of Hilkiah attaches itself, in order to attain to honor by him (Isaiah 22:24 a). They hang on Eliakim the offspring (φΰφΰιν an expression which occurs only Job 5:25; Job 21:8; Job 27:14; Job 31:8 and Isaiah 34:1; Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 44:3; Isaiah 48:19; Isaiah 61:9; Isaiah 65:23) and the issue; the two expressions, denote the direct and collateral issue. φְ ?τִ ?ςεִֹ ?ϊ properly parasite plants, hangers-on. φτιςδ, ἅπ. λεγ., is a contemptuous expression, as we can see from φτις (Ezekiel 4:15). All vessels of small quantity, of smallness (Isaiah 36:9, comp. Exodus 15:16) from the basins (Exodus 24:6) to the skin bottles, or vessels like skin bags or bottles. Thus his entire kindred will fasten themselves on him.
The proper, literal expressions “the offspring and the issue” are illustrated by the figurative expressions which follow. Isaiah 22:25. In that day (with significant allusion to Isaiah 22:20) i. e., at the time when this nepotism will be at its height, and be ripe for judgment, the nail which was fastened in a sure place will give way, break and fall, and the burden hanging on it will be dashed to pieces. Many interpreters take offence at this turn of the prophecy, which unexpectedly betokens disaster, and Hitzig pronounces Isaiah 22:24 sq. a later addition. But as the prophecy directed against Shebna had the effect that he actually resigned his post in favor of Eliakim, and was content with the lower office of a scribe (Isaiah 36:3 sqq.), in like manner the unexpected statement, Isaiah 22:24 sq., can have had the salutary design, and effect of warning Eliakim. If this result followed, then the words were not, in fact, pregnant with disaster, but with profit.
If Eliakim did not let himelf be admonished, he deserved what is threatened.
Footnotes:privy counsellor.
Or, O he.
will whirl thee out with a whirl as a man.
Heb. large of spaces.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 21:2 “God punishes one villain by means of another, and a man is punished by the very sin which he himself commits (Wis 11:17). Thus God punished the Babylonians by the Persians, the Persians by the Greeks, the Greeks by the Romans, the Romans by the Goths, Longobardi, and Saracens.”—Cramer. [The Persians shall pay the Babylonians in their own coin; they that by fraud and violence, cheating and plundering, unrighteous wars and deceitful treaties, have made a prey of their neighbors, shall meet with their match, and by the same methods shall themselves be made a prey of. Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 21:3. “The Prophets do not rejoice at the loss suffered by their enemies; but have sympathy for them as for men made in the image of God. We ought not to cast off every humane feeling towards our foes (Matthew 5:34).”—Cramer.3. On Isaiah 21:5. “Invadunt urbem vino somnoque sepultam.” Virgil. “We see here how people commonly feel the more secure, the more they indulge their fleshly lusts, although they are drawing nearer their punishment. So was it with the antediluvian world, so is it now also in these last times when the coming of Christ is expected, as He says, Matthew 24:38.”—Renner. The Prophet Isaiah expounded, etc.—Stuttgart, 1865, p. 73.
4. On Isaiah 21:6 sqq. “It is a grand, infallible evidence of the prophetic Scriptures, and of their divine inspiration, that they do not speak in general uncertain terms, but describe future things so accurately, and exactly, as if we saw them before our eyes. This serves to establish the authority of the Holy Scriptures.”—Cramer.5. On Isaiah 21:10. Only what the Lord said to him, and all that the Lord said to him, the Prophet declares. Therefore he is sure and certain, even when he has incredible things to announce.
Therefore is he firm and courageous, though what he has to proclaim does not please the world. He conceals and keeps back nothing; neither does he add anything. He is a faithful declarer of the mind of God, and does not spare even himself. The proof, fulfilment and accomplishment he leaves to Him who spake through him.
6. On Isaiah 21:11. “He who sets the watch without God, watches in vain (Psalms 127:1). And when God Himself is approaching, then no care of the watchmen is of any use, whether it be day or night. For when the day of the Lord begins to burn, even the stars of heaven and his Orion, do not shine brightly. For God covers the heavens, and makes the stars thereof dark, and covers the sun with a cloud (Ezekiel 32:7). For when God the Creator of all things frowns on us, then all creatures also frown on us, and are terrible and offensive to us.”—Cramer. From this place Christian Friedr. Richter, has composed his fine morning hymn:—
Hόter, wird die Nacht der SόndenNicht verschwinden?[Comp. in English Bowring’s well-known hymn:—
Watchman, tell us of the night,
What its signs of promise are.—D. M.]
7. On Isaiah 21:14. “We ought not to forget to be hospitable towards the needy (Hebrews 13:1).”—Cramer.8. On Isaiah 21:16. “I regard as a true Prophet him who does not declare a matter upon mere imagination and conjecture, but measures the time so exactly that he fixes precisely when a thing shall happen.”—Cramer.9. On Isaiah 22:2 sqq. To see the enemy at the gates, and at the same time to regard him merely with curiosity, and to indulge in mirth and jollity, as if all were well, and this too at a time when God’s servants warn men with tears, as Isaiah did Jerusalem (Isaiah 22:4), this is blind presumption which God will punish. But when the calamity has burst upon them, and all expedients by which they try to avert it are of no avail, for men to despise then the only one who can help them, and to spend the brief remaining time in sensual pleasure, this is open-eyed defiance, and will lead to judicial blindness, and that sin which will not be forgiven (Matthew 12:32).
10. On Isaiah 22:13. This is the language of swine of the herd of Epicurus, comp. Isaiah 56:12; Wis 2:6 sqq.; 1 Corinthians 15:32.
11. On Isaiah 22:14. It is true, as Augustine says, that “no one should despair of the remission of his sin, seeing that even they who put Christ to death obtained forgiveness,” and “the blood of Jesus Christ was so shed for the forgiveness of all sins that it could wash away the sins of those by whom it was shed”—but that obstinacy, which refuses to see the needed help, excludes itself from grace and forgiveness.
12. On Isaiah 22:15 sqq. The mission which Isaiah here receives, reminds us strongly of that which Jeremiah had to discharge towards Jehoiakim (Jeremiah 22:1 sqq., esp. Isaiah 22:19), and also of what he was obliged to say to Pashur (Isaiah 20:6). A Prophet of the Lord must show no respect of persons. Isaiah indeed seems to have produced the desired effect; for we find 36 and 37. Shebna as Scribe and Eliakim as steward of the house. But Jeremiah received as recompense for the fulfilment of his mission bitter hatred and cruel persecution.
13. On Isaiah 22:17. The Vulgate translates here: Ecce Dominus asportari te faciet, sicut asportatur gallus gallinaceus. And Jerome in his exposition says: “Hebraeus, qui nos in lectione veteris Testamenti erudivit, gallum gallinaceum transtulit. Sicut inquit gallus gallinaceus humero portatoris de allo loco transfertur ad alium, sic te Dominus de loco tuo leviter asportabit.” The cock which is never mentioned in the Old Testament, and for which we have no genuine Hebrew word, is in fact called βֶּ ?αֶ ?ψ by the Talmudists. “Conscience, wanting the word of God, is as a ball rolling on the ground, and cannot rest.”—Luther.14. On Isaiah 22:19. “Service at court is not in itself to be condemned, and a good ruler and a worthy prime minister are the gift of God (Sir 4:8; Sir 4:11; Ch. 10).
Let him therefore who is called to such an office abide, as the Lord has called him (1 Corinthians 7:17), and beware of excessive pomp. For God can quickly depose the proud.”—Cramer.15. On Isaiah 22:21 sqq. The comparison of a magistrate in high position with a father is very appropriate. The whole extent, and the proper measure of a ruler’s power are involved in this similitude. The authority of a father and that of a ruler have a common root in love.
Eliakim in having the keys of the house of David laid on his shoulder that he might open and no one shut, and shut and no one open is (Revelation 3:7) viewed as a type of Christ, who is the administrator appointed by God over the house of David in the highest sense, i. e., over the kingdom of God. Christ has this power of the keys in unrestricted measure. The ministers of the Lord exercise the same only in virtue of the commission which they have from Him; and their exercise of it is only then sanctioned by the Lord, when it is in the Spirit which the Lord breathed into the disciples before He committed to them the power of the keys (John 20:22 sq.). [“The application of the same terms to Peter (Matthew 16:19) and to Christ Himself (Revelation 3:7) does not prove that they here refer to either, or that Eliakim was a type of Christ, but merely that the same words admit of different applications.” Alexander. “It is God that clothes rulers with their robes, and, therefore, we must submit ourselves to them for the Lord’s sake and with an eye to Him (1 Peter 2:13). And since it is He that commits the government into their hand,—they must administer it according to His will, for His glory. And they may depend on Him to furnish them for what He calls them to; according to the promise here. I will clothe him: and then there follows, I will strengthen him.” After Henry—D.
M.]
16. On Isaiah 22:25. “No one is so exalted or raised to such high dignity as to abide therein. But man’s prosperity, office and honor, and whatever else is esteemed great in the world are, like human life, on account of sin inconstant, vain and liable to pass away. This serves as an admonition against pride and security.” Cramer. HINTS ON 21–221. On Isaiah 21:1-4. God’s judgments are terrible, 1) for him on whom they fall; 2) for him who has to announce them.
2. On Isaiah 21:6-10. The faithful watchman. 1) He stands upon his watch day and night. 2) He announces only what he has seen and what he has heard from the Lord (Isaiah 22:9-10). 3) But he announces this as a lion, i. e. aloud and without fear.
3. On Isaiah 22:11-12. The spiritual night on earth. 1) It is a. a night of tribulation, b. a night of sin. 2) It awakens a longing for its end. 3) It does not entirely cease till the Lord “vouchsafes to us a happy end, and graciously takes us from this valley of weeping to Himself in heaven.”
4. On Isaiah 21:14 sq. We may fitly employ this text for a charity sermon on any occasion when an appeal is made to the benevolence of the congregation (especially for exiles, as those banished from the Salzburg territory for their Evangelical faith). What we ought to consider when our contributions are asked. 1) Our own situation (we dwell in the land of Tema, a quite fertile oasis). 2) The situation of those who come to us in their distress. 3) What we have to give them.
5. On Isaiah 22:1-7. Warning against thoughtlessness. Pride precedes a fall. Blind presumption is often changed into its opposite.
6. On Isaiah 22:8-14. Blind presumption is bad, but open-eyed obstinacy is still worse. The latter is when one clearly perceives the existing distress, and the insufficiency of our own powers and of the means at our command, and yet refuses to look to Him who alone can help, or to consider the fate which awaits those who die without God, and seeks before the impending catastrophe happens to snatch as much as possible of the enjoyments of this world.
7. On Isaiah 22:15-19. He who will fly high is in danger of falling low. God can easily cast him down. The waxen wings of lcarus. Shebna illustrates, 1 Peter 5:5.
8. On Isaiah 22:20-25. A mirror for those in office. Every one who has an office, ought 1) to be conscious that he has come into the office legally, and according to the will of God; 2) He ought to be a father to those over whom he is set; 3) He ought so to do everything which he does in his office, that its justice is apparent, and that no one can impugn it. 4) He ought not to be like a nail on which all the relations of his family strive to fasten their hope of success; for that is bad for himself and for those who would so abuse his influence.
IV. AGAINST TYPE
Isaiah 23All the nations hitherto mentioned, bordering on Judah, come under the power of Assyria. But Tyre, according to verse 13, is to fall a prey to the Chaldζans. This prophecy is placed last on account of its fulfilment belonging to a time subsequent to the supremacy of Assyria. Tyre was not only the head of the minor Ph�nician states, but was also the mistress of the sea, both for commerce and war; and for these two reasons was the most important ally of Egypt. He who would attack Egypt from the north must first seek to possess himself of Tyre, which was the bulwark of Egypt. Assyria had long an eye on Egypt.
They were, in fact, natural rivals. Shalmaneser, rightly perceiving the importance which Tyre had for his plans against Egypt, made himself master of Ph�nicia, with exception of insular Tyre, which he blockaded for five years, and sought, by cutting off its supply of water, to force to surrender. Whether he succeeded in this attempt cannot be definitely ascertained. In any case Tyre suffered no great loss. Our prophecy must have had its rise at this time. For further particulars see below in remarks on Isaiah 33:15-18.
Rationalistic interpreters place this alternative before us in regard to the genuineness of the prophecy. Either the prophecy refers to a conquest of Tyre by the Assyrians—in that case it is genuine; or it is intended to announce a conquest by the Chaldaeans—in that case it is spurious. It is admitted that it bears the marks of having Isaiah for its author. But it is judged impossible for Isaiah to have announced the Chaldζans as the conquerors of Tyre. I believe it would be more scientific not to regard this as impossible, but to treat it as a problem. Even Knobel defends the authenticity of the prophecy against the shallow objections drawn from language and history by Hitzig and Movers (Tόbingen Quarterly Journal III. p. 506 sqq.).
Movers afterwards modified his view so as to allow chapter 23. to be genuine, but revised and altered by Jeremiah (Phoen. II. 1, p. 396, Note). Knobel defends also its integrity against Eichhorn, Ewald and Meier. The Isaiah 23:15-18 stand and fall with the expression “the land of the Chaldζans,” Isaiah 23:13. The piece consists of two parts, of which the first (Isaiah 23:1-14) has for its subject the fall of Tyre, the second (vers.15–18) Tyre’s restoration.
____________________
a) The fall of Tyre Isaiah 23:1-141 The burden of Tyre.
Howl, ye ships of Tarshish;
For it is laid waste,
So that there is no house, no entering in,
From the land of Chittim it is revealed to them.
2 Be still, ye inhabitants of the isle;
Thou whom the merchants of Zidon, that pass over the sea,
Have replenished.
3 And by great waters the seed of Sihor,
The harvest of the river, is her revenue;
And she is a mart of nations.
4 Be thou ashamed, O Zidon; for the sea hath spoken,
Even the strength of the sea, saying,
I travail not, nor bring forth children,
Neither do I nourish up young men,
Nor bring up young virgins.
5 As at the report concerning Egypt,
So shall they be sorely pained at the report of Tyre.
6 Pass ye over to Tarshish;
Howl, ye inhabitants of the isle.
7 Is this your joyous city,
Whose antiquity is of ancient days?
Her own feet shall carry her afar off to sojourn.
8 Who hath taken this counsel against Tyre, the crowning city;Whose merchants are princes,
Whose traffickers are the honourable of the earth?
9 The Lord of hosts hath purposed it,
To stain the pride of all glory,
And to bring into contempt all the honorable of the earth.
10 Pass through thy land as a river,
O daughter of Tarshish:
There is no more strength.
11 He stretched out his hand over the sea;
He shook the kingdoms.
The Lord hath given a commandment against the merchant cityTo destroy the Strongholds thereof.
12 And he said,
Thou shalt no more rejoice,
O thou oppressed virgin, daughter of Zidon;
Arise, pass over to Chittim,
There also shalt thou have no rest.
13 Behold, the land of the Chaldeans;
This people was not:—
Till the Assyrian founded it
For them that dwell in the wilderness:
They set up the towers thereof;
They raised up the palaces thereof;
And he brought it to ruin.
14 Howl, ye ships of Tarshish;
For your strength is laid waste.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_23:1. διμιμι which is first found in Joel (Isaiah 1:5; Isaiah 1:11; Isaiah 1:13), occurs besides in Isaiah only in the first prophecy against Babylon (Isaiah 13:6 here evidently borrowed from Joel) and in the form δֵ ?ιμִ ?ιμִ ?ι in the Massa against the Philistines (Isaiah 14:31).
Isaiah 23:3. ρָ ?ηַ ?ψ never means emporium, mart, which it must signify if εϊδι should be referred to ΰι. The form ρְ ?ηַ ?ψ can denote only what is traded, or gain resulting from merchandise (Isaiah 45:14 and Proverbs 3:14). It is identical in meaning with ρַ ?ηַ ?ψ, Isaiah 23:18; Proverbs 3:14; Proverbs 31:18. [ρְ ?ηַ ?ψ is obviously the construct state, and is referred by Ewald to ρַ ?ηַ ?ψ, by Gesenius to an assumed form ρָ ?ηָ ?ψ.—D. M.].
Isaiah 23:4. πγμϊι and ψεξξϊι as Isaiah 1:2. [Delitzsch pertinently asks, “Who does not in these words hear Isaiah speak?”—D. M.].
Isaiah 23:5. αִּ before ωׁ ?ξς marks coincidence, ωֵׁ ?ξַ ?ς is the accusative of time.
Isaiah 23:7. ַ ?ςμִּ ?ιζָ ?δ (comp. Isaiah 22:2) involves perhaps an allusion to the Ph�nician female name Elissa. ιεֹ ?αִ ?ιμ (δֵ ?αִ ?ιΰ=) is to lead, to bring. ξψηεχ afar (comp. on Isaiah 22:3).
Isaiah 23:11. ξςζπιδ is treated by some, e.g., Olshausen, as an anomaly; by others it is supposed capable of explanation. We must agree with those who regard it as an anomalous form which has arisen by some oversight.
Isaiah 23:13. αַּ ?ηִ ?ιο, Keri αַּ ?ηεּ ?ο from αָּ ?ηַ ?ο explorare is the specula, turris exploratoria. The word occurs only here. ςεֹ ?ψְ ?ψεּ Pilel from ςψψ (= ςָ ?ψָ ?δ nudum esse, Isaiah 22:6, ςεּ ?ψ Habakkuk 3:9) nudare, to make naked, i.e., to uncover by overturning. The conjugation Pilel only here, Pilpel Jeremiah 51:58. ξַ ?τֵ ?μָ ?δ besides only Isaiah 25:2. Comp. ξֵ ?τָ ?μָ ?δ Isaiah 17:1.
AND 1. The Prophet in the first place calls upon the Tyrian mariners sojourning in Tarshish far from their home, to break forth into loud lamentation. as the tidings have come to them across the land of Chittim that their home is destroyed, and a return thither is no longer possible (Isaiah 23:1). Then in a brief word stillness, eternal silence is enjoined on insular Tyre, that had been hitherto the noisy centre of the Ph�nician commerce, the great negotiator between Egypt with its abundance of products and the other nations (verses 2 and 3). Then Zidon is reminded of the shame it will feel, when, on coming to the site of Tyre, it will find no children there, but only the dead rock and unfruitful sea (verse 4). Egypt, too, learns the report, and is affrighted (Isaiah 23:5). Nothing remains for Tyre but to flee to Tarshish, as its ships can no more return to Tyre (Isaiah 23:6).
Next, the Prophet makes a comparison between what Tyre was and what it is. The terrible blow falls on a joyous city having a wide dominion from ancient time (Isaiah 23:7). But from whom does this whole purpose respecting Tyre proceed? From Jehovah who humbles all pride (Isaiah 23:8-9), who liberates the nations hitherto oppressed by Tyre (Isaiah 23:10), who rules over sea and nations, in order to exercise judgment on the haughty Ph�nicians, who now must flee into distant countries, to find even there no rest (Isaiah 23:11-12). But what people will be the instrument in Jehovah’s hand to execute this judgment? It will be the people of the Chaldaeans, hitherto not a nation, but who will one day make Assyria a habitation for the beasts of the desert.
This people sets up its siege apparatus against Tyre, throws down the high buildings, and reduces the city to ruins (Isaiah 23:13). With the cry, “Howl, ye ships of Tarshish, for your strength is laid waste,” the discourse closes as it began (Isaiah 23:14).
2. The burden of Tyre——revealed to them.Isaiah 23:1. Attention has properly been called to the fact that the first Massa (xiii.) was directed against Babylon, the greatest worldly power possessing supreme dominion on the land, the rich and luxurious consumer of all precious productions of the earth; and that, on the other hand, the last Massa has for its subject the first power on the sea, the centre of the world’s commerce, the great purveyor of all things that are costly, or that minister to enjoyment. Here too we can add that the worldly power first threatened with a Massa, is according to Isaiah 23:13 to execute the judgment on the one last threatened. The ships of Tarshish (comp. on Isaiah 2:16) are addressed by metonymy instead of the mariners sailing in them. The form of expression is singularly brief and concise.
They are to howl αִּ ?ιωֻׁ ?γַּ ?γ, i.e. that it has been laid waste, that a destruction, a devastation has taken place (Isaiah 15:1), and such a one as excludes the mariners from their house and home, and from a return home (αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ the opposite of ιָ ?φָ ?ΰ, e.g., in designating the setting of the sun). ξִ ?ο has a negative signification, and the force of an ecbatic conjunction, marking the result. That the destruction which renders it impossible for the Tyrian mariners to return home is the destruction of Tyre itself, is self-evident. The Prophet is too sparing of his words to say that. This sad news has come from the land of the Chittim to the Tyrian mariners far away from their home. The report reached Chittim first, and thence was carried to Tarshish. They do not learn the news in Chittim, but it comes from it; for the text is “from the land,” not “in the land.” The name Chittim is found in Citium, Κίττιον, Κίτιον, Κήτιον, the name of a considerable port in the island of Cyprus.
The Chittim are then, in the first place, the inhabitants of the island of Cyprus. In a wider signification, however, the word denotes the islands and maritime countries of the Mediterranean Sea in general (Isaiah 23:12; Genesis 10:4; Jeremiah 2:10; Ezekiel 27:6; Daniel 11:30), comp. on Jeremiah 2:10. πִ ?πְ ?μָ ?δ (comp. Isaiah 22:14; Isaiah 38:12; Isaiah 40:5; Isaiah 53:1) intimates that the report received from the land of the Chittim was a sure one. Therefore they are summoned to howl.
3. Be still——of the nations.Isaiah 23:2-3. The Prophet passes from the extreme west to the extreme east of the Mediterranean Sea. He calls now to the Tyrians themselves; γּ ?ξּ ?εּ, i.e. be silent, be still (the word only here in Isaiah). He means evidently dumb, speechless amazement (comp. Exodus 15:16). ΰִ ?ι is terra maritima, including not only an island but also continental territory having a sea coast (comp. on Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 20:6).
Old Tyre was on the mainland and possessed no harbor. Insular Tyre lay 30 stadia north of Palae-Tyrus, and 3 stadia from the mainland. It had excellent harbors, the best on the whole coast of Palestine (Movers,Phoen. II., I., p. 176). As according to the latter part of Isa 23:2, only that Tyre can here be meant which the merchants that pass over the sea filled, we must understand insular Tyre under ΰִ ?ι. The word is masculine, but is here treated as feminine, as the feminine suffix in ξִ ?μְ ?ΰεּ ?κְ refers to ΰִ ?ι.
The merchants of Zidon (which was an older city, comp. Justin Isaiah 18:3) filled Tyrus, says the Prophet. Zidon was itself a seaport town, but the port of Tyre was better. The Zidonians had in the 13th century, B. C., laid out a port and city on the rocky islands of Tyre (comp. Movers,Phoen.
II., 313; Justin Isaiah 18:3; Isaiah 18:5). Hiram completed this plan by building the suburb Eurychoros on the east side of the smaller island, and the new city on this smaller island; and at the same time he connected the new city with the western or old city, which was on the larger island. It is readily conceivable that beside the Tyrians, chiefly Zidonian merchants and mariners filled the port and city of insular Tyre. How could old Egypt, a neighboring country, excelling as it once did, all the nations of the East in agriculture and industry, avoid coming into the liveliest intercourse with the great commercial centre, Tyre? The one was necessary to the other. Of late years Ebers in particular (Egypt and the Books of Moses I., p. 127 sqq.) has shown the ancient connection of Ph�nicia with Egypt.
The Ph�nician alphabet, as can be positively demonstrated in regard at least to the greater part of the letters, is derived from the hieratic written characters of the Egyptians. “In the third millenium B. C.,” says Ebers,ut supra, p. 149, the Ph�nicians stood in close intercourse with Egypt, learned from the subjects of the Pharaohs the cursive mode of writing, and communicated the same to all nations of Western Asia and of Europe.” But the Ph�nicians received from the Egyptians, not merely intellectual, but also material goods for their own use, and to trade with distant regions: Isaiah 23:3, By great waters,i.e., by the Nile and the sea came the seed of Sihor, and the harvest of the river (comp. on Isaiah 19:7, where a like expression is to be noted) to Tyre, and so became the income of this city, what was gathered into it. Sihor ωִׁ ?ηֹ ?ψ Hebraized from Σῖρις the vernacular name of the Upper Nile, but as a Hebrew word formed from the root ωָׁ ?ηַ ?ψ, niger fuit, Job 30:30=the black river, Μέλας. The name Sihor denotes undoubtedly the Nile, Jeremiah 2:18; the places (1 Chronicles 13:5; Joshua 13:3; Joshua 19:26) are uncertain. The double designation seed of the Nile and harvest of the river is a poetic parallelism which resolves one conception into two, which, it is true, are not equivalent. What was sown and reaped on the Nile the Tyrians gathered in, not to keep it wholly for themselves, but only in order to secure commercial profit by selling it again.
Translate the last clause of Isa 23:3, “And it (the income of Tyre, what was gathered into it) became the merchandise of the nations.” What the Tyrians brought in from Egypt goes out from them as profitable merchandise to all nations.
4. Be thou ashamed——of the isle.Isaiah 23:4-6. Who should be more affected by the fate of Tyre than its mother Zidon in the north, and its neighbor and commercial friend Egypt in the south? Zidon is accordingly bidden to be ashamed at suffering the disgrace of seeing her offspring die out in the second generation. Early extinction of race was regarded as a punishment inflicted by God, and awakened the suspicion of either open or secret crime on the part of the person thus visited (comp. the Book of Job). For this reason want of children was a reproach (Genesis 30:23; Isaiah 4:1; Luke 1:25).
By “the sea and the strength (fortress) of the sea,” most interpreters understand the city of Tyre itself, and the complaint I have not travailed nor brought forth,etc., is supposed to mean: I have lost again all the children born of me. But it must appear strange in the highest degree that Tyre, because it is situated in the sea, and lives from the sea, should itself be called “sea.” And “I have not brought forth,” etc.,” is something quite different from “I have lost again my children.” Jerome takes the words “I have not travailed,” etc., as words of the sea used metaphorically: “frustra divitias comportavi, . … illa dives illa luxuriosa et populorum quondam gaudens multitudine, in qua nascebatur turba mortalium, caterva puerorum, juventutis examina, cujus plateae virginum. … ac juvenum. … lusibus perstrepebant, nunc ad solitudinem redacta est.” But even according to this view a meaning is artificially put upon the figurative speech which is not necessarily contained in its terms. I believe that a literal, and not metaphorical interpretation suits better both the context and the words employed. Zidon comes to Tyre, her daughter, to look around her. But with shame must the mother behold the place empty where her daughter with her many children had dwelt. She sees nothing but the sea, and the natural bulwark on which the waves of the sea break, the bare rocks of insular Tyre.
And the sea together with the bulwark calls to Zidon, ashamed at the sight: “I have not travailed,” etc., i.e. thou seekest children, but findest nothing else than rock and sea, which do not travail nor bring forth, nor nourish children. [Alexander seems to me to set forth in brief terms the correct view of Isa 23:4 : “The Prophet hears a voice from the sea, which he then describes more exactly as coming from the stronghold or fortress of the sea, i.e., insular Tyre as viewed from the mainland. The rest of the verse is intended to express the idea, that the city thus personified was childless, was as if she had never borne children.”—D. M.]. Isaiah 23:5. As Zidon is ashamed after the fall of Tyre so Egypt is terrified. Translate: “when the report comes to Egypt.” The concluding words of the verse seem to contain an empty pleonasm.
But this is not the case. The Prophet intends to say: Egypt is affrighted, as the report (reaches, comes to) it, namely, the judgment of Tyre. The terror will correspond to the importance which the fall of Tyre must have both positively and negatively for Egypt. The words of the sixth verse I take as a call uttered by those who have heard the report concerning Tyre, first of all, by the Egyptians. These are forthwith impressed by the thought that nothing further remains for the surviving Tyrians to do than to flee with howling as far away as possible to the opposite end of the earth, to Tarshish. There is yet another reason why Tarshish is the place to which Tyre should flee.
There, according to Isaiah 23:1, its ships are staying, which cannot return home, and which are now the only property and refuge of the mother country.
5. Is this your joyous——no rest.Isaiah 23:7-12. These verses contain words of the Prophet. He contrasts what Tyre was once with what it is now. δζΰϊ, etc., is a question. Must it so happen to you? Must this be your lot, as it were, the end of the song?
And must such a conclusion follow the joyful beginning? We feel the antithesis between ςμιζδ and the condition to which ζΰϊ points. A joyous, because glorious and powerful city was Tyre, and this foundation of its joy was deep and broad. For its origin (ַ ?χγְ ?ξָ ?δprincipium, origo, in Isaiah only here) dates from ancient time, and its power extended to the most distant countries. Herodotus, who was himself in Tyre, relates (II. 44) that the priests in the temple of Hercules had declared the age of the city and temple to be 2,300 years. As Herodotus was in Ph�nicia in the year 450 b. c., this would carry back the founding of Tyre to the year 2,750 b. c., and Movers (II. 1, p. 135) finds this quite credible.
Moreover, this age in comparison with that of the oldest Egyptian things of which we have accounts, would not be a very high one. Comp. Strabo XVI. 2, 22; Curt. IV. 4. Her feet carried her afar (see on Isaiah 22:3) to dwell. It cannot be objected to our explanation that Tyre reached by ship those distant places, and that therefore not flight into regions beyond the sea, but carrying away into captivity, therefore painful migration on foot is held out in prospect to her.
For it is unjustifiable to press the expression “feet,” and we dare not think on a future migration to a distance, because such a thought is here inept. It would be proper in Isaiah 23:6, and also in Isaiah 23:12 it suits the connection; but in Isaiah 23:7 it makes the impression of tautology. Isaiah 23:8. But who is he who had the power to decree this concerning the rich old Tyre of far-reaching might? The Prophet in the following verses shows a great interest in answering this question. Tyre was not merely the wearer of crowns, but also the bestower of crowns (δςθιψ).
This can hardly mean that she herself had crowned kings. (Comp. Hiram, 2 Samuel 5:11; 1 Kings 6:1; Jeremiah 27:3). For many cities had these, which are not for this reason called coronatrices. We must, therefore, think of dependent cities, either Ph�nician (therefore the king of Tyre is called Great-king, comp. VaihingerinHerzog’s,R. Encycl.
XI. p. 617 sqq.), or colonial cities. Of Tartessus (Herod. 1:163; Psalms 72:10) Citium and Carthage (originally) it is expressly stated that they had kings. Comp. Gesenius on this passage, Movers,Ph�n. II. 1, p. 529 sqq.; especially p. 533, 535, 539. Jeremiah too mentions besides the kings of Tyre and Zidon also ξַ ?μְ ?λֵּ ?ιδָ ?ΰִ ?ιJeremiah 25:22.
Moreover, the rich and mighty metropolis had also in her midst citizens, who, though only merchants, equalled princes in wealth, pomp and power. How exactly too the Prophet distinguishes ωָׂ ?ψִ ?ιν and ξְ ?μָ ?λִ ?ιν. can be seen from Isaiah 10:8. The Ph�nicians called their country λְּ ?πַ ?ςַ ?ο and themselves Canaanites. But because they were the chief representatives of trade, merchants in general are called Canaanites; as at a later period Chaldean denoted an astrologer; Lombard, a money changer; and Swiss, a porter or body guard. Observe that here λπςο stands for απςπι (comp. Genesis 15:2, Damascus for Damascene).
Above all this pomp and power the might of Jehovah is highly exalted. He has decreed its destruction in order to profane (ηִ ?μֵּ ?μ) the pride of all glory.—This is to happen by delivering up and casting down into the mire of the earth. From the use of the expression “profane” the conclusion has not improperly been drawn that the Prophet had especially in his mind the famous, magnificent and ancient temples of Tyre (comp. Herodotusut supra). Jehovah purposed further by the ruin of Tyre to humble all the proud (proudest) of the earth. An essential part of this humiliation is that the colonies hitherto drained of their resources for the benefit of the mother country, and kept under rigorous restraint, now become free.
This is illustrated by the instance of the most remote colony Tartessus. Tarshish (Isaiah 23:10) is now told that she may be independent, and may dispose freely of her own territory and products. This verse has been explained in a great variety of ways by the old interpreters. (Comp. Rosenmueller). Since Koppe the explanation which we have given is commonly adopted. As the Nile overflows Egypt (comp.
Amos 8:8; Amos 9:5) so shall Tarshish (daughter of Tarshish, comp. on Isaiah 22:4) spread herself without restraint over her own land. This must have been previously prevented; and the phrase “there is no more girdle” must have a meaning that refers to this. The word ξֵ ?ζַ ?η is found besides only Psalms 109:19. Of the same signification is ξְ ?ζִ ?ιηַ ?Job 12:21. Both words can only denote in these places the girdle. This meaning does not well suit the passage before us.
But it seems to me that the Prophet by the word “girdle” intends an allusion which is unintelligible to us. Possibly an octroi-line restricting commerce for the benefit of the lords paramount, a cordon or something of a like nature, was designated by a Ph�nician term cognate with the Hebrew ξֵ ?ζַ ?η. How, and by what means does the Lord execute His purpose against Tyre? This is answered in Isaiah 23:11 in general terms. He sets the sea and the kingdoms of the earth for this purpose in motion. Here as little as in Isaiah 23:4 would I understand under “Sea,” Tyre (Hitzig), or all Ph�nicia Knobel); nor do I take the expression he stretched out his hand,etc., as meaning that He simply reached His hand over the sea (Delitzsch); for does the Prophet imagine Jehovah to be dwelling on the other side of the sea?
But the expression “to stretch the hand over the sea” denotes here, as in Exodus 14:21 (which place the Prophet had perhaps before his eye), such an outstretching of the hand as sets the sea in motion. And so δִ ?ψְ ?πιζ denotes here not to put in terror, trembling; but to put in commotion in order that they may arise to execute what the Lord commands them (Isaiah 14:16). The second part, of the verse tells for what purpose the sea and kingdoms are put in motion. The Lord has given them a commandment (φִ ?εָּ ?δ as Isaiah 10:6 : the pronominal object being omitted, as often happens) against Canaan (αְּ ?πַ ?ςַ ?ο = Ph�nicia, as the Ph�nicians themselves gave the country this designation, comp. on Isaiah 23:8) in order to destroy (μַ ?ωְׁ ?ξִ ?ιγ comp. on Isaiah 3:8) its bulwarks. The meaning of the whole verse is: Land and sea will conspire to destroy the bulwarks of Tyre. Tyre shall be successfully assailed both by land and sea.
But Tyre shall be destroyed not merely for the moment, but permanently (although at first not forever, Isaiah 23:15 sqq.). This is the meaning of Isa 23:12. Tyre had been called “joyous” Isaiah 23:7. But the rejoicing shall depart from her. She is now a ξςωχδ a virgo compressa, vitiata (Pual only here comp. Isaiah 52:4), and such a one does not rejoice.
That Tyre is here called “daughter of Zidon,” i.e., Zidonian, is perhaps not merely a generalization of the name Zidon, but possibly at the same time a blow designedly given to the pride of Tyre, which named herself on coins “the mother of the Zidonians” (comp. Movers,Ph�n. II. 1, p. 94, 119 sq.), and perhaps called herself so in the time of Isaiah. Tyre must be punished, must be destroyed. Therefore the remnant are summoned to emigrate to Cyprus, into the hitherto dependent colony of Chittim, as the command had already been given (Isaiah 23:6) to pass over to Tarshish. But Tyre arrives in Chittim, not as mistress, but as an exile without power; a situation which excites in those who had been hitherto oppressed by her the desire to revenge themselves on her.
Hence even there poor Tyre finds no rest.
6. Behold, the land——is laid waste.Isaiah 23:13-14. We had been told (Isaiah 23:11-12) in general terms how Tyre should be destroyed, and Isaiah 23:13 informs us regarding the particular instrument, i.e., regarding the people that the Lord had destined to execute punishment. We receive from Isaiah 23:13 the impression that the prophetic vision is turned in another direction. It is as if his look were suddenly diverted from west to east. He sees suddenly before him to his own astonishment the land of the Chaldeans.
The land of the Chaldeans, not the people! The people he might see everywhere marching, fighting. The land he can behold only in its own place. The very part of the earth’s surface where the country of the Chaldeans lay, apart from its relation to Tyre, was of great importance for the Prophet and his people. Thence should the destroyer of Jerusalem come; there should the people of Judah pass 70 years in captivity. And because the look of the Prophet is here for the first time directed to the Chaldeans, he is prompted to characterize them in brief terms.
He does this with two, but with two very significant strokes. The first describes the past, the second the future of the people. He first declares—This is the people that was not. He certainly does not mean to say thereby, that the people of the Chaldeans was not at all, or was not in the physical sense. Could the Prophet have known nothing of Nimrod (Genesis 10:10), nothing of Ur of the Chaldeans, the original home of Abraham? But prophecy, in its grand style, confines, as is well known, the whole history of the world to a few kingdoms; and what does not belong to them is regarded as if it were not.
But it was after the Assyrians that the Chaldeans first came upon the theatre of the world’s history. Hence from the prophetic view of history the Chaldeans appear to us a people that hitherto was not. But why does he say δָ ?ςָ ?ν, the people? If he had said “a people,” this would not have been at all singular. There were such nations without number. But the Chaldeans do not belong to the common nations.
They were a leading nation. There were then in the sense of prophecy only two leading nations, i.e., representatives of the worldly power. The one was Assyria; the other, the Chaldeans, had not yet appeared. With the second stroke ΰַ ?ωּׁ ?εּ ?ψιΧμφΧ he describes the future of the Chaldeans. I decidedly agree here with Paulus and Del. who regard ΰωׁ ?εּ ?ψ as the object of ιργ placed absolutely before the verb. Ashur—this has it (viz.: the Chaldean nation) set, founded for the beasts of the desert.—This view alone suits the context.
If we take Ashur as the subject, then we must connect it with μΰδιδ as the old versions and some modern interpreters do, but contrary to the Masoretic punctuation. “This people, which is not Assyria,” will then signify either; this people will be more fortunate than the Assyrians (were under Shalmaneser against Tyre), or: this people, when it will be no more Assyrian, or: which is not civilized as the Assyrians. This suffix in ιργδ is then referred by all to Tyre. It is manifest that all these explanations of μΰδιδΰωεψ are arbitrary. But if we take ΰωεψ according to the accents as subject of ιργδ then this will mean: “Ashur has appointed them to be dwellers of the desert, i.e., Ashur has transplanted them to the Babylonian plain, and made of mountaineers dwellers of the desert.” It is then assumed that the Chaldeans after their first migration from the Carduchian mountains, which event belongs to a very early time, were subsequently strengthened by additional settlers sent by the Assyrian kings (So Knobel, Arnold in Herzog’sR.-Enc. II., p. 628 sqq.). It is certain that there were Chaldeans in Babylonia and in the Armenian mountains.
The first point needs no proof; the second point is clear from the narrative of Xenophon (Cyrop. III. 1, 34; Anab. IV. 3, 4 sqq.; V. 5, 17; VII. 8, 25) and is determined by the statements of Strabo (12:3, 18 sqq.), and of Stephanus Byzantinus (s. v.Χαλδαῖοι), and is also generally acknowledged. It is also quite possible that the Chaldeans separated at a very early time, and that one part remained in the old seats, i.e., in the Karduchian mountains, while another part, pursuing the natural routes, i.e., the river-valleys, migrated to the south, and settled on the lower Euphrates. For according to the Assyro-Babylonian monuments, here lies the mat Kaldi or Kaldu. According to them it extended to the Persian Gulf (comp.
Schrader,Cuneiform Inscriptions, p. 44). With this agree the classic authors who (as Strabo XVI. 1, 6, 8) designate this border of the Gulf and the swamps in which the Euphrates loses itself as lacus Chaldaici (Pliny VI. 31; comp. Strabo XVI. 4, 1, τὰἕλητὰκατὰΧαλδαίους). That these regions were even in very remote times peopled by the Chaldeans, is established by the fact that the ancient Ur of the Chaldeans, the home of Abraham, has been lately discovered in Mugheir, which lies south-east of Babylon on the right bank of the Euphrates. For upon all the clay tablets found there in great number, the name U-ru-u, i.e., ΰεּ ?ψ occurs (comp. Schraderut supra, p. 383 sq.).
Schrader refers further to an inscription of king Hammurabi dating from the second millennium B. C., composed in the purest Assyrian, in which he states that “II and Bel, the inhabitants of Sumir and Accad (names of tribes and territories in South Babylonia) surrendered to his rule” (ibid. p. 42). From the language of this inscription it is clear that a Semitic people then dwelt in those regions. But this can have been none other than the people of the Chaldeans. In the tenth century B. C.
Asurnasirhabal speaks of the mat Kaldu as a part of his dominion (ibid. p. 44). Resting on all these grounds Schrader utters the following judgment: We can assume that since the Chaldeans immigrated in the second or third millennium B. C. into these regions on the lower Euphrates and Tigris, they were uninterruptedly the proper ruling nation, the dominant one under all circumstances. On the other hand, they were certainly not aboriginal in the country. They found already there a highly cultivated people of Cushite or Turanian extraction, from whom they borrowed the complicated cuneiform mode of writing. If the Chaldeans on the lower Euphrates and Tigris were not aboriginal, it is natural after what has been said to assume that they migrated from the territories at the source of the Euphrates and Tigris into the region at the mouth of these rivers (comp.
Ewald,Hist. I., p. 404 sq.). But it is a mere hypothesis derived from this passage, and entirely without evidence, to assume a transplantation of the Chaldeans in later times by Shalmaneser. It is also very questionable whether φιִּ ?ιν can denote inhabitants of the desert; for the only place which is adduced, Psalms 72:9 ought to exclude the possibility of any other interpretation, in order to be able to counterpoise the weight of all other places where the word signifies “beasts of the desert.” It is questionable, too, whether the very fertile country of Babylon could be described as φִ ?ιָ ?δbefore it was visited by the divine judgments (comp. 13; Jeremiah 1). Many attempts have been made at conjectural emendations of the passage. Ewald would substitute Canaanites, and Meier, Chittim for Chaldeans.
Olshausen (Emendations of the Old Testament, p. 34 sqq.) would make much greater changes. But all these attempts are capricious and unwarranted. I have already remarked that the view proposed by Paulus and Delitzsch (taking Ashur as the object of ιργ placed absolutely before it) alone corresponds to the context. Only in this way is something said of the Chaldeans that briefly, but completely, characterizes them. For they are then described as the people that hitherto had not appeared as the great worldly power, but that will now supplant the Assyrians in this character. There is yet another proof of the accuracy of our view.
There are in this paragraph various allusions to the ninth chapter of Amos. Three times Amos employs in that chapter the Piel φִ ?εָּ ?δ in the signification of “appoint, order, command,” in which meaning the word occurs here also (Isaiah 23:11). Amos again (Isaiah 23:5) twice makes use of the comparison with the overflowing Nile; comp. in our paragraph, Isaiah 23:10. In Amos 9:6, as in ΰωׁ ?εψιργδμφιιν, the object of the sentence is placed first absolutely, and then repeated by means of a feminine suffix attached to ιργ. In the word Ashur the Prophet has before him the idea of the country and of the city rather than that of the people. Hence the feminine suffix to ιργ.
Such constructions κατὰσύνεσινoccur in Hebrew in the most varied forms.—ιργ is constituere, to found, to establish (Habakkuk 1:12; Psalms 104:8). The Chaldeans, says Isaiah, make of Ashur, i.e., the country and city, but especially the city, as it were an establishment for beasts of the desert, i.e., a place of residence appointed for them as their legitimate possession and permanent property. Finally we must point to Zephaniah 2:13 sq., as the oldest commentary on this passage. For not only does Zephaniah say clearly what ιργμφιιν means, but we can also regard his words as a proof of the accuracy of our view in general. For they show that Zephaniah, too, understood this passage of the destruction of Nineveh. When Zephaniah (Isaiah 2:15) says of Nineveh “This is the rejoicing city,” had he not Isaiah 23:7 of our chapter in his eye?
The words “and he will stretch out his hand” (Zephaniah 2:13) recall “He stretched out his hand” (Isaiah 23:11). Comp., too, in Zephaniah 2:13φִ ?ιָּ ?δλַ ?ξִּ ?γְ ?αָּ ?ψ with the φִ ?ιִּ ?ιν before us. If then there are clear traces that Zephaniah, when he wrote the second chapter of his prophecy, had beside other passages in Isaiah (Isaiah 13:21; Isaiah 14:23; Isaiah 34:11) also this twenty-third chapter in his mind, and if he gives in his prophecy a description of the ruined Nineveh, which by the word φִ ?ι connects itself with our passage, and appears as a more detailed description of what is only slightly indicated by Isaiah, may we not in such circumstances be permitted to affirm that Zephaniah understood the place before us as we do? Further, there is contained in Zephaniah’s reference to this passage the proof that it must have been already in existence in his time, consequently in the reign of king Josiah (624 B. C.). If now Zephaniah did not hesitate to understand this passage of the destruction of Nineveh, we will not allow ourselves to be prevented from doing the same, either by the objection of Delitzsch that this would be the only place in which Isaiah prophesies that the worldly supremacy would pass from the Assyrians to the Chaldeans, or by the objections of others who regard it as absolutely impossible that in the time of Isaiah a destruction of Tyre by the Chaldeans should have been foretold.
In regard to Delitzsch’s objection, I would wish it to be remarked that the prophecy of Isaiah is related to that of those who come after him, as a nursery is to the plantations that have arisen from it. Do not the germs of the later prophecies originally he to a large extent in the prophecy of Isaiah? Such a germ we have here. The words ζδδςν to μφιιν form a parenthesis which quite incidentally, in language brief and enigmatical, and probably not understood by the Prophet himself, deposit a germ which even Nahum and Zephaniah have only partially developed. Not till the time of Jeremiah and after the battle of Car-chemish, which determined Nebuchadnezzar’s supremacy in the earth, could it be completely unfolded. And if I assume that Isaiah could already prophesy the destruction of Nineveh by the Chaldeans, I must much more affirm that he could also predict the destruction of Tyre by the same people.
The Assyrian invasion undoubtedly gave occasion to this prophecy. The Assyrians had a design on Egypt. The taking of Samaria, and the attacks on Judah and on the countries lying east and west of it, were only means to that end. We perceive from Isaiah 23:3; Isaiah 23:5 that Tyre then stood in close relation to Egypt. The power of the Tyrians on the sea was naturally of the greatest importance for Egypt. The Assyrians had therefore all the more occasion for depriving Egypt of this valuable ally.
Let us add, that Isaiah had then to warn Judah most emphatically against forming an alliance with Egypt. Would not Tyre also have been an object of the untheocratic hopes which the unbelieving Jews placed in Egypt the ally of Tyre? This would aptly explain to us the reason why Isaiah lifted his voice against Tyre also. Israel should trust in no worldly power, therefore not even in Tyre. Tyre too is doomed to destruction; but it will not be destroyed by the Assyrians. This might then readily have been conjectured when the Assyrians were actually engaged in hostilities with Tyre.
But it was a part of the task assigned to Isaiah to counteract the dread inspired by Assyria. He therefore declares expressly: another later nation that is not yet a people, namely, the Chaldeans will destroy Tyre. What follows (Isaiah 23:15 sqq.), agrees with this. The 70 years are undoubtedly the years of the Chaldean supremacy. As we observed already, the words ζδηςν to φιιν (Isaiah 23:13) are to be treated as parenthetical. With δχιξε the Prophet proceeds to describe the action of the people of the Chaldeans, as the appointed instrument for the destruction of Tyre.
They set up his watch-towers,i.e., the many set up the watch-towers belonging to the whole body (comp. touching this change of number Isaiah 1:23; Isaiah 2:8; Isaiah 23:23, 26; Isaiah 8:20). With Isaiah 23:14 the paragraph closes as it began.
Footnotes:Heb. silent.And it became merchandise for the nations.this and the fallowing verbs in past tense.When the report comes to Egypt, they are forthwith in terror at the report concerning Tyre.Is this your lot, O joyous city?Her feet carried her afar to dwell.the crown-giver.Heb. to pollute.Heb. girdle.Or, concerning a merchantman.Heb. Canaan.Or, strengths.See Exegetical Comment.
b) The Restoration of TyreIsa_23:15-1815 And it shall come to pass in that day,
That Tyre shall be forgotten seventy years,
According to the days of one king:
After the end of seventy years
Shall Tyre sing as an harlot;
16 Take an harp, go about the city,
Thou harlot that hast been forgotten:
Make sweet melody, sing many songs,
That thou mayest be remembered.
17 And it shall come to pass after the end of seventy years,
That the Lord will visit Tyre,
And she shall turn to her hire,
And shall commit fornication
With all the kingdoms of the world upon the face of the earth.
18 And her merchandise and her hire
Shall be holiness to the Lord;It shall not be treasured nor laid up:
For her merchandise shall be for them that dwell before the Lord,To eat sufficiently, and for durable clothing.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_23:15. On the form πִ ?ωְׁ ?αַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ comp. Ewald, § 194 b.Isaiah 23:17. The He of the suffix is without Mappik. Comp. Ewald, § 247 d.Isaiah 23:18. ςϊιχ is ἅπ. λεγ. [The word in Arabic means old and then excellent.—D. M.].
AND 1. After 70 years, which will have a character of unity as the period of the reign of one king, the wish will be fulfilled in Tyre that is expressed in a well-known song which advises a forgotten harlot, by singing and playing in the streets of the city, to cause herself to be again remembered (Isaiah 23:15-16). The Lord will again assist Tyre, she will renew her commercial intercourse, which is compared with amorous solicitation, with all the countries of the earth (Isaiah 23:17). But the gain of her harlotry will be consecrated to the Lord, and be assigned by Him to His servants for their rich enjoyment.
2. Isaiah 23:15-16. Regarding the expression In that day comp. on Isaiah 7:18. Seventy years shall Tyre be forgotten.—This is the duration of the Chaldζan supremacy, which according to Jeremiah (comp. my remarks on Jeremiah 25:11), lasted from the battle of Carchemish to the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus, consequently according to the information we now possess, from 605 (4) till 538 B. C., or 67 years. This period of 67 years may possibly, when we have more exact knowledge, be extended to quite 70 years or thereabouts.
It can, however, be taken as a round number of 70 years, according to prophetic reckoning. Tyre will be so far forgotten, as it will be lost in the great empire of the world. This period of its being forgotten shall last 70 years according to the days of one king—The expression recalls Isaiah 16:14 : Isaiah 21:16; but the meaning is different. Here the emphasis lies on ΰηγ. The Prophet intends to declare that this period will have for Tyre a character of unity. It will happen to Tyre under the successor as under the predecessor.
The change of rulers will produce no alteration. This time of seventy years, during which Tyre will be forgotten, will bear as uniform a character as if the whole period were the time of the reign of only a single king. These words make the judgment heavier; there will be no alleviation of its severity. [This interpretation is preferable to the common one which makes king stand here for kingdom or dynasty.—D. M.]. After 70 years, what in a well-known song often sung by frivolous young people, is under a certain condition set forth in prospect to a courtesan who is no longer sought after, shall be fulfilled in the case of Tyre. She shall regain the lost favor.
But the Prophet intends at the same time to say that Tyre must do as the harlot in order again to attain favor. Tyre shall, after 70 years, endeavor to recover the favor of the nations, and again employ her old commercial arts in order to form business connections. And the Lord will vouchsafe success. [The translation of the latter part of Isa 23:15, in the text of the E. V., cannot be fairly made out of the original Hebrew. The rendering in the margin is the right one. Isaiah 23:16 is a snatch of the song of the harlot, and might have the marks of a quotation.
D. M.].
3. And it shall come——clothing.Isaiah 23:17-18. That commercial intercourse is compared with unchaste intercourse has its ground herein that the former serves Mammon and the belly (taken in the widest sense). But mammon and the belly are idols, and idolatry is fornication (comp. Nahum 3:4). Tyre will return to her hire for harlotry (Micah 1:7), and will practise fornication with all the kingdoms of the earth.
And her gain (Isaiah 23:3), or her hire as a harlot, will be holy unto the Lord.—It will not be kept by the gainers and laid up in the treasury (Isaiah 39:6), or concealed, hidden in the ground (ηρο as a verb only here), but it will serve those who dwell before Jehovah (not stand, for to stand before the Lord marks the service of the priests in the temple, Deuteronomy 10:8; Judges 20:28, etc.), i.e. the Israelites in general, because the territory in which they dwell is the holy land, which has the house of Jehovah for its all-dominating centre. We may ask here how it is conceivable that the Lord can restore a people on which He has inflicted judgment, in order that it may begin again its old business of fornication; and how the wages of prostitution can be consecrated to the Lord, as in Deuteronomy 23:18 it is expressly forbidden to bring “the hire of a whore” into the house of God. I believe that the passage before us, which bears in this point a great resemblance to Isaiah 19:18 sqq., belongs to those utterances which must have been obscure to the Prophet himself, because the key to their interpretation is not furnished till they are fulfilled. This fulfilment, however, seems to be afforded by the Christian Tyre, respecting which we shall say more immediately. [“Instead of a queen reinstated on the throne, Tyre appears as a forgotten harlot suing once more for admiration and reward. This metaphor necessarily imparts a contemptuous tone to the prediction. The restoration here predicted was to be a restoration to commercial prosperity and wealth, but not to regal dignity or national importance.… Notwithstanding the apparent import of the figure, the conduct of Tyre is not in itself unlawful.
The figure, indeed, is now commonly agreed to denote nothing more than commercial intercourse, without necessarily implying guilt. In ancient times when international commerce was a strange thing, and nearly monopolized by a single nation, and especially among the Jews, whose laws discouraged it for wise but temporary purposes, there were probably ideas attached to such promiscuous intercourse entirely different from our own. Certain it is that the Scriptures more than once compare the mutual solicitations of commercial enterprise to illicit love. That the comparison does not necessarily involve the idea of unlawful or dishonest trade, is sufficiently apparent from Isaiah 23:18.” Alexander. D. M.].
4. In regard to the fulfilment of this prophecy we can get at the right view only when we attend carefully to the peculiarity of the prophetic vision. The Prophet does not see every thing, but only the principal matters, and he sees all the chief things which are essentially identical, not one after the other, but as it were on one surface beside each other. Hence it happens that that appears to him an immediate effect, which in reality is the result of a long course of development extending over thousands of years. Hence frequently the appearance is as if “fulfilment did not correspond to the prophecy, while yet the fulfilment only happens in another way than it seemed from the point of view of the Prophet that it ought to happen. I have, to cite an example, shown in detail in my Commentary on Jeremiah , 50, 51, that Babylon was never destroyed by the hand of man.
It has been various times captured. The conquerors injured the city, the one on this, the other on that part, but none of them at once so entirely destroyed it, as, according to Jeremiah 50, 51, apparently should have been done. And yet the final, result corresponds quite to the picture which Jeremiah draws of Babylon’s destruction. The same is the case here. Isaiah affirms two separate things: 1) Tyre shall be destroyed, and that by the Chaldζans; 2) It shall be restored after 70 years, and its wealth shall be serviceable to the kingdom of God. And these announcements have also on the whole been fulfilled; but because the separate constituents of the prophecy were accomplished at various times, widely apart from one another, the fulfilment, while it corresponds to the prophetic picture as a whole, is not evident in its details.
Our prophecy does not refer to the siege by Shalmaneser, because the Prophet (Isaiah 23:13) expressly declares that he has the Chaldeans in view as the enemies that would cause the ruin of Tyre. After what has been already said I cannot acknowledge that there is anything to justify an alteration of the text. But the conflicts of Shalmaneser with Tyre can have furnished the occasion for our prophecy. The object at which the Assyrian, and afterwards the Babylonian rulers aimed for the extension and security of their kingdom towards the southwest, was the conquest of Egypt. The conquest of Syria, Phenicia, Palestine, Philistia and the adjoining territories of Arabia was only in order to the attainment of that end. The possession of Phenicia, that ruled the sea, was especially of the greatest importance for the war with Egypt, because Phenicia, with its fleet in the hands of the Assyrians, could be just as useful to them as, in the service of the Egyptians, it could be hurtful to them.
For this reason the Prophet (Isaiah 23:5) depicts the terror which the capture of Tyre would produce in Egypt. For that party in Jerusalem that was disposed to rely on the alliance with Egypt against Assyria, the integrity of Tyre must for this reason be a matter of prime moment. We might say: they relied on Tyre as the right arm of Egypt. As now the Prophet combated the reliance on Egypt, he must also be concerned to destroy the false hopes that were placed on Tyre. He does this in our chapter, while he represents Tyre as a city devoted by the Lord to destruction (Isaiah 23:8 sqq.). Why should Judah trust in such a power and not rather in Him who is able to decree such a doom on the nations?
To set this before his people for due consideration, was certainly the practical aim of Isaiah. But we must now inquire more precisely: Did Isaiah see himself prompted to this discourse before the campaign of Shalmaneser against Tyre, during the same, or after it? It is not indeed impossible for the Prophet to have uttered this prediction before the conflicts which Shalmaneser, according to the fragment of Menander in Josephus (Antiqq. IX. 14, 2), carried on with the Tyrians; but any ground in facts for making this assumption is entirely wanting. It is also in itself not impossible for Isaiah to have composed the prophecy after the blockade of Tyre had been raised, perhaps at the same time with those prophecies against Egypt (18, 19, 20), and against the nations whose subjugation was a necessary preliminary to attacking Egypt (15, 16, Isaiah 21:11 sqq.). We might even appeal in support of this view to Isaiah 20:6, where under δָ ?ΰִ ?ιδַ ?ζֶּ ?δ it would be proper to understand Phenicia and specially Tyre.
But this prophecy belongs to the year 711 B. C., consequently to a time when the blockade of Tyre by Shalmaneser was long past. For Shalmaneser was in the year 722 already dead. But now it is certainly less probable that a Prophet should make a matter the subject of a prophecy at a time when this matter has been partially disposed of and engages less the general interest, than that he should do this at a time when the matter in question is going on, and is attracting the greatest attention. I therefore hold it to be more probable that our prophecy was delivered before the year 722, and that it consequently belongs to a time when the conflict with Tyre was still lasting. The prophecy published at this juncture was, moreover, intended to tell the Israelites that the Assyrians would not conquer Tyre, as then seemed likely, but that the Chaldeans would do so.
The prophecy then belongs to the same time as chapter 28 (comp. the introduction to 28–33), which first assails the Egyptian alliance, and, as we will there show, must have been composed before the capture of Samaria (comp. Isaiah 28:1), and therefore before the contemporaneous blockade of Tyre (comp. Schrader,ut supra, p. 155). The blockade by Shalmaneser and his successor Sargon, although the expression ἐκαρτέρησαν in Menander would warrant our inferring a final surrender, does not seem to have been attended with consequences particularly hurtful to the Tyrians. The Assyrians were themselves interested in sparing the resources of the Tyrians, that they might use them for their own advantage. From this time till the commencement of the Chaldean wars there is a complete gap in the history of Phenicia (Movers, II., I., p. 400).
That Nebuchadnezzar besieged Tyre is now no more disputed by any one. That the siege lasted thirteen years has at least great internal probability. Josephus states it on the authority of Philostratus (Antiqq. X. 11, 1) and of the Tyrian Menander (although, without expressly mentioning his name, Contra Apion, 1, 21). We have, besides, the authority of the prophet Ezekiel (26–28, Isaiah 29:16 sqq.). But the question is: Did Nebuchadnezzar also destroy Tyre?
On this subject many needless words have been used by those who thought that the honor of prophecy absolutely required that Tyre should have been destroyed at once and directly by Nebuchadnezzar. This did not happen, and is by no means necessary to save the credit of prophecy. We know from Herodotus (II. 161) and Diodorus (I. 68) that the Egyptian king Apries, who was cotemporary with Nebuchadnezzar, undertook a successful expedition against the Phenicians who had hitherto been his allies. How would this be conceivable if Phenicia (to which doubtless Tyre is to be reckoned) had not been for the Egyptians the country of an enemy, i.e., a Babylonian province? According to the account already mentioned, which Josephus (Contra Apion I. 21) communicates from Tyrian sources, there arose difficulties in regard to the succession to the throne of Tyre after the thirteen years’ siege. A king Baal ruled for ten years after Itobaal, in whose reign the siege began.
But then follow two judges, one high-priest, then again two judges, who govern in conjunction with a king. The duration of these governments was, in the case of some of them, very brief. At last the Tyrians procure for themselves a king from Babylon in the person of Merbaal, and after his death they obtain from the same place his brother Hiram. For, according to 2 Kings 25:28, there were, beside Zedekiah, other captive kings in Babylon. If now Nebuchadnezzar brought the royal family with him to Babylon, is not that a proof of his having conquered Tyre? (comp. Movers,ut supra, p. 460 sqq.).
So much is established, that Tyre, since the close of the conflicts with Nebuchadnezzar, ceased to be an independent state. Although it was not destroyed, which would not have served the interests of the Chaldeans, it became a province of the Babylonian empire, whence it passed over into the hands of the Persians, Grecians and Romans, as Jerome on Ezekiel 27 says: “Quod nequaquam ultra sit regina populorum nec proprium habeat imperium, uti habuit sub Hiram et ceteris regibus, sed vel Chald�is vel Macedonibus vel Ptolem�is et ad postremum Romania servitura sit.” The conquest by Nebuchadnezzar was the act in the world’s history which originated the complete destruction of Tyre, though its ruin was not all at once effected. This act had involved in it what should take place in the future, and this future gradually unfolded the significance of that act which was such a beginning as presaged the coming end, as was the earnest of the final doom of Tyre. Its capture by Alexander the Great (333 B. C.; comp. Curt. 4:7 sqq.; Arrian II. 24) was one of the chief events in the accomplishment of its predicted ruin.
But Tyre outlived even this visitation. Curtius says expressly: “Multis ergo casibus defuncta et post excidium renata, nunc tamen longa pace cuncta refovente sub tutela Roman� mansuetudinis acquiescit.” Who can help thinking here on the restoration which Isaiah, Isaiah 23:15 sqq., promises to the city? Isaiah indeed promises this restoration after 70 years. But these 70 years denote only the duration of the rule of the Chaldeans. The Prophet sees only one master of the Phenician capital—the Chaldeans (Isaiah 23:13). This is the relative defect in his vision.
He sees too the restoration immediately after the disappearance of this one enemy. This is likewise a relative defect. For, as in reality the destruction of Tyre had many distinct stages, so also was it with the restoration. The occasion and starting point of the restoration is seen by the Prophet in the passing away of this one arch-enemy. But to Isaiah this flourishing anew of Tyre was only a revival of its commerce, and this was really the fact. Thus Jerome on Ezekiel 27 states that Tyre “usque hodie perseverat ut omnium propemodum gentium in illa exerceantur commercia.”Pliny, however, remarks (Hist.
Nat. V. 17): “Tyrus olim clara. …. nunc omnis ejus nobilitas conchylio atque purpura constat.” Tyre became afterwards a Christian city. When our Lord was upon earth, longing souls came from the borders of Tyre and Zidon to see and to hear Him; and He, on His part, did not disdain to honor these borders with His presence (Mark 3:8; Luke 6:17; Matthew 15:21). Paul found there (Acts 21:3 sqq.) a Christian church. In the beginning of the fourth century Methodius was bishop of Tyre. In 315 a church erected there at great expense was dedicated by Eusebius of Cζsarea.
In 355 a Synod convoked by the Eusebians against Athanasius was held there. In 1125 it was taken by the crusaders and incorporated in the kingdom of Jerusalem. In 1127 it became the seat of an archbishop. William of Tyre, the celebrated historian, occupied the see of Tyre from the year 1174. Not till the end of the 13th century did the Saracens destroy the fortifications. After Alexander the Great had connected Tyre with the main land by means of a mole, it ceased to be an island, and it is now a village of fishermen’s huts, with about 3,000 inhabitants (Sur).
All that the Prophet announced has thus in fact been fulfilled. But in the language of prophecy and in the language of its fulfilment, divine thoughts clothe themselves in such strangely different forms that only he can perceive the identity who understands how to combine the long-drawn lines of history into one picture in perspective. This picture will exactly correspond to that of the Prophet. [The remarks of our author, when carefully studied, vindicate the Prophet from the charge of even a relative error. The Prophet does not say that the predicted restoration of Tyre should all at once take place on the expiration of seventy years, or the close of the rule of the Chaldeans. The requirement of the prophecy is satisfied if Tyre should begin to flourish after its deliverance from the Chaldean oppression. The Spirit of God again saw in the capture of Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar the germinant force which would issue in its final complete destruction, and accordingly foretells that the ruin of Tyre would follow that event.
But whether this should happen at once, or in the course of time, is not declared. Nebuchadnezzar brought Tyre to ruin; for his capture of it led to its entire destruction, though there intervened a long line of operations and issues which it required many ages to develop. The remark of Abarbanel, that has been often quoted, is here in point, “that it is the custom of the prophets in their predictions to have respect at once to a near and remote period, so that prophecies pointing to very distant times are found among others which relate to the immediate future. Whence we may the more certainly conclude that God might threaten the Tyrians with the destruction of their city, though it might be brought on at different times and by gradual advances.” There is no mistake made by Isaiah in the picture which he drew. It fully served the object intended by God. The relative mistake is in the exponent of the prophecy.—D.
M.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 23:1 sqq. “Commerce and seaports are not in themselves evil—but where commerce prospers and is in full bloom, there God’s gift and ordinance are to be recognised. Solomon engaged in commerce (2 Kings 10:28). When trade declines, this is to be looked upon as a punishment from the hand of God on account of the extortion practised by merchants. For a merchant shall hardly keep himself from doing wrong, and a huckster shall not be freed from sin (Sir 27:29). Sin is committed not only where merchants deal falsely, but also where they are proud of their riches and magnificence, and move along as princes and lords, and forget the poor, and at the same time neglect divine service, God’s word and sacrament.” Cramer. [This is quite too indiscriminate a censure of merchants and traders.
Cicero (De Off. Lib. 1) expresses a similar opinion as to the necessity for hucksters to practise deceit in order to make a profit. Happily the book of Ecclesiasticus is not inspired Scripture, and Christianity has so far improved the spirit of men of business that the language of the Apocrypha as quoted above and of Cicero would not now be tolerated, but would be universally regarded as most unjust and calumniatory.—D. M.]
2. On Isaiah 23:8-9. “This place affords us consolation. As the threatening of the Prophet against Tyre was not vain, so also the tyranny of our adversaries will come to an end. Neither the Pope nor the Turk believes that they can fall—but they shall fall, as Tyre fell.” Luther.3. On Isaiah 23:18. “Ego intelligo de futuro regno Christi, quod et ipsa Tyrus convertenda est ad Dominum. Dicit igitur, postquam reversa fuerit ad suas negociationes, imminebit regnum Christi, quod Tyrus quoque amplectetur, sicut testatur Acts 21.” Luther.On Isaiah 23:18.
They who dwell before the Lord—i.e., who believe on Him, will have: 1) their merchandise, 2) will eat and be satisfied, 3) will be well clothed. Therefore money and property, food and goodly apparel, are not to be condemned and renounced. This admits of practical application against monkery and the Anabaptists.” Cramer. [The original Anabaptists of Germany maintained a community of goods.—D. M.]
AND HINTS1. [On Isaiah 23:1-14. Why did God bring these calamities on Tyre? Not to show an arbitrary and irresistible power, but to punish the Tyrians for their pride (Isaiah 23:9). Many other sins, no doubt, reigned among them: idolatry, sensuality and oppression—but the sin of pride is fastened upon as that which was the particular ground of God’s controversy with Tyre. Let the ruin of Tyre be a warning to all places and persons to take heed of pride—for it proclaims to all the world that he who exalts himself shall be abased. After Henry.—D. M.]
2. [Isaiah 23:8-9. An appropriate text for a discourse on God’s moral government over the nations, Daniel 4:3.—D. M.]
3. On Isaiah 23:18. Concerning the right use of worldly goods: 1) We ought not to gather them as a treasure, nor to hide them. 2. We ought to consecrate them to the Lord, and therefore apply them: a) to sacred objects, b) for the wants of the body according to the will of the Lord.
Footnotes:Heb. It shall be unto Tyre as the song of an harlot.gain.Heb. old.splendid.
B.—THE FINALE TO THE AGAINST THE NATIONS: THE Isaiah 24-27If there is a living God who concerns Himself with the history of mankind and directs the same according to His counsel, without detriment to that human freedom which is the basis of the moral responsibility of every individual,—and if consequently there is such a thing as prophecy which demonstrates the divine rule in history for our consolation and warning, then we need not be surprised if prophecy should refer even to the very close of history. Must not God, who directs history, foreknow what is most remote as well as what is near at hand? And can He have no reason for causing the things that will take place at the end of the world to be predicted by the interpreters of His will, the prophets? There is just the same reason for His doing this which there is for prophecy at all. We ought to know that the history of the world is moving toward a certain goal fixed by God, in order that one class may fear, and that the other may have a firm support in every temptation, and the certain hope of final victory. And we ought therefore not to be astonished if Isaiah, the greatest of all the prophets, penetrates by the spiritual vision given to him into the most distant future.
This only would with reason surprise us,—if Isaiah should describe the distant future as one who had experienced it and passed through it. But this is not the case. For we clearly perceive that the pictures of the future which he presents to us are enigmatical to himself. He takes his stand in the present time; he is not only a man, but also an Israelite of his own age. He depicts the destruction of the earth in such a way that we can see that it appears to him as the occurrence on a grand scale of what was well known to him, “the wasting of cities and countries.” From his point of view he distinguishes neither the exact chronological succession of the different objects, nor the real distance which separates him from the last things. And he is so much an Israelite that the judgment of the world appears to him as the closing act in the great controversy of Israel against the heathen nations.
For Delitzsch is perfectly right when he regards our chapters as the fitting finale to chaps. 13–23. The Prophet is, moreover, an Israelite of his own age. For, although he knows that the judgment will extend to all the nations that constitute the worldly power, nevertheless Assyria and Egypt stand in the foreground as its prominent representatives (Isaiah 27:12-13). Only once, when he places the countries of the second exile over against those of the first, do the former appear in their natural double form as the countries of the Euphrates and of the Tigris, or, as it is there expressed (Isaiah 27:1), the straight and the crooked Leviathan. Under the latter we are to understand Babylon (see the Exposition). And in another place (Isaiah 25:10 sqq.) Moab appears for a particular reason (see the Exposition) as the representative of all the nations hostile to the theocracy.
The same criticism, which would make the Almighty get out of the way wherever He makes His appearance within our sphere, has endeavored in various ways to refer this prophecy to particular situations in the world’s history. But here one interpreter is arrayed against the other, and one testimony destroys the other. After Bertholdt (Einleit., p. 1390), Knobel is of the opinion (shared by Umbreit) that the prophecy points to the time when Jerusalem, which had been captured by the Chaldeans, was completely destroyed by Nebuzaradan (2 Kings 25:8 sqq.). Eichhorn (Hebr. Proph. III., p. 206 sqq.) refers the piece to the destruction of the empire of the Chaldeans, and assumes as its anthor a Hebrew dwelling in the ruined and desolate Palestine.
Rosenmueller (Scholia 1 Ed.), Gesenius and Maurer represent the piece as composed during the exile, at a time when the fall of Babylon was imminent (Isaiah 24:16 sqq.; Isaiah 26:20 sq.; Isaiah 27:1). Boettcher (de inf. § 435, 440) attributes the discourse to a merchant who, resident in the neighborhood of the country of the Moabites, journeyed on business between Assyria and Egypt, and appended his poem on the fall of Babylon (composed in the year 538) to that of another merchant on the fall of Tyre (23). Ewald refers the piece to the time “when Cambyses was preparing his Egyptian campaign.” These are the more important of the views of those who deny that Isaiah wrote these chapters. He who wishes to learn the other opinions may consult Rosenmueller, Gesenius, Hitzig and Knobel.There are four points which seem to me to prove to a demonstration that the Prophet has not in view ordinary events of history. First, the destruction of the globe of the earth announced, Isaiah 24:18-20. For, when it is affirmed of the earth with a repetition of the word ΰψυ five times, that its foundations are shaken, that it is utterly broken, clean dissolved, moved exceedingly, and reels to and fro like a drunkard or a hammock, more is certainly intended thereby than a political revolution, or an occurrence in nature accompanying such a revolution.
It is the shaking of the earth in a superlative sense—a shaking from which it will not rise again (Isaiah 24:20 b). Secondly, it is declared (Isaiah 24:21 sqq.) that the judgment will extend to the stars and the angelic powers, and that sun and moon will cease to rule the day and the night (Genesis 1:16), because Jehovah alone will be the source of light and glory (comp. the Exposition). Thirdly, Isaiah 25:6-8, we have set before us in prospect the gathering together of all nations on Mount Zion, the removal of the covering from their eyes, the abolition of death and of every evil. This is no picture of earthly happiness. It points beyond the bounds of this world and of this dispensation.
Fourthly, the resurrection of the dead is foretold (Isaiah 26:19 sqq.) together with the last judgment which brings to light all hidden guilt. Every restriction of this prophecy to a mere wish involves a contradiction. For that this place really contains the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead is acknowledged by all. But no one will affirm, much less be able to prove, that this resurrection was expected in the time of the exile, and in order to the re-peopling of Palestine; or, if the latter is the case, then the resurrection of the dead is not the subject of discourse. For it would be an unheard-of assertion to affirm that the Israelites expected that their return to Palestine and the resurrection should take place at the same time. And how arbitrary is the exegesis which limits “the inhabitant of the earth” Isaiah 24:21, to any particular people, and puts into the latter part of the verse the thought: the earth will restore the blood of those who were slain in a certain time!
Passages can indeed be quoted in which we read of innocent blood that had been shed not penetrating into the earth (Job 16:18; Ezekiel 24:7 sq). But the bringing forth again of all shed blood, and the coming forth of all that had been killed out of the earth belong naturally to eschatology. For these are preliminaries to the realization of the final judgment. If the view which refers this prophecy to events in the world’s history were correct, must there not be some mention of Nebuchadnezzar and of the Chaldeans, in order to justify the interpretation of Bertholdt, Umbreit and Knobel? When we reflect what a mighty impression this worldly power made upon Jeremiah, and how, after the battle of Carchemish, he never comes forth as a Prophet without mentioning Nebuchadnezzar and the Chaldeans, it is inconceivable how a Hebrew who was among those who suffered the crushing stroke from the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, could speak only of Egypt and Assyria, and at most, allusively and covertly, of the Chaldeans (Isaiah 27:1) as enemies of the theocracy. But if our piece refers to the capture of Babylon by Cyrus, why is there no mention of the Persians?
And the same objection avails against all other interpretations which apply the passage to events in the history of the world. Against all of them the want of any specification of such events may be justly objected. In regard to the style, and to the range of thought that characterize this piece, the exact and minute investigation which lies at the basis of our exposition will show that the language is altogether that of Isaiah. If there are found in it manifold points of connection with other pieces which criticism has pronounced spurious, we have simply to say: in view of the large amount of words and expressions that we find here, undoubtedly germane to the authentic style of Isaiah, we are entitled to draw the reverse conclusion, and to affirm that those pieces must be genuine, because they resemble so much our prophecy which undoubtedly has proceeded from Isaiah. The accumulation of paronomasias, which are pronounced devoid of taste, has been made a cause of reproach to our piece. But it must be shown that these paronomasias are more tasteless than other such forms of speech, which we meet with in the acknowledged compositions of Isaiah, and that they are of a different kind.
So long as this is not done, I venture to affirm that this ingenious facility in the management of language best corresponds to the eminent intellectual gifts of Isaiah, which we know sufficiently from other sources. Persons of such mental power, and possessing such a command of language, are at all times rare. According to our modern criticism there must have been dozens of them among the Israelites at the time of the captivity. But I fear that such a judgment is only possible when the critics, because they cannot, or will not perceive the divinely great in these works of genius, so degrade them by the aid of their intolerably petty and vulgar standard, that, in sooth, any bungler might have composed them. Further, against regarding Isaiah as the author of these chapters it has been objected that they contain many peculiar thoughts and expressions which occur only here. But what does this objection amount to?
Do these thoughts and expressions contradict Isaiah’s manner of thinking and speaking? No one has yet been able to prove this. But if this is not the case, the circumstance that they occur only here is of no significance whatever. For among the chapters of Isaiah that are acknowledged genuine, there is not a single one which does not contain thoughts and words that are new and peculiar to it alone. This is not surprising in a mind so inexhaustibly fertile as that of Isaiah. The objection drawn from the occurrence of ideas that are said to belong to a later age, might be of more weight.
To this class of ideas is referred the curse of the law (Isaiah 24:6). But apart from Deuteronomy 28-30 (comp. espec. Isaiah 29:19), that the curse should fall on transgressors of the law is so obvious an idea, that it is inconceivable that it should be regarded as the sign of a later time. That it happens not to occur in writings universally admitted to precede the age of Isaiah may appear strange, but is no proof of the later origin of these chapters. That gods are spoken of as protecting powers of kingdoms, Isaiah 24:21, is just as little established as that the sun and moon, Isaiah 24:23, are named as objects of idolatrous homage (comp. our Exposition). The cessation of death (Isaiah 25:8), and the resurrection of the dead (Isaiah 26:19) are closely connected.
Both are confessedly ideas which could not have entered clearly into the consciousness of the Israelites till they had attained an advanced stage of religious culture. But that the Israelites first received this doctrine when, in exile, from Parseeism is, as Klostermann says, “an unfounded, unproved, modern tradition.” Von Hofmann is certainly right when he sees in the first, and fundamental promise [Genesis 3:15] the basis of the hope that “finally everything will have an end that has come into the world through the enemy of God—sin and death.” This does not prevent this passage from belonging to the oldest documents of the awakening consciousness of this hope of faith. As we cannot see in this a proof of the composition of this piece during the exile, so it appears to us equally improbable that this event, which belongs to the final history of the world, could escape the eye of an Isaiah.
In regard to the time of composition, it is very difficult to say anything definite. More particular indications fixing the date are entirely wanting. The Prophet, as it were, soars high above his time, and as if cut loose from it, lives wholly in the future. Nevertheless, he beholds the theocracy in conflict with Assyria and Egypt; and even Babylon appears, although but dimly disclosed, among these foes. If we add that these chapters follow immediately the prophecies against the heathen nations, and appear as the winding up of the same, the supposition very readily suggests itself that they were composed in the time of Hezekiah, and as Delitzsch says, as finale to chapters 13–23. The manifold points of connection with later pieces by Isaiah, which we will particularly point out in the course of our exposition, favor this view.
The structure of the piece indicates no little art. The number two lies at its basis. There are twice two chapters, of which the first and third have the final judgment of the world for their subject, the second and fourth the deliverance of Israel. Each of these four chapters again consists of two parts.
We make out the following plan of the piece:
1) The beginning of distress; the destruction of the surface of the earth (Isaiah 24:1-12).
2) The destruction of the globe of the earth (Isaiah 24:13-23).
3) Israel’s song of praise for the deliverance experienced (Isaiah 25:1-5).
4) Zion as the place of the feast given to all nations in contrast to Moab that perishes ingloriously (Isaiah 25:6-12).
5) The judgment as the realization of the idea of justice (Isaiah 26:1-10).
6) The resurrection of the dead, and the concluding act in the judgment of the world (Isaiah 26:11-21).
7) The downfall of the worldly powers and Zion’s joyful hope (Isaiah 27:1-9).
8) The fall of the city of the world and Israel’s glad restoration (Isaiah 27:10-13).
_______________________
1. THE OF : THE OF THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH
Isaiah 24:1-121 Behold the Lord maketh the earth empty,
And maketh it waste,
And turneth it upside down,
And scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof.
2 And it shall be,
As with the people, so with the priest;
As with the servant, so with his master;
As with the maid, so with her mistress;
As with the buyer, so with the seller;
As with the lender, so with the borrower;
As with the taker of usury, so with the giver of usury to him.
3 The land shall be utterly emptied, and utterly spoiled:
For the Lord hath spoken this word.
4 The earth mourneth, and fadeth away,
The world languisheth and fadeth away,
The haughty people of the earth do languish.
5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof;
Because they have transgressed the laws,
Changed the ordinance,
Broken the everlasting covenant.
6 Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth,
And they that dwell therein are desolate:
Therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned,
And few men left.
7 The new wine mourneth,
The vine languisheth,
All the merry-hearted do sigh.
8 The mirth of tabrets ceaseth,
The noise of them that rejoice endeth,
The joy of the harp ceaseth.
9 They shall not drink wine with a song;
Strong drink shall be bitter to them that drink it.
10 The city of confusion is broken down:
Every house is shut up, that no man may come in.
11 There is a crying for wine in the streets;
All joy is darkened,
The mirth of the land is gone.
12 In the city is left desolation,
And the gate is smitten with destruction.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_24:1. αּ ?εֹ ?χֵ ?χ (comp. Isaiah 19:3 and Isaiah 24:3; Hosea 10:1; Nah. 11:3; Jeremiah 19:7; Jeremiah 51:2), part. from αָּ ?χַ ?χ to pour out, to empty, forms with αּ ?εμχδ (devastare) a paronomasia, as also Nahum 2:11, where only the word occurs again. ςִ ?εָּ ?δ pervertere, conturbare (comp. Isaiah 21:3 Niph., Piel besides only Lamentations 3:9) is here applied to the surface of the earth in the sense of throwing confusedly together everything found upon it.
Isaiah 24:2. On λְּ ?—λְּ = as, so, ὥς—ὥς comp. Ewald, § 360. The abnormal employment of the article in λַּ ?βְּ ?αִ ?ψְ ?ϊָּ ?δּ is occasioned by the endeavor to produce an assonance with πωֶׁ ?δ ּ ?λַּ ?ωִ ?τְ ?ηָ ?δ is creditor, and of like meaning with ξַ ?μְ ?εֶ ?δ, but the idea of usury seems to be involved in πωֶׁ ?δ.
Isaiah 24:3. ϊִּ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ζ ,ϊִּ ?αּ ?εֹ ?χ instead of ϊּ ?αַּ ?ζ ,ϊִּ ?αַּ ?χ may be regarded as forms borrowed from the related ςε—stems, and are here chosen for the sake of conformity with the infinitive forms δִ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ζ ,δִ ?αּ ?εֹ ?χ.
Isaiah 24:4. The half pause, which is indicated by the punctuation ΰֻ ?ξְ ?μָ ?μεּ, has the force of a dash in our language. The application to personal beings of this predicate, that had been used previously of lifeless things, is thereby emphasized.
Isaiah 24:6. δψψ in Kal only here, Niph. Isaiah 41:11; Isaiah 45:24.
Isaiah 24:7. ΰָ ?πַ ?η (current only in Niph.) is found only here in Isaiah, probably borrowed from Joe 1:18.
Isaiah 24:10. ξִ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ as Isaiah 23:1.
Isaiah 24:12. ωְׁ ?ΰִ ?ιָּ ?δ is ἅπ. λεγ. and stands in apposition to the object, or, as the word is passive, in apposition to the subject of ιֻ ?λַּ ?ϊ, to express what should be made of the object or subject. Translate: The gate is smitten to ruins. Comp. Isaiah 6:11; Isaiah 37:26. On the form ιֻ ?λַּ ?ϊ (Hoph. from λָּ ?ϊַ ?ϊ contundere, Isaiah 11:4; Isaiah 30:14) comp. Olshausen, Gram., § 261.
AND 1. The Prophet transports himself in spirit to the end of all things. He describes the destruction of the world. He sees, however, that this destruction will be gradually accomplished. He here depicts the first scene: the destruction of all that exists on the surface of the earth. This destruction bears the closest resemblance to such desolations of countries and cities as even now occur in consequence of wars.
Hence the Prophet borrows the colors for this his first picture of the destruction of the world from such occurrences in actual history. Jehovah empties, devastates, depopulates the surface of the earth (Isaiah 24:1), and the inhabitants are without distinction of person swept away (Isaiah 24:2); and this work of emptying and devastation is thoroughly accomplished (Isaiah 24:3). In consequence, inanimate nature appears mourning, and every height and glory of creation has vanished (Isaiah 24:4); and this too is quite natural, for the earth has been defiled by the sins of men (Isaiah 24:5). Therefore the curse has, as it were, devoured the earth; therefore men, with the exception of a small remnant, are destroyed from the earth (Isaiah 24:6). Therefore the precious productions of the earth that gladden the heart of man have vanished, and with them all joy on earth (Isaiah 24:7-9). The head of the earth, the great city of the world is a chaos of ruins, its houses no man enters any more (Isaiah 24:10).
In the streets nothing is heard save lamentations over the loss of what gladdens the heart of man. All joy has departed (Isaiah 24:11). Nothing remains in the city but solitude and desolation. The gates are broken to pieces (Isaiah 24:12).
2. Behold the LORD … do languish.Isaiah 24:1-4. δִ ?πֵּ ?δ, with a participle following, frequently introduces in Isaiah the prophetic discourse Isaiah 3:1; Isaiah 8:7; Isaiah 10:33; Isaiah 13:9; Isaiah 13:17; Isaiah 17:1; Isaiah 22:17 et saepe. In general, this usage occurs in all the Prophets. But it is peculiar to Isaiah, quite abruptly and without any introductory formula to begin the prophetic discourse with δִ ?πֵּ ?δ. The description of the destruction of the earth begins with its surface (comp. Isaiah 24:18 b sqq.).
To it the inhabitants also belong, for they can exist only on the surface. If now all things on the surface of the earth are thrown confusedly together, the inhabitants, too, are naturally scattered. δֵ ?τִ ?ιυ, an expression which seems to be taken from the threatening words of Deuteronomy (comp. Deuteronomy 4:27; Deuteronomy 28:64; Deuteronomy 30:3) is found besides in Isaiah only Isaiah 28:25; Isaiah 41:16. The Lord knows no respect of persons. When the great forces of nature by God’s command assail our race, then all are alike affected. In a desolation wrought by human hands the case can be different.
Then the more distinguished persons are often treated otherwise than the poor, and are reserved for a better fate (comp. 1 Samuel 15:8 sq.; 2 Kings 25:27 sqq.). When “people” and “priest” are put in contrast, and not “people” and “prince” or “king,” the reason is to be sought in the fact that the priests in the theocracy form properly the nobility. The place, moreover, is a quotation from Hosea 4:9. Any citizen may become a king; but he only can be a priest who is of the priestly race. Comp. Leviticus 21; Ezekiel 44:15 sqq.; JosephusCon.
Ap. I, 7; Mishna Kiddushin iv. 4. [The rightful King of Israel must according to the divine appointment be of the house of David.—D. M.] The sentence Isaiah 24:2 contains six comparisons. As in the first half of the verse, the second and third comparisons are not specifically distinct from one another, so is it too in the second half of the verse. With a repetition of assonant sounds, which like waves or shocks succeed one another, the Prophet paints the emptying and plundering of the earth. We have already remarked that he depicts the devastation of the surface of the earth in colors which are borrowed from the devastation of a single country by an earthly enemy.
For that the subject treated of is the devastation of the earth, and not merely of the land of Palestine, appears from the whole scope of chapters 24–27, which are intended to depict the judgment of the world; and this point comes ever more clearly to light in the course of the prophecy. It might be asked: if ΰψυ is the earth, who then are the plunderers? But this is an idle question. For the Prophet sees in spirit an occurrence which appears to him at the first sight quite like the devastation of a country in war by a hostile military force. He sees great confusion, men shouting and fleeing, houses burning and falling down, smoke rising to heaven, etc. He sees no particular country; he sees no definite persons in the plundering enemies.
It is a question if he really perceives plundering persons. For the whole representation is at first a comparatively indistinct picture which gradually attains greater clearness and definiteness. On the expression “For the Lord hath spoken,” which occurs more frequently in Isaiah than in the other Prophets, comp. on Isaiah 1:2. The addition “this word“ is found only here. It is evidently used in order to continue in the second half of the verse the play with words by means of lingual and labial sounds. The effect of the devastation is that the land appears mourning and exhausted (Isaiah 24:4).
Here too the Prophet heaps together assonant words. ΰָ ?αַ ?μ to mourn, is used by Isaiah 3:26; Isaiah 19:8; Isaiah 33:9. The description in Joe 1:9 sq. seems to have been here before his mind. πָ ?αַ ?μ, to hall off, from being withered, is used by Isaiah 1:30; Isaiah 28:1; Isaiah 28:4; Isaiah 34:4; Isaiah 64:5. ϊֵּ ?αֵ ?μ, the earth (either as terra fertilis, or as οἰκουμένη, never as designation of a single country) is a current word with Isaiah. Comp. on Isaiah 13:11. ςνδΰψυ, an expression which Isaiah does not elsewhere employ, seems to denote here the inhabitants of the earth in general. This is the rather possible, as our place is the first and oldest in which the expression occurs. It has not here the specific sense of “common people,” plebs, in opposition to people of rank, in which sense it afterwards occurs. Comp. my remarks on Jeremiah 1:18. ξָ ?ψεֹ ?ν is the abstract for the concrete, the height for the high and eminent.
Not only inanimate creation, man too presents the sad look of decay. What among men blooms and flourishes, as well as the fresh green vegetation, becomes withered and languid.
3. The earth also is defiled——covenant.Isaiah 24:5. This verse must be regarded as related to what precedes as the statement of the cause. For here the sins of men are pointed out. But sin has punishment for its necessary consequence. We must say, therefore, that there lies a causal power in the wav with which this verse begins; as is not unfrequently the case.
That the land is defiled through blood-guiltiness and other sin is declared Numbers 35:33, which place Isaiah has probably in his eye, (comp. Jeremiah 3:1-2; Jeremiah 3:9). ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ is to be taken in the local sense. The earth lies as a polluted thing under the feet of its inhabitants. How could such polluted ground be suffered to exist? It is an object of wrath, it must be destroyed. The second half of the verse tells by what the earth has been defiled; men have transgressed the divine laws, have wantonly slighted the ordinance, and broken the everlasting covenant (Isaiah 30:8; Isaiah 55:3). ϊּ ?εֹ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ only here in Isaiah, is frequent in the Pentateuch: Genesis 26:5; Exodus 16:28; Exodus 18:16; Exodus 18:20 et saepe.ηָ ?μַ ?σ of the law only here.
Mark the assonance with ηπσ. The radical meaning of the word is “to change,” comp. on Isaiah 2:18; Isaiah 8:8; Isaiah 9:9; Isaiah 21:1. Not only to the people of Israel has God given a law, not merely with this people has God made a covenant; the Noachic covenant is for all men; yea, in a certain sense for all creatures on the earth (Genesis 9:1 sqq., and Isaiah 24:9 sqq.). God has given witness of Himself to all men (Acts 14:17), and made it possible for all to perceive His invisible power and godhead (Romans 1:20). The Prophet indicates here the deep moral reason why our earth cannot forever continue in its present material form.
4. Therefore hath the curse—drink it.Isaiah 24:6-9. On the statement of the cause, Isaiah 24:5, follows anew with “therefore” the declaration of the consequences, so that Isaiah 24:5 serves as a basis both for what precedes and what follows. The same condition is described in the main by Isaiah 24:6-12 as by Isaiah 24:1-4. Only in so far are Isaiah 24:6-12 of a different import, as they prominently set forth not only the general, but the special experiences of men through the withdrawal of the noblest fruit, wine, and as they from verse 10 direct the look to the great centre of the earth, the city of the world. Jeremiah has our place in general before his eyes (Isaiah 33:10).
The curse is conceived as the devouring fire of the divine wrath (Exodus 24:17; Deuteronomy 4:24; Deuteronomy 9:3; Isaiah 10:16 sq.; Isaiah 29:6; Isaiah 30:27-30; Isaiah 33:14). The expression ΰμδΰλμδ (mark the assonance with Isaiah 24:4) occurs only here. ΰָ ?ωַׁ ?ν (in Isaiah only here) denotes in this connection, not “to be guilty, to contract guilt,” but “to suffer the punishment of guilt.” Comp. Hosea 10:2; Hosea 14:1 et saepe. The effect of that burning wrath which devours the guilty, extends first to men. These are parched by it, their sap is dried up (Psalms 32:4). But where the sap of life is dried up, death ensues, and, in consequence, but few people remain on the earth.
This surviving of a small remnant is confessedly a very significant point in Isaiah’s prophecy (Isaiah 4:3; Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 10:19 sqq.; Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 11:16; Isaiah 17:6). Isaiah uses the word ΰֱ ?πֹ ?εωׁ more frequently than the other Prophets. He employs it six times beside the case before us; Isaiah 8:1; Isaiah 13:7-12; Isaiah 33:8; Isaiah 51:7; Isaiah 56:2. Of the other Prophets only Jeremiah uses it, and but once. In the book of Job the word occurs 19 times. ξִ ?ζְ ?ςָ ?ψ is found only in Isaiah 10:25; Isaiah 29:17; Isaiah 16:14. ζְ ?ςֵ ?ιּ ?ψ also is found only Isaiah 28:10; Isaiah 28:13, and Job 36:2. ωִׂ ?ξְ ?ηֵ ?ιμֵ ?α occurs only here. ξָ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ωׂ occurs 17 times in the Old Testament; of these 10 times in Isaiah 8:6; Isaiah 24:8 (bis), Isaiah 24:11; Isaiah 32:13-14; Isaiah 60:15; Isaiah 62:5; Isaiah 65:18; Isaiah 66:10. Isaiah 24:8ϊֹּ ?σ the tambourine Isaiah 5:12; Isaiah 30:32. ωָׁ ?ΰεֹ ?ο eight times in Isaiah (Isaiah 5:14; Isaiah 13:4; Isaiah 17:12 (bis), 13; Isaiah 24:8; Isaiah 25:5; Isaiah 66:6); in the whole Old Testament 17 times. ςַ ?μִּ ?ιζ, save in two dependent places in Zeph. (Isaiah 2:15; Isaiah 3:11), only in Isaiah 13:3; Isaiah 22:2; Isaiah 23:7; Isaiah 32:13 comp.
Isaiah 5:14. The only Prophet save Ezekiel (Isaiah 26:13) that uses λִּ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ψ is Isaiah; he has it five times: Isaiah 5:12; Isaiah 16:11; Isaiah 23:16; Isaiah 24:8; Isaiah 30:32. In αַּ ?ωִׁ ?ιψ observe the αְּ marking accompaniment. ωִ ?ιψ is used five times by Isaiah (Isaiah 23:16; Isaiah 26:1; Isaiah 30:29; Isaiah 42:10). No other Prophet employs the word so frequently. ξָ ?ψַ ?ψ, to be bitter, in Isaiah in different forms three times: Isaiah 22:4; Isaiah 24:9; Isaiah 38:17. ωֵׁ ?λָ ?ψ intoxicating drink; with the exception of Micah who uses the word once (Micah 2:11), it is used by no other Prophet save Isaiah 5:11; Isaiah 5:22; Isaiah 24:9; Isaiah 28:7 ter;Isaiah 56:12. Isaiah, after having foretold, Isaiah 24:7, the destruction of the vine, the noblest fruit of the ground, depicts its consequence, the cessation of joy which wine produces (Psalms 104:15).
5. The city of confusion——destruction.Isaiah 24:10-12. In these three verses the Prophet proceeds to describe the destiny of the great worldly city, the head and centre of the kingdom of the world. It is not surprising that he gives particular prominence to it, when we consider how largely Babylon figures in prophecy (comp. my remarks on Jeremiah 50, 51 Introduction). I would not, however, be understood as affirming that our Prophet had Babylon specifically before his mind. Isaiah intends just the city of the world κατ̓ἐξοχήν, whatever name it might bear.
I do not think that χψιδ is to be taken collectively as Isaiah 25:3. (Arndtde Jes. xxiv–xxvii. Commentatio, 1826, p. 10, Drechsler,etc.). For it is unnecessary to emphasize the cities beside the level country. No one looks for their specification; for every one includes the cities in all that has been previously said of the ΰψυ or ϊαμ. But an emphatic mention of the city of the world, the proper focus of worldliness, corresponds to its importance. The place Isaiah 25:3 cannot be compared; for there the context and construction (plural verbs) are decidedly in favor of our taking the word as a collective.
That under this city we do not understand Jerusalem, as most do, is self-evident from our view of this passage. The city of the world is called the city of emptiness, [not confusion] because worldliness has in it its seat and centre, and worldliness is essentially ϊֹּ ?δεּ ?i.e., vanitas, inanity, emptiness, ϊֹּ ?δεּ is used in this sense (Isaiah 29:21; Isaiah 34:11; Isaiah 40:17; Isaiah 40:23; Isaiah 41:29; Isaiah 44:9; Isaiah 45:18-19; Isaiah 49:4; Isaiah 59:4; 1 Samuel 12:21). The Prophet declares that the inward chaos would also be outwardly manifested. Every thing here is in accordance with the style of Isaiah. ωָׁ ?αַ ?ψ is used very often by Isaiah (Isaiah 8:16; Isaiah 14:5; Isaiah 17:25, 29; Isaiah 27:11; Isaiah 28:13; Isaiah 30:14, et saepe). χּ ?ψְ ?ιָ ?δ is found sixteen times in the prophets; of these, ten times in Isaiah (Isaiah 1:21; Isaiah 1:26; Isaiah 22:2; Isaiah 24:10; Isaiah 25:2-3; Isaiah 26:5; Isaiah 29:1; Isaiah 32:13; Isaiah 33:20). ϊּ ?δεּ occurs twenty times in the O. T.; of these, eleven times in Isaiah; one of the places is admitted to be genuine (Isaiah 29:21); the other places where it occurs are assailed by the critics. We might wonder how one could speak of closed houses in a destroyed city.
We may not understand this, with Drechsler, of some houses that remained uninjured. It was rather the falling of the houses that rendered them incapable of being entered into. In the street too (Isaiah 24:11) the lamentation at the loss of wine and the departure of all joy is repeated (comp. Isaiah 16:7-10). ςָ ?ψַ ?α occurs only twice in the O. T.; viz.:Judges 19:9 and here. Its meaning is nigrum esse, obscurari, occidere.
When all joy and life have fled from the city, nothing remains in it but desolation (Isaiah 24:12). If I am to state what future events will correspond to this prophecy of the first act of the judgment of the world, it appears to me that the description of the Prophet, as it refers solely to occurrences which have for their theatre the surface of the earth, corresponds to what our Lord in His discourse on the last things says of the signs of His coming, and of the beginning of sorrows (Matthew 24:6-8; Mark 13:7-8; Luke 21:9 sqq.). And the beginning of sorrows corresponds again to what the Revelation of John represents under the image of seven seals, seven trumpets, and seven vials (chap. 6 sqq.).
AND ETHICAL1. Isaiah 24:2. “When general judgments take place, no distinction is observed between man and wife, master and servant, mistress and maid, learned and unlearned, noble and plebeian, clergy and laity; therefore let no one rely on any external prerogative or superiority, but let every one without distinction repent and forsake sin.”—Cramer. Though this is right, yet we must, on the other hand, remember that the Lord declares in reference to the same great event, “Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left” (Matthew 24:10 sq.). There is no contradiction in these two statements. Both are true: outward relations will make no difference; there shall be no respect of persons.
But the state of the heart will make a difference. According to the inward character there will, in the case of those whose external position in the world is perfectly alike, be some who enter life, others whose doom is death.
2. Isaiah 24:5 sq. “The earth is burdened with sins, and is therefore deprived of every blessing. The earth must suffer for our guilt, when we have as it were spoilt it, and it must be subject to vanity for our sakes (Romans 8:20). What wonder is it that it should show itself ungrateful toward us?”—Cramer.[3. Isaiah 24:13 sq. “Observe the small number of this remnant; here and there one who shall escape the common calamity (as Noah and his family, when the old world was drowned), who when all faces gather blackness, can lift up their head with joy. Luke 21:26-28.” Henry.—D. M.].
4. Isaiah 24:17-20. Our earth is a volcanic body. Mighty volcanic forces were active at its formation. That these are still in commotion in the interior of the earth is proved by the many active volcanoes scattered over the whole earth, and by the perpetual volcanic convulsions which we call earthquakes. These have hitherto been confined to particular localities.
But who can guarantee that a concentration and simultaneous eruption of those volcanic forces, that is, a universal earthquake, shall not hereafter occur? The Lord makes express mention of earthquakes among the signs which shall precede His second coming (Matthew 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:11). And in 2 Peter 3:5 sqq. the future destruction of the earth by fire is set over against the destruction of the old world by water. Isaiah in our place announces a catastrophe whose characteristic features will be that, 1) there will be no escape from it; 2) destructive forces will assail from above and below; 3) the earth will be rent asunder; 4) it will reel and totter; 5) it will suffer so heavy a fall that it will not rise again (Isaiah 24:20 b). Is there not here a prophecy of the destruction of the earth by volcanic forces? And how suddenly can they break loose!
The ministers of the word have every reason to compare this extreme exposedness of our earth to fire, and the possibility of its unexpectedly sudden collapse with the above-cited warnings of the word of God, and to attach thereto the admonition which is added in 2 Peter 3:11.
5. Isaiah 24:21. The earth is a part of our planetary system. It is not what it appears to the optical perception to be, a central body around which worlds of a different nature revolve, but it, together with many similar bodies, revolves round a common centre. The earth according to that view of the account of the creation in Genesis 1, which appears to me the true one, has arisen with all the bodies of our Solar system out of one primary matter, originally united, common to them all. If our Solar System is a well-ordered, complete organism, it must rest on the basis of a not merely formal, but also material unity; i.e., the separate bodies must move, not only according to a principle of order which governs all, but they must also as to their substance be essentially like.
And as they arose simultaneously, so must they perish simultaneously. It is inconceivable that our earth alone should disappear from the organism of the Solar System, or pass over to a higher material condition. Its absence, or ceasing to exist in its previous form and substance, would necessarily draw after it the ruin of the whole system. Hence the Scripture speaks every where of a passing away and renovation of the heaven and the earth (Psalms 102:26; Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; Matthew 5:18; Matthew 24:29; Matthew 24:35; 2 Peter 3:7; 2 Peter 3:10; 2 Peter 3:13; Hebrews 12:26; Revelation 20:11; Revelation 21:1). The heaven that shall pass away with a great noise, whose powers shall be shaken, whose stars shall fall, is the planetary heaven. The same lot will happen to the companions of our earth, to the other planets, and to the centre, the sun, and to all other co-ordinate and subordinate stellar bodies, which will befall the earth itself.
This is the substance of the view which serves as a basis for our place. But personal beings are not thereby by any means excluded from the φαΰξψεν. The parallel expression ξμλιδΰγξδ, and the use in other places of the related expression φαΰδωׁ ?ξιν lead us rather to suppose personal beings to be included. But I believe that a distinction must be made here. As the heavenly bodies which will pass away simultaneously with the earth, can only be those which arose together with it, and which stand in organic connection with it, so also the angelic powers, which are judged simultaneously with us men, can be only those which stand in connection with the heavenly bodies of our Solar System, i.e., with the earthly material world. There are heavenly bodies of glorious pneumatic substance.
If personal beings stand in connection with them, they must also be pure, glorious, resplendent beings. These will not be judged. They are the holy angels, who come with the Lord (Matthew 25:31). But it is quite conceivable that all the bodies of our Solar System are till the judgment like our earth suffered to be the theatre of the spirits of darkness.
6. Isaiah 24:21-23, It seems to me that the Prophet has here sketched the chief matters pertaining to eschatology. For the passing away of heaven and earth, the binding of Satan (Revelation 20:1-3), the loosing of Satan again (Revelation 20:7), and finally the reign of God alone, which will make sun and moon unnecessary (Revelation 21:23)—are not these the boundary-stones of the chief epochs of the history of the end of the world?
7. Isaiah 25:6. [“The Lord of hosts makes this feast. The provision is very rich, and every thing is of the best. It is a feast, which supposes abundance and variety; it is a continual feast to believers: it is their fault if it be not. It is a feast of fat things and full of marrow; so relishing, so nourishing are the comforts of the Gospel to all those that feast upon them and digest them. The returning prodigal was entertained with the fatted calf; and David has that pleasure in communion with God, with which his soul is satisfied as with marrow and fatness.
It is a feast of wines on the lees; the strongest-bodied wines, that have been long kept upon the lees, and then are well refined from them, so that they are clear and fine. There is that in the Gospel which, like fine wine, soberly used, makes glad the heart, and raises the spirits, and is fit for those that are of a heavy heart, being under convictions of sin, and mourning for it, that they may drink and forget their misery (for that is the proper use of wine; it is a cordial for those that need it, Proverbs 31:6-7) may be of good cheer, knowing that their sins are forgiven, and may be vigorous in their spiritual work and warfare, as a strong man refreshed with wine.” Henry.—D. M.]
8. Isaiah 25:9. “In the Old Testament the vail and covering were before men’s eyes, partly because they waited for the light that was to appear, partly because they sat in darkness and in the shadow of death (Luke 1:79). The fulfilment of this prediction has in Christ already begun, and will at last be perfectly fulfilled in the Church triumphant where all ignorance and sorrow shall be dispelled (1 Corinthians 13:12).” Cramer.9. Isaiah 25:8. “God here represents Himself as a mother, who presses to her bosom her sorrowful son, comforts him and wipes away his tears (Isaiah 66:13). The righteous are to believe and appropriate this promise, that every one may learn to speak with Paul in the time of trial: the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us, Romans 8:18.” Cramer.10. Isaiah 25:10. “This is now the hope and consolation of the church that the hand of the Lord rests on this mountain, that is, that He will be gracious, and let His power, help and grace be there seen and felt.
But the unbelieving Moabites, i.e., the Jews, with all others who will not receive the gospel, shall be threshed to pieces as straw in the mire; these the Lord’s hand will not rescue, as it helps those who wait on Him, but it shall press them down so that they will never rise, according to the saying, Mark 16:16.” Veit Dietrich.11. Isaiah 25 Three thoughts contained in this chapter we should hold fast: 1) When we see the world triumph over every thing which belongs to the Lord and His kingdom, when our hearts are anxious about the preservation in the world of the Church of Christ, which is sore oppressed, let this word of the Prophet comfort our hearts. The world-city which contains all that is of the world, sinks into the dust, and the church of Christ goes from her chains and bands into the state of freedom and glory. We have often seen that it is the Lord’s way to let every thing come to maturity. When it is once ripe, He comes suddenly with His sentence. Let us comfort ourselves therewith, for thus will it happen with the world and its dominion over the faithful followers of Christ.
When it is ripe, suddenly it will come to an end. 2) No one who has a heart for the welfare of the nations can see without the deepest pain how all hearts are now seduced and befooled, and all eyes closed and covered. The simplest truths are no longer acknowledged, but the more perverse, brutal and mean views and doctrines are, the more greedily are they laid hold of. We cannot avert this. But our comfort is that even this seduction of the nations will reach its climax. Then men will come to themselves. The vail and covering will fall off, and the Gospel will shine with new light before the nations.
Therewith let us comfort ourselves. 3) Till this happens, the church is sorrowful. But she shall be full of joy. The promise is given to her that she shall be fully satisfied with the good things of the house of the Lord. A life is promised to her which neither death nor any pain can affect, as she has rest from all enemies. The word of the Lord shall be fulfilled in her: Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. The Church that has such a promise may wait in patient quietness for its accomplishment, and praise the Lord in affliction, till it pleases Him to glorify her before all nations.” Weber, The Prophet Isaiah. 1875.
12. Isaiah 26:1. “The Christian church is a city of God. God has built it, and He is the right Master-builder. It is strong: 1) on account of the Builder; 2) on account of the foundation and corner-stone, which is Christ; 3) on account of the bond wherewith the living stones are bound together, which is the unity of the faith.” Cramer. [The security and happiness of true believers, both on earth and in heaven, is represented in Scripture under the image of their dwelling in a city in which they can bid defiance to all their enemies. We dwell in such a city even now, Psalms 46:4-5. We look for such a city, Hebrews 11:10; Hebrews 11:16; Revelation 21—D. M.]
13. Isaiah 26:2. [These words may be taken as a description of the people whom God owns, who are fit to be accounted members of the church of the living God on earth, and who will not be excluded from the celestial city. Instead of complaining that only the righteous and the faithful will be admitted into the heavenly city, it should rather give us joy to think that there will be no sin there, that none but the just and true will there be found. This has been a delightful subject of reflection to God’s saints. The last words written by Henry Martyn were: “Oh! when shall time give place to eternity? When shall appear that new heaven and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness?
There, there shall in no wise enter in any thing that defileth; none of that wickedness which has made men worse than wild beasts—none of their corruptions which add to the miseries of mortality shall be seen or heard of any more.”—D. M.]
14. Isaiah 26:4. “The fourth privilege of the church is trust in God the Rock of Ages, i.e., in Christ, who not only here, but also Matthew 16; 1 Corinthians 10; 1 Peter 2, is called a rock in a peculiar manner, because no other foundation of salvation and of the church can be laid except this rock, which is here called the rock of ages on account of the eternity of His being, merit and office. Hence a refutation can be drawn of the papistical fable which makes Peter and his successors, the Roman Pontiffs, to be the rock on which the church is built.” Foerster. [“Whatever we trust to the world for, it will be but for a moment. All we expect from it is confined within the limits of time; but what we trust in God for will last as long as we shall last. For in the Lord Jehovah, Jah, Jehovah, in Him who was, and is, and is to come, there is a rock of ages, a firm and lasting foundation for faith and hope to build upon; and the house built on that rock will stand in a storm.” Henry.”—D. M.]
15. Isaiah 26:5. “It is very common with the prophets, when they prophesy of the kingdom of Christ to make reference to the proud and to the needy, and to represent the latter as exalted and the former as brought low. This truth is directed properly against the self-righteous. For Christ and His righteousness will not endure spiritual pride and presumption; but the souls that are poor, that hunger and thirst for grace, that know their need, these Christ graciously receives.” Cramer.16. Isaiah 26:6. “It vexes the proud all the more that they will be overcome by those who are poor and of no consequence. For example, Goliath was annoyed that a boy should come against him with a staff (1 Sam. 13:43) Cramer.17.
Isaiah 26:8-10. That the justice of God must absolutely manifest itself that the majesty of the Lord may be seen, and that the wicked may learn righteousness, must even from a new Testament view-point be admitted. But the New Testament disputes the existence of any one who is righteous when confronted by the law, and who is not deserving of punishment. [But that there is none righteous, no not one, is taught most emphatically in the Old Testament also.—D. M.]. But it (the New Testament) while it shuts up all, Jews and Gentiles, without exception, under sin (Galatians 3:22; Romans 3:9; Romans 11:32), sets forth a scheme of mediation, which, while it renders full satisfaction to justice, at the same time offers to all the possibility of deliverance. This mediation is through the Cross of Christ.
It is only when this mediation has not been accepted that punitive justice has free course. It should not surprise us that even the Evangelist of the Old Covenant, who wrote chap. 53, did not possess perfect knowledge of this mediation. Let us remember John the Baptist (Matthew 3:7; Matthew 11:11) and the disciples of the Lord (Luke 9:54). [Let us not forget that Isaiah was a true Prophet, and spoke as he was moved by the Spirit of God. The Apostle Paul did not find fault with the most terrible denunciations of judgment contained in the Old Testament, or affect a superiority over the men who uttered them. On the contrary, he quotes them as words which could not be suffered to fall, but which must be fulfilled in all their dreadful import. See e.g.
Romans 11:9-10.—D. M.].
18. Isaiah 26:12. “It is a characteristic of true, sincere Christians, that they give God the glory and not themselves, and freely confess that they have nothing of themselves, but everything from God (1 Corinthians 4:7; Philippians 2:13; Hebrews 12:2).” Cramer.19. Isaiah 26:16. The old theologians have many comforting and edifying thoughts connected with this place: “A magnet has the power to raise and attract to itself iron. Our heart is heavy as iron. But the hand of God is as a magnet.
When that hand visits us with affliction, it lifts us up, and draws us to itself.” “Distress teaches us to pray, and prayer again dispels all distress. One wedge displaces the other.” “Ex gravibus curis impellimur ad pia vota.” “Ex monte myrrhae procedimus ad collem thuris (Cant. 9:6). In amaritudine crucis exsurgit odor devotae precationis (Psalms 86:6 sq.).” “Ubi nulla crux et tentatio, ibi nulla vera oratio. Oratio sine mails est tanquam avis sine alis. Optimus orandi magister necessitas. Τὰπαθήματαμαθήματα. Quae nocent, docent.
Ubi tentatio, ibi oratio. Mala, quae hic nos premunt, ad Deum ire compellunt. Qui nescit orare, ingrediatur mare.” “When the string is most tightly drawn, it sounds best. Cross and temptation are the right prayer-bell. They are the press by which God crushes out the juice of prayer.” Cramer and Foerster.20. Isaiah 26:20.
As God, when the deluge was about to burst, bade Noah go into his ark as into his chamber, and Himself shut the door on him (Genesis 7:6); so does the Lord still act when a storm is approaching; He brings His own into a chamber where they can be safe, either for their temporal preservation and protection against every might (Psalms 91:1), or, on the other hand, to give them repose by a peaceful and happy death.” “His anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life (Psalms 30:6).” Cramer.21. Isaiah 27:1. [“Great and mighty princes [nations] if they oppose the people of God, are in God’s account, as dragons and serpents, and plagues of mankind; and the Lord will punish them in due time. They are too big for men to deal with, and call to an account; and therefore the great God will take the doing of it into His own hands.” Henry.—D. M.].
22. Isaiah 27:2-5. “It seems to the world that God has no concern for His church and Christians, else, we imagine, they would be better off. But certain it is, that it is not the angels but God Himself that will be watcher over this vineyard, and will send it gracious rain.” Veit Dietrich. [“The church is a vineyard of red wine, yielding the best and choicest grapes, intimating the reformation of the church, that it now brings forth good fruit unto God, whereas before it brought forth fruit to itself, or brought forth wild grapes, Isaiah 5:4.” “God takes care (1) of the safety of this vineyard; I the Lord do keep it. He speaks this, as glorying in it, that He is, and has undertaken to be, the keeper of Israel; those that bring forth fruit to God are, and shall be always, under His protection. (2) God takes care of the fruitfulness of this vineyard: I will water it every moment; and yet it shall not be over watered. We need the constant and continual waterings of the divine grace; for if that be at any time withdrawn, we wither and come to nothing.” Henry. D. M.].
23. Isaiah 27:4. “Est aurea promissio, qua praecedentem confirmat. Indignatio non est mihi, fury is not in me. Quomodo enim is nobis irasci potest, qui pro nobis est mortuus? Quanquam igitur appareat, eum irasci, non tamen est verum, quod irascatur. Sic Paulo immittitur angelus Satanae, sed non est ira, nam ipse Christus dicit: sufficit tibi gratia mea.
Sic pater filium delinquentem castigat, sed non est ira, quanquam appareat ira esse. Custodia igitur vineae aliquando cogit Deum immittere speciem irae, ne pereat luxurie, sed non est ira. Est insignis textus, which we should inscribe on all tribulations: Non est indignatio mihi, non possum irasci. Quod autem videtur irasci est custodia vineae, ne pereas et fias securus. Luther. “In order to understand fully the doctrine of the wrath of God we must have a clear perception of the antithesis: the long-suffering of God, and the wrath of God, wrath and mercy.” Lange.24. Isaiah 27:7-9. “Christ judges His church, i.e., He punishes and afflicts it, but He does this in measure.
The sorrow and cross is meted out, and is not, as it appears to us, without measure and infinite. It is so measured that redemption must certainly follow. But why does God let His Christians so suffer? Why does He not lay the cross on the wicked? God answers this question and speaks: the sin of Jacob will thereby cease. That is: God restrains sin by the cross, and subdues the old Adam.” Veit Dietrich.25.
Isaiah 27:13. [“The application of this verse to a future restoration of the Jews can neither be established nor disproved. In itself considered, it appears to contain nothing which may not be naturally applied to events long past.” J. A. Alexander.—“This prediction was completely and entirely fulfilled by the return of the Jews to their own country under the decree of Cyrus.” Barnes.—D. M.].
AND 1. On Isaiah 24:4-6. Fast-day sermon. Warning against dechristianization of the life of the people. 1) Wherein such dechristianization consists: a, transgression of the commandments that are in force; b, alteration of the commandments which are essential articles of the everlasting covenant, as e.g. removing of all state institutions from the basis of religion. 2) Its consequences: a, Desecration of the land (subjectively, by the spread of a profane, godless sentiment; objectively, by the secularization of relations hitherto held sacred); b, the curse consumes the land, Isaiah 24:4.
2. On Isaiah 25:1-5. The Lord, the refuge of the needy. 1) He has the power to help. This we perceive a, from His nature (Lord, God, Wonderful); b, from His deeds (Isaiah 25:1 b, Isaiah 25:2). 2) He gives His strength even to the feeble, (Isaiah 25:4). 3) These are thereby victorious, (Isaiah 25:5).
3. On Isaiah 25:6-9. Easter Sermon, by T. Schaeffer (Manch. Gab. u. ein Geist III. p. 269):—“The glorious Easter-blessing of the Risen One: 1) Wherein it consists? 2) who receive it? 3) what are its effects? Christmas Sermon, by Romberg [ibid. 1869, p. 78): Our text represents to us Christmas joy under the image of a festive board. Let us consider, 1) the host; 2) the guests; 3) the gifts.”
4. On Isaiah 26:1-4. Concerning the church. 1) She is a strong city in which salvation is to be found. 2) The condition of having a portion in her is faith. 3) The blessing which she is instrumental in procuring is peace.
5. Isaiah 26:19-21. The comfort of the Christian for the present and future. 1) For the present the Christian is to betake himself to his quiet chamber, where he is alone with his Lord and by Him made cheerful and secure. 2) For the future he has the certain hope, a, that the Lord will judge the wicked, b, raise the believer to everlasting life.
6. Isaiah 27:2-9. How the Lord deals with His vineyard, the church. 1) Fury is not in Him towards it; 2) He protects and purifies it; 3) He gives it strength, peace and growth; 4) He chastens it in measure; 5) He makes the chastisement itself serve to purge it from sins.
Footnotes:Heb. perverteth the face thereof.Or, prince.earth.Heb. the height of the people.emptiness.
2. THE OF THE GLOBE
Isaiah 24:13-2313 When thus it shall be in the midst of the land among the people,
There shall be as the shaking of an olive tree,
And as the gleaning grapes when the vintage is done.
14 They shall lift up their voice,
They shall sing for the majesty of the Lord,They shall cry aloud from the sea.
15 Wherefore glorify ye the Lord in the fires,
Even the name of the Lord God of Israel in the isles of the sea.
16 From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs,
Even glory to the righteous.
But I said,
My leanness, my leanness, woe unto me!
The treacherous dealers have dealt treacherously;
Yea, the treacherous dealers have dealt very treacherously.
17 Fear, and the pit, and the snare are upon thee,
O inhabitant of the earth.
18 And it shall come to pass,
That he who fleeth from the noise of the fear
Shall fall into the pit;
And he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit
Shall be taken in the snare:
For the windows from on high are open,
And the foundations of the earth do shake.
19 The earth is utterly broken down;
The earth is clean dissolved,
The earth is moved exceedingly.
20 The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard,
And shall be removed like a cottage;
And the transgression thereof shall be heavy upon it;
And it shall fall,
And not rise again.
21 And it shall come to pass in that day,
That the Lord shall punish the host of the high ones that are on high,
And the kings of the earth upon the earth.
22 And they shall be gathered together, as prisoners are gathered in the pit,
And shall be shut up in the prison,
And after many days shall they be visited.
23 Then the moon shall be confounded,
And the sun ashamed,
When the Lord of hosts shall reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem,
And before his ancients gloriously.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_24:13. The impersonal expression λδιδιδ is to be understood as εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ Isaiah 17:5.
Isaiah 24:19. ψֹ ?ςָ ?δ is a substantive as αֶּ ?βֶ ?γ in Isaiah 24:16 and ΰֲ ?ρֵ ?τָ ?δ in Isaiah 24:22; three examples in this chapter of the infin. abs. being represented by a substantive formed from the same stem. Isaiah 24:22. Many would connect ΰַ ?ρִּ ?ιψ with ΰֲ ?ρֵ ?τָ ?δ; but ΰַ ?ρִּ ?ιψ is really in apposition to the subject involved in ΰֻ ?ρִּ ?τεּ. The singular ΰַ ?ρִּ ?ιψ need not cause surprise; comp. Isaiah 20:4. The case before us comes under the category of the ideal number treated of, Naegelsbach Gr., § 61, 1 sq. ςַ ?μ stands in the signification of ΰֵ ?μ. Comp. on Isaiah 10:3.
AND 1. The Prophet depicts here the second stage of the world’s destruction. This consists substantially in the shattering of the globe of the earth itself. The transition is formed by the thought, Isaiah 24:13, that only few men, a gleaning, as it were, will survive the first catastrophe. But these saved ones are the pious, the elect of God. These flee to the promised land, to Jerusalem.
From the sea, i.e., from the west, the prophet hears the song of praise (Isaiah 24:14). He answers by calling on east and west to praise the name of the Lord (Isaiah 24:15). This summons is obeyed. We perceive from this, that the elect of God are hidden in a safe place (Isaiah 24:16 a). But that is just the occasion for the signal to be given for the occurrence of the last and most frightful catastrophe. The Prophet announces it with an exclamation of anxiety and terror.
At the same time he declares why it must be so; the sin of men provokes the judgment of God (Isaiah 24:16 b). He characterizes beforehand the catastrophe as one which shall take place in different successive acts, each more severe than the preceding, so that he who has escaped the first blow will certainly fall under the second or the third (Isaiah 24:17-18 a). For, as at the deluge, the windows of heaven will be opened, and the foundations of the earth will be broken up (Isaiah 24:18 b). The globe of the earth will then rend, burst, break (Isaiah 24:19), reel like a drunken man. The earth cannot bear the load of sin. It must, therefore, fall to rise again no more (Isaiah 24:20).
But the judgment of God is not confined to the earth: The angelic powers that are hostile to God will, as well as the representatives of the worldly power on earth, be cast into the abyss, and there shut up for a time; but after a certain term has expired, they will again be liberated (Isaiah 24:21-22). Sun and moon, too, will lose their brightness, so that only in one place of the world can safety be found, namely, in Zion. For, although the rest of the earth be shattered, Zion, the holy mount, remains uninjured. For there Jehovah rules as king, and through the heads of His people there gathered round Him will He communicate His glory to His people also (Isaiah 24:23).
2. When thus it shall be—treacherously.Isaiah 24:13-16. In the olive and grape harvest the great mass of the fruit is shaken or plucked off and cast into the press. Only few berries remain on the olive tree or vine. The few remaining olives are struck off with a stick. The few grapes remaining on the vine are afterwards cut off.
When, then, at the close of the catastrophe depicted in Isaiah 24:1-13, only few persons survive, that is a proof of the extent of the catastrophe, and a measure whereby to estimate it. This by the way of explaining the λִ ?ι. [Translate, “For thus it shall be;” not as in the E. V. “When thus it shall be,” etc.]. But few escape destruction. These are the elect. To these few, who are by implication supposed in Isaiah 24:13 b, δֵ ?ξָּ ?δ, Isaiah 24:14, refers.
They exult at their deliverance, which they owe to the majesty of Jehovah, ψπο is found as here connected with φָ ?δַ ?μ12:6; Isaiah 54:1. ψπο occurs frequently in the first and second part of Isaiah. βָ ?ΰεֹ ?ο is an expression very common in Isaiah. But why does the Prophet hear from the sea, i.e., from the west the exulting shout of them that have escaped? We cannot, with Drechsler and some older interpreters, take ξִ ?ιָּ ?ν in the comparative sense (they shall cry aloud more than the sea); for φδμ, an onomatopoetic word, denotes a clear sound (like the neighing of a horse) which cannot be compared with the thunder of the sea. Does there lie in the expression ξιν something like a foreboding of the fact that the Church of the Lord would spread especially in the lands of the west, and that, therefore, the great mass of the redeemed would come from that quarter? From the moment when the Prophet announced the comforting word (Isaiah 24:13-14), all the godly dwelling in the east and west are to praise the name of the Lord who has given to them, in place of the terrible day of judgment, the promise of deliverance. There can be no doubt that the word ΰֻ ?ψִ ?ιν is connected with ΰεּ ?ψ ,ΰεֹ ?ψ (ignis, flamma, a word peculiar to Isaiah; for beside Isaiah 31:9; Isaiah 44:16; Isaiah 47:14; Isaiah 50:11, it is found only Ezekiel 5:2, and there probably as a reminiscence from Isaiah) and with ΰεּ ?ψִ ?ιν (on the breastplate of the high-priest).
As the light rises daily in the east of the earth, as in opposition to it the north is conceived as φָ ?τεֹ ?ο (plaga abscondita, caliginosa), as the Greeks too designate the eastern region of the heavens by πρὸςἠῶτ’ ἠέλιόντε (Il. xii. 239 et saepe), we are justified in understanding by ΰֻ ?ψִ ?ιν the countries of light, or the sun, i.e. the east. The meaning “eastern countries” answers well to the “islands of the sea” in the parallel clause. There is no need for altering the text. In Isaiah 24:14 those who are saved are described as coming with jubilation, and in Isaiah 24:15 all who desire deliverance are summoned to shout for joy. This explains how the Prophet, Isaiah 24:16, actually hears songs of praise (comp. Isaiah 12:2; Isaiah 51:3; Isaiah 25:5) from the end of the earth (λָּ ?πָ ?σala, ora, extremity; λπσδΰψυ only here, yet comp.
Isaiah 11:12). The theme of the songs is φְ ?αִ ?ιμַ ?φַּ ?γִּ ?ιχ. If it were said λָּ ?αεֹ ?γμΧ, I would unhestitatingly refer φγιχ to God. But, as Delitzsch well remarks, Jahve bestows φְ ?αִ ?ι4:2; Isaiah 28:5; but to him λּ ?αεֹ ?γ is given. The thought is like that in Romans 2:6 sqq. Every one is rewarded according to his works.
Therefore praise (φְ ?αִ ?ιornatus, decus, splendor4:2; Isaiah 13:19; Isaiah 23:9; Isaiah 28:1; Isaiah 28:4-5) is to the righteous, but tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that doeth evil. The fundamental idea of the divine judgment is thus expressed. The Prophet has seen the one side “glory to the righteous” fulfilled. These, the righteous, have arrived at their hiding place. They are gathered on the holy mountain, and find there protection (Isaiah 4:5 sq.). But thereby the sign is given that now the judgment can begin, and has to begin on the ungodly.
This prospect agitates the Prophet exceedingly. He sees himself in that fatal moment fear and quake, and hears himself breaking out into the words ψζιμιεβεΧ. This he introduces with εΰξψ.ψָ ?ζι. is ἅπ. λεγ. But the signification is clear. The verb ψָ ?ζָ ?δ denotes attenuare, maciare (Isaiah 17:4). The Prophet feels his powers wasting away as the effect of the extraordinary terror (comp.
Daniel 7:28; Daniel 8:27; Daniel 10:16 sqq.). He next declares that the φγιχ has his counterpart on earth in the αֹ ?λֵּ ?γ. As the former has glory for his portion from a just God, so the latter receives “fear and the pit and the snare.” It will have been seen that I do not take αβγ in the sense of “robber,” but retain its proper signification of perfidy, faithlessness, falling away (Isaiah 21:2; Isaiah 33:1; Isaiah 48:8). The Prophet by the accumulation and repetition of verbal and substantive forms of αָּ ?πγ indicates that this perfidy and faithlessness were exercised in the highest degree, and in all forms.
3. Fear and the pit——rise again.
Isaiah 24:17-20. By three assonant words which sound in accord not only with one another, but also with the immediately preceding symphony, the Prophet characterizes, first in general terms, the terrible catastrophe, the second act of the judgment of the world. By the threefold series of punishments the impossibility of escaping judgment is effectively set before the eyes. And then, in particular, the all-embracing character of the judgment which lets nothing escape, is exhibited by showing how the earth is affected above, below, and in the midst, and shaken till it is broken down. First, the windows (ΰψαεϊcancelli, fenestrae, Genesis 7:11; Genesis 8:2 comp. Isaiah 60:8) from on high,i.e., from heaven, are opened, not to let rain fall in order to produce a deluge; for the earth shall not be destroyed again by water (Genesis 9:11).
But the Lord has yet other weapons. Wind, fire, thunder and lightning, drought, pestilence, etc., are also God’s instruments of punishment, and they also in a certain sense come from on high (comp. Psalms 78:49). The foundations of the earth (Isaiah 58:12, comp. Isaiah 40:21) are the foundations on which the earth rests. These shall be shaken (Isaiah 13:13; Isaiah 14:16).
Then the globe of the earth, assailed from above, and from beneath deprived of its supports, must feel in itself the powerful hand of Almighty God. Four times in succession is the word “the earth” or “earth” used with emphasis. Terrible, not merely local, but universal earthquakes shake the earth. It receives rents, becomes full of breaks, totters (Isaiah 40:20; Isaiah 41:7; Isaiah 54:10), reels (Isaiah 6:4; Isaiah 7:2; Isaiah 19:1; Isaiah 29:9; Isaiah 37:22) as the drunkard (generic article) and oscillates to and fro as the hammock shaken by the wind (Isaiah 1:8). Who could deem it possible that there is a burden which the earth that sustains everything, cannot bear, by which it is crushed as a house too heavily burdened? This burden is sin (Isaiah 1:4; Psalms 38:5).
This is the destruction of men and of things. Where God’s creation is tainted with it, it must come to naught. As man, the lord of creation, fell by sin, so must the earth also, the theatre of human history, fall by sin never again to rise in its previous form. The words It shall fall and not rise again, are a clear proof that the total destruction of the globe of the earth in its present form is the subject treated of. In its present form! For the earth shall rise again in a higher, holy form beyond the range of sin and its consequence, death.
For there is a new heaven and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness (Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; 2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1).
4. And it shall come—gloriously.Isaiah 24:21-23. The Prophet now lifts up his eye to the super-terrestrial sphere. As the lot of the earth is affected by the influence of that sphere, so the swoop of the judgment that falls upon the earth must reach even to it. That φαΰδξψεν are not earthly powers (Luther“hohe Ritterschaft,”Targum, Calvin, Haveernick and others), may be inferred even from the expression φαΰ; for the high ones of the earth do not form a φָ ?αָ ?ΰ. Moreover φαΰηξψεν is evidently identical with “the host of heaven,” Isaiah 34:4, and by the addition αַּ ?ξָּ ?ψεν this φαΰδξψεֹ ?ν is more than sufficiently distinguished from every conceivable φαΰδξψεν upon the earth.
That the host of the height are only the stars, as Hofmann (Schriftbeweis II. 2, p. 522) would have it, seems to be rendered by the context incredible. For how could the irrational glories of heaven be put in conjunction with the rational glories of the earth? The former correspond not to our kings, but to our earth itself. How, too, can we conceive a judgment executed on a world, without its affecting at the same time those intelligent beings that stand in any connection with that world? It seems to me to be likewise one-sided to refer φαΰδξψεν merely to the angels, who are said to be heads and guardians of the separate kingdoms (Daniel 10:13; Daniel 10:20; Rosenmueller, Hitzig, Delitzsch, and others), or to the heathen gods conceived of as angels (Knobel). The judgment of God falls certainly on every thing that can be called φαΰδξψεν, so far as it has at all merited the judgment.
The expression is found only here; but the nearly related expression, “the host of heaven,” is frequently used to designate, sometimes, the host of the stars (Isaiah 40:26; Isaiah 45:12; Jeremiah 8:2; Jeremiah 33:22; Daniel 8:10), sometimes, the angelic world (1 Kings 22:19; Psalms 103:21; Nehemiah 9:6, and the expression φְ ?αָ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ), sometimes, perhaps, both together (Deuteronomy 4:19; Deuteronomy 17:3; 2 Kings 17:16; 2 Kings 21:3; 2 Kings 21:5; Isaiah 34:4; Zephaniah 1:5). The host of the height and the kings of the earth are both the subject of ΰρτε, Isaiah 24:22. As now we have shown that the host of the height can designate the world of angels, and as the Scripture clearly testifies that the angels are bound as a punishment for their apostasy (2 Peter 2:4; Judges 6; Revelation 20:1-3), can not the Prophet’s eye have perceived this feature of the picture of what will take place at the end of the world? The invisible, extramundane heads of the worldly power, as well as their earthly, visible organs, will, according to the statement of the Prophet, be collected as prisoners in the pit, and shut up in it. The pit is here used for Sheol as oftentimes (Isaiah 14:15; Isaiah 14:19; Isaiah 38:18). But not merely the binding of those angelic and worldly powers, their being set loose for a time is also announced by the Prophet.
Only by a brief, obscure word, probably not seen through by himself, does the Prophet intimate this. Even we should not understand this word if the revelation of the New Testament, which is nearer the time of the fulfilment, did not throw light on this dark point. It declares expressly that after a thousand years Satan should be loosed out of his prison (Revelation 20:7). Isaiah uses here an indefinite announcement of time—after many days—and an indefinite verb. τχγ stands here as Isaiah 23:17 of a visiting which consists in looking again after some one who has remained for a time neglected (Jeremiah 27:22). This ἐπισκέπτειν can be a gracious visitation, but it can also be a new stage in the visitation of judgment. That we have to take the word here in the latter sense is seen from the place quoted from the Revelation of John.
The setting loose of Satan is only the prelude to his total destruction, Revelation 20:10. Then follows the last, highest and grandest revelation of God. The earth now becomes what it ought originally to have been, but which it was hindered from being by sin, viz., the common dwelling-place of God and of men. The heavenly Jerusalem, the tabernacle in which God dwells with men (Revelation 21:3) descends upon the renovated earth. This is the Jerusalem in which according to Isaiah 24:23, Jehovah Zebaoth reigns as King. This city needs no sun and no moon any more—for the Lord Himself is its light (Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).
Before this light the earthly sun (ηַ ?ξָּ ?δ, Isaiah 30:26) and the earthly moon (ibid.) grow pale (comp. Isaiah 1:29); they which were created to rule the day and to rule the night, resign their dominion to Him who alone and everywhere from this time on will from mount Zion rule the earth. Here too is the place where the redeemed of the Lord (Isaiah 24:13-16) find everlasting rest and protection (Isaiah 4:5 sq.). The Prophet has already (Isaiah 1:22 sqq.) shown the importance of rulers for the moral condition of the people. The whole history of the people is a proof of their importance. In the new Jerusalem the new Israel will have new elders also, who will not be the promoters of wickedness and misery any more, but of all that is good and glorious (Isaiah 3:14).
The elders of the Apocalypse, who perhaps bear their name from this place before us, are, therefore, in my opinion, not angels, as Hofmann will have them to be, but representatives of the people of God. For why should there not be order and organization even in the kingdom of glory?
AND ETHICAL1. Isaiah 24:2. “When general judgments take place, no distinction is observed between man and wife, master and servant, mistress and maid, learned and unlearned, noble and plebeian, clergy and laity; therefore let no one rely on any external prerogative or superiority, but let every one without distinction repent and forsake sin.”—Cramer. Though this is right, yet we must, on the other hand, remember that the Lord declares in reference to the same great event, “Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left” (Matthew 24:10 sq.). There is no contradiction in these two statements. Both are true: outward relations will make no difference; there shall be no respect of persons.
But the state of the heart will make a difference. According to the inward character there will, in the case of those whose external position in the world is perfectly alike, be some who enter life, others whose doom is death.
2. Isaiah 24:5 sq. “The earth is burdened with sins, and is therefore deprived of every blessing. The earth must suffer for our guilt, when we have as it were spoilt it, and it must be subject to vanity for our sakes (Romans 8:20). What wonder is it that it should show itself ungrateful toward us?”—Cramer.[3. Isaiah 24:13 sq. “Observe the small number of this remnant; here and there one who shall escape the common calamity (as Noah and his family, when the old world was drowned), who when all faces gather blackness, can lift up their head with joy. Luke 21:26-28.” Henry.—D. M.].
4. Isaiah 24:17-20. Our earth is a volcanic body. Mighty volcanic forces were active at its formation. That these are still in commotion in the interior of the earth is proved by the many active volcanoes scattered over the whole earth, and by the perpetual volcanic convulsions which we call earthquakes. These have hitherto been confined to particular localities.
But who can guarantee that a concentration and simultaneous eruption of those volcanic forces, that is, a universal earthquake, shall not hereafter occur? The Lord makes express mention of earthquakes among the signs which shall precede His second coming (Matthew 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:11). And in 2 Peter 3:5 sqq. the future destruction of the earth by fire is set over against the destruction of the old world by water. Isaiah in our place announces a catastrophe whose characteristic features will be that, 1) there will be no escape from it; 2) destructive forces will assail from above and below; 3) the earth will be rent asunder; 4) it will reel and totter; 5) it will suffer so heavy a fall that it will not rise again (Isaiah 24:20 b). Is there not here a prophecy of the destruction of the earth by volcanic forces? And how suddenly can they break loose!
The ministers of the word have every reason to compare this extreme exposedness of our earth to fire, and the possibility of its unexpectedly sudden collapse with the above-cited warnings of the word of God, and to attach thereto the admonition which is added in 2 Peter 3:11.
5. Isaiah 24:21. The earth is a part of our planetary system. It is not what it appears to the optical perception to be, a central body around which worlds of a different nature revolve, but it, together with many similar bodies, revolves round a common centre. The earth according to that view of the account of the creation in Genesis 1, which appears to me the true one, has arisen with all the bodies of our Solar system out of one primary matter, originally united, common to them all. If our Solar System is a well-ordered, complete organism, it must rest on the basis of a not merely formal, but also material unity; i.e., the separate bodies must move, not only according to a principle of order which governs all, but they must also as to their substance be essentially like.
And as they arose simultaneously, so must they perish simultaneously. It is inconceivable that our earth alone should disappear from the organism of the Solar System, or pass over to a higher material condition. Its absence, or ceasing to exist in its previous form and substance, would necessarily draw after it the ruin of the whole system. Hence the Scripture speaks every where of a passing away and renovation of the heaven and the earth (Psalms 102:26; Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; Matthew 5:18; Matthew 24:29; Matthew 24:35; 2 Peter 3:7; 2 Peter 3:10; 2 Peter 3:13; Hebrews 12:26; Revelation 20:11; Revelation 21:1). The heaven that shall pass away with a great noise, whose powers shall be shaken, whose stars shall fall, is the planetary heaven. The same lot will happen to the companions of our earth, to the other planets, and to the centre, the sun, and to all other co-ordinate and subordinate stellar bodies, which will befall the earth itself.
This is the substance of the view which serves as a basis for our place. But personal beings are not thereby by any means excluded from the φαΰξψεν. The parallel expression ξμλιδΰγξδ, and the use in other places of the related expression φαΰδωׁ ?ξιν lead us rather to suppose personal beings to be included. But I believe that a distinction must be made here. As the heavenly bodies which will pass away simultaneously with the earth, can only be those which arose together with it, and which stand in organic connection with it, so also the angelic powers, which are judged simultaneously with us men, can be only those which stand in connection with the heavenly bodies of our Solar System, i.e., with the earthly material world. There are heavenly bodies of glorious pneumatic substance.
If personal beings stand in connection with them, they must also be pure, glorious, resplendent beings. These will not be judged. They are the holy angels, who come with the Lord (Matthew 25:31). But it is quite conceivable that all the bodies of our Solar System are till the judgment like our earth suffered to be the theatre of the spirits of darkness.
6. Isaiah 24:21-23, It seems to me that the Prophet has here sketched the chief matters pertaining to eschatology. For the passing away of heaven and earth, the binding of Satan (Revelation 20:1-3), the loosing of Satan again (Revelation 20:7), and finally the reign of God alone, which will make sun and moon unnecessary (Revelation 21:23)—are not these the boundary-stones of the chief epochs of the history of the end of the world?
7. Isaiah 25:6. [“The Lord of hosts makes this feast. The provision is very rich, and every thing is of the best. It is a feast, which supposes abundance and variety; it is a continual feast to believers: it is their fault if it be not. It is a feast of fat things and full of marrow; so relishing, so nourishing are the comforts of the Gospel to all those that feast upon them and digest them. The returning prodigal was entertained with the fatted calf; and David has that pleasure in communion with God, with which his soul is satisfied as with marrow and fatness.
It is a feast of wines on the lees; the strongest-bodied wines, that have been long kept upon the lees, and then are well refined from them, so that they are clear and fine. There is that in the Gospel which, like fine wine, soberly used, makes glad the heart, and raises the spirits, and is fit for those that are of a heavy heart, being under convictions of sin, and mourning for it, that they may drink and forget their misery (for that is the proper use of wine; it is a cordial for those that need it, Proverbs 31:6-7) may be of good cheer, knowing that their sins are forgiven, and may be vigorous in their spiritual work and warfare, as a strong man refreshed with wine.” Henry.—D. M.]
8. Isaiah 25:9. “In the Old Testament the vail and covering were before men’s eyes, partly because they waited for the light that was to appear, partly because they sat in darkness and in the shadow of death (Luke 1:79). The fulfilment of this prediction has in Christ already begun, and will at last be perfectly fulfilled in the Church triumphant where all ignorance and sorrow shall be dispelled (1 Corinthians 13:12).” Cramer.9. Isaiah 25:8. “God here represents Himself as a mother, who presses to her bosom her sorrowful son, comforts him and wipes away his tears (Isaiah 66:13). The righteous are to believe and appropriate this promise, that every one may learn to speak with Paul in the time of trial: the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us, Romans 8:18.” Cramer.10. Isaiah 25:10. “This is now the hope and consolation of the church that the hand of the Lord rests on this mountain, that is, that He will be gracious, and let His power, help and grace be there seen and felt.
But the unbelieving Moabites, i.e., the Jews, with all others who will not receive the gospel, shall be threshed to pieces as straw in the mire; these the Lord’s hand will not rescue, as it helps those who wait on Him, but it shall press them down so that they will never rise, according to the saying, Mark 16:16.” Veit Dietrich.11. Isaiah 25 Three thoughts contained in this chapter we should hold fast: 1) When we see the world triumph over every thing which belongs to the Lord and His kingdom, when our hearts are anxious about the preservation in the world of the Church of Christ, which is sore oppressed, let this word of the Prophet comfort our hearts. The world-city which contains all that is of the world, sinks into the dust, and the church of Christ goes from her chains and bands into the state of freedom and glory. We have often seen that it is the Lord’s way to let every thing come to maturity. When it is once ripe, He comes suddenly with His sentence. Let us comfort ourselves therewith, for thus will it happen with the world and its dominion over the faithful followers of Christ.
When it is ripe, suddenly it will come to an end. 2) No one who has a heart for the welfare of the nations can see without the deepest pain how all hearts are now seduced and befooled, and all eyes closed and covered. The simplest truths are no longer acknowledged, but the more perverse, brutal and mean views and doctrines are, the more greedily are they laid hold of. We cannot avert this. But our comfort is that even this seduction of the nations will reach its climax. Then men will come to themselves. The vail and covering will fall off, and the Gospel will shine with new light before the nations.
Therewith let us comfort ourselves. 3) Till this happens, the church is sorrowful. But she shall be full of joy. The promise is given to her that she shall be fully satisfied with the good things of the house of the Lord. A life is promised to her which neither death nor any pain can affect, as she has rest from all enemies. The word of the Lord shall be fulfilled in her: Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. The Church that has such a promise may wait in patient quietness for its accomplishment, and praise the Lord in affliction, till it pleases Him to glorify her before all nations.” Weber, The Prophet Isaiah. 1875.
12. Isaiah 26:1. “The Christian church is a city of God. God has built it, and He is the right Master-builder. It is strong: 1) on account of the Builder; 2) on account of the foundation and corner-stone, which is Christ; 3) on account of the bond wherewith the living stones are bound together, which is the unity of the faith.” Cramer. [The security and happiness of true believers, both on earth and in heaven, is represented in Scripture under the image of their dwelling in a city in which they can bid defiance to all their enemies. We dwell in such a city even now, Psalms 46:4-5. We look for such a city, Hebrews 11:10; Hebrews 11:16; Revelation 21—D. M.]
13. Isaiah 26:2. [These words may be taken as a description of the people whom God owns, who are fit to be accounted members of the church of the living God on earth, and who will not be excluded from the celestial city. Instead of complaining that only the righteous and the faithful will be admitted into the heavenly city, it should rather give us joy to think that there will be no sin there, that none but the just and true will there be found. This has been a delightful subject of reflection to God’s saints. The last words written by Henry Martyn were: “Oh! when shall time give place to eternity? When shall appear that new heaven and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness?
There, there shall in no wise enter in any thing that defileth; none of that wickedness which has made men worse than wild beasts—none of their corruptions which add to the miseries of mortality shall be seen or heard of any more.”—D. M.]
14. Isaiah 26:4. “The fourth privilege of the church is trust in God the Rock of Ages, i.e., in Christ, who not only here, but also Matthew 16; 1 Corinthians 10; 1 Peter 2, is called a rock in a peculiar manner, because no other foundation of salvation and of the church can be laid except this rock, which is here called the rock of ages on account of the eternity of His being, merit and office. Hence a refutation can be drawn of the papistical fable which makes Peter and his successors, the Roman Pontiffs, to be the rock on which the church is built.” Foerster. [“Whatever we trust to the world for, it will be but for a moment. All we expect from it is confined within the limits of time; but what we trust in God for will last as long as we shall last. For in the Lord Jehovah, Jah, Jehovah, in Him who was, and is, and is to come, there is a rock of ages, a firm and lasting foundation for faith and hope to build upon; and the house built on that rock will stand in a storm.” Henry.”—D. M.]
15. Isaiah 26:5. “It is very common with the prophets, when they prophesy of the kingdom of Christ to make reference to the proud and to the needy, and to represent the latter as exalted and the former as brought low. This truth is directed properly against the self-righteous. For Christ and His righteousness will not endure spiritual pride and presumption; but the souls that are poor, that hunger and thirst for grace, that know their need, these Christ graciously receives.” Cramer.16. Isaiah 26:6. “It vexes the proud all the more that they will be overcome by those who are poor and of no consequence. For example, Goliath was annoyed that a boy should come against him with a staff (1 Sam. 13:43) Cramer.17.
Isaiah 26:8-10. That the justice of God must absolutely manifest itself that the majesty of the Lord may be seen, and that the wicked may learn righteousness, must even from a new Testament view-point be admitted. But the New Testament disputes the existence of any one who is righteous when confronted by the law, and who is not deserving of punishment. [But that there is none righteous, no not one, is taught most emphatically in the Old Testament also.—D. M.]. But it (the New Testament) while it shuts up all, Jews and Gentiles, without exception, under sin (Galatians 3:22; Romans 3:9; Romans 11:32), sets forth a scheme of mediation, which, while it renders full satisfaction to justice, at the same time offers to all the possibility of deliverance. This mediation is through the Cross of Christ.
It is only when this mediation has not been accepted that punitive justice has free course. It should not surprise us that even the Evangelist of the Old Covenant, who wrote chap. 53, did not possess perfect knowledge of this mediation. Let us remember John the Baptist (Matthew 3:7; Matthew 11:11) and the disciples of the Lord (Luke 9:54). [Let us not forget that Isaiah was a true Prophet, and spoke as he was moved by the Spirit of God. The Apostle Paul did not find fault with the most terrible denunciations of judgment contained in the Old Testament, or affect a superiority over the men who uttered them. On the contrary, he quotes them as words which could not be suffered to fall, but which must be fulfilled in all their dreadful import. See e.g.
Romans 11:9-10.—D. M.].
18. Isaiah 26:12. “It is a characteristic of true, sincere Christians, that they give God the glory and not themselves, and freely confess that they have nothing of themselves, but everything from God (1 Corinthians 4:7; Philippians 2:13; Hebrews 12:2).” Cramer.19. Isaiah 26:16. The old theologians have many comforting and edifying thoughts connected with this place: “A magnet has the power to raise and attract to itself iron. Our heart is heavy as iron. But the hand of God is as a magnet.
When that hand visits us with affliction, it lifts us up, and draws us to itself.” “Distress teaches us to pray, and prayer again dispels all distress. One wedge displaces the other.” “Ex gravibus curis impellimur ad pia vota.” “Ex monte myrrhae procedimus ad collem thuris (Cant. 9:6). In amaritudine crucis exsurgit odor devotae precationis (Psalms 86:6 sq.).” “Ubi nulla crux et tentatio, ibi nulla vera oratio. Oratio sine mails est tanquam avis sine alis. Optimus orandi magister necessitas. Τὰπαθήματαμαθήματα. Quae nocent, docent.
Ubi tentatio, ibi oratio. Mala, quae hic nos premunt, ad Deum ire compellunt. Qui nescit orare, ingrediatur mare.” “When the string is most tightly drawn, it sounds best. Cross and temptation are the right prayer-bell. They are the press by which God crushes out the juice of prayer.” Cramer and Foerster.20. Isaiah 26:20.
As God, when the deluge was about to burst, bade Noah go into his ark as into his chamber, and Himself shut the door on him (Genesis 7:6); so does the Lord still act when a storm is approaching; He brings His own into a chamber where they can be safe, either for their temporal preservation and protection against every might (Psalms 91:1), or, on the other hand, to give them repose by a peaceful and happy death.” “His anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life (Psalms 30:6).” Cramer.21. Isaiah 27:1. [“Great and mighty princes [nations] if they oppose the people of God, are in God’s account, as dragons and serpents, and plagues of mankind; and the Lord will punish them in due time. They are too big for men to deal with, and call to an account; and therefore the great God will take the doing of it into His own hands.” Henry.—D. M.].
22. Isaiah 27:2-5. “It seems to the world that God has no concern for His church and Christians, else, we imagine, they would be better off. But certain it is, that it is not the angels but God Himself that will be watcher over this vineyard, and will send it gracious rain.” Veit Dietrich. [“The church is a vineyard of red wine, yielding the best and choicest grapes, intimating the reformation of the church, that it now brings forth good fruit unto God, whereas before it brought forth fruit to itself, or brought forth wild grapes, Isaiah 5:4.” “God takes care (1) of the safety of this vineyard; I the Lord do keep it. He speaks this, as glorying in it, that He is, and has undertaken to be, the keeper of Israel; those that bring forth fruit to God are, and shall be always, under His protection. (2) God takes care of the fruitfulness of this vineyard: I will water it every moment; and yet it shall not be over watered. We need the constant and continual waterings of the divine grace; for if that be at any time withdrawn, we wither and come to nothing.” Henry. D. M.].
23. Isaiah 27:4. “Est aurea promissio, qua praecedentem confirmat. Indignatio non est mihi, fury is not in me. Quomodo enim is nobis irasci potest, qui pro nobis est mortuus? Quanquam igitur appareat, eum irasci, non tamen est verum, quod irascatur. Sic Paulo immittitur angelus Satanae, sed non est ira, nam ipse Christus dicit: sufficit tibi gratia mea.
Sic pater filium delinquentem castigat, sed non est ira, quanquam appareat ira esse. Custodia igitur vineae aliquando cogit Deum immittere speciem irae, ne pereat luxurie, sed non est ira. Est insignis textus, which we should inscribe on all tribulations: Non est indignatio mihi, non possum irasci. Quod autem videtur irasci est custodia vineae, ne pereas et fias securus. Luther. “In order to understand fully the doctrine of the wrath of God we must have a clear perception of the antithesis: the long-suffering of God, and the wrath of God, wrath and mercy.” Lange.24. Isaiah 27:7-9. “Christ judges His church, i.e., He punishes and afflicts it, but He does this in measure.
The sorrow and cross is meted out, and is not, as it appears to us, without measure and infinite. It is so measured that redemption must certainly follow. But why does God let His Christians so suffer? Why does He not lay the cross on the wicked? God answers this question and speaks: the sin of Jacob will thereby cease. That is: God restrains sin by the cross, and subdues the old Adam.” Veit Dietrich.25.
Isaiah 27:13. [“The application of this verse to a future restoration of the Jews can neither be established nor disproved. In itself considered, it appears to contain nothing which may not be naturally applied to events long past.” J. A. Alexander.—“This prediction was completely and entirely fulfilled by the return of the Jews to their own country under the decree of Cyrus.” Barnes.—D. M.].
AND 1. On Isaiah 24:4-6. Fast-day sermon. Warning against dechristianization of the life of the people. 1) Wherein such dechristianization consists: a, transgression of the commandments that are in force; b, alteration of the commandments which are essential articles of the everlasting covenant, as e.g. removing of all state institutions from the basis of religion. 2) Its consequences: a, Desecration of the land (subjectively, by the spread of a profane, godless sentiment; objectively, by the secularization of relations hitherto held sacred); b, the curse consumes the land, Isaiah 24:4.
2. On Isaiah 25:1-5. The Lord, the refuge of the needy. 1) He has the power to help. This we perceive a, from His nature (Lord, God, Wonderful); b, from His deeds (Isaiah 25:1 b, Isaiah 25:2). 2) He gives His strength even to the feeble, (Isaiah 25:4). 3) These are thereby victorious, (Isaiah 25:5).
3. On Isaiah 25:6-9. Easter Sermon, by T. Schaeffer (Manch. Gab. u. ein Geist III. p. 269):—“The glorious Easter-blessing of the Risen One: 1) Wherein it consists? 2) who receive it? 3) what are its effects? Christmas Sermon, by Romberg [ibid. 1869, p. 78): Our text represents to us Christmas joy under the image of a festive board. Let us consider, 1) the host; 2) the guests; 3) the gifts.”
4. On Isaiah 26:1-4. Concerning the church. 1) She is a strong city in which salvation is to be found. 2) The condition of having a portion in her is faith. 3) The blessing which she is instrumental in procuring is peace.
5. Isaiah 26:19-21. The comfort of the Christian for the present and future. 1) For the present the Christian is to betake himself to his quiet chamber, where he is alone with his Lord and by Him made cheerful and secure. 2) For the future he has the certain hope, a, that the Lord will judge the wicked, b, raise the believer to everlasting life.
6. Isaiah 27:2-9. How the Lord deals with His vineyard, the church. 1) Fury is not in Him towards it; 2) He protects and purifies it; 3) He gives it strength, peace and growth; 4) He chastens it in measure; 5) He makes the chastisement itself serve to purge it from sins.
Footnotes:For thus it shall be.Or, valleys.the lands of light, the east.Heb. wing.Heb. leanness to me, or, my secret to me.shake like a hammock.Heb. visit upon.Heb. with the gathering of prisoners.Or, dungeon.Or, found wanting.Or, There shall be glory before his ancients.
3. ISRAEL’S SONG OF PRAISE FOR
Isaiah 25:1-51 O Lord, thou art my God;
I will exalt thee, I will praise thy name;
For thou hast done wonderful things;Thy counsels of old are faithfulness and truth.
2 For thou hast made of a city an heap;
Of a defenced city a ruin;
A palace of strangers to be no city;
It shall never be built.
3 Therefore shall the strong people glorify thee,
The city of the terrible nations shall fear thee.
4 For thou hast been a strength to the poor,
A strength to the needy in his distress;
A refuge from the storm, a shadow from the heat;
When the blast of the terrible ones is as a storm against the wall.
5 Thou shalt bring down the noise of strangers,
As the heat in a dry place;
Even the heat with the shadow of a cloud:
The branch of the terrible ones shall be brought low.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_25:1. ΰγεξξκ (comp. Psalms 30:2) forms an intended rhyme with ωִׁ ?ξְ ?κָ. The expression ςωׂ ?δτμΰ first occurs Exodus 15:11. Comp. τֶ ?μֶ ?ΰιεֹ ?ςֵ ?υ Isaiah 9:5. Here ςφεϊ follows τμΰ as there ιεֹ ?ςυ. Is this accidental? ΰξοΰξεπδ (ΰξο is ἄπ. λεγ.). The two words are dependent on ςωׂ ?ιϊ. God has shown truth which is faithfulness, i.e., faithful, certain. The two substantives of the same root (comp. Isaiah 3:1; Isaiah 16:6) which are placed togother, stand in the relation of apposition. Similar constructions occur Proverbs 22:21; Jeremiah 10:10; Genesis 1:12; Jeremiah 20:1. In these cases the substantive standing in apposition serves the place of an adjective that is wanting, or intensifies the notion of the adjective.
Isaiah 25:2. The construction ωׂ ?ξϊξςιψμπμ is a confusio duarum constructionum. For it must be either ωַׂ ?ξְ ?ϊָּ ςִ ?ιψμְ ?πַ ?μ (comp. Joe 1:7; Isaiah 5:20; Isaiah 14:23, et saepe) or ωַׂ ?ξְ ?ϊָּ πַּ ?μξֵ ?ςִ ?ιψ (comp. Hosea 13:2; Genesis 2:19). The construction here employed has arisen from the blending of these two modes of expression. Before ηψֶֹ ?α, Isaiah 25:5 b, we have to supply λְּ from the first part of the verse, or ηψα is to be regarded as in apposition.
AND 1. The contemplation of the mighty acts of God naturally excites to praise and thanksgiving. We are here reminded of Rom 11:33 sqq., where Paul cannot avoid praising in a hymn the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge of God. In like manner the Prophet here extols the Lord for having executed so gloriously His wonderful purpose embracing the most remote times, thus having proved Himself to be true, and at the same time having attested the Prophet as a faithful interpreter of the thoughts of God (Isaiah 25:1). The Lord has shown how He can make good what is most incredible. He announced the destruction of great cities, when they were in the height of their power and glory; and so it has happened (Isaiah 25:2).
He has thereby constrained even His enemies to honor and fear Him (Isaiah 25:3). But to His poor oppressed church He has been a shield and refuge; and has subdued the raging of her enemies against her (Isaiah 25:5).
2. O LORD … truth.Isaiah 25:1. The Prophet here sings a psalm as in chapter 12. The very commencement: O LORD, thou art my God recalls places of the Psalms as Psalms 31:15; Psalms 40:6; Psalms 86:12; Psalms 118:28; Psalms 143:10; Psalms 145:1; comp. Jeremiah 31:18, places which are related to the one before us partly as models, but mostly as copies. The ςφεϊξψηχ are in my judgment not merely the counsels conceived from afar, i.e., from eternity (Isaiah 22:11; Isaiah 37:26), but also the counsels reaching to a remote incalculable distance. ξψηχ can grammatically bear this meaning (Isaiah 17:13; Isaiah 20:3).
And is it not a quite characteristic mark of the prophecy contained in chap. 24 to which this hymn particularly relates, that it reaches to the utmost, end of the present aeon of the world? Could this have remained unknown to the Prophet? Although, according to 1 Peter 1:11, Isaiah, when reflecting on the time of the fulfilment, could not attain to exact knowledge, yet so much he must have been aware of, that his look was fixed on facts which follow the destruction of the globe of the earth in its present form (Isaiah 24:17 sqq.). The Prophet risked something when he gave expression to these strange unintelligible things which appeared such as an enthusiast would utter. But he could not do otherwise, and he did it unhesitatingly, confiding in the omniscience and veracity of the Lord. And this sure confidence, that he with his bold prophecy would not be put to shame, did not deceive him.
He sees all the marvels which he predicted realized. Therefore he praises God’s truth, faithfulness.3. For thou hast made—fear thee.Isaiah 25:2-3. The Prophet now goes into details. The prophecy contains partly threatening, partly promise. The Lord has made both good.
This is first affirmed of the threatening, and at the same time the salutary effect of its fulfilment is shown (Isaiah 25:3). λִּ ?ι in the beginning of Isa 25:2, and λִּ ?ι in the beginning of Isa 25:4 correspond to one another. Both serve to prove the truth of what was said in Isaiah 25:1 : For thou hast done,etc. The general expression for thou hast made of a city a stone-heap, sets at defiance all attempts of modern criticism to explain the prophecy of some definite historical fact. Not only once, but as often as it was predicted, the Lord has converted into a stone-heap a city which at the time of the threatening was mighty and flourishing. City and defenced city are used collectively. After the all-including ςִ ?ιψ the Prophet makes mention of the prominent parts of the city, the fortifications and the high buildings (palaces). ΰψξεο23:13; Isaiah 32:14; Isaiah 34:13.
The palaces of the foreigners (comp. on Isaiah 1:7) have become ξֵ ?ςִ ?ιψ, i.e., without city, and therefore no city. They stand desolated and solitary in the midst of the destroyed city, still capable of being recognized as palaces, but yet in the way of becoming what all around them is. For what else than a ruin can a palace become, which no city, no wall encompasses, which is exposed to every attack? The ruins of the palaces of Nineveh, Babylon, etc., attest this. ξִ ?ο in ξֵ ?ςִ ?ιψ is therefore to be taken in that negative sense in which it can denote “without,” and also “not.” (Comp. Isaiah 17:1; Isaiah 7:8; Isaiah 23:1). We have further to observe that the two ξֵ ?ςִ ?ιψ in Isaiah 25:2 correspond to one another; if out of the city (ξֵ ?ςִ ?ιψ), there has become a heap, then the ΰψλΰο is also ξֵ ?ςιψ, i.e., the palace has no longer a city around it, and is also no more a city.
This is very prominently set forth by the last clause it shall never be built (from Deuteronomy 13:7, comp. Job 12:14). The conquered must own the might of the victor, do him homage and fear him. This homage and fear may be caused by sheer force, and so be merely outward. But it is possible that the conquered have been inwardly vanquished by their adversary, i.e., that they have perceived that there is error and injustice on their side, and on the side of their conqueror, truth and right. In this case the honor and fear which they render, will be not merely constrained and outward, but voluntary and sincere.
The latter is to be supposed here. Isaiah has frequently predicted the conversion of the heathen Isaiah 2:2 sqq.; Isaiah 11:10; Isaiah 19:18 sqq.; Isaiah 23:15 sqq.; Isaiah 24:13 sqq. Mark the imperfects (futures) in Isaiah 25:3. The Prophet sees what is expressed in Isaiah 25:2 as absolutely past; but the honoring and fearing spoken of in Isaiah 25:3, will continue to all eternity.
4. For thou hast been—brought low.Isaiah 25:4-5. The leading thought of these two verses is that the Prophet perceives with gratitude and joy the manner in which the Lord has fulfilled His promises. λִּ ?ι in Isaiah 25:4 corresponds therefore to λִּ ?ι in Isaiah 25:2. That the Lord will be ξָ ?ςεֹ ?ζ (stronghold, Isaiah 17:9-10; Isaiah 23:4; Isaiah 23:14; Isaiah 27:5; Isaiah 30:3) to the γַּ ?μ (Isaiah 10:2; Isaiah 11:4; Isaiah 14:30; Isaiah 26:6) and to the ΰֶ ?αְ ?ιεֹ ?ο (Isaiah 14:30; Isaiah 29:19; Isaiah 32:7; Isaiah 41:17) has been often enough declared by the Prophet (comp. the passages referred to). γμ and ΰαιεο are, as Delitzsch remarks, designations, well-known from the Psalms, of the “ecclesia pressa.” The second part of Isa 25:4 is almost wholly borrowed from Isaiah 4:6. What is there promised is here seen by the Prophet as fulfilled (comp. Isaiah 32:2).
But this fulfilment has a positive and a negative side. The positive, i.e., the giving of safety is only possible on the ground of the negative, i.e., after the destruction of those who would deprive the poor of safety and bring them to ruin. λִּ ?ι (translate for) before ψεּ ?ηַ is therefore not co-ordinate with λִּ ?ι in the beginning of Isa 25:2; Isaiah 25:4, but is subordinate to the latter. ψεּ ?ηַ is here the blast, the storm, the furious snorting, raging of the violent ones (Isaiah 30:28; Isaiah 33:11). ζψνχιψ is a wall-storm,i.e., a storm beating against a strong wall. See a parallel expression in Isaiah 9:3 : ξַ ?θֵּ ?δωְׁ ?λֶ ?ν, the staff striking the shoulder. Mark how the hindrances to safety previously mentioned are here represented under a three-fold gradation ψεּ ?ηַ ,ωָׁ ?ΰεֹ ?ο and ζְ ?ξִ ?ιψ. We shall not err if we regard the first word as marking the beginning, the second the middle, and the third the end of the hostile action. For one part of the assaults made by the wicked on the servants and children of God is warded off at the very commencement, when it is yet only snorting.
It rebounds without doing harm as rain from the stone wall. But another part reaches its full meridian height. It sends forth the arrows of its fury as the sun sends forth the arrows of its flame in the hot land, but the Lord bends them downwards. After a victory has been won, songs of triumph are sung (ζξιψ means triumphal song, not branch, comp. Son 2:12). The enemies of the people of God can in many cases have their victory and triumph.
But even when it has gone so far, the Lord is still able to afford deliverance. He can bow to the dust the enemy already triumphant, and singing songs of praise. As the shadow (Isaiah 30:2-3; Isaiah 49:2; Isaiah 51:16) of a cloud keeps off the rays of the sun, and so diminishes the heat, so will a humiliating termination be prepared for the enemies’ song of victory by the hand of the Most High, which He holds as a sheltering shadow over His people (Isaiah 49:2; Isaiah 51:16; Job 8:9).
AND ETHICAL1. Isaiah 24:2. “When general judgments take place, no distinction is observed between man and wife, master and servant, mistress and maid, learned and unlearned, noble and plebeian, clergy and laity; therefore let no one rely on any external prerogative or superiority, but let every one without distinction repent and forsake sin.”—Cramer. Though this is right, yet we must, on the other hand, remember that the Lord declares in reference to the same great event, “Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left” (Matthew 24:10 sq.). There is no contradiction in these two statements. Both are true: outward relations will make no difference; there shall be no respect of persons.
But the state of the heart will make a difference. According to the inward character there will, in the case of those whose external position in the world is perfectly alike, be some who enter life, others whose doom is death.
2. Isaiah 24:5 sq. “The earth is burdened with sins, and is therefore deprived of every blessing. The earth must suffer for our guilt, when we have as it were spoilt it, and it must be subject to vanity for our sakes (Romans 8:20). What wonder is it that it should show itself ungrateful toward us?”—Cramer.[3. Isaiah 24:13 sq. “Observe the small number of this remnant; here and there one who shall escape the common calamity (as Noah and his family, when the old world was drowned), who when all faces gather blackness, can lift up their head with joy. Luke 21:26-28.” Henry.—D. M.].
4. Isaiah 24:17-20. Our earth is a volcanic body. Mighty volcanic forces were active at its formation. That these are still in commotion in the interior of the earth is proved by the many active volcanoes scattered over the whole earth, and by the perpetual volcanic convulsions which we call earthquakes. These have hitherto been confined to particular localities.
But who can guarantee that a concentration and simultaneous eruption of those volcanic forces, that is, a universal earthquake, shall not hereafter occur? The Lord makes express mention of earthquakes among the signs which shall precede His second coming (Matthew 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:11). And in 2 Peter 3:5 sqq. the future destruction of the earth by fire is set over against the destruction of the old world by water. Isaiah in our place announces a catastrophe whose characteristic features will be that, 1) there will be no escape from it; 2) destructive forces will assail from above and below; 3) the earth will be rent asunder; 4) it will reel and totter; 5) it will suffer so heavy a fall that it will not rise again (Isaiah 24:20 b). Is there not here a prophecy of the destruction of the earth by volcanic forces? And how suddenly can they break loose!
The ministers of the word have every reason to compare this extreme exposedness of our earth to fire, and the possibility of its unexpectedly sudden collapse with the above-cited warnings of the word of God, and to attach thereto the admonition which is added in 2 Peter 3:11.
5. Isaiah 24:21. The earth is a part of our planetary system. It is not what it appears to the optical perception to be, a central body around which worlds of a different nature revolve, but it, together with many similar bodies, revolves round a common centre. The earth according to that view of the account of the creation in Genesis 1, which appears to me the true one, has arisen with all the bodies of our Solar system out of one primary matter, originally united, common to them all. If our Solar System is a well-ordered, complete organism, it must rest on the basis of a not merely formal, but also material unity; i.e., the separate bodies must move, not only according to a principle of order which governs all, but they must also as to their substance be essentially like.
And as they arose simultaneously, so must they perish simultaneously. It is inconceivable that our earth alone should disappear from the organism of the Solar System, or pass over to a higher material condition. Its absence, or ceasing to exist in its previous form and substance, would necessarily draw after it the ruin of the whole system. Hence the Scripture speaks every where of a passing away and renovation of the heaven and the earth (Psalms 102:26; Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; Matthew 5:18; Matthew 24:29; Matthew 24:35; 2 Peter 3:7; 2 Peter 3:10; 2 Peter 3:13; Hebrews 12:26; Revelation 20:11; Revelation 21:1). The heaven that shall pass away with a great noise, whose powers shall be shaken, whose stars shall fall, is the planetary heaven. The same lot will happen to the companions of our earth, to the other planets, and to the centre, the sun, and to all other co-ordinate and subordinate stellar bodies, which will befall the earth itself.
This is the substance of the view which serves as a basis for our place. But personal beings are not thereby by any means excluded from the φαΰξψεν. The parallel expression ξμλιδΰγξδ, and the use in other places of the related expression φαΰδωׁ ?ξιν lead us rather to suppose personal beings to be included. But I believe that a distinction must be made here. As the heavenly bodies which will pass away simultaneously with the earth, can only be those which arose together with it, and which stand in organic connection with it, so also the angelic powers, which are judged simultaneously with us men, can be only those which stand in connection with the heavenly bodies of our Solar System, i.e., with the earthly material world. There are heavenly bodies of glorious pneumatic substance.
If personal beings stand in connection with them, they must also be pure, glorious, resplendent beings. These will not be judged. They are the holy angels, who come with the Lord (Matthew 25:31). But it is quite conceivable that all the bodies of our Solar System are till the judgment like our earth suffered to be the theatre of the spirits of darkness.
6. Isaiah 24:21-23, It seems to me that the Prophet has here sketched the chief matters pertaining to eschatology. For the passing away of heaven and earth, the binding of Satan (Revelation 20:1-3), the loosing of Satan again (Revelation 20:7), and finally the reign of God alone, which will make sun and moon unnecessary (Revelation 21:23)—are not these the boundary-stones of the chief epochs of the history of the end of the world?
7. Isaiah 25:6. [“The Lord of hosts makes this feast. The provision is very rich, and every thing is of the best. It is a feast, which supposes abundance and variety; it is a continual feast to believers: it is their fault if it be not. It is a feast of fat things and full of marrow; so relishing, so nourishing are the comforts of the Gospel to all those that feast upon them and digest them. The returning prodigal was entertained with the fatted calf; and David has that pleasure in communion with God, with which his soul is satisfied as with marrow and fatness.
It is a feast of wines on the lees; the strongest-bodied wines, that have been long kept upon the lees, and then are well refined from them, so that they are clear and fine. There is that in the Gospel which, like fine wine, soberly used, makes glad the heart, and raises the spirits, and is fit for those that are of a heavy heart, being under convictions of sin, and mourning for it, that they may drink and forget their misery (for that is the proper use of wine; it is a cordial for those that need it, Proverbs 31:6-7) may be of good cheer, knowing that their sins are forgiven, and may be vigorous in their spiritual work and warfare, as a strong man refreshed with wine.” Henry.—D. M.]
8. Isaiah 25:9. “In the Old Testament the vail and covering were before men’s eyes, partly because they waited for the light that was to appear, partly because they sat in darkness and in the shadow of death (Luke 1:79). The fulfilment of this prediction has in Christ already begun, and will at last be perfectly fulfilled in the Church triumphant where all ignorance and sorrow shall be dispelled (1 Corinthians 13:12).” Cramer.9. Isaiah 25:8. “God here represents Himself as a mother, who presses to her bosom her sorrowful son, comforts him and wipes away his tears (Isaiah 66:13). The righteous are to believe and appropriate this promise, that every one may learn to speak with Paul in the time of trial: the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us, Romans 8:18.” Cramer.10. Isaiah 25:10. “This is now the hope and consolation of the church that the hand of the Lord rests on this mountain, that is, that He will be gracious, and let His power, help and grace be there seen and felt.
But the unbelieving Moabites, i.e., the Jews, with all others who will not receive the gospel, shall be threshed to pieces as straw in the mire; these the Lord’s hand will not rescue, as it helps those who wait on Him, but it shall press them down so that they will never rise, according to the saying, Mark 16:16.” Veit Dietrich.11. Isaiah 25 Three thoughts contained in this chapter we should hold fast: 1) When we see the world triumph over every thing which belongs to the Lord and His kingdom, when our hearts are anxious about the preservation in the world of the Church of Christ, which is sore oppressed, let this word of the Prophet comfort our hearts. The world-city which contains all that is of the world, sinks into the dust, and the church of Christ goes from her chains and bands into the state of freedom and glory. We have often seen that it is the Lord’s way to let every thing come to maturity. When it is once ripe, He comes suddenly with His sentence. Let us comfort ourselves therewith, for thus will it happen with the world and its dominion over the faithful followers of Christ.
When it is ripe, suddenly it will come to an end. 2) No one who has a heart for the welfare of the nations can see without the deepest pain how all hearts are now seduced and befooled, and all eyes closed and covered. The simplest truths are no longer acknowledged, but the more perverse, brutal and mean views and doctrines are, the more greedily are they laid hold of. We cannot avert this. But our comfort is that even this seduction of the nations will reach its climax. Then men will come to themselves. The vail and covering will fall off, and the Gospel will shine with new light before the nations.
Therewith let us comfort ourselves. 3) Till this happens, the church is sorrowful. But she shall be full of joy. The promise is given to her that she shall be fully satisfied with the good things of the house of the Lord. A life is promised to her which neither death nor any pain can affect, as she has rest from all enemies. The word of the Lord shall be fulfilled in her: Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. The Church that has such a promise may wait in patient quietness for its accomplishment, and praise the Lord in affliction, till it pleases Him to glorify her before all nations.” Weber, The Prophet Isaiah. 1875.
12. Isaiah 26:1. “The Christian church is a city of God. God has built it, and He is the right Master-builder. It is strong: 1) on account of the Builder; 2) on account of the foundation and corner-stone, which is Christ; 3) on account of the bond wherewith the living stones are bound together, which is the unity of the faith.” Cramer. [The security and happiness of true believers, both on earth and in heaven, is represented in Scripture under the image of their dwelling in a city in which they can bid defiance to all their enemies. We dwell in such a city even now, Psalms 46:4-5. We look for such a city, Hebrews 11:10; Hebrews 11:16; Revelation 21—D. M.]
13. Isaiah 26:2. [These words may be taken as a description of the people whom God owns, who are fit to be accounted members of the church of the living God on earth, and who will not be excluded from the celestial city. Instead of complaining that only the righteous and the faithful will be admitted into the heavenly city, it should rather give us joy to think that there will be no sin there, that none but the just and true will there be found. This has been a delightful subject of reflection to God’s saints. The last words written by Henry Martyn were: “Oh! when shall time give place to eternity? When shall appear that new heaven and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness?
There, there shall in no wise enter in any thing that defileth; none of that wickedness which has made men worse than wild beasts—none of their corruptions which add to the miseries of mortality shall be seen or heard of any more.”—D. M.]
14. Isaiah 26:4. “The fourth privilege of the church is trust in God the Rock of Ages, i.e., in Christ, who not only here, but also Matthew 16; 1 Corinthians 10; 1 Peter 2, is called a rock in a peculiar manner, because no other foundation of salvation and of the church can be laid except this rock, which is here called the rock of ages on account of the eternity of His being, merit and office. Hence a refutation can be drawn of the papistical fable which makes Peter and his successors, the Roman Pontiffs, to be the rock on which the church is built.” Foerster. [“Whatever we trust to the world for, it will be but for a moment. All we expect from it is confined within the limits of time; but what we trust in God for will last as long as we shall last. For in the Lord Jehovah, Jah, Jehovah, in Him who was, and is, and is to come, there is a rock of ages, a firm and lasting foundation for faith and hope to build upon; and the house built on that rock will stand in a storm.” Henry.”—D. M.]
15. Isaiah 26:5. “It is very common with the prophets, when they prophesy of the kingdom of Christ to make reference to the proud and to the needy, and to represent the latter as exalted and the former as brought low. This truth is directed properly against the self-righteous. For Christ and His righteousness will not endure spiritual pride and presumption; but the souls that are poor, that hunger and thirst for grace, that know their need, these Christ graciously receives.” Cramer.16. Isaiah 26:6. “It vexes the proud all the more that they will be overcome by those who are poor and of no consequence. For example, Goliath was annoyed that a boy should come against him with a staff (1 Sam. 13:43) Cramer.17.
Isaiah 26:8-10. That the justice of God must absolutely manifest itself that the majesty of the Lord may be seen, and that the wicked may learn righteousness, must even from a new Testament view-point be admitted. But the New Testament disputes the existence of any one who is righteous when confronted by the law, and who is not deserving of punishment. [But that there is none righteous, no not one, is taught most emphatically in the Old Testament also.—D. M.]. But it (the New Testament) while it shuts up all, Jews and Gentiles, without exception, under sin (Galatians 3:22; Romans 3:9; Romans 11:32), sets forth a scheme of mediation, which, while it renders full satisfaction to justice, at the same time offers to all the possibility of deliverance. This mediation is through the Cross of Christ.
It is only when this mediation has not been accepted that punitive justice has free course. It should not surprise us that even the Evangelist of the Old Covenant, who wrote chap. 53, did not possess perfect knowledge of this mediation. Let us remember John the Baptist (Matthew 3:7; Matthew 11:11) and the disciples of the Lord (Luke 9:54). [Let us not forget that Isaiah was a true Prophet, and spoke as he was moved by the Spirit of God. The Apostle Paul did not find fault with the most terrible denunciations of judgment contained in the Old Testament, or affect a superiority over the men who uttered them. On the contrary, he quotes them as words which could not be suffered to fall, but which must be fulfilled in all their dreadful import. See e.g.
Romans 11:9-10.—D. M.].
18. Isaiah 26:12. “It is a characteristic of true, sincere Christians, that they give God the glory and not themselves, and freely confess that they have nothing of themselves, but everything from God (1 Corinthians 4:7; Philippians 2:13; Hebrews 12:2).” Cramer.19. Isaiah 26:16. The old theologians have many comforting and edifying thoughts connected with this place: “A magnet has the power to raise and attract to itself iron. Our heart is heavy as iron. But the hand of God is as a magnet.
When that hand visits us with affliction, it lifts us up, and draws us to itself.” “Distress teaches us to pray, and prayer again dispels all distress. One wedge displaces the other.” “Ex gravibus curis impellimur ad pia vota.” “Ex monte myrrhae procedimus ad collem thuris (Cant. 9:6). In amaritudine crucis exsurgit odor devotae precationis (Psalms 86:6 sq.).” “Ubi nulla crux et tentatio, ibi nulla vera oratio. Oratio sine mails est tanquam avis sine alis. Optimus orandi magister necessitas. Τὰπαθήματαμαθήματα. Quae nocent, docent.
Ubi tentatio, ibi oratio. Mala, quae hic nos premunt, ad Deum ire compellunt. Qui nescit orare, ingrediatur mare.” “When the string is most tightly drawn, it sounds best. Cross and temptation are the right prayer-bell. They are the press by which God crushes out the juice of prayer.” Cramer and Foerster.20. Isaiah 26:20.
As God, when the deluge was about to burst, bade Noah go into his ark as into his chamber, and Himself shut the door on him (Genesis 7:6); so does the Lord still act when a storm is approaching; He brings His own into a chamber where they can be safe, either for their temporal preservation and protection against every might (Psalms 91:1), or, on the other hand, to give them repose by a peaceful and happy death.” “His anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life (Psalms 30:6).” Cramer.21. Isaiah 27:1. [“Great and mighty princes [nations] if they oppose the people of God, are in God’s account, as dragons and serpents, and plagues of mankind; and the Lord will punish them in due time. They are too big for men to deal with, and call to an account; and therefore the great God will take the doing of it into His own hands.” Henry.—D. M.].
22. Isaiah 27:2-5. “It seems to the world that God has no concern for His church and Christians, else, we imagine, they would be better off. But certain it is, that it is not the angels but God Himself that will be watcher over this vineyard, and will send it gracious rain.” Veit Dietrich. [“The church is a vineyard of red wine, yielding the best and choicest grapes, intimating the reformation of the church, that it now brings forth good fruit unto God, whereas before it brought forth fruit to itself, or brought forth wild grapes, Isaiah 5:4.” “God takes care (1) of the safety of this vineyard; I the Lord do keep it. He speaks this, as glorying in it, that He is, and has undertaken to be, the keeper of Israel; those that bring forth fruit to God are, and shall be always, under His protection. (2) God takes care of the fruitfulness of this vineyard: I will water it every moment; and yet it shall not be over watered. We need the constant and continual waterings of the divine grace; for if that be at any time withdrawn, we wither and come to nothing.” Henry. D. M.].
23. Isaiah 27:4. “Est aurea promissio, qua praecedentem confirmat. Indignatio non est mihi, fury is not in me. Quomodo enim is nobis irasci potest, qui pro nobis est mortuus? Quanquam igitur appareat, eum irasci, non tamen est verum, quod irascatur. Sic Paulo immittitur angelus Satanae, sed non est ira, nam ipse Christus dicit: sufficit tibi gratia mea.
Sic pater filium delinquentem castigat, sed non est ira, quanquam appareat ira esse. Custodia igitur vineae aliquando cogit Deum immittere speciem irae, ne pereat luxurie, sed non est ira. Est insignis textus, which we should inscribe on all tribulations: Non est indignatio mihi, non possum irasci. Quod autem videtur irasci est custodia vineae, ne pereas et fias securus. Luther. “In order to understand fully the doctrine of the wrath of God we must have a clear perception of the antithesis: the long-suffering of God, and the wrath of God, wrath and mercy.” Lange.24. Isaiah 27:7-9. “Christ judges His church, i.e., He punishes and afflicts it, but He does this in measure.
The sorrow and cross is meted out, and is not, as it appears to us, without measure and infinite. It is so measured that redemption must certainly follow. But why does God let His Christians so suffer? Why does He not lay the cross on the wicked? God answers this question and speaks: the sin of Jacob will thereby cease. That is: God restrains sin by the cross, and subdues the old Adam.” Veit Dietrich.25.
Isaiah 27:13. [“The application of this verse to a future restoration of the Jews can neither be established nor disproved. In itself considered, it appears to contain nothing which may not be naturally applied to events long past.” J. A. Alexander.—“This prediction was completely and entirely fulfilled by the return of the Jews to their own country under the decree of Cyrus.” Barnes.—D. M.].
AND 1. On Isaiah 24:4-6. Fast-day sermon. Warning against dechristianization of the life of the people. 1) Wherein such dechristianization consists: a, transgression of the commandments that are in force; b, alteration of the commandments which are essential articles of the everlasting covenant, as e.g. removing of all state institutions from the basis of religion. 2) Its consequences: a, Desecration of the land (subjectively, by the spread of a profane, godless sentiment; objectively, by the secularization of relations hitherto held sacred); b, the curse consumes the land, Isaiah 24:4.
2. On Isaiah 25:1-5. The Lord, the refuge of the needy. 1) He has the power to help. This we perceive a, from His nature (Lord, God, Wonderful); b, from His deeds (Isaiah 25:1 b, Isaiah 25:2). 2) He gives His strength even to the feeble, (Isaiah 25:4). 3) These are thereby victorious, (Isaiah 25:5).
3. On Isaiah 25:6-9. Easter Sermon, by T. Schaeffer (Manch. Gab. u. ein Geist III. p. 269):—“The glorious Easter-blessing of the Risen One: 1) Wherein it consists? 2) who receive it? 3) what are its effects? Christmas Sermon, by Romberg [ibid. 1869, p. 78): Our text represents to us Christmas joy under the image of a festive board. Let us consider, 1) the host; 2) the guests; 3) the gifts.”
4. On Isaiah 26:1-4. Concerning the church. 1) She is a strong city in which salvation is to be found. 2) The condition of having a portion in her is faith. 3) The blessing which she is instrumental in procuring is peace.
5. Isaiah 26:19-21. The comfort of the Christian for the present and future. 1) For the present the Christian is to betake himself to his quiet chamber, where he is alone with his Lord and by Him made cheerful and secure. 2) For the future he has the certain hope, a, that the Lord will judge the wicked, b, raise the believer to everlasting life.
6. Isaiah 27:2-9. How the Lord deals with His vineyard, the church. 1) Fury is not in Him towards it; 2) He protects and purifies it; 3) He gives it strength, peace and growth; 4) He chastens it in measure; 5) He makes the chastisement itself serve to purge it from sins.
Footnotes:stronghold.stronghold.for the blast of the terrible ones was, etc.triumphal song.
4. ZION AS THE PLACE OF THE FEAST GIVEN TO ALL NATIONS IN TO MOAB, WHICH
Isaiah 25:6-126 And in this mountain
Shall the Lord of hosts make unto all people
A feast of fat things,
A feast of wines on the lees,
Of fat things full of marrow,
Of wines on the lees well refined.
7 And he will destroy in this mountain
The face of the covering cast over all people,
And the vail that is spread over all nations.
8 He will swallow up death in victory;
And the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces;
And the rebuke of his people shall he take away
From off all the earth;
For the Lord hath spoken it.9 And it shall be said in that day,
Lo, this is our God;
We have waited for him, and he will save us:
This is the Lord; we have waited for him,
We will be glad and rejoice in his salvation.
10 For in this mountain shall the hand of the Lord rest,
And Moab shall be trodden down under him,
Even as straw is trodden down for the dunghill.
11 And he shall spread forth his hands in the midst of them,
As he that swimmeth spreadeth forth his hands to swim:
And he shall bring down their pride
Together with the spoils of their hands.
12 And the fortress of the high fort of thy walls shall he bring down,
Lay low, and bring to the ground,
Even to the dust.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_25:6. ωְׁ ?ξָ ?πִ ?ινξְ ?ξֻ ?ηָ ?ιν are not fat pieces unmarrowed, but, on the contrary, fat pieces marrowy, yea provided with abundant marrow. If the stem ξָ ?ηָ ?δ, from which ξξηιν comes, is to be regarded as not different from ξָ ?ηָ ?δ to wipe away, and not as a denominative from ξֹ ?ηַ marrow, we must assume as common fundamental signification “to rub, to spread over, to besmear.” But as then ξְ ?ξֻ ?ηָ ?δ would be only what is covered over with fat, not what is in itself fat, the derivation from ξֹ ?ηַ is in my opinion more probable. This Pual is found only here, and no other of the forms that occur has the signification “pinguem, medullosum esse.” Instead of ξְ ?ξֻ ?ηִ ?ιν we have ξְ ?ξֻ ?ηָ ?ιִ ?ν, a verb μδ֞ (ξָ ?ηָ ?δ) being formed from ξֹ ?ηַ and its third radical appearing after the manner of verbs μδ֞ (comp. αְּ ?ςָ ?ιεּ ,ΰֵ ?ϊָ ?ιεּ, Isaiah 21:12). The object of employing this form is to increase the concord of sounds which is in Isaiah 25:6 so prominent.
Isaiah 25:7. In τπιδμεθ we have the genitive of identity, the covering being marked as that which forms the front view, as the foreside. The substantive μεֹ ?θ is found only here. The participle μεֹ ?θ is evidently chosen for the sake of assonance (comp. Isaiah 24:3). It is formed after the analogy of χεֹ ?ν, 2 Kings 16:7. Comp. Gesen. Gr., § 72, note 1. ξַ ?ρֵּ ?λָ ?δ and πְ ?ρεּ ?λδָ are not from πָ ?ρַ ?κְ effundere, libare, but from another πָ ?ρַ ?κְ whose radical meaning seems to be “to weave.” ξַ ?ρֵּ ?λָ ?δ is therefore properly a texture, a woven covering. The word is found besides Isaiah 28:20.
Isaiah 25:10. δִ ?γּ ?εּ ?ωׁ is as a verbal form quite abnormal and unexampled. It appears to me to be a changing of the regular infinitive form δִ ?γּ ?εֹ ?ωׁ into a nominal form, and is allied to forms such as δִ ?ϊּ ?εּ ?κְ, Ezekiel 22:22, ηִ ?μּ ?εּ ?μ, Leviticus 19:24. δγּ ?εּ ?ωׁ would then be conculcatio, detrusio. AND 1. After the hymn by which the Prophet had given expression to his subjective emotions, he returns to his objective representation of the future. He resumes the discourse broken off at Isaiah 24:23, whilst he further depicts what will happen on Mount Zion, and—in opposition to this—what will befall the wicked. What will take place on Mount Zion is of a twofold character, positive and negative.
Positively, the Lord will prepare for all nations a feast consisting of the most precious articles of food and drink (Isaiah 25:6). Negatively, He will first remove the covering which was hitherto spread over all nations (Isaiah 25:7); Secondly, He will abolish death, wipe off all tears, and take away the reproach which His people had hitherto to endure on the whole earth (Isaiah 25:8). While believers rejoice in the salvation prepared for them by Jehovah their God, to whom they can now point as to one who is not merely to be believed in, but to be seen in His manifested presence (Isaiah 25:9), and whose hand bears and upholds all the glory of Mount Zion (Isaiah 25:10 a), the Moabites, i.e., those who are represented by Moab, are cast like straw into the dung-hole on which they stand (Isaiah 25:10 b). They will indeed work with the hands in order to rescue themselves, but their efforts will not save them from the most ignominious ruin, and their proud, high fortresses will be levelled to the ground, and crushed to dust (Isaiah 25:11-12).
2. And in this mountain——refined.Isaiah 25:6. “This mountain” points back to “Mount Zion,” Isaiah 24:23. Not only Israel, all nations will be collected on the mountain. There the Lord will prepare a feast for them. That it is a spiritual feast, and that it is not simply for one occasion, but that it will be a permanent, everlasting entertainment, is implied in the nature of the thing. For there everything will be spiritual; and when according to Isaiah 25:8. death will be forever abolished, there must, that the antithesis may be maintained, reign forever life, and everything which is the condition of life.
This feast meets us elsewhere, both in the Old and in the New Testament, under various forms. In Exodus 24:11 it is related that Moses and the elders of Israel, after they had seen God, ate and drank on the holy mountain, which transaction we are by all means justified in regarding as a typical one. Comp. Psalms 22:27; Psalms 22:30; Isaiah 55:1; Isaiah 65:11 sqq. In the New Testament this holy feast given by God appears sometimes as the Great Supper (Luke 14:16 sqq.), sometimes as the marriage of the king’s son (Matthew 22:1 sqq.; Isaiah 25:1 sqq.), or the marriage of the Lamb (Revelation 19:7; Revelation 19:9; Revelation 19:17 sqq., in which latter place the counterpart of this feast is set forth). It is remarkable that this most glorious, most spiritual feast is represented in so homely a way by the Prophet.
This is a clear example of that law of prophecy according to which the future is always represented from the materials furnished by the present. The richest, strongest, most nutritious thing which Isaiah knew to be served up at an earthly feast, is employed as an image to set forth the heavenly banquet. This richest thing was the fat. Therefore the fat of the animals offered in sacrifice (flos carnis) was the chief constituent of the bloody offerings, especially of the Shelamim [E. V., peace offerings] (Exodus 29:13-22; Leviticus 3:3-5; Leviticus 9-11; Leviticus 14-16; Leviticus 8:16; Leviticus 9:19 sqq.). We can therefore say: What God Himself formerly required of men, as the noblest part of the victims offered to Him, He now Himself as host offers to His redeemed upon His holy mountain.
But the expression “fat” or “marrow” is used also in reference to the land and its vegetable products, to designate the finest. Thus it is said, Genesis 45:18, “ye shall eat the fat of the land;” Numbers 18:12, “all the fat of oil and all the fat of new wine and corn;” Deuteronomy 32:14, “the fat of kidneys of wheat.” That ωֶ ?ξֶ ?ο can stand in this sense, we have already seen from other utterances of Isa 5:1; Isaiah 10:16; Isaiah 17:4; Isaiah 28:1-4. The most excellent drink accompanies the choicest food. That Isaiah designates this drink by ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ψִ ?ιν is owing to the endeavor to put as parallel to ωֶׁ ?ξָ ?πִ ?ιν a word resembling it in sound. But the question arises, how can Isaiah call the most excellent wine ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ψִ ?ιν? This word seems primarily to denote a wine containing dregs, that is, turbid with dregs, therefore, a bad wine.
But Isaiah manifestly understands by ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ψִ ?ιν wines which have lain a sufficient time on their lees. For the lees are not only the product of a process of purification, but also a reacting substance which contributes to heighten the strength, color and durability of the wine. A wine poured off from its lees too soon tastes too sweet and does not keep long. Cato, too, (De re rust. cap. 154) designates a wine that has lain long enough on its lees vinum faecatum. Comp. Gesenius,Thes., p. 1444, and his commentary on this place.
The expression ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ψִ ?ιν (only plural) comes therefore from ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ψ, and ωֶׁ ?ξֶ ?ψ is primarily conservatio, the letting lie, then conservatum, that which is let lie (comp. Jeremiah 48:11). The plural denotes the multiplicity of the ingredients contained in the sediment. ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ψִ ?ιν is moreover used here metonymically; for it plainly signifies not the lees alone, but also the wine united with the lees. But we can not, of course, drink the lees united with the wine. This wine poured off from the lees must be percolated (ξζχχ only here in Isaiah).
3. And he will destroy——spoken it.Isaiah 25:7-8. The covering here spoken of brings at once to mind the vail of Moses, Exodus 34:30 sqq. To the visible covering there corresponds an invisible one also, which lies on the heart. But when the Lord will take away the covering, He will first of all remove the covering of the heart, as Paul says, 2 Corinthians 3:16, “περιαιρεῖταιτὸκὰλυμμα.” Then will the external covering also fall off, and men will be capable of seeing the glory of the Lord face to face (1 Corinthians 13:12; 1 John 3:2). [All that the Prophet here says of a covering and vail must be understood metaphorically. A literal, external covering cast over the nations, distinct from a spiritual one, is not to be thought of.
D. M.]. Isaiah 25:8. The second negative blessing is that the Lordswallows up death also. αִּ ?μַּ ?ς occurs not unfrequently in Isaiah 3:12; Isaiah 9:15; Isaiah 29:3; Isaiah 49:19. It seems here and Isaiah 25:7 to denote more than that its object is removed, for then it could be placed somewhere else; but its object is to be conceived as existing no more. Paul tells us (1 Corinthians 15:26; 1 Corinthians 15:54) that death shall in this sense be swallowed up.
When there is no death, there are no more tears. For tears flow, either in the case of the living, over that which leads to death; or in the case of survivors, over those who have suffered death. The Apostle John quotes in Revelation 7:17; Revelation 21:4, our place to prove that he regards the things which he saw as a fulfilment, not only of his own prophecy, but also of that spoken by Isaiah. He thus makes his own prophecy an echo or reproduction of the prophetic word of the Old Testament. Where sin and death have disappeared, there can be no more reproach, but only glory. There is a new earth: it is a dwelling-place of God with man; it has, therefore, become the place of the divine glory.
Where then could there be upon it any more a place for the reproach of those who belong to the people of God? For the Lord hath spoken it. Comp. on Isaiah 1:2.
4. And it shall be said——restIsa_25:9-10 a. What follows is not a hymn, but a report of one. This is plain from the use of the impersonal ΰξψ (Isaiah 45:24; Isaiah 65:8). The hymn in Isaiah 25:1 sqq. came from the Prophet’s own mouth: this one is heard by him, and related with a brief statement of its leading thoughts. The redeemed now see the Lord in whom they have hitherto only believed (comp.
Isaiah 25:7 and 1 John 3:2). That they see Him is clear from the expression δπֵּ ?δζֶ ?δ (comp. Isaiah 21:9). The heathen, who believed in false gods, experience the very opposite. They are confounded when they must mark the vanity of their idols; but they who believe in Jehovah will after faith be rewarded with seeing; for they can point with the finger to their God as one who is really existent and present before the eyes of all, and can say: Our God is no illusion as your false gods; we and all see Him as truly existing, as Him who was and is to come, ιδεδ (Exodus 3:14). Herein is their joy perfect (John 15:11). ειεωׁ ?ιςπε is not “and He saves us,” but “that He may save us” (comp.
Isaiah 8:11; Ew. § 347 a): That the joy for the experienced salvation is not transitory and delusive, but will be everlasting is confirmed by the sentence, For in this mountain shall the hand of the LORD rest,etc., Isaiah 25:10 a. The hand of Jehovah will settle upon this mountain, it will rest upon it (Isaiah 7:2; Isaiah 11:2). But what the hand of Jehovah holds, stands fast for ever.
5. And Moab——to the dust.Isaiah 25:10 b –12. In opposition to the high, triumphant joy of believers, the Prophet now depicts the lot of unbelievers. He mentions Moab as the representative of the latter. He cannot mean thereby the whole nation of Moab. For all nations partake of the great feast on the holy mountain (Isaiah 25:6), from all nations the covering is taken off (Isaiah 25:7), from all faces the tears are wiped away (Isaiah 25:8).
Moab consequently cannot be excluded. Even Jeremiah (Jeremiah 48:47) leads us to expect the turning of the captivity of Moab in the latter days. It can therefore be only the Moab that hardens itself against the knowledge of God which will suffer the doom described in Isaiah 25:10 sqq. But if Moab, so far as it is hostile to God, has to bear this sentence, why not likewise the God-opposing elements from all other nations? Moab therefore stands for all. But why is Moab in particular named?
The Moabites were remarkable for their unbounded arrogance. Jeremiah (Isaiah 48:11) specifies as the cause of this arrogance the fact that they had, from the time when they began to be a people, dwelt undisturbed in their own land. Further, we must assume that the Prophet, when he began the sentence (Isaiah 25:10 b), had before his mind the image which he uses (Isaiah 25:10-11), and the whole series of thoughts attached to it. It is, moreover, probable that he chose the name Moab just for the sake of the image. According to Genesis 19:37 the father of the Moabites owed his birth to the incestuous intercourse of the eldest daughter of Lot with her father. An allusion to this fact has been always supposed to be contained in the name ξεֹ ?ΰָ ?α.
And this view is not destitute of philological support, comp. Ges.Thes., p. 774, sub voceξεΰα. The K’ri ξεֹ ξַ ?γְ ?ξֵ ?πָ ?δ lets us more clearly perceive why Isaiah made mention of Moab as the representative of the heathen world, and should, therefore, perhaps be preferred. But, whether we read ξֵ ?ι or ξεֹ, it is manifest that the Prophet wishes to express the idea “water of the dung-hole,” and that, alluding to the etymology of Moab, he has named the unbelievers of Moab as representatives of the unbelievers of all nations. Moab is therefore cast down (Isaiah 28:27 sq.; Isaiah 41:15) under him (i.e., under the place on which he stood, comp. Exodus 16:29; Joshua 5:8; Joshua 6:5; Job 40:12; Amos 2:13).
Straw is cast into the filthy water of the dung-hole, in order that it may be saturated by it, and rendered fitter for manure. Our interpretation of ξεξΧ is confirmed by the fact that ξγξπδ obviously contains an intentional allusion to the Moabite city ξַ ?γְ ?ξֵ ?ο (Jeremiah 48:2). The person cast into the dung-hole seeks to save himself. We have therefore to suppose the hole to be of considerable extent. He spreads forth his hands as if to swim. But it is sorry swimming.
The desperate struggle for life is thus depicted. The effort is unavailing. Moab must find an ignominious end in the impure element. The Lord presses Him down. Moab is elsewhere blamed for two evil qualities: 1) his pride, 2) his lying disposition (Isaiah 16:6; Jeremiah 48:29). A corresponding punishment is inflicted: the lies, the artifices symbolized by the skilful motions of the hands (ΰψαεϊ from ΰָ ?ψַ ?αnectere, especially insidias struere) are of no avail.
The haughty Moab (comp. πΰεδ here and Jeremiah 16:6) must perish in the pool of filthy water. The Lord humbles the proud by making disgrace an element of their punishment. That ςִ ?ν signifies “in spite of” is not sufficiently attested. It can well retain here its proper signification “with;” for, in fact, Jehovah presses down not only the proud, but also the cunning and artful. The humbling of pride is, however, the main thing. This is therefore once more asserted, Jeremiah 25:13, without a figure in strong expressions.
The phrase “the defence of the height of thy walls” for “the defence of thy high walls” is idiomatic Hebrew. Compensation for the adjective is sought in substantive forms (comp. Isaiah 22:7; Isaiah 30:30). Three verbs are used corresponding to the three substantives. If ςγΞςτψ is not equivalent simply to μΰψυ, we must find in it the idea of being reduced to dust.
AND ETHICAL1. Isaiah 24:2. “When general judgments take place, no distinction is observed between man and wife, master and servant, mistress and maid, learned and unlearned, noble and plebeian, clergy and laity; therefore let no one rely on any external prerogative or superiority, but let every one without distinction repent and forsake sin.”—Cramer. Though this is right, yet we must, on the other hand, remember that the Lord declares in reference to the same great event, “Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left” (Matthew 24:10 sq.). There is no contradiction in these two statements. Both are true: outward relations will make no difference; there shall be no respect of persons.
But the state of the heart will make a difference. According to the inward character there will, in the case of those whose external position in the world is perfectly alike, be some who enter life, others whose doom is death.
2. Isaiah 24:5 sq. “The earth is burdened with sins, and is therefore deprived of every blessing. The earth must suffer for our guilt, when we have as it were spoilt it, and it must be subject to vanity for our sakes (Romans 8:20). What wonder is it that it should show itself ungrateful toward us?”—Cramer.[3. Isaiah 24:13 sq. “Observe the small number of this remnant; here and there one who shall escape the common calamity (as Noah and his family, when the old world was drowned), who when all faces gather blackness, can lift up their head with joy. Luke 21:26-28.” Henry.—D. M.].
4. Isaiah 24:17-20. Our earth is a volcanic body. Mighty volcanic forces were active at its formation. That these are still in commotion in the interior of the earth is proved by the many active volcanoes scattered over the whole earth, and by the perpetual volcanic convulsions which we call earthquakes. These have hitherto been confined to particular localities.
But who can guarantee that a concentration and simultaneous eruption of those volcanic forces, that is, a universal earthquake, shall not hereafter occur? The Lord makes express mention of earthquakes among the signs which shall precede His second coming (Matthew 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:11). And in 2 Peter 3:5 sqq. the future destruction of the earth by fire is set over against the destruction of the old world by water. Isaiah in our place announces a catastrophe whose characteristic features will be that, 1) there will be no escape from it; 2) destructive forces will assail from above and below; 3) the earth will be rent asunder; 4) it will reel and totter; 5) it will suffer so heavy a fall that it will not rise again (Isaiah 24:20 b). Is there not here a prophecy of the destruction of the earth by volcanic forces? And how suddenly can they break loose!
The ministers of the word have every reason to compare this extreme exposedness of our earth to fire, and the possibility of its unexpectedly sudden collapse with the above-cited warnings of the word of God, and to attach thereto the admonition which is added in 2 Peter 3:11.
5. Isaiah 24:21. The earth is a part of our planetary system. It is not what it appears to the optical perception to be, a central body around which worlds of a different nature revolve, but it, together with many similar bodies, revolves round a common centre. The earth according to that view of the account of the creation in Genesis 1, which appears to me the true one, has arisen with all the bodies of our Solar system out of one primary matter, originally united, common to them all. If our Solar System is a well-ordered, complete organism, it must rest on the basis of a not merely formal, but also material unity; i.e., the separate bodies must move, not only according to a principle of order which governs all, but they must also as to their substance be essentially like.
And as they arose simultaneously, so must they perish simultaneously. It is inconceivable that our earth alone should disappear from the organism of the Solar System, or pass over to a higher material condition. Its absence, or ceasing to exist in its previous form and substance, would necessarily draw after it the ruin of the whole system. Hence the Scripture speaks every where of a passing away and renovation of the heaven and the earth (Psalms 102:26; Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; Matthew 5:18; Matthew 24:29; Matthew 24:35; 2 Peter 3:7; 2 Peter 3:10; 2 Peter 3:13; Hebrews 12:26; Revelation 20:11; Revelation 21:1). The heaven that shall pass away with a great noise, whose powers shall be shaken, whose stars shall fall, is the planetary heaven. The same lot will happen to the companions of our earth, to the other planets, and to the centre, the sun, and to all other co-ordinate and subordinate stellar bodies, which will befall the earth itself.
This is the substance of the view which serves as a basis for our place. But personal beings are not thereby by any means excluded from the φαΰξψεν. The parallel expression ξμλιδΰγξδ, and the use in other places of the related expression φαΰδωׁ ?ξιν lead us rather to suppose personal beings to be included. But I believe that a distinction must be made here. As the heavenly bodies which will pass away simultaneously with the earth, can only be those which arose together with it, and which stand in organic connection with it, so also the angelic powers, which are judged simultaneously with us men, can be only those which stand in connection with the heavenly bodies of our Solar System, i.e., with the earthly material world. There are heavenly bodies of glorious pneumatic substance.
If personal beings stand in connection with them, they must also be pure, glorious, resplendent beings. These will not be judged. They are the holy angels, who come with the Lord (Matthew 25:31). But it is quite conceivable that all the bodies of our Solar System are till the judgment like our earth suffered to be the theatre of the spirits of darkness.
6. Isaiah 24:21-23, It seems to me that the Prophet has here sketched the chief matters pertaining to eschatology. For the passing away of heaven and earth, the binding of Satan (Revelation 20:1-3), the loosing of Satan again (Revelation 20:7), and finally the reign of God alone, which will make sun and moon unnecessary (Revelation 21:23)—are not these the boundary-stones of the chief epochs of the history of the end of the world?
7. Isaiah 25:6. [“The Lord of hosts makes this feast. The provision is very rich, and every thing is of the best. It is a feast, which supposes abundance and variety; it is a continual feast to believers: it is their fault if it be not. It is a feast of fat things and full of marrow; so relishing, so nourishing are the comforts of the Gospel to all those that feast upon them and digest them. The returning prodigal was entertained with the fatted calf; and David has that pleasure in communion with God, with which his soul is satisfied as with marrow and fatness.
It is a feast of wines on the lees; the strongest-bodied wines, that have been long kept upon the lees, and then are well refined from them, so that they are clear and fine. There is that in the Gospel which, like fine wine, soberly used, makes glad the heart, and raises the spirits, and is fit for those that are of a heavy heart, being under convictions of sin, and mourning for it, that they may drink and forget their misery (for that is the proper use of wine; it is a cordial for those that need it, Proverbs 31:6-7) may be of good cheer, knowing that their sins are forgiven, and may be vigorous in their spiritual work and warfare, as a strong man refreshed with wine.” Henry.—D. M.]
8. Isaiah 25:9. “In the Old Testament the vail and covering were before men’s eyes, partly because they waited for the light that was to appear, partly because they sat in darkness and in the shadow of death (Luke 1:79). The fulfilment of this prediction has in Christ already begun, and will at last be perfectly fulfilled in the Church triumphant where all ignorance and sorrow shall be dispelled (1 Corinthians 13:12).” Cramer.9. Isaiah 25:8. “God here represents Himself as a mother, who presses to her bosom her sorrowful son, comforts him and wipes away his tears (Isaiah 66:13). The righteous are to believe and appropriate this promise, that every one may learn to speak with Paul in the time of trial: the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us, Romans 8:18.” Cramer.10. Isaiah 25:10. “This is now the hope and consolation of the church that the hand of the Lord rests on this mountain, that is, that He will be gracious, and let His power, help and grace be there seen and felt.
But the unbelieving Moabites, i.e., the Jews, with all others who will not receive the gospel, shall be threshed to pieces as straw in the mire; these the Lord’s hand will not rescue, as it helps those who wait on Him, but it shall press them down so that they will never rise, according to the saying, Mark 16:16.” Veit Dietrich.11. Isaiah 25 Three thoughts contained in this chapter we should hold fast: 1) When we see the world triumph over every thing which belongs to the Lord and His kingdom, when our hearts are anxious about the preservation in the world of the Church of Christ, which is sore oppressed, let this word of the Prophet comfort our hearts. The world-city which contains all that is of the world, sinks into the dust, and the church of Christ goes from her chains and bands into the state of freedom and glory. We have often seen that it is the Lord’s way to let every thing come to maturity. When it is once ripe, He comes suddenly with His sentence. Let us comfort ourselves therewith, for thus will it happen with the world and its dominion over the faithful followers of Christ.
When it is ripe, suddenly it will come to an end. 2) No one who has a heart for the welfare of the nations can see without the deepest pain how all hearts are now seduced and befooled, and all eyes closed and covered. The simplest truths are no longer acknowledged, but the more perverse, brutal and mean views and doctrines are, the more greedily are they laid hold of. We cannot avert this. But our comfort is that even this seduction of the nations will reach its climax. Then men will come to themselves. The vail and covering will fall off, and the Gospel will shine with new light before the nations.
Therewith let us comfort ourselves. 3) Till this happens, the church is sorrowful. But she shall be full of joy. The promise is given to her that she shall be fully satisfied with the good things of the house of the Lord. A life is promised to her which neither death nor any pain can affect, as she has rest from all enemies. The word of the Lord shall be fulfilled in her: Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. The Church that has such a promise may wait in patient quietness for its accomplishment, and praise the Lord in affliction, till it pleases Him to glorify her before all nations.” Weber, The Prophet Isaiah. 1875.
12. Isaiah 26:1. “The Christian church is a city of God. God has built it, and He is the right Master-builder. It is strong: 1) on account of the Builder; 2) on account of the foundation and corner-stone, which is Christ; 3) on account of the bond wherewith the living stones are bound together, which is the unity of the faith.” Cramer. [The security and happiness of true believers, both on earth and in heaven, is represented in Scripture under the image of their dwelling in a city in which they can bid defiance to all their enemies. We dwell in such a city even now, Psalms 46:4-5. We look for such a city, Hebrews 11:10; Hebrews 11:16; Revelation 21—D. M.]
13. Isaiah 26:2. [These words may be taken as a description of the people whom God owns, who are fit to be accounted members of the church of the living God on earth, and who will not be excluded from the celestial city. Instead of complaining that only the righteous and the faithful will be admitted into the heavenly city, it should rather give us joy to think that there will be no sin there, that none but the just and true will there be found. This has been a delightful subject of reflection to God’s saints. The last words written by Henry Martyn were: “Oh! when shall time give place to eternity? When shall appear that new heaven and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness?
There, there shall in no wise enter in any thing that defileth; none of that wickedness which has made men worse than wild beasts—none of their corruptions which add to the miseries of mortality shall be seen or heard of any more.”—D. M.]
14. Isaiah 26:4. “The fourth privilege of the church is trust in God the Rock of Ages, i.e., in Christ, who not only here, but also Matthew 16; 1 Corinthians 10; 1 Peter 2, is called a rock in a peculiar manner, because no other foundation of salvation and of the church can be laid except this rock, which is here called the rock of ages on account of the eternity of His being, merit and office. Hence a refutation can be drawn of the papistical fable which makes Peter and his successors, the Roman Pontiffs, to be the rock on which the church is built.” Foerster. [“Whatever we trust to the world for, it will be but for a moment. All we expect from it is confined within the limits of time; but what we trust in God for will last as long as we shall last. For in the Lord Jehovah, Jah, Jehovah, in Him who was, and is, and is to come, there is a rock of ages, a firm and lasting foundation for faith and hope to build upon; and the house built on that rock will stand in a storm.” Henry.”—D. M.]
15. Isaiah 26:5. “It is very common with the prophets, when they prophesy of the kingdom of Christ to make reference to the proud and to the needy, and to represent the latter as exalted and the former as brought low. This truth is directed properly against the self-righteous. For Christ and His righteousness will not endure spiritual pride and presumption; but the souls that are poor, that hunger and thirst for grace, that know their need, these Christ graciously receives.” Cramer.16. Isaiah 26:6. “It vexes the proud all the more that they will be overcome by those who are poor and of no consequence. For example, Goliath was annoyed that a boy should come against him with a staff (1 Sam. 13:43) Cramer.17.
Isaiah 26:8-10. That the justice of God must absolutely manifest itself that the majesty of the Lord may be seen, and that the wicked may learn righteousness, must even from a new Testament view-point be admitted. But the New Testament disputes the existence of any one who is righteous when confronted by the law, and who is not deserving of punishment. [But that there is none righteous, no not one, is taught most emphatically in the Old Testament also.—D. M.]. But it (the New Testament) while it shuts up all, Jews and Gentiles, without exception, under sin (Galatians 3:22; Romans 3:9; Romans 11:32), sets forth a scheme of mediation, which, while it renders full satisfaction to justice, at the same time offers to all the possibility of deliverance. This mediation is through the Cross of Christ.
It is only when this mediation has not been accepted that punitive justice has free course. It should not surprise us that even the Evangelist of the Old Covenant, who wrote chap. 53, did not possess perfect knowledge of this mediation. Let us remember John the Baptist (Matthew 3:7; Matthew 11:11) and the disciples of the Lord (Luke 9:54). [Let us not forget that Isaiah was a true Prophet, and spoke as he was moved by the Spirit of God. The Apostle Paul did not find fault with the most terrible denunciations of judgment contained in the Old Testament, or affect a superiority over the men who uttered them. On the contrary, he quotes them as words which could not be suffered to fall, but which must be fulfilled in all their dreadful import. See e.g.
Romans 11:9-10.—D. M.].
18. Isaiah 26:12. “It is a characteristic of true, sincere Christians, that they give God the glory and not themselves, and freely confess that they have nothing of themselves, but everything from God (1 Corinthians 4:7; Philippians 2:13; Hebrews 12:2).” Cramer.19. Isaiah 26:16. The old theologians have many comforting and edifying thoughts connected with this place: “A magnet has the power to raise and attract to itself iron. Our heart is heavy as iron. But the hand of God is as a magnet.
When that hand visits us with affliction, it lifts us up, and draws us to itself.” “Distress teaches us to pray, and prayer again dispels all distress. One wedge displaces the other.” “Ex gravibus curis impellimur ad pia vota.” “Ex monte myrrhae procedimus ad collem thuris (Cant. 9:6). In amaritudine crucis exsurgit odor devotae precationis (Psalms 86:6 sq.).” “Ubi nulla crux et tentatio, ibi nulla vera oratio. Oratio sine mails est tanquam avis sine alis. Optimus orandi magister necessitas. Τὰπαθήματαμαθήματα. Quae nocent, docent.
Ubi tentatio, ibi oratio. Mala, quae hic nos premunt, ad Deum ire compellunt. Qui nescit orare, ingrediatur mare.” “When the string is most tightly drawn, it sounds best. Cross and temptation are the right prayer-bell. They are the press by which God crushes out the juice of prayer.” Cramer and Foerster.20. Isaiah 26:20.
As God, when the deluge was about to burst, bade Noah go into his ark as into his chamber, and Himself shut the door on him (Genesis 7:6); so does the Lord still act when a storm is approaching; He brings His own into a chamber where they can be safe, either for their temporal preservation and protection against every might (Psalms 91:1), or, on the other hand, to give them repose by a peaceful and happy death.” “His anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life (Psalms 30:6).” Cramer.21. Isaiah 27:1. [“Great and mighty princes [nations] if they oppose the people of God, are in God’s account, as dragons and serpents, and plagues of mankind; and the Lord will punish them in due time. They are too big for men to deal with, and call to an account; and therefore the great God will take the doing of it into His own hands.” Henry.—D. M.].
22. Isaiah 27:2-5. “It seems to the world that God has no concern for His church and Christians, else, we imagine, they would be better off. But certain it is, that it is not the angels but God Himself that will be watcher over this vineyard, and will send it gracious rain.” Veit Dietrich. [“The church is a vineyard of red wine, yielding the best and choicest grapes, intimating the reformation of the church, that it now brings forth good fruit unto God, whereas before it brought forth fruit to itself, or brought forth wild grapes, Isaiah 5:4.” “God takes care (1) of the safety of this vineyard; I the Lord do keep it. He speaks this, as glorying in it, that He is, and has undertaken to be, the keeper of Israel; those that bring forth fruit to God are, and shall be always, under His protection. (2) God takes care of the fruitfulness of this vineyard: I will water it every moment; and yet it shall not be over watered. We need the constant and continual waterings of the divine grace; for if that be at any time withdrawn, we wither and come to nothing.” Henry. D. M.].
23. Isaiah 27:4. “Est aurea promissio, qua praecedentem confirmat. Indignatio non est mihi, fury is not in me. Quomodo enim is nobis irasci potest, qui pro nobis est mortuus? Quanquam igitur appareat, eum irasci, non tamen est verum, quod irascatur. Sic Paulo immittitur angelus Satanae, sed non est ira, nam ipse Christus dicit: sufficit tibi gratia mea.
Sic pater filium delinquentem castigat, sed non est ira, quanquam appareat ira esse. Custodia igitur vineae aliquando cogit Deum immittere speciem irae, ne pereat luxurie, sed non est ira. Est insignis textus, which we should inscribe on all tribulations: Non est indignatio mihi, non possum irasci. Quod autem videtur irasci est custodia vineae, ne pereas et fias securus. Luther. “In order to understand fully the doctrine of the wrath of God we must have a clear perception of the antithesis: the long-suffering of God, and the wrath of God, wrath and mercy.” Lange.24. Isaiah 27:7-9. “Christ judges His church, i.e., He punishes and afflicts it, but He does this in measure.
The sorrow and cross is meted out, and is not, as it appears to us, without measure and infinite. It is so measured that redemption must certainly follow. But why does God let His Christians so suffer? Why does He not lay the cross on the wicked? God answers this question and speaks: the sin of Jacob will thereby cease. That is: God restrains sin by the cross, and subdues the old Adam.” Veit Dietrich.25.
Isaiah 27:13. [“The application of this verse to a future restoration of the Jews can neither be established nor disproved. In itself considered, it appears to contain nothing which may not be naturally applied to events long past.” J. A. Alexander.—“This prediction was completely and entirely fulfilled by the return of the Jews to their own country under the decree of Cyrus.” Barnes.—D. M.].
AND 1. On Isaiah 24:4-6. Fast-day sermon. Warning against dechristianization of the life of the people. 1) Wherein such dechristianization consists: a, transgression of the commandments that are in force; b, alteration of the commandments which are essential articles of the everlasting covenant, as e.g. removing of all state institutions from the basis of religion. 2) Its consequences: a, Desecration of the land (subjectively, by the spread of a profane, godless sentiment; objectively, by the secularization of relations hitherto held sacred); b, the curse consumes the land, Isaiah 24:4.
2. On Isaiah 25:1-5. The Lord, the refuge of the needy. 1) He has the power to help. This we perceive a, from His nature (Lord, God, Wonderful); b, from His deeds (Isaiah 25:1 b, Isaiah 25:2). 2) He gives His strength even to the feeble, (Isaiah 25:4). 3) These are thereby victorious, (Isaiah 25:5).
3. On Isaiah 25:6-9. Easter Sermon, by T. Schaeffer (Manch. Gab. u. ein Geist III. p. 269):—“The glorious Easter-blessing of the Risen One: 1) Wherein it consists? 2) who receive it? 3) what are its effects? Christmas Sermon, by Romberg [ibid. 1869, p. 78): Our text represents to us Christmas joy under the image of a festive board. Let us consider, 1) the host; 2) the guests; 3) the gifts.”
4. On Isaiah 26:1-4. Concerning the church. 1) She is a strong city in which salvation is to be found. 2) The condition of having a portion in her is faith. 3) The blessing which she is instrumental in procuring is peace.
5. Isaiah 26:19-21. The comfort of the Christian for the present and future. 1) For the present the Christian is to betake himself to his quiet chamber, where he is alone with his Lord and by Him made cheerful and secure. 2) For the future he has the certain hope, a, that the Lord will judge the wicked, b, raise the believer to everlasting life.
6. Isaiah 27:2-9. How the Lord deals with His vineyard, the church. 1) Fury is not in Him towards it; 2) He protects and purifies it; 3) He gives it strength, peace and growth; 4) He chastens it in measure; 5) He makes the chastisement itself serve to purge it from sins.
Footnotes:Heb. Swallow up.Heb. covered.for ever.reproach.Or, threshed.be cast down.Or, threshed in Madmenah.cast down into the waters of the dunghole.devices.
5. THE AS OF THE IDEA OF JUSTICE
Isaiah 26:1-101 In that day shall this song be sung in the land of Judah;
We have a strong city:
Salvation will God appoint for walls and bulwarks.
2 Open ye the gates,
That the righteous nation which keepeth the truth may enter in.
3 Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace whose mind is stayed on thee;Because he trusteth in thee.
4 Trust ye in the Lord for ever;
For in the Lord Jehovah Isaiah 5 everlasting strength.
5 For he bringeth down them that dwell on high;
The lofty city, he layeth it low;
He layeth it low, even to the ground;
He bringeth it even to the dust.
6 The foot shall tread it down,
Even the feet of the poor, and the steps of the needy.
7 The way of the just is uprightness;
Thou, most upright, dost weigh the path of the just.
8 Yea, in the way of thy judgments, O Lord, have we waited for thee;
The desire of our soul is to thy name, and to the remembrance of thee.
9 With my soul have I desired thee in the night;
Yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early;
For when thy judgments are in the earth,
The inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.
10 Let favor be shewed to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness;
In the land of uprightness will he deal unjustly,
And will not behold the majesty of the Lord.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_26:1. Hophal δεּ ?ωַׁ ?ψ only here. According to the punctuation ςζ ought to be connected with μπε. But most interpreters take ςִ ?ιψςζ together after Proverbs 18:19. I believe, however, that the Masoretes indicate the correct sense, and the one which corresponds to the context. We must not forget that the inhabitants of the “land” of Judah speak thus. ςִ ?ιψ stands consequently in opposition to ΰψυ.
The redeemed of the Lord do not all dwell in the city. They dwell also in the country round about. But the city is their ςֹ ?ζ, their strong defence, and place of refuge. It is therefore as if they said: We dwell indeed in the country, but yet we are not without protection; for we have a city into which we can hasten and find shelter. Comp. Psalms 28:8; Psalms 84:6; Isaiah 12:2; Isaiah 45:24; Isaiah 49:5; Isaiah 2:9; Isaiah 3:1; Isaiah 62:8.
Observe the structure of the second sentence of this verse. The sentence consists of three members, each member has two words; for even ςζΞμπε is rendered by Maqqeph one word. The first two words begin each with ς; the second two with ιωׁ; the third two with η.
Isaiah 26:4. That αְּ before ιδָּ is not the so-called Beth essentiae was already perceived by Drechsler. αְּ serves here not as a mere periphrasis of the predicate (Psalms 68:5); but it marks the idea φεּ ?ψ, which is by no means coincident with Jehovah (since it can be sought out of Jehovah), as one which believers find in Jehovah (comp. Psalms 31:3; Psalms 89:27; Psalms 94:22; Psalms 95:1 et saepe). ςψιςψ comp. Isaiah 65:18. The plural ςεμָ ?ξִ ?ιν besides here Isaiah 45:17; Isaiah 51:9.
Isaiah 26:6. ψָ ?ξַ ?ρ (comp. on Isaiah 1:12; Isaiah 28:3), ςָ ?πִ ?ι (comp. on Isaiah 3:14 sq.), γַּ ?μ (comp. on Isaiah 25:4) are all expressions characteristic of Isaiah.
Isaiah 26:8. ΰַ ?σ is an antithetic “yea.” Not only does the righteous man wish himself to do right, but he desires also to see the righteousness of God. The word belongs especially to poetry. It is remarkable that it is found in Isaiah in such specifically poetic sections in which αַּ ?μ also occurs. ΰֹ ?ψַ ?η is acc. loci. πτωׁ ?ι and ψεηι, Isaiah 26:9 a, are acc. instrum. ωָׁ ?ηַ ?ψ, Piel ωִׁ ?ηַ ?ψ, is a word current chiefly in the book of Job, in the Psalms and Proverbs. To ξωׁ ?τθκ a verb is to be supplied (say, ιָ ?αֹ ?ΰεּ as Kimchi and Rashi propose). The perfect μָֽ ?ξְ ?γεּ does not appear to me to be used in its paradigmatic force to express a matter of experience that has frequently happened (Delitzsch), for the Prophet complains of a want in this respect,—but the perfect is intended to mark this learning as a certain, infallible effect of the desired judgments.
AND 1. Here, too, the Prophet relates a hymn which he hears coming from the holy mountain, and out of the holy city. Its leading thought corresponds to the declaration 2 Peter 3:13 regarding the new earth in which righteousness dwells. This thought is here carried out in all directions. The redeemed, who sing the hymn, begin with telling that they dwell in a strong city well provided with walls (Isaiah 26:1). But the gates of the city shall be open only to a righteous people that keepeth truth (Isaiah 26:2), as the salvation also which this city affords, the peace which is through faith, rests on the foundation of the faithfulness of God, who will just as surely never disappoint faith (Isaiah 26:3-4) as He has humbled the proud, unbelieving worldly power, and bowed it under the feet of the once despised believers (Isaiah 26:5-6).
The righteous people, who dwell in the city, walk in righteous ways (Isaiah 26:7). But they long exceedingly to see the righteousness of God reveal itself free and unrestricted in all directions. Therefore they wait for the Lord in the way of His judgments (Isaiah 26:8). Only when the earth is visited by these judgments, do men learn righteousness (Isaiah 26:9). The wicked man, when favored, does not learn righteousness: he pursues his sinful course even in the land of virtue, and never comes to know the majesty of God (Isaiah 26:10).
2. In that day——enter in.Isaiah 26:1-2. By the expression in that day, what follows is marked as contemporaneous and homogeneous with Isaiah 25:9-12. (Comp. “in that day,” Isaiah 26:9). There the redeemed praise the person of their God. They rejoice that they have this Lord for their God. Here they extol the righteousness of their God and of His kingdom.
The expression land of Judah is plainly employed to form an antithesis to Moab, Isaiah 25:10 sqq. For not Zion or Jerusalem, but only Judah can stand contrasted with Moab, whether this name denotes country or people, or, as is most probable (comp. Isaiah 26:12), denotes both. At the same time it is self-evident that they who dwell in the land of Judah, are the same as those who according to Isaiah 24:23; Isaiah 25:6-10, are to be found on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, i.e., not merely the people of Judah in the ethnographical sense, but all those who according to Isaiah 25:6 sqq., are called and entitled to partake of the great feast on Mount Zion, i.e., the entire ’Ισραὴλπνευματικός. The hymn itself begins with a brief description of the city of God. ιωׁ ?εςδιωׁ ?ιϊεβεΧ. Very many interpreters understand that the Prophet here affirms that the city has no walls, but has instead of walls ιωׁ ?εςδ.
Appeal is made to Isaiah 60:18 and to Zechariah 2:9 [E. V., Isaiah 2:5]. Comp. Psalms 125:2. But it is said, Revelation 21:12, of the city of God, that it had “a wall great and high, and had twelve gates,” etc. There would therefore exist a contradiction between the Apocalypse and the places that have been quoted from the Old Testament.
But this contradiction disappears when we understand Isaiah 60:18 to mean: thou shalt give names to thy walls and gates, and designate thy walls by the name “Salvation,” and thy gates by the name “Praise,” (as e.g. the walls of Babylon had names: Imgur-Bel and Nivitti-bel. See Comment. on Jeremiah 51:58). The passage Zechariah 2:8 sq. is no more to be taken literally than Psalms 125:2. But the Jerusalem, Revelation 21, 22, is a quite definite locality, not merely ideal, but real, though spiritual, (pneumatisch-real). Therefore this latter Jerusalem has walls, while Jerusalem, as the spiritual mother that includes all nations (Galatians 4:26; Zechariah 2:8 sq.), has no material, outward, visible walls. But in our place where the Prophet, as has been shown, distinguishes the land of Judah and the city belonging to it, we have first of all to think of that city spoken of in Revelation 21, 22.
This Jerusalem has a real wall. If this wall, according to Isaiah 60:18, bears the name Salvation, this can be the case only because it actually affords safety, deliverance. And therefore I take ιωׁ ?εςδ, as placed first, in apposition to ηξεϊεημ, or as the accusative predicate, although Delitzsch rejects this construction. [The mode of construing this sentence proposed by our author I cannot assent to. He renders “God places walls and bulwark, for salvation or safety.” This rendering is not so well recommended as that given in the E. V., and the thought thus expressed is incomparably less grand and exalted. This bald, prosaic translation is sought out in order to avoid a contradiction with the Apocalypse which speaks of the New Jerusalem as girt with a wall.
But the Apocalypse is pre-eminently a symbolical book; and by taking its imagery in the literal sense, it could be easily shown not only to contradict statements of the Old Testament, but to be self-contradictory. E. G. According to Revelation 21:2 there is no temple in the New Jerusalem; but Ezekiel describes at large a temple that will be in it, and according to Revelation 3:12 the believer will abide perpetually in the temple of the city of God. Is there then a contradiction here? No.
But when in symbolical language it is said that there will be a temple in the New Jerusalem, the meaning is that what will answer to the idea of a temple will be found there. God’s servants will dwell in His presence and continually worship Him. Symbolically a temple can be spoken of. But a material temple will be wanting in the holy city. So it can be said to have a sun which will never go down; and again, no sun will be seen there. So, too, the most perfect protection can be symbolized under the figure of a wall great and high; but the essential meaning of this statement (not a contradiction of it), is given when it is declared “Salvation will God appoint for walls and bulwark.” The divine help is a better defence of the city than artificial fortifications.
Verse 2 shows that the whole righteous nation will dwell within the strong city whose walls and bulwark are Salvation. The city is thus set forth as the abode of more than a portion of the inhabitants of the land of Judah. “The nations of them that are saved shall walk in the light of it,” Revelation 21:24. The church, too, can exult in a strong city which she has even now, Psalms 46:4-5.—D. M.]. The words walls and bulwark are used together as here, Lamentations 2:8, (comp. 2 Samuel 20:15). ημ is the pomoerium, the outer circumvallation before the chief wall. Comp.
Comment. on Lamentations 2:8 and Jeremiah 51:58.
3. Open ye—everlasting strength.Isaiah 26:2-4. These gates, according to Isaiah 60:11 and Revelation 21:25 are never shut. In Isaiah 60:11 it is said that they will always, night and day, stand open; but in Revelation 21 it is said they will not be shut by day. But the latter statement is identical with the former; for there will be no night there, as is expressly declared in the Revelation. I do not think that Isaiah 26:2 is to be regarded as spoken by angels’ voices, and that the city is to be supposed empty.
It is not intended merely to express the first opening of the gates in order to admit inhabitants. The same persons who said “We have a city,” say also “Open the gates,” and they at the same time declare that they know what their city is intended to be according to the will of God. They know that there shall not enter into it anything that is common, neither whatsoever worketh abomination or a lie (Revelation 21:27; Revelation 22:14 sq.). This fundamental law of their city they here declare. The gates shall always stand open that a righteous nation that keepeth faith may go in. The words recall to mind Psalms 24:7; Psalms 24:9 as they are reproduced in Psalms 118:19-20. βει stands here not in an ethnographical, but in a rhetorical signification.
It denotes a multitude of people, as e.g., Genesis 20:4; Isaiah 49:7. An essential part of the φְ ?γָ ?χָ ?δ of this righteous people is that it keeps faith.ΰξπιν is found only here in Isaiah. Not a superficial, vacillating righteousness, but a righteousness having a firm foundation is required. For as God is a sure stronghold, a φεּ ?ψςεֹ ?μָ ?ξִ ?ιν in which we can confide, so He requires also a people that trusts firmly in Him, and cleaves to Him with a fidelity that cannot be shaken. ΰξπιν therefore, as the Latin fides, signifies both faith and fidelity. Comp. Isaiah 1:26.
The Lord, on His part, offers as a firm formation, peace, peace (Isaiah 57:19; Isaiah 27:5). ιֵ ?φֶ ?ψ is a formation, frame. When it denotes a thought that is framed, then ιֵ ?φֶ ?ψ is almost always united with ξηωׁ ?αεϊ or μֵ ?α (Genesis 6:5; Genesis 8:21; 1 Chronicles 28:9; 1 Chronicles 29:18). As ιֵ ?φֶ ?ψ stands alone in our place, it signifies here what it means elsewhere when standing alone;—a thing framed of any kind (Isaiah 29:16; Psalms 103:14; Habakkuk 2:18). ρָ ?ξεּ ?κְ (Psalms 111:8; Psalms 112:8) is = established, firmly founded. As now in a city there are many artificial formations, things framed, both of a visible and invisible nature, as pillars, statues, buildings, contrivances, institutions, and such like, which serve partly for ornament, partly for use, so here peace is called a formation or thing framed which the Lord keeps on its firm foundation. The participle passive αָּ ?γθεּ ?ηַ is found further only in Psalms 112:7, where it is used as synonymous with πָ ?λεֹ ?ο. We may take it in our place also as = confiding, confidently established (conglutinatum, copulatum ac tanquam concretum, ac coagmentatum.Fuerst).
Peace is a structure that rests on a good foundation, because it is founded on the Lord. But the fact that peace objectively is founded on the Lord does not exclude the necessity for individuals subjectively to found themselves on the Lord,i.e., in faith to rely upon Him. On the contrary, he who does not subjectively yield Himself to the Lord in faith will not be partaker of the blessing of the objective salvation that has been constituted, established (John 3:14 sqq.). Hence (Isaiah 26:4) the emphatic exhortation: “trust in the Lord,“ etc. [I cannot accept the interpretation of Isa 26:3 given by Dr. Naegelsbach. The best modern interpreters are substantially in accord with the E.
V. The most literal translation of the verse that can be given is: “The mind stayed or supported (on Thee) Thou wilt keep (in) peace, peace, because it trusteth in Thee.” Peace as an objective formation could not be said to trust in God, for it is not a living being possessed of will. This objection is fatal to the view wrought out so ingeniously and elaborately by our author.—D. M.] The abbreviation ιָ ?δּ standing alone is found in Isaiah besides here, Isaiah 38:11. The combination forming a climax ιδιδεδ occurs in Isaiah besides here only Isaiah 12:2. φεּ ?ψ in the spiritual signification is found in Isaiah 8:14; Isaiah 17:10; Isaiah 30:29; Isaiah 44:8; Isaiah 51:1. [This hallowed designation of the Lord, “Rock of Ages,” is found as marginal rendering of what in the text of the E. V. is translated “everlasting strength.” The rendering of the margin is literal and accurate.
The expression “Rock of Ages” is found in the Bible in this place only.”—D. M.]
4. For he bringeth——the needy.Isaiah 26:5-6. A pledge that the Lord will be the everlasting refuge of His people is seen by the Prophet in this, that the Lord has already humbled, cast down the worldly power. He expresses this partly in words which he repeats from Isaiah 25:12. Those who dwell on high (Isaiah 33:5; Isaiah 33:16), the lofty city (comp. 11:11, 17; Isaiah 12:4; Isaiah 30:13), He has brought low [instead of the first verb being in the present tense, as in the E. V., it should be in the perfect].
The following imperfects (futures) express the permanent condition of humiliation in consequence of the overthrow. The Prophet depicts the endless duration of the humiliation by the repetition of the verb expressing it (Anadiplosis). The different forms of the pronominal suffix attached to the verb are an agreeable variation. The feet of those who had before been trodden in the dust by the violent foot of the worldly power now pass without danger over the city of the world which has been laid by God in the dust.
5. The way—majesty of the Lord.Isaiah 26:7-10. In Isaiah 26:3-6 the Prophet, in connection with ΰξπιν had discussed the idea of the reciprocal fides implied in the life of the redeemed in communion with their God and in the city of God. In the following verses he discusses the idea of φγιχ, so that the words righteous nation that keepeth faith, Isaiah 26:2, appear as the theme on which the Prophet here enlarges. The people of God must before all be themselves righteous. They are such when their path is ξֵ ?ιωָׁ ?ψִ ?ιν, which is here the subject, and means rectitudo, sinceritas.
It forms the ground which serves the righteous as substratum of His walk, as the pathway of life. But the glory is due to God. For He it is who so levels (properly rolls, the Prophet had here in view Proverbs 4:26; Proverbs 5:6; Proverbs 5:21) the path (ξςπμ only here in Isaiah) of the righteous that it becomes ιָ ?ωָׁ ?ψ. The structure of the sentence forms a prolepsis similar to Isaiah 26:1. But in order that the idea of righteousness may attain its full realization in the world, it is necessary that the divine righteousness also should unfold itself freely and unconfined. The unrighteousness which reigns in the world must be judged, the holy nature of God must become manifest in its full splendor.
And this manifestation of the holiness and righteousness of God forms an object of the most intense desire of the believers of the Old Testament. This desire finds expression in many Psalms, and the Prophet here again adopts quite the tone of the Psalms. We wait for thee in the way of thy judgments, means: We expect to see Thee march through the world as a righteous judge (comp. Isaiah 40:14; Proverbs 2:8; Proverbs 17:23). This manifestation of justice is hoped for by the righteous, not for their own sake, but for the sake of the honor of God. Their desire, therefore, is to the name and remembrance (comp.
Exodus 3:15 and Psalms 135:13) of the Lord,i.e., that the Lord may so manifest Himself that men may be put in a position to call Him by the right name, and to spread and propagate the right knowledge of Him. But even for the sake of the world, i.e. of unrighteous men themselves, the Prophet most fervently longs for the full manifestation of the divine righteousness, which he here conceives of not exactly as that which destroys the ungodly, but rather as that which punishes them for their own profit (Isaiah 26:9). After having hitherto used the plural, the Prophet passes over into the singular, I desire, I seek. This can be explained only on the supposition that he here gives expression to a wish in which he personally was intensely interested. Was he not himself the object and perpetual witness of human injustice? He whom the question: How can God tolerate such injustice? and the wish that an end may soon be put to it, does not suffer to rest even in the night, is the Prophet himself rather than those who, dwelling already in the glorified city of God, have behind them the chief stages of the judgment of the world (24; Isaiah 25:10 sqq.).
We cannot ascribe this longing to carnal vindictiveness. In what follows the Prophet gives reasons for his desire in such a way as to show clearly to what an extent he transfers the actual necessities of the present time to that ideal future which he depicts. We have here another example of the Prophet’s manner of representing the future with the materials which the present time supplies. The Prophet longs for the judgments of God, because he hopes that in proportion as the earth is visited by them, men will learn righteousness. We recognize here the teacher and preacher, who deeply laments that words produce but little impression, that facts which make themselves profoundly felt are necessary to bring men to the knowledge and practice of righteousness. In Isaiah 26:10 the Prophet declares that if judgments do not take place, if the wicked has favor shown him he does not learn righteousness (ιֻ ?ηַ ?ο Hoph of ηָ ?πַ ?ο, only here in Isaiah; it occurs, Proverbs 21:10.
The conditional sentence is without the hypothetical particle, as is often the case). The wicked is not improved when favor is shown to him, but proceeds even when surrounded by the righteous (πְ ?λֹ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ30:10; comp. Isaiah 57:2; Isaiah 59:14) to act perversely (ςִ ?εֵּ ?μ, Piel in the causative sense, besides only Psalms 71:4), and will never perceive the nature of God in all its glory and majesty (βֵ ?ΰεּ ?ϊ a word characteristic of Isaiah’s writings, Isaiah 9:17; Isaiah 12:5; Isaiah 28:3; it occurs besides only Psalms 17:10; Psalms 89:10; Psalms 93:1). We must indeed acquit the Prophet of a low carnal desire of revenge, but I am decidedly of opinion that the passage, nevertheless, breathes the legal spirit of the Old Testament (comp. Matthew 3:7; Luke 3:7), and is not born of the Spirit whose children we are to be. [A corrective to this last observation is furnished in the Exposition, which well sets forth the motives which inspired the Prophet to desire God’s judgments on the earth. Without them men will not learn righteousness.
God’s goodness is despised or made the occasion of licentiousness, if there is no clear demonstration by terrible things in righteousness, that verily there is a God that judgeth in the earth. If John the Baptist’s words (Matthew 3:7 and Luke 3:7) are, like those of Isaiah, pronounced inconsistent with the Spirit of the New Testament, what shall be said of the words of our Saviour, Matthew 23:33, and elsewhere? The desire that evil-doers should be punished, and that there should be a manifestation of the retributive justice of God, is not at variance with the Spirit of the Gospel, or that love of our enemies which Christ enjoined and exemplified, comp. Revelation 6:10; Revelation 15:4; Revelation 19:1-2; 1 Corinthians 16:22; 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10, etc.—D. M.].
AND ETHICAL1. Isaiah 24:2. “When general judgments take place, no distinction is observed between man and wife, master and servant, mistress and maid, learned and unlearned, noble and plebeian, clergy and laity; therefore let no one rely on any external prerogative or superiority, but let every one without distinction repent and forsake sin.”—Cramer. Though this is right, yet we must, on the other hand, remember that the Lord declares in reference to the same great event, “Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left” (Matthew 24:10 sq.). There is no contradiction in these two statements. Both are true: outward relations will make no difference; there shall be no respect of persons.
But the state of the heart will make a difference. According to the inward character there will, in the case of those whose external position in the world is perfectly alike, be some who enter life, others whose doom is death.
2. Isaiah 24:5 sq. “The earth is burdened with sins, and is therefore deprived of every blessing. The earth must suffer for our guilt, when we have as it were spoilt it, and it must be subject to vanity for our sakes (Romans 8:20). What wonder is it that it should show itself ungrateful toward us?”—Cramer.[3. Isaiah 24:13 sq. “Observe the small number of this remnant; here and there one who shall escape the common calamity (as Noah and his family, when the old world was drowned), who when all faces gather blackness, can lift up their head with joy. Luke 21:26-28.” Henry.—D. M.].
4. Isaiah 24:17-20. Our earth is a volcanic body. Mighty volcanic forces were active at its formation. That these are still in commotion in the interior of the earth is proved by the many active volcanoes scattered over the whole earth, and by the perpetual volcanic convulsions which we call earthquakes. These have hitherto been confined to particular localities.
But who can guarantee that a concentration and simultaneous eruption of those volcanic forces, that is, a universal earthquake, shall not hereafter occur? The Lord makes express mention of earthquakes among the signs which shall precede His second coming (Matthew 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:11). And in 2 Peter 3:5 sqq. the future destruction of the earth by fire is set over against the destruction of the old world by water. Isaiah in our place announces a catastrophe whose characteristic features will be that, 1) there will be no escape from it; 2) destructive forces will assail from above and below; 3) the earth will be rent asunder; 4) it will reel and totter; 5) it will suffer so heavy a fall that it will not rise again (Isaiah 24:20 b). Is there not here a prophecy of the destruction of the earth by volcanic forces? And how suddenly can they break loose!
The ministers of the word have every reason to compare this extreme exposedness of our earth to fire, and the possibility of its unexpectedly sudden collapse with the above-cited warnings of the word of God, and to attach thereto the admonition which is added in 2 Peter 3:11.
5. Isaiah 24:21. The earth is a part of our planetary system. It is not what it appears to the optical perception to be, a central body around which worlds of a different nature revolve, but it, together with many similar bodies, revolves round a common centre. The earth according to that view of the account of the creation in Genesis 1, which appears to me the true one, has arisen with all the bodies of our Solar system out of one primary matter, originally united, common to them all. If our Solar System is a well-ordered, complete organism, it must rest on the basis of a not merely formal, but also material unity; i.e., the separate bodies must move, not only according to a principle of order which governs all, but they must also as to their substance be essentially like.
And as they arose simultaneously, so must they perish simultaneously. It is inconceivable that our earth alone should disappear from the organism of the Solar System, or pass over to a higher material condition. Its absence, or ceasing to exist in its previous form and substance, would necessarily draw after it the ruin of the whole system. Hence the Scripture speaks every where of a passing away and renovation of the heaven and the earth (Psalms 102:26; Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; Matthew 5:18; Matthew 24:29; Matthew 24:35; 2 Peter 3:7; 2 Peter 3:10; 2 Peter 3:13; Hebrews 12:26; Revelation 20:11; Revelation 21:1). The heaven that shall pass away with a great noise, whose powers shall be shaken, whose stars shall fall, is the planetary heaven. The same lot will happen to the companions of our earth, to the other planets, and to the centre, the sun, and to all other co-ordinate and subordinate stellar bodies, which will befall the earth itself.
This is the substance of the view which serves as a basis for our place. But personal beings are not thereby by any means excluded from the φαΰξψεν. The parallel expression ξμλιδΰγξδ, and the use in other places of the related expression φαΰδωׁ ?ξιν lead us rather to suppose personal beings to be included. But I believe that a distinction must be made here. As the heavenly bodies which will pass away simultaneously with the earth, can only be those which arose together with it, and which stand in organic connection with it, so also the angelic powers, which are judged simultaneously with us men, can be only those which stand in connection with the heavenly bodies of our Solar System, i.e., with the earthly material world. There are heavenly bodies of glorious pneumatic substance.
If personal beings stand in connection with them, they must also be pure, glorious, resplendent beings. These will not be judged. They are the holy angels, who come with the Lord (Matthew 25:31). But it is quite conceivable that all the bodies of our Solar System are till the judgment like our earth suffered to be the theatre of the spirits of darkness.
6. Isaiah 24:21-23, It seems to me that the Prophet has here sketched the chief matters pertaining to eschatology. For the passing away of heaven and earth, the binding of Satan (Revelation 20:1-3), the loosing of Satan again (Revelation 20:7), and finally the reign of God alone, which will make sun and moon unnecessary (Revelation 21:23)—are not these the boundary-stones of the chief epochs of the history of the end of the world?
7. Isaiah 25:6. [“The Lord of hosts makes this feast. The provision is very rich, and every thing is of the best. It is a feast, which supposes abundance and variety; it is a continual feast to believers: it is their fault if it be not. It is a feast of fat things and full of marrow; so relishing, so nourishing are the comforts of the Gospel to all those that feast upon them and digest them. The returning prodigal was entertained with the fatted calf; and David has that pleasure in communion with God, with which his soul is satisfied as with marrow and fatness.
It is a feast of wines on the lees; the strongest-bodied wines, that have been long kept upon the lees, and then are well refined from them, so that they are clear and fine. There is that in the Gospel which, like fine wine, soberly used, makes glad the heart, and raises the spirits, and is fit for those that are of a heavy heart, being under convictions of sin, and mourning for it, that they may drink and forget their misery (for that is the proper use of wine; it is a cordial for those that need it, Proverbs 31:6-7) may be of good cheer, knowing that their sins are forgiven, and may be vigorous in their spiritual work and warfare, as a strong man refreshed with wine.” Henry.—D. M.]
8. Isaiah 25:9. “In the Old Testament the vail and covering were before men’s eyes, partly because they waited for the light that was to appear, partly because they sat in darkness and in the shadow of death (Luke 1:79). The fulfilment of this prediction has in Christ already begun, and will at last be perfectly fulfilled in the Church triumphant where all ignorance and sorrow shall be dispelled (1 Corinthians 13:12).” Cramer.9. Isaiah 25:8. “God here represents Himself as a mother, who presses to her bosom her sorrowful son, comforts him and wipes away his tears (Isaiah 66:13). The righteous are to believe and appropriate this promise, that every one may learn to speak with Paul in the time of trial: the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us, Romans 8:18.” Cramer.10. Isaiah 25:10. “This is now the hope and consolation of the church that the hand of the Lord rests on this mountain, that is, that He will be gracious, and let His power, help and grace be there seen and felt.
But the unbelieving Moabites, i.e., the Jews, with all others who will not receive the gospel, shall be threshed to pieces as straw in the mire; these the Lord’s hand will not rescue, as it helps those who wait on Him, but it shall press them down so that they will never rise, according to the saying, Mark 16:16.” Veit Dietrich.11. Isaiah 25 Three thoughts contained in this chapter we should hold fast: 1) When we see the world triumph over every thing which belongs to the Lord and His kingdom, when our hearts are anxious about the preservation in the world of the Church of Christ, which is sore oppressed, let this word of the Prophet comfort our hearts. The world-city which contains all that is of the world, sinks into the dust, and the church of Christ goes from her chains and bands into the state of freedom and glory. We have often seen that it is the Lord’s way to let every thing come to maturity. When it is once ripe, He comes suddenly with His sentence. Let us comfort ourselves therewith, for thus will it happen with the world and its dominion over the faithful followers of Christ.
When it is ripe, suddenly it will come to an end. 2) No one who has a heart for the welfare of the nations can see without the deepest pain how all hearts are now seduced and befooled, and all eyes closed and covered. The simplest truths are no longer acknowledged, but the more perverse, brutal and mean views and doctrines are, the more greedily are they laid hold of. We cannot avert this. But our comfort is that even this seduction of the nations will reach its climax. Then men will come to themselves. The vail and covering will fall off, and the Gospel will shine with new light before the nations.
Therewith let us comfort ourselves. 3) Till this happens, the church is sorrowful. But she shall be full of joy. The promise is given to her that she shall be fully satisfied with the good things of the house of the Lord. A life is promised to her which neither death nor any pain can affect, as she has rest from all enemies. The word of the Lord shall be fulfilled in her: Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. The Church that has such a promise may wait in patient quietness for its accomplishment, and praise the Lord in affliction, till it pleases Him to glorify her before all nations.” Weber, The Prophet Isaiah. 1875.
12. Isaiah 26:1. “The Christian church is a city of God. God has built it, and He is the right Master-builder. It is strong: 1) on account of the Builder; 2) on account of the foundation and corner-stone, which is Christ; 3) on account of the bond wherewith the living stones are bound together, which is the unity of the faith.” Cramer. [The security and happiness of true believers, both on earth and in heaven, is represented in Scripture under the image of their dwelling in a city in which they can bid defiance to all their enemies. We dwell in such a city even now, Psalms 46:4-5. We look for such a city, Hebrews 11:10; Hebrews 11:16; Revelation 21—D. M.]
13. Isaiah 26:2. [These words may be taken as a description of the people whom God owns, who are fit to be accounted members of the church of the living God on earth, and who will not be excluded from the celestial city. Instead of complaining that only the righteous and the faithful will be admitted into the heavenly city, it should rather give us joy to think that there will be no sin there, that none but the just and true will there be found. This has been a delightful subject of reflection to God’s saints. The last words written by Henry Martyn were: “Oh! when shall time give place to eternity? When shall appear that new heaven and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness?
There, there shall in no wise enter in any thing that defileth; none of that wickedness which has made men worse than wild beasts—none of their corruptions which add to the miseries of mortality shall be seen or heard of any more.”—D. M.]
14. Isaiah 26:4. “The fourth privilege of the church is trust in God the Rock of Ages, i.e., in Christ, who not only here, but also Matthew 16; 1 Corinthians 10; 1 Peter 2, is called a rock in a peculiar manner, because no other foundation of salvation and of the church can be laid except this rock, which is here called the rock of ages on account of the eternity of His being, merit and office. Hence a refutation can be drawn of the papistical fable which makes Peter and his successors, the Roman Pontiffs, to be the rock on which the church is built.” Foerster. [“Whatever we trust to the world for, it will be but for a moment. All we expect from it is confined within the limits of time; but what we trust in God for will last as long as we shall last. For in the Lord Jehovah, Jah, Jehovah, in Him who was, and is, and is to come, there is a rock of ages, a firm and lasting foundation for faith and hope to build upon; and the house built on that rock will stand in a storm.” Henry.”—D. M.]
15. Isaiah 26:5. “It is very common with the prophets, when they prophesy of the kingdom of Christ to make reference to the proud and to the needy, and to represent the latter as exalted and the former as brought low. This truth is directed properly against the self-righteous. For Christ and His righteousness will not endure spiritual pride and presumption; but the souls that are poor, that hunger and thirst for grace, that know their need, these Christ graciously receives.” Cramer.16. Isaiah 26:6. “It vexes the proud all the more that they will be overcome by those who are poor and of no consequence. For example, Goliath was annoyed that a boy should come against him with a staff (1 Sam. 13:43) Cramer.17.
Isaiah 26:8-10. That the justice of God must absolutely manifest itself that the majesty of the Lord may be seen, and that the wicked may learn righteousness, must even from a new Testament view-point be admitted. But the New Testament disputes the existence of any one who is righteous when confronted by the law, and who is not deserving of punishment. [But that there is none righteous, no not one, is taught most emphatically in the Old Testament also.—D. M.]. But it (the New Testament) while it shuts up all, Jews and Gentiles, without exception, under sin (Galatians 3:22; Romans 3:9; Romans 11:32), sets forth a scheme of mediation, which, while it renders full satisfaction to justice, at the same time offers to all the possibility of deliverance. This mediation is through the Cross of Christ.
It is only when this mediation has not been accepted that punitive justice has free course. It should not surprise us that even the Evangelist of the Old Covenant, who wrote chap. 53, did not possess perfect knowledge of this mediation. Let us remember John the Baptist (Matthew 3:7; Matthew 11:11) and the disciples of the Lord (Luke 9:54). [Let us not forget that Isaiah was a true Prophet, and spoke as he was moved by the Spirit of God. The Apostle Paul did not find fault with the most terrible denunciations of judgment contained in the Old Testament, or affect a superiority over the men who uttered them. On the contrary, he quotes them as words which could not be suffered to fall, but which must be fulfilled in all their dreadful import. See e.g.
Romans 11:9-10.—D. M.].
18. Isaiah 26:12. “It is a characteristic of true, sincere Christians, that they give God the glory and not themselves, and freely confess that they have nothing of themselves, but everything from God (1 Corinthians 4:7; Philippians 2:13; Hebrews 12:2).” Cramer.19. Isaiah 26:16. The old theologians have many comforting and edifying thoughts connected with this place: “A magnet has the power to raise and attract to itself iron. Our heart is heavy as iron. But the hand of God is as a magnet.
When that hand visits us with affliction, it lifts us up, and draws us to itself.” “Distress teaches us to pray, and prayer again dispels all distress. One wedge displaces the other.” “Ex gravibus curis impellimur ad pia vota.” “Ex monte myrrhae procedimus ad collem thuris (Cant. 9:6). In amaritudine crucis exsurgit odor devotae precationis (Psalms 86:6 sq.).” “Ubi nulla crux et tentatio, ibi nulla vera oratio. Oratio sine mails est tanquam avis sine alis. Optimus orandi magister necessitas. Τὰπαθήματαμαθήματα. Quae nocent, docent.
Ubi tentatio, ibi oratio. Mala, quae hic nos premunt, ad Deum ire compellunt. Qui nescit orare, ingrediatur mare.” “When the string is most tightly drawn, it sounds best. Cross and temptation are the right prayer-bell. They are the press by which God crushes out the juice of prayer.” Cramer and Foerster.20. Isaiah 26:20.
As God, when the deluge was about to burst, bade Noah go into his ark as into his chamber, and Himself shut the door on him (Genesis 7:6); so does the Lord still act when a storm is approaching; He brings His own into a chamber where they can be safe, either for their temporal preservation and protection against every might (Psalms 91:1), or, on the other hand, to give them repose by a peaceful and happy death.” “His anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life (Psalms 30:6).” Cramer.21. Isaiah 27:1. [“Great and mighty princes [nations] if they oppose the people of God, are in God’s account, as dragons and serpents, and plagues of mankind; and the Lord will punish them in due time. They are too big for men to deal with, and call to an account; and therefore the great God will take the doing of it into His own hands.” Henry.—D. M.].
22. Isaiah 27:2-5. “It seems to the world that God has no concern for His church and Christians, else, we imagine, they would be better off. But certain it is, that it is not the angels but God Himself that will be watcher over this vineyard, and will send it gracious rain.” Veit Dietrich. [“The church is a vineyard of red wine, yielding the best and choicest grapes, intimating the reformation of the church, that it now brings forth good fruit unto God, whereas before it brought forth fruit to itself, or brought forth wild grapes, Isaiah 5:4.” “God takes care (1) of the safety of this vineyard; I the Lord do keep it. He speaks this, as glorying in it, that He is, and has undertaken to be, the keeper of Israel; those that bring forth fruit to God are, and shall be always, under His protection. (2) God takes care of the fruitfulness of this vineyard: I will water it every moment; and yet it shall not be over watered. We need the constant and continual waterings of the divine grace; for if that be at any time withdrawn, we wither and come to nothing.” Henry. D. M.].
23. Isaiah 27:4. “Est aurea promissio, qua praecedentem confirmat. Indignatio non est mihi, fury is not in me. Quomodo enim is nobis irasci potest, qui pro nobis est mortuus? Quanquam igitur appareat, eum irasci, non tamen est verum, quod irascatur. Sic Paulo immittitur angelus Satanae, sed non est ira, nam ipse Christus dicit: sufficit tibi gratia mea.
Sic pater filium delinquentem castigat, sed non est ira, quanquam appareat ira esse. Custodia igitur vineae aliquando cogit Deum immittere speciem irae, ne pereat luxurie, sed non est ira. Est insignis textus, which we should inscribe on all tribulations: Non est indignatio mihi, non possum irasci. Quod autem videtur irasci est custodia vineae, ne pereas et fias securus. Luther. “In order to understand fully the doctrine of the wrath of God we must have a clear perception of the antithesis: the long-suffering of God, and the wrath of God, wrath and mercy.” Lange.24. Isaiah 27:7-9. “Christ judges His church, i.e., He punishes and afflicts it, but He does this in measure.
The sorrow and cross is meted out, and is not, as it appears to us, without measure and infinite. It is so measured that redemption must certainly follow. But why does God let His Christians so suffer? Why does He not lay the cross on the wicked? God answers this question and speaks: the sin of Jacob will thereby cease. That is: God restrains sin by the cross, and subdues the old Adam.” Veit Dietrich.25.
Isaiah 27:13. [“The application of this verse to a future restoration of the Jews can neither be established nor disproved. In itself considered, it appears to contain nothing which may not be naturally applied to events long past.” J. A. Alexander.—“This prediction was completely and entirely fulfilled by the return of the Jews to their own country under the decree of Cyrus.” Barnes.—D. M.].
AND 1. On Isaiah 24:4-6. Fast-day sermon. Warning against dechristianization of the life of the people. 1) Wherein such dechristianization consists: a, transgression of the commandments that are in force; b, alteration of the commandments which are essential articles of the everlasting covenant, as e.g. removing of all state institutions from the basis of religion. 2) Its consequences: a, Desecration of the land (subjectively, by the spread of a profane, godless sentiment; objectively, by the secularization of relations hitherto held sacred); b, the curse consumes the land, Isaiah 24:4.
2. On Isaiah 25:1-5. The Lord, the refuge of the needy. 1) He has the power to help. This we perceive a, from His nature (Lord, God, Wonderful); b, from His deeds (Isaiah 25:1 b, Isaiah 25:2). 2) He gives His strength even to the feeble, (Isaiah 25:4). 3) These are thereby victorious, (Isaiah 25:5).
3. On Isaiah 25:6-9. Easter Sermon, by T. Schaeffer (Manch. Gab. u. ein Geist III. p. 269):—“The glorious Easter-blessing of the Risen One: 1) Wherein it consists? 2) who receive it? 3) what are its effects? Christmas Sermon, by Romberg [ibid. 1869, p. 78): Our text represents to us Christmas joy under the image of a festive board. Let us consider, 1) the host; 2) the guests; 3) the gifts.”
4. On Isaiah 26:1-4. Concerning the church. 1) She is a strong city in which salvation is to be found. 2) The condition of having a portion in her is faith. 3) The blessing which she is instrumental in procuring is peace.
5. Isaiah 26:19-21. The comfort of the Christian for the present and future. 1) For the present the Christian is to betake himself to his quiet chamber, where he is alone with his Lord and by Him made cheerful and secure. 2) For the future he has the certain hope, a, that the Lord will judge the wicked, b, raise the believer to everlasting life.
6. Isaiah 27:2-9. How the Lord deals with His vineyard, the church. 1) Fury is not in Him towards it; 2) He protects and purifies it; 3) He gives it strength, peace and growth; 4) He chastens it in measure; 5) He makes the chastisement itself serve to purge it from sins.
Footnotes:Heb. truths.As firm formation wilt thou preserve peace, peace, for upon thee it is confided.Heb. peace, peace.Or, thought, or, imagination.Heb. the rock of ages.Thou wilt level right the path of the just.
6. THE OF THE DEAD AND THE ACTS OF THE OF THE WORLD
Isaiah 26:11-2111 Lord, when thy hand is lifted up, they will not see;
But they shall see, and be ashamed for their envy at the people;
Yea, the fire of thine enemies shall devour them.
12 Lord, thou wilt ordain peace for us:
For thou also hast wrought all our works in us.
13 O Lord our God!
Other lords beside thee have had dominion over us:
But by thee only will we make mention of thy name.
14 They are dead, they shall not live;
They are deceased, they shall not rise:
Therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them,
And made all their memory to perish.
15 Thou hast increased the nation, O Lord,Thou hast increased the nation; thou art glorified:
Thou hadst removed it far unto all the ends of the earth.
16 Lord, in trouble have they visited thee;
They poured out a prayer when thy chastening was upon them.
17 Like as a woman with child, that draweth near the time of her delivery,
Is in pain, and crieth out in her pangs;
So have we been in thy sight, O Lord.18 We have been with child, we have been in pain,
We have as it were brought forth wind;
We have not wrought any deliverance in the earth;
Neither have the inhabitants of the world fallen.
19 Thy dead men shall live: Together with my dead body shall they arise.
Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust:
For thy dew is as the dew of herbs,
And the earth shall cast out the dead.
20 Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers,
And shut thy doors about thee:
Hide thyself as it were for a little moment,
Until the indignation be overpast.
21 For, behold, the Lord cometh out of his place
To punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity:
The earth also shall disclose her blood,
And shall no more cover her slain.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_26:12. It is not inconceivable that ϊִּ ?ωְׁ ?τֹ ?θ stood here originally, and was changed through ignorance into ϊωׁ ?τϊ. In that case ωׁ ?τּ ?θ would include ideally the transitive notion of awarding, allotting by judicial sentence; and on this ideal transitive notion ωׁ ?μενμπε would depend. We are struck by the rare word ωׁ ?τּ ?ϊ, while ωׁ ?τθ is suggested by the context. [The correction of the text suggested is unnecessary.—D. M.].
Isaiah 26:13. μְ ?αַ ?γ stands here adverbially as Ecclesiastes 7:29. The normal form of expression would be αְּ ?κָ μְ ?αַ ?γּ ?κָ (Psalms 51:6; Proverbs 5:17).
Isaiah 26:15. ιρσ is properly “to add.” But the word is not rarely employed in the sense of “to increase,” it being left to the reader to think either of that to which something is added, or of the addition which is made. Niphal πλαγ is found besides here Isaiah 3:5; Isaiah 23:8-9; Isaiah 43:4; Isaiah 49:5. Piel ψִ ?ηַ ?χ Isaiah 6:12; Isaiah 29:13.
Isaiah 26:16. φָ ?χεּ ?ο (on this form which is found besides only Deuteronomy 8:3; Deuteronomy 8:16, comp. Olshausen Gr., § 226, p. 449), is = effundunt (besides here Job 28:2; Job 29:6; Job 41:14; Psalms 41:9). Analogous is the Latin preces fundere (Virg. Aen. 6, 55) and ιִ ?ωׁ ?τֹּ ?κְ ωִׂ ?ιηεֹ Psalms 102:1.—ξερψκμξε corresponds to αַּ ?φַּ ?ψ in the first half of the verse, and is best taken as a circumstantial clause with a verb to be supplied (comp. Ewald, § 341 a, p. 823). μָ ?ξεֹ as μָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ Isaiah 26:9. Comp.
Isaiah 53:8.—λְּ ?ξεֹ is here, as afterwards, Isaiah 26:18 a, conjunction (comp. Isaiah 41:25; Genesis 19:15), and signifies not only in Isaiah 26:17, but also in Isaiah 26:18, if we examine thoroughly the construction, tanquam, like as (λַּ ? ?ֽ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶ ?ψ). In Isaiah 26:17 this is quite evident, for the construction is simple: As a woman with child is in pain, so were we far from Thee. [Or rather, so we were from Thy presence, i.e., our evil condition proceeded from Thee.—D. M.].
Isaiah 26:18. The particle of comparison has the signification “quasi, as if.”
Isaiah 26:20. Instead of γְּ ?μָ ?ϊֶ ?ικָ the K’eri reads γְּ ?μָ ?ϊֶ ?κָ, undoubtedly because a chamber has only one γֶּ ?μֶ ?ϊ, and not γְּ ?μָֽ ?ϊְ ?κָ) γμָ ?ϊַ ?ιִ ?ν, moreover, is not derived from γֶ ?μֶ ?ϊ, but from a form γָּ ?μָ ?δ which does not elsewhere occur). But both the assonance with ηγψֹ ?ικ and the anomalous nature of the form γְּ ?μָ ? ?ֽ ?ϊְ ?κָ speak in favor of ηֲ ?αִ ?ι ּ ?γְּ ?μָ ?ϊֶ ?ικָ is a singular form. It can be derived only from ηָ ?αָ ?δ, which is not met with elsewhere: ηָ ?αָ ?ΰ is the form in use (in Isaiah 42:22; Isaiah 49:2). The appearance of the radical Yod is also strange (ηֲ ?αִ ?ι instead of ηֲ ?αֵ ?δ). If this ηαι is to be regarded as a feminine form, this too would be singular; for all the parallel verbal and nominal forms are masculine.
The expression λξςθΞψβς is found only here and in Ezra 9:8. Comp. Isaiah 54:7.
AND 1. A new wonderful scene of the great eschatological drama presents itself to the view of the Prophet: the resurrection of the dead! He introduces this revelation with three brief sentences addressed to Jehovah, each of them beginning with the name Jehovah. In the first sentence he expresses the thought that men do not perceive the hand of the Lord already lifted up for judgment. But they shall one day perceive it when God’s zeal will display itself. But then they will be confounded, and fire will consume the adversaries (Isaiah 26:11).
On the other hand, the Prophet expresses the assurance that the judgment of God will promote the peace of the godly, as their works are wrought by God Himself (Isaiah 26:12). The Prophet in the third place introduces us into that sphere to which he means to direct especially our attention in what follows. For even this sphere stands in the closest relation to the manifestation of God indicated in Isaiah 26:11-12. He characterizes this region, first in general, as one whose inhabitants in a certain sense are not under the dominion of God, but are in the power of another lord. [Other lords, it should be said. And the verb is in the past tense.—D. M.].
An abnormal condition! The persons here meant cannot praise God; for this can be done only when a man is united to God, when he is in Him (Isaiah 26:13). It is at once apparent from Isaiah 26:14 that the Prophet means the dead. According to the prevailing opinion the dead cannot live again. God Himself has destroyed and blotted out forever their remembrance (Isaiah 26:14). This realm of death goes on increasing; its borders are ever further removed (Isaiah 26:15).
Yet the longing for deliverance is by no means extinct even in the dead: they seek the Lord, and their whispered prayer ascends to God from their place of trial (Isaiah 26:16). Yea, the world of the dead even make exertions to restore themselves to life, which efforts can be compared with the pangs of a woman in travail (Isaiah 26:17). But the result is useless: only wind is brought forth (Isaiah 26:18). Yet their hope is not disappointed. But only the dead who are the Lord’s will rise to life. These are summoned to awake and rejoice.
As a dew of luminous substances will it be, when the earth brings to the light the inhabitants of the world of shades (Isaiah 26:19). But the earth will restore not merely the bodies of the godly. She will bring to the light all the evil, especially all the blood-guiltiness which is buried in her bosom. This will be a terrible element of wrath and judgment. While this takes place, those who have risen from the dead are to conceal themselves. After a moment the wrath will be past, and then salvation and peace will reign forever (Isaiah 26:20-21). [It is a strange and unique imagination of Dr.
Naegelsbach, that the Prophet gives us in Isaiah 26:13, the language of the dwellers in Sheol; as it is most manifest that the speakers in Isaiah 26:12, continue in what follows their speech addressed to Jehovah. See how verse 13 begins like the two preceding verses with the name Jehovah. There is nothing to indicate the assumed change of speakers, or to make us suppose that the occupants of an inframundane region, an infernal limbus, suddenly and without a pause, take up the address to the Almighty, abruptly dropped by the ecclesia militans. The perfect tense, too, in Isaiah 26:13, may not be arbitrarily treated as the present, to accommodate the language to the author’s theory. This earth, and not Sheol, is unquestionably the theatre of what is described in Isaiah 26:15-18. The prayer spoken of in Isaiah 26:16 comes not from the shades of the departed, but from the inhabitants of this world when God’s judgments are in the earth (comp.
Isaiah 26:9). It is a purely gratuitous assumption, involving, too, an anti-scriptural error, that a place of trial under the earth is the scene of the vain endeavors so graphically depicted in Isaiah 26:18-19. I append Dr. J. A. Alexander’s brief analysis of Isa 26:12-21. “The Church abjures the service of all other sovereigns, and vows perpetual devotion to Him by whom it has been delivered and restored (Isaiah 26:12-15).
Her utter incapacity to save herself is then contrasted with God’s power to restore His people to new life, with a joyful anticipation of which the song concludes (Isaiah 26:16-19). The additional sentences contain a beautiful and tender intimation of the trials which must be endured before these glorious events take place, with a solemn assurance that Jehovah is about to visit both His people and their enemies with chastisements (Isaiah 26:20-21).”—D. M.].
2. Lord——thy name.Isaiah 26:11-13. The Prophet perceives the approach of great things, but men perceive nothing of them. He complains of this to the Lord.Thy hand is lifted up, says he, and they see it not. [The adverb “when” is unnecessarily supplied in the E. V. It is better to render literally “Thy hand is lifted up; they will not see” or “(but) they do not see it.”—D.
M.]. The uplifted hand is ready, and able to smite. The expression ιָ ?γψָ ?ξָ ?δ is found in the Pentateuch in more senses than one. May it not signify here the menacing high hand? According to Scripture great signs on earth and in heaven will precede the coming of the Lord (Matthew 24:3; Matthew 24:8; Matthew 24:29), but the wicked will not give heed to these signs (Matthew 24:37-39). They will not be willing to see the hand of God in them.
But they will be forced to their confusion (ειαωׁ ?ε is a parenthetical clause marking a circumstance) to recognize the hand of God in the signs from the correspondence between them and the decisive facts following on them, when they shall have perceived the zeal, i.e., the strict, judging, and avenging righteousness of God (comp. Isaiah 9:6; Isaiah 11:13; Isaiah 38:32; Isaiah 63:15) attesting itself on the people (comp. in regard to the construction, Psalms 69:10). [The expression χπΰϊςν made dependent in the E. V. on ιּ ?αωׁ ?ε, and understood of the envy of the heathen toward the people of God, is rightly made dependent by our author on ιηζε, and is also rightly understood of the zeal of the Lord of hosts (Isaiah 9:6 : Isaiah 37:32), but this zeal of the Lord is not directed against a people who are none of His, as Dr. Naegelsbach thinks, but is the zeal of the Lordfor His own people.—D. M.]. The fire of this zeal will consume those men who could see, but would not see; will devour thy adversaries (φψικ, prefixed apposition to the suffix in ϊΰλμν).
From the wicked, who to their dismay are surprised by the judgment of God, the Prophet turns to the pious who wait for the day of judgment as the day of their redemption (Luke 21:28). These express the confident assurance that the Lord will assign, prepare them peace on that great day. ωָׁ ?τַ ?ϊ, ponere, statuere, is found in Isaiah only here, comp. 2 Kings 4:38; Ezekiel 24:3; Psalms 22:16. The righteous justly expect from the judgment the peace of God. For how could the righteous Judge award them aught else, seeing that He Himself has wrought their works? Instead of the second μָ ?πε we should perhaps rather expect αָּ ?πεּ; but the Prophet, who delights in significant accords in sound, chose undoubtedly to make a second μπε correspond to the first, in order to indicate thereby that the fruit of the judgment must correspond to the fruit of the life. The third sentence begins with ιδεδΰμδιπε.
The address is thus more forcible, and forms an antithesis to the subject and predicate of the sentence. Is it not a contradiction which cannot be maintained, when it must be said: Thou art indeed our God, but others rule over us? [But the perfect tense should not be treated as a present.—D. M.]. To understand ΰγπιν of the worldly powers alone, which is the common view, seems to me quite too restricted, and not to correspond to the context. I translate αְּ ?κָ “in thee” [“By thee,” i.e., by thy power or help, is the common rendering.—D. M.].
The aim of Isa 26:13 is that of a general introduction into the region which is afterwards to be particularly spoken of. [“As to the lords who are mentioned in the first clause, there are two opinions. One is, that they are the Chaldees or Babylonians, under whom the Jews had been in bondage. This is now the current explanation. The other is, that they are the false gods or idols whom the Jews had served before the exile. Against the former and in favor of the latter supposition it may be suggested, first, that the Babylonian bondage did not hinder the Jews from mentioning Jehovah’s name or praising Him; secondly, that the whole verse looks like a confession of their own fault and a promise of amendment, rather than a reminiscence of their sufferings; and thirdly, that there seems to be an obvious comparison between the worship of Jehovah as our, with some other worship and some other deity.….. An additional argument in favor of the reference of the verse to spiritual rulers, is its exact correspondence with the singular fact in Jewish history, that since the Babylonish exile they have never even been suspected of idolatry.” Alexander.—D.
M.].
3. They are dead——ends of the earth.Isaiah 26:14-15. The Prophet proceeds now directly to the thought which he intends afterwards, Isaiah 26:19, to bring to light: the resurrection of the dead. But that the light of this wonderful divine revelation may shine more conspicuously he presents, as a foil to it, the opinion which had not been hitherto disputed, and which was supposed to be indisputable, viz., that the dead do not come to life again. [But what indication is given that the Prophet in the 14th verse means to relate an opinion said to prevail universally in regard to the impossibility of a resurrection of the dead? Why not rather understand this verse as a declaration that the other lords just spoken of should not merely cease to exist, but even to be remembered? The language used is applicable to the deities of an effete mythology once worshipped by Israel, as well as to the Babylonian and previous oppressors of Israel.
In regard to the opinion which “hitherto has passed and even now passes in the whole world as incontrovertible truth, that there is no redemption from the bands of death,” does not Hosea, an earlier Prophet than Isaiah, announce that death and Sheol should be deprived of their prey? Hosea 13:14. Isaiah himself, too, does not here for the first time make mention of the vanquishing of death. See Isaiah 25:8; comp. Job 19:25-27.—D. M.].
For this very reason (μָ ?λֵ ?ο=with reference to this, in so far. Comp. on Jeremiah 5:2; Isaiah 27:9) hast thou visited and destroyed them and made their memory to perish. Most interpreters understand verse 15 of the fall and resuscitation of the people of Israel. [And rightly do they so understand it. Few readers will assent to Dr. Naegelsbach’s singular opinion that the land that is enlarged is the region of the dead. In the E.
V. the last clause of verse 15 is rendered “thou hadst removed it far unto all the ends of the earth.” But the words “it” and “unto” are not in the original text, and the pluperfect is not warranted. Omitting these additions and discarding the pluperfect, we have the rendering, “thou hast removed the ends of the land,” i.e., extended the boundaries of the country. Thus we are told that extension of territory had been granted along with increase of population.—D. M.].
3. LORD in trouble——world fallen.Isaiah 26:16-18. But even in the realm of the dead the longing for life and the hope of regaining it are not extinguished. Even the dead in their distress seek the Lord, the fountain of all hope. [“Visit is here used in the unusual but natural sense of seeking God in supplication.”—Alexander]. The prayer of the dead in a low whisper (μηω) ascends from their place of trial to the Lord. [If we take our theology from the book of Isaiah, there is no “place of trial” for the godly after this life. The righteous man when he dies enters into peace, Isaiah 57:2.
I need hardly state here that a purgatory, according to Roman Catholic doctrine, is not intended for unbelievers.—D. M.]. Verse 17 obviously supposes that a deliverance from Sheol is possible, and that the hope of this deliverance is not extinct in its occupants. This hope produces rather, according to the view of the Prophet, in the dwellers of Hades, a struggle and endeavor after liberation from prison which can be compared with the pains of child-bearing. But this impulse of hope remains unsatisfied so long as it is a merely natural one. I take ξִ ?τָּ ?πֶ ?ικָ not in the causal but in the local signification=far from (comp.
Isaiah 14:19; Isaiah 22:3; Judges 9:21). Far from Jehovah, without vital union with Him, a dead man cannot raise himself to new life. [I prefer taking ξִ ?τָּ ?πֶ ?ικָ in the causal signification. The text runs—“So have we been” (δָ ?ιִ ?πεּ), not “we are.”—D. M.]. All convulsive efforts of the dead which aim at a new life are ineffectual. They are like bringing forth wind, the issue of an apparent pregnancy in consequence of the disease called empneumatosis (Gesenius, Delizsch).
The ξֵ ?ϊִ ?ιν must learn by experience that without Jehovah they cannot bless (comp. on ιְ ?ωεּ ?ςָ ?δ Isaiah 26:1) the land of their habitation, i.e., here, the earth (comp. afterwards ϊֵ ?αֵ ?μ), because, however convulsive their pangs may be, through them no inhabitants of the world (Psalms 33:8; Isaiah 18:3; Isaiah 26:9; Nahum 1:5; Lamentations 4:12) will drop,i.e., no births to a new life will take place. πτμ is used here and Isaiah 26:19 of the partus. Comp. the Greek πίπτειν, the Latin cadere, the German werfen (Ges.Thes. p. 897). [This meaning of πτμ is in my opinion more than doubtful. But what are we to think of the Shades in Hades striving to give birth to themselves, fruitlessly laboring to get back into the world, and this, not so much for the purpose of releasing themselves from their gloomy abode, as with a view to bless the world with new inhabitants, and to work deliverance or safety for it? Generous Shades! So self-forgetful amid their sufferings in Hades! The judicious reader may be left to make his own comments on this strange notion.—D.
M.].
5. Thy dead—the dead.Isaiah 26:19. [“This verse is in the strongest contrast with the one before it. To the ineffectual efforts of the people to save themselves, he now opposes their actual deliverance by God.”—Alexander.]. The suffix of the first person in παμϊι corresponds to the suffix of the second person in παμδ .ξϊικ (Isaiah 26:25) is never used in the plural. It is a collective word (comp. Leviticus 11:8; Leviticus 11:11 sqq.; Jeremiah 7:33; Jeremiah 16:4 et saepe).
We have to refer the suffix of the first person to the Prophet who here speaks in the name of the church. It is he who after the disconsolate words of the Shades [?] speaks as the interpreter of Jehovah here (and afterwards Isaiah 26:20-21) words of consolation, and in the spirit of prophecy utters the triumphant call to awake, which will one day be pronounced by a mightier voice that it may be fulfilled. ωλπιςτψ only here, comp. Isaiah 18:3. The words λιθψεβεΧ graphically depict the thought expressed in what goes before. On the morning of the resurrection a wonderful dew will cover the earth. It is no more the earthly dew, it is a heavenly, a divine dew (therefore θַ ?μֶּ ?κָ).
If even now the earthly dew, when the rays of the sun mirror themselves in it, sparkles like pearls, how resplendent will be the drops of that heavenly dew, every one of which will be a glorified luminous body, a body of the resurrection! The plural ΰεψϊ is found only here; for ΰֹ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ2 Kings 4:39 is a quite different word [?]. ΰεֹ ?ψιִ ?ν also occurs only once; Psalms 136:7. The singular ΰεֹ ?ψָ ?δ is found Psalms 139:12; Esther 8:16. That the signification “lights” suits the connection cannot be doubted. For the new resurrection life is a life in the light (John 1:4; John 8:12), and the δόξα of which our body, as σύμμορφον with the body of Christ, will partake (Philippians 3:21) is in its nature light (Matthew 17:2). But whence come these forms of light which as heavenly dew-drops will on the morning of the resurrection shine on the surface of the earth?
They have arisen, i. e., they come out of the earth in which they hitherto as ψτΰιּ ?ν, as gloomy shades have dwelt. At the almighty word of the Lord the earth was forced to give up (cast out, Isaiah 26:18) these ψτΰιν that had been hitherto regarded as a spoil that could not be snatched from it (Isaiah 26:14).
6. Come my people——her slain.Isaiah 26:20-21. If we receive the simple natural impression made by the Prophet’s representation, we must say that we are transported by these two verses into the time after the resurrection. [?] For what people can be addressed except that which according to Isaiah 26:19 has been awakened to new life? And why must this people after it had in Hades pined so long in suspense and anxiety, [?] conceal itself again after it had hardly come forth to the light? And why is it set forth as a characteristic mark of the time during which the people shall remain hidden, that in that time the earth shall disclose all the shed blood it had absorbed, and all corpses of the slain which it had concealed and kept? Is that not a clear reference to the time of the last judgment which brings everything to light and finishes everything?
These are questions the answer to which was not known by the Prophet himself. It is the Apocalypse of the New Testament that first solves for us this riddle. It distinguishes a first and a second resurrection. And it makes the setting loose of Satan with the last assault on the city of God follow the first resurrection, after which there ensues the second general resurrection with the great universal judgment (Rev. xx.). [According to this exposition they who partake of the first resurrection were gloomy shades in misery till the earth cast them forth; and after having been raised from the dead they must hide themselves. But the dead in Christ were never shades in misery, and when they are raised, they shall be at once caught up to meet the Lord in the air and to be ever with Him. 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17. The ingenuity displayed by our author in illustrating this passage of Isaiah from the Apocalypse is very striking.—D.
M.]. What those chambers are into which the people should go (ηֶ ?γֶ ?ψּ only here in Isaiah) the Prophet does not explain. But when according to Revelation 20:9 the παρεμβολὴτῶνἁγίων and the πόλιςἠγαπημένη is surrounded by enemies, I cannot doubt that the saints are enjoined during the short tribulation of the city to withdraw, and give themselves to solitary prayer in quiet expectation. At the same time this does not, I think, exclude the application of the counsel here given by the Prophet to all cases related to that final and highest storm of indignation as typical and preparatory events. Isaiah 26:21ζַ ?ςַ ?νa storm, storm of wrath, is a word which occurs not rarely in Isaiah 10:5; Isaiah 10:25; Isaiah 13:5; Isaiah 30:27. The storm is comparatively short, but in its intensity surpasses all others.
For it comprehends according to Revelation 20:9-15 nothing less than the overthrow of Satan, and the general judgment. Verse 21 answers to this exactly. If Jehovah rises from His place in order to visit the guilt of the inhabitants of the earth (ιωׁ ?αδΰΧ ? ? collectively) on them, and if the earth then discloses all hidden blood-guiltiness, this plainly enough indicates that that storm of wrath involves a work of judgment. The words “for, behold, the Lord cometh out of his place,” are taken literally from Micah 1:3 comp. Matthew 25:31; Revelation 20:11. As counterpart to the blessed fruits, which the earth according to Isaiah 26:19 will bring forth, and at the same time as proof of the all-comprehensive character of the judgment, the slain and the blood that has been shed are specified as what the earth will on that day cause to come to light.
The earth opened its mouth to receive the blood of Abel who was the first person slain (Genesis 4:11). And since that time it has taken in all the blood that has been shed, and all the dead bodies of the slain; and preserves them faithfully for the day of judgment, when they shall come forth as incontrovertible witnesses against the guilty. In the book of the Revelation, too, it is expressly declared that the sea, and death, and Hades will disclose all their dead (Revelation 20:13).
AND ETHICAL1. Isaiah 24:2. “When general judgments take place, no distinction is observed between man and wife, master and servant, mistress and maid, learned and unlearned, noble and plebeian, clergy and laity; therefore let no one rely on any external prerogative or superiority, but let every one without distinction repent and forsake sin.”—Cramer. Though this is right, yet we must, on the other hand, remember that the Lord declares in reference to the same great event, “Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left” (Matthew 24:10 sq.). There is no contradiction in these two statements. Both are true: outward relations will make no difference; there shall be no respect of persons.
But the state of the heart will make a difference. According to the inward character there will, in the case of those whose external position in the world is perfectly alike, be some who enter life, others whose doom is death.
2. Isaiah 24:5 sq. “The earth is burdened with sins, and is therefore deprived of every blessing. The earth must suffer for our guilt, when we have as it were spoilt it, and it must be subject to vanity for our sakes (Romans 8:20). What wonder is it that it should show itself ungrateful toward us?”—Cramer.[3. Isaiah 24:13 sq. “Observe the small number of this remnant; here and there one who shall escape the common calamity (as Noah and his family, when the old world was drowned), who when all faces gather blackness, can lift up their head with joy. Luke 21:26-28.” Henry.—D. M.].
4. Isaiah 24:17-20. Our earth is a volcanic body. Mighty volcanic forces were active at its formation. That these are still in commotion in the interior of the earth is proved by the many active volcanoes scattered over the whole earth, and by the perpetual volcanic convulsions which we call earthquakes. These have hitherto been confined to particular localities.
But who can guarantee that a concentration and simultaneous eruption of those volcanic forces, that is, a universal earthquake, shall not hereafter occur? The Lord makes express mention of earthquakes among the signs which shall precede His second coming (Matthew 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:11). And in 2 Peter 3:5 sqq. the future destruction of the earth by fire is set over against the destruction of the old world by water. Isaiah in our place announces a catastrophe whose characteristic features will be that, 1) there will be no escape from it; 2) destructive forces will assail from above and below; 3) the earth will be rent asunder; 4) it will reel and totter; 5) it will suffer so heavy a fall that it will not rise again (Isaiah 24:20 b). Is there not here a prophecy of the destruction of the earth by volcanic forces? And how suddenly can they break loose!
The ministers of the word have every reason to compare this extreme exposedness of our earth to fire, and the possibility of its unexpectedly sudden collapse with the above-cited warnings of the word of God, and to attach thereto the admonition which is added in 2 Peter 3:11.
5. Isaiah 24:21. The earth is a part of our planetary system. It is not what it appears to the optical perception to be, a central body around which worlds of a different nature revolve, but it, together with many similar bodies, revolves round a common centre. The earth according to that view of the account of the creation in Genesis 1, which appears to me the true one, has arisen with all the bodies of our Solar system out of one primary matter, originally united, common to them all. If our Solar System is a well-ordered, complete organism, it must rest on the basis of a not merely formal, but also material unity; i.e., the separate bodies must move, not only according to a principle of order which governs all, but they must also as to their substance be essentially like.
And as they arose simultaneously, so must they perish simultaneously. It is inconceivable that our earth alone should disappear from the organism of the Solar System, or pass over to a higher material condition. Its absence, or ceasing to exist in its previous form and substance, would necessarily draw after it the ruin of the whole system. Hence the Scripture speaks every where of a passing away and renovation of the heaven and the earth (Psalms 102:26; Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; Matthew 5:18; Matthew 24:29; Matthew 24:35; 2 Peter 3:7; 2 Peter 3:10; 2 Peter 3:13; Hebrews 12:26; Revelation 20:11; Revelation 21:1). The heaven that shall pass away with a great noise, whose powers shall be shaken, whose stars shall fall, is the planetary heaven. The same lot will happen to the companions of our earth, to the other planets, and to the centre, the sun, and to all other co-ordinate and subordinate stellar bodies, which will befall the earth itself.
This is the substance of the view which serves as a basis for our place. But personal beings are not thereby by any means excluded from the φαΰξψεν. The parallel expression ξμλιδΰγξδ, and the use in other places of the related expression φαΰδωׁ ?ξιν lead us rather to suppose personal beings to be included. But I believe that a distinction must be made here. As the heavenly bodies which will pass away simultaneously with the earth, can only be those which arose together with it, and which stand in organic connection with it, so also the angelic powers, which are judged simultaneously with us men, can be only those which stand in connection with the heavenly bodies of our Solar System, i.e., with the earthly material world. There are heavenly bodies of glorious pneumatic substance.
If personal beings stand in connection with them, they must also be pure, glorious, resplendent beings. These will not be judged. They are the holy angels, who come with the Lord (Matthew 25:31). But it is quite conceivable that all the bodies of our Solar System are till the judgment like our earth suffered to be the theatre of the spirits of darkness.
6. Isaiah 24:21-23, It seems to me that the Prophet has here sketched the chief matters pertaining to eschatology. For the passing away of heaven and earth, the binding of Satan (Revelation 20:1-3), the loosing of Satan again (Revelation 20:7), and finally the reign of God alone, which will make sun and moon unnecessary (Revelation 21:23)—are not these the boundary-stones of the chief epochs of the history of the end of the world?
7. Isaiah 25:6. [“The Lord of hosts makes this feast. The provision is very rich, and every thing is of the best. It is a feast, which supposes abundance and variety; it is a continual feast to believers: it is their fault if it be not. It is a feast of fat things and full of marrow; so relishing, so nourishing are the comforts of the Gospel to all those that feast upon them and digest them. The returning prodigal was entertained with the fatted calf; and David has that pleasure in communion with God, with which his soul is satisfied as with marrow and fatness.
It is a feast of wines on the lees; the strongest-bodied wines, that have been long kept upon the lees, and then are well refined from them, so that they are clear and fine. There is that in the Gospel which, like fine wine, soberly used, makes glad the heart, and raises the spirits, and is fit for those that are of a heavy heart, being under convictions of sin, and mourning for it, that they may drink and forget their misery (for that is the proper use of wine; it is a cordial for those that need it, Proverbs 31:6-7) may be of good cheer, knowing that their sins are forgiven, and may be vigorous in their spiritual work and warfare, as a strong man refreshed with wine.” Henry.—D. M.]
8. Isaiah 25:9. “In the Old Testament the vail and covering were before men’s eyes, partly because they waited for the light that was to appear, partly because they sat in darkness and in the shadow of death (Luke 1:79). The fulfilment of this prediction has in Christ already begun, and will at last be perfectly fulfilled in the Church triumphant where all ignorance and sorrow shall be dispelled (1 Corinthians 13:12).” Cramer.9. Isaiah 25:8. “God here represents Himself as a mother, who presses to her bosom her sorrowful son, comforts him and wipes away his tears (Isaiah 66:13). The righteous are to believe and appropriate this promise, that every one may learn to speak with Paul in the time of trial: the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us, Romans 8:18.” Cramer.10. Isaiah 25:10. “This is now the hope and consolation of the church that the hand of the Lord rests on this mountain, that is, that He will be gracious, and let His power, help and grace be there seen and felt.
But the unbelieving Moabites, i.e., the Jews, with all others who will not receive the gospel, shall be threshed to pieces as straw in the mire; these the Lord’s hand will not rescue, as it helps those who wait on Him, but it shall press them down so that they will never rise, according to the saying, Mark 16:16.” Veit Dietrich.11. Isaiah 25 Three thoughts contained in this chapter we should hold fast: 1) When we see the world triumph over every thing which belongs to the Lord and His kingdom, when our hearts are anxious about the preservation in the world of the Church of Christ, which is sore oppressed, let this word of the Prophet comfort our hearts. The world-city which contains all that is of the world, sinks into the dust, and the church of Christ goes from her chains and bands into the state of freedom and glory. We have often seen that it is the Lord’s way to let every thing come to maturity. When it is once ripe, He comes suddenly with His sentence. Let us comfort ourselves therewith, for thus will it happen with the world and its dominion over the faithful followers of Christ.
When it is ripe, suddenly it will come to an end. 2) No one who has a heart for the welfare of the nations can see without the deepest pain how all hearts are now seduced and befooled, and all eyes closed and covered. The simplest truths are no longer acknowledged, but the more perverse, brutal and mean views and doctrines are, the more greedily are they laid hold of. We cannot avert this. But our comfort is that even this seduction of the nations will reach its climax. Then men will come to themselves. The vail and covering will fall off, and the Gospel will shine with new light before the nations.
Therewith let us comfort ourselves. 3) Till this happens, the church is sorrowful. But she shall be full of joy. The promise is given to her that she shall be fully satisfied with the good things of the house of the Lord. A life is promised to her which neither death nor any pain can affect, as she has rest from all enemies. The word of the Lord shall be fulfilled in her: Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. The Church that has such a promise may wait in patient quietness for its accomplishment, and praise the Lord in affliction, till it pleases Him to glorify her before all nations.” Weber, The Prophet Isaiah. 1875.
12. Isaiah 26:1. “The Christian church is a city of God. God has built it, and He is the right Master-builder. It is strong: 1) on account of the Builder; 2) on account of the foundation and corner-stone, which is Christ; 3) on account of the bond wherewith the living stones are bound together, which is the unity of the faith.” Cramer. [The security and happiness of true believers, both on earth and in heaven, is represented in Scripture under the image of their dwelling in a city in which they can bid defiance to all their enemies. We dwell in such a city even now, Psalms 46:4-5. We look for such a city, Hebrews 11:10; Hebrews 11:16; Revelation 21—D. M.]
13. Isaiah 26:2. [These words may be taken as a description of the people whom God owns, who are fit to be accounted members of the church of the living God on earth, and who will not be excluded from the celestial city. Instead of complaining that only the righteous and the faithful will be admitted into the heavenly city, it should rather give us joy to think that there will be no sin there, that none but the just and true will there be found. This has been a delightful subject of reflection to God’s saints. The last words written by Henry Martyn were: “Oh! when shall time give place to eternity? When shall appear that new heaven and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness?
There, there shall in no wise enter in any thing that defileth; none of that wickedness which has made men worse than wild beasts—none of their corruptions which add to the miseries of mortality shall be seen or heard of any more.”—D. M.]
14. Isaiah 26:4. “The fourth privilege of the church is trust in God the Rock of Ages, i.e., in Christ, who not only here, but also Matthew 16; 1 Corinthians 10; 1 Peter 2, is called a rock in a peculiar manner, because no other foundation of salvation and of the church can be laid except this rock, which is here called the rock of ages on account of the eternity of His being, merit and office. Hence a refutation can be drawn of the papistical fable which makes Peter and his successors, the Roman Pontiffs, to be the rock on which the church is built.” Foerster. [“Whatever we trust to the world for, it will be but for a moment. All we expect from it is confined within the limits of time; but what we trust in God for will last as long as we shall last. For in the Lord Jehovah, Jah, Jehovah, in Him who was, and is, and is to come, there is a rock of ages, a firm and lasting foundation for faith and hope to build upon; and the house built on that rock will stand in a storm.” Henry.”—D. M.]
15. Isaiah 26:5. “It is very common with the prophets, when they prophesy of the kingdom of Christ to make reference to the proud and to the needy, and to represent the latter as exalted and the former as brought low. This truth is directed properly against the self-righteous. For Christ and His righteousness will not endure spiritual pride and presumption; but the souls that are poor, that hunger and thirst for grace, that know their need, these Christ graciously receives.” Cramer.16. Isaiah 26:6. “It vexes the proud all the more that they will be overcome by those who are poor and of no consequence. For example, Goliath was annoyed that a boy should come against him with a staff (1 Sam. 13:43) Cramer.17.
Isaiah 26:8-10. That the justice of God must absolutely manifest itself that the majesty of the Lord may be seen, and that the wicked may learn righteousness, must even from a new Testament view-point be admitted. But the New Testament disputes the existence of any one who is righteous when confronted by the law, and who is not deserving of punishment. [But that there is none righteous, no not one, is taught most emphatically in the Old Testament also.—D. M.]. But it (the New Testament) while it shuts up all, Jews and Gentiles, without exception, under sin (Galatians 3:22; Romans 3:9; Romans 11:32), sets forth a scheme of mediation, which, while it renders full satisfaction to justice, at the same time offers to all the possibility of deliverance. This mediation is through the Cross of Christ.
It is only when this mediation has not been accepted that punitive justice has free course. It should not surprise us that even the Evangelist of the Old Covenant, who wrote chap. 53, did not possess perfect knowledge of this mediation. Let us remember John the Baptist (Matthew 3:7; Matthew 11:11) and the disciples of the Lord (Luke 9:54). [Let us not forget that Isaiah was a true Prophet, and spoke as he was moved by the Spirit of God. The Apostle Paul did not find fault with the most terrible denunciations of judgment contained in the Old Testament, or affect a superiority over the men who uttered them. On the contrary, he quotes them as words which could not be suffered to fall, but which must be fulfilled in all their dreadful import. See e.g.
Romans 11:9-10.—D. M.].
18. Isaiah 26:12. “It is a characteristic of true, sincere Christians, that they give God the glory and not themselves, and freely confess that they have nothing of themselves, but everything from God (1 Corinthians 4:7; Philippians 2:13; Hebrews 12:2).” Cramer.19. Isaiah 26:16. The old theologians have many comforting and edifying thoughts connected with this place: “A magnet has the power to raise and attract to itself iron. Our heart is heavy as iron. But the hand of God is as a magnet.
When that hand visits us with affliction, it lifts us up, and draws us to itself.” “Distress teaches us to pray, and prayer again dispels all distress. One wedge displaces the other.” “Ex gravibus curis impellimur ad pia vota.” “Ex monte myrrhae procedimus ad collem thuris (Cant. 9:6). In amaritudine crucis exsurgit odor devotae precationis (Psalms 86:6 sq.).” “Ubi nulla crux et tentatio, ibi nulla vera oratio. Oratio sine mails est tanquam avis sine alis. Optimus orandi magister necessitas. Τὰπαθήματαμαθήματα. Quae nocent, docent.
Ubi tentatio, ibi oratio. Mala, quae hic nos premunt, ad Deum ire compellunt. Qui nescit orare, ingrediatur mare.” “When the string is most tightly drawn, it sounds best. Cross and temptation are the right prayer-bell. They are the press by which God crushes out the juice of prayer.” Cramer and Foerster.20. Isaiah 26:20.
As God, when the deluge was about to burst, bade Noah go into his ark as into his chamber, and Himself shut the door on him (Genesis 7:6); so does the Lord still act when a storm is approaching; He brings His own into a chamber where they can be safe, either for their temporal preservation and protection against every might (Psalms 91:1), or, on the other hand, to give them repose by a peaceful and happy death.” “His anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life (Psalms 30:6).” Cramer.21. Isaiah 27:1. [“Great and mighty princes [nations] if they oppose the people of God, are in God’s account, as dragons and serpents, and plagues of mankind; and the Lord will punish them in due time. They are too big for men to deal with, and call to an account; and therefore the great God will take the doing of it into His own hands.” Henry.—D. M.].
22. Isaiah 27:2-5. “It seems to the world that God has no concern for His church and Christians, else, we imagine, they would be better off. But certain it is, that it is not the angels but God Himself that will be watcher over this vineyard, and will send it gracious rain.” Veit Dietrich. [“The church is a vineyard of red wine, yielding the best and choicest grapes, intimating the reformation of the church, that it now brings forth good fruit unto God, whereas before it brought forth fruit to itself, or brought forth wild grapes, Isaiah 5:4.” “God takes care (1) of the safety of this vineyard; I the Lord do keep it. He speaks this, as glorying in it, that He is, and has undertaken to be, the keeper of Israel; those that bring forth fruit to God are, and shall be always, under His protection. (2) God takes care of the fruitfulness of this vineyard: I will water it every moment; and yet it shall not be over watered. We need the constant and continual waterings of the divine grace; for if that be at any time withdrawn, we wither and come to nothing.” Henry. D. M.].
23. Isaiah 27:4. “Est aurea promissio, qua praecedentem confirmat. Indignatio non est mihi, fury is not in me. Quomodo enim is nobis irasci potest, qui pro nobis est mortuus? Quanquam igitur appareat, eum irasci, non tamen est verum, quod irascatur. Sic Paulo immittitur angelus Satanae, sed non est ira, nam ipse Christus dicit: sufficit tibi gratia mea.
Sic pater filium delinquentem castigat, sed non est ira, quanquam appareat ira esse. Custodia igitur vineae aliquando cogit Deum immittere speciem irae, ne pereat luxurie, sed non est ira. Est insignis textus, which we should inscribe on all tribulations: Non est indignatio mihi, non possum irasci. Quod autem videtur irasci est custodia vineae, ne pereas et fias securus. Luther. “In order to understand fully the doctrine of the wrath of God we must have a clear perception of the antithesis: the long-suffering of God, and the wrath of God, wrath and mercy.” Lange.24. Isaiah 27:7-9. “Christ judges His church, i.e., He punishes and afflicts it, but He does this in measure.
The sorrow and cross is meted out, and is not, as it appears to us, without measure and infinite. It is so measured that redemption must certainly follow. But why does God let His Christians so suffer? Why does He not lay the cross on the wicked? God answers this question and speaks: the sin of Jacob will thereby cease. That is: God restrains sin by the cross, and subdues the old Adam.” Veit Dietrich.25.
Isaiah 27:13. [“The application of this verse to a future restoration of the Jews can neither be established nor disproved. In itself considered, it appears to contain nothing which may not be naturally applied to events long past.” J. A. Alexander.—“This prediction was completely and entirely fulfilled by the return of the Jews to their own country under the decree of Cyrus.” Barnes.—D. M.].
AND 1. On Isaiah 24:4-6. Fast-day sermon. Warning against dechristianization of the life of the people. 1) Wherein such dechristianization consists: a, transgression of the commandments that are in force; b, alteration of the commandments which are essential articles of the everlasting covenant, as e.g. removing of all state institutions from the basis of religion. 2) Its consequences: a, Desecration of the land (subjectively, by the spread of a profane, godless sentiment; objectively, by the secularization of relations hitherto held sacred); b, the curse consumes the land, Isaiah 24:4.
2. On Isaiah 25:1-5. The Lord, the refuge of the needy. 1) He has the power to help. This we perceive a, from His nature (Lord, God, Wonderful); b, from His deeds (Isaiah 25:1 b, Isaiah 25:2). 2) He gives His strength even to the feeble, (Isaiah 25:4). 3) These are thereby victorious, (Isaiah 25:5).
3. On Isaiah 25:6-9. Easter Sermon, by T. Schaeffer (Manch. Gab. u. ein Geist III. p. 269):—“The glorious Easter-blessing of the Risen One: 1) Wherein it consists? 2) who receive it? 3) what are its effects? Christmas Sermon, by Romberg [ibid. 1869, p. 78): Our text represents to us Christmas joy under the image of a festive board. Let us consider, 1) the host; 2) the guests; 3) the gifts.”
4. On Isaiah 26:1-4. Concerning the church. 1) She is a strong city in which salvation is to be found. 2) The condition of having a portion in her is faith. 3) The blessing which she is instrumental in procuring is peace.
5. Isaiah 26:19-21. The comfort of the Christian for the present and future. 1) For the present the Christian is to betake himself to his quiet chamber, where he is alone with his Lord and by Him made cheerful and secure. 2) For the future he has the certain hope, a, that the Lord will judge the wicked, b, raise the believer to everlasting life.
6. Isaiah 27:2-9. How the Lord deals with His vineyard, the church. 1) Fury is not in Him towards it; 2) He protects and purifies it; 3) He gives it strength, peace and growth; 4) He chastens it in measure; 5) He makes the chastisement itself serve to purge it from sins.
Footnotes:they shall see to their shame thy zeal for the people.Or, toward thy people.fire shall devour them, thy enemies.Or, for us.Shades.thou hast removed far all the borders of the land.Heb. secret speech.far from thy sight.my dead body shall arise.lights.Heb. bloods.
7. THE OF THE WORDLY POWERS AND ZION’S JOYFUL
Isaiah 27:1-91 In that day the Lord with his sore and great and strong sword,
Shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent,
Even leviathan, that crooked serpent;
And he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.
2 In that day sing ye unto her,
A vineyard of red wine.
3 I the Lord do keep it;
I will water it every moment.
Lest any hurt it,
I will keep it night and day.
4 Fury is not in me;
Who would set the briers and thorns against me in battle?
I would go through them,
I would burn them together.
5 Or let him take hold of my strength,
That he may make peace with me;
And he shall make peace with me.
6 He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root:
Israel shall blossom and bud,
And fill the face of the world with fruit.
7 Hath he smitten him, as he smote those that smote him?
Or is he slain according to the slaughter of them that are slain by him?
8 In measure, when it shooteth forth, thou wilt debate with it;
He stayeth his rough wind in the day of the east wind.
9 By this, therefore, shall the iniquity of Jacob be purged;
And this is all the fruit to take away his sin;
When he maketh all the stones of the altar
As chalkstones that are beaten in sunder,
The groves and images shall not stand up.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_27:2. On the authority of the Septuagint (ἀμπελὼνκαλὸςἐπιθν́μημα), of the Targum (vinea plantata in terra bona), and of many codices and editions, many interpreters read ηֶ ?ξֶ ?γ, which finds support in λַּ ?ψְ ?ξֵ ?ιΞηֶ ?ξֶ ?γ, Amos 5:11, and ωְׂ ?γֵ ?ιηֶ ?ξֶ ?γ, Isaiah 32:12. Comp. Isaiah 5:7; Jeremiah 3:19. Although ηξψ is the more difficult reading, ηֶ ?ξֶ ?γ is perhaps to be preferred here. For what does λψνηξψ mean? [But compare βֶ ?τֶ ?οδַ ?ιַּ ?ιִ ?ο, Numbers 6:4; Judges 13:14, and such phrases as a mine of wealth, a well of water.
Though Dr. Naegelsbach follows most modern commentators in preferring the reading ηξγ, there is no necessity for altering here the common text of the Hebrew Bible.—D. M.]. If the supposition be made that λֶּ ?ψֶ ?ν denotes a plantation in general, and λֶּ ?ψֶ ?νζַ ?ιִ ?ϊ, Judges 15:5, be appealed to, still λψν alone denotes a vineyard in so many places that the addition ηξψ appears pleonastic. [But this objection would equally avail against such an expression as a spring of water.—D. M.]. It cannot be proved that ηξψ denotes a nobler kind of wine.
I prefer therefore, with Drechsler and Delitzsch, and many older interpreters, to read ηֶ ?ξֶ ?γ.
Isaiah 27:5. Drechsler is in error in thinking that ιςωׂ ?δ cannot be taken as jussive. Comp. Naegelsbach, § 90, 3, c.Isaiah 27:6. δִ ?ωְׁ ?ψִ ?ιωׁ radices agere (Job 5:3; Psalms 80:10) is denominative from ωֹׁ ?ψֵ ?ωׁ (comp. 48:24).
Isaiah 27:8. The word αρΰρΰδ is best derived from ρְ ?ΰָ ?δ mensura, so that the word is contracted from αִּ ?ρְ ?ΰָ ?δρְ ?ΰָ ?δ. Dagesh forte in the second ρ arises from the assimilation of the δ, while the first ΰ has completely lost its power as a consonant. Compare μִ ?χְ ?ψַ ?ΰϊ for ηַ ?θַ ?ΰϊ ,μְ ?χִ ?ψְ ?ΰַ ?ϊ for ηַ ?θְּ ?ΰַ ?ϊ.
AND 1. If we consider that Isaiah 27:1; Isaiah 27:10-11 of this chapter are directed against the worldly power, while Isaiah 27:2-9; Isaiah 27:12-13, contain words of comfort for Israel, we ascertain that the chapter is divided into two principal parts, each of which again consists of two subdivisions which correspond to one another. The Prophet sees here also the salvation of Israel set off by the foil of the judgment inflicted on the heathen worldly power. If we connect, as many do, Isaiah 27:1 with chap. 26. we destroy the beautiful parallelism of chapter 27, violate the principle of the number two, which dominates chaps, 24–27, and bring Isaiah 27:1 into a connection to which it does not belong. For after the words in Isaiah 26:21, which are of so general a character, chap. 27. would not follow naturally; and is not Isaiah 27:1, by the formula in that day, even as manifestly separated from Isaiah 26:21 as it is connected thereby with Isaiah 27:2? As chapter 25. is related to chapter 24, so is chap. 27. related to chap. 26.
As in chap. 25. Mount Zion emerges from the all-embracing scenes of judgment as the only place of salvation and peace, so the leading thought in chap. 27 is seen to be Israel’s victory over its enemies, the worldly powers, and its deliverance from their grasp, in order, as a united people, to partake of salvation on Mount Zion. The Prophet in Isaiah 25:10 sqq., set forth the worldly powers under the name of Moab, and he now gives a different emblematic representation of them. He exhibits them under the form of beasts as the straight and the coiled Leviathan, and as the crocodile. Of all these he declares that they will be vanquished by the mighty sword of Jehovah (Isaiah 27:1). A call is at the same time made by him to begin a hymn regarding Israel, as he himself had already done, Isaiah 25:1 sqq. (Isaiah 27:2).
In this hymn Jehovah Himself is introduced as the Speaker. He declares that He will faithfully protect and tend Israel as His vineyard (Isaiah 27:3). And if hostile powers, like thorns and thistles, should desire again to injure the vineyard, He will terribly intervene, and burn them up (verse 4): unless they make peace with Him by humble and believing submission under His might (5). Israel shall accordingly in the distant future take root, blossom and bud, and fill the earth with its fruits (Isaiah 27:6). That the prospect of such a glorious future is disclosed to Israel ought not to seem strange. Think how the Lord has hitherto treated Israel.
It has never been exposed to such destructive strokes as its enemies (Isaiah 27:7). The Lord metes out punishment to Israel in spoonfuls, not by the bushel, punishing it only by temporary rejection when He makes His breath pass over the land like a blast of the east wind (Isaiah 27:8). And by these very chastisements Israel’s guilt is purged, and Israel reaps then the blessed fruit, that the stones of the altars of its false gods are become as lime-stones that are crushed and cast away, and that therefore the images of Ashtoreth and of the sun will stand up no more (Isaiah 27:9).
2. In that day——in the sea.Isaiah 27:1. The expression in that day indicates here too that what is introduced by this formula belongs to the same stage of the world’s history as what precedes. The Prophet freely uses the verb τχγ in these chapters of punitive visitation: Isaiah 24:21; Isaiah 26:14; Isaiah 26:21; Isaiah 27:3. That ιτχψ here is connected with μτχγ, Isaiah 26:21, may be readily admitted. For truly the visitation spoken of in Isaiah 27:1 is a part, yea, the chief part of that universal one which has for its object, according to Isaiah 26:21, the whole population of the earth.
But I cannot concede that the visitation Isaiah 27:1 is absolutely identical with the one threatened in Isaiah 26:21. For, as has been shown above, chap. 27 is not of so general a character as chap. 26. And the formula in that day points to a difference as well as to contemporaneousness. In Isaiah 27:1 that part of the judgment is prominently set forth which has respect to the great worldly powers that are the immediate oppressors of Israel, as chaps, 25 and 27 have for their subject the singular position of Israel in the general judgment indicated by αδψφιεοεαιψεωׁ ?μιν (Isaiah 24:23 comp. Isaiah 25:6) or αδψδχγωׁ εαιψεωׁ ?μιν (Isaiah 27:13). The sword of Jehovah, symbol of His power that destroys everything opposed to it, is after the original passage, Deuteronomy 32:41 sq., often mentioned; Psalms 7:13; Psalms 17:13; Isaiah 34:5-6; Isaiah 66:16; Jeremiah 12:12; Jeremiah 47:6.
This sword with which the Lord will annihilate the enemies of Israel is described as hard in respect to its material, great in regard to its length, and strong with reference to its irresistible action. These enemies of Israel are represented under the image of monstrous beasts. This form of expression is based on views which pervade the divine revelation of the Old and New Testament. Comp. Psalms 68:31; Psalms 74:13; Daniel 7:3 sqq.; Isaiah 8:3 sqq.; Revelation 12:3 sqq.; Isaiah 13:1 sqq. The kingdom of God is human (Daniel 7:13 sqq.), the worldly power is animal, brutal, heartless, cruel.
Here, first of all, the question arises whether merely earthly powers of the world are meant, and not rather powers of heaven and of the world as Isaiah 24:21. In support of the view that the two Leviathans mentioned in this verse are powers of heaven, appeal is made to Job 26:13, where certainly πηωׁ αψιη is mentioned as a constellation. Hence the conclusion is drawn that also πηωׁ ςχμϊεο is a constellation (Hitzig, Hendewerk, Drechsler). But the whole structure of these four chapters proves that powers of heaven cannot be here in question. For our chapter stands parallel to chap. 25, and treats of the peculiar position of Israel in opposition to the worldly power. But in chap. 25. the worldly power is represented by what is of the earth, by the personified Moab.
Here there is a climax, while three animal forms, placed at the commencement of the discourse, take the part of Moab, which is there placed at the close. Moreover, in this passage, πηωׁ αψιη and πδωׁ ςχμϊεο are not the leading terms. But these designations only define more particularly the term Leviathan. The case would be different if the latter term were wanting, and the Prophet spoke only of πηωׁ αΧ and πηωׁ ςΧ. As our text runs, we can only say that the Prophet has in view two powers that in their nature are closely related, nay essentially alike, for which reason he designates both of them by the name Leviathan.—They have, however, their individual peculiarities, wherefore he more particularly defines the one as the fleeing serpent and the other as the coiled serpent. The predicate “fleeing serpent” is manifestly borrowed from Job 26:13, as we have already observed manifold traces of the use of the book of Job in Isaiah (comp. on Isaiah 14:30; Isaiah 17:2; Isaiah 21:4; Isaiah 22:2; Isaiah 22:4; Isaiah 22:22; Isaiah 22:24; Isaiah 23:12; Isaiah 25:2).
The expression πηωׁ αψιη denotes in Job, as is on all hands admitted, a constellation or appearance in the heavens, although the learned still dispute whether it is the dragon, or the milky way, or the scorpion, or the rainbow (comp. Leyrer in Herzog’sR. Ency. XIX., p. 565). Isaiah, however, found the expression in its literal signification fit to be appended as an apposition to the term Leviathan. This is apparent, because Leviathan nowhere else denotes a constellation, and the second apposition πηωׁ ςχμϊεο occurs in no other place as the name of a constellation.
The question then is, what is the proper meaning of πηωׁ αψιη? That πηωׁ denotes a serpent, is undoubted. The word is found in this signification in Isaiah 14:29; Isaiah 65:25. But αψιη which, besides here and Job 26:13, occurs only Isaiah 43:14, can according to its etymology (αָּ ?ψַ ?ηfugere) have only the meaning “fleeing.” A πηωαψιη is therefore a serpent which at full stretch flees away in haste. In opposition to it πηωׁ ςχμϊεο is a crooked, coiled serpent. The word ςχμϊεο is ἃπ. λεγ.
The radix ςχμ occurs besides only in ξְ ?ςֻ ?χָ ?μ (Habakkuk 1:4 jus perversum) and in ςֲ ?χַ ?μְ ?χַ ?μּ ?εֹ ?ϊtortuosa, crookednesses, crooked ways (Judges 5:6; Psalms 125:5). μִ ?εְ ?ιָ ?ϊָ ?ο is a poetic symbolical generic name which is sometimes given to the Crocodile (Job 40:25; Psalms 74:14), sometimes to other monsters of the deep (Job 3:8; Psalms 104:26). With such a bellua aquatica the two worldly powers are here compared in such a way that each is placed in parallel with a species of this genus. For it is plain that two powers are compared with two species of the genus Leviathan, the one with one species, and the other with another species; and that a third power is compared with the ϊַּ ?πִּ ?ιο. The sword is a single one. It is only once mentioned, and is the subject common to three predicates. But the Leviathan is twice named, each time with a different specifying word.
And that the Prophet understands under the ϊπιο a third hostile power is evident from his not putting this term in apposition to the term Leviathan. When afterwards, Isaiah 27:12-13, the land of the Euphrates, Assyria and Egypt are expressly designated as the countries from which redeemed Israel will return home, is not this to be regarded as a consequence of the Lord having according to Isaiah 27:1 crushed these hostile powers and so compelled them to let Israel go free? It has been further observed that ϊַּ ?πִּ ?ιο denotes Egypt, Isaiah 51:9 (the only place beside this one where it occurs in Isaiah); Ezekiel 29:3; Ezekiel 32:2; Psalms 74:13. The word is in meaning, though not in etymology, closely connected with the term Leviathan. Now if these places where ϊπιο is used in reference to Egypt are borrowed from the one before us, they certainly bear witness to an ancient and indisputable interpretation. We are, therefore, fully justified in understanding Egypt to be denoted by the dragon that is in the sea (regarding ιָ ?ν comp.
Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 19:5; Isaiah 21:1). But if the ϊַּ ?πִּ ?ιο denotes Egypt, then the Leviathan, the fleeing serpent, must be the land of the Tigris, i.e., Assyria, for the serpent shooting quickly along is an apt emblem of the rapid Tigris, which name, according to the testimony of the ancients (Strabo XI. p. 527; Curt. VI. 36), means an arrow. In the Persian and Kurdish Tir denotes both an arrow and the Tigris (comp. Gesen.,Thes., p. 448). In regard to the windings of the Euphrates Herodotus speaks (I., 185) and relates that in sailing down the river, Arderikka, a place situated on it, is passed by three times in three days.
Might not Jeremiah (Jeremiah 50:17) have had this passage before his mind in writing: “first the king of Assyria ate him, and last this Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, hath crushed his bones?” Assyria, the power that rushed straight upon Israel,laid hold of him with its teeth. But it tore off as it were only pieces of his flesh, inflicted flesh wounds. But Babylon has as the Boa Constrictor enfolded Israel in the coils of his powerful body and crashed his bones. Comp. Naegelsbach on Jeremiah 50:17. That Isaiah had Babylon before his mind is just as possible here as Isaiah 21:1-10.
Both places are to be similarly explained.
3. In that day——wine.Isaiah 27:2. While the worldly powers are annihilated, Israel is elevated to high joy and honor. The Prophet announces this for the comfort of his people in a hymn which is parallel to the hymn Isaiah 25:1-5. This hymn is peculiar in its structure, as it consists of brief members formed of only two words. It is true that many members of it consist of three or four words.
But two constitute always the leading ideas what is over and above, may be said to be accessory ideas which are only grammatically indispensable. In Isaiah 27:4 in the line ξιΞιϊππεωׁ ?ξιψωׁ ?ιϊ the first two and the last two words form each one principal notion. The two chief sentences, verses 3 and 4, contain each four such members or lines consisting of two ideas; the introduction (Isaiah 27:2) and the close (Isaiah 27:5) each contain three of them. The principle of duality is here carried out in such a way that the whole consists of six times two, and eight times two, consequently, of 28 members. That the introduction and close have each only three times two members, imparts to the whole the charm of a sort of crescendo and decrescendo. Isaiah 27:2 does not properly belong to the song itself.
For it contains only the theme and the summons to celebrate it in song. But it is rhythmically constructed as the song itself, and rhythmically regarded, it is a part of the song. The words λψνηξψ form the title prefixed absolutely (comp. δַ ?αָּ ?ΰִ ?ιν Isaiah 27:6). Israel is compared with a vineyard as in Isaiah 5:1 sqq. But there is this difference, that in Isaiah 5:1 sqq. Israel appears as a vineyard consigned to destruction as a punishment; here it is a vineyard faithfully protected and tended. ηֶ ?ξֶ ?ψ is found only here and Deuteronomy 32:14.
That the word denotes wine is certain; but it is doubtful how this meaning is reached whether ab effervescendo (from fermenting) or a rubedine. [The analogy of the cognate Arabic and Syriac supports the former of these derivations, which is the one commonly adopted by modern scholars.—D. M.]. ςπεμδ is not to be joined with αιενηδεΰ. For this date plainly refers to all that follows, and ςπεμδ are not words of the Prophet, but words which people at that day will call out to one another. μְ after ςπδ in the signification “in reference to” as Numbers 21:17; 1 Samuel 21:12; 1 Samuel 29:5; Psalms 147:7.
4. I the LORD——peace with me.Isaiah 27:3-5. The Prophet by putting into the mouth of the people a song in which Jehovah Himself as speaker gives glorious promises to the people, intimates that the people may regard these promises as their own certain possession. For they belong to them as those who publish them, and they are sure to them, because they proclaim them as verba ipsissima of Jehovah. The Lord promises now that He will keep His vineyard and abundantly water it (μψβςινevery moment asμαχψιν which two expressions stand together Job 7:18, Comp. Isaiah 33:2; Psalms 73:14 et saepe) yea watch it night and day, that it may not be visited by an enemy (τχγ with ςμ which elsewhere denotes a visitation for punishment, comp Hosea 12:3; Jeremiah 9:24 sq., seems to stand here in the sense of, τּ ?βַ ?ωׁ ,τָּ ?βַ ?ς .
The fury (ηֵ ?ξָ ?δ here for the first time comp. Isaiah 34:2; Isaiah 42:25; Isaiah 51:13; Isaiah 51:17; Isaiah 51:20; Isaiah 51:22 et saepe in the second part of Isaiah), which the Lord formerly felt and manifested toward His vineyard Israel (Isaiah 27:5 sqq.), no longer exists. Nay more, thorns and thistles, which the Lord according to ver, 6 would for a punishment let grow up in the old vineyard, He wishes now to be set before Him in order to show by destroying them the zeal of His love for the renewed vineyard. Thorns and thistles, which grow from the soil of the vineyard itself, are, in opposition to the wild beasts which break in from without, symbols of internal decay, symptoms of the germs of evil still existing in the vineyard itself. Here external foes are not expressly mentioned as in chap. 5, and we have therefore to understand here under thorns and thistles everything which could set itself against the nature and purpose of the vineyard. [But does not the expression αַּ ?ξִּ ?μְ ?ηָ ?ξָ ?δ point rather to external enemies of the Church as denoted under the symbols of briers and thorns? D.
M.]. The asyndetonbriers, thorns, is explained by the lively emotion of the Prophet (comp. Isaiah 32:13). ξιιϊππι (only here in Isaiah, comp. Job 29:2; Jeremiah 9:1) is a formula expressive of a wish. The suffix has here a dative sense. αξμηξδ is connected by the Masoretes with what precedes, but it belongs necessarily to what follows, as Knobel and Delitzsch have perceived. With war,i.e., with martial impetuosity, would the Lordstride in (τωׂ ?ςgradiri, ingredi only here, substantives derived from it 1 Samuel 20:3; 1 Chronicles 19:4) against them (αָּ ?δּ the feminine suffix refers to the nouns ωָׁ ?ξִ ?ιψωַׁ ?ιִ ?ϊ, and is to be taken in a neuter sense, as afterwards the suffix in ΰφιϊπδ) and burn up the bushes all altogetherδֵ ?φιϊ for δִ ?φִּ ?ιϊ only here.
When in Isaiah 27:5 the Lord speaks of people before whom the alternative is placed, either to be overcome by the storm of war just mentioned, or (ΰεֹ as conjunction with omitted λִּ ?ι comp. Exodus 21:36; 2 Samuel 18:13 comp. Leviticus 13:16; Leviticus 13:24) to lay hold of the protection of Jehovah (δηζχαְּ ?4:1; 1 Kings 1:50; ξςεζdefence, protection, Isaiah 17:9-10; Isaiah 23:4; Isaiah 23:11; Isaiah 23:14; Isaiah 25:4; Isaiah 30:3) and to make peace with Him (Joshua 9:15), we perceive that He thinks of such among the people for whom there is a possibility of repentance and salvation. From this possibility even the external enemies of the theocracy are not excluded (Isaiah 2:3; Isaiah 25:6 sqq.), but to Israel it appertains pre-eminently. This is another reason for supposing that under the thorns and thistles (Isaiah 27:4) internal enemies arising out of Israel are to be understood. The taking hold of protection is a subordinate matter, involving merely passive submission and endeavor after safety.
But in the making of peace with God there is something higher, positive yielding of one’s self to him, union with Him.
To the last thought peculiar weight and emphasis is given by its repetition with ωׁ ?μεν the chief term placed first. The close of the song is thus at the same time fitly intimated.
5. He shall cause——with fruit.Isaiah 27:6. The cessation of a uniform rhythm shows that the language of prose is resumed. But what is now said is in sense closely connected with the song, the thoughts of which it explains and completes. For it sounds as the solution of a riddle (comp. Isaiah 27:7), when it is now explicitly stated that Israel is the vineyard of the Lord; at the same time the fruit of the vineyard is described as glorious, and spreading far and wide. [Dr.
Naegelsbach’s translation of the first clause: “In the coming days Jacob shall take root” is adopted by the best modern scholars, and is much more natural and accurate than the rendering of the Eng. ver.: “He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root.” The sense of causing to take root is foreign to the form of the verb employed, and the order of the words will not admit of the translation those that come of Israel.—D M.] δαΰιν supply ιָ ?ξִ ?ιν, comp. e.g., ιָ ?ξִ ?ιναָּ ?ΰִ ?ινJeremiah 7:32; Ecclesiastes 2:6 and ΰֹ ?ϊִ ?ιεֹ ?ϊres futurae Isaiah 41:23; Isaiah 44:7. The accusative marks the duration of time. The names Jacob and Israel designate sometimes the whole people (chaps. 2, 3, 5, 6 and seqq.), sometimes the northern kingdom in particular (Isaiah 9:7). Here, however, it seems as if the Prophet by the use of the two names intended to designate the entire people by its two halves. In favor of this view is the plural ξμΰε, as only the singular would have been requisite, as in the verbal forms ιφιυ ,τψδιωׁ ?ψωׁ. That ιφιυ (only here in Isaiah) stands before τψη (germinare, sprout, comp.
Isaiah 17:11; Isaiah 35:1-2; Isaiah 66:14) is not to be pressed. We too, can say “blossom and bud” or “bud and blossom.” At most we might say that the Prophet wished to put the blossom first as the higher of the two. The fruit (ϊπεαδproventus, produce of fruit, only here in Isaiah) will be in such abundance that the whole earth will be filled with it (Isaiah 37:31). Israel will then, when the judgment shall have destroyed the worldly powers and the heathen, be all in all. For mount Zion and Jerusalem shall stand, even if heaven and earth should perish.
6. Hath he smitten—stand up.Isaiah 27:7-9. The declaration that Israel will continue, even if all the rest of the world should be swallowed up by the floods of judgment, is so bold as to require a particular justification. This is given by the Prophet while he shows from history how the Lord always distinguished Israel, and even when He smote him, never smote him as his enemies. (Comp. Isaiah 10:24 sqq.). Therefore he asks, verse Isaiah 7 : has Jehovah, his God, smitten him, namely Israel, with the stroke of his smiter (ξַ ?λֶּ ?δ as Isaiah 10:26; Isaiah 14:7; Isaiah 30:26; ξַ ?λֵּ ?δεּ (comp.
Isaiah 9:12; Isaiah 10:20; Isaiah 14:29) i.e., even so hard as He smote those who smote Israel? Or has he ever been so slain as the enemies of the theocracy that were slain by him (Israel)? δֶ ?ψֶ ?β in Isaiah besides Isaiah 30:25. Part. δψεβιν in Isaiah only here and Isaiah 26:21. δֹ ?ψַ ?β Pual only here and Psalms 44:23. The meaning is: Israel has never suffered complete destruction. Turning to address the Lord Himself the Prophet continues: In small measure by sending her away thou punishest her. The connection requires the signification mensura.
Reference is rightly made to Jeremiah 10:24; Jeremiah 30:11 (Jeremiah 46:28), where μַ ?ξִּ ?ωְׁ ?τָּ ?θ is used in a like sense. Knobel objects that ρΰδ does not signify measure in general, but a definite measure, and the figurative use of it would be as hard as if we should say: to punish one by the quart. ρְ ?ΰָ ?δ is by all means a definite measure of grain, and according to the statements of the ancients, the third part of an ephah. But this signification suits admirably, The translation in measure is of course not literal. It should be: with the measure of a seah by putting away thou punishest her. The meaning accordingly is that the Lord ordains only a small measureful of punishment for Israel. The antithesis to this is then a large measure which causes destruction.
The expression “small measure” involves necessarily the idea of clemency. Hitzig, Ewald and Knobel propose to read αְּ ?ρַ ?ΰְ ?ρְ ?ΰָ ?δּ Inf. Pilp. from =ζες=ρεΰby his disquietude. But this thought, apart from the artificial etymology, does not suit the context. It appears to me that this αρΰρΰδ was a popular and familiar expression. At all events, it occurs in the language of Scripture only here.
The feminine suffix in the last two words shows that the Prophet, in accordance with the notion of “putting away,” thinks of Israel as a wife, ψιλ stands here with accusative of the person in a signification in which it is commonly construed with one of the prepositions ΰֶ ?μ ,ςִ ?ν or αְּ, namely = altercari, to contend, dispute with, punish. However, this construction with the accusative is found elsewhere: Isaiah 49:25; Deuteronomy 33:8; Job 10:2; Hosea 4:4. The imperfect (future) is not used to express repetition in the past; for the Prophet cannot yet say that Israel’s exile has terminated. Israel is to-day still in exile. The imperfect rather marks the still uncompleted, enduring fact. That the second person imperfect is used, while before and afterwards Jehovah is spoken of in the third person, has, apart from the ease with which in Hebrew the person is changed, its reason perhaps in this, that the Prophet wishes to make the three words of this clause which are like one another in respect to the ending and number of the consonantal sounds, as conformable to one another as possible in their initial sounds also.
For Tan is certainly more nearly related to the S-sounds with which the preceding words begin, than Yod. Lexicographers and interpreters are inclined to regard δָ ?βָ ?δ as an independent verbal stem, to which they ascribe the meaning “amovere, separare, to sift,” which is supposed to occur only here and Proverbs 25:4-5. I believe that our δβδ is identical with the δβδ that occurs so frequently. The word is clearly onomatopoetic, and its radical meaning is “to breathe;” and it means that kind of breathing which consists is a strong ejection of air through the throat. The sound that is thus produced corresponds to the rough guttural sound of the roaring lion (Isaiah 31:4), to the noise of thunder (Job 37:2), to the moaning of a dove (Isaiah 38:14), to the muttering of conjurers (Isaiah 8:19), and to the sighing of a man (Isaiah 16:7), and is also the physical basis for human speech, whether this be a speaking with others or a speaking with one’s self under profound emotion (meditari). Even in Proverbs 25:4 sq. this signification holds. “Breathe (blow) the dross from the silver” is what we read there.
This means, we are to remove by blowing the impure ingredients that swim on the surface of the molten silver. And so (Proverbs 25:5) the court is to be purified from the hurtful presence of a wicked man, he is to be blown away as scum upon molten silver. In our place, too, δָ ?βָ ?δ is simply “to breathe.” He breathes with his rough breath in the day of the east wind means nothing else than: God blows Israel away out of his land by sending, like the storm of an east wind, His breath with great force over the land. The thought involved in ωׁ ?μηδ is once more expressed by an image. The Prophet knows that exile is the severest punishment which Jehovah inflicts on His people. Whether it was the case that Isaiah had already witnessed the carrying away of the ten tribes, or that passages of the Pentateuch which threaten the punishment of exile were present to him (Deuteronomy 4:27 sq.; Deuteronomy 28:36; Deuteronomy 28:63 sqq.; Deuteronomy 29:28), he certainly means that Jehovah does not exterminate His people as He, e.g., exterminated the Canaanites, but that He inflicts on them as the maximum of punishment only temporary exile.
The use of the perfect δָ ?βָ ?δ is then quite normal, in order to describe further a matter contained in the principal sentence (ωׁ ?μηδ). The expression ψεηχωׁ ?δ does not elsewhere occur. But Isaiah does speak of a ΰֲ ?γֹ ?πִ ?ινχָ ?ωֶׁ ?δ19:4, of a ηָ ?ζεּ ?ϊχָ ?ωָׁ ?δ21:2, of ςֲ ?αֹ ?γָ ?δχָ ?ωָׁ ?δ14:3, of a ηֶ ?ψֶ ?αχָ ?ωָׁ ?δ Isaiah 27:1. A mighty political catastrophe which would purify the land is here compared with a stormy wind, or east wind, the most violent wind known in Palestine (Job 27:21; Hosea 13:15, which place was perhaps before the mind of the Prophet; Jonah 4:8; Ezekiel 17:10; Ezekiel 19:12); and this wind is marked as ψεּ ?ηַ ιδεδ as a breath proceeding from the mouth of God; wind being frequently in the O. T. described as God’s breath, or God’s breath being described as wind (Exodus 15:8; Job 4:9; Job 15:30; Hosea 13:15; Isaiah 40:7; Isaiah 59:19). As a violent tempest causes much damage, but at the same time does much good by its purifying influence, so this punishment of expulsion from the land is so far from being intended for the destruction of Israel, that the salvation of Israel arises from it.
For just thereby (μָ ?λֵ ?ο as Isaiah 26:14; Jeremiah 5:2) the guilt of Jacob is expiated (covered comp. Isaiah 22:14). The words by this, therefore, are to be taken together, and point with emphasis backwards. αζΰϊ cannot be referred to the following αωׂ ?εξε, because atonement is not made for Israel by this ωׂ ?εּ ?νεβεΧ, but on the contrary, this ωׂ ?ενεβεΧ is the fruit of the expiation. By this expiatory punishment Israel is made partaker of great blessing. The Lord knows how to make good come out of evil (Genesis 50:20). The expiation, i.e., the removal of guilt has the effect that Israel thereby becomes free also from the power and dominion of sin. [ιְ ?λֻ ?τַּ ?ψ, though it strictly means shall be atoned for, is here metonymically used to denote the effect and not the cause, purification and not expiation.
In the very same way it is applied to the cleansing of inanimate objects. Alexander.—D. M.]. ζֶ ?δ refers to τְּ ?ψִ ?ι and what follows. All fruit of the forgiveness of sin, consequently all sanctification concentrates itself in Israel’s keeping now the first and greatest commandment, and in definitively renouncing idolatry. ζֶ ?δ is not, however, the demonstrative pronoun, but is to be taken adverbially; this word, as is well known, possessing the two significations this and there. Hence the construction αְּ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?ξεֹ (not ωׂ ?εּ ?ξεֹ) can follow. Comp. ςֲ ?μεּ ζֶ ?δαַ ?πֶּ ?πֶ ?α Numbers 13:17.
Israel by so dashing in pieces all the stones of their idolatrous altars, that they can no longer serve for places of worship for Ashtoreth and images of the sun, exhibits the fruit of the expiation that has been rendered and of the forgiveness that has been received. βιψ (ἅπ. λεγ) is lime, ΰαπιβιψ are not lime-stones, in the mineralogical sense, but stones in a wall which are covered with lime, mortar [?]. ξπτφεϊ, (comp. Isaiah 11:12; Isaiah 33:3) are the same stones, when they, in consequence of the destruction of the wall which they formed, lie broken in pieces. This shall happen to the stones of the idolatrous altars, and they will in consequence no longer serve as pedestals on which images of Ashtoreth and of the sun (comp on Isaiah 17:8) stand up.
Footnotes:hard.Or, crossing like a bar.fleeing.will set.Or, march against.In coming days will Jacob take root.Heb. according to the stroke of those.Or, when thou sendest it forth.Or, when he removeth it.he bloweth with his rough blast.stones of mortar.images of Ashtoreth.Or, sun-images.
8. THE OF THE WORDLY CITY AND ISRAEL’S JOYFUL
Isaiah 27:10-1310 a Yet the defenced city shall be desolate,
And the habitation forsaken, and left like a wilderness:
There shall the calf feed, and there shall he lie down,
And consume the branches thereof.
11 When the boughs thereof are withered, they shall be broken off:
The women come and set them on fire:
For it is a people of no understanding;
Therefore he that made them will not have mercy on them,
And he that formed them will show them no favor.
12 And it shall come to pass in that day,
That the Lord shall beat off
From the bchannel of the river unto the stream of Egypt,
And ye shall be gathered one by one,
O ye children of Israel.
13 And it shall come to pass in that day,
That the great trumpet shall be blown,
And they shall come which were ready to perish in the land of Assyria,
And the outcasts in the land of Egypt,
And shall worship the Lord in the holy mount at Jerusalem.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_27:10. αγγ (only here in Isaiah) is an adverb, or substantive used adverbially. It might also be μְ ?αָ ?γָ ?γ (comp. Numbers 23:9; Micah 7:14). That an adverb can be the predicate is well known.
Isaiah 27:12. μְ ?ΰַ ?ηַ ?γΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ, i.e., to one one, to one which is one and nothing else, wholly one. This combination occurs only here (for Ecclesiastes 7:27 is different). ΰַ ?ηַ ?γ is the form of the construct state, and can be treated here as such; for the construct state marks in appositional relations nothing but the closest connection (Naegelsbach Gr., § 64, 1). [To one one, i.e., one to the other, to mark careful attention to each individual, and to express the idea that all will be gathered together and without exception.—D. M.].
AND 1. The Prophet again draws on a dark background the picture of the worldly power. He had represented it, Isaiah 27:1, in the form of beasts; here, as already (Isaiah 24:10-12; Isaiah 25:2-3; Isaiah 25:12; Isaiah 26:5), the great city of the world, the centre of the worldly power, is made to appear. He depicts it as a desolate forsaken place, overgrown with bushes, whose tender branches the calves eat off, whose withered twigs women gather for fuel. This pitiable lot is the punishment of their folly (Isaiah 27:10-11). Quite different is the case with Israel.
This people finds grace in the eyes of its Lord. Out of the sheaves of the nations, which shall be gathered in the day of judgment, all the ears that belong to Israel shall be separated, and bound together (Isaiah 27:12). And when the great trumpet sounds, all the Israelites lost and scattered in the lands of the heathen, shall return home, in order to worship Jehovah on the holy mountain at Jerusalem (Isaiah 27:13).
2. Yet the defenced—no favor.Isaiah 27:10-11. The city which becomes desolate and finds no mercy (Isaiah 27:11) cannot possibly be Jerusalem. It can only be the city which the Prophet has already (Isaiah 24:10-12; Isaiah 21:2-3; Isaiah 21:12; Isaiah 26:5) so emphatically set forth as the centre of the worldly power, and distinguished from the earth of which it is the centre. Isaiah 27:10-11 are therefore connected with Isaiah 27:1. λִּ ?ι is here explicative, rather than causal. The defenced city of Isa 27:10 is identical with the χψιδαφεψδ in Isaiah 25:2.—βָ ?εֶ ?δ (comp.
Isaiah 32:18; Isaiah 33:20; Isaiah 34:13; Isaiah 35:7; Isaiah 65:10) is originally a habitation of Nomades, a place where people can stay with their flocks and herds. Then it is habitation in general; and as the city is here designated as πεδπςζα, what the city was, and not what it is, is denoted by πεδ. It was formerly an inhabited city. πεδ is accordingly not to be taken here as “pasturage,” but as habitation, dwelling-place. The πεδ is said by Metonymy to be driven away (ξְ ?ωֻׁ ?μָּ ?η) although only its inhabitants are so. (Comp. χֵ ?οξωμη. Isaiah 16:2; δָ ?ςִ ?ιψδַ ?ιφֵֹ ?ΰϊAmos 5:3; and ϊָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υϊֵּ ?ωֵׁ ?αIsaiah 13:20). As the wilderness can be said to be forsaken, but not driven away, we have to connect only πςζα with λξγαψ, and not ξωׁ ?μη also.
On the place that has been so forsaken calves will feed (comp. Isaiah 5:17; Isaiah 27:13 sqq.), and lie down, and consume (Isaiah 49:4) the branches (comp. Isaiah 17:6) thereof,i.e., of the forsaken city. What remains of the branches (χφιψ in the collective sense of foliage, especially in Job 14:9; Job 18:16; Job 29:19), and is withered, is broken off (the plural ϊωαψπδ to be referred to the idea of a multitude of branches contained in χφιψ); then women come and kindle it (ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?δּ as a neuter comp. on Isaiah 27:4), i.e., they make an ΰεּ ?ψ, a flame of it (Isaiah 31:9; Isaiah 44:16; Isaiah 50:11 comp. Malachi 1:10). This judgment comes upon the people (i.e., the nations conceived as one) of the worldly power; because it is a people without right understanding (plural only here.
Comp. on Isaiah 11:2). Therefore, although Jehovah is the Creator of the heathen also (Genesis 1:26 : comp. Job 12:10; Acts 17:26), yet He will not be gracious unto them (ςωׂ ?δε as Isaiah 17:7; Isaiah 29:16. ιφψε comp. Isaiah 29:16; Isaiah 45:9 et saepe). [Many of the best interpreters hold that the city spoken of in Isaiah 27:10 is Jerusalem, and not Babylon. The desolation here described is not so complete as that denounced against Babylon (Isaiah 13:19-22), and corresponds exactly to the judgment foretold elsewhere by Isaiah against Israel and Jerusalem Isaiah 32:13-14; Isaiah 5:17. The people of no understand standing, whose Maker and Former is Jehovah, certainly looks like Israel.
Comp. Isaiah 1:3.—D. M.].
3. And it shall come—Jerusalem.Isaiah 27:12-13. In contrast to the sad image of a wilderness in Isaiah 27:10-11, the Prophet depicts Israel’s final destiny as a harvest of glory and highest honor for Israel. The image of a great harvest-day (Matthew 13:39; Revelation 14:14 sqq.), forms the basis of the figurative language of Isa 27:12-13. The sheaves are gathered, even in the countries where Israel lives in exile, mainly therefore, in the countries of the Euphrates and the Nile. For these countries are for the Prophet here, as Isaiah 11:11 sqq.; Isaiah 19:23 sqq., representatives of the lands of exile in general.
But when the harvest-sheaves of those countries are borne by the reapers, the Lord shall beat these sheaves (ηָ ?αַ ?θ of the beating off of olives Deuteronomy 24:20; of the threshing of grain with a staff Judges 6:11; Rth 2:17; Isaiah 28:27), and the ears of Israel will fall out, and then be gathered to be brought back. It is plain that the Prophet means by this image what he afterwards, Isaiah 27:13, states in proper terms. For the scattered Israelitish ears amid the great sheaves of the Gentiles are nothing but the ΰαγιν and πγηιν Isaiah 27:13. I take therefore ωִׁ ?αֹּ ?μֶ ?ϊ Isaiah 27:12 as a collective designation of ears of grain. For what significance would it have here to give prominence to the Euphrates being at high water, as it is quite indifferent for the Geographical boundary whether the Euphrates has much water or little (ωׁ ?αμϊ, fluxus aquae, emphasizes the abundance of water, Psalms 69:3; Psalms 69:6; besides only Judges 12:6 where the meaning is a matter of no consequence)? We dare not press the line of the Euphrates, or the line of the πημξφψιν any more than the depth of the Euphrates as a sharply drawn boundary-line.
For the grain-ears of the Euphrates are just the ears of the lands of the Euphrates, and the ears of the brook of Egypt are the ears of Egypt, as appears from ΰψυΰωׁ ?εψ and ξφψιν Isaiah 27:13. I believe that in regard to grammar we are fully justified in supplying ωׁ ?αμϊ after ςγ and before πημξι. The omission of substantives after prepositions of comparison furnishes a perfectly sufficient analogy for this omission (comp. Job 33:25). [The proposed construction is intolerably hard, and has no clear parallel to support it. It is unwarrantably assumed that ωׁ ?αμϊδπηψ must mean the high water of the river Euphrates as distinguished from the river at low water.ωׁ ?αμϊ denotes current, flood, and so abundance of water, and it may well be put as an adjunct of the river Euphrates when the other terminus is the insignificant stream of Egypt, the Wadi el Arish. It appears to me exceedingly forced to take ωׁ ?αμϊ here as a collective, meaning ears of grain, and then to suppose an ellipsis of this substantive after ςγ.—D.
M.].
That the πημξΧ is the Wadi el Arish which flows near Rhinocolura into the sea is certain. (Comp. Ebers,Egypt and the books of Moses, I. p. 275). But it is not mentioned along with the Euphrates to designate a boundary of the Israelitish kingdom (Genesis 15:18; 1 Kings 8:65), but as emblem of the southern and first land of exile; as the Euphrates is emblem of the second and northern land of exile.
At the signal which will be given by sound of trumpet (Isaiah 18:3; Matthew 24:3; 1 Corinthians 15:52; 1 Thessalonians 4:16) all the Israelites who are lost (Jeremiah 50:6) and scattered (Isaiah 11:12 comp. Ezekiel 34:4; Ezekiel 34:16) in the lands of Assyria and Egypt (in the same lands which were previously designated by πδψ and πημξΧ) come to worship the Lord in Jerusalem, on the mountain of the Sanctuary (Isaiah 24:23; Isaiah 25:6-7; Isaiah 25:10). Here ends the libellus apocalypticus of Isaiah. This worship he conceives as never ending (comp. Isaiah 25:7 sq.). Israel’s return to his own land is type of the restoration of redeemed men (the Ἰσραὴλπνευματικός) into the heavenly home. It is not possible in this connection to think merely (as even Drechsler does) on a single act of worship before taking possession of the land and settling in it.
AND ETHICAL1. Isaiah 24:2. “When general judgments take place, no distinction is observed between man and wife, master and servant, mistress and maid, learned and unlearned, noble and plebeian, clergy and laity; therefore let no one rely on any external prerogative or superiority, but let every one without distinction repent and forsake sin.”—Cramer. Though this is right, yet we must, on the other hand, remember that the Lord declares in reference to the same great event, “Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left” (Matthew 24:10 sq.). There is no contradiction in these two statements. Both are true: outward relations will make no difference; there shall be no respect of persons.
But the state of the heart will make a difference. According to the inward character there will, in the case of those whose external position in the world is perfectly alike, be some who enter life, others whose doom is death.
2. Isaiah 24:5 sq. “The earth is burdened with sins, and is therefore deprived of every blessing. The earth must suffer for our guilt, when we have as it were spoilt it, and it must be subject to vanity for our sakes (Romans 8:20). What wonder is it that it should show itself ungrateful toward us?”—Cramer.[3. Isaiah 24:13 sq. “Observe the small number of this remnant; here and there one who shall escape the common calamity (as Noah and his family, when the old world was drowned), who when all faces gather blackness, can lift up their head with joy. Luke 21:26-28.” Henry.—D. M.].
4. Isaiah 24:17-20. Our earth is a volcanic body. Mighty volcanic forces were active at its formation. That these are still in commotion in the interior of the earth is proved by the many active volcanoes scattered over the whole earth, and by the perpetual volcanic convulsions which we call earthquakes. These have hitherto been confined to particular localities.
But who can guarantee that a concentration and simultaneous eruption of those volcanic forces, that is, a universal earthquake, shall not hereafter occur? The Lord makes express mention of earthquakes among the signs which shall precede His second coming (Matthew 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:11). And in 2 Peter 3:5 sqq. the future destruction of the earth by fire is set over against the destruction of the old world by water. Isaiah in our place announces a catastrophe whose characteristic features will be that, 1) there will be no escape from it; 2) destructive forces will assail from above and below; 3) the earth will be rent asunder; 4) it will reel and totter; 5) it will suffer so heavy a fall that it will not rise again (Isaiah 24:20 b). Is there not here a prophecy of the destruction of the earth by volcanic forces? And how suddenly can they break loose!
The ministers of the word have every reason to compare this extreme exposedness of our earth to fire, and the possibility of its unexpectedly sudden collapse with the above-cited warnings of the word of God, and to attach thereto the admonition which is added in 2 Peter 3:11.
5. Isaiah 24:21. The earth is a part of our planetary system. It is not what it appears to the optical perception to be, a central body around which worlds of a different nature revolve, but it, together with many similar bodies, revolves round a common centre. The earth according to that view of the account of the creation in Genesis 1, which appears to me the true one, has arisen with all the bodies of our Solar system out of one primary matter, originally united, common to them all. If our Solar System is a well-ordered, complete organism, it must rest on the basis of a not merely formal, but also material unity; i.e., the separate bodies must move, not only according to a principle of order which governs all, but they must also as to their substance be essentially like.
And as they arose simultaneously, so must they perish simultaneously. It is inconceivable that our earth alone should disappear from the organism of the Solar System, or pass over to a higher material condition. Its absence, or ceasing to exist in its previous form and substance, would necessarily draw after it the ruin of the whole system. Hence the Scripture speaks every where of a passing away and renovation of the heaven and the earth (Psalms 102:26; Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; Matthew 5:18; Matthew 24:29; Matthew 24:35; 2 Peter 3:7; 2 Peter 3:10; 2 Peter 3:13; Hebrews 12:26; Revelation 20:11; Revelation 21:1). The heaven that shall pass away with a great noise, whose powers shall be shaken, whose stars shall fall, is the planetary heaven. The same lot will happen to the companions of our earth, to the other planets, and to the centre, the sun, and to all other co-ordinate and subordinate stellar bodies, which will befall the earth itself.
This is the substance of the view which serves as a basis for our place. But personal beings are not thereby by any means excluded from the φαΰξψεν. The parallel expression ξμλιδΰγξδ, and the use in other places of the related expression φαΰδωׁ ?ξιν lead us rather to suppose personal beings to be included. But I believe that a distinction must be made here. As the heavenly bodies which will pass away simultaneously with the earth, can only be those which arose together with it, and which stand in organic connection with it, so also the angelic powers, which are judged simultaneously with us men, can be only those which stand in connection with the heavenly bodies of our Solar System, i.e., with the earthly material world. There are heavenly bodies of glorious pneumatic substance.
If personal beings stand in connection with them, they must also be pure, glorious, resplendent beings. These will not be judged. They are the holy angels, who come with the Lord (Matthew 25:31). But it is quite conceivable that all the bodies of our Solar System are till the judgment like our earth suffered to be the theatre of the spirits of darkness.
6. Isaiah 24:21-23, It seems to me that the Prophet has here sketched the chief matters pertaining to eschatology. For the passing away of heaven and earth, the binding of Satan (Revelation 20:1-3), the loosing of Satan again (Revelation 20:7), and finally the reign of God alone, which will make sun and moon unnecessary (Revelation 21:23)—are not these the boundary-stones of the chief epochs of the history of the end of the world?
7. Isaiah 25:6. [“The Lord of hosts makes this feast. The provision is very rich, and every thing is of the best. It is a feast, which supposes abundance and variety; it is a continual feast to believers: it is their fault if it be not. It is a feast of fat things and full of marrow; so relishing, so nourishing are the comforts of the Gospel to all those that feast upon them and digest them. The returning prodigal was entertained with the fatted calf; and David has that pleasure in communion with God, with which his soul is satisfied as with marrow and fatness.
It is a feast of wines on the lees; the strongest-bodied wines, that have been long kept upon the lees, and then are well refined from them, so that they are clear and fine. There is that in the Gospel which, like fine wine, soberly used, makes glad the heart, and raises the spirits, and is fit for those that are of a heavy heart, being under convictions of sin, and mourning for it, that they may drink and forget their misery (for that is the proper use of wine; it is a cordial for those that need it, Proverbs 31:6-7) may be of good cheer, knowing that their sins are forgiven, and may be vigorous in their spiritual work and warfare, as a strong man refreshed with wine.” Henry.—D. M.]
8. Isaiah 25:9. “In the Old Testament the vail and covering were before men’s eyes, partly because they waited for the light that was to appear, partly because they sat in darkness and in the shadow of death (Luke 1:79). The fulfilment of this prediction has in Christ already begun, and will at last be perfectly fulfilled in the Church triumphant where all ignorance and sorrow shall be dispelled (1 Corinthians 13:12).” Cramer.9. Isaiah 25:8. “God here represents Himself as a mother, who presses to her bosom her sorrowful son, comforts him and wipes away his tears (Isaiah 66:13). The righteous are to believe and appropriate this promise, that every one may learn to speak with Paul in the time of trial: the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us, Romans 8:18.” Cramer.10. Isaiah 25:10. “This is now the hope and consolation of the church that the hand of the Lord rests on this mountain, that is, that He will be gracious, and let His power, help and grace be there seen and felt.
But the unbelieving Moabites, i.e., the Jews, with all others who will not receive the gospel, shall be threshed to pieces as straw in the mire; these the Lord’s hand will not rescue, as it helps those who wait on Him, but it shall press them down so that they will never rise, according to the saying, Mark 16:16.” Veit Dietrich.11. Isaiah 25 Three thoughts contained in this chapter we should hold fast: 1) When we see the world triumph over every thing which belongs to the Lord and His kingdom, when our hearts are anxious about the preservation in the world of the Church of Christ, which is sore oppressed, let this word of the Prophet comfort our hearts. The world-city which contains all that is of the world, sinks into the dust, and the church of Christ goes from her chains and bands into the state of freedom and glory. We have often seen that it is the Lord’s way to let every thing come to maturity. When it is once ripe, He comes suddenly with His sentence. Let us comfort ourselves therewith, for thus will it happen with the world and its dominion over the faithful followers of Christ.
When it is ripe, suddenly it will come to an end. 2) No one who has a heart for the welfare of the nations can see without the deepest pain how all hearts are now seduced and befooled, and all eyes closed and covered. The simplest truths are no longer acknowledged, but the more perverse, brutal and mean views and doctrines are, the more greedily are they laid hold of. We cannot avert this. But our comfort is that even this seduction of the nations will reach its climax. Then men will come to themselves. The vail and covering will fall off, and the Gospel will shine with new light before the nations.
Therewith let us comfort ourselves. 3) Till this happens, the church is sorrowful. But she shall be full of joy. The promise is given to her that she shall be fully satisfied with the good things of the house of the Lord. A life is promised to her which neither death nor any pain can affect, as she has rest from all enemies. The word of the Lord shall be fulfilled in her: Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. The Church that has such a promise may wait in patient quietness for its accomplishment, and praise the Lord in affliction, till it pleases Him to glorify her before all nations.” Weber, The Prophet Isaiah. 1875.
12. Isaiah 26:1. “The Christian church is a city of God. God has built it, and He is the right Master-builder. It is strong: 1) on account of the Builder; 2) on account of the foundation and corner-stone, which is Christ; 3) on account of the bond wherewith the living stones are bound together, which is the unity of the faith.” Cramer. [The security and happiness of true believers, both on earth and in heaven, is represented in Scripture under the image of their dwelling in a city in which they can bid defiance to all their enemies. We dwell in such a city even now, Psalms 46:4-5. We look for such a city, Hebrews 11:10; Hebrews 11:16; Revelation 21—D. M.]
13. Isaiah 26:2. [These words may be taken as a description of the people whom God owns, who are fit to be accounted members of the church of the living God on earth, and who will not be excluded from the celestial city. Instead of complaining that only the righteous and the faithful will be admitted into the heavenly city, it should rather give us joy to think that there will be no sin there, that none but the just and true will there be found. This has been a delightful subject of reflection to God’s saints. The last words written by Henry Martyn were: “Oh! when shall time give place to eternity? When shall appear that new heaven and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness?
There, there shall in no wise enter in any thing that defileth; none of that wickedness which has made men worse than wild beasts—none of their corruptions which add to the miseries of mortality shall be seen or heard of any more.”—D. M.]
14. Isaiah 26:4. “The fourth privilege of the church is trust in God the Rock of Ages, i.e., in Christ, who not only here, but also Matthew 16; 1 Corinthians 10; 1 Peter 2, is called a rock in a peculiar manner, because no other foundation of salvation and of the church can be laid except this rock, which is here called the rock of ages on account of the eternity of His being, merit and office. Hence a refutation can be drawn of the papistical fable which makes Peter and his successors, the Roman Pontiffs, to be the rock on which the church is built.” Foerster. [“Whatever we trust to the world for, it will be but for a moment. All we expect from it is confined within the limits of time; but what we trust in God for will last as long as we shall last. For in the Lord Jehovah, Jah, Jehovah, in Him who was, and is, and is to come, there is a rock of ages, a firm and lasting foundation for faith and hope to build upon; and the house built on that rock will stand in a storm.” Henry.”—D. M.]
15. Isaiah 26:5. “It is very common with the prophets, when they prophesy of the kingdom of Christ to make reference to the proud and to the needy, and to represent the latter as exalted and the former as brought low. This truth is directed properly against the self-righteous. For Christ and His righteousness will not endure spiritual pride and presumption; but the souls that are poor, that hunger and thirst for grace, that know their need, these Christ graciously receives.” Cramer.16. Isaiah 26:6. “It vexes the proud all the more that they will be overcome by those who are poor and of no consequence. For example, Goliath was annoyed that a boy should come against him with a staff (1 Sam. 13:43) Cramer.17.
Isaiah 26:8-10. That the justice of God must absolutely manifest itself that the majesty of the Lord may be seen, and that the wicked may learn righteousness, must even from a new Testament view-point be admitted. But the New Testament disputes the existence of any one who is righteous when confronted by the law, and who is not deserving of punishment. [But that there is none righteous, no not one, is taught most emphatically in the Old Testament also.—D. M.]. But it (the New Testament) while it shuts up all, Jews and Gentiles, without exception, under sin (Galatians 3:22; Romans 3:9; Romans 11:32), sets forth a scheme of mediation, which, while it renders full satisfaction to justice, at the same time offers to all the possibility of deliverance. This mediation is through the Cross of Christ.
It is only when this mediation has not been accepted that punitive justice has free course. It should not surprise us that even the Evangelist of the Old Covenant, who wrote chap. 53, did not possess perfect knowledge of this mediation. Let us remember John the Baptist (Matthew 3:7; Matthew 11:11) and the disciples of the Lord (Luke 9:54). [Let us not forget that Isaiah was a true Prophet, and spoke as he was moved by the Spirit of God. The Apostle Paul did not find fault with the most terrible denunciations of judgment contained in the Old Testament, or affect a superiority over the men who uttered them. On the contrary, he quotes them as words which could not be suffered to fall, but which must be fulfilled in all their dreadful import. See e.g.
Romans 11:9-10.—D. M.].
18. Isaiah 26:12. “It is a characteristic of true, sincere Christians, that they give God the glory and not themselves, and freely confess that they have nothing of themselves, but everything from God (1 Corinthians 4:7; Philippians 2:13; Hebrews 12:2).” Cramer.19. Isaiah 26:16. The old theologians have many comforting and edifying thoughts connected with this place: “A magnet has the power to raise and attract to itself iron. Our heart is heavy as iron. But the hand of God is as a magnet.
When that hand visits us with affliction, it lifts us up, and draws us to itself.” “Distress teaches us to pray, and prayer again dispels all distress. One wedge displaces the other.” “Ex gravibus curis impellimur ad pia vota.” “Ex monte myrrhae procedimus ad collem thuris (Cant. 9:6). In amaritudine crucis exsurgit odor devotae precationis (Psalms 86:6 sq.).” “Ubi nulla crux et tentatio, ibi nulla vera oratio. Oratio sine mails est tanquam avis sine alis. Optimus orandi magister necessitas. Τὰπαθήματαμαθήματα. Quae nocent, docent.
Ubi tentatio, ibi oratio. Mala, quae hic nos premunt, ad Deum ire compellunt. Qui nescit orare, ingrediatur mare.” “When the string is most tightly drawn, it sounds best. Cross and temptation are the right prayer-bell. They are the press by which God crushes out the juice of prayer.” Cramer and Foerster.20. Isaiah 26:20.
As God, when the deluge was about to burst, bade Noah go into his ark as into his chamber, and Himself shut the door on him (Genesis 7:6); so does the Lord still act when a storm is approaching; He brings His own into a chamber where they can be safe, either for their temporal preservation and protection against every might (Psalms 91:1), or, on the other hand, to give them repose by a peaceful and happy death.” “His anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life (Psalms 30:6).” Cramer.21. Isaiah 27:1. [“Great and mighty princes [nations] if they oppose the people of God, are in God’s account, as dragons and serpents, and plagues of mankind; and the Lord will punish them in due time. They are too big for men to deal with, and call to an account; and therefore the great God will take the doing of it into His own hands.” Henry.—D. M.].
22. Isaiah 27:2-5. “It seems to the world that God has no concern for His church and Christians, else, we imagine, they would be better off. But certain it is, that it is not the angels but God Himself that will be watcher over this vineyard, and will send it gracious rain.” Veit Dietrich. [“The church is a vineyard of red wine, yielding the best and choicest grapes, intimating the reformation of the church, that it now brings forth good fruit unto God, whereas before it brought forth fruit to itself, or brought forth wild grapes, Isaiah 5:4.” “God takes care (1) of the safety of this vineyard; I the Lord do keep it. He speaks this, as glorying in it, that He is, and has undertaken to be, the keeper of Israel; those that bring forth fruit to God are, and shall be always, under His protection. (2) God takes care of the fruitfulness of this vineyard: I will water it every moment; and yet it shall not be over watered. We need the constant and continual waterings of the divine grace; for if that be at any time withdrawn, we wither and come to nothing.” Henry. D. M.].
23. Isaiah 27:4. “Est aurea promissio, qua praecedentem confirmat. Indignatio non est mihi, fury is not in me. Quomodo enim is nobis irasci potest, qui pro nobis est mortuus? Quanquam igitur appareat, eum irasci, non tamen est verum, quod irascatur. Sic Paulo immittitur angelus Satanae, sed non est ira, nam ipse Christus dicit: sufficit tibi gratia mea.
Sic pater filium delinquentem castigat, sed non est ira, quanquam appareat ira esse. Custodia igitur vineae aliquando cogit Deum immittere speciem irae, ne pereat luxurie, sed non est ira. Est insignis textus, which we should inscribe on all tribulations: Non est indignatio mihi, non possum irasci. Quod autem videtur irasci est custodia vineae, ne pereas et fias securus. Luther. “In order to understand fully the doctrine of the wrath of God we must have a clear perception of the antithesis: the long-suffering of God, and the wrath of God, wrath and mercy.” Lange.24. Isaiah 27:7-9. “Christ judges His church, i.e., He punishes and afflicts it, but He does this in measure.
The sorrow and cross is meted out, and is not, as it appears to us, without measure and infinite. It is so measured that redemption must certainly follow. But why does God let His Christians so suffer? Why does He not lay the cross on the wicked? God answers this question and speaks: the sin of Jacob will thereby cease. That is: God restrains sin by the cross, and subdues the old Adam.” Veit Dietrich.25.
Isaiah 27:13. [“The application of this verse to a future restoration of the Jews can neither be established nor disproved. In itself considered, it appears to contain nothing which may not be naturally applied to events long past.” J. A. Alexander.—“This prediction was completely and entirely fulfilled by the return of the Jews to their own country under the decree of Cyrus.” Barnes.—D. M.].
AND 1. On Isaiah 24:4-6. Fast-day sermon. Warning against dechristianization of the life of the people. 1) Wherein such dechristianization consists: a, transgression of the commandments that are in force; b, alteration of the commandments which are essential articles of the everlasting covenant, as e.g. removing of all state institutions from the basis of religion. 2) Its consequences: a, Desecration of the land (subjectively, by the spread of a profane, godless sentiment; objectively, by the secularization of relations hitherto held sacred); b, the curse consumes the land, Isaiah 24:4.
2. On Isaiah 25:1-5. The Lord, the refuge of the needy. 1) He has the power to help. This we perceive a, from His nature (Lord, God, Wonderful); b, from His deeds (Isaiah 25:1 b, Isaiah 25:2). 2) He gives His strength even to the feeble, (Isaiah 25:4). 3) These are thereby victorious, (Isaiah 25:5).
3. On Isaiah 25:6-9. Easter Sermon, by T. Schaeffer (Manch. Gab. u. ein Geist III. p. 269):—“The glorious Easter-blessing of the Risen One: 1) Wherein it consists? 2) who receive it? 3) what are its effects? Christmas Sermon, by Romberg [ibid. 1869, p. 78): Our text represents to us Christmas joy under the image of a festive board. Let us consider, 1) the host; 2) the guests; 3) the gifts.”
4. On Isaiah 26:1-4. Concerning the church. 1) She is a strong city in which salvation is to be found. 2) The condition of having a portion in her is faith. 3) The blessing which she is instrumental in procuring is peace.
5. Isaiah 26:19-21. The comfort of the Christian for the present and future. 1) For the present the Christian is to betake himself to his quiet chamber, where he is alone with his Lord and by Him made cheerful and secure. 2) For the future he has the certain hope, a, that the Lord will judge the wicked, b, raise the believer to everlasting life.
6. Isaiah 27:2-9. How the Lord deals with His vineyard, the church. 1) Fury is not in Him towards it; 2) He protects and purifies it; 3) He gives it strength, peace and growth; 4) He chastens it in measure; 5) He makes the chastisement itself serve to purge it from sins.
THIRD OF ISRAEL TO ASSYRIA IN THE TIME OF KING
Isaiah 28-33As Isaiah 7-12, resting on the facts related Isaiah 7:1 sqq., contain the first great cycle of Isaiah’s prophecies, so Isaiah 28-33, which have for their basis the facts narrated in the historical appendix (36–37) contain the second great cycle. Chapters 7–12 depict the relation of Israel to Assyria in the time of Ahaz. Our chapters set forth this relation as it stood in the time of Hezekiah. As the sin of Ahaz consisted in his seeking protection against Aram-Ephraim not in the Lord, but in Assyria, so Hezekiah erred in seeking protection against Assyria, that had become a scourge through Ahab’s guilt, not in the Lord, but in Egypt. Hezekiah, the otherwise pious king, must have been weak enough to yield so far to the influence of those around him, as to sanction a policy which aimed at concluding a league with Egypt, as the infallible means of deliverance. Isaiah now in Isaiah 28-33 assails with all his might this Egyptian alliance, which the government of Hezekiah, knowing it to be contrary to the will of God, was seeking behind the back of the Prophet to bring about with all diplomatic skill, and at great sacrifices of money and property.
He follows it from its rise through all stages of its development. He leads us, chap. 28, to its source. The Prophet assigns as its source a swamp, if we may employ a figure; the swamp of low carnal passion for drink. From this swamp the policy had already issued which Ephraim was pursuing to its destruction. From this swamp too the disposition was produced which led Judah to contemn the admonitions of the Lord, and to place wicked confidence in its own carnal prudence (Isaiah 28:14 sq.). in chap. 29 the Prophet lets it be clearly perceived that the secret plotting behind his back did not remain concealed from him (Isaiah 29:15 sqq.). But it is not till chap. 30 that he plainly declares (Isaiah 28:2 sqq.) that those secret machinations were with a view to an alliance with Egypt.
But he certifies at once by a written declaration (Isaiah 28:8), that this Egyptian alliance will be of no benefit. The Lord only will deliver Israel. He will certainly do it. In chaps. 31 and 32, which belong together, the Lord proclaims the vanity of Egyptian succor. Assyria will not fall by the sword of a man (Isaiah 31:8), but the Lord will overturn it; and to this promise of the impending deliverance of Israel from Assyrian oppression the Prophet immediately attaches a glorious picture of the future, which, while it praises the truly noble disposition of those high in rank in the Messianic time, is very severe on the existing aristocracy, composed of the nobility and of public functionaries; and at the same time (as in chap. 3) addresses with an impressive warning the women who have great influence, and occupy high positions. Finally (33), the Prophet speaks directly to Assyria in order to announce its speedy and sudden destruction.
This last chapter contains matter which is for the most part of a joyful character for Israel. It has a dark side for the people of the Lord only so far as it sets forth that the predicted glorious deliverance will make a disagreeable impression on the sinners in Israel, who desire to know nothing of Jehovah. Although therefore chaps. 28–33 are arranged according to a certain plan, they do not, form one connected speech. There are rather five, speeches delivered at different times, each of which in itself forms a whole, while each presents a complete picture of what the Prophet beheld, embracing threatening and promise. We have hers to remark that the Prophet always draws the most remote Messianic future into the sphere of his vision, though he does so every time from a different point of view. The first speech must have been composed before the destruction of Samaria (722 B.C.), for it addresses Samaria as yet standing.
Nay, more, as Samaria is seen flourishing in all her pride, and her inhabitants indulge their evil passions without fear or restraint, the speech must have been written before the commencement of the three years’ siege of Samaria by the Assyrians, say in the year 725, and therefore in the commencement of the reign of Hezekiah. Chap. 29 belongs to a later time. In Isaiah 28:1 the Prophet declares that the city of Jerusalem should be shut in. He can only mean that isolation of the city in regard to which Sennacherib states in his inscriptions (comp. Schrader, pp. 176 and 187), that he had enclosed Hezekiah “as a bird in a cage.” This event, according to the usual chronology, happened in the year 714, while according to the Assyrian monuments (comp. Schrader, Cuneiform Inscriptions, p. 299, and our Introduction to chaps, 36–39), it took place in the year 700.
As this difference, as we will attempt to show in the introduction to chaps, 36–39, was occasioned by a misunderstanding of later writers, there being originally no disagreement between the biblical and Assyrian chronology, but both originally agreeing in referring the expedition of Sennacherib against Phenicia, Egypt and Judah to the 28th year of Hezekiah, i. e., the year 700 B.C., the speech contained in chapter 29 would consequently have been delivered about the year 702. We have an aid to fixing the date in the words Isaiah 28:1 : “Add year to year, let the festivals complete their round.” According to our exposition the Prophet intimates by these words that after the expiration of the current year another year should complete its revolution, and then the hour of decision should arrive. That at this time the Egyptian alliance had been already, as is hinted in Isaiah 28:15, arranged to a considerable extent in secret consultations, is extremely probable. And when we find, Isaiah 30:2 sqq., the Jewish Ambassadors already on the way to Egypt, and hear, Isaiah 31:1 sqq., the futility of Egyptian help again emphatically asserted, and then read Isaiah 32:10 that, after an indefinite number of days above a year had expired, Jerusalem should be cut off from its fields and vineyards by the enemy, we may draw from all this the conclusion, that chaps, 30–32 were produced not long after chap. 29. But when we read, Isaiah 33:7 sqq., that the ambassadors of peace sent by Hezekiah return in sorrow, because the Assyrian king in addition to the great ransom (2 Kings 18:14 sqq.) demands the surrender of the city itself; when that passage describes the occupation of the surrounding country by the enemy, in consequence of which Judah (Isaiah 33:23) is compared with a ship whose ropes no longer keep the mast firm, when at last the Lord, Isaiah 33:10, exclaims “Now will I rise; now will I be exalted; now will I lift up myself,” we shall not err in assuming that this prophecy belongs to the time immediately after the return of those ambassadors of peace, and was therefore uttered shortly before the summons given to Hezekiah by Rabshakeh. Each of the five speeches of our prophetic cycle begins with δει.
From the absence of δεֹ ?ι at the beginning of chap. 32, as well as from the tenor of this chapter, we see that it forms with chap. 31 one whole. δει is found once, Isaiah 29:15, even in the middle of the discourse.
That Isaiah is the writer of these speeches is almost universally admitted. The doubts which were raised by Eichhorn in regard to separate parts, were seen by Gesenius to be unfounded (Comment. I. 2, p. 826); and Ewald’s conjecture as to the composition of chap. 33 by a disciple of Isaiah, has been sufficiently refuted by Knobel.We have not in the section before us one organic discourse, but five speeches, which from the initial word common to all of them we shall designate as first woe, second woe, etc.____________________
I.—THE FIRST WOEChap. 281. SWAMP EPHRAIM, SWAMP JUDAH, AND WHAT ARISES OUT OF THE SWAMPS
Isaiah 28:1-131 Woe to the crown of pride, to the drunkards of Ephraim,
Whose glorious beauty is a fading flower,
Which are on the head of the fat valleys
Of them that are overcome with wine.
2 Behold, the Lord hath a mighty and strong one;
Which, as a tempest of hail,
And a destroying storm,
As a flood of mighty waters overflowing,
Shall cast down to the earth with the hand.
3 The crown of pride, the drunkards of Ephraim,
Shall be trodden under feet.
4 And the glorious beauty which is on the head of the fat valley,
Shall be a fading flower,
And as the hasty fruit before the summer;
Which, when he that looketh upon it seeth,
While it is yet in his hand he eateth it up.
5 In that day shall the Lord of hosts be for a crown of glory,
And for a diadem of beauty, unto the residue of his people,
6 And for a spirit of judgment to him that sitteth in judgment,
And for strength to them that turn the battle to the gate.
7 But they also have erred through wine,
And through strong drink are out of the way;
The priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink;
They are swallowed up of wine,
They are out of the way through strong drink;
They err in vision, they stumble in judgment.
8 For all tables are full of vomit and filthiness,
So that there is no place clean.9 Whom shall he teach knowledge?
And whom shall he make to understand doctrine?
Them that are weaned from the milk,
And drawn from the breasts.
10 For precept must be. upon precept, precept upon precept;
Line upon line, line upon line;
Here a little, and there a little:
11 For with stammering lips and another tongue,
Will he speak to this people.
12 To whom he said,
This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest;
And this is the refreshing;
Yet they would not hear.
13 But the word of the Lord was unto them
Precept upon precept, precept upon precept;
Line upon line, line upon line;
Here a little, and there a little;
That they might go, and fall backward,
And be broken, and snared, and taken.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_28:1.φִ ?ιυπֹ ?αֵ ?μ as subst. cum adj. would be here abnormal, inasmuch as nothing can come between the nomen rectum and regens. The normal construction would be φִ ?ιυφαιϊλּ ?ΰψϊεδַ ?πֹּ ?αֵ ?μ. But we know from Isaiah 1:30 and Isaiah 34:4, that Isaiah uses the participle of πָ ?αֵ ?μ substantively in the signification of that which is withered, falling off. We have then to regard πֹ ?αֵ ?μ here not as an adjective qualifying φιυ, but as a substantive coordinate with the other members in the series of genitives. Comp. on φִ ?ιφַ ?ϊπαֵ ?μ Isaiah 28:4. The absolute state ωׁ ?ξπιν need cause no surprise.
The word does not stand in the genitival relation to what follows. But two genitives are dependent on ψΰωׁ, namely,βιΰωξπιν and δμεξιιιο. [We prefer to say with Delitzsch that ωְׁ ?ξָ ?πִ ?ιν, although standing connected with what follows, has the absolute form, the logical relation carrying it over the syntax. Comp. Isaiah 32:13; 1 Chronicles 9:13.—D. M.].
Isaiah 28:3. The verb ϊψξρπδ in the plural has no expressed subject. This is not necessary. For in the Hebrew language an ideal subject can be readily understood. The proud crown is Samaria. But this one great crown includes many smaller ones.
The plural can be referred to this ideal multitude (comp. Naegelsbach’s Gr., S. 61, 1). [It appears to me simpler to say with the Jewish grammarians that the word crown is to be taken here as a collective noun.—D. M.]. In Isaiah 28:4 φִ ?ιφַ ?ϊ looks as a hint for the right understanding of πֹ ?λֵ ?μ. We have already remarked on Isaiah 28:1 that πֹ ?λֵ ?μis to be taken as a substantive. If this could be seen from the mere grammatical construction, and from the parallel places, Isaiah 1:30; Isaiah 34:4, it is obvious from the word φιφϊ.
For we clearly perceive from this nominal form which occurs only here, and which is certainly intentionally chosen, that πֹ ?λֵ ?μ is to be regarded as a substantive, and as a coordinate member of the series of genitives.
Isaiah 28:7. λּ ?εχ, Kal, only here. Besides only Hiphil Isaiah 58:10. λּ ?μιμιδ (accus. loci) only here. Comp. Isaiah 16:3; Job 31:28.
Isaiah 28:9. On the preposition between the governing and the governed noun, see Naegelsbach’s Gr., § 63, 4 c.Isaiah 28:12. ΰָ ?αεּ ?ΰ for ΰָ ?λεּ comp. Olshausen’s Gr., §226, b, p. 449 sq.
AND 1 Samaria is still standing in proud pomp, but sunk in the vice of drunkenness. Therefore the Prophet proclaims a woe upon it (Isaiah 28:1), and announces that a mighty foe as a tempest will cast it to the ground (Isaiah 28:2), and tread the proud crown under foot (Isaiah 28:3). Then shall this glorious but already decaying flower quickly disappear, as an early fig which a man no sooner sees than he eats it (ver, 4). Not till then is the moment come when the Lord Himself will be to the remnant of His people for an adorning crown, and for a guiding spirit in judgment, and for strength in war (Isaiah 28:5-6). with Jerusalem it stands no better than with Samaria, There, too, the vice of drunkenness prevails fearfully, Even priests and prophets are under its sway. Even in the sacred moments of prophetic vision [?] and of judging, its effects are visible on them; the holy places are polluted by their vomiting (Isaiah 28:7-8). And, moreover, they mock the servant of Jehovah who warns them: Whom does he think that he has before him?
Are they mere children ? (Isaiah 28:9). We hear from him continually trifling moral preaching, broken into little bits, which are scoffingly imitated by short, oft-repeated words, which resemble stammering sounds (Isaiah 28:10). For this they will have to hear the stammering sounds of a foreign nation of barbarous speech (Isaiah 28:11). Because they would not hear the word of Jehovah which offered rest and comfort to the weary (Isaiah 28:12), the will of God will be made known to them in words, which in sound resemble their scornful words, but in import are short, sharp words of command. That will of God has this significance, that they will be ensnared in inextricable ruin.
2 Woe——eateth it up.Isaiah 28:1-4. It is no honor for Jerusalem, when it is said to her that she walks in the footsteps of Samaria. Jerusalem should be ashamed of this likeness, and seek to remove it. This is, doubtless, the reason why the Prophet first directs his look to Samaria in order to describe the there prevailing vice of literal (and in connection therewith of spiritual) drunkenness, and to threaten it with punishment from God. Thence his look passes over to Jerusalem. Micah had before Isaiah done just the same.
In chap.Isaiah 1:6 sq. Micah first of all threatens Samaria with judgment, although “Judah and Jerusalem were the proper objects of his mission” (comp. Caspari,Micah the Morasthite, p. 105). Isaiah himself had once already (Isaiah 8:6 sqq.) announced that the storm of judgment would first come upon Ephraim, and thence spread into the territory of Judah. This way of the judgments of God is not determined simply by the geographic situation. There is also a deeper reason when Jerusalem goes in the ways of Samaria.
On δει comp. on Isaiah 1:4. ςθψϊ besides only Isaiah 62:3. On βΰεϊ comp. on Isaiah 26:10. φִ ?ιυ stands in conjunction with παμ besides only Isaiah 40:7-8. On φαιϊλּ ?ΰψϊε comp. on Isaiah 4:2; Isaiah 13:19. This proud crown of Ephraim, this flower of his glorious ornament which lay upon the head of the valley of fatnesses (comp. Isaiah 5:1; Isaiah 25:6) i. e., on a beautiful hill commanding a fertile valley, is Samaria (1 Kings 16:24; Amos 4:1; Amos 6:1). ηֲ ?μεּ ?ξֵ ?ιιַ ?ιִ ?ο (Comp. Isaiah 16:8) are vino obtusi, percussi.
Compare Qui se percussit flore Liberi, Plant. Cas. 3, 5, 16; multo percussus tempora Baccho, Tib. 1, 2, 3; mero saucius Mart, 3, 6, 8; οἰνοπλήξ, οἰνόπληκτος, etc. Two images are here blended: namely, that Samaria is the crown of the hill, and the crown or garland on the head of the Ephraimites. The accumulation of predicates shows off the vain-glorious pride of the Ephraimites; and at the same time it is intimated by φιυπλμ and ςμψΰωημεξιιιε that this garland, this crown will not endure long. For garland is withered, and the crown totters upon the head of the drunkards. For the avenger of this drunken pride is already prepared.
The Lord has him at hand (Isaiah 2:12), He is the Assyrian. He will overturn to the ground (Amos 5:7) Ephraim’s glory with his hand (αιγ stands over against the following λψβμιν), as a storm of hail (Isaiah 25:4; Isaiah 30:30), as a shower of destruction (ωׂ ?ςψ and χθα only here in Isaiah), as the rushing of mighty waterfloods (λַּ ?αִּ ?ιψ only Job 8:2; Job 15:10; Job 31:25; Job 34:17; Job 34:24; Job 36:5 bis and Isaiah 10:13; Isaiah 16:14; Isaiah 17:12, and in this place; ωׁ ?θσ, Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:17-18; Isaiah 8:7 sq., 10, 22; Isaiah 30:28; Isaiah 43:2; Isaiah 66:12). The meaning is that Ephraim, when standing, shall be dashed to the ground with the hand; when lying, shall be trodden with the feet. Isaiah 28:4. The flower of the fading one is like the expression δַ ?χָּ ?θָ ?ολְּ ?μֵ ?ι, Isaiah 22:24. This flower will be destroyed as quietly as an early fig, which is no sooner seen than it is eaten off-hand by him who discovers it.
Such a dainty morsel (comp. Isaiah 9:10) is not laid by, as the other fruits which ripen at the usual time, which are afterwards eaten at table out of the dish or off the plate. This is the meaning of αςεγδ. The intentionally lengthened sentence ιψΰδδψΰδΰεϊδ paints how the inquiring look passes slowly and gradually over the tree. The Prophet predicts not a hasty capture of the city (Samaria, as is known, did not fall till after a siege of three years, 2 Kings 17:5; Schrader,The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O.T., p. 157 sqq.), but a change of affairs in general, which should take place in a surprisingly brief time, considering the proud security that then prevailed. If our prophecy was delivered in one of the first years of Hezekiah, it was fulfilled in such a manner that four or five years later a kingdom of Israel was no longer in existence.
Of this no one could have had a presentiment when the Prophet uttered these words.
3 In that day——to the gate.Isaiah 28:5-6. It is self-evident that αιενδεΰ is again to be taken as a prophetic date, which is not to be judged according to the ordinary human measure. It simply intimates that when Ephraim has lost the deceptive earthly crown, Jehovah will take the place of it. Judgment must make it possible for the Lord to assume the place at the head of His people which belongs to Him. This has virtually and in principle taken place, as soon as judgment has done its work. But when and how this coronation will be outwardly exhibited, is known to God only.
But although it should not happen till after thousands of years, still the word of the Lord is true, and faith may console itself with it in patience. ωׁ ?ΰψςξε is to be referred neither to the Israelites left in the land after the carrying away of the ten tribes, nor to the tribes of the kingdom of Judah, but to the total remnant primarily of Israel, of which those carried captive, yea, all who are still of the seed of Israel, form a part. For the Prophet here speaks first of all of Ephraim. This brief word of promise, Isaiah 28:5-6, makes, moreover, the impression as if the Prophet would herewith let Israel have his definite and complete portion of threatening and promise. For in what follows he refers to Judah only. But it is obvious, that Ephraim is included in the promises which are given to the remnant of all Israel (comp. on Isaiah 4:2 sqq.; Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 7:3; Isaiah 10:20 sqq.). The expression ςθψϊφαι is found only here.
We frequently meet with ςθψϊδλּ ?ΰψϊ (Proverbs 4:9; Proverbs 16:31; Isaiah 62:3; Jeremiah 13:18; Ezekiel 16:12; Ezekiel 23:42). But Isaiah has here preferred for the sake of the assonance to join ϊλּ ?ΰψδ with the term φλּ ?ιψδ (from φλּ ?ψin orbem ivit, orbiculus, hoop, diadem, besides only Ezekiel 7:7; Ezekiel 7:10). But Jehovah will be not only the source of the highest honor for His people, but also the source of the wisdom and strength so much wanted in the present time. Jehovah Himself, who is one with His Spirit, will fill the judges as a spirit of judgment. (Comp. Isaiah 4:4; comp. Isaiah 11:1; Isaiah 11:1 Kings12:22). ιωαςμδξωׁ ?λּ ?θ can mean to sit over a forensic cause as over the object submitted to the judge, and we may compare such places as 1 Samuel 25:13ιָ ?ωְֽׁ ?αεּ ςַ ?μΞδַ ?λֵּ ?μִ ?ιν or ςμ stands in a modified signification equivalent to ΰֶ ?μ (μְ), and such places as 1 Samuel 20:24εַ ?ψֵּ ?ωֶׁ ?αςַ ?μΞδַ ?μֶּ ?ηֶ ?ν and Psalms 29:10ιּ ?Χμַ ?ξַּ ?αּ ?εּ ?μιָ ?ωַׁ ?α may be compared. μְ is wanting before ξωׁ ?ιαι.
The μְ which stands in the corresponding μιεωׁ ?α is to be regarded as carrying its force over to this clause. (Comp. Isaiah 30:1; Isaiah 48:17; Isaiah 61:7). To turn back the war towards the gate is to be understood of the repulse of the enemy either to the gate through which he entered, or back even to the enemy’s own gate. (2 Samuel 11:23; 2 Kings 18:8; 1Ma 5:22)
4. But they also have erred——no place clean.Isaiah 28:7-8. The Prophet now turns from Samaria to Jerusalem. With ΰֵ ?μֶּ ?η he points to his own countrymen in particular. They, too, are seized by a spirit of giddiness which arises from the fearfully prevailing vice of literal drunkenness. The Prophet ingeniously depicts the extent and intensity of this vice, through the accumulation of words related in form: Shagu—ta-u,—shagu—ta-u, shagu—paku.
We hear and see as it were the reeling and staggering of the drunken company, ωָׁ ?βָ ?δ to reel, is used only here by Isaiah, ϊςδ of a drunken person, also Isaiah 19:14 comp. Isaiah 21:4. How fearfully the vice of drunkenness had spread is seen from the fact that even priests and Prophets were addicted to it, and that not only in their private life; but they even performed their official functions in a state of intoxication. This is strictly forbidden in the law. Leviticus 10:8-9 (comp. Ezekiel 44:21).
The expression παμςεξοΞδιιο occurs only here. It does not mean that they in consequence of drinking wine have been swallowed up one of another, ξִ ?ο does not here mark what is mediately or remotely causal; but it denotes the immediate cause. The wine itself has swallowed up those who greedily swallowed it (comp. Isaiah 28:4). Not only has the carouser the fit of intoxication, but the fit of intoxication has him. ψֹ ?ΰֶ ?ς stands only here for ψֳ ?ΰִ ?ι (Genesis 16:13; 1 Samuel 16:12 et saepe) as ηֹ ?ζֶ ?δ Isaiah 28:15 for ηָ ?ζεּ ?ϊ. Even in such moments when they should be under the influence of the Spirit of God alone, they are by a blasphemous perversion under the influence of the spirit of alcohol.
Not less wicked is it when judges, who should speak judgment in the name and Spirit of God (Exodus 18:15 sq.; Deuteronomy 1:17; Deuteronomy 19:17; 2 Chronicles 19:6), appear governed by that infernal spirit while performing this sacred function. That pronouncing judgment in the highest instance pertained to a priestly tribunal, may be seen from Deuteronomy 17:8 sqq. Comp. Isaiah 19:17; Herzog,R.-Encycl V. p. 58. The wickedness, therefore, of these priestly judges appears so much the greater. For they sit in a commission that has not trifling matters, but the most difficult and important causes to decide.
Every one may convince himself that the Prophet has not said too much of the drunkenness of those people, who will take the trouble to visit the places where they sit. He will find there palpable traces of it; all tables full of filthy vomit (χִ ?ιΰ19:14 vomit, φֹ ?ΰָ ?δ from ιָ ?φָ ?ΰexcrementa, sordes, dirt, Isaiah 4:4; Isaiah 36:12), and consequently, no place to sit on, or to lay anything (αμι especially frequent in Job 8:11; Job 24:10; Job 31:39; Job 33:9 et saepe; in Isaiah 5:13-14; Isaiah 14:6; Isaiah 32:10; ξχιν comp. Isaiah 5:8).
5. Whom shall He teach——there a little.Isaiah 28:9-10. In these words the Prophet lets his drunken adversaries themselves come on the scene. He makes them utter scoffing words, that he may give the same back to them in another sense as a threatening of punishment. They are themselves Prophets and Priests, and therefore full grown men, educated men, and not children. They, therefore, ask indignantly: Does he—namely the Prophet of Jehovah—not know whom he has before him?
To whom does he think that he has to impart right knowledge? (γςδ11:9). To whom has he to give understanding by his preaching? (ωׁ ?ξεςδ Isaiah 28:19 and besides only Isaiah 53:1, in the signification “preaching, announcement” = the Greek ἀκοήRomans 10:16-17; in another signification Isaiah 37:7). Is it to little children who have just been weaned from the milk (Isaiah 11:8), removed from the breasts (ςַ ?ϊִּ ?ιχ in this sense only here in Isaiah)? And now the Prophet exhibits them as ridiculing the tenor of his preaching in monosyllabic words, which by their sound and repetition are designed to produce merriment, while he at the same time turns his opponents into ridicule, as these monosyllabic words admirably represent the stammering of a person intoxicated. φַ ?ε from φִ ?εּ ?δָ is praeceptum (besides here only Hosea 5:11); χַ ?ε (comp. Isaiah 28:17; Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 18:7; Isaiah 34:11; Isaiah 34:17; Isaiah 44:13) is cord, measuring cord, direction, rule. They reproach the Prophet with bringing forward a mass of little sentences, precepts, rules in wearisome repetition, and without a right plan and order, here a little, there a little (ζְ ?ςֻ ?ιψ besides Job 36:2, comp. ξִ ?ζְ ?ςָ ?ψ10:25; Isaiah 16:14; Isaiah 24:6; Isaiah 29:17).
The contemptuous designation σπερμολόγος which the Athenian Philosophers gave the Apostle Paul, has been fitly compared (Acts 17:18).
6. For with stammering——and taken.
Isaiah 28:11-13. The Prophet replies to this mocking speech, and concedes that it is to a certain extent accurate and just. For these scoffing words will indeed be spoken. But not as those drunkards think. For (λִּ ?ι Isaiah 28:11) the Lord will speak them to them by a foreign and hostile people, whose utterances will be to them as stammering and strange jargon. μָ ?ςֵ ?βbalbutiens, balbus, barbarus is found besides only Psalms 35:16. In Isaiah 33:19 Isaiah uses in the same sense, and likewise of the Assyrian language the participle Niphal πִ ?μְ ?ςָ ?β.
It is easy to conceive that the Assyrian language, as being much less cultivated than their own, and having only the three fundamental vowels a, i, u, made upon the Israelites the impression of being as the lisping of children. What a Nemesis! Because this people to whom the Lord spake words of comfort in its own mother tongue would not hear them, it must hear from the enemy’s mouth harsh sounds, which fall on the ear like the scoffing words uttered against the Prophet, but have a quite different meaning; for they are words of command intending the destruction of the vanquished and captured people. The words ζΰϊδξπεηδ are taken from Micah 2:10. Micah there reproaches the false Prophets with withholding from the people the genuine word of God, which is affectionate and kind, and with instigating the people with lies to forsake that wherein it would truly find rest. [This is hardly the sense of the passage referred to in Micah.—D. M.].
In opposition to this Isaiah characterizes the genuine preaching of Jehovah by the words ζΰϊδξπεηδ. For justly in reference to that of which the false Prophets say μֹ ?ΰΞζֹ ?ΰϊδַ ?ξְּ ?πεּ ?ηָ ?δ, the real Prophet must say ζֹ ?ΰϊδַ ?ξְ ?πεּ ?ηָ ?δ. This true “rest of the people of God,” says Isaiah, Jehovah has not merely shown from afar. He has also commanded to put the weary souls longing for salvation in possession of it, (ηָ ?πִ ?ιηַ to procure rest for one, Isaiah 14:3), and has offered the place of rest, i. e., the real means of grace and salvation. ξπεηδ means elsewhere, place of rest; but here I take it in the sense of rest (comp. Isaiah 66:1) in opposition to ξψβςδ the place of rest (ἅπ. λεγ. Comp.
Jeremiah 6:16). Isaiah, in thus referring to a word of his colleague Micah, which he confirms and applies, reaches him here again the fraternal hand. The words appear too general for us to find any political allusions in them. When in Isaiah 28:13 the scornful words of the Prophet’s adversaries are employed as a weapon turned against themselves, it seems to me that what makes it possible to put them in the enemies’ mouth lies not merely in the effect upon the ear, in the resemblance to stammering sounds, but in the actual meaning also. As we found in χַ ?εΞχַ ?ε, Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 18:7 the meaning of a short, sharp order, this meaning seems still more to lie in the present place. The Israelites will hear nothing but such short, monosyllabic words.
But they will be words full of meaning, whose effect will be seen in what we read at the close of Isa 28:13. For to fall backward and be broken and snared and taken captive will be the doom of the presumptuous people. Isaiah 28:13 b, from εְ ?λָ ? ?ֽ ?ωְׁ ?μεּ, is an almost literal reproduction of Isa 8:15.
Footnotes:of the drunkards of Ephraim.valley.Heb. broken.of the drunkards of Ephraim.Heb with feet.early fig.Heb. Swalloweth.Heb. the hearing.followed by note of interrogation.followed by note of interrogation.Or, hath been.Heb. stammerings of lips.Or, he hath spoken.shall come.
2. THE FALSE AND THE TRUE REFUGE
Isaiah 28:14-2214 “Wherefore hear the word of the Lord, ye scornful men,
That rule this people which is in Jerusalem:
15 Because ye have said,
We have made a covenant with death,
And with hell are we at agreement;
When the overflowing scourge shall pass through,
It shall not come unto us:
For we have made lies our refuge,
And under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
16 Therefore thus saith the Lord God,Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone,
A tried stone, a precious corner stone,
A sure foundation:
He that believeth shall not make haste.
17 Judgment also will I lay to the line,
And righteousness to the plummet:
And the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies,
And the waters shall overflow the hiding-place.
18 And your covenant with death shall be disannulled,
And your agreement with hell shall not stand;
When the overflowing scourge shall pass through,
Then ye shall be trodden down by it.
19 From the time that it goeth forth it shall take you:
For morning by morning shall it pass over,
By day and by night;
And it shall be a vexation only to understand the report.
20 For the bed is shorter than that a man can stretch himself on it;
And the covering narrower than that he can wrap himself in it.21 For the Lord shall rise up as in mount Perazim,
He shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon,
That he may do his work, his strange work;
And bring to pass his act, his strange act.
22 Now therefore be ye not mockers,
Lest your bands be made strong;
For I have heard from the Lord God of hosts a consumption,
Even determined upon the whole earth.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_28:15. ωׁ ?εθωׁ ?εθσ. So we are to read with the K’ri, 1, because the Kethibh ωַׁ ?ιִ ?θ has in Isaiah 33:21 the signification “oar,” which is not suitable here; 2, on account of the assonance with ωׁ ?εֹ ?θֵ ?σ, which would otherwise be lost; 3, because in Isaiah 28:18 b there is a blending of two figures for the sake of the alliteration. For ωׁ ?εֹ ?θ is a scourge (Isaiah 10:26), and ωׁ ?θσ is to overflow, inundate (comp. on Isaiah 28:2). A scourge when swung makes a flowing motion; but it does not inundate, overflow. Only the divine judgments do this, and these for another reason can be called the scourge of God. The K’ri ιςαψ, which is both supported and discountenanced by Isaiah 28:18, is anyhow unnecessary, for the perfect can be taken as a futurum exactum (comp. Isaiah 4:4; Isaiah 6:11).
Isaiah 28:16. The Dagesh forte in ξεּ ?ρָּ ?γ is manifestly intended to distinguish the word as a participle from the substantive ξεּ ?ρָ ?γ.
Isaiah 28:20. Hithp. δωׂ ?ϊψς se extendere, porrigere, only here, Kal. ωׂ ?ψς only Leviticus 21:18; Leviticus 22:23.
Isaiah 28:21. On the absence of the preposition of place before δַ ?ψ and ςֵ ?ξֶ ?χ, comp. Isaiah 1:25; Isaiah 5:18; Isaiah 5:29; Isaiah 10:14; Gesenius Gr., § 118, 3, note.
AND 1. Those scoffers, who are here described as the rulers of the people in Jerusalem, had naturally a foundation on which they rested, in opposition to the foundation of the Prophet which they derided. Their foundation was falsehood and deceit, by the aid of which they hoped that they would have nothing to fear from death and Hades. (Isaiah 28:14-15). Against this foundation the Lord now says to them: I have laid in Zion my strong corner—and foundation—stone: only he who holds fast to it will not yield (Isaiah 28:16) And on this foundation-stone the building shall be erected by means of judgment and righteousness; but the flood of waters will sweep away that refuge of lies (Isaiah 28:17). And that covenant with death and Sheol will not stand. They who made it, shall be trodden down by those who Shall come upon them as the scourge of God (Isaiah 28:18).
That scourge, moreover, shall come not only once, but repeatedly by day and night. Then shall they hear no more a preaching by word, but! a preaching by deed; and it will be nothing but terror (19). For Israel’s might will then prove too weak (Isaiah 28:20). But the Lord will rise in might as formerly on Mount Perazim, and in the valley of Gibeon, in order to execute His very strange work of destruction, which appears to the secure Jews impossible (Isaiah 28:21). Therefore the scoffers should be quiet, that they may not remain forever in the snares mentioned Isaiah 28:13; for that they should not escape from them is announced by the Prophet as the decree of Jehovah, which cannot be averted (Isaiah 28:22). We perceive, therefore, that the section Isaiah 28:14-22 corresponds exactly to the preceding one Isaiah 28:1-13, and especially to the Isaiah 28:9-13.
For here the right foundation is set in opposition to that false one, resting on which those scoffers think that they may deride the Prophet (Isaiah 28:14-17); then the vanity, yea destructiveness of that false foundation is shown (Isaiah 28:18-21), and the scoffers are accordingly exhorted to give up their mocking (Isaiah 28:22).
2. Therefore hear—hid ourselves.Isaiah 28:14-15. With μָ ?λֵ ?ο, Isaiah 28:14, the Prophet introduces the judgment of the Lord, which he has to publish on the ground of the accusation preferred Isaiah 28:9-13. This judgment is addressed to the scoffers (Proverbs 29:8), whose derisive speeches (Isaiah 28:10) are quoted, and who, after the judgment has been pronounced, are exhorted to mock no more (Isaiah 28:22). These scoffers are not insignificant men. They are the leaders of the people (Isaiah 14:1; Isaiah 52:5), its Priests and Prophets (Isaiah 28:7). λִּ ?ι in the beginning of Isa 28:15 is “because;” the illative particle μָ ?λֵ ?ε in Isaiah 28:16 corresponding to it.
The utterance is put in the mouths of these people, which if not actually spoken by them, yet certainly corresponds to their actual conduct: we have made a covenant with death,etc. This explains why these people scoffed at the Prophet. They stand with their whole manner of thinking and feeling upon another foundation than his. Isaiah has the Lord Himself for his foundation. But they deride this very foundation. They have another and better, as they imagine.
This is the art of falsehood, of cunning policy, of fine diplomacy. By its help they hope to be safe from death and Hades. The Prophet admonishes them to obey the Lord, and to trust in Him in order to find protection against Assyria. But in their opinion these are fanatical means of defence, which good policy could not employ. An alliance with Egypt, artfully planned, carried out with all diplomatic skill, appeared to those politicians to be a much more reliable, yea an infallible remedy against the threatening evils. For they hope through that alliance to be proof against death and Hades.
They imagine that they have thereby as it were concluded a friendly alliance with death and Hades (λψϊαψιϊ as Isaiah 55:3; Isaiah 61:8). ηֹ ?εֶ ?δ (comp. ψֹ ?ΰֶ ?δ Isaiah 28:7), for which below in Isaiah 28:18ηָ ?ζεּ ?ϊ stands, has only here the signification “treaty, agreement.” The lie of which they speak, may well refer to the relation of dependence on Assyria into which Ahaz, the predecessor of Hezekiah, had brought Judah (2 Kings 16:7 sqq.). For they may even then have considered the right policy to consist in a secret league with Egypt, while appearing to stand by the obligations entered into towards Assyria. A like course was subsequently pursued (2 Kings 17:4; Ezekiel 17:15, sqq.). The conjunction of ηρδ and ρϊψ is characteristic of Isaiah, comp. Isaiah 28:17; Isaiah 4:6.
3. Therefore thus saith—the whole earth.Isaiah 28:16-22. The scoffers had declared that they had made falsehood their refuge, and that they hope relying on this refuge, to get the better of death and Hades. The Prophet wishes to expose the vanity of this hope. There is only one refuge that guarantees safety. This is the foundation, and corner-stone laid by the Lord Himself in Zion.
The water sweeps away the other false foundation, and they who rest upon it go to ruin. Our passage contains, therefore, primarily not a promise, but a threatening. For first of all, the confidence expressed in Isaiah 28:15 is to be shown to be unfounded. But naturally the (unreal, resting only on appearance) negation of the truth can be overcome only by the positive setting forth of the truth. And where this real positive foundation of truth is exhibited, it involves always eo ipso a promise. μָ ?λֵ ?ζ, as has been shown, corresponds to the λִּ ?ι in Isaiah 28:15. The false affirmation necessitates a protest in which the truth is testified. δππιιρψ=ηπְ ?πִ ?ιδεּ ?ΰΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψιִּ ?ρַּ ?γ comp.
Isaiah 29:14; Isaiah 38:5. But what sort of a stone is that which the Lord has laid in Zion? It must be a stone which really guarantees truth and right. Consequently it cannot be Zion itself (Hitzig, Knobel), nor the royal house of David (Reinke), nor Hezekiah (Rabbis, Gesenius, Maurer and others; which explanation Theodoret characterizes as ἄνοιαἐσχάτη), nor the temple (Ewald). As Isaiah does not say that they had made Egypt their refuge, but that they had made falsehood their refuge, the antithesis to this refuge of lies can only be a refuge of truth. As such we might, with Umbreit, regard the law, or, with Schegg, the word of God in general.
But the law and the word of God, so far as they are laid in Zion as objective means of Salvation, suppose a still deeper, a personal foundation: the law supposes Him through whom the revelation of the law took place; the spoken and written word supposes the living, personal word of God Himself, the Logos (So the Catholic expositors Loch and Reischl, comp. Reinke,the Messianic Prophecies I. p. 404). The Logos, the only mediator between God and men, the Messiah promised in the Old Covenant, who has appeared in the New, this is the personal and living foundation-stone laid in Zion, on whom the whole building fitly framed together grows unto a holy (erected therefore according to the line of right and justice) building (Ephesians 3:20 sqq.). That the personal Word of the Lord can be called a stone, is apparent from Isaiah 8:14, where Jehovah Himself is called ΰֶ ?αֶ ?ε and φεּ ?ψ. It is not impossible that Isaiah had this last passage in view, and perhaps the composer of the 118th Psalm had in Isaiah 28:22 regard to both these passages of Isaiah. Anyhow Peter (1 Peter 2:6-8) combines these three places.
The Lord Himself (Matthew 21:42-44) had in view the place in the Psalms and Isaiah 8:14 sq.; and Paul, Romans 9:33, refers to both places of Isaiah; while in Acts 4:11 reference is made to the 118th Psalm only; and in Romans 10:11, solely to the place before us. The stone laid in Zion is further called an ΰαεαηε, i. e., lapis probationis. The term αηε can be taken in an active or passive sense: a tried and a trying stone. The former would mark its tested firmness, the latter would express the idea, that the thoughts of the hearts must be made manifest by it. For no one can escape it, but all must be tried on it, and it must have some effect on all, and be either for their fall or rising. The passages Matthew 21:44; Luke 2:34 speak strongly for the latter view.
I do not dispute it, but I believe that the Prophet designedly chose an ambiguous expression. For the former interpretation is likewise recommended, being naturally suggested by the expression employed, and by the context. We expect to hear the nature of the stone extolled, and not merely to be told what service it can render. That the praise should be expressed in this particular form is in accordance with the usus loquendiobservable in this chapter, in which so many designations of a property are denoted by a substantive in the genitive (Isaiah 28:1-5; Isaiah 28:8). τִ ?πָּ ?δ is corner.—And a stone which forms the corner is naturally a corner-stone. (Comp. Isaiah 19:13; Job 38:6; Jeremiah 51:26; Psalms 118:22). ιְ ?χָ ?ψָ ?δ is here, as perhaps also Psalms 37:20; Proverbs 17:27, a substantive, preciousness, so that we must translate; a corner-stone of preciousness of a founded foundation (ξεּ ?ρָ ?γ after the form ξεּ ?ρָ ?ψ, comp. 2 Chronicles 8:16; ξεּ ?ρָ ?γָ ?δIsaiah 30:32; Ezekiel 41:8; ξεּ ?ρָּ ?γ Part Hoph.), i. e., a corner-stone well suited (1 Kings 5:31; 7:9–11) for a firm foundation. The emphatic expression ξεּ ?ρָ ?γξεּ ?ρָּ ?γ is like ηֲ ?λָ ?ξִ ?ιν, Proverbs 30:24.
We have already observed that the Prophet shows here a predilection for the accumulation of substantives in the genitive. The firm foundation-stone manifests its saving efficacy, not in a magical way; but this efficacy is conditioned by the inward susceptibility, or faith. The firm foundation itself requires a keeping fast to it. Therefore the Prophet adds: He who believes flees not.—This apothegmatic addition reminds us, both by its form and tenor, of chapter Isaiah 7:9δΰξιε ּ ?ϊֵ ?ΰָ ?ξֵ ?πεּ ?ΰִ ?νμֹ ?ΰϊַ ?ΰֲ ?ξִ ?ιπεּ λִּ ?ιμֹ ?ΰ occurs further Isaiah 30:21; Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 53:1. δֵ ?ηִ ?ιωׁ is here not indirectly (to make something or another hasten, Isaiah 5:19; Isaiah 60:22) but directly causative; to make haste, to flee hastily, to retreat. There lies in it an antithesis to the idea of firmness, which is contained in what is said of the stone, and in ξΰξιε. The word has this meaning no where else.
Where the firm foundation is objectively laid, and the individual subjectively in faith keeps fast on it, then the erection of a holy temple in the Lord is possible, an erection in which right serves for the line (χַ ?ε comp. on Isaiah 28:10), and righteousness for the plummet (ξִ ?ωְׁ ?χֶ ?μֶ ?ϊ only here, comp. ξִ ?ωְׁ ?χμֶ ?ϊ2 Kings 21:13); a figurative expression, the meaning of which can be only this, that this building will arise according to the rules of divine justice, and will consequently be a holy building. ξωׁ ?τθ and φγχδ stand here related as in Isaiah 1:27; Isaiah 5:16; Isaiah 9:6; Isaiah 32:16; Isaiah 33:5; Isaiah 56:1; Isaiah 59:9; Isaiah 59:14. This building stands firm. But the refuge of lies and the hiding-place of deceit the hail will sweep away (ιָ ?ςָ ?η, whence ιָ ?ς a shovel for the clearing away of ashes from the altar, Exodus 27:3; Exodus 38:3; Numbers 4:14 et saepe, is ἄπ. λεγ) and the waters wash away (Isaiah 28:2). Inconsequence, that covenant with death and Hades, of which they boasted (Isaiah 28:15), shall be covered,i. e., obliterated, annulled. The covenant is conceived of as a written document, whose lines are covered, i. e., overspread with the fluid used for writing. Comp. obliterare offensionem, famam, memoriam.
To μΰιαεΰπε in verse 15, εδιιϊνμεμξψξρ corresponds. Comp. Isaiah 5:5; Isaiah 7:25; Isaiah 10:6. The Prophet here leaves the image out of sight. The expression is shaped by his realizing in thought the thing signified by the previous figure, namely, the invading host which serves as the scourge of God. This host shall stamp the scoffers under foot, shall tread them like dirt on the streets.
The Prophet had expressly declared in Isaiah 10:6 that the army of the Assyrians should do this. But the scourge will come not once only, but often. Isaiah 28:19. The expression ιִ ?χַ ?η is suggested by another image, namely, the idea of something which takes away (Jeremiah 15:15), snatches, washes away, corresponding therefore to ωׁ ?εθσ, as a mighty flood which comes along by rushes. In fact, the invasions by the Assyrians and by the Chaldaeans, who were called to complete their work, were as waterfloods that kept ever inundating the land till it was entirely desolated (Isaiah 24:1; Isaiah 24:3). The second half of Isa 28:19 is clearly related to ιαιεωׁ ?ξεςδ in Isaiah 28:9.
There the scoffers had asked: to whom will he preach? They thought themselves much too high to need the preaching of the Prophet. In opposition to this language Isaiah now tells them: because you would not hear my well-meant preaching by word, which was designed to give you ξְ ?πεּ ?ηָ ?δ, you will be compelled to hear a preaching in act, and it will be naught but terror. ζεςδ stands therefore opposed to ξπεηδ. If in Isaiah 28:9δαιεωׁ ?ξεςδ signified “to make to know, or understand preaching,” it must in the connexion in which it here stands signify “to hear preaching” (comp. Isaiah 39:16; Job 28:23; Micah 4:12 et saepe). For it is not the preacher who experiences terror, but he who hears the preaching. ζְ ?εָ ?ςָ ?δ (only here in Isaiah, besides comp.
Deuteronomy 28:25; Jeremiah 15:4 et saepe; Ezekiel 23:46) is concussio, commotio vehemens, formido. The subject of the sentence is δָ ?αִ ?ιε and the predicate ζְ ?εָ ?ςָ ?δ. Is not that a dreadful preaching, when one finds himself in a situation which is fittingly compared to a bed that is too short, or to a covering that is too narrow?—This is a distressful condition. For resistance is encountered on all sides, and the means are insufficient for any undertaking. χφψ in Isaiah besides only Isaiah 1:2; Isaiah 59:1. ξַ ?φָּ ?ςstratum, ἅπλεγ. ξַ ?ρֵּ ?λָ ?δ besides only Isaiah 25:7. αָּ ?πַ ?ρ, colligere, coacervare, Hithp. se ipsum colligere, to make of one’s self a heap, only here λְּ in λְּ ?δִ ?ϊְ ?λַּ ?πֵּ ?ρ marks coincidence = when one bends one’s-self together, coils one’s-self (Isaiah 18:3; Isaiah 23:5). That such will really be the nature of the situation is now further illustrated by two historical examples. Israel will themselves be in a condition like that in which they through God’s help twice brought their enemies.
One of these events to which the Prophet here alludes, is the defeat which David inflicted on the Philistines at Baal-Perazim (2 Samuel 5:20; 1 Chronicles 14:11). David there said τָ ?ψַ ?υι ? ΰֶ ?ϊΞΰֹ ?ιְ ?αַ ?ιμְ ?λָּ ?πַ ?ιλְ ?τֶ ?ψֶ ?υξַ ?ιִ ?ν, i.e., Jehovah has broken through my enemies before me, as water breaks through. Vitringa perceived that Isaiah was led to think of this passage by what he had said in Isaiah 28:17 and Isaiah 28:2 of the ξινωֹׁ ?θְ ?τִ ?ιν. The other event I take, with most of the older interpreters, to be the defeat which Joshua inflicted on the Canaanites at Gibeon (Joshua 10:10). There, in Isaiah 28:11, it is said expressly that the Lord crushed the enemy by a great hail-storm. And this circumstance corresponds exactly to what Isaiah in verse 2 and verse 17 had said of the hail from which Israel should suffer.
That victory of David over the Philistines at Gibeon (2 Samuel 5:22 sqq.; 1 Chronicles 14:14 sqq.) does not supply such an analogy. ιψπε comp. on Isaiah 14:9. ζψξςωׂ ?δε (comp. Isaiah 5:12) and πλψιδςαγϊε (Isaiah 2:6) are parenthetical clauses, and not in apposition to the preceding ξςωׂ ?δε and ςαγϊε; for the putting of the adjective first would in that case be quite abnormal. Strange, inconceivable is the work of the Lord pronounced, because He does something which could not have been expected of Him. Who could have thought that Jehovah would treat Israel as the heathen, that He would thus destroy His own work? After all these statements we see how foolish and infatuated the people were in scoffing at the warning voice of the Prophet, and in relying on their own miserable, self-chosen supports (Isaiah 28:15). The admonition which the Prophet adds at the close, and now be ye not mockers is well-meant, and deserving to be laid to heart.
Hithp.δϊμεφυ=to behave mockingly, is found only here. If they do not cease to mock, the bands by which they have been bound ever since Ahaz foolishly made submission to Assyria (2 Kings 16:7 sqq.), can never be broken. For that they must bear these bands, and become acquainted with the nature of them, that is the purpose of God, resolved on, and already revealed to the Prophet. On λμδεπηψφδ comp. on Isaiah 10:23.
Footnotes:Sheol.flee.Sheol.Heb. a treading down to it.as often as.Or, when he shall make you to understand doctrine.
THE IN MEASURE
Isaiah 28:23-2923 Give ye ear, and hear my voice;
Hearken, and hear my speech.
24 Doth the plowman plow all day to sow?
Doth he open and break the clods of his ground?
25 When he hath made plain the face thereof,
Doth he not cast abroad the fitches,
And scatter the cummin,
And cast in the principal wheat,
And the appointed barley,
And the rie in their place?
26 For his God doth instruct him to discretion,
And doth teach him.
27 For the fitches are not threshed with a threshing instrument,
Neither is a cartwheel turned about upon the cummin;
But the fitches are beaten out with a staff,
And the cummin with a rod.
28 Bread corn is bruised;
Because he will not ever be threshing it,
Nor break it with the wheel of his cart,
Nor bruise it with his horsemen.
29 This also cometh forth from the Lord of hosts,
Which is wonderful in counsel,
And excellent in working.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_28:25. πִ ?ρְ ?ξָ ?ε is ἅπ. λεγ. It seems to be part. Niphal which denotes “marked off, designated by ρִ ?ιξָ ?πִ ?ιν.” This πρξε is to be considered as accus. loci “in the place marked off.”
Isaiah 28:28. ΰָ ?γεֹ ?ωׁ, if there be not a clerical mistake, is to be derived from a form ΰָ ?ψַ ?ωׁ, which does not elsewhere occur.
AND 1. As the Prophet could not leave the brief word concerning Ephraim (Isaiah 28:1-4) without a consolatory conclusion (Isaiah 28:5-6), so he cannot conclude the word directed against Jerusalem (Isaiah 28:14) without making at the close of its rebukes an announcement of salvation. This he does by employing a parable drawn from agriculture. He does not interpret the parable in clear terms. Therefore, before uttering it, he calls for attentive reflection (Isaiah 28:23). Then he sets forth the parable.
It has, we may say, a double point. First, the Prophet makes us observe that the farmer does not always plough, does not always as it were lacerate the ground with sharp coulter or pointed harrow (Isaiah 28:24). No, he casts into the bosom of the earth good seed of various kinds (Isaiah 28:25). Moreover, the fruit produced from the seed, which can be divested of its integuments only by the application of a certain force, is yet not too severely handled by him, nor is equal force applied to all kinds of fruit, but he is careful in his treatment as the nature of things appointed by God teaches him (Isaiah 28:26). For, not a threshing sledge, or threshing roller is applied to the more tender kinds of fruit, as the cummin, but only a staff (Isaiah 28:27). Even the corn-fruits that yield bread are not so threshed that the grain is crushed thereby (Isaiah 28:28).
That, too, has been arranged by the Lord, that His wonderful wisdom in counsel, and His great power to help may be known (Isaiah 28:29). The operations of ploughing and threshing, which are necessary for seed time and harvest, should therefore teach Israel in symbol the certainty that the temporal judgments which they must endure are only correctives in the hand of God, from which Israel will come forth as glorious fruit cleansed and purified.
2. Give ye ear——in their place.Isaiah 28:23-25. The summons to pay attention (comp. as to the words 1, 2 and Isaiah 32:9), is owing to the character of the following speech. As it is an ingenious parable, it is necessary for the hearer to consider it with attention and reflection, that its meaning may be apparent to him. λμδιεν Isaiah 28:24, i.e., continually, perpetually. The expression is found in Isaiah usually in this signification Isaiah 51:13; Isaiah 52:5; Isaiah 62:6; Isaiah 65:2; Isaiah 65:5. The addition μζψς might appear superfluous.
But the Prophet wishes to intimate that the end in view is cultivation of the soil, and not merely clearing away of vegetation for any other purpose, such as for building a house. This expression μζψς conveys a pre-intimation that the Lord’s procedure towards His people is not simply of a destructive character, no mere negation without positively designing their salvation. δλμδιεν is to be connected also with the second half of Isa 28:24 (Jeremiah 49:7). τִ ?ϊֵּ ?ηֵ is only here used of opening, turning over, ploughing the earth. Yet its use to denote engraving in wood or stone is analogous: Comp. Exodus 28:9; Exodus 28:36; 1 Kings 7:36, et saepe.ωִׂ ?γִּ ?γִ ?occare, to harrow, besides here only Job 39:10; Hosea 10:11. The suffix in ΰγξϊε delicately expresses the affection which the farmer cherishes to his own land. Because it is dear to him, he will not wish to injure it. ωִׁ ?εָּ ?δ occurs in the sense of aequavit, complanavit only here (Piel besides in Isaiah 38:13).
The Prophet has evidently before his mind a large farm regularly laid out in various kinds of fruits. χֶ ?φַ ?η [not fitches as in E. V., but] black cummin (nigella arvensis, common black cummin, or more probably nigella damascena, garden black cummin, which grows wild near the Mediterranean) occurs only in this place. λַּ ?ξֹּ ?ε cummin, common cummin, carum carvi, which belongs to a different order from that of the black cummin (namely to the umbelliferae, while the other belongs to the ranunculaceae), is mentioned in the Old Testament only here. ωָׂ ?ν is the proper expression for the placing or planting of the wheat, in reference to which Gesenius remarks: “Industrious farmers in the Orient plant as they do garden plants, many kinds of grain which with us are only sown (Niehbuhr’sArabien, p. 157); they thrive when planted much better. (Comp. Plinius,Hist. Nat. 18:21).” ωׂ ?εֹ ?ψָ ?δ, ἄπ. λεγ. is identical with the Talmudic and Arabic ωׂ ?εּ ?ψָ ?δ series, row, order. The planting of wheat spoken of, is done in rows (ωׂ ?εֹ ?ψָ ?δaccus. loci). λֻּ ?ρֶּ ?ξָ ?ϊ [rye E. V.], according to an excursus of Consul Wetzstein, in Delitzsch’s Commentary on Isaiah, is a variety of the common vetch (vicia sativa) the Kursenne.
According to the passage before us this plant, which is eaten by cattle much less readily than barley, would be planted around the corn fields as a border or enclosure, in order to serve to protect the nobler kinds of grain, as according to Wetzstein,ut supra, the Ricinus is at present employed for this purpose. βְּ ?αεּ ?μָ ?δ (Sing. only here, Plur. Isaiah 10:13) confinium, the border, enclosure. The Suffix in βαεμϊε is to be referred to some such term as a piece of ground (ωָׁ ?ψֶ ?δ) which is not expressed, but is supposed in what has been previously said.
3. For his God——teach him.Isaiah 28:26-29. [Dr. Naegelsbach renders this verse: “He (the farmer, beats (corrects) it properly, his God so teaches him.” But the E. V. is correct (comp. Proverbs 31:1) D.M.]. The Prophet does not think of the heathen fables of Isis and Osiris, Bacchus and Ceres, etc.
In what follows the way and manner in which the farmer takes fruits from their husks is spoken of. And here there is a two-fold procedure, a part of the fruits is not threshed in the oriental manner, by means of a threshing sledge or threshing roller, but is beaten out with a staff. To this class belong black cummin and cummin—ηָ ?ψεּ ?υ, acutus, (the full designation is ξεψַ ?βηָ ?ψεּ ?υIsaiah 40:15) is the threshing instrument, which consisted either of planks only, or of planks with rollers among them. Those planks and rollers were fitted with sharp iron or stones, which tore the ears of grain (comp. Herzog, R.-Encycl. iii. p. 504). The word is found besides only Job 41:22; Amos 1:3. [Comp. the Latin tribute, a similar threshing machine, whence tribulation, lit, a subjection to the tribula.—D.M.]. ΰετοςβμη, wheel of the wagon, denotes the last mentioned sort of threshing instrument; whether its rollers were themselves movable, and therefore at the same time wheels, or were immovable, and were drawn by the wheels. ιερα denotes not the turning round of the wagon, its going in a circle, but the turning of the wheels.
For ρα is also used of the turning of a door on its hinge (Proverbs 26:14; Ezekiel 41:24). ιηαθ comp. on Isaiah 27:12. μηνιεγχ must be taken as a question (Hitzig, Knobel, Delitzsch); Is bread-corn crushed? Answer; No! For not incessantly, i.e., till the grain is completely bruised does he thresh it, or drive the wheels of his wagon, and his horses over it. He does not crush it. The other explanation: it is crushed into bread, (i.e., afterwards in the mill, but not in the threshing), for not incessantly, etc.—is refuted by the necessity of understanding before λִּ ?ιμֹ ?ΰ the words indicated as required to complete the sense; while according to our explanation only the simple “no” must be supplied, and it is implied in the question. μֶ ?ηֶ ?ν is here as σῖτοςbread-corn comp. Isaiah 30:23; Isaiah 36:17; Genesis 47:17; Psalms 104:14.
The Prophet distinguishes from the various species of cummin the proper bread-corn, whose grains are harder to separate from the husk. γχχ besides in Isaiah only Isaiah 41:15. δָ ?ξַ ?ν, concitare, to drive, only here in Isaiah. Isaiah 28:29πβζΰϊεβεΧ namely, this procedure of the farmer, comp. ver, 26, ιεֹ ?ψֶ ?πּ ?εּ. That the punishments spoken of Isa 28:14-22 proceed from Jehovah, needed not to be particularly affirmed. But that this so simple, unpretending, customary procedure of the farmer is a shell wherein a kernel of divine wisdom is concealed, and therefore according to God’s intention a means of teaching men such wisdom—this might well be set forth and emphatically affirmed. δτμιΰ in Isaiah only here and Isaiah 29:14. God manifests wonderfully wise counsel, both in the ordinances of nature, and in His direction of history, for which latter the former work serves as a type full of instruction and comfort. But the aim of this wonderful wisdom is salvation (ϊεωׁ ?ιδ only here in Isaiah).
It seems to me more appropriate to take the word in the meaning “salvation” (Job 6:13; Job 30:22; Proverbs 2:7; Micah 6:9), because the idea of “wisdom” is so nearly related to that of “counsel,” that almost a tautology would arise from the translation wisdom. It is certainly reasonable to expect that the Prophet in a place like the present, in which the whole fulness of his thoughts is compressed. should in significant, closing words combine in two different words two specifically different thoughts.
[But God’s counsel and wisdom, as nearly related ideas, can be very properly extolled together at the close of this chapter. The rendering of the last word ϊּ ?εּ ?ωִׁ ?ιָּ ?δ by working in the E. V. is warranted neither by the usus loquendi nor by etymology. The Prophet here simply magnifies the Lord’s counsel and wisdom.—D. M.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 28:1-4. A glorious city on a hill overlooking a broad, fertile plain, when the Lord is not its foundation and crown. What is it else than one of the vanities over which the preacher laments (Sir 2:4 sqq.)? Samaria and Jerusalem, Nineveh and Babylon have fallen. Cannot Paris, and London, and Berlin [and New York] also fall? How vain and transitory is the pomp of men! [All travellers unite in praising the situation of Samaria for its fertility, beauty and strength. But “the crown of pride” has been trodden under foot.—D. M.]
2. On Isaiah 28:7-8. Those words of Solomon are therefore to be remembered: it is not for kings to drink wine; nor for princes strong drink; lest they drink and forget the law, and pervert the judgment of any of the afflicted (Proverbs 31:4-5), Most of all is drunkenness unseemly in preachers and teachers. Scripture enjoins that they should be sober and not given to wine (1 Timothy 3:2-3).” Renner. Can. Apost.
Isaiah 53 : “Si clericus in caupona comedens deprehensus fuerit, segregetur, paeterquam si in diversorio publico in via propter necessitatem diverterit.” Song of Solomon 1 : “Episcopus aut presbyter aut diaconus aleae et ebrietati deserviens aut desinat, aut condemnetur.” [What! a priest, a prophet, a minister, and yet drunk! Tell it not in Gath. Such a scandal are they to their coat. Isaiah 28:8. All tables are full of vomit, etc. “See what an odious thing the sin of drunkenness is—what an affront it is to human society; it is rude and ill-mannered enough to sicken the beholders.”—Henry.—D. M.] In accordance with the rabbinical usage, which not seldom puts ξָ ?χεֹ ?ν by a metonymy for God, the expression here employed, αμιξχν is translated in Pirke Aboth iii.
Isaiah 3 : “without God.” [The passage of the Mishna referred to runs thus: Rabbi Simeon says, Three who have eaten at one table, and have not spoken at it words of the law, are as if they ate of sacrifices to the dead; for it is said, for all their tables tire full of vomit and filth, without ξָ ?χεֹ ?ν,” i.e., place, God the place of all things, or who contains all things. Of course this is only an ingenious diversion of the language of Isaiah from its real meaning.—D. M.]
3. Isaiah 28:9 sqq. “This is the language of scorners and the ungodly, who have always mocked and railed at God’s word and its ministers. Job, Jeremiah and David must be their song and mocking-stock (Job 30:9; Lamentations 3:63; Psalms 69:13). If such dear men of God could not render all the people more pious, what will happen in our age in which there will be no lack of mockers (2 Peter 3:3)? Cramer.”
4. Isaiah 28:13. “The severe and yet well-deserved punishment for contempt of the word of God is that they who are guilty of it fall, and not only fall, but also are broken, and not only are broken, but also are snared and taken. For when they have not the love of the truth, God sends them strong delusions that they should believe a lie, that they all might be condemned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness (2 Thessalonians 2:10).” Cramer.5. On Isaiah 28:15. This is the direct reverse of trust in God. The people of whom the Prophet here speaks believe themselves secure from death and hell because they had made a friendly alliance with them.
And the sign of this covenant is their setting their hope on lies and hypocrisy. For the devil is the father of lies (John 8:44). He who is in league with him must lie, and learns to lie to the highest perfection. But the fools who have built their hope on this master— and their mastery in lying—must at last, as their righteous punishment, see that they are themselves deceived. For the devil urges a man into the swamp of wickedness, and when he sticks so deep in it that he cannot get out, then he leaves the deluded being in the lurch, and appears as an accuser against him. Hence he is called not only tempter (πειράζων), but also accuser (διάβολος, κατήγωρ, Revelation 7-10).
6. On Isaiah 28:16. “Christ is the head and foundation-stone of the Christian Church, and another foundation cannot be laid (1 Corinthians 3:11; Acts 4:11). There is, moreover, no other means of laying hold of Christ than faith, whose effect and property it is to be confident of what we hope for, and not to doubt of what we do not see (Hebrews 11:1).” Cramer. [The image of faith here given is that of a stone resting on a foundation by which it is supported and sustained. When we are told that “he that believeth shall not make haste or flee,” we are taught the confidence, composure and peace which trust in the Lord Jesus Christ imparts.—D. M.]
7. On Isaiah 28:17 sqq. “He who relies on his own wisdom, strength, riches, or righteousness, on the help of man, on the intercession of the saints, on letters of indulgence and such like, he makes to himself a false refuge, and cannot endure, but builds his house on a quicksand.” Cramer. [“They that make any thing their hiding-place but Christ, the waters shall overflow it, as every shelter but the ark was overtopped and overthrown by the waters of the deluge.” Henry.—D. M.]
8. On Isaiah 28:19. “People who are not tried are inexperienced, and have a merely speculative religion, which is of no advantage to them. “Meditatio, oratio, tentatio faciunt Theologum.” Luther. “As long as all is well with us, and we have the enjoyment of life, there is too much noise around us, and we cannot hear the voice of God. Every affliction is a wilderness, in which a man is in solitude and stillness, so that he understands better the word of God. Every tribulation is a power of the soul. In the noisy day we have hearkened so much to the voices of men. In the wilderness there is quiet, and when human voices are silent, the voice of God begins to sneak.” Tholuck.9.
On Isaiah 28:20. “Vexatio seu crux perinde est atque brevis lectus, in quo contrahendum est corpus, nisi algere velimus. Hoc est: Solus verbi auditus retinendus ac sequendus est. Tribulatio autem continet nos ceu in brevi lecto, nec sinit nos evagrari in nostra studia.” Luther.10. On Isaiah 28:21. [“This will be His strange work, His strange act, His foreign deed; it is work that He is backward to; He rather delights in showing mercy, and does not afflict willingly; it is work that He is not used to; as to His own people, He protects and favors them; it is a strange work indeed if He turn to be their enemy and fight against them (Isaiah 63:10); it is a work that all the neighbors will stand amazed at. Deuteronomy 29:24.” Henry.—D. M.]
11. On Isaiah 28:22. “Nolite evangelium et verbum habere pro fabula, alioquin fiet, ut magis constringamini et implicemini efficacioribus erroribus ut fiatis improbi ad omne bonum opus.” Luther.12. On Isaiah 28:23 sqq. “God Himself is the husbandman. The field is the Church on earth. Before it can bring forth fruit, it must be ploughed and prepared. The plough is the cross of trial, when the ploughers make their furrows long upon our backs (Psalms 129:3).
The seed is the imperishable word of God (1 Peter 1:23). The rain is the Holy Ghost who gives the increase (Isaiah 44:3; 1 Corinthians 3:6). Further, when the fruit is gathered in, if men will bake bread out of it, it must be threshed. This is done not for its destruction, but with such moderation as the nature of the grain can bear. The practical application is that we learn to yield ourselves to such husbandry of God, and bear with patience what God does to us. For He knows according to His supreme wisdom to order every thing, that we may be His grain, and good, pure bread upon His table of shew-bread.” Cramer.13. [“We see (1) The reason of afflictions.
It is for the same reason which induces the farmer to employ various methods on his farm. (2) We are not to expect the same unvarying course in God’s dealings with us. (3) We are not to expect always the same kind of afflictions. We may lay it down as a general rule that the divine judgments are usually in the line of our offences; and by the nature of the judgment we may usually ascertain the nature of the sin. (4) God will not crush or destroy His people. The farmer does not crush or destroy his grain. (5) We should therefore bear afflictions and chastisements with patience. God is good and wise.” Barnes.—D. M.]
14. On Isaiah 28:26. [Where men do not cultivate the corn-plants, wheat, rye, barley, etc., the cerealia, as they are called, they are in the condition of savages. Savages live on what comes to hand without patient culture. Man could never have learned the cultivation of the corn-plants without being taught by God. The cerealia do not grow as other annuals, spontaneously or by the dispersion and germination of their seed. If left to themselves, they quickly become extinct.
They do not grow wild in any part of the world. Their seed must be sown by man in ground carefully prepared to receive it. But while human culture is necessary for the growth and propagation of corn-plants, man is naturally ignorant of their use and value. It would never have occurred to man to prepare the soil for wheat-seed at a particular time of the year, and to wait many months for the grain that would ripen in the ear; and then to grind the hard seeds, and to mix them with water, and to bake this paste is what man, left to himself, would never have thought of. The fact that we have corn-plants alive on the earth at this day demonstrates that they must have been called into existence when man was on the earth to cultivate them, and that man must have been taught by a Higher Power to do so, and to use them for his support. It is then a matter that can be established by the clearest and most convincing evidence, that God, as the Prophet here tells us, instructed the plowman to plow, to open and break the clods of the ground, and to cast in the wheat and barley. (Isaiah 28:24-25) These may appear to us now simple operations.
But they must have been at first taught to man by God in order that wheat and barley, and the other cereals, which He had made for the use of man, might be preserved on the earth. Beside the natural powers furnished us by God, to whom we owe the capacity of knowledge and the lessons given by Providence in external nature, God still teaches the husbandman through that primeval revelation of the art of agriculture made to man when He put him into the garden to dress it and to keep it—D. M.]
HINTS1. On Isaiah 28:1-6. “In the light of this word of God let the glorious acts of God (the fall of Paris, etc.) be to us a mighty proclamation: 1) of God’s judgment, 2) of God’s grace.” Frommel, Zeitpredigten, Heidelberg, 1873.
2. On Isaiah 28:11-12. An earnest warning voice to our people. It bids us consider 1) What the Lord has hitherto in kindness offered to us (How rest may be had is preached to us Matthew 11:28 sq.); 2) How we have received what has been offered to us (We will not have such preaching); 3) What the Lord for our punishment will hereafter offer to us (He will speak with mocking lips and with another tongue unto this people).
3. On Isaiah 28:14-20. Text for a political sermon such as might be delivered before a Christian court, or before an assembly of those who have influence on the direction of public affairs. God’s word to those who direct the affairs of the State: 1) The false foundation: a. as to its nature (Isaiah 28:15), b. as to its consequences (Isaiah 28:17 b–20). 2) The true foundation: a. wherein it consists (Isaiah 28:16), b. the conditions of its efficacy (giving heed to the word, believing), c. its effects.
4. On Isaiah 28:16-17. The foundation and corner-stone of the Christian Church: 1) Who He is (Matthew 21:42; Acts 4:11; Romans 9:33; 1 Peter 2:6 sq.). 2) How we partake of His blessing (He who believes flees not). 3) What salvation He brings us (Isaiah 28:17). Isaiah 28:16 is often used as a text for discourses at the laying of the foundation-stone of churches.
5. On Isaiah 28:19. Affliction teaches us to give heed to the word. Affliction is the best instructress of the foolish heart of man; for it teaches us to know: 1) the vanity of earthly things, 2) the power to comfort and to save which lies solely in the benefits offered to us in the word of God.
6. On Isaiah 28:22. Warning to scoffers. God will accomplish in the whole world the triumph of His cause. Woe then to the scoffers. Their bands will only become the harder. They hurt themselves by their scoffing.
7. On Isaiah 28:23 sqq. Consolatory discourse. God does not always chastise. Chastisement is with Him only a means to an end, as with the husbandman ploughing and threshing. When the chastisement has reached its aim, it ceases. Let us therefore give heed unto the word, and the trial will not be continued.
8. [The Church is God’s tilled land. 1 Corinthians 3:9. Paul tells the Corinthians: Ye are God’s γεώργιον, God’s tilled land. Christ has called His Father the γεωργός, the husbandman, John 15:1. God does not leave us without culture. He treats us as the farmer does his field. He gives us, too, what corresponds to the rain and sunshine, in the influences of His Spirit. He employs means for making us fruitful. Comp. Hebrews 6:7-8 as to the doom of those who fail to bring forth fruit—set forth by a metaphor taken from agriculture.—D. M.]
Footnotes:Or, the wheat in the principal place, and barley in the appointed place.Wheat in rows and barley in the appointed place.Or, spelt.Heb. border.Or, and he bindeth it in such sort as his God doth teach him.and he beats it properly; his God teaches him this.Is bread com crushed?
helping.
II.—THE SECOND WOEIsaiah 291. THE ARIEL.
Isaiah 29:1-121 Woe to Ariel, to Ariel,
The city where David dwelt!
Add ye year to year;
Let them kill sacrifices.
2 Yet I will distress Ariel,
And there shall be heaviness and sorrow;
And it shall be unto me as Ariel.
3 And I will camp against thee round about,
And will lay siege against thee with a mount,
And I will raise forts against thee.
4 And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground,
And thy speech shall be low out of the dust,
And thy voice shall be as of one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground,
And thy speech shall whisper out of the dust.
5 Moreover the multitude of thy strangers shall be like small dust,
And the multitude of the terrible ones shall be as chaff that passeth away;
Yea, it shall be at an instant suddenly.
6 Thou shalt be visited of the Lord of hosts
With thunder, and with earthquake, and great noise,
With storm and tempest, and the flame of devouring fire.
7 And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel,
Even all that fight against her, and her munition,
And that distress her,
Shall be as a dream of a night vision.
8 It shall even be as when an hungry man dreameth,
And, behold, he eateth;
But he awaketh, and his soul is empty;
Or as when a thirsty man dreameth,
And, behold, he drinketh;
But he awaketh, and, behold, he is faint,
And his soul hath appetite:
So shall the multitude of all the nations be,
That fight against mount Zion.
9 Stay yourselves, and wonder;
Cry ye out, and cry:
They are drunken, but not with wine;
They stagger, but not with strong drink.
10 For the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep,
And hath closed your eyes:
The prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.
11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed,
Which men deliver to one that is learned,
Saying, Read this, I pray thee:
And he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:
12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned,
Saying, Read this, I pray thee;
And he saith, I am not learned.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_29:1. By comparing Isaiah 30:1 we see that ρְ ?τεּ is not from ιָ ?ρַ ?σ, but from ρτδ (Jeremiah 7:21, et saepe). πχσ (Kal only here, Hiphil further in Isaiah 15:8) is circuire circulare. This meaning belongs to ϊְּ ?χεּ ?τָ ?δ Exodus 34:22; 2 Chronicles 24:23.
Isaiah 29:7. φֹ ?αֶ ?ιδָ, is used for the sake of variety instead of φֹ ?αְ ?ΰֶ ?ιδָ comp. εΰπιδϊΰπιδ Isaiah 29:2, μαּ ?ϊςαּ ?ϊΰν Isaiah 29:5. The construction of the suffix is to be explained as in χָ ?ξַ ?ι Psalms 18:40; Psalms 18:49. ξְ ?φεֹ ?γָ ?δ is found also in Ezekiel 19:9, where the king of Judah is spoken of who was caught by means of net and pit, placed in a cage by means of hooks, and brought to Babylon into ξְ ?φֹ ?γεֹ ?ϊ. The whole connection there renders it probable that ξְ ?φγֹ ?εֹ ?ϊ denotes a place for wild animals that have been captured—a prison or something of that kind—whereas in Ecclesiastes 9:12, where only the word again occurs, the meaning “net” is undoubted. When then ξְ ?φֹ ?γָ ?δ, and not ξְ ?φεּ ?γָ ?δ is in the text, and when, moreover, I consider that the grammatical co-ordination of ξφγϊδ with the suffix in φαιδ (all her assailants and of her ξφγδ) would be very abnormal, because we cannot, e.g., say αָּ ?πֶ ?ιδָ εַֽ ?ΰֲ ?ηεֹ ?ϊָ ?δּ instead of αָּ ?πֶ ?ιδָ εּ ?αְ ?πֵ ?ιΰֲ ?ηεֹ ?ϊָ ?δּ,—it seems to me much more probable that ξְ ?φֹ ?γָ ?δ is intended to denote here not the fortress Zion, but the siege entrenchments set up against Zion, the ξְ ?φֻ ?ψֹ ?ϊ verse 3, which enclose the city as a net, and can therefore be called its net. And this net of bulwarks, together with those who by means of it distress Zion (ξφιχιν comp. on δφιχεϊι Isaiah 29:2), shall disappear as a vision of a dream. Moreover the conjecture of Boettcher (Aehrenlese p. 32) that we should read φִ ?αְ ?ιָ ?δּ instead of φֹ ?αֶ ?ιδָ seems to me not unworthy of attention.
For the difficulty still remains to give a specific meaning to φֹ ?αֶ ?ιδָ, if it is to stand for φֹ ?αְ ?ΰֶ ?ιδָ. Boettcher not unjustly remarks, too, that the φְ ?αִ ?ι, the splendor of the city (Isaiah 23:9; Isaiah 28:1 sqq.; Isaiah 32:13 sq.) certainly formed a prominent point in the vanishing vision as “the refreshment which they desire, and imagine they will receive.” Whoever is inclined to adopt this conjecture of Boettcher, which even Knobel accepts, will have no difficulty in connecting εξφγϊδ with what precedes it.
Isaiah 29:8. We should expect a pronomen separatum (δεּ ?ΰ) along with the participles ΰεֹ ?αֵ ?μ and ωֹׁ ?ϊֶ ?δ, and the adjective ςָ ?ιֵ ?σ. But it is well known that this pronoun is frequently omitted.
Isaiah 29:11. Instead of ιεֹ ?γֵ ?ςַ δַ ?ρֵּ ?τֶ ?ψ we find in the K’ri ρֵ ?τֶ ?γ without the article, as in Isaiah 29:12. But the alteration is needless. For in this connection δַ ?ρֵּ ?τֶ ?ψ can also be said, if only we take the article as the generic. Respecting εְ ?ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψ, vers.11 and 12, comp. on Isaiah 40:6.
AND 1. The Prophet sets forth in vers.1 and 2 the theme of his discourse. For he announces to Ariel, i.e., to the city of God, Jerusalem, that he will cause her after a time great distress, notwithstanding that she is Ariel, i.e., lion of God; that she, however, in this distress will prove herself to be Ariel, i.e., the hearth of God. This thought! is further developed in what follows. The Lord causes Jerusalem to be told that He will besiege and afflict her greatly (Isaiah 29:3), so that she, bowed low in the dust, will let her voice sound faintly as the spirit of one dead (Isaiah 29:4). But the comforting promise is immediately annexed, that the enemies of Jerusalem will suddenly become as fine dust or as flying chaff (Isaiah 29:5).
For Jehovah will come against them as with thunder, and tempest, and devouring fire (Isaiah 29:6). The whole force, therefore, of the enemies that fight against Ariel, i. e., here the mount of God, will pass away as a vision of a dream in the night (Isaiah 29:7); these enemies will be in the condition of one who in a dream thinks that he has eaten and drunk, and only on awaking perceives that he has been dreaming (Isaiah 29:8). In Isaiah 29:9-12 the Prophet himself depicts the effect of his words on the obdurate people. They build on other aid. They therefore hear the word of the Prophet in fixed amazement (Isaiah 29:9). For they are as blind (Isaiah 29:10), and in relation to the prophecy they are as one who has to read a sealed document, or as one who has an unsealed writing given him to read, but he cannot read (Isaiah 29:11-12).
2. Woe to Ariel—as Ariel.Isaiah 29:1-2. This paragraph begins with δεֹ ?ι as Isaiah 28:1; Isaiah 29:15; Isaiah 30:1; Isaiah 31:1; Isaiah 33:1. The name ΰψιΰμ occurs 2 Samuel 23:20 (1 Chronicles 11:22) as the name of Moabite heroes; Ezra 8:16 as the name of a Levite; Ezekiel 43:15-16 the altar is called δַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μ and ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?μ (K’ri, Kethibh ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ΰֵ ?ιμ); Isaiah 33:7ΰֶ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μ is found in the signification “hero.” Interpreters take the word as often as it occurs in the passage before us, namely, Isaiah 29:1 (bis), Isaiah 29:2 (bis), and Isaiah 29:7, either in the signification of “lion of God,” or in that of “hearth of God.” Only Hitzig, who is on this account censured, assumes a play on the word, and takes it in ver.1 as ara Dei, and Isaiah 29:2 as lion of God. I am of opinion that Hitzig has not gone far enough. For it seems to me that the Prophet has each time used the word in a different signification according to the connection, and that it is taken in four different meanings [?].
First of all, Ariel appears as an enigmatical, significant name which the Prophet attributes to the city of Jerusalem in a manner unusual and fitted to excite inquiry. That Jerusalem is meant by it is clear from the connection, especially from χψιϊηπδγεγ Isaiah 29:1, and from δψΞφιεζ in Isaiah 29:8. But we mark from the connection in each instance, that the Prophet intends each time a different allusion while employing the same word. In adding in Isaiah 29:1χψιϊηπδγεγ he gives us to understand that under ΰψιΰμ he alludes to ςָ ?ψΰֵ ?μcity of God. The word ςָ ?ψ is used besides only of the Moabite capital Ar-Moab: Numbers 21:15; Numbers 21:28; Deuteronomy 2:9; Isaiah 15:1. ςָ ?ψΰֵ ?μ may accordingly involve an antithesis to ςָ ?ψξεֹ ?ΰָ ?α—Moab, as in Isaiah 25:10 sq., being thought of as the representative of all opposition to God. The Septuagint translator has referred ΰψιΰμ to Moab, while he takes this word to designate the Moabite city; for he renders ον̓αὶπόλις ’Αριήλ, ῆνΔανὶδἐπολέμησεν,” whereby he certainly had in his eye the victory achieved by David over the Moabites, 2 Samuel 8:2.
But what led him to think of Moab in connection with ΰψιΰμ, was either the recollection of the Moabite heroes mentioned 2 Samuel 23:20, or the similarity in sound to the name of the city Ar (Greek ’́ΑρNumbers 21:15; Deuteronomy 2:9) which lies in Ar-iel. That the resemblance could have been thought of by the Prophet appears from the manifold permutations which occur between ΰ and ς in Hebrew, and in the cognate dialects (comp. Isaiah 29:5τϊς and τϊΰν, ΰβν and ΰζμςπν, and ϊΰα ,ςζμ and ϊςα, βΰμ and βςμetc. Comp. Ewald,Gr., § 58, a, note 1 and c; Gesen.Thes. p. 2). The yod in ΰψιΰμ does not militate against our exposition.
For, apart from the fact that a mere similarity in sound is the matter in question, the “i” would not grammatically stand in the way of the explanation “City of God,” as this “i” occurs not rarely as an antique connecting vowel especially in proper names (comp. Gabriel, Abdiel, etc., Ewald,Gr., § 211, b). Accordingly I consider the words χψιϊηπδγεγ as explanatory of the word Ariel, or as a hint to intimate in what signification the Prophet would have us understand the word here. For Jerusalem, a holy city from a high antiquity (Genesis 14:18 sqq.), became, the city of God (Isaiah 60:14; Psalms 46:5; Psalms 48:2; Psalms 48:9; Psalms 87:3; Psalms 101:8), and the centre of the theocracy from the day when David, chosen king, by all Israel, took up in it his royal residence, (2 Samuel 5:6 sqq.). With the words ραּ ?ιωׁ ?πδεβΧ to εΰπιδ the Prophet confirms the woe which he had pronounced. First of all, the question presents itself, whether the words ρτε … ιπχτε contain an indefinite or a definite statement of time.
If the declaration of time be indefinite, the occurrence of the calamity would be placed in prospect at a point of time incalculably remote. For nothing would indicate how long this adding year to year, and this revolution of the festivals should last. Thereby, however, the effect of the prophecy on those living at the time of its delivery would be neutralized. For they could indulge the hope that the catastrophe would not affect them. The design of the Prophet could not be to produce such an impression.
We must therefore assume that the Prophet wishes to indicate by these words an interval at least approximately defined, and a point of time not very remote, but rather relatively near (as Isaiah 32:10). The meaning then would be: Add to the present year another year, and let another annual revolution of festivals be completed. This would be tantamount to saying, that from the end of the present year another year would run its course, and then the catastrophe announced in what follows would take place. The addition ηβινιπχτε is intended to intimate that a full sacred year has yet to run its course. If the time when the Prophet spoke this prophecy was coincident with the beginning of the sacred year, then the addition was really superfluous. But if this coincidence did not exist, then the addition had the meaning that the complete year is not to be reckoned from the day when the Prophet spoke the words, but from the beginning of the next sacred year.
It is therefore not probable that the Prophet made the utterance at the time of the Passover festival, which formed the commencement of the theocratic year (Exodus 7:2). But the Prophet must have spoken the words a considerable time before the Passover. [“Many of the older writers, and the E. V., take the last words of the verse in the sense, let them kill (or more specifically, cut off the heads) the sacrificial victims; but it is more in accordance both with the usage of the words and with the context to give ηַ ?βִּ ?ιν its usual sense of feasts or festivals, and πָ ?χַ ?σ that of moving in a circle or revolving, which it has in Hiphil. The phrase then exactly corresponds to the one preceding, “add year to year.” Alexander.—D. M.] Isaiah 29:2 tells what shall happen at the point of time indicated. Then the Lord will cause Ariel difficulty and distress (Isaiah 29:7; Isaiah 51:13); and there shall arise sighing and groaning (besides only Lamentations 2:5 borrowed from this place; the verb ΰָ ?πָ ?δIsaiah 3:26; Isaiah 19:8, comp. the related ϊַּֽ ?ΰֲ ?πָ ?δ of the snorting of the female camel [wild she-ass.—D.M.] in heat, Jeremiah 2:24).
Here Ariel is represented as on all sides oppressed, which extorts pitiable groaning. The name Ariel seems therefore to involve here an antithesis to δφιχεϊι: The strong is oppressed, and in this his distress he sighs and groans. When then in this connection the idea of strength is prominent in ΰψιΰμ, we shall have to take the word here in its common signification=lion of God. But this distress does not last forever. The Prophet in this statement passes hastily over the whole field of vision from the bad beginning to the glorious end: Jerusalem (for this is the subject of εδιϊδ) shall yet be to the Lord as ΰψιΰμ. It is manifest that the word must be taken here as a word of good meaning.
In such a signification we find it used Ezekiel 43:15 sq. For there the altar of burnt offering is so designated. The same altar is also called there δַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μ. But this designation seems to be given to the altar as a whole. When therefore ΰψιΰμ along with δψΰμ is an altar-name, we may assume that both words have a signification referring to the nature of the altar. In the case of δψΰμ this is at once evident; the high place of God is put in opposition to the high places (αָּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ) of the false gods.
It is true that ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ι is found elsewhere only in the signification lion. But the radix ΰָ ?ψָ ?δ denotes carpere (Psalms 80:13; Son 5:1), and can, like αָ ?ςַ ?ψ, be used of fire. If further we compare the Arabic ’irβ, focus, caminus, and consider that in Isaiah 31:9, it is said of the Lord that ΰεּ ?ψμεֹ αְ ?φִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ο, it follows that the Prophets were justified, in a connection in which a manifold playing on a word is ingeniously practised, in finding in the word ΰψι an allusion to the place of fire, to the altar. It is particularly to be observed that the Prophet in our place says λַּֽ ?ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?μas Ariel. He does not say μַֽ ?ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?μ. Jerusalem is not therefore to become an altar, but it is to prove itself as a holy hearth, which it has long been.
It shall be treated as such by the Lord, it shall therefore be again delivered out of distress.
3. And I will camp——the dust.Isaiah 29:3-4. What was stated in Isaiah 29:1-2 with the brevity of a theme is now set forth more fully. And, first, it is shown how the Lord will afflict the strong lion, and compel him to utter lamentable sounds of distress. ηπδ, which is employed by Isaiah only in this chapter, denotes here encamping with a view to besieging. The word stands frequently in the historical books in this sense in conjunction with ςַ ?μ: Joshua 10:5; Joshua 10:31; Joshua 10:34; 2 Samuel 12:28 et saepe.λַּ ?γּ ?εּ ?γ (besides only Isaiah 22:18)=as in a circle. γּ ?εּ ?ψ (related to γּ ?εֹ ?ψperiodus) is to be regarded as standing in the accus. localis.φεּ ?ψ (in Isaiah besides only Isaiah 21:2) stands frequently with ςַ ?μ in the sense of pressing upon: Deuteronomy 20:12; Deuteronomy 20:19;2 Kings 6:25; 2 Kings 24:11; Jeremiah 32:2 et saepe.ξֻ ?φָּ ?α (ἅπ. λεγ.), is synonymous with ξַ ?φָּ ?α ,ξַ ?φָּ ?πָ ?δ ,πְ ?φִ ?ια = Statio, excubiae praeaidium, post. As to construction the word is to be regarded as in the accusative (accus. instrum.). ξְ ?φεּ ?ψָ ?δ, which occurs in Isaiah only here, is a very general term, which is most frequently equivalent to ξָ ?φεֹ ?ψ in the expression ςָ ?ψֵ ?ιξְ ?φεּ ?ψַ ?δ (2 Chronicles 11:10; 2 Chronicles 11:23; 2 Chronicles 12:4; 2 Chronicles 14:5; 2 Chronicles 21:3).
It manifestly denotes not instruments for attacking a place, but fortifications, entrenchments employed by a besieging army, among which are ρֹ ?μְ ?μָ ?δ(2 Samuel 20:15; Jeremiah 6:6, et saepe) and γָּ ?ιֵ ?χּ (2 Kings 25:1). The plural then denotes the various parts of the works thrown up by the besiegers. As the fortifications for defence are also called ξְ ?φεּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ2 Chronicles 11:11. The expression εδχιξϊι is not opposed to what has been said. For the machines used in a siege, the λָּ ?ψִ ?ιν, as is clear from Ezekiel 4:2, belong to the ξφεψιν. Isaiah 29:4 illustrates the words in Isaiah 29:2, and there shall be sighing and groaning [E.
V., heaviness and sorrow]. The construction εωׁ ?τμϊϊγαψι is the well-known one, according to which an adverbial notion is expressed by the verb that is placed first. Jerusalem will lie so low that her voice will be only heard as if it proceeded from the dust, yea, from under the earth. There is here a climax descendens. The voice comes from a female sitting on the ground, out of the dust, from under the earth. In the clause εξςτψεΧ we mark a pregnant construction. ωָׁ ?ηַ ?η is used by Isaiah with tolerable frequency: Isaiah 2:9; Isaiah 2:11; Isaiah 2:17; Isaiah 5:15; Isaiah 25:12; Isaiah 26:5.
The word is used especially of a suppressed voice Ecclesiastes 12:4. Regarding ΰεֹ ?α and φτφσ comp. on Isaiah 7:19. The voice will, like that of the spirit of one dead, come forth out of the earth.
4. Moreover the multitude——Mount Zion.Isaiah 29:5-8. These words expand the short promise at the close of Isa 29:2. The distress of Jerusalem shall not last long. The supplication of her who has been brought so low shall be heard; her enemies shall be brought still lower; they shall be crushed even to dust. ΰָ ?αָ ?χ comp. Isaiah 5:24. γַּ ?χ besides Isaiah 40:15. δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο is used by the Prophet four times in this passage: Isaiah 29:5 bis, Isaiah 29:7 and Isaiah 29:8.
Regarding ζָ ?ψ comp. on Isaiah 1:7. The image of chaff carried away by the wind is frequent: Isaiah 17:13; Isaiah 41:15; Psalms 1:4; Psalms 35:5; Job 21:18; Zephaniah 2:2. ςψιφιν comp. Isaiah 13:11. The crushing of the enemies shall be not only complete, but also sudden. It will be thereby all the more terrible. τֶּ ?ϊַ ?ς is substantive=the opening of the eyes, a moment; but τִּ ?ϊְ ?ΰֹ ?ν is an adverb (comp. ιεֹ ?ξָ ?ν ,δֲ ?μֹ ?ν). In regard to the permutation of ς and ΰ see on Isaiah 29:1.
The two words stand together Numbers 6:9, where, however, we find ατϊςτϊΰν, and Isaiah 30:13. μְ denotes the measure (momentaneo modo, comp. μְ ?ΰַ ?θ ,μְ ?φֶ ?γֶ ?χ ,μָ ?αֶ ?θַ ?η, etc). Isaiah 29:6 describes the means, by which the Lord crushes the enemy of Jerusalem. ϊτχγ is taken by Gesenius, Hitzig, Knobel, Delitzsch impersonally: A visitation shall be made. But it seems to me that this would require the passive of the causative conjugation, namely Hophal. (Comp. on Isaiah 38:10). The reference to Jerusalem is suggested by Isaiah 29:2; Isaiah 29:7-8. The Prophet says therefore, that Jerusalem will be graciously visited, i. e., delivered (Isaiah 24:22) [According to this interpretation we must translate “and she shall be visited, etc.” If we use the second person as in the E. V., “thou shalt be visited,” then the enemy must be addressed, and not the city Jerusalem, which would require the verb to be in the feminine form of the second person.—D.
M.]. αψςνεβεΧ, observe here the similarity of sound in these words. ψַ ?ςַ ?ν, the cracking, roaring (of thunder Psalms 104:7; Psalms 77:19), is found only here in Isaiah. ψςωׁ ?conquassatio, σεισμός (hence earthquake 1 Kings 19:11; Amos 1:1), is further used by Isaiah 9:4. ρετδ from ρεּ ?σ (ΰָ ?ρַ ?σ, ρָ ?τָ ?δ) auferre, rapere, is rather the whirlwind, turbo, comp. Isaiah 5:28; Isaiah 17:13; Isaiah 21:1; Isaiah 66:15. ρςψδ tempest, hurricane, comp. Isaiah 40:24; Isaiah 41:6. Both words are found in conjunction elsewhere only in Amos 1:14. The flame of devouring fire, comp. Isaiah 30:30.
The plural μδαιν13:8; Isaiah 66:15. Besides μֶ ?δָ ?αָ ?δ4:5; Isaiah 5:24; Isaiah 10:17; Isaiah 43:2; Isaiah 47:14. ΰωׁ ΰλμδ comp. Isaiah 30:27; Isaiah 30:30; Isaiah 33:14. Vitringa thinks that we ought to take these words literally, and find in them an intimation that the Lord destroyed the Assyrians in that night (Isaiah 37:36) by a frightful thunderstorm. But this is a manifest misconception of the Prophetic style. In Isaiah 29:7-8 the Prophet depicts at the close the disappointment which the enemy will feel.
This is expressed by a simple image. The Assyrians, so far as they had really seen Jerusalem before them, and had it in reach of their power, will, after their overthrow, have the impression that they had seen Jerusalem only in a dream, in a vision of the night: and in so far as they had hoped to be able easily to conquer Jerusalem, they will be as if they had eaten in a dream, but on awaking, should feel themselves as hungry as before. By the two images the Prophet expresses very emphatically the thought that the whole attempt of Assyria upon Jerusalem should be as if it had not been; should be in fact as empty and unreal as the fabric of a dream. The subject of Isa 29:7 is δξοεΞεΧ and ελμΞφαιδεβεΧ. The expression ημενηζεομιμδ is found besides only Job 33:15, where we read αַּ ? ?ֽ ?ηֲ ?μεֹ ?νηֶ ?ζְ ?ιεֹ ?ομַ ?ιְ ?μָ ?δ (comp. Job 4:13; Job 20:8).
They who fight against Ariel will be as a vision of a dream (φαΰ as a verb in Isaiah besides only Isaiah 31:4). In what sense we have to take Ariel here, is evident from Isaiah 29:8. For there the whole phrase “the multitude of all the nations that fight against” is repeated, but instead of “Ariel” we read “Mount Zion.” This makes it clear that the Prophet would have us take ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?μ here in the sense of δַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μ Mount of God [?]. ΰ and δ are interchanged just as frequently as ΰ and ς, comp. ΰֵ ?ικְ and δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο ,δֵ ?ικְ and ΰַ ?γֹּ ?ψָ ?ν ,ΰָ ?ξεֹ ?ο1 Kings 12:18 and δַ ?γֹּ ?ψָ ?ν2 Chronicles 10:18; (See Gesen.Thes. p. 2). Ezekiel too has in Isaiah 43:15 got from our ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?μ his δַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μ. In Isaiah 29:8 the Prophet compares the departure of the Assyrians from Jerusalem to the awaking of a hungry or thirsty man who perceives that he has only dreamt that he has been eating or drinking. The term πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ as in Isaiah 5:14; Isaiah 32:6. ωׁ ?εֹ ?χֵ ?χָ ?δ (Psalms 107:9) has the signification “panting for, hungry” as a derivative meaning from the radical notion “to run to and fro,” (Isaiah 33:4).
The concluding words of this verse “the multitude of all the nations that fight against Mount Zion,” which correspond exactly to what we find in Isaiah 29:7, except that there instead of “Mount Zion” the name “Ariel” occurs, furnish the key to the understanding of the enigmatical word Ariel. Can it be deemed accidental that the Prophet in Isaiah 29:8 repeats those words of Isa 29:7 with the sole change of substituting for “Ariel” the words “Mount Zion?” Is not this a hint which the Prophet at the close gives to assist in understanding his meaning? And the first who understood this hint was Ezekiel (Isaiah 43:15).
5. Stay yourselves——not learned.Isaiah 29:9-12. The prediction contained in Isaiah 29:1-8, must have been received by the hearers of the Prophet with very mingled feelings, because it holds out to them the prospect of deliverance, but deliverance in a way not agreeable to them. For the saying ξςνιδεδϊτχγ Isaiah 29:6 did not please them. Although then the Prophet is aware that he does not say what corresponds to their wishes, still they must just hear it for their punishment. Yes, stop and wonder, whether it please you or not, whether you comprehend it or not; it is so as I have said to you.
The Hithpael δϊξδξδ (to stand questioning, refusing, delaying Genesis 43:10; Psalms 119:60 et saepe) is found only here in Isaiah. ϊξδ to be astonished, to wonder (conjoined with δϊξδξδ in Habakkuk 1:5 as here) occurs further in Isaiah 8:8. Both verbs denote amazement at what is offered, with unwillingness to receive it. The Hithpael δωׁ ?ϊςωׁ ?ς stands Psalms 119:16; Psalms 119:47 undoubtedly in the signification oblectari, delectari. Many expositors would take the word here too in this meaning, while they consider the two imperatives as marking an antithesis (be joyous and yet blind). But we do not perceive from the context why they should be joyful. It is better therefore to take δωׁ ?ϊςωׁ ?ς in the original signification of Kal which is “permulsum, oblitum esse” (comp.
Isaiah 6:10). Hence the significations “oblectari” (Isaiah 11:8; Isaiah 66:12) and “to become blind” are equally derived. Kal occurs only in this passage where it has this last signification. The threatening of a punishment, which should first affect the spirit, is here announced to the Israelites. But this punishment will also produce its outward and visible effects. Because these effects follow in the way of punishment, the Prophet speaks of them no more in the imperative, but in the perfect.
He sees the people reel and stagger like drunken men, although this intoxication does not proceed from wine. ιιο with ωׁ ?λψε is the accusative of the instrument. Where a capacity to receive the divine word is wanting, there it works an effect the very opposite of what it should properly produce; it hardens, blinds, stupefies. It is as if the spirit of understanding had become in those who do not desire the knowledge of the truth, a spirit of stupefaction, of stupidity. ϊψγξδ, which is found only here in Isaiah, has here this spiritual sense. ςָ ?φַ ?ν is used Isaiah 33:15 of the binding up of the eyes, but in Isaiah 31:1 in its usual signification of being strong. That these two significations are closely connected in other cases also is well known. Compare ηָ ?ζַ ?χ ,ηεּ ?μ (Isaiah 22:21) χָ ?ωַׁ ?ψ (Genesis 30:42), ἴσχω, ἰσχύω. The Piel ςִ ?φֵּ ?ν, which is used by Jeremiah (Jeremiah 50:17) as a denominative in the sense of “to break the bones, to bone,” occurs only here in Isaiah.
The words prophets and seers, if omitted, would not be missed in Isaiah 29:10. For this reason it is utterly improbable that they are an interpolation of a glossator. They obscure the meaning, instead of making it more apparent. We might almost conjecture that there were Prophets of a first, and of a second rank. The latter would have been the interpreters of the former, as in the New Testament the speech of those who spoke with tongues was explained by interpreters (1 Corinthians 12:10; 1 Corinthians 12:30; 1 Corinthians 14:5; 1 Corinthians 14:13). Not as if these prophets of the second rank or interpreters had an official position.
For there is no trace of this. But there were persons who, when the meaning of the prophetic utterances was the subject of conversation among the people, pushed themselves in the foreground, claiming to be specially endowed with the capacity of explaining what the prophets had spoken; and perhaps they acquired as such here and there a certain authority. The prophetic word of the great Isaiah may have been often thus interpreted to the people by such prophets. But these subordinate prophets, although perhaps their possession of a certain physical gift of prophecy was not to be disputed, (comp. Saul, 1 Samuel 10:10 et saepe) stood yet in a nearer relation to the people than to the Lord. Therefore their prophetic gift was often not sufficient; often it was even abused by them (comp. 1 Corinthians 14:32; 1 Kings 22:6 sqq.).
Isaiah alludes here to this state of matters. The people were often puzzled by the prophecy of Isaiah, and even their prophets who were wont to be their eyes for such things, had as it were bound-up eyes or covered heads. πָ ?αִ ?ιΰ and ηֹ ?ζֶ ?δ, comp. παιΰ and ψֹ ?ΰֶ ?δ1 Samuel 9:9. The figure employed in Isaiah 29:11-12 suits very well to the explanation proposed. Reading was an art which was not understood by every one. He who could not himself read, must request another to read to him. Thus was it too with the prophecy of Isaiah.
The people must apply to their prophets to interpret it for them. But it happened then, says Isaiah, as it often happens to one who applies to another in order to have a writing read to him. It can be the case that the person asked is able to read, but yet cannot read the document reached to him, because it is sealed. But what can this mean? If any one reaches me a sealed paper, in order that I may read it to him, he must unite with his request the permission to unseal it. Or, were there seals which could not be removed by every one?
It appears to me, that the comparison here made use of is purely imaginary. It is very unlikely that any one could not comply with the request to read a document, because it was sealed. The Prophet only imagines such a case. But what he meant to intimate thereby was most real. The words of Isaiah were to many among those prophets of the people sealed words, i.e., intelligible as to their verbal meaning, but incomprehensible as to their inner signification. To others, or partially perhaps even to all, they were not intelligible even in their verbal meaning.
They did not know what to make of them. They stood before them as one who cannot read stands before what is written. It seems that this prophecy regarding Ariel proved to be one of the most obscure prophecies of Isaiah. This gives occasion to the Prophet’s expressing himself in this manner regarding the reception and understanding of his prophecies. ηζεϊδλμ denotes not merely the immediately preceding prediction, but the prophecy of Isaiah in general. For why should it have happened thus with only those words that immediately precede? ηζεϊ (comp. Isaiah 21:2; Isaiah 28:18) is synonymous with ηָ ?ζεֹ ?ο Isaiah 1:1.
Footnotes:Or, O Ariel, that is, the lion of God.Or, of the city.let the feasts complete a revolution.Heb. cut off the heads.then.post.of the spirit of one dead. Heb. peep, or, chirp.But.she shall be visited (delivered).Or, take your pleasure and riot.blind yourselves and be blind.Heb. heads.Or, letter.knows writing.
2. THE SECRET COUNSEL OF MEN, AND THE SECRET COUNSEL OF GOD
Isaiah 29:13-2413 Wherefore the Lord said,
Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth,
And with their lips do honor me,
But have removed their heart far from me,
And their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men;
14 Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people,
Even a marvellous work and a wonder;
For the wisdom of their wise men shall perish,
And the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.
15 Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord,And their works are in the dark,
And they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us?
16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter’s clay;
For shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not?
Or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?
17 Is it not yet a very little while,
And Lebanon shall be turned into a fruitful field,
And the fruitful field shall be esteemed as a forest?
18 And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book,
And the eyes of the blind shall see
Out of obscurity, and out of darkness.
19 The meek also shall increase their joy in the Lord,And the poor among men shall rejoice in the Holy One of Israel.
20 For the terrible one is brought to nought,
And the scorner is consumed,
And all that watch for iniquity are cut off:
21 That make a man an offender for a word,
And lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate,
And turn aside the just for a thing of nought.
22 Therefore thus saith the Lord, who redeemed Abraham,
Concerning the house of Jacob,
Jacob shall not now be ashamed,
Neither shall his face now wax pale.
23 But when he seeth his children, the work of mine hands, in the midst of him,
They shall sanctify my name,
And sanctify the Holy One of Jacob,
And shall fear the God of Israel.
24 They also that erred in spirit shall come to understanding,
And they that murmured shall learn doctrine.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_29:13. That we are to read not πִ ?βַ ?ωׂ (with the Targum and many MSS. and Editions, in the sense of “to urge, trouble, torment one’s self,”) but πִ ?βַ ?ωׁ, is shown by the antithetic ψִ ?ηַ ?χ. That contrary to the accentuation ατιε is to be connected with πβωׁ, is apparent from this, that the people are to be reproached, not with drawing near to God in general, but with the outward, deceitful approach to Him. The great liberty which in Hebrew is indulged in with reference to person and number, is seen from λαγεπι and ιψΰϊν in relation to ατιε, ωׂ ?τּ ?ϊιε and μαε. We have to take ψηχ as a causative, and at the same time intensive Piel (to make removal with zeal = to strive to get away).
Isaiah 29:14. On ιεֹ ?ρִ ?σ as the third person comp. on Isaiah 28:16. [ιεֹ ?ρִ ?σ is the third person of the future. There is an ellipsis to be supplied: Behold, I (am he who) will add, etc.—D. M.]. ΰֵ ?ϊ after δτμιΰ is not the sign of the accusative, but is the preposition. Instead of a second infinitive, a noun of the same stem τμΰ is attached to the infinitive absolute (comp. Isaiah 22:17-18; Isaiah 24:19).
Isaiah 29:15. ηςξιχ is the proper causative Hiphil=to make a deepening, a sinking. At the same time the construction with ξִ ?ο is a pregnant one; but μρϊιψ [syncopated Hiphil comp. Isaiah 23:11—D. M.] is not a statement of the design, but is the ablative or gerundine infinitivus modalis, which when united with a causative conjugation, can be expressed by us by a verb with any adverb, as here: who deep from Jehovah hide, etc. Comp. Jeremiah 49:8; Jeremiah 49:30, and as to the usus loquendi Isaiah 7:11; Isaiah 30:33; Isaiah 31:6. ΰִ ?ν in Isaiah 29:16 corresponds to the Latin an, and marks the second member of a disjunctive question, the first of which is to be supplied.
Isaiah 29:20. ωָׁ ?χֵ ?γσπουδάζειν, alacrem esse, vigilare, invigilare, is elsewhere always construed with ςַ ?μ (Jeremiah 1:12; Jeremiah 5:6; Jeremiah 31:28; Jeremiah 44:27; Proverbs 8:34; Job 21:32). This word is found in Isaiah only here. The construction in this place is to be judged according to such forms of expression as ωָׁ ?αֵ ?ιτֶ ?ωַׁ ?ς (Isaiah 59:20), ηֲ ?μεּ ?υφָ ?αָ ?ΰ (Numbers 32:27) and similar phrases. The form ιְ ?χωׁ ?εּ ?ο might, considered by itself, be the perfect (comp. ιָ ?χωְׁ ?ϊִּ ?ι Jeremiah 50:24), as the form ιָ ?χωֽׁ ?εּ with the primitive ο must be ιְ ?χωֽׁ ?εּ ?ο according to the rule that a closed syllable can be without the tone only when it has a short vowel, and an open syllable precedes (comp. ιְ ?χεּ ?ξֽ ?εּ ?ο—ιָֽ ?χεּ ?ξεּ Ewald, § 85, a; 88, c). But if we have regard to the syntax, the imperfect (future) is more correct, because the Prophet has in his mind not merely single definite facts, but the permanent habit of those people. The form is in this case to be derived from χεֹ ?ωׁ, which occurs only here.
AND 1. The Prophet urges the people to fear Jehovah, and to trust in Him alone. Even in Hezekiah’s times the people were not pleased to do so. On this account the preceding announcement (Isaiah 29:1-8), notwithstanding the glorious promise with which it ends, was to so many an offence (Isaiah 29:9-12). The Prophet, therefore, directs now his discourse against those who honor the Lord with merely external, ceremonial service, and not from the heart (Isaiah 29:13), and announces that the Lord will deal strangely with them, and that their wisdom will be brought to shame (Isaiah 29:14). He further reproves those who imagine that they can carry out in the most profound secresy the plans of their untheocratic policy (Isaiah 29:15), by reminding them that the clay can never be equal to the potter, or the work formed from clay be able to deny the potter, or accuse him of ignorance (Isaiah 29:16).
A great change will soon happen: Assyria, which is like Lebanon, shall be brought low; Judah, which resembles only Carmel, shall be highly exalted. Then people will understand the words of the Prophet, which they had before despised, and will perceive that they are true and salutary. But behind that deliverance, which belongs to the history of the nation, the Prophet discerns also Messianic blessing. The comparison has therefore this meaning also for him, that the wilderness shall become uncultivated land, while uncultivated land shall become a wilderness (Isaiah 29:17). This means that a poor condition of external nature shall be remedied by the divine favor, and, conversely, a condition of high culture shall, by the withdrawal of the divine favor, pass into a state of wildness; the deaf shall hear, the blind see (Isaiah 29:18); the poor and oppressed shall become strong and joyful in the Lord (Isaiah 29:19). The violent and false shall be exterminated (Isaiah 29:20-21).
For the Lord, who redeemed Abraham will bring Jacob to honor (Isaiah 29:22). For when Jacob shall see the Lord’s wonderful work for his salvation, he will sanctify the Lord (Isaiah 29:23), and understand what makes for his peace (Isaiah 29:24).
2. Wherefore the Lord said——be hid.Isaiah 29:13-14. By means of ειΰξψ the Prophet connects what he has to say with the immediately foregoing. He indicates by this verbal form that what follows is occasioned by the stupid and perverse behaviour of the people (Isaiah 29:9-10). That perversity had its root in the people trusting more in themselves and their wisdom than in the Lord. They, therefore, thought that they could satisfy the Lord, whose worship Hezekiah lately imposed on them, by the performance of outward ceremonial service.
For the rest, in what concerned their life and conduct, and especially in their policy, they went their own ways. The Lord had already said (Deuteronomy 6:4 sqq.), that He is not satisfied with mere ceremonial service, but desires hearty love from His people. But it was this chief and greatest commandment (Matthew 22:38) which Israel never learned. Hence till the time of the exile the inclination to idolatry prevailed, and if they at times served the Lord, this was only as a pause in the song. And the reformations of Hezekiah and Josiah were no expression of the mind of the people, and were consequently not of long duration. Manasseh followed Hezekiah, and Jehoiakim and Zedekiah followed Josiah.
But Isaiah here takes up earlier utterances (Psalms 50; Amos 5:21 sqq.; Micah 6:6 sq.). He afterwards returns to this subject (Isaiah 58:2 sqq., comp. Isaiah 1:11 sqq.). The expression ξφεδξμξγδ is found only here. When we compare such expressions as ςֶ ?βְ ?μָ ?δξμξγδ. Hosea 10:11, ξְ ?μֻ ?ξּ ?γֵ ?ιωִׁ ?ιψ1 Chronicles 25:7, ξμξγιξμδξδSon 3:8, we perceive that in ξμξγδ as here used, there lies the idea of training, of external discipline and accustoming. [The complaint is that their religion, instead of being founded on the authority of God’s word, rested on human ordinances.—D.
M.]. The punishment for this hypocritical conduct of the people towards Jehovah is that the Lordcontinues to deal with them in a wonderful way. Wonderful had been all the ways which the Lord had from the beginning pursued towards the people. The Prophet seems to wish by the word δρϊϊψ to prepare the transition to Isaiah 29:15. From the wisdom, which must hide itself, because it is brought to disgrace, he passes over to the wisdom which desires to hide itself, while it cannot do so.
3. Woe unto them——understanding.Isaiah 29:15-16. We clearly perceive here how significant was the position of the great Prophets. They might be said to be the eye and the mouth of Jehovah. They watched over the course of the theocracy, and the leaders of it could not but respect them. If then the policy approved by the leaders was untheocratic, they must fear the word of the Prophets.
For their word was the word of Jehovah. When, therefore, there was a consciousness of an untheocratic aim, care was taken to conceal the political measures from the Prophets. Thus Ahaz sought to hide from Isaiah his Assyrian policy (7). Here likewise Hezekiah tries to keep secret his Egyptian policy. For even Hezekiah does not seem to have risen to the height of the only truly theocratic policy, which must consist in having the Lord alone as their support. εδιδεβεΧ. Not merely is the plan secretly concocted, but the execution of it, too, takes place with all secresy. ξηωׁ ?κ, in Isaiah besides only Isaiah 42:16. ξςωׂ ?ιδν, so far as the form is concerned, might be singular.
But as the copula δָ ?ιָ ?δ precedes, ξςωׂ ?ιην can also be the plural, and this view corresponds better to the usus loquendi elsewhere (Isaiah 41:29; Isaiah 59:6; Isaiah 66:18). δτλλν Isaiah 29:16 is an exclamation: O your perverting! That is, how ye pervert things! They act, as if their wisdom were greater than the wisdom of God, as if they could therefore review, determine, and according to their pleasure influence and direct the thoughts of the Lord, while they are but clay in the hand of the potter. The word δτλλν (on account of the Dagesh lene, not from the Infin Kal, but from the substantive δֹ ?τֶ ?κְ, which occurs only here, comp. δֵ ?τֶ ?κδֶ ?τֶ ?κְ ?Ezekiel 16:34) is to be taken in an active signification, so that it marks not so much perversity, as the perversion of ideas which proceeds from perversity, as is in Isaiah 29:15 implicitly, and in Isaiah 29:16 explicitly evinced. If the potter were clay, and the clay were potter, then the clay could determine and direct the potter, could for this purpose lead him astray, deceive him, etc. Either, then, the Israelites are perverse, or the potter is not clay.
If indeed the clay were potter, then the former could justly say: he, the potter made me not,—or he understands and observes nothing. This is what Israel says in imagining that he is able to lead astray the Prophet, that is, the omniscient Lord Himself. While the politicians forge Hezekiah’s plans, they think that they knead them, as potters do their vessels, according to their pleasure, and unobserved by the Lord, while they themselves are yet but clay.
4. Is it not yet——a thing of noughtIsa_29:17-21. An end will be put to this evil condition. The Lord Himself will reform His people, and that thoroughly. Then the deaf will hear, and the blind see, and to the poor the Gospel will be preached. But those proud, imperious and infatuated politicians, who forcibly suppress all opposition against their line of action, will go to ruin.
When the Prophet holds out the prospect of this reformation within a brief period, he does this in the exercise of that prophetic manner of contemplation which reckons the times not according to a human but a divine measure. For in fact the Prophet here beholds along with, and in what is proximate the time of the end. The prospect of blessedness which he presents belongs also to the days of the Messiah, as we clearly perceive from Isaiah 29:18-19. The expression ςεγξςθξζςψ is used thus in Isaiah 10:25 also. Comp. Isaiah 26:20; Isaiah 54:7.
In a short time, therefore, Lebanon shall become a fruitful field, and the fruitful field a forest. The expression can be variously explained. It seems to me to denote primarily that the Lord can bring down that which is high, and raise that which is low. And in this sense the word was fulfilled in the overthrow of Sennacherib. Then Assyria, the lofty Lebanon, became the low Carmel; but Judah, which was a little mount, and low plain, became a lofty wooded mountain-range. Thereby it became at the same time evident how false the untheocratic policy was in its calculation, and how truly the Lord’s mouth spoke by the Prophet.
Lebanon and the forest represent wild nature, or the natural wilderness; the fruitful field again represents a state of culture (Isaiah 10:18; Isaiah 37:24). All depends on the essential character, the nature of a thing. What in its nature and essence is good, although it looks rough and wild as the wooded mountain-range, shall yet gradually, even in outward appearance, become a fruitful cultivated land; but what is in its nature rough and wild, even when it appears to be cultivated, will certainly sooner or later manifest its true nature as a wilderness, in a corresponding external appearance. In short, the true nature of things must at last be manifest. [“The only natural interpretation of the verse, is that which regards it as prophetic of a mutual change of condition, the first becoming last and the last first.”—Alexander. D. M.].
This form of speech was probably proverbial, and seems to me in the form in which it here lies to bear the meaning assigned to it. That it was used in yet another form, and then naturally in a signification modified as the case required, we can see from Isaiah 32:15. Instead of ωָׁ ?α we find εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ in Isaiah 32:15. The passage before us seems to be the only one in which ωׁ ?εּ ?α is undoubtedly employed in this wider signification = to turn one’s self from one direction to another (it properly signifies; to turn one’s self back). The definite article before λψξμ and ιςψ is the generic (comp. Isaiah 29:11). λψξμ is used nine times by Isaiah 10:18; Isaiah 16:10; Isaiah 29:17 (bis); Isaiah 22:15-16; Isaiah 33:9 and Isaiah 35:2 (proper name); Isaiah 37:24.
The expression ιֵ ?ηָ ?ωֵׁ ?αμְ is not meant to affirm that the fruitful field is merely esteemed as a forest, without really being such. That it really is such, is what the Prophet means to affirm. In the following verses the proverbial and figurative expression, Isaiah 29:17, is illustrated. The deaf shall in that day (i. e., in the time indicated by ξςθξζςψ) hear words of the writing, and the blind will see out of obscurity, and out of darkness.—When the bound senses of the deaf and dumb can freely unfold themselves, when the love of life, which is kept under in the poor and wretched, can display itself without impediment, then Lebanon, the wooded mountain range, has become a fruitful field, for then nature has advanced from neglected disorder to a well-ordered, cultivated condition. When it is said that the deaf will hear, γαψιρτψ, the word ρτψ seems superfluous. But the Prophet alludes evidently to Isaiah 29:11, from which it is at the same time clear that he is not speaking of physical deafness, etc.
It was there declared of the people present that the Lord had poured out upon them a spirit of sleep (in which, as all know, one does not hear), and bound up their eyes so that the prophecy was to them as the words of a sealed book. When then Lebanon has become a fruitful field, and nature shall have given place to grace, then too the ears of the people that were previously deaf will be opened, and they will understand the γִּ ?αְ ?ψֵ ?ιρֵ ?τֶ ?ψδֶ ?ηָ ?ϊεּ ?ν, i. e., the words of the prophecy proceeding from the Lord through His Prophets, and will emerge from gloom. (ΰֹ ?τֶ ?μ only here in Isaiah) and darkness, (in which they hitherto were with their eyes bound up by the Lord), so as to behold the light (comp. 30. 5). They will, therefore, perceive also the errors of their policy, and see that the word of the Prophet which shocked them, pointed out the true way of safety. They who were deaf and blind were also unhappy, just for this cause. When they hear and see, then are they happy men, delivered from oppression and distress, and joyful in their God. ςπειν outwardly and inwardly oppressed, in Isaiah besides Isaiah 11:4; Isaiah 61:1; [ςπε means meek, and is to be distinguished from ςπιpoor.—D. M.]. ιρτε comp.
Isaiah 37:31; they obtain joy not only once, but continually, i. e., they increase joy.αιδεδ comp. ἐνκυρίῳ in the New Testament; it is therefore not merely = through, but = in the Lord, namely as those who are rooted and grounded in the Lord. The expression ΰαιεπιΰγν is found only here, comp. Exodus 23:11. χγεωׁ ιΧ comp. on Isaiah 1:4. ιβιμε,—the rejoicing too has the Lord first for its basis, afterwards for its object (Isaiah 41:16). Is not the purport of these two verses, 18 and 19, reproduced in the saying of Christ, “The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the Gospel preached to them” (Matthew 11:5; Luke 7:22)? In this passage in the Gospel allusions are commonly found only to Isaiah 35:5; Isaiah 61:1. Without wishing to deny these references, we yet remark that Isaiah 29:18-19 contains the ideas conjoined, which the other places present apart.
And when the Lord in dealing with John, who had fallen into doubt regarding His Messiahship, describes His works by pointing to this passage, are we not justified in saying that this passage is of Messianic import? We of course admit that Matthew 11:5 is not an exact quotation of our passage. The joy of the pious has as its condition the removal of the wicked, whose unchecked display of themselves is identical with the deterioration of the fruitful field into a forest. Hence Isaiah 29:20-21, which explain Isaiah 29:17 b, are connected by λִּ ?ι with what immediately precedes. ΰָ ?τֵ ?ρ besides only Isaiah 16:4. μֵ ?υ only here in Isaiah, but comp. Isaiah 28:14; Isaiah 28:22. Hiphil δηθιΰ to make, to declare a sinner, (Deuteronomy 24:4; Ecclesiastes 5:5), only here in Isaiah.
They make people sinners by words,i. e., they bring about their condemnation not by actual proofs, but merely by lying words. [The rendering of the E.V. is much more easy and natural: that make a man an offender for a word, and is justly preferred by Ewald, Alexander and Delitzsch.—D. M.]. ξεֹ ?λִ ?ιηַ the reprover, reprehensor, he who maintains the truth. Comp. Job 32:12; Job 40:2; Proverbs 9:7; Proverbs 24:25, et saepe;Ezekiel 3:26. Isaiah seems to have had specially before him Amos 5:10. δִ ?θָּ ?δ with the accusative of the thing (Deuteronomy 27:19; Proverbs 17:23; Amos 2:7), or the person (Proverbs 18:5; Amos 5:12), to designate a violent deed perpetrated by wresting judgment, is of frequent occurrence. But where it is joined with αְּ, it denotes the sphere in which, or the means by which the wresting of judgment is accomplished, not the terminus in quem.
As moreover ϊֹּ ?δεּ denotes everywhere in Isaiah what is null, vain, empty, and is synonymous with ψεּ ?ηַ (wind) ΰֶ ?τֶ ?ν ,δֶ ?αֶ ?μ (comp. Isaiah 24:10; Isaiah 34:11; Isaiah 40:17; Isaiah 40:23; Isaiah 41:29; Isaiah 44:9; Isaiah 45:18-19; Isaiah 49:4; Isaiah 59:4), we have to regard ϊֹּ ?δεּ as designating the empty lying accusations which were brought against the Prophet.
5. Therefore thus saith—doctrine.Isaiah 29:22-24. These verses contain the comprehensive close. According to verses 13 and 14, Israel had omitted to serve the Lord in the proper manner, and according to verse 15, they had omitted to trust in the Lord alone. That on this double sin a double crisis must follow, which will make the good elements of the people ripe for salvation, the bad elements ripe for judgment, had been declared Isaiah 29:16-21. Now the close follows: As the ancestor of Israel had been delivered from the danger of idolatry like a brand plucked from the fire, so shall Israel also be delivered, when it shall have seen that judgment on the wicked.
It will sanctify the name of the Lord, it will learn the true wisdom, and that will be its safety. ΰֶ ?μΞαֵּ ?ιϊιΧ Isaiah 29:22 = in reference to the house of Jacob (comp. Genesis 20:2; Psalms 2:7 et saepe), for in what follows it is spoken of in the third person. The clause ΰωׁ ?ψτγδεβεΧ refers to ιδεδ. That God, who had formerly saved Abraham, the progenitor of Israel, from the snares of idolatry (Joshua 24:2; Joshua 24:14-15), will also redeem Israel from the internal and external dangers which now threaten him. Israel will in the end not be put to shame (Isaiah 19:9; Isaiah 20:5; Isaiah 37:27; Isaiah 45:16-17; Isaiah 54:4 et saepe). ηָ ?εַ ?ψ candidum esse, pallescere isἅπ. λεγ. Delitzschhere observes “that people whose faces are of a bronze color know in their language only of a growing pale for shame, and not of a blushing for shame.” Both the correction (Isaiah 29:20-21), and the deliverance (Isaiah 29:18-19), will bear fruit.
The Prophet intends both when he speaks of the work of Jehovah among the people. When Israel (i.e., not the patriarch but his descendants, ιμγιε is added by way of explanation to αψΰεϊε to obviate any misunderstanding) shall see this, he will sanctify the Lord,i. e., regard Him as holy (comp. on Isaiah 8:13, and the first petition of the Lord’s prayer). [But the E.V., which puts the work of my hands in apposition to his children, is better, comp. Isaiah 49:18-21.—D. M.]. The Prophet states in Isaiah 29:23 b, that the effect of the sanctification of the name of God will be that the people will esteem as holy the Holy One of Jacob, and will fear the God of Israel. Beside the variation of Jacob and Israel, which is so frequent in the second part of Isaiah, mark how the Prophet distinguishes between sanctifying the name of God, and sanctifying the Holy One of Jacob.
This sanctification must be substantially one and the same. But when the Holy One of Jacob and the God of Israel is named as object of the second sanctification (Isaiah 29:23 b), a sanctifying seems to be thereby intended, which gives in a way which all men can perceive, the glory to this God above the gods of the heathen. The fruit of the inward disposition of heart which is externally perceptible and operative, seems to be thereby intended. As ιּ ?χγιωׁ ?εωׁ ?ξι refers to Isaiah 8:13, so ιςψιφε refers to Isaiah 8:12. Thus Israel will become truly wise. That wisdom which they thought they must conceal from God, was both foolishness and destruction.
But when they shall have learnt to sanctify the Lord, then they who hitherto erred in spirit (comp. Psalms 95:10), will attain the true wisdom, and they who heretofore murmured against God’s counsel and direction (ψβο Kal only here), will be satisfied with the discipline of God, and let it have its effect upon them (μֶ ?χַ ?η what one takes, Proverbs 1:5; Proverbs 4:2 et saepe, only here in Isaiah).
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 29:1-8. The Prophet designates Jerusalem as Ariel in a four-fold sense. Taking Ariel as denoting the city of God, the name suits Jerusalem as the holy, separated dwelling-place in which the church of God, and all saving ordinances have their seat and centre. Taking Ariel as the lion of God, the names applies to Jerusalem as the ecclesia militans, as the host of God fighting against the worldly power and conquering it. Taking Ariel as denoting the Altar of God, it sets forth Jerusalem as the place in which reconciliation with God, and the bestowal of all the gifts of His grace take place.
And, lastly, Jerusalem appears as Ariel in the signification of Mount of God, because it is the height of God which overtops all other heights, in which He manifests His glory to all the world, and to which all nations flow in order to worship Him (Isaiah 2:2 sqq.). But when Jerusalem forgets these her high honors, and neglects the obligations thereby laid upon her, she is corrected and humbled as any other city. [There may be an allusion made by the Prophet to the two-fold meaning of Ariel as lion of God, and hearth of God, but sober exegesis will be slow to admit the other meanings attached to the name of Ariel, and supposed to be here significantly alluded to by Isaiah.—D. M.].
2. Isaiah 29:3. [“It was the enemy’s army that encamped against Jerusalem; but God says that He will do it, for they are His hand, He does it by them. God had often, and long, by a host of angels, encamped for them round about them, for their protection and deliverance; but now He was turned to be their enemy, and fought against them: The siege laid against them was of His laying, and the forts raised against them were of His raising. Note, when men fight against us, we must, in them, see God contending with us.” Henry.—D. M.].
3. On Isaiah 29:7 sq. “A very consolatory comparison. The Romans and all enemies of the church are as blood-thirsty dogs. But when they have drunk up a part of the blood of the saints, and imagine, that they have swallowed up the church, it is only a dream. Since we see, that Christ and His Christians are, thank God, not yet destroyed.”—Cramer.4. On Isaiah 29:9-12. “Awful description of the sorest punishment from God, which is spiritual, confirmed blindness; which is at this day so manifest in the Jews.
For although they are confuted by so many clear and plain Scriptures of the Prophets, although they must themselves confess that the time is past, the place no more in existence, the lineage of David extinct, so that they can have no certain hope of a Messiah, they yet remain so hardened and obstinate in their opinion, as if they were drunken, mad and drowned in the snares of the devil by which they are bound, and could not come to sober and rational thoughts. This we ought to take as a mirror of the wrath of God, that we, while the book is yet open to us, may freely and diligently look into it, that it may not be closed and sealed before our eyes also.—Cramer.5. On Isaiah 29:9-12. To all those who bring to the reading of the Holy Scripture not the Spirit, from whom it proceeded, but the opposite spirit, the spirit of the world, the Scripture must be a sealed book, into which they can stare with plastered eyes, which see and yet do not see, which watch and yet at the same time sleep (Isaiah 6:9-10; Luke 8:10; Acts 28:26-27).
6. On Isaiah 29:13. Ah! how pious people would be, if only piety consisted in lip-service, and external behavior! Dιvotion aisιe, convenient religion, that is the business of all those who would willingly give to God what is God’s, and to the devil, what is the devil’s; that is, who would like to have a religion because it is required by a voice within the breast, and the power of custom and example, without thereby paining the flesh. Comp. Isaiah 1:11 sqq.; Isaiah 58:2 sqq.; Amos 5:23; Matthew 15:7 sqq.
7. On Isaiah 29:14. [“They did one strange thing, they removed all sincerity from their hearts; now God will go on and do another, He will remove all sagacity from their heads: the wisdom of their wise men shall perish. They played the hypocrite, and thought to put a cheat upon God, and now they are left to themselves to play the fool; and not only to put a cheat upon themselves, but to be easily cheated by all about them …. This was fulfilled in the wretched infatuation which the Jewish nation were manifestly under, after they had rejected the gospel of Christ … Judgments on the mind, though least taken notice of, are to be most wondered at.—Henry, D. M.].
8. [Formalism in worship is here assigned as the cause of the judicial blindness which has happened to Israel. Mark the logical connection between Isaiah 29:13-14. The same judgment inflicted for the same reason, has befallen a large part of the nominal Christian Church. They who worship God must worship Him in spirit and in truth. We are amazed at the ignorance in matters of religion displayed by men of great mental capacity and learning, who have appeared among the Jews, and professors of a corrupt Christianity. That which excites our astonishment is here accounted for.—D. M.].
9. On Isaiah 29:18 sqq. “Here everything is reversed. Before, he had said, the wise shall be blind. Here he says, the blind shall see. The scope of all that is said is that they who were in office and were called priests and Levites, together with the bulk of the people, should be blinded for their unbelief. On the other hand, the poor, wretched people, that had neither office nor reputation, together with the heathen, shall be called, and shall be the people of God, who truly know God, invoke His name, and have joy, comfort and help in Him.” Veit.
Dietrich.10. On Isaiah 29:23. [“The emphatic mention of the Holy One of Jacob and the God of Israel, as the object to be sanctified, implies a relation still existing between all believers and their spiritual ancestry, as well as a relation of identity between the Jewish and the Christian church. Alexander.—D. M.].
HINTSOn Isaiah 29:1-8. How the Lord regards and deals with His church. 1) She is precious in His eyes, a. as the city of God; b. as the lion of God; c. as the altar of God; d. as the mount of God. 2) He brings her very low (Isaiah 29:2-6). 3) He delivers her wonderfully (Isaiah 29:7-8).
2. On Isaiah 29:9-12. As the light of the sun does not illuminate, but dazzles and closes an eye which is not adapted for receiving it (e. g., that of the mole), so also the word of God is for those who are not born of God and cannot receive the Spirit of God, by no means a light which enlightens their inner sense, but rather an element which dazzles their mental eye, and confuses their senses, so that they stand before the word as one who can read stands before a sealed book, or as one who cannot read before a writing which is handed to him.
3. On Isaiah 29:13-14. Warning against hypocrisy. 1) Its nature (it consists in honoring God with self-invented, external, ceremonial service, while yet the heart is far from Him); 2) its punishment (the wisdom which is self-asserting and forgets God will come to shame).
4. On Isaiah 29:15-24. Every man has his task in this life. Some, however, are minded to transact their affairs without God. For either they do not believe that there is a God, or if they believe it, they wish to be independent of Him. They wish to execute everything according to their own mind and their own lusts. But when they imagine that they can carry out their plans as it were behind God’s back, unobserved by Him, this cannot be (Isaiah 29:15-16). This is great folly, too. For such a work cannot succeed. Therefore the Prophet utters a woe on such an attempt, Isaiah 29:15. They, on the other hand, who do everything with God, partake of the most manifold blessing; the deaf hear, the blind see, the wretched rejoice, the poor are enriched, the oppressed and despised are delivered.
Footnotes:Heb. I will add.O your perverting! Or is the clay esteemed like the potter, that the work should say to its maker, etc.Heb; shall add.mischief.by word.by deceit.For when he, when his children, see the work of my hands, etc.Heb. shall know understanding.
III.—THE THIRD WOE Isaiah 301. THE SIN OF THOSE WHO SEEK HELP FROM EGYPT, NOT FROM JEHOVAH
Isaiah 30:1-51 Woe to the rebellious children, saith the Lord,That take counsel, but not of me;
And that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit,
That they may add sin to sin:
2 That walk to go down into Egypt,
And have not asked at my mouth;
To strengthen themselves in the strength of Pharaoh,
And to trust in the shadow of Egypt!
3 Therefore shall the strength of Pharaoh be your shame,
And the trust in the shadow of Egypt your confusion.
4 For his princes were at Zoan,
And his ambassadors came to Hanes.
5 They were all ashamed of a people that could not profit them,
Nor be an help nor profit,
But a shame, and also a reproach.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_30:1. If we take ρεψψιν in a causative sense = making apostasy, which view is justified by the form of the word, (which is after the Pilel conjugation), and by its use elsewhere, (Lamentations 3:11), we can then join with it μςωׂ ?εϊεβεΧ as the infinitive of nearer specification. This infinitive then expresses wherein and how far they are απινρεψψιν (Isaiah 1:23; Isaiah 65:2).
Isaiah 30:2. The Kal. ςεּ ?ζ from which many derive ςεֹ ?ζ, does not occur. We find only Hiphil δֵ ?ςִ ?ιζ, Isaiah 10:31; Exodus 9:19; Jeremiah 4:6; Jeremiah 6:1. The context too appears to me not to require by any means the signification “confugere and refugium,” as this meaning is contained in the following clause, and a repetition of the same thought cannot be expected. I prefer, therefore, to take ςεֹ ?ζ in the signification “to be strong” and ξςεζ, as it is. often used = munimentum, defence, protection (Isaiah 17:10; Isaiah 25:4; Isaiah 27:5, et saepe). ηָ ?ρָ ?δ is confugere; it is found united with ςַ ?μ Judges 9:15; Psalms 36:8; Psalms 57:2.
Isaiah 30:3. ξַֽ ?ηֲ ?ρֶ ?δ = ) ηָ ?ρεּ ?ϊ Isaiah 4:6; Isaiah 25:1; Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:17), is ἅπ. λεγ.
Isaiah 30:5. δֹ ?αִ ?ΰιωׁ is a mongrel form arising from δִ ?αְ ?ΰִ ?ιωׁ δֹ ?αִ ?ιωׁ, the former of which itself proceeding from a confusion of the two roots ιָ ?αַ ?ωׁ and αּ ?εֹ ?ωׁ, signifies pudorem produxit, to produce shame, to be ashamed, to come to disgrace, while δִ ?αְ ?ΰִ ?ιωׁ denotes foetorem protulit, both together therefore signify “to produce stinking disgrace, or disgraceful stench, to make a stinking, disgraceful figure, therefore, ignominiously to come to shame.” All (Ewald, § 286, e) are disgraced on account of a people that does not profit them (the senders of the embassy), is not for help, nor for profit. This εμֹ ?ΰμδεςιμ strikes us as tautological. It is probably occasioned by the effort clearly apparent in this sentence to multiply the “L” and “O” sounds, and especially the combination of the two.
AND 1. The subject treated by the Prophet in these chapters is unfolded more and more fully, so as to be perfectly clear. What he had hitherto only hinted at, he now declares in plain terms: the alliance with Egypt is the sin against which he contends with all the force of his spirit. This alliance is no longer a subject of deliberation. It has already taken shape. An embassy to conclude this league is already on the way.
The Prophet therefore utters another (the third) woe against the apostate people, because they form such purposes without the Lord, only to heap sin upon sin (Isaiah 30:1). They have gone down to Egypt without consulting the Lord, in order to find there increase of power, and protection (Isaiah 30:2). But power and protection shall be changed into disgrace (Isaiah 30:3). It was possible to try to invalidate this threatening of the Prophet by a denial of the facts. But he leaves no room for such contradiction. For, says he, the Jewish princes are already in Zoan, and will come to Hanes (Isaiah 30:4).
Therefore, he repeats with emphasis his threatening: Israel will be ashamed of the Egyptian nation which can bring to the people of God no advantage, but only disgrace.
2. Woe to——a reproach.Isaiah 30:1-5. δει comp. on Isaiah 29:1. ςωׂ ?εϊςφδ is = to execute a counsel (2 Samuel 17:23). εμΰξπι as Hosea 8:4. We had ξַ ?ρֵּ ?λָ ?δ25:7; Isaiah 28:20 (comp. ξַ ?ρֶּ ?λֶ ?ϊJudges 16:13-14) in the signification “woven or plaited covering;” but in this chapter, Isaiah 30:22, (comp. Isaiah 42:17) the word has the signification “what is molten, cast.” That πρκξρλδ signifies here (Isaiah 30:1) to form an alliance, is placed out of doubt by the context. But it is questionable whether tire expression originally denotes “to weave a web,” or “σπονδὴνσπἐνδεσθαι.” The latter is to me the more probable, not although, but because ξρλδ from πָ ?ρַ ?κְ to pour, to cast, denotes a molten image. For it seems to me that the Prophet intends a double sense by the expression: libationem effundere and idolum fusile fundere.
He hints therewith at the idolatrous character of such a league, which is a transgression of the first [second] commandment. This agrees very well with εμΰψεηι, an expression which, both in sense and construction, is connected with εμΰξπι as we are to regard ψεηι as dependent on the preposition ξο. The clause that they may add sin to sin does not express the conscious, subjective design, but only affirms that the objective fact is of such a character as to warrant the conclusion as to the conscious design (comp. Amos 2:7; Jeremiah 44:8 et saepe). ρτεϊ comp. on Isaiah 29:1. δδμλιν Isaiah 30:2 (apposition to απινρεψψιν Isaiah 30:1) marks the going away, the terminus a quo,μψγϊthe terminus ad quern. In δδμλιν we must not press the notion of time, but only the notion of the word, i. e., the Prophet does not set forth that they are now going away (praesens), but states the simple fact of their going away. If we so understand the word, every appearance of a contradiction with Isaiah 30:4 disappears. ωׁ ?ΰμτιιΧΧ besides only Joshua 9:14 comp.
Genesis 24:57. Isaiah 30:4 contains a proof which is introduced by λִּ ?ι. It appears to me that the Prophet supposes the attempt on the part of his hearers still to deny this league with Egypt which had been laid to their charge. He therefore says: Everything stated in verses 1–3 is true, for the ambassadors have been already in Zoan, and are now on the way to Hanes. διε is therefore the proper perfect; the imperfect ιβιςε (comp. Genesis 28:12) stands for the designation of a fact yet incomplete, still in progress, i.e., the ambassadors are only about to reach Hanes. The accusative is accus, loci.
How Isaiah could so speak is easily seen, if we do not forget that he was the Prophet of Jehovah, and that the Spirit of the Lord, whom the others excluded in their consultations (ver.1), assisted the Prophet. Men told him nothing at all of the embassy; assuredly the ambassadors themselves sent him no message, nor was a message sent by them communicated to him. But yet he knows that the ambassadors have actually arrived in Egypt. His mentioning the cities Zoan and Hanes is not to be pressed, i.e., he does not mean to mark precisely the exact points between which the ambassadors now are. He has other reasons for naming these cities. I do not comprehend how Delitzsch can say, “the Tanitic dynasty then bore rule, which preceded the Ethiopian: Tanis and Anysis were the two royal seats.” For after the middle of the 8th century B.
C., the Ethiopian (the 25th) dynasty already bore rule (Duncker,Geschichte des Alterth. I p. 598). Hezekiah cannot therefore have formed an alliance with the predecessor of the Ethiopian dynasty. Delitzsch seems here to rely too much on Herodotus, II., 137 init., where a king Anysis of Anysis, i.e., Hanes, is named as predecessor of the Ethiopian Sabakos. Moreover, Ewald’s assumption resting on Herodotus, II. 141, that the Egyptian king, with whom Sennacherib had to do, was the Ethiopian Sethon, priest of Hephaestos, who was at the same time ruler of lower and middle Egypt with Tanis for his royal seat, is refuted by Assyrian monuments. For, although the first inscriptions that mention the name Tirhaka (Assyrian Tar-ku-u), belong to the time after Sennacherib, yet the monuments of Sennacherib expressly name his Egyptian opponent “king of Meroe” (Schrader,die Keilinsehriften und das A.
T., p. 203), which could not possibly be said of a Tanitic king. When Isaiah here mentions Zoan (situated in the Delta of the Nile, southwest of Pelusium), he is probably led to do so, because this city, since the end of the second millennium before Christ, had been the capital of the kingdom. For till the expulsion of Hyksos, Memphis, then Thebes, had been the capital; then, from the epoch mentioned, Zoan, (comp. Dunker,Geschichte des Alterth, I. p. 598). Isaiah had already (Isaiah 29:11) mentioned Hanes (Egyptian Hnηs, Ehnes, afterwards Herakleopolis, situated in the neighborhood of lake Moeris), because it had been last after Tanis the royal seat of a native dynasty (comp. Herodotus, II, 137).
If then Zoan and Hanes are the cities which had last been royal seats, and if they were known as such to the Prophet, there is really no reason with Hitzig, Knobel and others to adopt the reading ηִ ?πָּ ?νιִ ?ιβָֽ ?ςεּ, which lies at the basis of the Alexandrine version, but has in it only a very uncertain support. It is likewise unnecessary, and does not correspond to the context to refer the suffix in ξַ ?μְ ?ΰָ ?λָ ?ιε to the Egyptian king as having vainly summoned the warrior caste by his messengers (Herodotus, II. 141). It is most natural to refer the suffix in ξμΰλιε to the same subject to which the suffix in ωׂ ?ψιε belongs. If the Prophet wished the suffix in ξμΰλιε to have a different reference from that in ωׂ ?ψιε, he must have made this known in a way not to be misunderstood.
Footnotes:make an alliance.have been.come.
2. THE PROPHET AS HE OUGHT TO BE, AND AS HE OUGHT NOT TO BE
Isaiah 30:6-146 The burden of the beasts of the south:
Into the land of trouble and anguish,
From whence come the young and old lion,
The viper and fiery flying serpent,
They will carry their riches upon the shoulders of young asses,
And their treasures upon the bunches of camels,
To a people that shall not profit them.7 For the Egyptians shall help in vain, and to no purpose;
Therefore have I cried concerning this, Their strength is to sit still.
8 Now go, write it before them in a table,
And note it in a book,
That it may be for the time to come for ever and ever:
9 That this is a rebellious people,
Lying children, children that will not hear the law of the Lord:10 Which say to the Seers, See not;
And to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things,
Speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits:
11 Get you out of the way, turn aside out of the path,
Cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us.
12 Wherefore thus saith the Holy One of Israel,
Because ye despise this word,
And trust in oppression and perverseness,
And stay thereon:
13 Therefore this iniquity shall be to you as a breach ready to fall,
Swelling out in a high wall,
Whose breaking cometh suddenly at an instant.
14 And he shall break it as the breaking of the potters’ vessel,
That is broken in pieces; he shall not spare;
So that there shall not be found in the bursting of it a sherd
To take fire from the hearth,
Or to take water withal out of the pit.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_30:11, The form ξִ ?πֵּ ?ι is found only here. The Masoretic note under the text is to be read “Two Nuns with Tseri.” ξִ ?πֵּ ?ι is formed after the analogy of the forms ΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψֵ ?ι ,ςֲ ?μֵ ?ι, etc., and has the same meaning as the more common ξִ ?πִּ ?ι (Isaiah 46:3).
AND 1. In order to set forth right vividly the certainty of his prophecy, Isaiah tells the people that he has been commanded to mark his utterance concerning the Egyptian help as a particular massa, to which he now gives an emblematic title similar to what we find in chapters 21, 22. The purport of this massa is this: The Jewish ambassadors drag rich treasures laboriously through the perilous wilderness to Egypt, in order to purchase the assistance of the Egyptians which will prove to be empty vapor; wherefore Jehovah Himself gives Egypt the name “Boaster, sitting still” (Isaiah 30:6-7). This massa is to be preserved till the remotest future, as a witness for the truth of what was said by the Prophet (Isaiah 30:8). In this way it must be made possible to establish objectively the truth of the prophetic testimony, as all sense for the truth is wanting in the people of Israel, for they are a lying race, that will not hear the law of Jehovah (Isaiah 30:9). They show this by actually demanding of the prophets that they should not tell them the truth, but only what is agreeable, even when it is pure falsehood (verse 10); and, further, by requiring that they (the prophets) should depart from the right way, and remove from their (the people’s) eyes the Holy One of Israel (Isaiah 30:11).
Because then they despise the word of the Lord, and rely only on violence at home and a perverse foreign policy (Isaiah 30:12), this their sin shall be to them as a rent wall which bulges out and threatens every moment to fall (Isaiah 30:13). And it will also fall, and its remains will through the violence of the fall become reduced to small pieces such as the sherds of a pot, none of which is large enough for one to carry in it fire from the hearth or water from the pit (Isaiah 30:14).
2. The burden——and ever.Isaiah 30:6-8. Very unjustly is the spuriousness of the inscription ξωׂ ?ΰαδξεϊπβα maintained. In Isaiah 30:8 the Prophet is commanded to record it, i.e., the preceding brief, sharply marked saying in a particular tablet to serve as documentary evidence in the future. I understand this saying to be verses 6 and 7. For they are essentially of the same import as verses 1–5.
But they reproduce this import in a quite peculiar, emblematic, mystical form. They bear, we might say, a decidedly prophetical character. Their purport is designedly set forth in this peculiar form for the purpose of being specially recorded. If now this brief saying is manifestly designed to have an independent existence, why should it not also have its own name, its particular inscription? The Prophet has recorded from 13–23. a series of prophecies against foreign nations, to each of which he gives the title ξַ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ. He has, in particular, in chapter 21 brought together some rather short utterances under the title ξωׂ ?ΰ with an emblematical addition (Isaiah 21:1; Isaiah 21:11; Isaiah 21:13).
Might he not designedly insert here in the text such a brief emblematic ξωּׂ ?ΰ, as he was led to do so by the peculiar circumstances attending its origin? As he states, Isaiah 30:8, he received, after having orally delivered the words, the command also to make a particular record of them in writing. As now this recording formed an interlude to his oral teaching, and as he committed to writing all his oral teaching, why should he not record this interlude also? It could not possibly be passed over. Nor could he place it as an independent ξωׂ ?ΰ among the rest, for it would have been unintelligible in that connection. It is a rash conclusion to declare that the very expression ξωׂ ?ΰ is an evidence that the inscription did not proceed from Isaiah, because he never used the word.
It is only in such prophecies as immediately refer to the theocracy that Isaiah does not use the word. It is with him a standing designation of prophecies concerning foreign nations. On this very account the word is here entirely appropriate. This only may be admitted, that when Isaiah orally delivered the prophecy contained in Isaiah 30:6-7, he did not then employ the words ξωׂ ?ΰαδΧπΧ. Possibly they may have been put as an inscription only to the writing mentioned in Isaiah 30:8. The purport of the massa is denoted by the words αδξεϊπβα.
I believe that these words are ambiguous, and are purposely used in their ambiguity. The emblematic inscriptions Isaiah 21:1; Isaiah 21:11; Isaiah 21:13; Isaiah 22:1 are ambiguous. πβα is the south generally (Joshua 15:4; Joshua 18:15; Joshua 18:19, et saepe), but also specially the south of Judah (comp. on Isaiah 21:1). It is clear that the word cannot be taken here in the latter sense. For although the ambassadors on the way to Egypt crossed the south of Judah, they went also far beyond it. They made a journey into the south, into southern lands in general, and to these Egypt, the end of their journey, belongs. The αηξεϊπβα are therefore beasts which belong to the south generally.
As then the Prophet above all means to warn against Egypt, must not also an Egyptian beast belong to these αְּ ?δֵּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊπβα? In fact αδξεϊ recalls to mind the αְּ ?δֵּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊJob 40:15, the hippopotamus, in Egyptian probably p-ehe-mou, from which there is formed in Hebrew αְּ ?δֵ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ resembling the plural of αְּ ?δֵ ?ξָ ?δ (Comp. Lepsius in Herz.R.-Enc, I., p. 141), which could the more easily happen, since the Egyptian word signifies bos aquae, as the animal is called among the Arabians gamϋs el-bahr, the river buffalo, and among the Italians bomarino. Comp. Herod. II. 71.
But the Prophet does not think of the behemoth only. He has certainly also in his eye the beasts going to the south, bearing the treasures of Judah. Yea, I believe that the editors of Drechsler’sIsaiah (II. p. 65, note) are perfectly right, when they say that we are to regard also as a subject of the oracle “the Magnates of Judah sent to Egypt, who more devoid of knowledge than ox and ass, belong to the beasts of burden.” This kind of irony corresponds to the manner of Isaiah, and suits the context well. For not the innocent beasts, but those fools and untrustworthy Egypt must be regarded as the objects of the divine massa. [The beasts of the south are simply the asses and camels that bear the treasures to Egypt—D. M.]. αΰψυφΧεφΧ is to be connected with μαιΰ .ιωׂ ?ΰο to ξςετσ is parenthetical. The expressions φָ ?γָ ?δ (angustiae) and φεּ ?χָ ?δ (coarctatio) occur also in the verse, Isaiah 8:22; yet they are found combined as here only in Proverbs 1:27.—μαιΰ comp. on Isaiah 5:29. μַ ?ιִ ?ωׁ is found combined with μαιΰ only here, and occurs besides only in two other places: Job 4:22; Proverbs 30:30. ξֵ ?δֶ ?ν refers to ΰψυ, there being substituted for this term in the singular the idea of the many separate localities from which such beasts may come.
We, who are more accustomed to mark the place where, than the place whence anything appears (comp. e.g.ξֵ ?ςַ ?μ and ξִ ?ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊμָ ?ψָ ?χִ ?ιςַ ?Genesis 1:7), can fitly render “wherein are lioness and lion.” ΰֶ ?τְ ?ςֶ ?δvipera, regulus, besides here Isaiah 59:5; Job 20:16. ωׂ ?ψσξςετσ comp. on Isaiah 14:29. Observe the irony: through so dangerous a country the grandees of Judah drag their treasures, in order to purchase a help which will leave them in the lurch. ςιψιν (Kethibh ςֲ ?εָ ?ψִ ?ιν) comp. Isaiah 30:24; Genesis 32:16; Judges 10:4; Judges 12:14. The plural of ηַ ?ιִ ?μ occurs besides only in the signification “forces, bands of warriors,” and is mostly preceded by βִ ?αֹּ ?ψֵ ?ι or ωָׂ ?ψֵ ?ι (1 Chronicles 7:5; 1 Chronicles 7:7; 1 Chronicles 7:11; 1 Chronicles 7:40; Jeremiah 40:7; Jeremiah 40:13; Jeremiah 41:11, et saepe). Only in Ecclesiastes 10:10 does the word stand in the general signification “vires.” γַּ ?αֶּ ?ωֶׁ ?ϊ hump, bunch, is ἄπ. λεγ. But Egypt will help vapor and emptiness (δαμεψιχ only here) i.e., the result of its assistance will be nothing but empty vapor, δαμεψιχ are therefore not to be taken as adverbs (which they can indeed be, comp.
Psalms 73:13; Job 21:34; Job 35:16, et saepe), but as accusatives of the object depending on an idea of making, effecting latent in ςζψ (comp. Isaiah 19:21; Exodus 10:26; Job 6:4; Zechariah 7:5). The Lord gives Egypt also a characteristic name, as it were, to serve as a warning that no one may rely on this deceitful help to his own detriment. He names Egypt ψδαδνωׁ ?αϊ. Here, first of all, it appears to me that the Prophet chose this expression with reference to a place in Job. We read, Job 9:13, in a context which treats of the might and majesty of the supreme God: “Eloah turns not His anger, under Him bow themselves ςֹ ?ζְ ?ψֵ ?ιψַ ?δַ ?α.” Whatever the author of the book of Job may have understood by these ςζψιψδα, at all events in view of Isaiah’s unquestionable acquaintance with the book of Job, and of his frequent references to it, it is certainly not to be regarded as accidental that he applies to Egypt the two words ςζψ and ψδα which stand together in that remarkable passage in Job which we own to be for us very obscure—ψδα (from ψָ ?δַ ?αtumultuari, strepere3:5; Proverbs 6:3; Psalms 138:3; Son 6:5) is ferocia, superbia, and is used poetically to designate a huge aquatic animal (Job 26:12; Isaiah 51:9) which is conceived of as symbol of Egypt; hence ψַ ?δַ ?α occurs simply as symbolical name of Egypt: Psalms 87:4; Psalms 89:11. ψδα is then also here a designation of Egypt in the sense of ferocia, superbia, haughtiness, boasting.
The words δνωׁ ?αϊ are a closer specification, involving at the same time an antithesis. We best fill up the ellipsis by supplying ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ before δֵ ?ν, as hereby the abruptness of the construction is avoided. Cases such as ςֵ ?ξֶ ?νδַ ?ωִּׂ ?γּ ?ινδεּ ?ΰιָ ?νδֵ ?ξֶּ ?μַ ?η ,αֶּ ?μςδִ ?ιΰΞφֹ ?ςַ ?ψGenesis 14:2-3 are not analogous; as in them an unknown name is explained by one that is known. But in our passage a new essential antithetic element is to be added to the first name; the whole name is to be marked as consisting of two parts in contrast to one another: Boasting that is at the same time sitting still. This thought is best expressed in German [and English] by the total omission of the pronoun, Boasting—sitting still.[“Those who approve of our common rendering, Their strength is to sit still, consider the words as designed to teach that the true strength and security of the Jews consisted in the exercise of quiet and patient confidence in God, assured that He would deliver them in His own way. To justify such rendering, however, the first two words must be joined, ψָ ?δְ ?αִ ?δֶ ?ν.
But against this construction there lie two objections. First, the pronominal suffix could not with propriety be referred to any antecedent but Egypt at the beginning of the verse. Secondly, the noun ψַ ?δַ ?α never occurs with the acceptation strength, but always signifies pride, insolence, rage.” Henderson. If we only keep in mind, as a Hebrew would do, the significance of the name Rahab as meaning arrogance, we shall hardly find a happier translation of this expression than that given by Lowth,Rahab the Inactive.—D. M.]. The same explanation is to be given of the plural δֵ ?ν as of ξֵ ?δֻ ?ν in Isaiah 30:6.
Drechsler is disposed, after the example of Cocceius and Vitringa, to derive ωֶ ?αֶ ?ϊ from ωָׁ ?αַ ?ϊdesinere. But. not to mention that such a derivative ωֶׁ ?αֶ ?ϊ does not occur (for in Genesis 21:19; Proverbs 20:3ωֶׁ ?αֶ ?ϊ is certainly the infin. of ιָ ?ωַׁ ?α), the notion of ceasing, of doing nothing more is here quite unsuitable. The context requires the idea of inability to do anything, not withstanding great noise with words and gestures. The Prophet, after having hitherto delivered his prophecy orally, received the command also to write it down immediately. And this should be done ΰִ ?ϊָּ ?νi.e., before their (the people’s) eyes (Isaiah 59:12; Job 12:3 et saepe). For it was to be established that the Prophet had predicted the fruitlessness of the effort to obtain aid from Egypt, in order that, when this should be demonstrated by fact, the omniscience of Jehovah, and the trustworthiness of His servant as a Prophet, might appear indubitable.
It appears to me that αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ intimates that the Prophet could not do the writing on the spot where he was speaking, but must repair to a place where he would find the materials necessary for writing. μεּ ?ηַ and ρֵ ?τֶ ?ψ differ only rhetorically in the parallelism. For, in fact, the word was to be not twice, but only once, written down. It is not necessary to read μְ ?ςֵ ?γ for μָ ?ςַ ?γ Observe the climax in the three specifications of time.
3. That this is a——of the pit.Isaiah 30:9-14. The writing down which was commanded would not be needful, if there were alive in the people a mind for the truth and for what was really conducive to their welfare. But as they now refuse to hear the warning voice of truth, so they would also hereafter deny that they had been warned, if it could not be proved to them, as we say, on black and white. The Prophet, therefore, gives a reason for what he had said, Isaiah 30:6-8, by the words λιςνξψιεβεΧ Isaiah 30:9 sqq. The expression ςַ ?νξְ ?ψִ ?ι is found only here in Isaiah.
He had, perhaps, Numb. 17:25 [E. V. Numbers 17:10] in view, where the command is given that the rod of Aaron should be kept λֶּ ?ηָ ?ωׁ ·μְ ?ΰιֹ ?ϊμִ ?αְ ?πֵ ?ιΞξֶ ?ψִֽ ?ι is found only here. So corrupt are the people that they actually dare to attempt to prescribe to the Prophets what they ought, and what they ought not to prophesy, as if the true Prophet could see anything else than what Jehovah shows him (comp. the demand made upon the Prophet Micaiah, the son of Imlah, and his answer to it, 1 Kings 22:13-14, also the answer of Balaam Numbers 22:38, sqq.). The distinction between εֹ ?ΰִ ?ιν and ηֹ ?ζִ ?ιν has merely a rhetorical significance; for there is no real difference between them (comp. Isaiah 29:10 and 1 Samuel 9:9). εֹ ?ΰֶ ?δ occurs in this signification in Isaiah only here.
These people would have best liked entirely to forbid the Prophets of Jehovah to see anything as Prophets. But where this failed, they tried to induce them at least to accommodate their visions to the wishes of the public. They said to them: see not right things (the truth Isaiah 26:10; Isaiah 59:14) for us (dat. commodi), speak unto us what is agreeable (properly smooth, going smoothly on, Psalms 12:3-4, only here in Isaiah), and see deceptions (ξδϊμεϊἄπ. λεγ., comp. δֲ ?ϊֻ ?μִּ ?ινJob 17:3 and Hiph. δֵ ?ϊֵ ?μGenesis 31:7; Judges 16:10 et saepe). Yea, they proceed quite consistently still further; they call upon the Prophets to turn aside altogether from the right way, that is, to forsake the Lord Himself, and to remove Him, the Holy One of Israel (on Isaiah 29:19) entirely from the face of the people. They thus require that the Prophets should not only apostatize to idolatry, but even take up an offensive attitude against the Lord.δִ ?ωְׁ ?αִּ ?ιϊ (Isaiah 13:11; Isaiah 16:10; Isaiah 21:2) is used of the abolition of idolatrous institutions, e.g., 2 Kings 23:5. This wicked conduct cannot remain unpunished.
Because they thus contemptuously reject (ξΰν with αְּ comp. Isaiah 7:15 sq.; Isaiah 33:15; comp. Amos 2:4) the warning word of the Lord, which Isaiah announced to them respecting their Egyptian policy, and hope for their deliverance by exacting by violence the money needed to purchase the aid of Egypt (Isaiah 30:6, comp. 2 Kings 15:20), and by sinful reliance on the help of the heathen (πָ ?μεֹ ?ζ part. Niph., perversum, pravum, only here in Isaiah, besides only in the Proverbs of Solomon Proverbs 2:14; Proverbs 3:32;Proverbs 14:2 comp. Proverbs 3:21; Proverbs 4:21), this godless procedure of theirs shall be to them the precursor of certain destruction. As the breach in a wall and its bulging out is the sure precursor of its fall, (comp.
Psalms 62:4), so this Egyptian alliance shall be a symptom, not of the deliverance, but of the ruin of Judah. τֶּ ?ψֶ ?υ (besides only Isaiah 58:2) is manifestly not simply the mere rent, but that which is rent or burst in pieces. A τּ ?ψυπτμ is a part of a wall that has burst asunder, which is falling, i.e., about to fall. It is also πִ ?αְ ?ςֶ ?δ (tumescens, αָּ ?ςָ ?δ to swell up, boil up, Isaiah 64:1, to desire eagerly Isaiah 21:12; except in Isaiah the word occurs only Obadiah 1:6) in a high wall, the higher the wall, the more dangerous the breach. τϊΰνμτϊς comp. Isaiah 29:5. The suffix in ωִׁ ?αְ ?ψָ ?δּ refers to ηεֹ ?ξָ ?δ. When we read in the next verse εּ ?ωְׁ ?αָ ?ψָ ?δּ, Jehovah is evidently the subject, and the object is the wall, by which Judah is to be understood—a rapid transition from the image to the thing signified, which is here the less surprising as another image is immediately employed in what follows.
That the subject of ωְׁ ?αָ ?ψָ ?δּ must be a person, clearly appears from the nature of the figure, as it is more closely defined by the following words λϊεϊμΰιηξμ. For it is not a potter’s vessel that breaks of itself that is spoken of, but. One which is intentionally (μΰιηξμ) broken in pieces (λϊεϊ is therefore the nearer specification of ωֵׁ ?αֶ ?ψ: the transition from the infinitive to the finite verb in μΰιηξμ occurs frequently, and is here rendered necessary especially by the negation). ξְ ?λִ ?ϊָּ ?δcontusio, then as the abstract for the concrete, that which is broken in pieces, the fragments, ηָ ?ϊָ ?δcapere, to fetch, besides here only Psalms 52:7; Proverbs 4:27; Proverbs 17:10; Proverbs 25:22. ιָ ?χεּ ?γ (the verb ιָ ?χַ ?γ in Isaiah only Isaiah 10:16; Isaiah 65:5 and here), is that which is kindled, burning, the glowing fire. ηָ ?ωַׂ ?σ is properly nudare, retegere. But while we take off the surface, we, as it were, uncover the fluid. ςֵ ?ψָ ?δ, nudavit, is likewise used of pouring out, because the bottom of the vessel is thereby uncovered—(Genesis 24:20; 2 Chronicles 24:11; Isaiah 53:12). ηָ ?ωַׂ ?σ occurs further in Isaiah 20:4; Isaiah 47:2; Isaiah 52:10. βֶּ ?αֶ ?ΰ is a cavity, a deep place in the earth, only here in Isaiah (comp. Ezekiel 47:11). That the Prophet alludes here to the exile is evident.
But the passage did not receive its complete fulfilment till the second, or Roman exile.
Footnotes:through a land of trouble.lioness and lion.I call it; Boaster that sits still.Or, to her.Heb. the latter day.Or, fraud.Heb. the bottle of potters.
3. THE AND THE WELL-FOUNDED
Isaiah 30:15-1815 For thus saith the Lord God, the Holy One of Israel;
In returning and rest shall ye be saved:
In quietness and in confidence shall he your strength:
And ye would not.
16 But ye said, No; for we will flee upon horses;
Therefore shall ye flee:
And, We will ride upon the swift;
Therefore shall they that pursue you be swift.
17 One thousand shall flee at the rebuke of one;
At the rebuke of five shall ye flee:
Till ye be left as a beacon upon the top of a mountain,
And as an ensign on an hill.
18 And therefore will the Lord wait, that he may be gracious unto you,
And therefore will he be exalted, that he may have mercy upon you:
For the Lord is a God of judgment:
Blessed are all they that wait for him.
AND 1. That the way of deliverance pursued by Israel was wrong, appears not only from its roots (Isaiah 30:9-11) and from its fruit (Isaiah 30:12-14), but also from setting over against it that which is declared by Jehovah to be alone salutary: Returning and rest in Him; quiet, patient trust in Him who only is strong and makes strong. But Israel declined to take this latter way (Isaiah 30:15). According to their notion, only Egypt’s horses could help them. But these horses are to serve only for precipitate flight. Runners, too, there shall be, but at the disposal of the pursuers of fleeing Israel (Isaiah 30:16).
A great number of Israelites will flee from a petty band of enemies, and Israel’s whole might will be reduced to but a small remnant, that might be compared with a single pine or a solitary banner on a mountain-height (Isaiah 30:17). And the final consequence will be that the Lord, as He is a God who exercises justice, must delay His help, which eventually will not be withheld. Then will it appear that only they are, to be pronounced happy who hope on the Lord (Isaiah 30:18). [I understand the purport of Isa 30:18 differently. See exegetical and critical remarks on it.—D. M.]
2. Isaiah 30:15-18. For thus saith——wait for him.—ωׁ ?εּ ?αָ ?δ [ἅπ. λεγ.) is certainly not quickening, vivificatio, but returning. For the question here relates to what Israel was bound to do. And ωεּ ?α is that very significant leading term in the prophecy of Isaiah, and especially in that of Jeremiah, which we have already (Isaiah 1:27) taken notice of, and have particularly remarked in the name ωׁ ?ΰψιωׁ ?εα (comp. on Isaiah 7:3). πηϊ from πεּ ?ηַ, to rest (comp. Isaiah 30:30, et saepe), as ψַ ?ηַ ?ϊ, Isaiah 30:24, from ψεּ ?ηַ, marks, as it were, the point where the ωׁ ?εּ ?αָ ?δ ends.
For Israel has to return to the Lord and then rest in the Lord (comp. “Syria resteth on Ephraim,” Isaiah 7:2). This meaning seems to me more appropriate than that of “rest from one’s own self-confiding endeavor” (Del.). [Delitzsch appears to me to set forth the exact idea intended by πηϊ. It is hard to assume an ellipsis of the words “in the Lord” after rest.But the supplement proposed by Delitzsch is naturally suggested by the context.—D. M.]—δωׁ ?χθ includes the idea of abstaining from making one’s self outwardly busy, as well as that of inward composure. Isaiah called δַ ?ωְׁ ?χֵ ?θ (Isaiah 7:4) to Ahaz, who was seeking safety in external military and political measures. αθηδ (ἅπ. λεγ.) forms a fine counterpart to δωׁ ?χθ: the true repose rests on the confidence which casts every concern on the Lord (comp. Isaiah 32:17, where also δωׁ ?χθ and αθη stand together.
In this union of self-restraint and of yielding one’s self to the Lord would consist Israel’s strength (βαεψδ, Isaiah 3:25; Isaiah 11:2; Isaiah 28:6; Isaiah 30:15; Isaiah 33:13; Isaiah 36:5; in the second part only the plural βְּ ?αεּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ63:15, occurs). But alas! Israel refuses to make this self-surrender to the Lord (Isaiah 30:9). The people say rather: ςμρενππεν (Isaiah 30:16). The Vulgate translates: ad equos fugiemus, as in Isaiah 10:3. But it is apparent that the rhyme between πεּ ?ν and ρεּ ?ν is designed; and for the sake of the rhyme a modification of the meaning of πεּ ?ν is allowable.
The following words—we will ride upon the swift—make clear the thought which the Prophet desired to express by ςμρενπΧ. I therefore take πεν, as many modern interpreters do, in the sense of celeriter ferri, festinare (comp. πεּ ?ς ,πεּ ?υ, in German fliehen and fliegen [in English to flee and to fly). If the clause signified “on horses will we flee” (Drechsler), then it must be said in opposition: therefore shall ye flee on foot. We should then expect a word which would indicate slow flight. But in using this language the Israelites were thinking of meeting the enemy on swift horses. The appropriate antithetic statement which the Prophet makes is: no, horses will serve you only for flight.
Parallel to “we will hasten upon horses” is the clause ςμΞχμπψλα. Only here is χμ, celer, κέλης (comp. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 19:1) used of the swift horse. The Israelites were warned in the Law against the horses of Egypt (Deuteronomy 17:16; comp. 1 Kings 10:25; 1 Kings 10:28), and our Prophet utters soon after (Isaiah 31:1; Isaiah 31:3) in plain words the same blame which we find here. [Beside the play of words in πεּ ?ν ,ρεּ ?ν and ϊְּ ?πεּ ?ρεּ ?ο, that in χַ ?μ and ιִ ?χַּ ?μּ ?εּ should not be overlooked.—D. M.] Isaiah 30:17 depicts the disgraceful haste and senselessness of their flight in terms that evidently allude to passages in the Law (comp. Leviticus 26:17; and especially Deuteronomy 32:30). [Lowth supposes that after ηֲ ?ξִ ?ωָׁ ?η there stood originally ψααδ, which has dropped out of the text.
But the connection with the following words would be disturbed by this proposed emendation: “at the rebuke of five shall ye flee till ye be left,” etc.Henderson properly quotes the censure of Kocher on such intermeddling with the sacred text: Quin tandem aliquando suae sibi viae certum vatem ire sinentes nostros errores corrigimus?—D.M.] This wasting, destructive flight will last till there remains of Israel only a small remnant. The smallness of this remnant is set forth by the Prophet under a double image. He compares it first with a single pine (ϊֹּ ?ψֶ ?ο=ΰֹ ?ψֶ ?ο44:14, originally the pine, then the mast made out of it, Isaiah 33:23; Ezekiel 27:5), on a high mountain, which is all that remains of a thick wood; and then with a solitary signal-pole (Numbers 21:8 sq.; Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 11:10; Isaiah 11:12, el saepe) set up on a bare height (Isaiah 13:2). The choice of this second image was perhaps determined by the resemblance in sound between πֵ ?ν and πεּ ?ν Isaiah 30:18 describes the second and last effect of the μΰΰαιϊν in Isaiah 30:15. The first was destruction and dispersion, the second is the delay in God’s showing favor [?] ηִ ?λָּ ?δ with μְ to wait for something, Psalms 106:13; Job 3:21; Isaiah 8:17; Isaiah 64:3. The sense of delaying lies in this word in 2 Kings 7:9; 2 Kings 9:3.
This sense, too, is not foreign to the passage, Job 32:4. The parallelism indicates that the words ιψενμψηξλν must have an analogous sense. I understand ψεּ ?ν here with Rashi (comp. Gesen.Thes. p. 1274) in the sense of ιְ ?ϊְ ?ψַ ?δֵ ?χ, he is high, i. e., gone away upwards, because he dwells on high. He takes a high, i.e., retired, distant position in relation to pitying you (comp. ξψενξωׁ ?τθικ, Psalms 10:5). It must be admitted that we should expect ξֵ ?ψַ ?ηֶ ?ξְ ?λֶ ?ν instead of μְ ?ψΧ.
The matter is still dubious. Perhaps we should read ιָ ?γεֹ ?ν or ιִ ?γּ ?εֹ ?ν (with Houbigant, Lowth, Ewald, Cheyne, and some Codices). That God delays in granting deliverance, is according to His justice. He must punish you. Divine justice requires this. If He should only show mercy, this would not be good for the sinner himself (Isaiah 26:10).
It is therefore on the ground of the declarations Exodus 34:6-7; Numbers 14:18 said of him [rather the Lord Himself says]: “I will not make a full end of thee; but I will correct thee in measure, and will not leave thee altogether unpunished” (Jeremiah 30:11; Jeremiah 46:28). Yet from this correction in measure, which satisfies justice and love, there is a deliverance to the enjoyment of the full light of salvation for those who wait on the Lord in faith. This thought forms the transition to the second part of the chapter, which is of a consolatory character. The last clause of Isa 30:18 recalls to mind the closing words of the second Psalm. [Must we then give up using the hallowed phrase: “The Lord waiteth to be gracious” as an encouragement to come to Him, and in deference to just criticism regard these words as rather a threatening that the Lord will delay to show favor? Though one or two instances of the rare use of ηλδ in the sense of delaying may be adduced, yet the word more naturally marks a tending or inclining to the object of waiting. Here we have ηλδ followed by μְ, which forces us to give the word a sense the very opposite of deferring or delaying.
Dr. Naegelsbach confesses the unsatisfactoriness of the explanation which must be given to the following parallel clause, if the first clause of the verse is to be understood of Jehovah delaying to be gracious. But, it may be asked, how is μָ ?λֵ ?ο at the beginning of the verse to be explained, if it does not contain a threatening? I connect “therefore” with the miserable condition of Israel described in the preceding verse. This misery awakens the divine compassion. Therefore the Lord “repents Himself for His servants when He seeth that their power is gone,” Deuteronomy 32:36.
He seeks opportunity to relieve the distressed because “He delighteth in mercy.” And “He is exalted above the heavens,” not to be remote, not to withdraw Himself and to withhold aid, but that “His beloved may be delivered,” Psalms 108:5-6. Need I add that it is in accordance with Scripture to represent the Lord as displaying His righteousness when He fulfils His promise to show mercy, and is faithful in keeping His gracious covenant? See how in the next, the 19th, verse the Prophet illustrates what he means by the Lord waiting that He may be gracious to Israel, when He declares “He will be very gracious unto thee at the voice of thy cry.”—D. M.]
Footnotes:hasten.Or, a tree bereft of branches: Or, a mast.a pine.
4. THE AND OF THE PEOPLE
Isaiah 30:19-2619 For the people shall dwell in Zion at Jerusalem:
Thou shalt weep no more:
He will be very gracious unto thee at the voice of thy cry;
When he shall hear it, he will answer thee.
20 And though the Lord give you the bread of adversity, and the water of affliction,
Yet shall not thy teachers be removed into a corner any more,
But thine eyes shall see thy teachers:
21 And thine ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying,
This is the way, walk ye in it,
When ye turn to the right hand, and when ye turn to the left.
22 Ye shall defile also the covering of thy graven images of silver,
And the ornament of thy molten images of gold:
Thou shalt cast them away as a menstruous cloth;
Thou shalt say unto it, Get thee hence.
23 Then shall he give the rain of thy seed,
That thou shalt sow the ground withal;
And bread of the increase of the earth,
And it shall be fat and plenteous:
In that day shall thy cattle feed in large pastures.
24 The oxen likewise and the young asses that ear the ground
Shall eat clean provender,
Which hath been winnowed with the shovel and with the fan.
25 And there shall be upon every high mountain and upon every high hill,
Rivers and streams of waters
In the day of the great slaughter,
When the towers fall.
26 Moreover the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun,
And the light of the sun shall be seven-fold,
As the light of seven days,
In the day that the Lord bindeth up the breach of his people,
And healeth the stroke of their wound.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_30:19. ιָ ?ηְ ?πְ ?κָ for ιְ ?ηָ ?πְ ?κָ as Genesis 43:29. Comp. Olshausen, Gr., § 243, a. λְּ before ωׁ ?ξςϊε marks coincidence. Comp. Genesis 24:30; Genesis 34:7; Genesis 39:15, et saepe. The Infinitive ωְׁ ?ξֹ ?ςַ with the feminine ending is found only here.
Isaiah 30:20. ξַ ?ιν is in the absolute state instead of the construct. [On this kind of apposition the note in Delitzsch’s Commentary in loco may be consulted.—D. M.]. λָּ ?πַ ?σ occurs as a verb only here. There is no reason apparent why this word should not be the root of λָּ ?πָ ?σ covering, wing, and accordingly signify to cover, to hide, in the Niphal to hide one’s-self. The singular is used because ιλπσ is the prefixed predicate.
Isaiah 30:21. ϊΰξιπε for ϊֵּ ?ιξִ ?ιπεּ (comp. Ewald, (Gr., § 122, e). This form occurs only here.
Isaiah 30:22. [γָ ?εδָ is abbreviation for λְּ ?μִ ?ιγָ ?εδָ. Del.].
Isaiah 30:23. ξχπικ could be in the singular. But forms such as ξִ ?χְ ?πַ ?ι Exodus 17:3; Numbers 20:19, show that the word is also actually used in the plural. ιψςδ is therefore singular as ιλπσ in Isaiah 30:20. (See remark on the latter place).
Isaiah 30:24. ζֹ ?ψֶ ?ψּ is either Pual part. for ξְ ?ζֹ ?ψֶ ?δ, or Part. Kal as a verbal form in which the subject is implied (comp. Isaiah 2:9; Isaiah 24:2; Isaiah 29:8).
Isaiah 30:26. Lowth, Gesenius, Hitzig, Hendewerk and Knobel regard the words λΰεψωׁ ?αςϊδιξιν as a gloss because they are wanting in the LXX. and form a needless epexegesis which disturbs the parallelism. But their absence in the LXX. is no reason for treating them as an interpolation. They are found in the Targum, in the Syriac and in Jerome. There is here no fixed metre. We can neither affirm that the verse consists of four members, nor that a definite length is required for each line. And in regard to the sense, the epexegesis is not so needless. For who is not sensible that the ωαςϊιν is set more vividly before us by the addition that follows?
AND 1. The Prophet, after preparing the way by Isaiah 30:18, looks into the distant future. It presents itself to him as a blessed time. He gives a general picture of it in colors borrowed from the present. We call it a general picture, because it will not be realized in a fixed time; but it comprehends as in a frame what will take place for the good of the people from the proximate till the most remote future. But this picture of the future is painted with colors of the present, for the circumstances of the present supply the images under which the Prophet represents the blessings of the future.
He assumes that there will always be a people dwelling in Zion, i.e., Jerusalem. This people will not always have to weep; a time will come when its requests will be speedily answered (Isaiah 30:19). They will not indeed be without bread of distress and water of tribulation in the future, but their eyes will also be constantly able to see the teachers who will show them the way out of distress (Isaiah 30:20); and the ears of the people will hearken every moment to the voice which will call from behind the direction as to the way they should go (Isaiah 30:21). Then will the people put away the abominations of idolatry (Isaiah 30:22). And the Lord will grant rain and glorious fruit to nourish men and cattle (Isaiah 30:23-24). Springs of water, too, will gush forth on the high mountains in the time when the Lord by rivers of blood has made this possible (Isaiah 30:25).
The light of sun and moon will shine many times brighter than now, in that time when the Lord shall have healed the wounds of His people (Isaiah 30:26).
2. For the people——Get thee hence.Isaiah 30:19-22. The cheering prospect of which Isaiah 30:18 permitted a view, is now fully and completely unfolded. First of all, the Prophet promises that in Zion—Jerusalem a people will always dwell, i.e., the holy city will never like the world-city become a desert forsaken by men (Isaiah 13:19 sqq.; Isaiah 25:2; Jeremiah 50:13 et saepe). αιψεωׁ ?μν is added for nearer explanation, and as if to prevent a misunderstanding. If the Prophet had written only Zion, it might have been supposed that he speaks of the kingdom whose proper centre was Zion, the seat of the house of David (comp. Psalms 2:6; Psalms 110:2 et saepe).
By the addition “Jerusalem” the Prophet renders it impossible to mistake that he means the city. And in fact Jerusalem has never ceased to be inhabited, whereby it is distinguished from the world-cities Babylon and Nineveh, which have lain desolate for thousands of years. We may not take ςַ ?ν as a vocative, though in that case ϊαλδ would fitly follow; but the first clause would then have no meaning. The sudden change of person, which occurs frequently in this paragraph, should not cause surprise. Comp. Isaiah 30:20μָ ?λֶ ?ν, Isaiah 30:21μְ ?λεּ ,ΰָ ?ζְ ?πֶ ?ικָ, ver.22λַּ ?ρְ ?τֶֽ ?κָ θִ ?ξֵּ ?ΰϊֶ ?ν.
The infinitive absolute αּ ?λָ ?εֹ has evidently the force that the weeping will not be long continued, as the Lord will speedily have mercy. In the future to which the look of the Prophet is directed, Israel will not be without tribulation. But this tribulation the Prophet comprises in the expression bread of distress, water of affliction.μֶ ?ηֶ ?νφַ ?ψ is found only here. 1 Kings 22:27; 2 Chronicles 18:26 we find μηνμηυεξινμηυ to designate the meagre fare of prisoners. As the Prophet according to what follows (comp. especially Isaiah 30:26) has the entire future in his eye, we cannot refer the expressions “bread of distress and water of affliction” merely to the siege of Jerusalem by the Assyrians (Isaiah 29:3 sqq.). But, although that siege stands in the fore-ground of the Prophet’s field of vision, we have to look upon that siege with its bread of distress and its water of affliction only as a type and representative of all the affliction which Israel must endure in the future. And if this affliction is here alluded to only in sparing terms, this is owing to the character of this second part of our prophecy, in which the threatening almost disappears behind the promise.
But Israel will bear affliction quite otherwise than formerly. Hitherto they displayed in times of need their rage against the Prophets of the Lord. These were called those who trouble Israel (1 Kings 18:17), were treated as ring leaders of sedition (Amos 7:10), and traitors to their country (Jeremiah 38:4 sqq.); all misery was attributed to the forsaking of the worship of idols owing to their urgent effort (Jeremiah 44:16 sqq.). Then the Prophets were persecuted, and must conceal themselves (Matthew 23:37; Jeremiah 36:26). This will happen henceforth no more. But Jerusalem will, on the contrary, in affliction direct its eyes to the teachers in order to follow them; it will open its ears to the word of the Lord which the servants of God, who are conceived as commanders marching behind a procession, will call to it, and will direct its steps exactly according to their commands.
[“Their teachers were to be before them, but when they declined from the right way, their backs would be turned to them, consequently, the warning voice would be heard behind them. The first and last clauses of the verse closely cohere.”—Henderson. D. M.]. This obedience to the word of Jehovah implies that they will abandon idols. This will be done while they treat the silver and golden images, without (see command Deuteronomy 7:25) regard to the precious metal, as impure things, yea, cast them away as objects of abhorrence (comp.
Isaiah 2:20). θִ ?ξֵּ ?ΰ as 2 Kings 23:8; 2 Kings 23:10; 2 Kings 23:16 (only here in Isaiah). φτει is the metal covering of statues (Deuteronomy 17:3-4; Exodus 38:7; Exodus 38:19) ΰτγδ is found besides only in Exodus 28:8; Exodus 39:5 in the expression δֵ ?ωֶׁ ?αΰֲ ?τֻ ?γָּ ?δ, a part of the priest’s dress. [“The word is the feminine of ΰֵ ?τεֹ ?γ: but here, as parallel with φτει, it signifies a covering or plating over the body of an image.”—Henderson]. ξַ ?ρֵּ ?λָ ?δ (Isaiah 30:1) fusio, fusura, fusile, a molten image (Exodus 32:4; Exodus 32:8 et saepe, further in Isaiah only Isaiah 42:17). The expression ϊζψνthou shalt scatter them, recalls Exodus 32:20. φֵ ?ΰ is a strong expression (comp. 2 Samuel 16:7). The singular μεֹ here involves the notion of something contemptible: Get out! thou wilt say to the trash.
3. Then shall he give——their wound.Isaiah 30:23-26. To the change of life described there is now attached the promise of the richest blessing even of a temporal kind. First, to the seed the necessary rain is promised, a blessing which could never be wanting in an oriental picture of prosperity, and is therefore also so frequently referred to in the theocratic promises: Leviticus 26:4; Deuteronomy 14:11; Joe 2:23; Jeremiah 5:24; Zechariah 10:1 et saepe. The rain which is to fructify the seed is the seed-rain or early rain (ιεֹ ?ψֶ ?δ) which falls in October. The expression “He shall give the rain of thy seed” instead of “to thy seed” recalls places such as Genesis 39:21; Numbers 12:6. ΰωׁ ?ψϊζψς = with which thou shalt sow (comp.
Isaiah 17:10) ζָ ?ψַ ?ς is here construed with a double accusative]. μην is by ϊαεΰϊδΰΧ generalized. It is therefore all that the earth produces for the food of man, as μην is used also in this comprehensive sense in the expression “to eat bread.” (Genesis 31:54; Genesis 43:16; Jeremiah 41:1 et saepe). All these products of the field serving for food shall be of the best quality, full of sap and strength (γָּ ?ωֵ ?ο as an adjective only here in Isaiah: comp. Psalms 92:15; Genesis 49:20). λַּ ?ψ in the signification of pascuum only here and Ps. 37:20; 65:14. The Niphal πψηαdilatatum, spatiosum esse is likewise found only here. The oxen and asses which till [In the E.
V., we have the word ear which is now obsolete and means to plough or to till.—D. M.] the land are the animals employed by the farmer for draught and carrying burdens. These shall be fed with the best provender.αְּ ?μִ ?ιμ (only here in Isaiah, besides Job 6:5; Job 24:6) is a mixture, a mash, provender consisting of grain (comp. the following ζֹ ?ψֶ ?δ) and chopped herbs. ηָ ?ξִ ?ιυ leavened, salted (comp. ηֹ ?ξֶ ?υ ,ηָ ?ξֵ ?υ) is ἅπ. λεγ. The provender is salted with salt or saltish herbs, in order to make it more palatable. It has previously to be cleansed from impurities that it may be more excellent. This is done by winnowing.
The implements which serve for winnowing are ψַ ?ηַ ?ϊ and ξִ ?ζְ ?ψֶ ?η which are still called Racht and Midra. The former is a flat shovel and serves, according to the interesting Excursus of Wetzstein in Delitzsch’s Commentary, to winnow leguminous fruits, and the mixed remains of the better kinds of grain. The latter is a five or six pronged fork which is employed in winnowing the superior kinds of grain. If the Prophet had mentioned the winnowing shovel only (racht), the meaning would be that the cattle would be fed only with inferior provender. The mention of the ξִ ?ζְ ?ψֶ ?δ intimates that they should also have grain of wheat and barley. ψַ ?ηַ ?ϊ is ἅπ. λεγ.ξִ ?ζְ ?ψֶ ?δ occurs further in Jeremiah 15:7. On all high mountains and towering hills were the places of idolatrous worship, where flowed the blood of the offerings so offensive to God, especially of the children sacrificed to Moloch (1 Kings 14:23; 2 Kings 17:10; Jeremiah 2:20; Jeremiah 3:6; Ezekiel 6:13; Ezekiel 20:28).
Instead thereof there should now flow on the mountains and hills water-brooks, a blessing hitherto confined to the valleys (Isaiah 41:8). τμβιν are certainly natural brooks; ιְ ?αָ ?μִ ?ιν (besides Isaiah 44:4) are perhaps water-courses turned off from them. But as the Prophet had already, Isaiah 30:20, intimated by the mention of bread of distress and water of affliction, that distress and affliction would not be wanting, so here at the close of his discourse he sets forth the prospect of great slaughter and falling of towers. By these intimations he lets us perceive that the glorious time of the end lies beyond a dreadful period which first must be passed through. This latter he has described often enough (comp. 24 sqq.), to be able to suppose that these brief allusions would be quite well understood by his readers. αιεν is to be taken here in that general sense in which we have already frequently met it (comp. e.g., Isaiah 27:1); but in our place the occurrence following that time is placed first. It is implied, too, in the αιεν that there is a certain connection between the occurrences mentioned. There is no chasm lying between them, so that the following time has absolutely nothing to do with the foregoing.
That water-streams of blessing succeed streams of blood is not accidental. These streams of blood must atone and purify so as to prepare the ground for blessing. δֶ ?ψֶ ?β occurs further Isaiah 27:7. I find in δψβ and πτμξβγμιν simply an allusion to the great judgments which must fall on people and city before the day of redemption. The old, theocratic Jerusalem with its towers and its temple is reduced to ruins, while streams of blood have at the same time flown. And here the Prophet takes in one view the first and second destruction of Jerusalem. But immediately behind this destruction he sees the time of blessing.
That long periods of time must intervene between these occurrences is matter of no moment. Verse 26 transports us into a time which lies beyond the present state of things, though not into the time of the new heaven and new earth, for the present sun and the present moon still exist. But their influence is intensified; they are elevated in the scale of existence. Delitzsch is certainly right in saying: “It is not the new heaven of which the Prophet here speaks, but that glorification of nature promised both in Old and New Testament prophecy for the final period of the world’s history.” Comp. Revelation 20:1-4. The light of the moon (μαπδ besides only Isaiah 24:23; Son 6:10) will then be as the light of the sun (ηξδ, likewise in Isaiah 24:23 and Son 6:10, besides Job 30:28); but the light of the sun will be the seven-fold (septuplum Genesis 4:15; Genesis 4:24; Psalms 12:7) of what it now is.
For it will be as the light of seven days, i.e., the quantity of light which has hitherto been sufficient for seven days will then be concentrated in a single day. On this day all the wounds which the Lord must inflict on His people before and after the time of the Prophets (Isaiah 30:20; Isaiah 30:25), will be healed. ωֶׁ ?αֶ ?ψ is a word of very frequent use by Isaiah. ξηυξλϊε is the fracture, contusion of the bone caused by the stroke which it receives. ξηυ seems to indicate a sorer evil than ωׁ ?αψ. [Instead of the E. V., the stroke of their wound, we should rather render the wound of their stroke. It is doubtful whether the suffix in ξλϊε should be referred to ςַ ?ν or ιδεδ—D. M.].
Footnotes:a people.Or, oppression.Heb. the graven images of thy silver.Heb. scatter.full of sap and fat.Or, savory. Heb. leavened.salted.fan and fork.Heb. lifted up.
5. THE MUSIC OF THE WORLD’S
Isaiah 30:27-3327 Behold, the name of the Lord cometh from far,
Burning with his anger, and the burden thereof Isaiah 24 heavy;
His lips are full of indignation,
And his tongue as a devouring fire:
28 And his breath, as an overflowing stream,
Shall reach to the midst of the neck,
To sift the nations with the sieve of vanity:
And there shall be a bridle in the jaws of the people,
Causing them to err.
29 Ye shall have a song, as in the night
When a holy solemnity is kept;
And gladness of heart, as when one goeth with a pipe
To come into the mountain of the Lord,To the mighty One of Israel.
30 And the Lord shall cause his glorious voice to be heard,
And shall show the lighting down of his arm,
With the indignation of his anger,
And with the flame of a devouring fire,
With scattering, and tempest, and hailstones.
31 For through the voice of the Lord
Shall the Assyrian be beaten down,
Which smote with a rod.
32 And in every place where the grounded staff shall pass,
Which the Lord shall lay upon him,
It shall be with tabrets and harps;
And in battles of shaking will he fight with it.
33 For Tophet is ordained of old;
Yea, for the king it is prepared;
He hath made it deep, and large,
The pile thereof is fire and much wood;
The breath of the Lord, like a stream of brimstone,
Doth kindle it.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_30:28. δֲ ?πָ ?τָ ?δ for (δָ ?πִ ?ισ) Isaiah 10:15 is a verbal noun used as an infinitive. Comp. Esther 2:18.
Isaiah 30:32. Instead of αָּ ?δּ which we must refer to the land of Assyria, the K’ri has the preferable reading αָּ ?ν.
Isaiah 30:33. The reading of the K’ri διΰ has probably arisen through the attempt to produce a conformity with the feminine suffix in ξְ ?γֻ ?ψָ ?ϊָ ?δּ .
AND 1. The Prophet sees the Lord appear with all His attributes as Judge, and the nations brought to Him as beasts compelled by the bridle to come to be destroyed (Isaiah 30:27-28). Meanwhile Israel’s song is heard as the rejoicing at a festival (Isaiah 30:29). Then Jehovah’s majestic voice sounds forth, and His arm is seen to descend to strike (Isaiah 30:30). It is Assyria that stands trembling before Him and receives the strokes (Isaiah 30:31), and every stroke is inflicted with the music of tabrets and harps, to which the sound of the heavy blows forms as it were the accompaniment (Isaiah 30:32). This is the immolation of Assyria, as we see from the broad and deep place of burning which is prepared with a huge pyre, which the breath of the Lord, as a brook of burning brimstone, will kindle in order to consume the slaughtered victim Assyria, i. e., the worldly power (Isaiah 30:33).
2. Behold the name—to err. Isaiah 30:27-28. The name of Jehovah that comes from far to judgment is not a mere word, nor does it stand simply for God Himself, but it is a manifestation of Deity in which He reveals His holy and righteous nature and His almighty majesty for the purpose of judgment. We have here to refer to Exodus 23:21, where the Lord declares of His angel: my name is in him;—and to all those places where it is said that the name of Jehovah dwells in His holy temple; and, lastly, to places such as Psalms 75:2 where we read “Thy name is near.” The name of Jehovah that comes to judgment is a person. It is He who is the Agent in every revelation of the Godhead, and accordingly He to whom the Father has committed all judgment (John 5:22; Acts 17:31; Romans 14:10; et saepe).
The name of God comes from far, because He comes from heaven (Psalms 138:6). But as far as the eye can reach He is seen. His appearance is like a tempest. αςψΰτִ ?ε recalls Psalms 2:12. ελαγξωׂ ?ΰδ supply ( δָ ?ιָ ?δ .ξωׂ ?ΰδ) is lifting up, and according to Judges 20:38 of smoke. It occurs only here. ζַ ?ςַ ?ν foam, foaming rage, (Isaiah 10:5; Isaiah 10:25; Isaiah 13:5; Isaiah 26:20). ΰωׁ ΰλμϊ occurs Exodus 24:17; Deuteronomy 4:24; Deuteronomy 9:3; hence in Joe 2:5 and Isaiah 29:6; Isaiah 30:27; Isaiah 30:30; Isaiah 33:14. It has been rightly remarked that two images—that of a tempest and that of a raging man—are here blended. The Lord moves along in His wrath like an overflowing brook which divides (ιηφδ) the man who has fallen into it into two unequal parts, only the smaller appearing above the water (Isaiah 8:8).
He sifts the people with the sieve (πָ ?τָ ?δἅπ. λεγ.) of emptiness,i. e., a sieve Which lets the light, useless grain fall through it. [This explanation is not natural. The sieve of vanity, or emptiness, or destruction is so-called as marking the result of the sifting, a reduction to nothingness.—D. M.]. The Lord comes as Judge. The nations are brought to Him against their will. A bridle is put into their jaws which compels them to go from the way which they intended ψροξϊςδ the expression only here, δϊςδ in Isaiah 3:12; Isaiah 9:15; Isaiah 19:13 sq.: Isaiah 63:17).
3. Ye shall have a song—Israel. Isaiah 30:29. The Prophet marks by the article before ωִׁ ?ιψ the customary solemn festal song. μָ ?λֶ ?ν is the dat. commodi. The night when the festival is kept or consecrated is the night from the fourteenth to the fifteenth of the month Nisan, the night in which the paschal lamb was eaten amid solemn songs; for this was the only festival which was celebrated at night. On the fifteenth the feast of unleavened bread began, to which the passover served as an introductory dedication.
Israel’s preservation in the night when the destroying angel smote the host of Sennacherib (Isaiah 37:36 sqq.) can be regarded as one, but not the only one, of the events which Isaiah had here in his eye. The Prophet comprehends in the section Isaiah 30:27-33, all that is future, as he had done in the parallel section Isaiah 30:19-26. δִ ?ϊֲ ?χַ ?γֵּ ?ωׁ is vox solemnis for the consecration preparatory to the festival (Exodus 19:22; Numbers 11:18; Joshua 3:5; Joshua 7:13 et saepe). But in those places the people or the priests are the subject. Here it is the festival. The expression is a metonymy, the festival being put for those who celebrate it. ηָ ?βκατ̓ἐζοχήν is elsewhere the feast of tabernacles. Here the festival is definitely marked as that of the passover by μֵ ?ιμ.
Beside the solemnity celebrated at night with song, the Prophet makes mention in the second part of the verse of another such solemnity happening by day. He also employs the manifold festal processions which with accompaniment of song and music moved to the temple, as types of the joy granted to Israel in distinction from the heathen. λְּ ?ωִׂ ?ξְ ?δַֹ ?ϊδַֹ ?μֵ ?κְ = λַּ ?δֹ ?μֵ ?κְ comp. Isaiah 5:29; Isaiah 10:10; Isaiah 13:4, et saepe.ηָ ?μִ ?ιμ5:12; αְּ marks accompaniment, Isaiah 12:6; Isaiah 14:9. αְּ ?δַ ?ψφΧ. n order to avoid using the same preposition twice αְּ is here used instead of ΰֵ ?μ or ςַ ?μ. The expression φεψΞιωׂ ?ψΰμ occurs besides here only 2 Samuel 23:3. The expression suits admirably the context in which it is said that Israel stands while all else falls. How could what has this rock as a refuge fall?
4. And the Lord—kindle it. Isaiah 30:30-33. The verses 27 and 28 had depicted the approach of the judge (comp. αָּ ?ΰ Isaiah 30:27). The description of the judgment begins with Isaiah 30:30. Jehovah makes the glory of his voice to be heard,the action of his arm he makes to be seen.
The image of corporal chastisement is employed by the Prophet to make his picture of the judgment the more incisive. ζַ ?ςַ ?σ snorting, anhelitus, only here in Isaiah. πֶ ?τֶ ?υ is ἅπ. λεγ. The root πָ ?τַ ?υ denotes “to scatter, to break or dash in pieces” (Isaiah 11:12; Isaiah 33:3; Jeremiah 51:20 sqq.). As snorting of the nose and flame of fire point to a thunder storm, while ζֶ ?ψֶ ?ν and ΰֶ ?αֶ ?οαָּ ?ψָ ?γ are kinds of rain, πֶ ?τֶּ ?υ must also belong to this category. We take it as signifying the breaking, the rending of a cloud, a water-spout. ζψν comp. on Isaiah 28:2. ΰֶ ?αֶ ?οαָּ ?ψָ ?γ comp. Isaiah 28:17; Joshua 10:11. λִּ ?ι in Isaiah 30:31 is explicative. What is the nature of the chastisement in question is explained.
First, we are told who is the party punished. It is Assyria. He stands before the Lord and trembles as a boy before his punisher’s rebuke—ιֵ ?ηַ ?ϊ comp. Isaiah 7:8; Isaiah 31:4; Isaiah 51:6-7 et saepe. He who administers the punishment is Jehovah. It is He who strikes with the staff.
Hence the repeated lighting down of his arm. The words αωׁ ?αθιλδ I do not refer to Assyria notwithstanding the agreement with Isaiah 10:24. For it was not needful to mention that Assyria formerly smote Israel with the rod. But it was necessary to say that Jehovah now strikes Assyria with the rod, in order to explain πηϊζψεςε Isaiah 30:30 and also λμξςαψιβεΧ Isaiah 30:32. The staff makes strokes, passes (ξַ ?ςֲ ?αָ ?ψ here in the active sense, the passing over). The staff is called (ξַ ?θֵּ ?δξεּ ?ρָ ?γָ ?δ) because it is handled according to divine appointment and ordination (Habakkuk 1:12) comp.
Isaiah 28:16 and Ezekiel 41:8. ιָ ?πִ ?ιηַ is related to πηϊ Ver 30. The meaning is “to make rest,” so that the ceasing, the extreme point of the motion is thus indicated (comp. Ezekiel 5:13; Ezekiel 16:42; Ezekiel 44:30; Exodus 17:11). Every stroke, which Jehovah makes to fall or rest on Assyria, is inflicted amid the noise of timbrels (Isaiah 5:12; Isaiah 24:8) and harps (Isaiah 5:12; Isaiah 16:11; Isaiah 23:16; Isaiah 24:8). This is doubtless that joyous noise with which Israel as it were accompanies the acts of judgment of his God (Isaiah 30:29). Thus there arises a complete concert.
The timbrels and harps form the soprano; “the battles of shaking,” i. e., the battles of the Lord fought with shaken, brandished hand, beat as it were the time, and also represent the bass. The strokes spoken of in Isaiah 30:30; Isaiah 30:32 are deadly strokes. This appears from the altar being already prepared for the slaughtered victim. And a dreadful altar it will be, a Tophet, deep and broad, with a huge pile of wood, which will be set on fire by the breath of the Lord in the form of a burning stream of brimstone. The Prophet had already said (Isaiah 10:16 sqq.), that Assyria’s glory will perish by violent fire. Who does not here think of the destruction of Nineveh, in which fire played a prominent part (comp.
Otto Strauss on Nahum 3:15)? ϊָּ ?τְּ ?ϊֶּ ?δ is ἅπ. λεγ. ϊֹּ ?τֶ ?ϊ occurs most frequently in Jeremiah. The derivation is uncertain (comp. my remarks on Jeremiah 7:31). The form ϊָּ ?τְ ?ϊֶּ ?δ is after the analogy of ΰִ ?ωֶּׁ ?δ ,μִ ?αְ ?πֶ ?δ. The Tophet in the valley of Hinnom was a place of sacrifice dedicated to Moloch; the Tophet here spoken of is intended to burn up the ξֶ ?μֶ ?κְ himself, in which word there is probably an allusion to ξֹ ?μֶ ?κְ. It is therefore a place like Tophet, and this may be the force of the form enlarged by the addition of Ξֶ ?δ. The form ΰֶ ?ϊְ ?ξεּ ?μ occurs only here and Micah 2:8.
With the preposition ξִ ?ο it is commonly ξִ ?ϊְּ ?ξεֹ ?μ. It cannot possibly mean here the definite past (yesterday). It denotes the indefinite past which is represented by yesterday. From the fact that the place of burning has been long ago prepared, we see that those strokes (Isaiah 30:30; Isaiah 30:32) are not mere chastisements administered in love, but destructive, deadly strokes. With βַּ ?νδεּ ?ΰ the second sentence begins. These words cannot be referred to ξֶ ?μֶ ?κְ, for then they must come after it.
But the Prophet intends to say that Ashur shall not only be slaughtered, but also solemnly consumed in a vast place of sacrifice specially prepared for this purpose. But why this consuming by fire ? Not simply to denote total annihilation. If the supposition should not be established that the worship of Moloch which Ahaz introduced was connected with Assyrian influences (comp. Keil on 2 Kings 16:3), still Assyria was essentially a representative of the idolatrous worldly power. And when Ashur is now told that the dreadful end of a sacrifice to Moloch awaits him, there lies therein a not indistinct allusion to the everlasting fire of that infernal lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which we find again Isaiah 34:9-10, whose name Gehenna is derived from the place Tophet βֵּ ?ιδִ ?πֹּ ?ν, a trace of which drawn from Isaiah we meet with Daniel 7:11, and which is more fully unfolded in the eschatological discourse of our Lord (Matthew 24, 25 where Matthew 25:41 τὸπῦρτὸαἰώνιοντὸἡτοιμασμένον clearly recalls “ordained of old” in our passage), and the Revelation 14:10-11; Revelation 19:20; Revelation 20:9-10; Revelation 20:14.
When mention is made in these places of a pool of fire and brimstone, it may be maintained that the idea of the λίμνη is drawn from the expression “he hath made it deep and wide,” while the idea of fire and brimstone comes from the latter half of this verse. ξְ ?γεּ ?ψָ ?δ from γּ ?εּ ?ψ (Isaiah 22:18; Isaiah 29:3) is the round pile of wood, the pyre. The word is found besides only Ezekiel 24:9 comp. ibid. Isaiah 30:5. I do not look on ΰֵ ?ωׁ εְ ?ςֵ ?φִ ?ιν as a hendiadys; for we see from the last clause of the verse that the Prophet desires to give prominence to the circumstance that fire will not be wanting to kindle properly the huge pile of wood. The two ideas of wood and fire are therefore not to be blended, but to be kept distinct. The words πωׁ ?ξϊεβεΧ accordingly tell us whence the mighty fire will come which is destined to kindle the pile of wood.
The breath of Jehovah (Isaiah 2:22; Isaiah 42:5) is here described as a stream of brimstone (πημβτψιϊ comp. Isaiah 34:9). Brimstone is set forth in Scripture as a destructive means of judgment, on the ground of that rain of brimstone which fell on Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:24). αָּ ?ςַ ?ψ in the signification accendere or accendiHos. Isaiah 7:4; Psalms 2:12. Not slowly and gradually from a spark will the flame spread, but suddenly and in an imposing manner a whole stream of burning brimstone shall kindle the pile of wood. Thus the view of the Prophet, which embraces together the near and the most remote, is directed from the temporary occasion of the Egyptian embassy to the end of the present dispensation.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 30:1-14. “Such false trust as the Jewish people placed in Egypt is the sin of idolatry, which is so strictly forbidden; and all who herein follow the example of the Jews are fitly called rebellious, disobedient, lying children. God brings them to shame and derision in regard to what they relied on, and ordains a curse and destruction upon them. Therefore the Scripture saith: “The fear of man bringeth a snare; but whoso putteth his trust in the Lord shall be safe.” Comp. also Psalms 146:3 and Jeremiah 17:5-8. Renner. [“God is true, and may be trusted; but every man a liar, and must be suspected. The Creator is a Rock of Ages, the creature a broken reed; we cannot expect too little from man, or too much from God.” Henry.]
2. Isaiah 30:8. [“The Prophet must not only preach this, but he must write it. 1. To shame the men of the present age who would not hear and heed it when it was spoken; their children may profit by it, though they will not. 2. To justify God in the judgments He was about to bring upon them; people will be tempted to think He was too hard upon them, and over severe, unless they know how very bad they were. 3. For warning to others not to do as they did, lest they fare as they fared.” Henry.]
3. Isaiah 30:10. A faithful minister must not suffer men to prescribe to him what he should preach. For some would tell him to prophesy of wine and strong drink (Micah 2:11), the covetous would ask that he should preach how they might practice extortion and oppression. Or if they dare not be so impudent, they would at least desire that he should pass over in silence what would be disagreeable to them, and speak what their ears itched for (2 Timothy 4:3). But faithful ministers preach sharply against sin that it may be avoided.
Examples: Ahijah, 1 Kings 14:6; Micaiah, 1 Kings 22:18.” Cramer.4. Isaiah 30:15. “Neque in religione solum valet hic locus sed etiam in politia. Sic enim fere accidit quod praecipitia consilia fallunt. Contra felicia sunt ea, quae timide et cum ratione suscipiuntur. Ideo laudant Romani cunctatorem Fabium qui cunctando restituit rem. Semper etiam fallit praesumtio de nostris viribus.
Bene igitur dictum est illud ‘patiens terit omnia virtus’ Et Paulus: ‘Vincite in bono malum’ ….. non enim possunt durare impii, et est verissimum, quod dicitur ‘malum destruit se ipsum.’ Simus igitur quieti et commendemus omnia manibus Dei. Deinde etiam speremus futuram liberationem et experiemur, quod spes non confundet nos, sed confundentur adversarii nostri, qui impietatis causam contra Christum impie defendendam susceperunt.” Luther.
5. Isaiah 30:18. “Precious consolatory discourse for all who have to bear the cross. God waits till the right time to help comes.” Cramer.6. Isaiah 30:19. [“He will be very gracious—and this in answer to prayer, which makes His kindness doubly kind: He will be gracious to thee at the voice of thy cry; the cry of thy necessity, when that is most urgent; the cry of thy prayer, when that is most fervent. When He shall hear it—there needs no more—at the first word He will answer thee, and say, Here I am. Herein He is very gracious indeed.” Henry.]
7. Isaiah 30:20. [It was a common saying among the old Puritans, “Brown bread and the Gospel are good fare.” Henry.]
8. Isaiah 30:22. [“Note: To all true penitents sin is very odious; they loathe it, and loathe themselves because of it; they cast it away to the dunghill.” Henry.]
9. Isaiah 30:29. [“It is with a particular satisfaction that wise and good men see the ruin of those who, like the Assyrians, have insolently bid defiance to God, and trampled upon all mankind.” Henry.]
HINTSOn Isaiah 30:1-3. What one who needs counsel has to do. 1) He is not to take counsel without the Lord; for a. thereby he apostatizes from the Lord, and heaps sin on sin; b. the counsel thus resolved on leads only to disgrace and misery. 2) He is to let himself be led by the Spirit of the Lord, while he a. invokes Him in prayer; b. seeks to know His will out of the word of God; c. according to such direction makes conscientious use of the means at his command.
2. On Isaiah 30:8. Text for a sermon at a Bible festival. The importance of the written word—litera scripta manet.3. On Isaiah 30:9-14. A mirror which the Prophet holds before our churches also. 1) Do you make the same demands on your minister which the contemporaries of Isaξah, according to Isaiah 30:9-11, made on the prophets? If so, it will happen to you according to the word of the prophet in Isaiah 30:12 to Isaiah 14:2) Or will you hear the law of the Lord (Isaiah 30:9)? Then you will be spared the judgments of God, and the peace of God will be imparted unto you.
4. On Isaiah 30:15-17. We have many and severe conflicts against outward and inward foes to stand. For this we need strength. Wherein does the right strength consist? 1) Not in horses and runners, etc. 2) The right strength is in the Lord, which we obtain when a. we make room for it by being still; when b. by believing hope we attract it to us.
5. On Isaiah 30:18. [“He will wait to be gracious; He will wait till you return to Him, and seek His face, and then He will be ready to meet yon with mercy. He will wait, that He may do it in the best and fittest time, when it will be most for His glory, when it will come to you with the most pleasing surprise. He will continually follow you with His favors, and not let slip any opportunity of being gracious to you.” Henry.—D. M.]
6. On Isaiah 30:20-21. The importance of a faithful teacher.7. On Isaiah 30:26-33. We can in treating of the last things cite these words, and show that the judgment has two sides, according as it has respect to the children of God, or to the ungodly.
Footnotes:Or, and the grievousness of flame.Heb. heaviness.Rock.Heb. the glory of his votes.with the rod will he smite.Heb. every passing of the rod founded.every stroke of the rod of doom.Heb. cause to rest upon him.Or, against them.a place of burning.Heb. from yesterday.
IV.—THE FOURTH WOEIsaiah 31-321. EGYPT CANNOT PROTECT WHAT THE LORD
Isaiah 31:1-41 Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help;
And stay on horses,
And trust in chariots, because they are many;
And in horsemen, because they are very strong;
But they look not unto the Holy One of Israel,
Neither seek the Lord!2 Yet He also is wise,
And will bring evil, and will not call back His words:
But will arise against the house of the evil-doers,
And against the help of them that work iniquity.
3 Now the Egyptians are men, and not God;
And their horses flesh, and not spirit.
When the Lord shall stretch out his hand,
Both he that helpeth shall fall, and he that is holpen shall fall down,
And they all shall fail together.
4 For thus hath the Lord spoken unto me,
Like as the lion and the young lion roaring on his prey,
When a multitude of shepherds is called forth against him,
He will not be afraid of their voice,
Nor abase himself for the noise of them:
So shall the Lord of hosts come down to fight for mount Zion,
And for the hill thereof.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_31:1. μςζψδ comp. on Isaiah 10:3; Isaiah 20:6.—Note the structure of sentence in this verse. First a participle depends on δεֹ ?ι, which, according to familiar Hebrew usage, in the second clause immediately changes to a verb. finitum, and that the Imperfect, because a continuous, not concluded action is meant; to this is joined the third clause by the Vav consecutivum, because it contains a special consequence of the preceding general clause; whereas the two negative concluding clauses are in the perfect, because they express the fundamental fact, complete and present, that conditions all that precedes. Comp. Isaiah 5:8; Isaiah 5:11; Isaiah 5:18; Isaiah 5:20 sqq.——τψωׁ ?ιν comp. on Isaiah 21:7; Isaiah 21:9; Isaiah 22:6 sq.; Isaiah 28:28.—ωׁ ?ςδ comp. on Isaiah 17:7 sq.; Isaiah 22:4.—χγεωׁ ιΧ comp. on Isaiah 1:4.
Isaiah 31:2. The aorist ειαΰ depicts the certainty.—δριψ comp. Joshua 11:15.—The expression αιϊξψςιν occurs only here: yet comp. Isaiah 1:4; Isaiah 14:20; Psalms 22:17; Psalms 26:5; Psalms 64:3.—ςζψδ stands here as abstractum proconcreto: the help for the totality of those helping.
Isaiah 31:4. δβδ of the growling of a lion only here; comp. on Isaiah 8:19.—ξμΰ, comp. Isaiah 6:3 : Isaiah 8:8, is the full number the totality.
AND Woe to them——the hill thereof.Isaiah 31:1-4. The Prophet raises anew his warning voice against trusting to Egyptian help, by representing its uselessness; on the other hand, he promises most glorious help from the grace of Jehovah, on condition of turning back from idols. For the fourth time from 28. on δει, “woe,” appears here at the head of a section, so that we may regard this resemblance as a sign that these chapters belong together. We must understand by “those that go down,” not only those physically going down to Egypt, but also those that accompanied them in spirit and shared their intention. Five clauses depend on “woe,” which all belong to one and the same degree of time, and in our way of speaking depend on one relative notion: woe to those who go down … lean on … trust … but look not to God … and seek not the Lord. See Text. and Gramm.The sending to Egypt seemed to the friends of this policy a particularly prudent measure.
They plumed themselves far too much on their penetration. In antithesis to it the Prophet says: Jehovah, too, who opposes that policy, is wise. [The comparison is double-edged: “God was as wise as the Egyptians, and ought therefore to have been consulted; He was as wise as the Jews, and could therefore thwart their boasted policy.”—J. A. A.] This statement, humble as it appears, contains, however, only a divine irony. For if God, comparing His wisdom with that of men, says: “I am wise also,” it means in effect: “I am wise and ye are fools.” The words that the Lord will not recall must be threatenings that He had uttered against the Egyptian alliance (comp. Isaiah 29:14 sqq.; Isaiah 30:12 sqq.).
That God keeps His word under all circumstances is declared Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29. The people in Egypt are indeed persons, therefore ψεּ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ, yet only finite, creature persons, thus not of a divine sort, and no equals of God. But their horses are not even spirit, not even creature spirit, but only weak, perishable flesh. Therefore neither man nor horse in Egypt is to be relied on, and Jehovah has but to stretch forth His hand, and both Egypt that is called to help and Judah that is supported by this help will be laid low.
Isaiah 31:4 proves the statement of Isa 31:3 by a comparison. It might, for instance, seem strange that the Lord, Isaiah 31:3, made no difference between Judah and Egypt, as if the former were no more to Him than the latter. Therefore He assures most expressly that no power will be able to deter Him from the judgment determined against Judah. The formula of transition, “for thus hath the Lord spoken unto me,” we had identically or at least similarly Isaiah 8:11; Isaiah 10:24; Isaiah 18:4; Isaiah 21:16; Isaiah 28:16; Isaiah 30:15. For when a lion has stolen one of the flock, all the shepherds are called to help (note the allusion to the calling on Egypt to help) and save it. But the lion is not alarmed (comp.
Isaiah 7:8; Isaiah 30:31; Isaiah 51:6 sq., etc.) by their cry and does not crouch (Isaiah 25:5) at their noise. He does not let them deprive him of his prey. From Bochart (Hieroz. I, cap. 44) on, expositors here recall similar images in Homer,Il. XII. 298 sqq.; XVIII. 161 sqq. So the Lord does not suffer Jerusalem, in as far as He has made it the object of His wrath, to be seized from Him by the mutual aid of Judah and Egypt.
Mount and hill of Zion are put antithetically, also Isaiah 10:32. It is seen from this passage that the Prophet understands by the mount the highest summit, the places of the temple and of the king’s house; but by the hill the other dwelling-places of the people. But most expositors understand Isaiah 31:4 of the protection that the Lord would extend to Jerusalem. [Thus Barnes, J. A. Alexander, Birks,etc.] The meaning would then be, not that Egypt, but that He, the Lord, would protect Zion and not suffer His city to be taken from Him. But (with Hitzig, Hendewerk, Delitzsch) I am decidedly of the opinion that the Prophet would say that the Lord will not suffer Jerusalem, as the prey of His anger, to be taken from Him (comp.
Isaiah 29:1 sqq.; and regarding φαΰ with ςμ, Isaiah 29:7-8; Numbers 31:7). In Isaiah 31:3 He has emphatically said, in fact, that both, the protector and the protected, should be destroyed. To this thought the “For” (λִּ ?ι, init.) of Isaiah 31:4 must relate. For did it only relate to λωׁ ?μςζψ (“the helper shall stumble”), there would arise a direct contradiction between Isaiah 31:3-4. It is urged that Isaiah 31:5 requires Isaiah 31:4 to be taken in a sense favorable to Jerusalem [see Translator’s note on Isaiah 31:5]. But then the fact is overlooked that Isaiah 31:5 has no sort of connecting word that joins it to Isaiah 31:4.
It follows abruptly, whereas Isaiah 31:4 is closely joined to Isaiah 31:3 by λִּ ?ι. The Prophet purposes here an abrupt transition from darkness to light. In all preceding chapters night and sunshine alternate. All begin with severe threatening, that is to change to glorious promise. This transition is effected in the preceding chapters in a variety of ways. But it accords with the facile spirit of our Prophet once, in the present case, to effect this transition with a leap, as I might say.
Would he thereby intimate, perhaps, that the deliverance also shall presently come, with a leap, quite suddenly and unexpected?
Footnotes:Heb. remove.But.And.growling.the totality.Or, multitude.against.
2.—JEHOVAH HIS EARTHLY HOME THAT HONORS HIM
Isaiah 31:5-95 As birds flying, so will the Lord of hosts defend Jerusalem;
Defending also he will deliver it;And passing over he will preserve it.6 Turn ye unto himFrom whom the children of Israel have deeply revolted.
7 For in that day every man shall cast away
His idols of silver, and his idols of gold,
Which your own hands have made unto you for a sin.
8 Then shall the Assyrian fall with the sword, not of a mighty man;
And the sword, not of a mean man, shall devour him:
But he shall flee from the sword.
And his young men shall be discomfited.
9 And he shall pass over to his strong hold for fear,
And his princes shall be afraid of the ensign,
Saith the Lord, whose fire is in Zion,
And his furnace in Jerusalem.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_31:5. βָ ?πַ ?ο Hiph. δֵ ?βֵ ?ο = “to make a cover,” is always joined to ςμ (ΰֶ ?μ) Isaiah 37:35; Isaiah 38:6 comp. 2 Kings 19:34; 2 Kings 20:6; Zechariah 9:15 or αְּ ?ςַ ?γ Zechariah 12:8.—βπεοεδφιμτρεηεδξμιθ is to be judged grammatically thus: 1). The infinn. absol., are to be regarded as put after the verb. fin. [ιָ ?βֵ ?ο; 2) the perfects εδφιμ and εδξμιθ signify by means of the Vav consec. the immediate consequences of that fact of the future intimated by ιβοβπεοτρεη, which may be expressed by “that.” There is accordingly no reason for regarding δִ ?φִּ ?ιμ and δִ ?ξְ ?μִ ?ιθ (with Gesenius in loc.), as rare infinitive forms.
Isaiah 31:6. After δςξιχερψδ one might look for ξִ ?ξֶּ ?πּ ?εּ, or perhaps, too, according to the connection, μεִֹ. But ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ is to be construed as a relative word in the broadest sense, or as universal relative adverb (“where”), that involves any kind of relative reference, however determined. δςξιχε comp. Isaiah 1:5; Hosea 5:2; Hosea 9:9.—I would not take απιιωׂ ?ψΰμ as vocative to ωׁ ?εּ ?αεּ, because the third person δςξιχε intervenes: it must be regarded as the subject of δςξιχε.
Isaiah 31:7. ηֵ ?θְ ?ΰ is in the accusative as the casus adverbialis signifying the (inward) modality: “sinful-fashion,” as quite similarly the substantives ωֶׁ ?χֶ ?ψ ,αֶּ ?θַ ?η ,ξֵ ?ιωָׁ ?ψִ ?ιν ,δֶ ?αֶ ?μ ,ΰֱ ?ξֶ ?ϊ, are used.
Isaiah 31:8. μֹ ?ΰΰִ ?ιωׁ, etc., comp. μֹ ?ΰΰִ ?μ Deuteronomy 32:5; Amos 6:13; Jeremiah 16:20; μֹ ?ΰςֵ ?υ Jeremiah 10:15, etc. On the distinction between ΰιωׁ and ΰγν comp. Isaiah 2:9.—ηψαϊΰλμπε comp. Isaiah 1:20.—πνμε dat. ethicus, comp.Jeremiah 2:22; Jeremiah 36:9.—διδμξν “to be held in villanage, made to serve, made a slave” (Genesis 49:15; Deuteronomy 20:11, etc.), only here in Isaiah.
Isaiah 31:9. ΰεּ ?ψ “fire, flame,” is quite an Isaianic word, For excepting Ezekiel 5:2, it occurs only in Isaiah 44:16; Isaiah 47:14; Isaiah 1:11, and here.—ξָ ?βֹ ?εψ only here in Isaiah.
AND 1. Judah gains nothing by self-elected human means. But the Lord will help in His fashion. As a bird spreads its feathers over its young, so the Lord protects Jerusalem (Isaiah 31:5). But, of course, only on condition that it turns from its deep falling away to its God (Isaiah 31:6). And this condition will be fulfilled; Israel shall cast away its idols (Isaiah 31:7). And so then Assyria shall be destroyed in all its parts by the sword of the Lord. This will certainly happen, for Jehovah has said it, who has His dwelling in Zion (Isaiah 31:8-9).
2. As birds flying——in Jerusalem.Isaiah 31:5-8. ςָ ?τεֹ ?ϊ; is not predicate, but attribute of φτψιν; therefore not “as birds fly,” but as “flying birds.” Of course the form of expression is short, and only suggestive. For it is not said what sort of flying is meant. One sees from the res comparata that the Prophet thinks of birds that, hovering over their young, protect them (comp. Deuteronomy 32:11). That ςεּ ?σ may mean such hovering appears from its being used for every sort of flying (Deuteronomy 4:17; Isaiah 6:6; Isaiah 11:14; Isaiah 60:8; Zechariah 5:1-2; Psalms 18:11). [These citations prove the very reverse of the Author’s idea.—Tr.] φτεψ is used sometimes as masculine, sometimes as feminine.
Being used here as feminine, one sees that the Prophet thinks of the female bird, therefore of maternal love. In τρεη [from which is derived τֶ ?ρַ ?η, “passover”] there lies a plain allusion (comparable to that in Isaiah 30:19) to that sparing of the avenging angel in “passing over” the Israelites, Exodus 12:13; Exodus 12:23; Exodus 12:27 (the only passages, with the text, in which the word occurs in this sense).
[Most readers will likely hesitate to take the Author’s leap from Isaiah 31:4 to Isaiah 31:5, but will rather agree with the almost universal sentiment that embraces them in one paragraph. The transition to light is plainly marked (even rhetorically marked by “turn ye”), at Isaiah 31:6. The Author’s division is prompted by the interpretation of the simile of Isa 31:5, which is the common, perhaps the universal interpretation. If this interpretation is correct, and the Author’s interpretation of the simile of Isa 31:4 be correct, then the division he makes of the context seems necessary. Certainly the view of Isa 31:4 given above seems obvious. The simile expresses “the intensity of God’s purpose” (Barnes).
Jerusalem, as the object of His anger, shall not escape Him, or be wrested from Him, no matter how many Egypts may be summoned to thwart Him. This is in perfect accord with the many passages that construe these alliances as rebellion against God Himself. Why shall we not let this clear sense prescribe the meaning of the next simile ? The Author shows how, vice versa, the supposed obvious meaning of Isa 31:5 has controlled the interpretation of Isa 31:4 (see above). The simile of Isa 31:5, then, is but a change of figure, such as is common in Isaiah, and represents by the motions of a bird of prey what was before represented by a beast of prey. It is a picture to the very life. ςτεϊ describes the strong-winged bird.
It covers (βπεο with ςַ ?μ) its quarry with its wings, and snatches it away (δφιμ, the common primary sense of πφμ in Isa. who frequently uses it in both parts; see List at the end of the volume; comp. also Isaiah 38:6, where both βπο and πφμ occur and imply the same figure as here); passing over (τρεη), say the heads of those that would frighten it from its prey, it gets off with it (δξμιθ; comp. Job 20:20 and FuerstLex. s.v.ξμθ). To this there seems absolutely no objection. The Author’s inference, from the use of φִ ?τּ ?εֹ ?ψ in the feminine, is not well grounded, seeing that the word is always feminine, there being only two exceptions (see Fuerst’sLex.). Moreover the word is explicitly used by Ezekiel (Ezekiel 39:4; Ezekiel 39:17) of birds of prey along with beasts of prey. The interpretation just given has the advantage of imparting to our context consistent sense and rhetorical harmony.—Tr.]
But to that protecting and sparing grace of God is attached a condition, which is expressed Isaiah 31:6. Israel must turn back from its idols (Isaiah 31:7) to its God. As we supply in thought this condition here, so at Isaiah 31:7 we must supply the thought that Israel is ready to fulfil this condition. In that day points into the time that the Prophet has before his eyes in all these promises. It is the day of salvation that begins with the deliverance from Assyria as its first morning twilight, and continues to the end of all days (comp. Isaiah 30:26).
Within this time will fall the entire conversion of Israel from idols. But the precise moment of this the Prophet does not declare. For he does not distinguish the stages of time. He does not see the things one after the other, but beside one another. Idols of silver,etc.—See Isaiah 2:20; comp. Isaiah 30:22; Isaiah 27:9; Isaiah 17:8.
What has just been said is confirmed anew by Isaiah 31:8. For there it appears as if the overthrow of Assyria would follow the time in which Israel would renounce the worship of idols, whereas in fact the reverse was true. [Why may not 2 Kings 18:1-8, with the history of Sennacherib following, be taken as a literal fulfilment, in its degree, and in the actual order of the text? So Barnes.—Tr.] The Prophet even sees Assyria’s fall along with the events of the last time. To determine the exact time relation is not his affair. It is enough for him to settle the “that” of the great facts of the future. The “when” can only become perfectly clear by the fulfilment.
For the understanding of Isa 31:9 it must first of all be settled that Assyria shall fall, not by human, but by God’s power! By this means we will avoid several explanations that are prosaic or far-fetched. The antithesis to ωָׂ ?ψִ ?ιν, “princes” (comp. also Isaiah 32:2) suggests that by ρμς is to be understood the king of Assyria (Luther, Hendewerk, Delitzsch). This hitherto strong and never shaken refuge of His army shall now suddenly abscond and disappear (comp. Isaiah 40:27; Deuteronomy 26:13; 1 Kings 22:24, etc.). The parallelism with ξξβεψ indicates that ξπν refers not to the Assyrian standard that the princes desert, but to the Jewish, whose appearance is enough to put them to cowardly flight.
Israel may assuredly rely on this comforting promise, for it proceeds from the mouth of God, who has chosen Zion above every other place in the whole earth as His dwelling-place. It is implied that He Himself is interested in bringing to nought the plan of the Assyrian; for it would, so to speak, have driven Jehovah Himself out of His own favorite dwelling. ΰַ ?εּ ?ψ is the fire at which one warms himself, and ϊּ ?πּ ?εּ ?ψ is the oven in which one cooks, and especially bakes bread. It never signifies the hearth for sacrificial fire. The expression is anthropomorphic, but for Israel uncommonly honorable and comforting. For by it Zion is signified to be not a mere place of worship, but actually the earthly home of Jehovah. [“But this use of fire and furnace is not only foreign from the usage of the Scriptures, but from the habits of the Orientals, who have no such association of ideas between hearth and home. The true explanation of the clause seems to be that which supposes an allusion both to the sacred fire on the altar and to the consuming fire of God’s presence, whose altar flames in Zion, and whose wrath shall thence flame to destroy His enemies.”—J.
A. Alexander,in loc.].
Footnotes:Hob. the idols of his gold.with.Omit mighty.Omit mean.Or, for fear of the sword.Or, tributary.Heb. for melting, or tribute.Heb. his rock shall pass away for fear.Or, his strength.
3. THE FALSE AND THE TRUE
Isaiah 32:1-81 Behold, a king shall reign in righteousness.
And princes shall rule a in judgment.
2 And a man shall be as an hiding place from the wind,
And a covert from the tempest;
As rivers of water in a dry place,
As the shadow of a great rock in a weary land.
3 And the eyes of them that see shall not be dim,
And the ears of them that hear shall hearken.
4 The heart also of the rash shall understand knowledge,
And the tongue of the stammerers shall be ready to speak plainly.
5 The vile person shall no more be called liberal,
Nor the churl said to be bountiful.
6 For the c vile person will speak villany,
And his heart will work iniquity,
To practise hypocrisy, and to utter error against the Lord,To make empty the soul of the hungry,
And he will cause the drink of the thirsty to fail.
7 The instruments also of the churl are evil:
He deviseth wicked devices
To destroy the poor with lying words,
Even when the needy speaketh right.
8 But the d liberal deviseth d liberal things;
And by d liberal things shall he stand.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_32:1. μφγχ is found only here. μְ here signifies the norm, as in μξωׁ ?τθ. It is thus=secundum, comp. μְ ?ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?ςΰָ ?ζְ ?πַ ?ιִ ?ν ,μְ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ΰֶ ?δ Isaiah 11:3. [“The use of μְ here may have been intended to suggest, that he would reign not only justly, but for the very purpose of doing justice.” J. A. A.].—μְ before ωׂ ?ψιν=quod attinet ad, comp. Ecclesiastes 9:4. Manifestly this unusual construction is for the sake of having the L—sound maintained, which thus occurs consecutively in five words.—–ωׂ ?ψψ, from which the imperfect ιωׂ ?ψε, Proverbs 8:16, occurs only here in Isaiah.
Isaiah 32:2. ξַ ?ηֲ ?αֵ ?ΰ, “hiding corner, place of hiding,” ἅπ. λεγ., comp. 1 Samuel 23:23.—ρϊψ comp. Isaiah 16:4; Isaiah 28:17.—τμβιξΧ comp. Isaiah 30:25.—φָ ?ιεֹ ?ο comp. Isaiah 25:5.—φμ comp. Isaiah 4:6; Isaiah 25:4-5.—ΰψυςιτδ again only Psalms 143:6.
Isaiah 32:3. ϊִּ ?ωְׁ ?ςֶ ?ιπָ ?δ can hardly be derived from ωָׁ ?ςָ ?δ. It comes nearer to take it in the sense of ωׁ ?ςς “oblinere, to close up; plaster up,” in which sense this latter verb often occurs in Isaiah 6:10; Isaiah 29:9.—χָ ?ωַׁ ?α, probably kindred to χָ ?φַ ?α “to point, to prick” (the ears), occurs only here in Kal.
Isaiah 32:4. ςִ ?μֵּ ?β, “balbus,” ἅπ. λεγ.—φֲ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ (comp. Isaiah 18:4) are nitentia, clara, clear, plain words.
Isaiah 32:5. Isaiah uses παμ only here; παμδ again Isaiah 9:16. λִּ ?ιμַ ?ι written λֵּ ?μַ ?ι in Isaiah 32:7 for the sake of similarity in sound with λֵּ ?μָ ?ιε, is to be derived from πָ ?λַ ?μ fraudulenter egit (Raschi, Kimchi, Gesen., and others), Genesis 37:18; Numbers 25:18; Psalms 105:25; Malachi 1:14, so that from πְ ?λִ ?ιμ, by rejecting the π, as in ωֹׂ ?ΰ ,ωֵׂ ?ΰϊ ,ϊֵּ ?ϊ, etc., there results λִּ ?ιμ with the rare ending Ξι- (comp. ωַׁ ?γַּ ?ι ,βֹ ?αַ ?ι ,ηֹ ?ψַ ?ι). See Green, § 194, 2, b.—ωׁ ?εֹ ?ςַ (from ωׁ ?εּ ?ςַ “amplus, dives fuit,” kindred to ιָ ?ωַׁ ?ς) is the rich man, independent on account of his means.
Isaiah 32:6. ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δΰָ ?εֶ ?ο occurs only here (comp. Isaiah 59:6); the idea is always expressed elsewhere by τςμΰεο.—μςωׂ ?εϊ gerundive.——ηֹ ?πֶ ?σ, ἅπ. λεγ.; comp. δֲ ?πֻ ?τָ ?δ Jeremiah 23:15; substantive from ηָ ?πֵ ?σ Isaiah 9:16; Isaiah 10:6; Isaiah 33:14.—ϊּ ?εςָ ?δ “error,” comp. Isaiah 29:24; again only Nehemiah 4:2.—Hiph. δηριψ again only Exodus 16:18.—The construction εְ ?Ξιַ ?ηְ ?ρִ ?ιψ—μְ ?δָ ?ψִ ?ιχ is to be explained as a return of the subordinate form into the principal form.
Isaiah 32:7. A mutual attraction appears to have happened here: 1) λֵּ ?μִ ?ιν chosen for the sake of λִּ ?ιμַ ?ι; 2) λִּ ?ιμַ ?ι changed to λֵּ ?μַ ?ι for the sake of λֵּ ?μָ ?ιε—ζִ ?ξָּ ?δ “consilium” (Job 17:11) then especially consilium pravum. scelus,” occurs only here in Isaiah.—δַ ?αֵּ ?μ “to destroy,” comp. Isaiah 13:5; Isaiah 54:16.
Isaiah 32:8. πְ ?γִ ?ιαָ ?δ occurs again only Job 30:15.
AND 1. This passage, which strongly reminds one of Isa 29:18-24, and somewhat also of Isa 30:20 sqq., must necessarily be joined to what precedes, as it can neither stand alone, nor be regarded as belonging to what follows. We see in these verses an amplification of Isa 31:6-7. For the latter passage only presents to view in a negative way the turning back and abandonment of idolatry. But in our passage is set forth what positive forces of blessing will become operative in the entire ethical life of the nation, and especially in the relation of the powerful and nobles to the lowly. It is manifest that the Prophet, in enumerating what shall no more be, has in mind the irregularities of his own time. It is very probable that he even alludes to particular, concrete facts, in a way that his
2. Behold——speak plainly.Isaiah 32:1-4. The king that will rule righteously must be the Messiah. For the time when Israel will be cleansed and purified, and live and be ruled according to truth and righteousness, is the Messianic time (comp. Isaiah 1:24 sqq.; Isaiah 9:6-7; Isaiah 11:11 sqq.; Isaiah 16:5; Isaiah 28:16 sqq.). Nothing justifies us in assuming that such a condition as our Isaiah 32:1-8 describe, will intervene before that time.
In that time only the Messiah can be king. Of an under-king prophecy knows nothing. One must only say, that, in distinction from passages like Isaiah 9:6 sq.; Isaiah 11:1 sqq., the person of the Messianic king appears more in the background, and the Prophet depicts the admirable surrounding of the expected Messiah, rather than His personality. One may suppose that the state of things under Hezekiah furnished the occasion. The king himself was good; but his surroundings did not correspond. Hence the Prophet emphasizes here, that in the Messianic time, the glorious central figure, whom he only briefly names Isaiah 32:1, will have also a suitable environment.
Thus the point of this passage is directed against the magnates that surrounded the king. Instead of oppressing the nation as heretofore (Isaiah 1:23; Isaiah 3:15; Isaiah 10:2; Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 29:20), each of them (the princes) will himself be a protector of the oppressed, like a sheltering, covering place of concealment protects from wind-storm and rain. Yea, they will even afford positive refreshment to the poor and wretched, as water-brooks and dense shade do to the traveller in the hot desert. The eyes of them that see, the ears of them that hear (Isaiah 32:3), are eyes and ears that can see and hear if they will. It is well-known that there are ways of plastering up such eyes, and of making such ears deaf (Isaiah 1:23; Isaiah 5:23; Isaiah 33:15). The like of that shall not be with these princes.
Delitzsch well remarks that, according to Isaiah 32:4, Israel shall be delivered also from faults of infirmity.
I would only so modify this remark as to make Isaiah 32:4, like that which precedes and follows, refer, not to Israel in general, but to the princes. Thus the πξδψιν “the rash, reckless,” are such judges as are naturally inclined to judge hastily, and superficially (comp. on Isaiah 35:4). These will apply a reflecting scrutiny (comp. on Isaiah 11:2) in order to know what is right. The stammering are such as do not trust themselves to speak openly, because they are afraid of blundering out the truth that is known to them, and so bringing themselves into disfavor. Thus all the conditions for the exercise of right and justice will be fulfilled. The judges will be what they ought to be in respect to eyes, ears, heart and mouth.
3. The vile person—shall he stand.Isaiah 32:5-8. From those in office the Prophet passes to the noble apart from office. In this respect there often exists in the present conditions the most glaring contradiction between inward and outward nobility. This contradiction will cease in the Messianic time. For then a fool will no longer be called a noble.
A fool, πָ ?αָ ?μ, is, according to Old Testament language, not one intellectually deficient, but one that practises gross iniquity; for sin in its essence is perverseness, contradiction, nonsense. The wicked surrenders realities of immeasurable value for a seeming good that is transitory; whereas the pious surrenders the whole world in order to save his soul, and this is at the same time the highest wisdom (comp. Deuteronomy 32:6; Jeremiah 17:11; Judges 19:23 sq.; Isaiah 20:6; 1 Samuel 25:25; 2 Samuel 13:12).—πָ ?γִ ?ια [Eng. Bibl.: “liberal”] undoubtedly involves originally the notion of voluntariness (Exodus 25:2; Exodus 35:5; Exodus 35:21-22; Exodus 35:29, etc.). But he that does good from an inward, free impulse is a noble man. Thus gradually πγια acquires the sense of noble, superior man, and indeed so much without regard to inward nobility, that the word is used with a bad side-meaning (Job 21:28).
Isaiah uses it again only Isaiah 13:2. One will not call a swindler baron, the prophet proceeds to say, Isaiah 32:5 b.
By the following causal sentence, Isaiah 32:6, the Prophet proves the sentence “the fool will no more be called noble.” His argument may be represented by the following syllogism: In the Messianic time each will be called what he is. But in that time also there will be people that are fools. Therefore in that time these will also be called fools and not noblemen. [It is not the Prophet’s aim in Isaiah 32:6, to state what fools will do in that time, as if their doing then will be different from now, which obviously it will not be. He would say there will be fools, and they will be called fools, and nobles and they will be called nobles.—Tr.]. Of course for the Prophet the only important thought is that in the last time falsehood will no longer reign as in the present, and that accordingly a man’s being and name will no longer be in contrast, but in perfect harmony. One sees that it is a point with him to say to the cheats of his day and age how they ought to be called, if every man had his dues.
The general thought of Isa 32:6 a, is particularized in what follows. One does and speaks folly when he practises unclean, shameful things (by which the land is defiled before God, Isaiah 24:5; Jeremiah 3:1), and utters error, (what misleads) against Jehovah. This doing and speaking is for the purpose of enriching one’s self by robbery of the poor and weak (Isaiah 1:23). This is figuratively expressed: to make empty the soul of the hungry (i. e., to take away what can satisfy the need of the hungry, comp. Isaiah 29:8) and to “cause the drink,” etc.λμιν, Isaiah 32:7, are properly instrumenta. Not the physical implements are meant here, but the ways and means in general of which the swindler makes use. [“He deviseth plots to destroy the oppressed (or afflicted) with words of falsehood, and (i. e., even) in the poor (man’s) speaking right (i. e., even when the poor-man’s claim is just, or in a more general sense, when the poor-man pleads his cause).”—J.
A. Alexander].
In Isaiah 32:8 we must remark the same in regard to εְ ?πָ ?γִ ?ια that we did in regard to παμ and λιμι Isaiah 32:6-7. The Prophet will not in general give a characteristic of the πγια, but he would say in what regard the namesπγια and παμ will be held in the Messianic time. Thus Isaiah 32:6-8 are proof of Isa 32:5. According to these verses none will be given a name that does not become him. He that is called παμ “fool,” will also speak παμδ, and he that is called πγια will certainly confirm his claim to this name by having noble thoughts, generosa meditatur.—χενςμπγιαεϊ can hardly mean “to stand on noble ground” (Meier), for πγιαּ ?εϊ are generose facta, the exhibitions of generosity, not this generosity as a moral fundamental habit. Otherwise the second πγιαεϊ would have a meaning different from the first.
Therefore ιχενεβεΧ must mean: and he perseveres in his noble thoughts, i. e., he not only conceives them, but he carries them out. In bestowing the name, men will not be influenced only by the thoughts that proclaim themselves; men will make the name depend on one’s steadily adhering to them his whole life. χεν often has this sense of continuing, persevering. Comp. Isaiah 40:8; Leviticus 25:30; Leviticus 27:19.
Footnotes:according to.Heb. heavy.plastered up.Heb. hasty.Or, elegantly.fool.noble.the cheat be called baron.fully.uncleanness.cheat.Or, when he speaketh against the poor in judgment.Or, be established.
4.—THE PRESENT OF THE PROUD WOMEN, AND THE FUTURE GLORY OF THE NATION
Isaiah 32:9-209 Rise up, ye women that Ire at ease;
Hear my voice, ye careless daughters;
Give ear unto my speech.
10 Many days and years shall ye be troubled, ye careless women:
For the vintage shall fail, the gathering shall not come.
11 Tremble, ye women that are at ease;
Be troubled, ye careless ones:
Strip you, and make you bare, and gird sackcloth upon your loins.
12 They shall lament for the teats,
For the pleasant fields, for the fruitful vine.
13 Upon the land of my people shall come up thorns and briars;
Yea, upon all the houses of joy in the joyous city:
14 Because the palaces shall be forsaken;
The multitude of the city b shall be left;
The forts and towers shall be for dens forever,
A joy of wild asses, a pasture of flocks;
15 Until the spirit be poured upon us from on high,
And the wilderness be a fruitful field,
And the fruitful field be counted for a forest.
16 Then judgment shall dwell in the wilderness,
And righteousness remain in the fruitful field.
17 And the work of righteousness shall be peace;
And the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance forever.
18 And my people shall dwell in a peaceable habitation
And in sure dwellings, and in quiet resting places;
19 When it shall hail, coming down on the forest;
And the city shall be in a low place.
20 Blessed are ye that sow beside all waters,
That send forth thither the feet of the ox and the ass.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_32:9. αֹּ ?θֵ ?ηַ is here used absolutely as in Judges 18:7; Judges 18:10; Judges 18:27; Jeremiah 7:8; Jeremiah 12:5.——ωׁ ?ΰπο again Isaiah 32:9; Isaiah 32:11; Isaiah 32:18; Isaiah 33:20; Isaiah 37:29.
Isaiah 32:10. The singular ωָׁ ?πָ ?δ must be taken in the sense of one year, seeing there is nothing to indicate that it is a collective.——After the specification of time the sentence ought properly to proceed with the Vav. consec. and the perf. Yet there are also examples of the use of the imperf. with Vav. (Exodus 12:3; Jeremiah 8:1 K’thibh) or without it (Isaiah 27:6; Isaiah 7:8 comp. Isaiah 21:16; Jeremiah 8:1 K’ri; Genesis 40:13; Genesis 40:19). The accusative ιξιν responds to the question “when,” to signify the point of time where the predicted event will intervene.——On πμι comp. at Isaiah 14:6.
Isaiah 32:11. In δִ ?ψְ ?γεּ we have the masculine as the chief form that includes the feminine, as the man rules and represents the woman: In ηֲֹ ?βֽ ?ψָ ?δ ,ςֹֽ ?ψָ ?δ ,τְּ ?ωֹֽׁ ?θָ ?δ ,ψֳ ?βֽ ?ζָ ?δ we have also the chief form of the imperative, i. e., the masculine, with the cohortative He of motion toward. Thus these imperatives contain no individualized command, but one formed quite generally as to matter, without regard to person and number: similar to our way in giving words of command, wherein at least no regard is had to the number of those addressed as we use the infin., or past particip. [the illustration is drawn of course from the Germ. idiom.—Tr.]. This ver. shows plainly how in Hebrew the gender of words is not so rigidly fixed as in classical and modern languages, and hence it not so consistently adhered to.——Isaiah uses τωׁ ?θ only here.——Of ςεּ ?ψ “nudum esse” he uses the Piel Isaiah 23:13.
Isaiah 32:12. The same preponderance of the masc. gender appears in ρτγιν that is noticed in Isaiah 32:11, and has the same explanation.——ρτγ as verb in Isaiah, only here; comp. Isaiah 22:12; Jeremiah 49:3,——Note the similarity in sound of ςַ ?μΞωָׁ ?γַ ?ιִ ?ν and ςַ ?μΞωְׂ ?γֵ ?ι.—ηֶ ?ξֶ ?γ “amoenitas, deliciae” only here in Isaiah, comp. on Isaiah 27:2; Amos 5:11—τψιδ comp. Isaiah 17:6; Psalms 128:3; Ezekiel 19:10.
Isaiah 32:13 χεֹ ?υ “thorn, thorn bushes,” again in Isaiah only Isaiah 13:12, and is joined with ωָׁ ?ξִ ?ιψ only here. Everywhere else Isaiah joins this word with ωַׁ ?ιִ ?ϊ (Isaiah 5:6; Isaiah 7:23 sqq.; Isaiah 9:17; Isaiah 10:17; Isaiah 17:4). One might grammatically regard the words χευωׁ ?ξιψ as having a genitive relation. But as the words ωָׁ ?ξִ ?ιψωַׁ ?ιִ ?ϊ ,Isaiah 27:3, occur in apposition (ωׁ ?ξιψ which is ωׁ ?ιϊ), we may assume the same construction here. The general notion χεֹ ?υ (resecandum, from χָ ?φַ ?υ = χεּ ?υ comp. χְ ?εֻ ?φּ ?εֹ ?ϊ “locks”) is more exactly defined as ωָׁ ?ξִ ?ιψ (“prickly thing”).—The αϊιξωׂ ?εωׂ are not necessarily the houses of χψιδςμιζδ. For there are such houses of pleasure, not only in the capital, but in all cities and villages of the land.
Therefore I can as little take ξαϊι in the genitive with χψιδςΧ as I could assume that construction Isaiah 28:1. As there δμεξιιΧ, so here χψιδςΧ is dependent on ςַ ?μ.
Isaiah 32:14. This verse is subordinated to the last clause of Isa 32:13, for it explains how the city has become overgrown with thorns.—There is a metonymy in the expression δξεοςιψςζα, the effect being put for the cause, i.e., ηξεοςιψ stands for ςιψδֹ ?ξִ ?ιָ ?δ Isaiah 22:2.
Isaiah 32:15. The expression ψεηξξψεν occurs only here; ξψεν occurs in Isaiah, often: Isaiah 22:16; Isaiah 24:18; Isaiah 40:26; Isaiah 57:15; Isaiah 58:4, etc.Isaiah 32:17. ξςωׂ ?δ (comp. Isaiah 5:2; Isaiah 4:10; Habakkuk 3:17) is "the yield;" ςαγδ in the sense of "fruit of service," comp. τְּ ?ςֻ ?μָּ ?δ, occurs, as far as I can see, only here.—πָ ?εֶ ?δ in the same sense as here Isaiah 33:20; Isaiah 34:13; Isaiah 35:7.—ξαθηιν in Isaiah only here.—ξπεηδ Isaiah 11:10; Isaiah 28:12; Isaiah 66:1.
Isaiah 32:19. The verb αָּ ?ψַ ?γ occurs only here: but comp. Isaiah 28:2; Isaiah 28:17; Isaiah 30:30—ωִׁ ?τְ ?μָ ?δ is ἅπ. λεγ—Note that αָּ ?ψַ ?γ and ωִׁ ?τְ ?μָ ?δ ,αְּ ?ψֶ ?γֶ ?ϊ and ϊִּ ?ωְׁ ?τַּ ?μ on the one hand, and ιַ ?ςַ ?ψ and ςִ ?ιψ on the other correspond in assonance.
AND 1. As in chapter 3. so here, the Prophet addresses men and women separately, having in mind especially those of the higher, and highest ranks. According to the foregoing exposition, Isaiah 32:1-8, under the guise of a glorious Messianic prophecy, contain a sharp reproof for powerful ones in Jerusalem. The second part of the chapter, on the other hand, is directed against the proud, secure women, announcing a season of disaster for them (Isaiah 32:9-14), [“until by a special divine influence a total revolution shall take place in the character, and, as a necessary consequence, in the condition of the people.”—J. A. A., on Isaiah 32:15] (Isaiah 32:15-20).
2. Rise up—pasture of flocks.Isaiah 32:9-14. The form of the introduction calls to mind Isaiah 1:2; Isaiah 28:23, but more especially the address of Lamech to his wives Genesis 4:23. I do not think that “rise up” demands a physical rising up. Like our German “auf” “up,” it may signify the merely inward rousing of the spirit to give attention (comp. Numbers 23:18). ωׁ ?ΰπο has elsewhere also the secondary meaning of proud ease: Psalms 123:4; Amos 6:1; Zechariah 1:15.
The specification of time in ιξινςμΞωׁ ?πδ Isaiah 32:10, does not relate to the continuance of the desolation, as is evident from Isaiah 32:15 “until the spirit,” etc. According to Isaiah 29:1, which is manifestly related to our passage both as to matter and time (see the exposition there), it is probable that the Prophet means an indefinite number of days added to a year. (See Text. and Gram.). Evidently the Prophet has in mind women that have heretofore never known any want, but have continually lived in abundance and luxury. Just for this reason will trembling and dismay seize them. For they would assuredly not have dispensed with the products of the wine and fruit harvest, had not the enemy occupied the territory about Jerusalem and made gathering and plucking impossible. Thus the scarcity of those noble products, felt as a sure token of the enemy’s presence, most of all in the apartments of women of rank, will frighten the women out of their secure and proud repose.
Comp. Isaiah 16:7 sqq. αφιψ “the wine harvest” (comp. Isaiah 24:13). ΰֹ ?ρֶ ?σ, elsewhere ΰָ ?ρִ ?ισ (Exod. 23:16; 24:22), is “the fruit harvest” (Micah 7:1). The word occurs again only Isaiah 33:4, and there only in its fundamental sense. That which Isaiah 32:10 is presented as in prospect, is announced in Isaiah 32:11 as the command, the will of God. Hence it must happen.
Strip you,etc. The command to disrobe is that garments of mourning may replace those before worn (Joe 1:13; Isaiah 15:3; Isaiah 22:12).
Though we may translate λִּ ?ι, Isaiah 32:13 b, by “yea” (immo), as more accordant with our speech, still there underlies it a causal relation. That the land is overgrown with thorns and thistles, will appear the more credible, when it is perceived that even the houses of pleasure, indeed the very capital grows rank with such weeds. (See Text. and Gram.). The joyous city means Jerusalem (comp. Isaiah 22:2; Zephaniah 2:15). ςμιζ as was shown at Isaiah 22:2, has the secondary meaning “presumptuous joy.” The propriety of this sense here in reference to the women of careless ease is evident. (On the logical connection of Isa 32:14 see Text. and Gram.). Inasmuch as “joyous city” and “multitude of the city,” (which expressions are conjoined Isaiah 22:2), occur only in Isaiah 22:2 and our text, one properly infers a relationship between these chapters both as regards matter and time.
As not every city has an Ophel, and thus Ophel may not be taken as a general attribute of cities, but as something peculiar to Jerusalem (though not in distinction from all cities, for Samaria had an Ophel, 2 Kings 5:24), so we may understand by it the locality mentioned, 2 Chronicles 27:3; 2 Chronicles 33:14; Nehemiah 3:26 sq.; Nehemiah 11:21, “the southern steep, rocky prominence of Moriah from the south end of the temple-place to its extremest point, the ’Οφλᾶ, Ὀφλᾶς of Josephus.” (Arnold in Herzog’sR. Ency. VIII., p. 632).—αַּ ?ηַ ?ο (ἅπ. λεγ.) is anyway kindred to αַּ ?ηεּ ?ο or αַּ ?ηִ ?εο (Isaiah 23:13) and must, according to the fundamental meaning of the verb αηο (probare, explorare, examinare) signify a locality suitable for this, a watch-tower, look-out. But whether towers in general or a particular tower is meant, is hard to say. αַּ ?ηַ ?ο does not occur elsewhere; yet the common word for “tower,” ξβγμ, signifies also watch-tower (2 Kings 9:17; 2 Kings 17:9, etc.), and wall-towers (Nehemiah 3:11; Nehemiah 12:38). Perhaps this would have been used here, were only towers in general spoken of. Hence it is rather probable that this word αηο, named along with ςλּ ?μ and occurring only in this passage, signifies a tower especially designated by this name, located in Ophel; perhaps “the great tower” of Nehemiah 3:27 that is mentioned in connection with Ophel.
Ophel and αηο shall be pro speluncis or vice speluncarum.αִּ ?ςַ ?γ which everywhere involves the notion of something separating, has here the meaning “for, instead of.” For what intervenes for another, in a measure puts itself before it, and in this way forms a partition between it and the observer. Wild, lonely, and far remote from all human intercourse must be the caves in which the wild ass (τֶּ ?ψֶ ?ΰ only here in Isaiah) has as much joy as a man in his finely built dwelling (Isaiah 32:13).
3. Until the spirit—and the ass.Isaiah 32:15-20. As all the preceding prophecies are double-sided, including as it were day and night, such too is the case with the present one. But here, too, the Prophet does not promise immediate salvation. He sets the glorious Messianic last time over against the pernicious present time, yet in a way that overleaps the long centuries that intervene, and sees that future directly behind the present. Thus ςγ that begins Isaiah 32:15 is both a restriction of the hyperbolical ςγΞςεμν (immeasurable extent of time as e.g., Isaiah 63:16; Jeremiah 2:20), and a bold bridge from the present into the remote future.
He portrays the latter in that aspect that corresponds to the things he reproves in the present. Proud security now reigns, for which however there is no reason. But in that time there will reign security and repose, resting on the securest foundation. For Israel will then be filled with the spirit of God, and serve in this spirit, by which shall be assured to them God’s protection and support against all enemies. The expression ιςψδ is very strong, meaning properly: the spirit from on high will be emptied out on us, completely poured out (comp. Isaiah 11:9, and respecting the word Genesis 24:20 comp.
Isaiah 3:17; Isaiah 22:6; Isaiah 53:12). How far-reaching and comprehensive is the gaze of the Prophet here! He regards the spirit from on high not merely as an ethical and intellectual, but also as a physical life-principle. He speaks here, as he does Isaiah 11:2-9, of nature and of persons as wholly pervaded by spirit. And the wilderness will be a fruitful field,etc., which has a proverbial sound, must certainly be taken in another sense than that of Isa 29:17. The latter passage speaks of retrogression; here progress is meant.
There is a descending climax, Lebanon, fruitful field, forest; here an ascending, desert, fruitful field, forest, in which the Prophet manifestly treats the forest, not as representing absence of cultivation, but as representing the most prodigious development of vegetation. He would say: what is now waste will then be fruitful field, and what is now fruitful field will then be forest, i.e., will stand high as a forest. Then a very different, a higher principle of life, originating from the divine δόξα will penetrate even nature. Of course, then, the personal life of men also. And how beautifully the Prophet depicts this harmony of both! He names again the wilderness and the fruitful field (Isaiah 32:16) in order to say that judgment and righteousness shall dwell in them (comp.
Isaiah 1:27; Isaiah 5:16; Isaiah 9:6; Isaiah 10:22; Isaiah 28:17). And the fruit of this spiritual right-being will in turn make its impress by a right glorious outward appearance, viz., in everlasting peace, rest and security. What a picture for the proudly secure women (Isaiah 32:9 sqq.)! They may see why they are so called in a reproving sense. Their ease and security lack foundation.
When it shall hail,etc. I can only regard Isaiah 32:19 as the sombre foil which the Prophet uses to enhance the splendor of that future which he displayed to his people. [Some think there is an allusion to the hail in Egypt while Goshen was spared; see Exodus 9:22-26.—Tr.]. We have had several such pictures of the future with a dark background (Isaiah 11:14 sq.; Isaiah 25:10 sqq.; Isaiah 26:5 sq., etc.). Every one admits that 19a, relates to Assyria. We had the forest as emblem of Assyria Isaiah 9:17; Isaiah 10:18-19; Isaiah 10:34. This forest shall fall under a storm of hail.
On ιψγ comp. Deuteronomy 28:52; Zechariah 11:2. It is not said that the forest shall break down by the hail, but that it shall hail when the forest breaks down. Thus this breaking down may be effected by something else, say by the blows of an axe. Anyway the forest will break down under a storm of hail, some phenomenon coming from on high and accredited as a divine instrument of judgment. Very many expositors understand the city in a low place to mean Jerusalem (Hitzig, Knobel, Caspari, Delitzsch,etc.).
But why of a sudden this dark trait in the picture of light? Is not the abasement of Jerusalem sufficiently declared in Isaiah 32:13-14? Why a repetition here? or, if not repetition, why thus suddenly a new judgment in the midst of the blessed, spirit-effected condition of peace? If the forest means the world-power generally, then the city must mean the centre of it, the world-city (comp. Isaiah 24:10-12; Isaiah 25:2-3; Isaiah 25:12; Isaiah 26:5. It is worthy of remark that, Isaiah 25:12; Isaiah 26:5, the Prophet uses δωׁ ?τιμ thrice in reference to the judgment on the world-city.
That he does not elsewhere in 28–33, mention the world-city is no reason why he may not once mention it here. Why need he mention it oftener? Is it more probable that he would not mention it at all, than that he should do so once?
In Isaiah 32:20 the Prophet returns exclusively to Israel In contrast with the desolations (near for Israel, remote for the world-power), he promises to his people the possession of the land in its widest extent, and the freest use of it for cultivation and pasture. Blessed are ye (comp. Isaiah 30:18; Isaiah 56:2) he says, who sow beside all waters, i.e., on all fruitful lands. Thus all well-watered and so fruitful land-stretches will be at Israel’s service, and Israel shall cultivate them, and raising cattle shall be unhindered (comp. Isaiah 30:23). In fact the earth shall be theirs, and they may use as much laud as they wish for either. Cattle may pasture in full freedom, unrestrained by fetters or fence. The whole land “shall be for the sending forth of oxen,” Isaiah 7:25.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 31:1-2, “Against the perverted confidence and fleshly trust in human wisdom, power and might, because the people doubt God’s help, and because of such wicked doubt put their trust in human power, wit and skill. It is true the Scripture does not deny that one may use means and call in human aid in danger, yet so that even the heart looks rather to God, and knows that if He watches not and keeps not Israel, all other human help and means are in vain (Psalms 127:1; Jeremiah 17:5).”—Cramer.2. On Isaiah 31:3. “Notetur diligenter sententia isthaec prophetae: Aegyptus homo et non Deus, adeoque symboli loco semper in ore habeatur et usurpatur tum ad doctrinam, tum ad consolationem (Psalms 62:10; Psalms 73:18 sq.).”—Foerster.3. On Isaiah 31:4-5. The Lord, on the one hand, compares Himself to a lion, that will not suffer his prey to be torn away from him, and means by that that He will not suffer Himself to be turned from His counsel against Jerusalem by those false helpers, to which Jerusalem looks for protection against the punishments that it has deserved.
But on the other hand the Lord compares Himself most touchingly and fittingly to the eagle that stretches its feathers over its young to protect them (Deuteronomy 32:11) [see Tr’s. note on Isaiah 32:5]. Blessed is he that sits under the shelter of the Highest, and abides under the shadow of the Almighty (Psalms 91:1; comp. Matt. 33:27).
4. On Isaiah 31:7. Foerster remarks on this verse, that it is used by the Reformed as a proof-passage against the use of images in churches. He distinguishes between imagines superstitiosae, whose use is of course forbidden, and imagines non superstitiosae, the like of which were even, permitted and used in the worship of Jehovah, e. g., the cherubim and other images of art in the Tabernacle and in the Temple.
5. On Isaiah 31:8. “God has manifold ways by which He can head off tyrants, and does not need always to draw the sword over them. Examples: Sennacherib, 2 Kings 19:35; Nebuchadnezzar, Daniel 4:30; Herod, Acts 12:23.”—Cramer.6. On Isaiah 31:9. That the Lord has in Zion His fire and His hearth in Jerusalem is at once the strength and the weakness of the Old Covenant. It is its strength so far as, of course, it is a high privilege that Israel enjoys above all nations of the Gentile world, that the point of the earth’s surface that the Lord has made the place of His real presence on earth is the central point of their land and of their communion.
But it is its weakness so far as this presence is only a transient and outward one, which, when misunderstood, can minister only to an outward worship and a false confidence (comp. Jeremiah 7:4) that affords only a treacherous point of support that is dangerous to the soul. How totally different is the real presence of the Lord in the church of the New Covenant! To it the Lord is organically joined as a member, as on the other hand the Lord joins all members of His church really to Himself by His Spirit and His sacraments.
7. On Isaiah 32:1-8. “The picture which the Prophet paints here of the church of the last time is the picture of every true congregation of Christ. In it, the will of the Lord must be the only law according to which men judge, and not any fleshly consideration of any sort. In it, there must be open eyes and ears for God’s work and word; and if in some things precedence is readily allowed to the children of this world, still in spiritual things the understanding must be right and the speech clear. Finally, in it persons must be valued according to their true Christian, moral worth, not according to advantages that before God are rather a reproach than an honor. But the picture of the true congregation mirrors to us our own deformities.
All this is not found in us. Everywhere appears worldly consideration, looking to the world, much weakness in spiritual judgment, and in speech far too much respect for the advantages that worldly position and wealth give the church member. May the Lord mend these things in us; and if only at the last He transforms the old church in its totality into the new, so let each of us pray the Lord that still He would more and more transform each worldling into a true, spiritual man.”—Weber. The Prophet Isaiah, 1875.
8. On Isaiah 32:1-4. Men of all times may learn from the Prophet’s words what sort of persons true kings, noblemen and officials ought to be. Underlying the whole discourse of Isaiah is the thought that those in authority are there for the sake of the people [comp. Luke 22:25-26.—Tr.], and that truth and honor are the first conditions of flourishing rule (comp. Herz., R-Encycl. XI. p. 24).
On Isaiah 32:8. Old Flattig once met the Duke of Wurtemburg on the latter’s birth day. “Well, Flattig,” inquired the Duke, what did you preach on my birth-day?” “Serene highness, what did I preach? I just preached that princes ought to have princely thoughts.” The Duke rode on without making any reply. Where there is no princely heart, there can come forth no princely thoughts. And only then does one have a princely heart when the Lord is the heart’s prince.
9. On Isaiah 32:9. “One must not suppose that it was no part of the Prophet’s office to reform women, seeing God includes all men under sin, and the proud daughters of Zion with their ostentation, were a great cause of the land being laden with sins (Isaiah 3:6).”—Cramer.[“The alarm is sounded to women,—to feed whose pride, vanity and luxury, their husbands and fathers were tempted to starve the poor.”—M. Henry, in loc.].
HINTS1. On Isaiah 31:1-4. Warning against confiding in human help. 1) It is insulting to God. 2) It proves idle at last, for a, the power of men is in itself weak; b, it is wholly powerless against the strong hand of God.
2. On Isaiah 31:5-9. The Lord alone is the shelter of His Own. 1) He will be such (Isaiah 32:5); 2) He must be such (ver, 9 b, His own interest demands this); 3) He alone can be such (Isaiah 32:8); 4) He will be such on one condition (Isaiah 32:6).
3. [On Isaiah 31:6-7 1) It is general; every one shall cast away his own idols and begin with them before trying to demolish those of other people, which there will be no need of when every man reforms himself. 2) It is thorough: for they shall part with their idolatry, their beloved sin, made more precious by the gold and silver devoted to it. 3) It is on the right principle: a principle of piety and not of policy; because idolatry was a sin and not because it was profitless (“deeply revolted,” “sinfully made idols”). After M. Henry, in loc—Tr.].
4. On Isaiah 32:1-8. As there are always poor people, so there must always be persons of power and superior rank. The latter must know that they are there for the sake of the people, as guardians of right, as protectors of the poor and weak, so to speak, as the eyes, ears and tongues of the commonwealth. But as in God’s kingdom descent from Abraham counts for nothing any more, and true worship is no more that which is offered in Jerusalem, but that which is in spirit and in truth, so, too, the nobility of the flesh must yield precedence to nobility of the spirit. Not he that is noble according to the flesh, but a fool according to the spirit shall be called noble. Only he that has princely thoughts shall be called a prince; for truth reigns in the kingdom of God.
5. [On Isaiah 32:2. This may be given a spiritual application by a special reference to Christ, as eminently true of Him, the King of kings. This application is old and precious. Wind and tempest, rain and hail and burning heat are emblems of the calamities of life, and especially of God’s judgments on sin. Distress and impending judgment make men seek shelter. Christ is the only adequate hiding-place and covert.
Let men run to Him with the eagerness of travellers in the burning desert taking refuge under a rock from the coming storm. The same rock-cliff often has a bountiful stream issuing just there where its cavernous recess affords the best shelter. While the traveller is safe from the tempest, he may rest and refresh himself from the distress he has endured. The rock “not only excludes the rays of the sun, but it has itself a refreshing coolness that is most grateful to a weary traveller.”—Barnes. “Some observe here, that as the covert, and hiding-place, and the rock, do themselves receive the battering of the wind and storm, to save those from it that take shelter in them, so Christ bore the storm Himself to keep it off from us.”—M. Henry. Tr.].
6. On Isaiah 32:9-11. When a land goes to ruin a great part of the blame of it rests on the women. For they are more easily prompted to evil, as they are to good. Where evil has once taken root, they are the ones that carry it to an extreme. “Und geht es zu des Bφsen Haus, das Weib hat tausend Schritt voraus.” Therefore the punishment falls the hardest on them. As the weaker and more delicate, they suffer the most under the blows of misfortune.
7. On Isaiah 32:15 sqq. When once the Spirit of God is poured out on all flesh (Joe 3:1) then the personal and impersonal creation will be glorified. Then Satan will be bound, and the Lord alone will rule in men, and in nature. Then at last will it be beautiful on earth. For then right and righteousness will reign on earth, and peace, and that rest that is promised to the people of God (Hebrews 4:9).
Footnotes:Heb. Days above a year.They beat on the breasts for.Heb. the fields of desire.Or, Burning upon, etc.is.Or, clifts and watchtowers.are.And.service.And it will hail when the forest falls.Or, the city shall be utterly abased.
V.—THE FIFTH WOEIsaiah 331. THE GLORIUS TURNING POINT: THE WOE UPON ISRAEL BECOMES A WOE UPON ASSYRIA
Isaiah 33:11 Woe to thee that spoilest and thou wast not spoiled;
And dealest treacherously, and they dealt not treacherously with thee!
When thou shalt cease to spoil, thou shalt be spoiled;
And when thou shalt make an end to deal treacherously, they shall deal treacherously with thee.
TEXTUAL AND ωׁ ?εγγ and αεβγ conjoined as in Isaiah 21:2.—The primary meaning of αָּ ?βַ ?γ is “to cover;” hence αֶּ ?βֶ ?γ “the cover, garment.” Hence the secondary meaning of perfidious, treacherous doing [like the secondary meaning of the English word “to cloak.”—Tr.].—On the inf. λδϊξκ see Ewald, § 114 a, Green, § 141, 3.—λַּ ?πְּ ?μֹ ?ϊְ ?κָ stands for λְּ ?δַ ?πְ ?μֹ ?ϊְ ?κָ, comp. Isaiah 3:8; the Dag. f. in the π is because of the Masorets assuming a synkope, whereas, properly, there Is an elision.
AND The season of preparation for withstanding the Assyrian foe, that Israel has spent in so perverse a fashion, is past. The enemy is at hand (comp. Isaiah 33:7). But now, too, is the time when God will fulfil His word that He would smite the Assyrian (Isaiah 30:18 sqq.; 31 sqq.; Isaiah 31:8 sq.). Now, therefore, the Prophet turns the woe against Assyria. This power, hitherto unconquered, will be overthrown (Isaiah 33:1).
This is the principal thought of the chapter, which the Prophet puts at the head Isaiah 33:1, as a theme. But as a stone thrown into the water makes wave-lines that extend in concentric circles wider and wider, so the Prophet joins on to this primary theme three declarations which, enlarging in extent and contents, state the particulars of the condition, the completion and consequence of that act of deliverance. This woe follows as a fifth those of Isa 28:1; Isaiah 29:1; Isaiah 30:1; Isaiah 31:1. But unlike the preceding, which are directed against Israel, this is against Assyria (comp. Isaiah 10:1; Isaiah 10:5). For, according to the contents of the chapter, none but Assyria can be the desolater.
This announcement of its destruction is opposed to that audacious presumption that regarded itself as invincible (Isaiah 10:5-14).
2. THE PRAYER OF FAITH QUICKLY HEARD
Isaiah 33:2-62 O Lord, be gracious unto us; we have waited for thee:
Be thou their arm every morning,
Our salvation also in the time of trouble.
3 At the noise of the tumult the people fled;
At the lifting up of thyself the nations were scattered.
4 And your spoil shall be gathered like the gathering of the caterpillar;
As the running to and fro of the locusts shall he run upon them.
5 The Lord is exalted; for he dwelleth on high:
He hath filled Zion with judgment and righteousness.
6 And wisdom and knowledge shall be the stability of the times,
And strength of Salvation:
The fear of the Lord is his treasure.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_33:2. δππε comp. Psalms 123:3; Psalms 57:2; Psalms 51:3, etc.—χִ ?εָּ ?δ often in the Pss., mostly with the Accusat. With μ referring to God it occurs only Psalms 119:95, compare Psalms 69:21. But Isaiah often construes the word thus: Isaiah 8:17; Isaiah 25:9; Isaiah 60:9.
Isaiah 33:3. πָֽ ?τְ ?φεּ is from πָ ?τַ ?υ (Niph. of τָּ ?φַ ?υ) inflected like the Kal. πτυ, perhaps because τφυ does not occur except in this and in two analogous Niphal forms (Genesis 9:19; 1 Samuel 13:11).
Isaiah 33:4. ΰֹ ?ρֶ ?σ may not be taken passively (with Cappellus, Doederlein, Drechsler, etc.), as appears from the image itself, and from βαιν (ἅπ. λεγ. comp. βּ ?εֹ ?α Nahum 3:17; βּ ?αַֹ ?ι Amos 7:1, certainly a name of the locust, although of uncertain derivation and meaning. Comp. Herz. R. Enc„ VI. p. 70). This latter word is expressly active.—On ΰֻ ?ρַּ ?σΰֹ ?ρֶ ?σ comp. Isaiah 24:22. ΰֹ ?ρֶ ?σ is here as Isaiah 32:10 a noun (Micah 7:1). As to construction, it is to be regarded as in the acc. modalis.—ηριμ only here in Isaiah; see Joe 1:4; Joe 2:25.ωׁ ?χχ (Isaiah 29:8) used in the same sense Joe 2:9.—ξַ ?ωָּׁ ?χ , “descursitatio” ἅπ. λεγ.—αּ ?εֹ refers to the camp, not before named, yet ideally present.
Isaiah 33:5. πωׂ ?βα, Isaiah 2:11; Isaiah 2:17; Isaiah 12:4.—ωׁ ?λοξψεν again only Isaiah 57:16; comp. Isaiah 33:16.—ξִ ?μֵּ ?ΰ Piel, again Isaiah 23:2; Isaiah 65:11; Isaiah 65:20.
Isaiah 33:6. The Plural ςϊιν occurs principally in later books; still also Job 24:1. Only here in Isa.: comp. Psalms 31:16.—ΰξεπϊςϊικ is predicate, the following substantives to γςϊ are subject.—ηֹ ?ρֶ ?ο “opes, thesaurus” only here in Isaiah comp. Proverbs 15:6; Proverbs 27:24;
Jeremiah 20:5; Ezekiel 22:25.—ιְ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?ςֹ ?ϊ Isaiah 26:18, elsewhere only in the Pss. 18:51; 28:8; 42:6, 12; 43:5, etc.—The suffix in ΰεφψε relates to the same subject as the suffix in ςϊικ Interchange of person often occurs in Isaiah, but it is not always so easily traced to its motive as in Isaiah 33:2. See below in Exeget. and Crit. AND 1. The first wave-circle! In grand, rapid flight the Prophet’s gaze hastens through three stages: he shows what must precede the overthrow of Assyria, then this itself, then its contrast in the remote future. For having by a prayer intimated that believing trust in Jehovah is the condition of salvation (Isaiah 33:2), he describes the immediately consequent overthrow of Assyria (Isaiah 33:3-4). But on this present earthly salvation follows for the Prophet at once the Messianic future with its blessings, of which the deliverance from Assyria is a type.
2. O Lord—His treasure.Isaiah 33:2-6. This short prayer, that unexpectedly interrupts the prophecy, is assuredly not an involuntary sigh, but it occupies a place in the discourse chosen with deliberation. The Prophet intends two things by it. First he would present to the people what they must do on their part to obtain deliverance. They must believe and confide in the Lord, according to the words “if ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established” (Isaiah 7:9), and “he that believes will not yield” (Isaiah 28:16).
But as the Prophet gives, not a warning to pray merely, but an example of it, and himself intercedes, he gives on the one hand an example to men, and on the other hand a proof to God that there are still righteous men in Israel (comp. Genesis 18:24 sqq.) that love the people and trust in God. A people from which issues such prayer is no dead heap of ashes. There is a glow in them that can be kindled up again (Isaiah 42:3). The prayer has the form of those in the Pss. (comp. 12).
The (suffix of the) third person in ζψςν “their arm,” that occurs in such harsh dissonance with (the suffixes of) the first person preceding and following, is to be explained, it seems to me, by the word ζְ ?ψֹ ?ςַ “arm” itself. The Prophet means here those called to protect city and state with the power of their arm. He and many others do what they can with heart, and head and otherwise. But when it concerns defence against an outward enemy, then those that serve with the arm are very important. Therefore the prayer that the Lord Himself might be the arm of those who have devoted their arm to the country. Comp.
Psalms 83:9; Psalms 89:11; Psalms 89:22, etc.μαχψιν comp. Psalms 73:14; Psalms 101:8. ΰַ ?σ comp. Isaiah 26:9; Psalms 16:6; Psalms 18:49, etc. Also ιωׁ ?εςδ is very frequent in the Psalms 68:20; Psalms 35:3; Psalms 62:2, etc.αςϊφψδ, see Psalms 37:39; comp. Psalms 20:2; Psalms 50:15.
In Isaiah 33:3-4 is announced the hearing of the prayer. In very drastic form, but, with all its brevity, still vivid, the flight of the Assyrian and the plundering of their camp are depicted. The enemy hear a loud tumult like the onset of an army. But it is no human army: for, as appears from ξψξξϊκ and from Isaiah 29:6; Isaiah 30:30 sq., the Lord effects that noise. He brings about a panic among them by letting them hear a tumult that has no actual existence (comp. Psalms 53:6; Exodus 14:24 sq.; Exodus 15:16; Judges 4:15; Judges 7:22; 1 Samuel 7:10).
The fleeing nations are of course those of Assyria. The Lord arises (comp. Isaiah 33:10; Isaiah 30:18; Ps. 21:14; 46:11, etc.), to smite the enemy, The expression is anthropomorphic, he, so to speak, raises himself high aloft. In Isaiah 33:4 the Prophet addresses the Assyrian. He sees the Israelites plundering his camp, gathering the spoil with a celerity like locusts clearing off a field. Seeing in this coming victory a type of the final, crowning triumph of Jehovah over the world-power, he contemplates his glory in Isaiah 33:5, chiefly from its inner side.
He would intimate that the treasures of salvation, that Israel will then acquire, will, because of a spiritual sort, be more glorious than the goods found in the Assyrian camp (comp. Isaiah 33:23; Isaiah 37:36, comp. 2 Kings 7:16). On account of this typical relation, the two periods are treated as a connected whole, without regard to their temporal disconnection. In this the Prophet does not contradict what he had said Isaiah 32:15 of the continuance of the desolation till the initiation of the great regeneration of the last time. For that period of the desolation falls precisely in the period that the Prophet over-leaps from the stand-point of his manner of regarding the matter. He thus sees the Lord elevated on high and withdrawn from every hostile attack because enthroned on high.
From this height the Lord fills Zion with right and righteousness, which plainly recalls Isaiah 32:15-16. Likewise Isaiah 33:6 recalls Isaiah 32:17; the very beginning with εδεδ coincides. But “the stability of thy times” corresponds to what in Isaiah 32:17 sq., is called “peace, assurance, sure dwelling, quiet resting place.” Thus we must give ΰξεπδ here the meaning “security,” a condition that guarantees peace, tranquility, confidence (Isaiah 33:16). When the times are such that there is no disturbance of the public welfare apprehended, then they have the quality of ΰξεπδ, then one may speak of an ΰξεπϊςϊιν. But of course ΰξεπδ occurs only here in this sense (comp. πֶ ?ΰֶֽ ?ξָ ?ο Isaiah 33:16). As in Isaiah 32:16 the security appears as the fruit of moral in workings, so here also.
Fulness of salvations, wisdom and knowledge shall be the stability,etc. As in the familiar declaration l’empire c’est la paix the copula has a tropical sense, so here there is the trope of the metonymy, since two things that actually stand related as cause and effect are, apparently, identified in expression. Thus the security of those times is the effect of the treasure, the wealth in treasures of salvation. It will not rest on subjective human possessions, as the women at ease (Isaiah 32:9) suppose, but upon objective, God-given treasures of salvation. The kind is declared in what follows, viz.: inward, spiritual goods: wisdom and knowledge (on these notions comp. Isaiah 11:2). “The fear of the Lord” is named last, although it is the beginning of wisdom (Proverbs 1:7).
But it seems to me the Prophet would distinguish between ΰεֹ ?φָ ?ψ and ηֹ ?ρֶ ?ο. The fear of the Lord is the treasure-house (ΰεφψ as e.g.Joe 1:17; 2 Chronicles 11:11, etc., = αֵּ ?ιϊδָ ?ΰεֹ ?φָ ?ψJeremiah 50:25, etc.), that hides that treasure in itself. Our passage recalls Isaiah 11:2 in many ways: also in this that, rightly counted, seven spiritual goods are named: 1) judgment, 2) righteousness, 3) security, 4) riches of salvations, 5) Wisdom , 6) knowledge, 7) the fear of the Lord.
Footnotes:we wait.flee.are.fills.Heb. Salvations.treasure-house.
3. WHERE NEED IS HELP IS NEAREST
Isaiah 33:7-127 Behold, their valiant ones shall cry without:
The ambassadors of peace shall weep bitterly.
8 The highways lie waste,
The wayfaring man ceaseth:
He hath broken the covenant, he hath despised the cities,
He regardeth no man.
9 The earth mourneth and languisheth:
Lebanon is ashamed and hewn down:
Sharon is like a wilderness;
And Bashan and Carmel shake off their fruits.10 Now will I rise, saith the Lord;Now will I be exalted;
Now will I lift up myself.
11 Ye shall conceive chaff, ye shall bring forth stubble:
Your breath, as fire, shall devour you.
12 And the people shall be as the burnings of lime:
As thorns cut up shall they be burned in the fire.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_33:7. The LXX. have somehow derived ΰψΰμν from ιָ ?ψֵ ?ΰ “to be afraid,” for they translate: “ἔντᾡφοβῳὑμῶναὐτοὶφοβηθήσονται” The other ancient versions refer the word to ψΰδ. Thus the Vulg. ecce videntes clamabunt foris. Symm. and Theod. “ὀφθήσομαιαὐτοῖς” Aquila:ὁραθήσομαι. It appears that they read ΰֶ ?ψְ ?ΰֶ ?μָּ ?ν as if it were ΰֵ ?ψָ ?ΰֶ ?μָּ ?ν (syncopated from ΰֵ ?ψָ ?ΰֶ ?δμָּ ?δֶ ?ν, like ξַ ?μַּ ?λֶ ?ν from ξַ ?δμָּ ?λֶ ?ν). Similarly the Chald. and Syr. (comp.
Gesen. in loc). But these derivations and explanations are ungrammatical and do not suit the context. In 2 Samuel 23:30 ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?μ seems to serve as designation for heroes, and in fact as nom. propr. though still retaining its fundamental appellative meaning, since it reads there ωְׁ ?πֵ ?ιΰֲ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?μ and not ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?μִ ?ιν or ΰֲ ?ψְ ?ιִ ?ιִ ΰֵ ?μ. But from ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?μ may be derived either ΰַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μ (like ΰַ ?αְ ?πֵ ?ψ from ΰֲ ?αִ ?ιπֵ ?ψ 1 Samuel 14:50), and this form underlies the patronymic ΰַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μִ ?ι (Genesis 4:16; Numbers 26:17); or ΰֶ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μ like e.g., ΰֶ ?αְ ?ιָ ?ρָ ?σ (1 Chronicles 6:8; 1 Chronicles 6:22) from ΰֲ ?αִ ?ιΰָ ?ρָ ?σ (Exodus 6:24), ΰֶ ?αְ ?ιָ ?ϊָ ?ψ from ΰֲ ?αִ ?ιιָ ?ϊָ ?ψ (1 Samuel 22:20 sq., etc.). From ΰֶ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μ comes our present word. ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?μ=“God’s lion,” i.e., hero, a designation that occurs also in the Arabic and Persian (comp. asadallah and schir-choda. Bochart Hieroz.
II., p. 7, ed. Rosenmueller, and Gesen. Thes., p.147). But this does not explain the daghesh forte in the μ. I would side with those that read ΰַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μִ ?ν or ΰַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μִ ?ν or ΰַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μָ ?ν, as eight codices actually have ΰַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μִ ?ιν. Taking ΰֶ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μָ ?ν as the mean between the Masoretic reading and what is otherwise demanded, we must in addition construe it as collective (ihre Heldenschaft).—ξַ ?ψ (comp.
Isaiah 5:20; Isaiah 38:15; Isaiah 38:17) is as accusative to be regarded as dependent on ιαλιεο: “they weep bitterness,” i.e., bitter tears (comp. Zephaniah 1:14).—The form ιαְ ?λָּ ?ιεּ ?ο occurs again only Job 31:38; comp. Isaiah 21:12; Isaiah 31:3.
Isaiah 33:8. ξָ ?ΰַ ?ν with following accusative Job 9:21; with αְּ, Judges 9:38; Job 19:18. Comp. Psalms 89:39, where ξָ ?ΰַ ?ν is used in the same sense as ζָ ?πַ ?η.
Isaiah 33:9. ΰָ ?αַ ?μ in the masculine as a prepositive and remote predicate. Comp. Isaiah 24:4; Isaiah 24:7; Isaiah 26:8; Isaiah 19:8.—δητιψ, direct causative Hiphil=pudorem producit. Isaiah 54:4.—χָ ?ξַ ?μ only again Isaiah 19:6. Pattahh in pause, Gr. § 65 a.Isaiah 33:10. ΰֵ ?ψεֹ ?ξָ ?ν stands for ΰֶ ?ϊְ ?ψεֹ ?ξָ ?ν, see Green’s Gr., § 82,5 a.Isaiah 33:11. δָ ?ψָ ?δ with the accusative of fulness: comp. Isaiah 59:4; Psalms 7:15.—ηֲ ?ωַׁ ?ωׁ see Isaiah 5:24.—χַ ?ωׁ see Isaiah 5:24;Isaiah 41:2; Isaiah 47:14.
Isaiah 33:12. χεφιν comp. on Isaiah 32:13.—λָּ ?ρַ ?η is desecare, abscindere: the word only here in Isaiah. Comp. Psalms 80:17.—ιφַּ ?ϊּ ?εּ, comp. Isaiah 9:17; Jer. 41:58; Jeremiah 49:2, Green’s Gram., § 24, c, 149, 1.
AND 1. The second wave-circle. It is broader as to I extent than the foregoing, but as regards intensity it is narrower. For it issues from the same point as the first, but extends only to the eve of the saving act. The distress occasioned by the hostile Assyrian is portrayed concretely and visibly, and just as visibly then do we see the Lord, as it were provoked by the intolerable distress, come to the rescue. A respectable embassy that Hezekiah had sent with a ransom had returned without accomplishing anything (Isaiah 33:7).
They could only say that the Assyrian had indeed accepted the ransom, but spite of that ravaged the land (Isaiah 33:8-9). This is the overweening αָּ ?βַ ?γ spoken of in Isaiah 33:1. Then Jehovah declares that now He will arise against the enemy (Isaiah 33:10). He threatens them that their plan shall come to naught, yea that it shall turn to their own destruction (Isaiah 33:11), and that they shall burn up like limestone, yea like dry brushwood (Isaiah 33:12).
2. Behold their valiant ones—burned with fire.
Isaiah 33:7-12. By φςχε and ιαλιεο the Prophet intends to express contrasts. Heroes raise a loud cry of lament; messengers of peace, that should bring and feel joy, weep. Almost all commentators agree that the Prophet means by these heroes and messengers of peace the ambassadors that Hezekiah sent to the Assyrian king to Lacish (2 Kings 18:14). They were to purchase the withdrawal of the Assyrians at the cost of subjection and a heavy ransom. Both were accepted.
But after the prodigious sum of 300 talents in silver and 30 talents in gold was paid, the Assyrians still would not retire, but demanded beside the surrender of the capital. The ambassadors came back with this sad news, that was afterwards confirmed by the message of Rabshakeh, and with news of all the ruin that the Assyrians had wrought in the land. In verses 8, 9 they give information of the condition of the land as they had found it in consequence of these desolations. The roads lay desolate (comp. Judges 5:20;) passengers along them had ceased (Psalms 8:9; Isaiah 23:2; Lamentations 1:12; Lamentations 2:15); there was no commerce over them. He, i.e., the king of Assyria had broken covenant, in that, spite of the ransom he had accepted, he still did not retire, but made further demands.
He treated the cities lightly, that is, not he despised them, but he captured them by his superior force that enabled him to make little account of their resistance. The words contain an intimation of the capture of the cities of Judah of which Isaiah 36:1; 1 Kings 18:13; 2 Chronicles 32:1, speak. Moreover he does not regard man; i.e., he sacrifices human life unsparingly (comp. Isaiah 2:22; Isaiah 13:17).
To this point the discourse is prose. Now it becomes poetry. For Isaiah 33:9 the Prophet personifies things of nature. The general notion earth is specified by naming the particular parts distinguished by their vegetation. First Lebanon, to the north of the Holy Land, is named. It is ashamed, withered.
Sharon, rich in flowers, the plain between Cζsarea and Joppa, has become like a steppe (Isaiah 65:10). The two fruitful elevations east and west, Bashan and Carmel, especially noted for their forests (Isaiah 2:13) autumnlike shake off their leaves (Isaiah 52:2, comp. Exodus 14:27; Psalms 136:15). The sad news of the embassy is at an end. It bows the hearts of the Israelites down deep, but for the Lord it is the signal that now has come the moment to interfere. But with Him the interference is bitter earnest.
This appears in the three-membered sentence with its thrice repeated self-summons, Isaiah 33:10. The Lord announces to the Assyrians the vanity of their purpose, yea its ruin to themselves. “Ye shall conceive hay,” i.e., your plans shall be like hay; not fresh, full of life, but utterly dry, without strength or sap; and hence when they come to the light they shall prove to be dry, dead stubble. That they shall prove their own destruction the Prophet expresses by saying: your puffing (comp. Isaiah 45:4; Isaiah 30:28) shall be a fire to devour you (Isaiah 1:31; Isaiah 9:17). This is characterized by a two-fold image (Isaiah 33:12). The first is burning lime.
Water poured on lime causes it to sink away without flame (comp. Jeremiah 34:5; Deuteronomy 27:2; Deuteronomy 27:4; Amos 2:1). But thorns burn with a bright flame, a loud crackling and much smoke. It seems to me the Prophet would say that, in the overthrow of the Assyrians, many nations would disappear in the great conflagration unnoticed and leaving no trace, whereas the fall of others (he means, doubtless, the greater and better known) will make the world wonder at the grand spectacle they present.
Footnotes:Or, messengers.Or, withered away.
4. THE ALARM OF SINERS; THE COMFORT OF THE PIOUS
Isaiah 33:13-2213 Hear, ye that are far off, what I have done;
And, ye that are near, acknowledge my might.
14 The sinners in Zion are afraid;
Fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites.
Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire?
Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?
15 He that walketh righteously, and speaketh uprightly
He that despiseth the gain of oppressions,
That shaketh his hands from holding of bribes,
That stoppeth his ears from hearing of blood,
And shutteth his eyes from seeing evil;
16 He shall dwell on high:
His place of defence shall be the munitions of rocks:
Bread shall be given him;
His waters shall be sure.
17 Thine eyes shall see the king in his beauty:
They shall behold the land that is very far off.
18 Thine heart shall meditate terror.
Where is the scribe? where is the receiver?
Where Isaiah 19 he that counted the towers?
19 Thou shalt not see a fierce people,
A people of deeper speech than thou canst perceive:
Of a stammering tongue, that thou canst not understand.
20 Look upon Zion, the city of our solemnities:
Thine eyes shall see Jerusalem a quiet habitation,
A tabernacle that shall not be taken down;
Not one of the stakes thereof shall ever be removed,
Neither shall any of the cords thereof be broken.
21 But there the glorious Lord will be unto us
A place of broad rivers and streams;
Wherein shall go no galley with oars,
Neither shall gallant ship pass thereby.
22 For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver,
The Lord is our king; he will save us.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_33:14. ψςγδ only here in Isaiah. Comp. Psalms 2:11; Psalms 48:7; Job 4:14.—βּ ?εּ ?ψ with accus. loc. comp. Judges 5:17; Psalms 5:5; Psalms 120:5. Elsewhere Isaiah construes βּ ?εּ ?ψ with prepositions; Isaiah 11:6; Isaiah 16:4; Isaiah 54:15.—μָ ?πεּ is the so called dativus ethicus. Though elsewhere this dative refers to the actual subject (comp.
Genesis 21:16; Genesis 31:41; Isaiah 2:22; Isaiah 31:8; Isaiah 36:9, etc.), according to which it would need to read here ξִ ?ιιָ ?βεּ ?ψμεֹ it is in this place related to the ideal subject, i.e., to the speakers, who properly affirm of themselves this inability to dwell with Jehovah. This dative everywhere represents a phrase that affirms an intensive relation to the interests of the speaker: in this place say: who will dwell (we say this in relation to ourselves, in our own interest) with devouring fire, etc.?—ξεχγ again only Psalms 102:4.—ξִ ?ιιָ ?βεּ ?ψ is the beginning of Psalms 15. Moreover the words δεμκφΧεγΧξιωׂ ?ΧΧ Isaiah 33:15 recall Psalms 15:2.
Isaiah 33:15. The plural φγχεϊ, juste facta occurs again in Isaiah 45:24; Isaiah 64:5.—γαψξιωׁ ?ψιν comp. Proverbs 23:16; the latter word again in Isaiah 26:7; Isaiah 45:19.—αφς (comp. Exodus 18:21) again in Isaiah 56:11; Isaiah 57:17. What sort of αφς is meant is explained by the addition ξςωׁ ?χεϊ (oppressiones, again only Proverbs 28:16).—πςψ see Isaiah 33:9.—The construction with ξο is constr. prζgnans. For the preposition depends on the notion of refraining ideally present in πςψ, “to shake.”—ωׁ ?ηγ comp. Psalms 15:5; Isaiah 1:23; Isaiah 5:23; Isaiah 45:13.—ΰֹ ?θֵ ?νΰָ ?ζְ ?πεֹ with following ξο occurs Proverbs 21:13,comp. Proverbs 17:28.—γָּ ?ξִ ?ιν is “bloodshed, murder,” (comp. Exodus 22:1; Isaiah 4:4).—ςφν rhyming with ΰθν, we find here in Kal. with the same meaning that it has in the Piel Isaiah 29:10.—ψΰδαψς “to look on evil with pleasure.”
Isaiah 33:16. ξψεξιν, plural, in Isaiah only here; comp. Judges 5:18; Proverbs 8:2, etc.—ξְ ?φָ ?γεֹ ?ϊ as st. constr. comp. 1 Samuel 24:1.—ξωׂ ?βα , “asylum,” “refuge,” again only Isaiah 25:12.
Isaiah 33:17. The 2 pers. masc. suffix, as in Isaiah 33:6; Isaiah 33:20, refers to the nation regarded as a unit.
Isaiah 33:18. δָ ?βָ ?δ, “to think, consider, meditari” (Joshua 1:8; Psalms 1:2; Psalms 2:1, etc.; Isaiah 59:13) may relate also to what is past.—ΰֵ ?ιξָ ?δ, “terror,” only here in Isaiah.—ρֹ ?τֵ ?ψ again Isaiah 36:3; Isaiah 37:2.—ωֹׁ ?χֵ ?μ as substantive only here in Isaiah; the verb “to weigh out” money Isaiah 46:6; Isaiah 55:2.
Isaiah 33:19. The two halves of this verse contain the antithesis of seeing and hearing. This proves that the explanation of πεֹ ?ςָ ?ζ= μεֹ ?ςֵ ?ζ barbare loquens (Psalms 114:1), does not agree with the context. That πεςζ means “mute beckoning” according to the Arab. wa‘asa (Hitzig) is disproved by Gesen. Thes. p. 607 sq. There remains thus the explanation that takes πεֹ ?ςָ ?ζ as part. Niph. from ςָ ?ζַ ?ζ = ιָ ?ςַ ?ζ (comp. ιָ ?ηַ ?ν and ιָ ?ξַ ?ωׁ ,ηָ ?ξַ ?ν, and ιָ ?ψַ ?χ ,ξָ ?ωַׁ ?ωׁ and ψָ ?χַ ?χ) and that with the meaning “hard, audacious, overweening conduct” (Symm. ἀναιδής, Vulg. impudens). The word, moreover, is ἅπ. λεγ. and for this reason it may be possible that Isaiah hints at some Assyrian word at present unknown to us.
Isaiah 33:20. φָ ?ςַ ?οἅπ. λεγ. Arab. ta‘ana of the roaming of the nomads.
Isaiah 33:21. λιιν corresponds to the negations of Isa 33:21.—ΰγιψ in Isaiah again only Isaiah 10:34.—Delitzsch after Luzzatto has proved that ξχεν is not to be taken=loco, “instead.” The suffixes in αε and ιςαψπε are manifestly to be referred to ξχεν—ωַׁ ?ιִ ?θ “oar” (comp. ξָ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?θ Ezekiel 27:29 and ξִ ?ωּׁ ?εֹ ?θ Ezekiel 27:6) is ἅπ. λεγ.—φִ ?ι contracted from φְ ?εִ ?ι, cavum, rotundum aliquid, is a great bellied-out ship (Numbers 24:24; Ezekiel 30:9; Psalms 105:41).
Isaiah 33:22. Since it does not read ξεֹ ?ωִׁ ?ιςֵ ?πεּ (Isaiah 43:3; Isaiah 47:15, etc.), I would accord with Hitzig, who takes ξμλπε, ξηχχπε ,ωׁ ?τθπε, not as predicates but as apposition with ιδεδ, so that εωׁ ?ιςπε is the sole predicate of the foregoing three subjects which are comprehended emphatically in the δεΰ.
AND 1. Here we have the final and broadest circuit of waves before us. According to Isaiah 33:10, Jehovah was about to arise and come to the rescue. He has done so. The rescue is accomplished in an astounding fashion. The present passage belongs to time after the rescue.
It presupposes it. For it contains glances into the future, that rest upon that deed as their foundation. First the Lord summons those far and near to give proper attention to what He does (Isaiah 33:13). Then the Prophet describes the effect of what has been done on the sinners in Jerusalem. They are terrified: they would flee the neighborhood of this mighty God, for they are ill-at-ease in it. Hence they ask: who can abide by this devouring fire? (Isaiah 33:14).
To this is replied: this fire is harmless for the pious, the lovers of truth, the righteous (Isaiah 33:15), for such will dwell in Jerusalem in security and abundance (Isaiah 33:16); and will see the king of Israel sitting in might and glory at the head of a wide empire (Isaiah 33:17). As one thinks of something that has disappeared from memory, so shall men reflect on the time of war’s distress (Isaiah 33:18), and of the terrific presence of the barbaric nation in the land (Isaiah 33:19). Zion will be a secure fortress, a quiet, abiding place of worship, and no more a shifting tabernacle as in the time of the journey through the wilderness (Isaiah 33:20). For Jehovah is there Himself in His majesty; protecting waters surround the place (Isaiah 33:21), and the Lord Himself as judge, law-giver and king is the deliverer of His people (Isaiah 33:22).
2. Hear—my mightIsa_33:13. The piece begins with the cry of a herald that makes known to the whole world the accomplished mighty act. For the perfect ΰωׂ ?ιϊι without doubt designates the act of rescue as accomplished, which verses 1, 3, 10 held in prospect; and we must regard βְּ ?αֻ ?ψָ ?δ (as often in the Books of Kings, where βαψδ and ΰωׂ ?δ continually stand parallel: 1 Kings 15:23; 1 Kings 16:27; 1 Kings 22:46, etc.), in the concrete sense as a display of power, and, because of ΰωιϊι, as already come to pass. But the herald’s cry would intimate that an event of vast and wide effect has happened, of concern to all men, even to those far remote. For they may know from this who is the true, and therefore also who is their God.
For He that did what happened to the Assyrian host in the neighborhood of Jerusalem in Hezekiah’s time must be God over all gods (comp. Isaiah 36:18-20; Isaiah 37:10-13) and Lord over all lords. Those near are plainly the Israelites, who had in great part been witnesses of the deed. These should acknowledge the demonstration of the Lord’s power. According to their inward condition they should draw from it comfort or warning.
3. The sinners—seeing evil.Isaiah 33:14-15. The Prophet first presents that mighty deed as a warning to the wicked. Such were the idolaters who had no joy in a proof so irrefragable of the sole power and divinity of Jehovah. Therefore these sinners (Isaiah 1:28; Isaiah 13:9) and the unclean (Isaiah 9:16; Isaiah 10:6; Isaiah 32:6—there lies in the word a hint at idolatry) in Zion are terrified. Devoid of the right knowledge of God, because they would not, not because they could not have it, the nearness of this almighty, and above all of this holy God is in the highest degree burdensome to these people.
Living in Jerusalem where this God has His fire and His furnace (Isaiah 31:9) is painful to them. Hence they cry: who among us,etc. It is manifest that by the devouring fire they mean Jehovah. By the strages Assyriorum He had proved Himself to be such. And shall they ever remain near this power that is as irresistibly present as it is terrible? The expression is taken from Deuteronomy 4:24; Deuteronomy 9:3, comp.
Isaiah 29:6; Isaiah 30:27; Isaiah 30:30. ξεχγ designates here the place where the fire burns, “the hearth.” By calling this everlasting they judge themselves: for they show by that a knowledge, that it is a veritable divine fire, that burns there, not an imaginary one. But just with this they will have nothing to do.
The Prophet (Isaiah 33:15) replies to their inquiry, that one may dwell very well by this burning fire. But with the Holy One, one must live holy. The image He proceeds to draw of a holy life is an Old Testament one. The traits of it are chiefly taken from passages in the Psalms (see Text. and Gram.). Shaking the hands, (thus refraining them) from taking a bribe, is a strong expression for striving to keep and prove the integrity of the hands.
4. He shall dwell——will save us.Isaiah 33:16-22. This is the confirmation that one may dwell happily with the devouring fire. For these verses show what blessings they shall have who live agreeably to the holy being of God. And since there shall never be wanting such in Zion, the salvation and glory of Zion is assured for all time. Thus these verses contain the same thought uttered by the Prophet already Isaiah 28:16 sqq.; Isaiah 29:22 sqq.; Isaiah 30:15; Isaiah 19 sqq.; Isaiah 31:6 sq.; Isaiah 32:1 sqq., 15 sqq., that Israel’s deliverance depends on an upright and thorough conversion to the Lord; that on this condition, however, it is secure forever. πΰξο “what is certain, never deceives expectation, never fails” (comp.
Isaiah 33:6; Jeremiah 15:18; Isaiah 22:23; Isaiah 22:25). As happened Isaiah 33:5-6, so here, for the Prophet the salvation of the near present merges into one with the great, final Messianic period. And so, influenced perhaps by the then oppressed look of the king of Judah, he contemplates the latter beaming with the joy of victory, and at the same time as the type of the Messiah, resplendent in the supremest beauty and glory, whose beauty the author of Psalms 45. (Isaiah 33:3) had also seen prefigured in the appearance of the bridegroom-king whom he celebrated. That the Prophet’s glance penetrates into the Messianic future appears from the expression the land that is very far off (Isaiah 8:9; Jeremiah 8:19). The expression is too strong to be understood merely of free motion in the land in contrast with the confining siege, or of the normal extending of Israelitish territory according to Deuteronomy 1:7; Deuteronomy 11:24. As royal pomp and beauty adorns the person of the king, so immeasurable extent does his land. ΰψυξΧ is thus not a far distant, but a wide extended land.
It is the same thought that meets us Isaiah 2:2 sqq.; Isaiah 9:7; Isaiah 11:10; Isaiah 25:6 sqq.
The Prophet in Isaiah 33:18-19 connects his glorious image of the future with the mournful condition of the present. For he describes it as a chief blessing of that future, that the bad things of the present will be present to thoughtful contemplation as things that one rejoices to have overcome. Et hoc meminisse juvabit. In his graphic way the Prophet gives prominence to particular terrors that must have left a peculiarly deep impression. The ρֹ ?τֵ ?ψ, “writer,” and the ωֹׁ ?χֵ ?μ, “weigher,” before whom one had to appear and pay tribute, and who then weighed the valuables received, and made a list of them, were certainly persons of terror from whose mouths they had often had experience of the Vae victis (Livy, 5, 48). [“The Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 1:20, has a sentence so much like this, in the threefold repetition of the question where, and in the use of the word scribe, that it cannot be regarded as a mere fortuitous coincidence.” “It may be regarded as a mere imitation, as to form and diction, of the one before us.”—J. A.
Alexander,in loc.]. Again it must have made a terrible impression, when from the walls they saw the enemy taking the first steps toward attacking the city by one of the leaders riding around the walls, regarding the towers, counting them and taking notes of his observations (comp. Psalms 48:13). What happiness to be able to call out: “where are they now those fearful men? They have disappeared forever!” What felicity to be quit of the foreign, repulsive appearance of this enemy; no more to be compelled to see the overweening nation; no more to hear its barbarous sounds! The Israelites will no more hear “the nation too deep of lip to be understood” and “stammering and jabbering with the tongue (comp. on Isaiah 28:11; Isaiah 37:22) without meaning.”
The Prophet having enumerated the bad things, now directs attention to the good that is to be seen in and about Jerusalem. He first describes Zion as the religious centre of the nation. There is the temple; there Jehovah dwells (comp. on Isaiah 33:14); thither the people assemble to worship the Lord and keep His feasts. Thus He calls the city χψιϊξεςγπε (comp. δַ ?ψξεֹ ?ςֵ ?γ14:13, comp. Isaiah 1:14). That he intends an antithesis to ΰδμξεςγ appears from Isaiah 33:15.
Israel then has no more a tabernacle, a city for festival gathering (of the people with one another, and with Jehovah). As such Zion must be especially looked to. And if one looks more narrowly, then the meaning of this designation appears to be that Jerusalem will be a secure, quiet abode (Isaiah 32:18), of course still a tabernacle, but no longer so in the original, nomadic sense; not like the travelling tent of the wilderness, but one that does not move about. The Prophet signifies that there shall happen to it neither a voluntary nor a violent breaking up of the tabernacle (πϊχ means a violent rending, comp. Isaiah 5:27, not the usual striking of a tent). This permanent tabernacle shall be attended with a glorious rest for the people of God in the future that is described, that shall be founded on the presence in the midst of them of Jehovah, the highest Majesty.
The Lord is called a place of rivers, of course in a figure. In all this figurative description lies the notion of defence, refuge. Hence “a place of rivers” may as appropriately be used of Jehovah, as “rock, tower, shield, horn of salvation,” (Psalms 18:3). But commentators are right in saying that the Prophet has in mind cities like Babylon, Nineveh, No-Ammon (Nahum 3:8), that were defended by great rivers and river canals. The present Jerusalem lacked such defences, but, such is the meaning, Jehovah Himself will be river-defences. πηψιν may allude to the cities of Mesopotamia, and ιΰψιν to the similarly located cities of Egypt; for δַ ?πָּ ?δָ ?ψ is κατ’’εξοχὴν the Euphrates (Isaiah 8:7; Isaiah 11:15) and ιְ ?ΰֹ ?ψ the Nile (Isaiah 19:7-8; Isaiah 23:10). Those streams and canals that recede right and left, and thus are very broad, are called ψηαιιγιν (comp.
Psalms 104:25; Isaiah 22:18; Genesis 34:21; Judges 18:10; 1 Chronicles 4:10; Nehemiah 7:4). Neither oared-ship, nor sail-ship shall be able to pass these mighty waters. The Prophet ends with rhymes that make the conclusion sound like a hymn. Jehovah, Israel’s judge (Isaiah 2:4; Isaiah 11:3-4), lawgiver (comp. Deuteronomy 33:21), and king, is also its deliverer.
Footnotes:unclean.Heb. in righteousness.Heb. uprightness.Or, deceits.Heb. bloods.Heb. heights, or, high places.His bread.a wide extended land.Heb. of far distances.Heb. weigher.the inscriber of the towers.the audacious.Or, ridiculous.that does not wander.A place of streams, of rivers broad on either side.Heb. broad spaces, or hands.Heb. statutemaker.
Recapitulation and ConclusionIsa_33:23-2423 Thy tacklings are loosed;
They could not well strengthen their mast,
They could not spread the sail:
Then is the prey of a great spoil divided;
The lame take the prey.
24 And the inhabitant shall not say, I am sick:
The people that dwell therein shall be forgiven their iniquity.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_33:23. We must take πθωׁ ?ε Niph. as the passive of the notion missum facers, “to slacken” (comp. Exodus 23:11; Proverbs 17:14). Expositors take λֵּ ?ο to mean the socket in which the mast sets in the bottom of the ship. But that (the ίστοπέδη) is not held by the cables. And when Vitringa says that the cables malum sustinentes thecae succurrunt, that is even not ηִ ?εַּ ?χ.
For this word denotes adstringere, firmum reddere, and can only relate directly to the mast, as occurs in the text. Hence Drechsler would not take cables but the seamen as subject of ιηζχε; in which case the negative expression appears strange. Hence I think that λֵּ ?ο here is not the substantive, but the adjective derived from λּ ?εּ ?ο, erectus stetit, which means rectus, and would here be taken in its original physical sense, though everywhere else, indeed, it is used in a spiritual or moral sense (unless, perhaps, 1 Kings 7:29; 1 Kings 7:31 form exceptions).—The suffix in ϊψπν (comp. Isaiah 30:17) is also proof that the cables are subject. For it is their chief aim to hold the mast (comp. Gφll, Kulturbilder aus Hellas und Rom.
II, p. 197). This may, therefore, be called their mast. The tangled cables hinder the unfurling of the flag (the ἐπίσημον or παράσημον, (comp. Ezekiel 27:7).—ςַ ?γ denoting “booty” occurs again only Genesis 49:27; Zephaniah 3:8.
Isaiah 33:24. Isaiah 33:23 and ωָׁ ?λֵ ?ο make it clear that αָּ ?δּ refers to Jerusalem.—πְ ?ωֻּׂ ?ΰςָ ?εֹ ?ο occurs only here; but comp. Psalms 32:1 and Isaiah 3:3; Isaiah 9:14.
AND 1. We regarded Isaiah 33:22, in form and contents, as a conclusion of the prophetic perspective that joins on to the act of deliverance spoken of before Isaiah 33:13, and presupposes it. With Isaiah 33:23 the Prophet returns into the immediate present distress from which proceeds the entire prophetic cycle of chaps. 28–33. At Isaiah 33:23 we stand again in the period before the overthrow of the Assyrians. With few, yet vigorous and clear lines the Prophet portrays, in the first three clauses of Isa 33:23, the present distress, using an image suggested by Isaiah 33:21. He compares the kingdom of Judah to a ship whose cables hang loose and hold neither flag nor mast [but see comment below].
For then (i. e., in the great moment referred to, Isaiah 33:1; Isaiah 33:3, whose approach he had announced as immediate Isaiah 33:10, and presupposes Isaiah 33:13 sqq.), in this great moment great booty is distributed, and in fact plunder is so easy that the lame themselves can share in it (Isaiah 33:23 end). Now Israel is reinvigorated to a healthy, strong life. It has in that deliverance the pledge that God has forgiven its sin, and that is the pledge of all salvation (Isaiah 33:24). Thus the prophecy concludes with a brief word as it began. And the pith of it is the same fact to which Isaiah 33:1 refers from another side.
2. Thy tacklings—iniquity.Isaiah 33:23-24. Expositors down to Ewald, whom Drechsler and Delitzsch join [so also Barnes, J. A. Alexander, Birks], understand the image of the ship to refer to Assyria, and to form a continuation of the allegory of Isa 33:21 : did the enemy succeed in crossing those trenches, they would be wrecked, and Israel would divide the spoil. The following considerations conflict with this view: 1) Isaiah 33:22 concludes the preceding discourse; 2) according to Isaiah 33:21 the hostile ships will not cross over those water trenches; the mention of them is in respect only of plundering and destruction; 3) the description of Isa 33:23 does not suit a vessel disabled in conflict, but only one badly equipped for battles; 4) what is said of the lame plundering implies a locality that such can reach, they cannot be supposed to take part in a sea-fight; 5) the feminine suffix in ηαμικ refers to Zion. because Assyria is nowhere else made feminine.
For in the sole passage quoted in proof that it is (Isaiah 30:32) the reading is doubtful, and if the reading αָּ ?δּ be correct, still the suffix must refer to the land of Assyria, which is impossible in our text. [The Author hardly does justice to the view he controverts, which, as put by J. A. Alexander,in loc., seems more natural than his own. “There is, at the beginning of this verse, a sudden apostrophe to the enemy considered as a ship. It was said (Isaiah 33:21) that no vessel should approach the holy city. But now the Prophet seems to remember that one had done so, the proud ship Assyria. But what was its fate?
He sees it dismantled and abandoned to its enemies.”—Tr.]
The ship of the Jewish state presents a desolate spectacle. But patience! Then (i.e., in the moment, that is partly predicted, partly presupposed in what precedes), spoil will be divided, which implies complete victory. The accumulation of words meaning booty ( αζ ,ωׁ ?μμ ,ςγ) denotes the rich abundance of it. What is said of the lame intimates plainly enough that the field of plunder must have been near Jerusalem, and that the enemy had fled. For only then could such reach the camp or venture into it.
Manifestly the Prophet has in mind the same fact to which he refers Isaiah 33:4 (2 Kings 19:35 sqq.; Isaiah 37:36 sqq.). As in Isaiah 33:5-6 the spoiling of the Assyrian is made the pledge of all other displays of divine grace, so, too, here. The nation that has experienced such salvation from God may comfort itself with the assurance of all support both for the body (24a) [comp. Jeremiah 14:18] and for the soul (24b). Both hang closely together (comp. Luke 5:20 sqq.).
But forgiving sin is the chief matter: for sin separates God and man; and as soon as it is taken away, both are closely united, and the way is opened for blessing men (comp. Isaiah 33:5-6).
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 33:1. Per quod quis peccat, per idem punitur et ipse. Jeremiah 30:16; comp. Adonibezek, Judges 1:5 sqq.; Matthew 7:2.
2. On Isaiah 33:10. God alone knows when the proper moment has come for Him to interpose. Till then He waits—but not a moment longer. Till then it is our part to wait with patience. But let the right moment come, and let the Lord once say: “Now will I rise,” then what is not of God falls to pieces, then the nations must despair and kingdoms fall; the earth must pass away when He lets Himself be heard (Psalms 46:7). Then the hidden truth of things becomes manifest: what appeared strong then appears weak, and the weak strong, that the Lord alone may be high at that time (Isaiah 2:11; Isaiah 5:15).
3. Isaiah 33:14. Here we get a deep insight into the obstinate and despairing heart of man, and recognize why it will not endure a living and personal God. As Peter said: “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord” (Luke 5:8), so they would turn the living God out of the world, because they feel themselves to be sinful men, who cannot renounce their sins, because they will not; for did they but earnestly will to do so, then they could also. The inmost reason of all practical and theoretical heathenism is the feeling of the natural man that he and the holy God cannot exist side by side in the world. One or other must yield.
Instead of adopting the way and means which God reveals, by which from natural and sinful men we may become holy children of God, we rather deny the living God and substitute either demons (1 Corinthians 10:20) or abstractions for Him. But the Prophet here awakens the presentiment that we may become holy children of God (Isaiah 33:15); the Son of God, however, in the new covenant teaches us this with perfect clearness (1 Peter 2:9 sqq.).
HINTS1. Isaiah 33:2-6. Help in great distress. 1) On what condition (believing prayer, Isaiah 33:2); 2) Its ground a. the grace of God (Isaiah 33:2 a); b. the power of God (Isaiah 33:3 b, Isaiah 5:5 a); 3) Its two sides, in that it is a. corporal (Isaiah 33:3-4); b. spiritual (Isaiah 33:5-6).
2. [Isaiah 33:5. When God’s enemies and ours are overthrown, both He and we are glorified. “1. God will have the praise of it (Isaiah 33:5 a); 2. His people will have the blessing of it (Isaiah 33:5 b).” M. Henry].
3. Isaiah 33:10-13. The Lord’s acts of deliverance. 1. They come at the right moment (Isaiah 33:10). 2. They are thorough in their effects (Isaiah 33:11-12). 3. They teach us to know and praise God.
4. [Isaiah 33:14. “1. The hypocrites will be greatly alarmed when they see punishment come upon the open and avowed enemies of God. 2. In such times they will have none of the peace and quiet confidence which His true friends have. 3. Such alarm is evidence of conscious guilt and hypocrisy. 4. The persons here spoken of had a belief in the doctrine of eternal punishment—a belief which hypocrites and sinners always have, else why should they be alarmed? 5. The punishment of hypocrites in the church will be dreadful.” A. Barnes].
5. [The character of a righteous man (Isaiah 33:15). The reward of the righteous (Isaiah 33:16 sqq.). See M. Henry and Barnes in loc.—Tr.]
6. Isaiah 33:20-22. Comfort for the church in adversity. The church of the Lord stands fast. For 1. It is the last and highest institution of God (Isaiah 33:20). 2. The Lord Himself is mighty in it, a. as Judge, b. as a Master (Teacher), c. as King (Isaiah 33:21-22).
Footnotes:Or, They have forsaken thy tacklings.They hold not erect their mast.flag.
FOURTH OF PART FIRSTIsaiah 34-35Chapters 34–35 are the proper conclusion of the first part of Isaiah’s prophecies. For chaps. 36–39 are only an historical supplement, though a very important one. Hence I do not think that chaps. 34–35. are only the finale of chaps 28–33; for that we have already found in chap. 33. rather chaps. 34–35 form a conclusion of the first half of the book that sums up and finishes the announcements of judgment and salvation of the first part, and prepares for and introduces those of part second. For we notice already in these chapters the language of 40–66. First of all the Prophet carries us in chap. 34 to the end of days. As if to make an end corresponding to the beginning, 1, 2, he summons the earth and all its inhabitants to notice the announcement of the final judgment that is to comprehend heaven and earth (Isaiah 34:1-4).
But he is not in condition to represent the how of the world’s destruction. As remarked in the introduction to 24–27 he can only paint that remote judgment in colors of the present. He gives at once a vivid and an agreeable picture of it by representing it as a judgment against Edom. For the negative base of Israel’s hope of salvation is that its enemies shall be destroyed. That the Prophet means here to conclude all announcement of judgment against their enemies appears from the demand of Isa 34:16 that they shall search “the book of the Lord,” and compare the prediction there with the fulfilment. We shall try to show that this appeal to “the book of the Lord” implies the entire foregoing book.
In chap. 35 the Prophet presents the other side of the judgment of the world, viz., the final redemption of Israel. It appears as a return home to Zion out of exile. Not a word intimates that the Prophet has in mind only the return from Babylon. He names no land; he speaks only of return (ιֵ ?ωֻׁ ?αεּ ?ο, Isaiah 34:10) in general. Already in Deuteronomy 30:3 sqq. it is promised that the Lord will gather the Israelites and bring them back out of all lands, even though driven out to the end of heaven, thence too the Lord will fetch them. On the ground of this passage Isaiah had already held out a similar prospect (Isaiah 11:11 sqq.; Isaiah 19:23 sq.; Isaiah 27:12 sq.), and after him Jeremiah especially deals much in this particular of the glorious last time (Jeremiah 16:14 sqq.; Jeremiah 23:3; Jeremiah 29:14; Jeremiah 32:37; Jeremiah 40:12; Jeremiah 46:27).
Therefore the Prophet promises here glorious and joyful return home—that to the Israelite must be dearest of all—and the object of his greatest longing (Psalms 137:5-6), and in that home eternal joy (Isaiah 34:10). One may say that he draws here the outline of the picture that he afterwards carries out in chaps. 40–66. in all the varieties of its forms.
Their contents show that the two chapters belong together. Chap. 35 is the necessary obverse of 34. The expressions πεδϊπινηφιψμΧ Isaiah 35:7, which manifestly contrasts with Isaiah 34:13, form a close bond between the two chapters; and it is to be noted that ηָ ?φִ ?ιψ in the sense of ηָ ?φֵ ?ψ occurs only in these two places. Also the metonymic use of πχς (Isaiah 34:15; Isaiah 35:6) which occurs beside only Isaiah 58:8; Isaiah 59:5, is a peculiarity of language that points to the correlation of the two chapters.
Eichhorn, Gesen., Rosenmueller, De W., Maur., Hitzig, Ew., Umbr., Knobel and others ascribe these chapters to a later author that lived in the time of the captivity. They only differ in that some (Gesenius, Rosenmueller, Hitzig, Ewald) put this unknown author at the end of the exile, the others at an earlier period. We will show in the exposition, by exact investigation of the language, that both the contents and the form of language of these chapters connect them intimately with 40–66, yet that in both these respects there is also a common character with part first. This view is confirmed by the undeniable fact that these chapters are variously quoted by prophets before the exile. This will be proved in respect to Jeremiah 46:10 in the comment on Isaiah 34:5 sqq. I have shown the connection between these chapters and Jeremiah 50:27; Jeremiah 50:39; Jeremiah 51:40; Jeremiah 51:60 sqq. by an extended examination in my work: “Der Prophet Jer. und Babylon, Erlangen, 1850.” Comp.
Kueper, Jerem. libr. sacr. interpr. atque vindex, Berolini, 1837, p. 79 sqq. Caspari, Jerem., ein Zeuge fόr d. Echtheit von Jes. 34, etc., Zeitschr. von Rudelbach und Guericke, 1843, Heft. 2, p. 1 sqq. The proof that Jer. has drawn on our chapters carries with it the proof that the resemblances noticed between Zephaniah 1:7-8 and Isaiah 34:6, and between Zephaniah 2:14 and Isaiah 34:11, are to be regarded as a use of these chapters by Zephaniah, the older contemporary of Jeremiah, and not a quotation of Zephaniah by these chapters.
The reasons adduced against Isaiah’s authorship of these chapters will not stand examination. Knobel thinks the hatred of Edom in the degree shown in Isaiah 34:5 sqq. is to be found only in passages that belong to the time after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans. But not to mention Obadiah (especially Isaiah 34:10-14), there are found in Joel (Joel 4:19) and Amos (especially Amos 1:11 sqq.) proofs enough that there could be in Isaiah’s time a hatred like that expressed in our chapter 34 We will show in the exposition of 35 that it does not presuppose the Babylonish exile, but the second, great and last exile in general. It is incomprehensible how the announcement of a great judgment on the heathen generally (Isaiah 34:2-3; Isaiah 34:5 sqq.; Isaiah 35:8) can denote a later authorship, seeing the same is announced in the acknowledged prophecies of Isa 2:4; Isaiah 2:11 sqq., and even in Isaiah 30:25 sqq. (see comm. in loc.). But we may refer in this matter to the entire liber apocalypticus (24–27), by assaulting which the critics of course becloud for themselves the conspectus of Isaiah’s field of vision. What Knobel further urges of the extravagant expectations (Isaiah 34:3-4; Isaiah 34:9; Isaiah 35:1-2; Isaiah 35:5 sqq.), affects only the bold and grand images in which the Prophet utters these expectations.
And these images are too bold, too hyperbolical for Isaiah! If the genuineness of chs. 13, 14, 24–27 is denied, then the analogies for the dissolution of the heavens (Isaiah 34:4) and for the goblins of night and wild beasts (Isaiah 34:11-17) are surrendered. On this subject we can only refer back to our defence of the genuineness of chap. 13, 14. Finally Knobel mentions a number of expressions in these chapters which in general, or at least, in their present meaning, occur only in later writers, putting in the latter class some expressions that are peculiar to this author. One may admit that many expressions occur in Isaiah that only later writers employ, or that are analogous to expressions of later use. But is this any proof of the later origin of these chapters?
Isaiah is so opulent a spirit, he reigns with such creative power even in the sphere of language, and his authority is so great with his successors, that we may confidently affirm, that very many later words and expressions are to be referred to him as the source or exemplar. Moreover that argument loses weight when we consider that in our chapters much ancient linguistic treasure occurs, e.g., αּ ?ΰֹ ?ωׁ Isaiah 34:3; ψְ ?ΰֵ ?ν Isaiah 34:7; πָ ?χָ ?ν and ωְׁ ?μּ ?εּ ?ν Isaiah 34:8.
Isaiah, then, is doubtless the author of our chapters. But he wrote them in his later period, when Assyria was for him a stand-point long since surmounted, and when, withdrawn from the present, he lived, with all his prophetic seeing and knowing, in the future. I agree with Delitzsch in assuming that Isaiah, in preparing the book as a whole (if he actually himself attended to this matter), put these chapters here as a conclusion of the first part of his prophetic discourses. I only add that on this occasion Isaiah must have added Isaiah 34:16-17 with their reference to the now completed “book of the Lord.”
The division of the chapters is simple:—
1. The judgment on all nations, Isaiah 34:1-4.
2. The judgment on Edom as representation of the whole in one particular example, of especial interest to Israel, Isaiah 34:5-15.
3. Concluding remark: summons to compare the prophecy with the fulfilment, Isaiah 34:16-17.
4. The obverse of the judgment: Israel’s redemption and return home, 35.
1. THE ON ALL NATIONS
Isaiah 34:1-41 Come near, ye nations, to hear;
And hearken, ye people:
Let the earth hear, and all that is therein;
The world, and all things that come forth of it.
2 For the indignation of the Lord is upon all nations,
And his fury upon all their armies:
He hath utterly destroyed them,
He hath delivered them to the slaughter.
3 Their slain also shall be cast out,
And their stink shall come up out of their carcases,
And the mountains shall be melted with their blood.
4 And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved,
And the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll:
And all their host shall fall down,
As the leaf falleth off from the vine,
And as a falling fig from the fig tree.
TEXTUAL AND [For the sake of economy in labor and space we will omit in this and subsequent chapters the Author’s abundant and laborious citations of texts illustrative of Isaiah’s style, and involving proof of the common authorship of parts first and second. The Author has prepared a comprehensive list of the words and texts concerned in these chapters, which appears at the close of the volume and, except where the commentary furnishes additional matter, we shall refer to that list by the sign see list.—Tr.].
Isaiah 34:1. δχωׁ ?ιλ ,μΰξιν ,χψαε see list.—βειν occurs often in both parts, e.g., Isaiah 1:4; Isaiah 2:4; Isaiah 10:7; Isaiah 11:10; Isaiah 40:15; Isaiah 41:2. The expression ΰψυεξμΰδ occurs Deuteronomy 33:16; Psalms 24:1; Micah 1:2, and often; in Isaiah only here. Comp. δινεξμΰε Isaiah 42:10; Isaiah 6:3; Isaiah 8:8; Isaiah 31:4.—ϊαμ (comp. on Isaiah 13:11) occurs only in part first.—φΰφΰιν (plur tant.) are τἄἔκγονα, “the products.” The expression is based on Genesis 1:12; Genesis 1:24 (ϊּ ?εֹ ?φֵ ?ΰδָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ). The Prophet thus does not mean only men, as many, influenced by the LXX. and Chald., have supposed. The word, being made parallel with ξμΰδ denotes everything that as production of the earth fills it.
Isaiah 34:2-3. ημμιν ,θαη ,φαΰ ,χφσ see list.—τπψιδν casus absolutus, comp. Ewald, § 309 b. αְּ ?ΰֹ ?ωׁ only here in Isaiah. Comp. Joe 2:20; Amos 4:10.
Isaiah 34:4. ξχχ (as verb only here in Isaiah), is used Psalms 38:6 of a festering wound, in Zechariah 14:12 of rotting flesh, i.e., eyes and tongues rotting in their natural place. In Leviticus 26:39; Ezekiel 24:23; Ezekiel 33:10 it is used in the more general sense of passing away, disappearing; Isaiah 3:24; Isaiah 5:24. ξַ ?χ is “that which has rotted, mouldered.” Add to this that ξָ ?λַ ?κְ Psalms 106:43; Job 24:24; Ecclesiastes 10:18, denotes corruere, collabi; ξεּ ?κְ Leviticus 25:25; Leviticus 25:35; Leviticus 25:39; Leviticus 25:47 means “to collapse, decline, wax poor,” but ξεּ ?β (Amos 9:5; Amos 9:13; Psalms 65:11, etc.), diffluere, dissolvi. Thus we must recognize as the fundamental meaning of this family of words “decomposition, dissolution, rotting, mouldering, turning to dust” occasioned by the departure of the spirit of life. But this effect may be variously brought about. Fire, e.g., can produce it in a tree by scorching it. Such appears the sense here.
Thus 2 Peter 3:12 οὐρανοὶπυρούμενοιλυθήσονται seems to me to correspond to our πָ ?ξַ ?χּ ?εּ ?—πָ ?βֹ ?μ for πָ ?βַ ?μ see Green’s Gram., § 140, 2. Niph. only here in Isaiah; Polal. Isaiah 9:4.—παμ comp.Isaiah 1:30; Isaiah 24:4; Isaiah 28:1; Isaiah 28:4; Isaiah 40:7-8; Isaiah 64:5, especially as regards παμϊ see on Isaiah 28:1; Isaiah 28:4.
AND 1. It is a mighty matter, the concern of all nations that the Prophet has to announce: hence he summons all to hear his address (Isaiah 34:1). For the wrath of the Lord is kindled against all nations and all that belongs to them. They are all to be given up to the slaughter (Isaiah 34:2), and shall be cast out so that the stench shall mount up, and whole mountains shall run with blood (Isaiah 34:3). Yea, the heavens shall roll up as by strong heat, and the heavenly bodies shall fall like dry leaves (Isaiah 34:4).
2. Come—fig tree.Isaiah 34:1-4. The expression φΰφΰιν occurs only in Job and Isaiah (see on Isaiah 22:24). The use nearest like the present Isaiah 42:5. In Isaiah 34:2 only the nations are mentioned as the object of the judgment. Though impersonal nature shares in it, still this is only the means to an end. λμΞωαΰν, having a similar relation to that of λμΞφΰφΰιδ (see Text. and Gram.), denotes not the host merely, but the host of mankind in general. Already, by virtue of the decree of wrath determined against them, the Lord has laid on them His curse or ban (δηψιν11:15; Isaiah 37:11), and devoted them to slaughter.
On the description Isaiah 34:3 comp. Isaiah 14:19; Isaiah 37:36; Isaiah 66:24; Isaiah 10:18; Isaiah 13:7; Isaiah 19:1. The passages Matthew 24:29; 2 Peter 3:7; 2 Peter 3:10; 2 Peter 3:12; Revelation 6:13-14 are founded on the present text. For that the Prophet has in mind the destruction of the world, is manifest from this description comprehending the earth and heavens.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 34:1-4. Because Revelation 6:12-17 has express reference to this passage, some would conclude that the Prophet here has in view only that special event of the world’s judgment (the opening of the sixth seal). But that is not justified. For other passages of the New Testament that do not specially relate to the opening of the sixth seal are based on this passage (Matthew 24:29; 2 Peter 3:7 sqq.; Revelation 14:11; Revelation 19:11 sqq.). It appears from this that the present passage is, as it were, a magazine from which New Testament prophecy has drawn its material for more than one event of fulfilment.
2. On Isaiah 34:16. The word of God can bear the closest scrutiny. Indeed it desires and demands it. If men would only examine the Scriptures diligently and with an unclouded mind and love of truth, “whether these things are so,” as did the Bereans (Acts 17:11; John 5:39)!
3. On Isaiah 35:3. “The Christian church is the true Lazaretto in which may be found a crowd of weary, sick, lame and wretched people. Therefore, Christ is the Physician Himself (Matthew 9:12) who binds up and heals those suffering from neglect (Ezekiel 34:16; Isaiah 61:1). And His word cures all (Wis 16:12). His servants, too, are commissioned officially to admonish the rude, to comfort the timid, to bear the weak, and be patient with all (1 Thessalonians 5:14). Therefore, whoever feels weak, let him betake himself to this Bethania; there he will find counsel for his soul,” Cramer.4. [On Isaiah 35:8-9. “They who enter the path that leads to life, find there no cause of alarm.
Their fears subside; their apprehensions of punishment on account of their sins die away, and they walk that path with security and confidence. There is nothing in that way to alarm them; and though there are many foes—fitly represented by lions and wild beasts—lying about the way, yet no one is permitted to ‘go up thereon.’ This is a most beautiful image of the safety of the people of God, and of their freedom from all enemies that could annoy them.” “The path here referred to is appropriately designed only for the redeemed of the Lord. It is not for the profane, the polluted, the hypocrite. It is not for those who live for this world, or for those who love pleasure more than they love God. The church should not be entered except by those, who have evidence that they are redeemed. None should make a profession of religion who have no evidence that they belong to “the redeemed,” and who are not disposed to walk in the way of holiness.
But for all such it is a highway on which they are to travel. It is made by leveling hills and elevating valleys; across the sandy desert and through the wilderness of this world, infested with the enemies of God and His people. It is made straight and plain, so that none need err; it is defended from enemies, so that all may be safe; because ‘He,’ their Leader and Redeemer, shall go with them and guard that way.” Barnes in loc.]
Footnotes:Heb. the fulness thereof.the Lord has wrath on.hath cursed.wilt.Or, wilted leaf-fall.
2. THE ON EDOM, AS OF THE WHOLE IN ONE EXAMPLE OF SPECIAL TO ISRAEL
Isaiah 34:5-155 For my sword shall be bathed in heaven:
Behold, it shall come down upon Idumea,
And upon the people of my curse, to judgment.
6 The sword of the Lord is filled with blood,
It is made fat with fatness,
And with the blood of lambs and goats,
With the fat of the kidneys of rams:
For the Lord hath a sacrifice in Bozrah,
And a great slaughter in the land of Idumea.
7 And the unicorns shall come down with them,
And the bullocks with the bulls;
And their land shall be soaked with blood,
And their dust made fat with fatness.
8 For it is the day of the Lord’s vengeance,
And the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion.
9 And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch,
And the dust thereof into brimstone,
And the land thereof shall become burning pitch.
10 It shall not be quenched night nor day;
The smoke thereof shall go up for ever:
From generation to generation it shall lie waste;
None shall pass through it for ever and ever.
11 But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it;
The owl also and the raven shall dwell in it:
And he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion,
And the stones of emptiness.
12 They shall call the nobles thereof to the kingdom,
But none shall be there,
And all her princes shall be nothing.
13 And thorns shall come up in her palaces,
Nettles and brambles in the fortresses thereof.
And it shall be an habitation of dragons,
And a court for owls.
14 The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island,
And the satyr shall cry to his fellow;
The screech owl also shall rest there,
And find for herself a place of rest.
15 There shall the great owl make her nest, and lay,
And hatch, and gather under her shadow:
There shall the vultures also be gathered,
Every one with her mate.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_34:5. Only by great ingenuity can λִּ ?ι be explained to mean “for.” Hence Knobel construes it as pleonastic, connecting the discourse, and appeals, e. g. to Isaiah 8:23. But there exists a plain causal connection between Isaiah 34:4-5, only the res causans is in verse 4 and not in Isaiah 34:5. Hence λִּ ?ι here=“because” and not “for.” Because the sword of God has become drunken in heaven it comes down to earth (comp. Genesis 3:14; Genesis 33:11; Exodus 1:19, etc.).—ψִ ?εָּ ?δ (comp. Isaiah 16:9) is direct causative Piel = ebrietatem facere, “to produce drunkenness.” As, e. g., δִ ?ωְׁ ?ξִ ?ιο not only means “fatten,” i. e., others, but also “make, produce, grow fat,” i. e., grow fat one’s-self, so this verb means not only “make others drunk” (Jeremiah 31:14; Psalms 65:11), but also “make one’s-self drunk.”—μξωׁ ?τθ=in behoof of accomplishing judgment; comp.
Habakkuk 1:12; Ezekiel 44:24 K’ri; comp. Isaiah 41:1; Isaiah 54:17, in another sense Isaiah 5:7; Isaiah 32:1; Isaiah 28:26.
Isaiah 34:6. Drechslek refers μιδεδ to ξμΰδ: the sword is to the Lord (the Lord has His sword) full of blood. But then it would need to read δַ ?ηֶ ?ψֶ ?α, as the sword has already been mentioned. Would one translate; “Jehovah has a sword that is full of blood,” that again does not suit the previous mention of the sword verse 5, though this translation would best suit the three other instances of the use of μιδεδ in this section (verses 2, 6, 9). The context requires the rendering “the sword of the Lord is full of blood.” For verses 6, 7 manifestly tell what the sword, (that Isaiah 34:5 was to come on Edom), when actually come, has done to Edom. This is intimated by describing the sword after the execution.
Thus the same sword as Isaiah 34:5 is meant. The article is wanting because ηψαμιδεδ, (instead of ηψαιδεδ, which occurs only 1 Chronicles 21:12) seems to be vox solennis, (Judges 7:20; Jeremiah 12:12; Jeremiah 47:6).—δֻ ?γַּ ?ωְׁ ?πָ ?δ instead of δֻ ?ϊְ ?γַּ ?ωְּׁ ?πָ ?δ, Hothpaal, from γΰο, comp. verse 7; Isaiah 30:23; Green’s Gram., § 96, a.——That ξִ ?ο before γַּ ?ν is to be explained according to Isaiah 2:6, does not seem probable. Rather it seems that the notion of causality, that lies in δγωπδξημα, has passed over to what follows: such as was before intimated, the sword has become from the blood of the sacrificial beasts.—λַּ ?ψ again only Isaiah 16:1.—ςַ ?ϊּ ?εּ ?γ again only Isaiah 1:11; Isaiah 14:9—ΰιμιν again in Isaiah 1:11; Isaiah 60:7. ζֶ ?αַ ?η and θֶ ?αַ ?η (verse 3) correspond in sense and sound. On ζαη see list.Isaiah 34:8. The Plural ωׁ ?μεξιν occurs only here: comp. the sing. Hosea 9:7; Micah 7:3.—If the pointing μְ ?ψִ ?ια is correct, then ψִ ?ια is to be construed as substantive.
For as such it is in the construct state and has given its tone to the governing noun; then μ does not stand directly before the tone syllable. But if it is a verb, then it has the tone, and μ in that case receives pretonic kamets (comp. μָ ?ψִ ?ια Isaiah 3:13). As noun ψια means causae actio, defensio, in the same sense as the verb with following accusative (Isaiah 1:17; Isaiah 51:22) is used (comp. Isaiah 19:20).
Isaiah 34:10. μְ ?πֵ ?φַ ?ηπְ ?φָ ?ηִ ?ιν (the Masoretic form of writing πֵ ?φַ ?η occurs four times; Psalms 49:20; 1 Samuel 15:29; 1 Chronicles 29:11) occurs only here.—ϊδε ;χַ ?ε, see list.Isaiah 34:12. ηֹ ?ψֶ ?ιδָ is put absolutely before.—ξμεαδ ,ΰτν; see list.Isaiah 34:13. ΰψξεο comp. Isaiah 23:13; Isaiah 25:2; Isaiah 32:14.—χξεωׁ ;ριψιν; and ηεη (kindred ηָ ?η Isaiah 37:29) occur only here in Isaiah, ξαφψ, locus munitus Isaiah 17:3; Isaiah 25:12.—πָ ?εֶ ?δ see list.Isaiah 34:13-15. ωׂ ?ςιψ ,ΰιιν ,φιιν ,απεϊ ,ιςπδ ,ϊβιν comp. on Isaiah 13:21-22.—ηָ ?φִ ?ιγ (=ηָ ?φֵ ?ψ locus septus) occurs again in Isaiah only Isaiah 35:7 (see Comm. in loc.).—τָ ?πַ ?ωׁ in Isaiah only here.—ΰַ ?κְ has here also its restrictive sense. When Gesenius (Thes. p. 89) says: that the vis restringendi relates non at proximum sed ad sequens quoddam vocabulum, and translates here accordingly: non nisi spectra ibi habitant, non nisi vultures ibi congregantur, the two statements exclude each other. For where only spectra dwell, the vulture cannot also dwell, and vice versa. To express that, the ΰַ ?κְ must be joined to μιμιϊ and γιεϊ (Isaiah 34:14-15). But both times it is joined to ωָׁ ?ν.
Hence it appears that the Prophet would say: only there does the lilith rest, only there does the vulture congregate: i.e., there is no other place so suitable for them.—δψπις again Isaiah 51:4 in another sense; in Isaiah 28:12 we had the noun ξψβςδ “resting place.” Also ξπεη “resting place,” only here in Isaiah; comp. Genesis 8:9; Lamentations 1:3.
AND 1. If the Prophet would not deal only in indefinite generalities in regard to the judgment on the nations of the earth, he must give prominence to the case of one nation instar omnium. Among neighboring nations Moab, and Edom, and Amnion, were most detested by the Israelites (comp. Deuteronomy 23:3-6; Ezekiel 35:5; sqq.; Amos 1:11 : Obadiah 1:10 sqq.; Psalms 137:7, etc.). As Isaiah elsewhere, in a similar connection, mentions the Moabites by way of exemplification (Isaiah 25:10 sqq.), it is natural he should give similar prominence also to Edom, as he does here and Isaiah 63:1 sqq. Now, because the sword of Jehovah has already become drunken in heaven with blood, it descends to earth, because it finds no more work above.
2. For my swored—of Zion.Isaiah 34:5-8. The relation of this section to what precedes is this: the Prophet has said (Isaiah 34:2-3), what the. Lordpurposes to do on earth. δηψιξν and πϊπν Isaiah 34:2 are to be understood of acts of the will, not of performance: Isaiah 34:3 describes prophetically what shall once take place on earth in consequence of that divine decree. Isaiah 34:4 pictures the judgment that shall be executed on the heavens, but here the Prophet combines intention and performance. He contemplates the judgment of God as beginning in heaven, and continued on earth.
[On the construction of λִּ ?ι see Text, and Gram. “It may be construed in its proper sense, either with Isaiah 34:3 (Hitzig), or with the whole of the preceding description. All this shall certainly take place for my sword (the speaker being God Himself) is steeped,” etc.—J. A. Alex.,in loc.].
The expression is a bold poetic one. Isaiah speaks of the sword of the Lord again Isaiah 27:1; Isaiah 66:16. But only here does he personify it. He may, as regards the sense, have in mind Deuteronomy 32:41-43. Inevitable and irresistible are the judgments of the Lord. This the Prophet expresses by saying that the sword of the Lord, intoxicated with the judgment accomplished on “the host of the high ones that are on high” (Isaiah 24:21), and thirsting for more blood, descends to earth, and that first on Edom, as the nation that above all has become an object of the divine ban. (ηֵ ?ψֶ ?ν the segregatio ad internecionem, 1 Kings 20:42; Isaiah 43:28).
Isaiah 34:6-7 describe the effects of the execution. The sword of the Lord is not only full of blood, but is fattened, dropping fat. As in the second clause of Isa 34:6, the Edomites are regarded as a sacrifice, they are here compared to sheep, goats and rams.
Bozra stands for Edom also Isaiah 63:1. Concerning this city see on Jer. 69:13.
The enumeration of buffaloes, bullocks and bulls (Isaiah 34:7) denotes that the entire nation shall perish, great and small, high and low. ψְ ?ΰֵ ?ν (only here in Isaiah, elsewhere only Numbers 23:22; Deuteronomy 33:17; Job 39:9 sq.; Psalms 22:22; Psalms 29:6; Psalms 92:11). It is now universally understood to mean the buffalo (see Herz.R.–Encycl, xl. p. 28). τָ ?ψִ ?ιν see on Isaiah 1:11. ΰαιψ meaning “bull” occurs only Isaiah 10:13 K’thibh. ιψγ meaning “to fell” trees, beasts or men, is peculiar to Isaiah (see Isaiah 32:19). For Jeremiah 48:15; Jeremiah 50:27; Jeremiah 51:40 the use of the word is not quite the same. In consequence of the slaughter the earth itself is drunk with blood, and fat with fat, comp. on Isaiah 34:5-6. The parallelism reigns not only in these verses, but in the entire complexity of Isa 34:6-8. For the description of the judgment in Isaiah 34:6 a. and Isaiah 34:7 correspond, and the reasons assigned Isaiah 34:6 b. and Isaiah 34:8. But progress appears in the thought because Isaiah 34:8 gives particularly the object of the “sacrifice” and the “slaughter.” The Lord will thereby satisfy His vengeance, and give Zion justice by a righteous recompense.
The expression for the day of the Lord’setc., recalls Isaiah 2:12 and Isaiah 63:4. But the Prophet seems moreover to have in mind Deuteronomy 32:35; Deuteronomy 32:41. For in those passages, as here, the notions of vengeance and recompense underlie the discourse.
But beside this, our passage lay before Jeremiah. For Jeremiah 46:10 is penetrated with elements drawn from Isaiah 34:5-8. The following considerations show that our passage is the source from which Jer. drew. 1) The grand, drastic boldness and loftiness of the language of our passage, of which the words of Jer., after the fashion of that Prophet, are but a tempered imitation. 2) Isaiah uses the expression ψִ ?εְּ ?ϊָ ?δ twice (Isaiah 34:5; Isaiah 34:7); Jer. says, ψָ ?εְ ?ϊָ ?δ It is much more likely that Jeremiah would dilute the strong expression of a predecessor, in his well-known fashion (see my comm. on Jer. Introd. § 3) than that an author living much later in the exile, should intensify the normal but weaker expression of Jeremiah 3) Jer. says ιεֹ ?νπְ ?χָ ?ξָ ?δ, Isaiah; ιεֹ ?ν Now in general πχν is the older form of the word, and is used only in Leviticus 26:25; Deuteronomy 32:35; Deuteronomy 32:41; Deuteronomy 32:43; Judges 16:28; Psalms 58:11; Proverbs 6:34; Micah 5:14, and in Isa. (Isaiah 35:4; Isaiah 47:3; Isaiah 59:17; Isaiah 61:2; Isaiah 63:4). In the exceptions Ezekiel 24:8; Ezekiel 25:12, πְ ?χֹ ?νπָ ?χָ ?ν is evidently said for the sake of the effect of sound; in Ezekiel 25:15 the expression εַ ?ιִ ?πָ ?χְ ?ξεּ πχν is used along with πְ ?χָ ?ξָ ?δ. On the other hand πְ ?χָ ?ξָ ?δ is the form exclusively used by Jeremiah, and in Ezekiel it is the prevalent form (the exceptions being given above) and beside these is used only here and there (Numbers 31:2-3; Lamentations 3:60; Psalms 149:7). But it is not probable that a writer later than Jeremiah has introduced the old form into a passage borrowed from Jeremiah.
3. And the streams—emptiness.Isaiah 34:9-11. Edom was situated at the southern point of the Dead Sea. The following description recalls the pitchy and sulphurous character of this sea and its surroundings. It seems as if the Prophet would allude to that event which, recorded in Genesis 19:24-25; Genesis 19:28, had impressed that character on the region. At least the sulphur, the overturning (δτκ) and the ascending smoke are traits that he seems to have borrowed from that passage. ζֶ ?τֶ ?ϊ occurs again only Exodus 2:3. πτψιϊ we had already where Isaiah 30:33 the breath of God is called “a stream of brimstone.” When the streams are flowing pitch and the dust of the land is sulphur, the whole land will become a fearful place of conflagration.
Day and night (the expression occurs Deuteronomy 28:66, beside comp. Isaiah 4:5; Isaiah 21:8; Isaiah 60:11), forever, for it is the flame of the last judgment, the burning shall continue. The burning land is the subject of ϊαλδ which is used intensively also Isaiah 43:17; Isaiah 46:24.
Isaiah 34:10. On γεψ as defining time see on Isaiah 13:20. ξγεψμγεψ occurs only here. ηַ ?ψַ ?αexarescere, exsiccari, comp. Isaiah 19:5-6; Isaiah 44:27; Isaiah 60:12. ΰֵ ?ιοςֹ ?αֵ ?ψ again only Isaiah 60:15. It does not agree well to say of the same land that it shall become an everlasting burning, and that it shall be a pathless desert. But the Prophet describes the future by means of the present, and contemplates the earth as an Edom cursed of God, and thinks of the latter as a scorched desert land. [The same may be said of the similarly inconsistent descriptions in all that follows in this section.—Tr.].
Isaiah 34:11. As such the land is inhabited only by beasts of the desert. [On the names of beings enumerated in this and the following verses see J. A. Alex.,comm, in loc, especially on μιμιϊ Isaiah 34:14.—Tr.]. χΰϊ (from χεΰ “to vomit”) is the pelican (Leviticus 11:18; Deuteronomy 14:17; Zephaniah 2:14), χτγ “the porcupine” (see on Isaiah 14:23; Zephaniah 2:14). πωׁ ?εσ “the owl” (only here in Isa. comp. Leviticus 9:17; Deuteronomy 14:16),—ςψα “the raven” (in Isaiah only here). As right building can only be done by means of measuring line and plummet (Job 38:5), so shall right destruction be directed by aid of the same implements. The image is the same as Amos 7:7-9, comp. 2 Kings 21:23; Lamentations 2:8. “The stone” is the weight that makes the line plumb. The expression ΰαπιαδε is ἄπ. λεγ.; and αδε Isaiah uses no where else (see Genesis 1:2; Jeremiah 4:23).
[“The sense of the whole metaphor may then be—that God has laid this work out for Himself and will perform it (Barnes),—that even in destroying He will proceed deliberately, and by rule (Knobel), which last thought is well expressed in Rosenmueller’s paraphrase (ad mensuram vastabitur, ad regulam depopulabitur).”—J. A. Alexander.]
4. They shall call—with her mate.Isaiah 34:12-15. The Prophet now describes the desolation as it affects the territory of the nobility of Edom, both as to their persons and their castles. ηψιδ being nominative absolute, the words must be translated: “as to her nobles, there are none there that call out a monarchy (election of king, accession to regency).” As the presence of the nobility is the necessary condition of a king’s election, and not vice versa, I regard this translation as more correct than the other which is also grammatically possible, viz.: “there is no kingdom that they may proclaim.” Moreover it is logically more correct that in the phrase with εְ the word put before absolutely should be the subject. Royalty in Edom was not inherited, but Esau’s descendants formed a high nobility from which the king proceeded by election (Genesis 36:15 sqq.; 31 sqq.). ηֹ ?ψliber, ingenuus, nobilis Isaiah uses only here. Comp. Ecclesiastes 10:17; Jeremiah 27:20 and often.
[On ηψιδ J. A. Alexander gives a copious synopsis of interpretations and then adds: “This great variety of explanations, and the harshness of construction with which most of them are chargeable, may serve as an excuse for the suggestion of a new one, not as certainly correct, but as possibly entitled to consideration.” Beside the meaning nobles, δֹ ?ψִ ?ιν in several places “no less certainly means holes or caves (see 1 Samuel 14:11; Job 30:6; Nahum 2:13). Now it is matter of history not only that Edom was full of caverns, but that these were inhabited and that the aboriginal inhabitants, expelled by Esau, were expressly called Horites (ηֹ ?ψִ ?ιν) as being inhabitants of caverns (Isaiah 14:6; Isaiah 36:20; Deuteronomy 2:12; Deuteronomy 2:22). This being the case, the entire depopulation of the country, and especially the destruction of its princes, might be naturally and poetically expressed by saying that the kingdom of Edom should be thenceforth a kingdom of deserted caverns.” For the appropriateness of description see in Robinson’s “Researches” the account of Petra.—Tr.].
Isaiah 34:13. The ruin of the nobility is followed by that of their palaces. They are said to mount up (ςμϊδ) but only ironically, for they appear great and high only by the rank wild growth on them.
Not only beasts of the desert, but also repulsive demons of the desert disport themselves in the desolate ruins of Edom. The Prophet mentions a female being, the ghost-like, restlessly wandering (comp. Matthew 12:43) Lilith, but which just there in those dreadful places finds a congenial resting place. The name μִ ?ιμιϊ certainly comes from μַ ?ιִ ?μ “the night,” and denotes a being of the night, a spectre. According to the Talmud Lilith is the chief of the nocturnal Schedim, of the μִ ?ιμִ ?ιο or θְ ?μָ ?πִ ?ιο (comp. Buxtorf,Lex. rabb., p. 1140 and 877), and bears the name ΰַ ?πִּ ?ψַ ?ϊαַּ ?ϊχַ ?ηְ ?μַ ?ϊi. e., “Agrath the (female) dancer.” Comp.
Kohut,Jόd. Angel, und Dδmonol, 1866, p. 61 and 86 sqq. Certainly Lilith is a production of popular superstition, to which various attributes and forms of appearance are ascribed. Comp. Buxtorf,l. c.Bochart,Hieroz. III. p. 829, ed.Rosenmueller, Gesen.Thes. p. 749. [Smith’sDiet, of Bible, under the word Owl]. μιμιϊ is ἄπ. λεγ.
[“In itself it means nothing more nor less than nocturnal, and would seem to be applicable to an animal or to any other object belonging to the night.” “This gratuitous interpretation of the Hebrew word” (viz., as referring to the superstitions mentioned above) “was unfortunately sanctioned by Bochart and Vitringa, and adopted with eagerness by the modern Germans who rejoice in every opportunity of charging a mistake in physics, or a vulgar superstition on the Scriptures. This disposition is the more apparent here, because the writers of this school usually pique themselves upon the critical discernment with which they separate the exegetical inventions of the Rabbins from the genuine meaning of the Hebrew text. Gesenius for example, will not even grant that the doctrine of a personal Messiah is so much as mentioned in the writings of Isaiah, although no opinion has been more universally maintained by the Jews, from the date of their oldest uncanonical books. In this case, their unanimous and uninterrupted testimony goes for nothing, because it would establish an unwelcome identity between the Messiah of the Old and New Testament. But when the object is to fasten on the Scriptures an odious and contemptible superstition, the utmost deference is paid, not only to the silly legends of the Jews, but to those of the Greeks, Romans, Zabians and Russians.” “Beside the fact that μιμιϊ means nocturnal, and that its application to a spectre is entirely gratuitous, we may argue here, as in Isaiah 13:25, that ghosts as well as demons would be wholly out of place in a list of wild and solitary animals. Is this a natural succession of ideas?
Is it one that ought to be assumed without necessity?” … “Of all the figures that could be employed, that of resting seems to be the least appropriate in the description of a spectre.” … The quotation of Mat 12:43 in this connection is “strange” and “incongruous,” “where the evil spirit is expressly said to pass through dry places seeking rest and finding none.” … “The sense 19 sufficiently secured by mating μιμιϊ mean a nocturnal bird (Aben Ezra), or more specificially, an owl (Cocceius), or screech-owl (Lowth). But the word admits of a still more satisfactory interpretation, in exact agreement with the exposition which has already been given of the preceding terms as general descriptions rather than specific names. If these terms represent the animals occupying Idumea, first as belonging to the wilderness (φιιν), then as distinguished by their fierce and melancholy cries (ΰιιν), and then as shaggy in appearance (ωׂ ?ςιψ), nothing can be more natural than that the fourth epithet should also be expressive of their habits as a class … nocturnal or belonging to the night.”—J. A. Alexander,in loc.—Tr.].
Isaiah 34:15. Bochart in his Hieroz., II. p. 194 sqq., has proved that χτεζ means arrow-snake. In lonely places, out of danger it harbors and lays its eggs. ξִ ?μֵ ?θ Piel=“to cause slipping away,” like the Hiph. Isaiah 66:7; the imperf., with Vav consecutive makes what must hypotactically be regarded as a repeated fact, appear paratactically as occurring once. αχς “to cleave,” for by cleaving open the young are brought forth, comp. Isaiah 35:6; Isaiah 58:8; Isaiah 59:5. γβψ “to cherish” (only here and Jeremiah 17:11), cherishes the young in its shadow (i. e., of its own body)—γιδ “vulture,” again only Deuteronomy 14:13. The expression ΰωׁ ?δψςεϊδ only here and Isaiah 34:16 in Isaiah. Drechsler justly construes it as asyndeton, and as in apposition with the subject, as must be done also Isaiah 34:16.
[“As to the particular species of animals referred to in this whole passage, there is no need, as Calvin well observes, of troubling ourselves much about them. (Non est cur in iis magnopere torqueamur). The general sense evidently is that a human population should be succeeded by wild and lonely animals—implying total and continued desolation.”—J. A. Alexander. For rich illustration of the subject from modern travellers see Barnes’ Notes on Isaiah, in loc.—Tr.].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 34:1-4. Because Revelation 6:12-17 has express reference to this passage, some would conclude that the Prophet here has in view only that special event of the world’s judgment (the opening of the sixth seal). But that is not justified. For other passages of the New Testament that do not specially relate to the opening of the sixth seal are based on this passage (Matthew 24:29; 2 Peter 3:7 sqq.; Revelation 14:11; Revelation 19:11 sqq.). It appears from this that the present passage is, as it were, a magazine from which New Testament prophecy has drawn its material for more than one event of fulfilment.
2. On Isaiah 34:16. The word of God can bear the closest scrutiny. Indeed it desires and demands it. If men would only examine the Scriptures diligently and with an unclouded mind and love of truth, “whether these things are so,” as did the Bereans (Acts 17:11; John 5:39)!
3. On Isaiah 35:3. “The Christian church is the true Lazaretto in which may be found a crowd of weary, sick, lame and wretched people. Therefore, Christ is the Physician Himself (Matthew 9:12) who binds up and heals those suffering from neglect (Ezekiel 34:16; Isaiah 61:1). And His word cures all (Wis 16:12). His servants, too, are commissioned officially to admonish the rude, to comfort the timid, to bear the weak, and be patient with all (1 Thessalonians 5:14). Therefore, whoever feels weak, let him betake himself to this Bethania; there he will find counsel for his soul,” Cramer.4. [On Isaiah 35:8-9. “They who enter the path that leads to life, find there no cause of alarm.
Their fears subside; their apprehensions of punishment on account of their sins die away, and they walk that path with security and confidence. There is nothing in that way to alarm them; and though there are many foes—fitly represented by lions and wild beasts—lying about the way, yet no one is permitted to ‘go up thereon.’ This is a most beautiful image of the safety of the people of God, and of their freedom from all enemies that could annoy them.” “The path here referred to is appropriately designed only for the redeemed of the Lord. It is not for the profane, the polluted, the hypocrite. It is not for those who live for this world, or for those who love pleasure more than they love God. The church should not be entered except by those, who have evidence that they are redeemed. None should make a profession of religion who have no evidence that they belong to “the redeemed,” and who are not disposed to walk in the way of holiness.
But for all such it is a highway on which they are to travel. It is made by leveling hills and elevating valleys; across the sandy desert and through the wilderness of this world, infested with the enemies of God and His people. It is made straight and plain, so that none need err; it is defended from enemies, so that all may be safe; because ‘He,’ their Leader and Redeemer, shall go with them and guard that way.” Barnes in loc.]
Footnotes:Because my sword has become drunken.Or, rhinoceros.buffaloes.Or, drunken.For a day of vengeance has Jehovah.Or, pelican.porcupine.Its nobles—there are none to proclaim the monarchy.no more.And its palaces soar aloft in thorns.jackal.Or, ostriches.Heb. daughters of the owl.Heb. ziim.Heb. Ijim.shaggy monster.—J. A. A.
Or, night monster.arrowsnake.
3. REMARK: SUMMONS TO COMPARE THE WITH ITS
Isaiah 34:16-1716 Seek ye out of the book of the Lord, and read,
No one of these shall fail,
None shall want her mate:
For my mouth it hath commanded, and bhis spirit it hath gathered them,
17 And he hath cast the lot for them,
And his hand hath divided it unto them by line:
They shall possess it for ever,
From generation to generation shall they dwell therein.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_34:16. Comp. λָּ ?ϊַ ?α with ςμ Isaiah 30:8; Jeremiah 36:29; Deuteronomy 27:3; Deuteronomy 27:8, etc.——εχψΰε comp. Isaiah 29:11-12.——The LXX. reads γָ ?ψָֽ ?ωׁ ?εּ instead of γִּ ?ψְ ?ωׁ ?εּ and refer the word to what goes before. Moreover it has somehow confounded ξςμΞρτψ with ξִ ?ρְ ?τָ ?ψ, and derived χְ ?ψָ ?ΰεּ from χָ ?ψָ ?ΰ occurrere, for it reads thus: ἐκεῖἔλαφοισυνήντησανκαὶἴδοντὰπρόσωπαἀλλήλων· ἀριθμῷπαρῆλθον. In the παρῆλθον is doubtless a reference to Genesis 2:19. Strangely enough late expositors (Knobel, Meier) adopt this rendering through misconception of the passage.—I do not believe that the feminines in ΰηϊξδπδ and ΰωׁ ?δψςεϊδ Hate relate only to the living beings enumerated in vers, 5–15.
For why are not other traits of the prophecy, murder, burning, etc, to be fulfilled? And why conceive of all the living beings as feminine? The Prophet changes the gender ver, 17. I agree with those that take these feminines in a neuter sense, and as relating to all the traits of the predicted judgment, which is grammatically quite justifiable (comp. Isaiah 41:22).——πςγψ is used Isaiah 40:26, as here, in the sense of desiderari, deesse.——As ΰִ ?ωָּׁ ?δΰֲ ?ηεֹ ?ϊָ ?δּ is said of inanimate things (Exodus 26:3; Exodus 26:5-6, etc.) so the same is possible of ΰωδψςεϊδ (asyndeton like Isaiah 34:15). τχγε is=“to miss,” (properly: to verify by inspection the non-existence, comp. 1 Samuel 20:6; 1 Samuel 25:15). The 3d pers. plur. denotes the impersonal subject=“one.”—τִ ?ι occasions great difficulty.
Some (as Drechsler) would refer the suffix in τι to the Prophet and in ψεηε to God. But could the Prophet say: my mouth has commanded it? He could only say “announced,” (δִ ?βִ ?ιγ or the like). Thus the Vulg. translates: quod ex ore meo procedit, ille mandavit. But the LXX. has simply, ὅτικύριοςἐνετείλατοαὑτοῖς. It is better, with several Rabbis and Delitzsch, to refer both suffixes to God: “ my mouth has commanded it and its spirit, i. e., the spirit of my mouth has gathered them.” Still this is a strange form of expression.
For it appears as if the Lord distinguished between His spirit and the spirit of His mouth, as if the latter were not His spirit; a distinction that does not appear Psalms 33:6; Job 15:30. More over the explanation of Gesenius, who would take δεΰ for the nomen regens belonging to λּ ?ι (comp. ξιξιδιΰ Nahum 2:9), is not satisfactory. This construction is quite abnormal; for Nahum 2:9 is not similar. With the exception of the clause “for my mouth—hath gathered them,” not only the entire preceding part of the chapt. but also verses 16, 17 are spoken only by the Prophet. A corruption of the text was very possible, in as much as λִּ ?ιδεּ, by reason of the δεּ ?ΰ after ψεּ ?ηεֹ, could easily change to λּ ?ιδεּ ?ΰ. Hence I think that we must simply translate “his mouth.”—χαφο (Piel, see list) is to be referred to the same objects as the fem. suffixes preceding.
Isaiah 34:17. δλּ ?ιμβεψμ only here in Isaiah; comp. Psalms 22:19; Ezekiel 24:6, etc. βεψμ alone and ηִ ?μֵ ?χ see list.—χַ ?ε and Φψωׁ ?εδ and ιωׁ ?λπεαδ comp. on verse 11.—μγεψεγεψ see verse 11.
AND 1. The Prophet translates himself in spirit into the time when his prophecy shall have been fulfilled. As a pledge to his present readers of the reliability of his predictions he, so to speak, stakes his own and God’s honor on the fulfilment, which must be compromised by the non-fulfilment. For what the mouth of the Lord has announced, that the Spirit of the Lord will bring to pass. Though the immediate reference of these words is to the prophecy against Edom, it lies in the nature of things that the present summons concerns in the same way all predictions of the Prophet. It is hard to see why only the prophecy against Edom should be provided with such a postscript as the present.
It is therefore a natural conjecture that this postscript stands connected with the position, and general significance of this prophecy against Edom. The latter concludes part first: for with 36 the historical pieces begin. We have found, too, this prophecy against Edom to be an exemplification in one nation of what is to happen to all (Isaiah 34:1-4). We may then take this postscript as pertaining to all the preceding threatening prophecies, because all of them are, so to speak, comprehended in this last one against Edom. Now as chap 34 is certainly more recent than most of the foregoing pieces, it is probable that this postscript was first added when the collection was made, to which perhaps the expression “Book of the Lord” refers. But, one may ask, why is this postscript put at the end of 35.?
The verses 16, 17 are by their contents most intimately connected with Isaiah 34:5-15. But why such an appeal to the written word only after a threatening prophecy? Christ, too, speaks the significant words “behold I have told you before” (Matthew 24:25; Mark 13:23) after announcing judgments. God’s salvation comes to the pious, and they know from whose hand it comes. But the wicked will not hear of God’s sending judgments. They ascribe them to accident or fatalistic necessity.
Therefore it specially concerns them to prove, that the judgment is something announced beforehand, and thus is something previously known and determined, that it is therefore the act of Him who knows all His works from the beginning of the world (Acts 15:18). Added to this, 35, points forwards more than backwards. It is the bridge to chapters 40–66, as it were, the morning twilight of the day of salvation, which dawns with chap. 40.
2. Seek ye—dwell therein. Isaiah 34:16-17. The summons to read in the written book seems to me to indicate that the Prophet has just been busy with a book and finished it, which he calls “the book of the Lord.” Gesen., and Drechsl., explain this to mean that the Prophet “had in mind the insertion of his oracle in a collection of holy Scriptures;” that he “knew it to be a part of a greater whole, into which, in its time, it must be adopted.” But then why does he think this only of this prophecy? Even though elsewhere there is mention of recording single prophecies for the purpose of appealing to them afterwards (Isaiah 8:1; Isaiah 30:8), still there is nowhere, beside the present, any mention of an entire book that deserved to be called “the book of the Lord.” But we evidently stand here at a boundary. The prophecies of part first conclude.
Chapters 36–39, form an historical supplement. With 40, the second part begins. And at this significant point a “book of the Lord” is mentioned. This is certainly not to be explained by saying that in closing his prophecy the Prophet happened here to mention the future book of which it was to become a part. It is much more likely that the Prophet provided this prophecy with such a conclusion, when he put this prophecy at the end of a great book, that he called Jehovah-book, as containing the entire Jehovah-word announced by him. The expression ρλּ ?ψιδεδ occurs only here.
Only a work in which Jehovah had space to give an all-sided revelation of His nature and will, deserved this name. And only a Prophet that was conscious of having been God’s faithful instrument in all he had said and written, could set such a title to his book.
The prophecy must he fulfilled because God is author of it. This is the general sense. But as to particulars λִּ ?ι occasions difficulty, on which see Text. and Gram. The Spirit of God, or perhaps more correctly the breath of God drives, or rather blows together, from all quarters what God needs in one place for the accomplishment of His counsel. Compare an analogous use of χִ ?αֵּ ?υMicah 1:7. The various beings or powers mentioned in Isaiah 34:5-15 are partly masculine, partly feminine. The Prophet repeats with emphasis that the total of them, i.e., the representatives of both genders are endowed with the land of Edom in eternal possession. He has similarly expressed the difference in gender by the different gender terminations, Isaiah 3:1.
[On Isaiah 34:17. “An evident allusion to the division of the land of Canaan, both by lot and measuring line. (See Numbers 26:55-56; Joshua 18:4-6). As Canaan was allotted to Israel, so Edom is allotted to these doleful creatures.”—J. A. Alexander.].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 34:1-4. Because Revelation 6:12-17 has express reference to this passage, some would conclude that the Prophet here has in view only that special event of the world’s judgment (the opening of the sixth seal). But that is not justified. For other passages of the New Testament that do not specially relate to the opening of the sixth seal are based on this passage (Matthew 24:29; 2 Peter 3:7 sqq.; Revelation 14:11; Revelation 19:11 sqq.). It appears from this that the present passage is, as it were, a magazine from which New Testament prophecy has drawn its material for more than one event of fulfilment.
2. On Isaiah 34:16. The word of God can bear the closest scrutiny. Indeed it desires and demands it. If men would only examine the Scriptures diligently and with an unclouded mind and love of truth, “whether these things are so,” as did the Bereans (Acts 17:11; John 5:39)!
3. On Isaiah 35:3. “The Christian church is the true Lazaretto in which may be found a crowd of weary, sick, lame and wretched people. Therefore, Christ is the Physician Himself (Matthew 9:12) who binds up and heals those suffering from neglect (Ezekiel 34:16; Isaiah 61:1). And His word cures all (Wis 16:12). His servants, too, are commissioned officially to admonish the rude, to comfort the timid, to bear the weak, and be patient with all (1 Thessalonians 5:14). Therefore, whoever feels weak, let him betake himself to this Bethania; there he will find counsel for his soul,” Cramer.4. [On Isaiah 35:8-9. “They who enter the path that leads to life, find there no cause of alarm.
Their fears subside; their apprehensions of punishment on account of their sins die away, and they walk that path with security and confidence. There is nothing in that way to alarm them; and though there are many foes—fitly represented by lions and wild beasts—lying about the way, yet no one is permitted to ‘go up thereon.’ This is a most beautiful image of the safety of the people of God, and of their freedom from all enemies that could annoy them.” “The path here referred to is appropriately designed only for the redeemed of the Lord. It is not for the profane, the polluted, the hypocrite. It is not for those who live for this world, or for those who love pleasure more than they love God. The church should not be entered except by those, who have evidence that they are redeemed. None should make a profession of religion who have no evidence that they belong to “the redeemed,” and who are not disposed to walk in the way of holiness.
But for all such it is a highway on which they are to travel. It is made by leveling hills and elevating valleys; across the sandy desert and through the wilderness of this world, infested with the enemies of God and His people. It is made straight and plain, so that none need err; it is defended from enemies, so that all may be safe; because ‘He,’ their Leader and Redeemer, shall go with them and guard that way.” Barnes in loc.]
Footnotes:fails, Neither one nor the other does one miss,
4. OBVERSE OF THE : ISRAEL’S AND RETURN HOME
Isaiah 35:1-101 The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them;
And the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose.
2 It shall blossom abundantly,
And rejoice even with joy and singing:
The glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it,
The excellency of Carmel and Sharon,
They shall see the glory of the Lord,And the excellency of our God.
3 Strengthen ye the weak hands,
And confirm the feeble knees.
4 Say to them that are of a fearful heart,
Be strong, fear not:
Behold, your God will come with vengeance,
Even God with a recompense;
He will come and save you.
5 Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened,
And the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.
6 Then shall the lame man leap as an hart,
And the tongue of the dumb sing:
For in the wilderness shall waters break out,
And streams in the desert.
7 And the parched ground shall become a pool,
And the thirsty land springs of water:
In the habitation of dragons, where each lay,
Shall be grass with reeds and rushes.
8 And an highway shall be there, and a way,
And it shall be called The way of holiness;
The unclean shall not pass over it; but it shall be for those:
The wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err therein.9 No lion shall be there,
Nor any ravenous beast shall go up thereon,
It shall not be found there;
But the redeemed shall walk there:10 And the ransomed of the Lord shall return,
And come to Zion with songs
And everlasting joy upon their heads:
They shall obtain joy and gladness,
And sorrow and sighing shall flee away.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_35:1. [The Author, like the LXX., translates the futures of this verse, (and also of Isa 35:2) as imperatives. But, as J. A. Alex. says, “there is no sufficient reason for departing from the strict sense of the future.”—Tr.]. The abnormal form ιְ ?ωֻׂ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?ν must not be regarded as an error in copying, as has been done by Lowth, Eichhorn, Hitzig, Umbreit, Olsh. (Gram.). Nor can the ending εּ ?ν be treated as a suffix, as is done by Gesenius, Rosenm., Maurer, Drechsler, who regard it as put for αָּ ?ν with reference to “the felicitous revolution of all things that is announced in the present chapter.” Such a reference would be harsh, and a departure from the analogy of the construction of verbs of rejoicing.
It is better (with Aben Ezra, Kimchi. Ewald, (§ 91, b), Knobel, Delitzsch) to explain the form as an assimilation of the ο in ιְ ?ωֻׂ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?ο to the following ξ: as in Numbers 3:49 τִּ ?γְ ?ιεֹ ?νξֵ ?ΰֵ ?ϊ stands for λּ ?γιεοξΧ and as, according to Wetstein (excursus in Delitzsch, p. 688), at the present day even in Arabic n becomes m before a labial. In Greek also τὴμημτέρα occurs for τὴνμητέρα. On the recurrence of ςψαδ ,φִ ?ιָּ ?δ ,ωׂ ?εּ ?ωׂ in Isaiah, see list.Isaiah 35:2. βִ ?ιμָ ?δ see list. The inf. ψַ ?πֵּ ?ο again only Psalms 132:16.—λαεγιΧ and δγψ see list.Isaiah 35:3. The words are manifestly borrowed from Job 4:3-4.
By a comparison of the Hebrew original it is seen that the first clause quite agrees with the words of Job; but the second combines elements of the two following clauses in Job, and λωׁ ?μεϊ is substituted for λψςεϊ. But the two expressions ηζχιγΧψλּ ?Χ and λωׁ ?μεϊ (or λψςεϊ) ΰξυαψλιν occur only in these two places.
Isaiah 35:4. Drechsler, Delitzsch, as some Rabbins before them, take πָ ?χָ ?ν as acc. modalis (Drechsler: “Rδchens kommt er,” i.e., as much to do vengeance, as also in vengeance, in exhibition of vengeance). But no example can be cited of designating the object of coming by the accusative, or of the use of πχν adverbially as denoting the manner of appearance, like the use of πεֹ ?ψָ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ ,δֶ ?αֶ ?μωֶׁ ?χֶ ?ψ ,αֶּ ?θַ ?η, etc. The parallel passages that re cited (Isaiah 13:9; Isaiah 30:27; Isaiah 40:10) prove only that ΰμδιλν can be joined to ιαεΰ as its predicate, something that is not doubted. The accents indeed favor this connection here, but they are not binding. In an entirely similar sentence as to structure (Jer. 23:19; 30:33) they make such a distribution as I think is also the correct one here.
With most expositors, therefore, I take δπδΰμδιλν as first clause, which incontestibly is grammatically possible (comp. e.g. Isaiah 17:14; Genesis 12:19), and πχνιαεΰ as the second. Thus by δπη, as it were with the index finger, the Prophet points to God as He draws near, and then with the following words explains His coming. Vengeance, says he (comp. on Isaiah 34:8), comes, divine recompense. βξεμΰΧ is in apposition with . ΰμδιν ּ ?πχν denotes not merely the author, but also the manner of the recompense; it is such as God only can visit, viz., as just in principle as it is complete in execution. The expression therefore recalls ηִ ?ϊַּ ?ϊΰΧ “the terror of God,” Genesis 35:5; ΰַ ?ψְ ?ζֵ ?ιΰֵ ?μ Psalms 80:11; ςֲ ?φֵ ?ιιΧ Psalms 104:16, etc.—δεΰιαεΰεΧ emphasizes the coming of the Lord for a positive object.—The form εְ ?ιωַׁ ? ?ֽ ?ςֲ ?λֶ ?ν stands for εְ ?ιωִׁ ?ιςֲ ?λֶ ?ν as Proverbs 20:22 εְ ?ιωַׁ ?ς for εְ ?ιωִׁ ?ιςַ. The abbreviated (Jussive) form denotes that the clause is to be construed as marking intention: “that he may save you.”
Isaiah 35:5. ηֵ ?ψֵ ?ωׁ, see list.Isaiah 35:6. γִּ ?μֵ ?β “to spring” (Psalms 18:30) and ΰιμ only here in Isaiah. λּ ?ρη comp. Isaiah 33:23.—ΰִ ?μֵּ ?ν, see list.Isaiah 35:7. ΰֲ ?βַ ?ν and ξαες (Ecclesiastes 12:6), see list.—φξΰεο again only Deuteronomy 8:15; Psalms 107:33.—Both as to sense and grammar it gives a harsh construction to take ψαφδ in apposition with πεδ, and to refer the suffix to ϊπιν. What need is there of saying that the πεδ of the jackal is also its ψαυ? Nor would I, with Drechsler refer the suffix in ψαφδ to ξιν: for ψαυ is a place of repose (comp. Isaiah 65:10; Jeremiah 1:6; Proverbs 24:15). ψαφδ is manifestly to be referred to Israel. It is true that in what precedes there is no word to which the suffix ַָ ?δּ may be grammatically referred.
But we know the great liberty of the Hebrew, in which verbal and nominal endings, as also suffixes are referred to ideal notions or such as are implied in the context (comp. on Isaiah 33:4). It is in this case to be referred to some feminine notion of the author’s mind, such as Zion or daughter of Zion. The following words, too, ηφιψιΧ are an echo of Isa 34:13 b (ηφιψμαπεϊιΧ). Hence the latter passage seems to me to indicate what must be the explanation of the present, and that we must here also take ηφιψ in the sense of ηָ ?φֵ ?ψ. This interchange, indeed, does not occur in any other than the passages named. But grammatically it is not impossible (comp. λָּ ?μִ ?ιθ and ιָ ?βִ ?ιςַ λָּ ?μֵ ?θ and ςָ ?ϊִ ?ιχ ,ιָ ?βִ ?ςַ and ςָ ?ϊֵ ?χ, Ewald, § 149, e) and the sense demands it in Isaiah 34:13.
For the ostrich does not eat grass. Hence I construe ηφιψ in this place as ηַ ?φֵ ?ψ and in apposition with πְ ?εֵ ?δϊΧ.
Isaiah 35:8. The εְ before δεΰ might be taken in a causal sense (Ewald, § 333, a). But it seems to me more suitable to regard the clause εδεΰμξε as the negative correlative of μΰιςαψπεθξΰ, and to translate εְ accordingly by “but” (Ewald, § 354, a, p. 843). Note here, too, what freedom the Prophet takes with the gender of the words. The fem. μָ ?δּ after ιχψΰ is immediately followed by the masculines ιιζַ ?αψπε and δεΰ—γψκ, is most commonly masculine (fem. only Deuteronomy 1:22; Psalms 1:6; Psalms 119:33; Ezra 8:2). But it is incredible that this interchange of gender is conditioned by the double gender of γψκ, for that would not justify such interchange in one and the same passage.
But μָ ?δּ relates ξρμεμ ,i.e., to the notion ξְ ?ρִ ?μָּ ?δ which is here in an exceptional way represented by the other word.—δμκ is part, absolutum, and prepositive conditional clause. In respect to the sense comp. Isaiah 42:16.—ΰειμ again only Isaiah 19:11.
Isaiah 35:9. λּ ?ψιυ only here in Isaiah.—The 3 pers. fem. in ϊξφΰ is to be referred διεϊ, for this 3 pers. fem. involves an ideal plural (comp. on Isaiah 34:13)—βΰεμιν again only Isaiah 51:10; Isaiah 62:12; Psalms 107:2; [but also, see list].
Isaiah 35:10. ΰπηδ ,ιβεο ,πωׂ ?βλּ ?γει, see list. ωׂ ?ωׂ ?εοεωׂ ?ξηδ comp. Isaiah 22:13; Isaiah 51:3; Isaiah 51:11; Isaiah 61:3.
AND 1. As in all sections of Isaiah’s prophecies, so here the perspective closes with a glorious future (comp. 11 and 12; Isaiah 23:15-18; Isaiah 27; Isaiah 33:13-24). As exile is the sum of all terrors for the Israelite, so exile’s end, return to Zion to everlasting, blessed residence there is the acme and sum of all felicity. Thus here the prospect of joyful return home is presented to Israel in contrast with the frightful judgments that (34) are to come upon the heathen, and at the same time as a transition and prelude to chapters 40–66.
The desert through which the way lies shall flourish like Carmel and Sharon (Isaiah 35:1-2). There all the weary and languishing shall receive new strength (Isaiah 35:3). The fearful and timid shall gain fresh courage at the prospect of the vengeance and deliverance from their God (Isaiah 35:4). The blind shall see; the deaf hear (Isaiah 35:5), the lame walk, the dumb speak; springs shall well up in the desert (Isaiah 35:6); the mirage shall become reality, the lair of the jackal will become a place of grass and water fitted for an encampment (Isaiah 35:7). A highway will appear that shall be a holy way. For as, on the one hand, nothing unclean shall go on it, so, on the other, the simple ones of Israel will not lose their way on it (Isaiah 35:8).
No ravenous beast shall render it insecure. Only the redeemed of the Lord shall travel it (Isaiah 35:9). They shall return on it to Zion with joy. Then shall everlasting joy go in there, and sorrow and sighing flee away (Isaiah 35:10).
2. The wilderness—of our God.Isaiah 35:1-2. These verses, as it were, prepare the theatre in general for the return of Israel. This return is to be through the desert. There is not a word to intimate that the Prophet has a definite desert in view. The march of Israel through the Arabian desert when returning from the Egyptian captivity, is as much the type for all home returns of Israel, as that first captivity is the type for all that follow.
For so says Isaiah 11:16 : “And there shall be an highway for the remnant of her people, which shall be left from Assyria, like as it was to Israel in the day that he came up out of the land of Egypt.” The Nile and Euphrates shall be made passable by dividing their beds into seven small streams (Isaiah 11:15), and the desert, (according to Jeremiah 31:21), by setting up signs and way marks, and preparing the road. Especially in Isaiah 43:19 sq.; Isaiah 48:21 it is promised that those returning home shall enjoy abundance of water in the desert. Thus then our passage sees in the wilderness the chief territory for the march of the home-returning Israelites. The desert shall conform to the blessed people that wander through it. It will change its nature. Hitherto a place of curse, abode of demons (Isaiah 34:14), it will become a place of blessing, a paradise.
The principle of a higher, spiritual, eternal life, the principle of glorification will become operative in it. This idea of the glorification of nature is peculiar to Isaiah (see Isaiah 4:2; Isaiah 6:3; Isaiah 11:7 sqq.). ηλφμϊ translated “rose,” occurs only here and Son 2:1. It is variously translated rose, lily, narcissus, crocus. That it denotes some sort of bulbous plant appears from αֶּ ?φֶ ?μ (Numbers 11:5) which means “onion.” η is often used to form quadraliterals, comp. ηֲ ?πָ ?ξָ ?μ ,ηִ ?γֶּ ?χֶ ?μ, Gesen.,Thes., p. 436. Some suppose that the meadow-saffron, colchicum autumnale is meant, because the Syriac translates the word chamzaloito (see Gesen.,Comm. in loc.). But it seems impossible that such a poisonous weed could be meant here and Son 2:1.
If a bulbous plant is meant, it may (distinguished from ωׁ ?εֹ ?ωַׁ ?πָּ ?δ, the lilium candidum, the λείριον of the Greeks), be the lilium bulbiferum, the fire lily (comp. Plin.Hist. nat. XXI.5, 11, est et rubens lilium, quod Graeciκρίνονvocant). In fact the LXX., translate it here by κρίνον. But it might even be the narcissus, “the miraculous flower, at the sight of which gods and men wonder, that raises itself out of the earth with a hundred heads, whose fragrance rejoices heaven, sea and earth” (Viktor Hehn,Kulturpflanzen, u. Hausthiere, Berlin, 1870, p. 164).
Arnold (Herz.,R.- Encycl., XI. p. 25) holds this view. [The translation “rose” is true to the poetry if not to the botany.—Barnes, J. A. Alexander]. But however this may be, the meaning is, that the entire steppe, covered with the bloom of this flower, shall appear like one single individual flower of the sort. Lebanon, (see list) Sharon (ibid.) and Carmel appear united, Isaiah 33:9, as types of the most glorious vegetation δֵ ?ξָּ ?δ must be referred to the gloriously adorned meadows. For just because they are honored with beholding the glory of God, they must themselves appear in adornment to suit.
3. Strengthen—the desert.Isaiah 35:3-6. The Prophet Isaiah 35:3 addresses his own word of encouragement to the returning ones, and then Isaiah 35:4 prescribes to them the words with which they are to reassure any that are dismayed (see on Isaiah 32:4 where the word is used for hurry in judging), to whom the undertaking may seem too bold and daring. The words “be strong, fear not” are evidently borrowed from Deuteronomy 31:6 (comp. 2 Chronicles 32:7). How can Israel fear since the Lord their God hastens to them to visit vengeance on the enemy and to redeem His people!
What is said Isaiah 35:5-6 of opening eyes, ears and tongues, and of the free use of members before crippled, we will need to understand as much in a spiritual as in a corporeal sense. For the “hasty of heart,” Isaiah 35:4, proves that also spirit and spiritual defects on the part of the returning Israelites are still to be removed. And λּ ?χη is the specific technical term for opening the eyes generally (only once of the ears Isaiah 42:20) and for opening the spiritual eyes in particular (Isaiah 37:17; Isaiah 42:7). [“As Henderson justly says, there is no proof whatever that Christ refers John the Baptist to this prophecy (Matthew 11:5; Luke 7:22): He employs none of the formulas which He uniformly uses when directing attention to the Old Testament (e.g., in Matthew 9:16; Matthew 11:10; Matthew 12:17; Matthew 13:14), but simply appeals to His miracles in proof of His Messiahship: the language is similar, but the subjects differ. To the question, whether this prediction is in no sense applicable to our Saviour’s miracles, we may reply with Calvin, that though they are not directly mentioned, they were really an emblem and example of the great change which is here described. So, too, the spiritual cures effected by the gospel, although not specifically signified by these words, are included in the glorious revolution which they do describe.—J. A. Alexander].
The clause Isaiah 35:6 b. gives a reason, not specially for the healing of the dumb, lame, etc., but in general for the exhortation to be of good cheer that is given to those returning, and to rejoice that is given to the desert itself from Isaiah 35:1 onwards. Abundance of water shall be given in the desert. This explains why the desert is to flourish and rejoice, and those that journey through it should be of good cheer. πλχς “to break out” (comp. at Isaiah 48:21) stands in the well-known metonymic sense as elsewhere (see list). But this verse forms at the same time the transition to what follows, viz.: the more particular description of the road, by which the redeemed shall return.
4. And the parched—flee away.Isaiah 35:7-10. [ωׁ ?ψπ it is now agreed denotes the illusive appearance often witnessed both at sea and land, called in English looming, in Italian fata morgana, and in French mirage. In the deserts of Arabia and Africa, the appearance presented is precisely that of an extended sheet of water, tending not only to mislead the traveller, but to aggravate his thirst by disappointment. “More deceitful than mirage” (or serab) is an Arabian proverb. The word (which occurs again in the Old Testament only Isaiah 49:10) adds a beautiful stroke to the description, not only by its local propriety, but by its strict agreement with the context. Comp. J. A. Alex., and Barnes,in loc.Herz.,R.-Encycl. XXI., p. 607. Curtius, Isaiah 7:5; Isaiah 7:3-4.—Tr.].
This torture shall not be experienced by the returning Israelites. Instead of the mocking atmospheric illusion there shall be an actual lake, and the dry region shall become a region of bubbling (ξαες) springs. Where before was only the lair of jackals, there Israel will bivouac as in a place where now is a green spot hedged in for cane and reed. The Prophet has in mind his own description Isaiah 34:13 b.On ψαφδ and ηφιψ see Text and Gram. By the construction defended there we see that the Prophet explains why a former lair of jackals has now become fit for a resting place. It has become a fence enclosure for reed and cane.
Once dry, it is now moist; so much so that plants requiring great moisture grow there. Wherever the moisture extends these plants grow. Their station, therefore, being sharply defined, may be called really a septum, a hedge. But this is a natural fence, not artificial; depending on organic life, not on stone walls. It is well remarked by Gesenius (Thes. p. 512) that the meanings of ηφιψ and ηֵ ?φָ ?ψ hang together. For the nomadic ηφψ extends exactly as far as there is ηφιψ.
So also the Greek χόρτος (by which the LXX. generally translate ηφιψ) is at once fodder, grass and fence, court (comp. hortus and chors, cors, cohors). We may then in the text take ηφιψ as having the additional notion of the natural hedge, the district of vegetation. χπδ “cane” see Isaiah 19:6. βξΰ, properly the papyrus reed (see on Isaiah 18:2) stands here for rushes generally (Job 8:11). Isaiah 35:8. The Lord’s care extends further: He will make in the desert an embanked highway, a causeway; an impossible construction for men! (= ξρμδξρμεμsee list) is ἅπ. λεγ. The expression “a highway and a way” is plainly a hendiadys. This way shall be holy.
The Lord built it and destined it to lead to His house. It is a pilgrim way. Hence nothing unclean, neither unclean person nor thing, may come up on it; it belongs only to them, i. e., the Israelites, which notion here, as well as in ψαφδ (see Text and Gram.), must be regarded as ideally present. Another advantage of this via sacra is that even the simple-minded (“Thumbe”), cannot go astray on it. For whoever goes on it is a sanctified one, under God’s protection and care. δμκγψκ is in contrast with μΰιςαψπεθξΰ: an unclean person will not cross the way, but as regards him who goes, i.e., who has once entered on the way,—even fools will not go astray. All that can make unclean or occasion danger will remain at a distance from the holy way. (Comp. comm. on Isaiah 43:20), Instead of that, redeemed, and only they shall journey on it.
Hence the way will be a, or rather the way of salvation. Isaiah 35:10, which is identical with Isaiah 51:11, defines the goal of the travellers and the success of their journey.
The ransomed of the Lord will return home. The idea ωׁ ?εּ ?α in all its modifications plays a great part in Isaiah and Jeremiah. Comp. on Isaiah 7:3; Isaiah 10:20-22; Jeremiah 3:1; Jeremiah 31:22. Joy and peace as the promised blessings (Deuteronomy 28:2; Deuteronomy 28:15) the redeemed shall receive, but sorrow and sighing shall flee. [On their headsmay be an expression denoting that joy is manifest in the face and aspect. Gesenius, Barnes.]
Footnotes:Be glad desert—rejoice steppe, etc.Bloom, bloom let it.is given.Hob. tasty.disconcertedvengeance comes, recompense of God! He conies that He may save you,mirage.In the habitation of jackals is their encampment, an enclosure for reeds and rushes.Or, a court for reeds, etc.Or, for he shall be with them.redeemed ones. AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 34:1-4. Because Revelation 6:12-17 has express reference to this passage, some would conclude that the Prophet here has in view only that special event of the world’s judgment (the opening of the sixth seal). But that is not justified.
For other passages of the New Testament that do not specially relate to the opening of the sixth seal are based on this passage (Matthew 24:29; 2 Peter 3:7 sqq.; Revelation 14:11; Revelation 19:11 sqq.). It appears from this that the present passage is, as it were, a magazine from which New Testament prophecy has drawn its material for more than one event of fulfilment.
2. On Isaiah 34:16. The word of God can bear the closest scrutiny. Indeed it desires and demands it. If men would only examine the Scriptures diligently and with an unclouded mind and love of truth, “whether these things are so,” as did the Bereans (Acts 17:11; John 5:39)!
3. On Isaiah 35:3. “The Christian church is the true Lazaretto in which may be found a crowd of weary, sick, lame and wretched people. Therefore, Christ is the Physician Himself (Matthew 9:12) who binds up and heals those suffering from neglect (Ezekiel 34:16; Isaiah 61:1). And His word cures all (Wis 16:12). His servants, too, are commissioned officially to admonish the rude, to comfort the timid, to bear the weak, and be patient with all (1 Thessalonians 5:14). Therefore, whoever feels weak, let him betake himself to this Bethania; there he will find counsel for his soul,” Cramer.4. [On Isaiah 35:8-9. “They who enter the path that leads to life, find there no cause of alarm.
Their fears subside; their apprehensions of punishment on account of their sins die away, and they walk that path with security and confidence. There is nothing in that way to alarm them; and though there are many foes—fitly represented by lions and wild beasts—lying about the way, yet no one is permitted to ‘go up thereon.’ This is a most beautiful image of the safety of the people of God, and of their freedom from all enemies that could annoy them.” “The path here referred to is appropriately designed only for the redeemed of the Lord. It is not for the profane, the polluted, the hypocrite. It is not for those who live for this world, or for those who love pleasure more than they love God. The church should not be entered except by those, who have evidence that they are redeemed. None should make a profession of religion who have no evidence that they belong to “the redeemed,” and who are not disposed to walk in the way of holiness.
But for all such it is a highway on which they are to travel. It is made by leveling hills and elevating valleys; across the sandy desert and through the wilderness of this world, infested with the enemies of God and His people. It is made straight and plain, so that none need err; it is defended from enemies, so that all may be safe; because ‘He,’ their Leader and Redeemer, shall go with them and guard that way.” Barnes in loc.]
FIFTH PIECES: THE OF THE AND THE FOR THE PERIOD.
Isaiah 36-39These four chapters run parallel with 2 Kings 18:13 to 2 Kings 20:19. It is not hard to see why they are here. Chaps. 36 and 37 represent to us the contemporaneous fulfilment of the prophecies relating to Assyria. Chaps, 38 and 39 show how “from afar” (ξψηεχ) was begun the spinning of the first threads of that web of Babylonish complications that were at last so fatal. There is good internal ground for putting side by side these two retrospective and prospective histories, which Delitzsch aptly compares to the head of Janus. It is, moreover, natural that the retrospective should come before the prospective piece.
But researches among the Assyrian monuments have established beyond doubt that the overthrow of Sennacherib did not occur in the fourteenth, but in the twenty-eighth year of Hezekiah; therefore not in 714 B. C., but in 700 B.C.
According to the annals and according to the Canon of Ptolemy, Sargon ascended also the throne of Babylon in 709 B. C. (see on Isaiah 38:1). For the latter calls the year 709 the first of Ἀρκέανος, i.e., Sargon, Therefore Sennacherib cannot possibly have reigned as early as 714. The lists of regencies (comp. Schrader, p. 331, 268 sqq.) say distinctly that Sennacherib, after the murder of his father on the 12th Ab (July) of the year 705, ascended the throne. Lenormant, as learned as he is positive in his opinions (Les prem. civilis, 2. p. 237) says: “In fact the attack of Sennacherib on the kingdom of Judah is fixed in a precise way at the third campaign of that king and at the year 700 B.
C. by the text of the annals of his reign inscribed on a cylinder of baked earth possessed by the British Museum. It is said, in fact, that it precedes by one year the installation of Asurnadinzum as viceroy in Babylon, an event which, in the astronomical Canon of Ptolemy, is inscribed in 699. Consequently the expedition against Judah took place in the twenty-eighth and not in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah.” It appears not clearly made out whether Sennacherib’s expedition against Judah occurred in 701 or in 700. Lenormant says 700, but Schrader (l. c.) is still in doubt. The difference is unessential. It appears to be occasioned by different computations of the beginnings of the years.
I will follow that of Lenormant.
Now while it appears that chaps. 36 and 37 relate the events of 700 B. C., or of the twenty-eighth year of Hezekiah’s reign, it is equally certain chaps 38 and 39 relate the events of 714, or of the fourteenth year of Hezekiah. For according to Isaiah 38:5 (see comm. in loc.) the Lord prolongs Hezekiah’s life fifteen years. We know also from 2 Kings 21:1 (2 Chronicles 33:1) that Manasseh was twelve years old when he succeeded his father Hezekiah. From this results that he could only have been born after the seventeenth year of Hezekiah’s reign. In the fourteenth then he was not yet born.
And this explains both the grief of Hezekiah (Isaiah 38:3) and his great joy (Isaiah 38:19). But the following considerations show that Hezekiah’s sickness and recovery and the embassy from Babylon did not occur before Sennacherib’s overthrow: 1) The treasury chambers, still full, in contrast with 2 Kings 18:14 sqq. (see Isaiah 39:2 and comm.). Had this been the spoil of an enemy, Hezekiah would have displayed it as such, and the Prophet (see comm. at Isaiah 39:6) would not have called it “that which thy fathers have laid up in store.” 2) The deliverance from Assyria is spoken of as in the future (Isaiah 38:6). 3) We do not find in Hezekiah’s psalm (Psalms 39:10 sqq.) the slightest reference to the miraculous deliverance spoken of in 36 and 37 which would be inexplicable if that glorious event were a thing of the past.
Accordingly it appears that chaps. 36–39 are not chronologically arranged, but according to their contents, as already explained. [On the misunderstandings to which this has led and the possible change of the captions, see Introduction, § § 3,4. The important question arises: which of these records is the original one—this in Isaiah 36-39, or the parallel one in 2 Kings 18:13 to 2 Kings 20:19? It seems to me that no impartial reader can remain in doubt on this subject. The text of the Book of Kings is the older.
This appears probable from the fact that it is more comprehensive and stands in an historical book. For as certainly as prophecy needs history, so certainly it needs only such facts as verify its fulfilment. And the presumption is that this in Isaiah being the shorter, has been abbreviated for the ends of a prophetic book. Moreover it is better to think, if any alterations must be admitted, that they are of the nature of abbreviations, rather than arbitrary additions, which is the alternative, if the shorter text be regarded as the older. These probabilities become certainties when we view the difference in these passages in concreto. The differences on the part of Isaiah form two chief classes, abbreviations and corrections.
Additions, i.e., where the text in Isaiah gives something more than the Book of Kings, there are none, except the psalm of thanksgiving, Isaiah 38:9-20. But this exception proves the rule. For it proves that the author of each book had in view his own object. Such a psalm suits better in a prophetic book to which song and prayer are kindred elements, than to historic annals. Moreover this psalm is so far important that it proves that, beside the two writings before us, there must have existed a third, that probably served as the source of both.
The abbreviations in Isaiah’s text are of two sorts. They are partly the omission of historical data that seemed unsuited to the aim of the prophetic book. To this sort belong Isaiah 36:1-2; Isaiah 37:36; Isaiah 38:4-7 (where the whole text is much contracted). And partly also they are omissions of rhetorical and grammatical redundancies. Such are Isaiah 36:2; Isaiah 36:6-7; Isaiah 36:11-14; Isaiah 36:17; Isaiah 37:4 (comp. Isaiah 36:17; Isaiah 39:2), 11, 21, 25; Isaiah 39:2.
I will refer for the particulars to the following commentary. But here I will call special attention to a few passages. Can any one deny that the accumulation of predicates in 2 Kings 18:17 b ειςμεειαΰειψεωμινειςμεειαΰεειςξγε are contracted into one word in Isaiah 36:2, wherein, besides, ιςξγε must become ιςξγִ because Isaiah leaves out two of the three ambassadors? Or can it be denied that the picturesque, circumstantial ειγαψειΰξψ of Kings has been contracted to the simple ειΰξψ, Isaiah 36:13? Or must the editor of 2 Kings 18:29 have added the surprising ξιγε? Did not rather the editor of the Isaiah text leave that word out because it was superfluous for him and seemed harsh?
But still more common are the differences that are due to corrections. They are the following: Isaiah 36:5; Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 36:10-11; Isaiah 36:13; Isaiah 36:15; Isaiah 36:19; Isaiah 36:21; Isaiah 37:2; Isaiah 37:6; Isaiah 37:9; Isaiah 37:12-15; Isaiah 37:17-19; Isaiah 37:23-24; Isaiah 37:26-27; Isaiah 37:29-30; Isaiah 37:32; Isaiah 37:34-37; Isaiah 38:2-3; Isaiah 39:1-3; Isaiah 39:5-8. I will notice here the following: Isaiah 36:5 we have ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ϊִּ ?ι instead of ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ϊָּ. The latter—though at first sight strange—is undoubtedly correct (see comm.). Can δξχεν have come from δΰψυ (2 Kings 18:25 and Isaiah 36:10), or εδηψιωε 2 Kings 18:36, have come from ειηψιωε, Isaiah 36:21? Is the ειηψιωε of Isaiah 39:8 changed into δֲ ?μֹ ?ΰΰִ ?ν 2 Kings 20:19?
These few examples and the others that are commented on more at length in the exposition below seem to prove irrefragably that we have in 2 Kings a more original text. Delitzsch (in Drechsler’s Comm. ii. p. 151 sqq. and in his own Comm., p. 373) is certainly right in saying that our chapters were not composed by the author of the Book of Kings himself, or drawn from the annals of the kingdom. I agree perfectly with his explanation of the difference between annalistic and prophetic writing of history, and according to which he ascribes our chapters to a prophetic source. I also quite agree with him, that an account composed by Isaiah must essentially be that source. For he justly appeals to the fact that, according to 2 Chronicles 26:22, Isaiah wrote a history of king Uzziah, and elsewhere weaves historical accounts into his prophecies (7, 8, 20), and in them speaks of himself partly in the third person, as he does in 36–39 I moreover willingly admit that the mention of the locality Isaiah 36:2, on account of almost literal agreement, connects with Isaiah 7:3, in fact presupposes it. And finally I have no objection to the statement that the author of 2 Kings had Isaiah’s book before him, and that 2 Kings 16:5 compared with Isaiah 7:1, may be adduced as proof.
I even add to this that the two passages now reviewed are proof of this. For the author of 2 Kings could have accepted for his book the arrangement according to the contents and contrary to the chronology, only on the ground of the book of prophecy that lay before him. But I must controvert the view that 2 Kings 18:13-30 is drawn from Isaiah 36-39 as its source. For reasons already given I think the text of 2 Kings the more original and better.
Isaiah may have written down an account of the remarkable events of which our chapters treat, a matter that is at least highly probable. From this source was first drawn what we have in 36–39. These chapters are so suitable and even necessary where they are, that we may refer the idea of them to the Prophet himself, and even admit that he directed his account to be adopted into his book of prophecy, not unaltered, but with a suitable transposition of events and abbreviation of the text. Both were done, but the latter not quite in the sense of the Prophet. The result was as described in the Introduction, § § 3, 4 (at the end). But we must not suppose the false dates of Isa 36:1; Isaiah 38:1; Isaiah 39:1 were put by this first editor.
The author of the Book of Kings, too, who wrote in the exile (probably 562–536 B. C.) must have known the right relations of these chapters and the proper dates. For he had at the same time before him that historical account of the Prophet as his source, and reproduced it more perfectly and unaltered than his predecessors that had used it for the prophetic book. Possibly, while following the order of Isaiah, he may have retained the original dates of their common source. But in time, and for reasons easily conjectured, his text would experience the same alterations as to dates as did the parallel passages in Isaiah, and perhaps by the same hand. And if, in respect to chronological arrangement of the account, the Book of Kings differed from the prophetic book and agreed with their common original source, then it is probable that a later hand, perhaps the same that changed the dates in Isaiah, brought the Book of Kings in this respect into accord with the prophetic book.
Thus it is found, that the transposition of events in the prophetic book for material reasons has become the origin of that discrepancy between the Assyrian and Bible chronology of this historical epoch. We have seen in respect to the taking of Samaria that these two sources completely agree. Also for Manasseh’s time the agreement is satisfactory. Only for Hezekiah’s time there existed this fatal difference of fourteen years in reference to the all-important event of Sennacherib’s overthrow. This difference is seeming. It dissolves when we consider the misunderstandings occasioned by the transposition of the chapters.
So it can have been. I do not say that it must have been so. For in these ancient matters we will hardly be able ever to make out the exact course things have taken. Only that chap 36–39 are not derived from Isaiah in their present form, but have proceeded by alteration and abbreviation from the original account of Isaiah seems to me certain.Delitzsch, in proof of the authenticity of the present text of Isaiah, appeals to 2 Chronicles 32:32 : “in the vision of Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, (and) in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel.” He finds in this that “an historical account of Hezekiah out of the collection of Isaiah’s prophecies with the superscription ηζεο passed over into the “book of the kings of Judah and Israel.” I admit that the words of the Chronicler have this sense, which is favored by 2 Chronicles 20:34. But what is gained by that? Only that then, when the Chronicler wrote, the books of Isaiah and Kings were in existence, and that he supposed the text in Kings to be taken from Isaiah.
He might have been moved to take this view by the recognized priority of Isaiah’s book, and by the conviction that Isaiah was certainly the author of the text contained in his book. But this view of the Chronicler does not weaken the fact that the text in 2 Kings is more original and purer than that in Isaiah.
It has been objected to the claim of originality for the text in 2 Kings, that 2 Kings 24:18 to 2 Kings 25:30, although the original text, is still more corrupt than the parallel text, Jeremiah 52. This is in general true (see my comm. on Jeremiah 52:1). But there one sees that the text of 2 Kings, being the older and more disintegrated, is, on account of adverse experiences, less preserved. But the text of Isaiah 36-39, on the contrary, has not become worse in process of time and by unfavorable circumstances, but it is from its origin worse through the faulty epitomizing and unfortunate emendations of its author.
The division of the chapters is very simple. Embassies play a great part in them. Chapters 36 and 37 contain the conclusion of the relations between Israel and Assyria. This first part has six subdivisions. 1) The embassy of Sennacherib to Hezekiah, chap. 36. 2) The embassy of Hezekiah to Isaiah, Isaiah 37:1-7. 3) The writing of Sennacherib to Hezekiah, Isaiah 37:8-13. 4) Hezekiah’s prayer, Isaiah 37:14-20. 5) Isaiah’s message to Hezekiah, Isaiah 37:21-35, 6) The deliverance, Isaiah 37:36-38. The second part that paves the way for the relations to Babylon has three subdivisions: 1) Hezekiah’s sickness and recovery, chap. 38. (a. sickness, Isaiah 36:1-3; b. recovery, Isaiah 36:4-8; psalm of thanksgiving, Isaiah 36:9-20 [22]). 2) The Babylonian embassy, Isaiah 39:1-8.
____________________
I.—THE OF THE OF ISRAEL TO ASSYRIAIsaiah 36, 371. THE EMBASSY OF TO
Isaiah 36:1-221 Now it came to pass in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah, that Sennacherib king of Assyria came up against all the defenced cities of Judah, and took them. 2And the king of Assyria sent Rabshakeh from Lachish unto Jerusalem unto king Hezekiah with a great army. And he stood by the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller’s field. 3Then came forth unto him Eliakim, Hilkiah’s son, which was over the house, and Shebna thescribe, and Joah, Asaph’s son, the recorder.
4And Rabshakeh said unto them, Say ye now to Hezekiah, Thus saith the great 5king, the king of Assyria, What confidence is this wherein thou trustest? I say, sayest thou, (but they are but vain words) I have counsel and strength for war: now on whom dost thou trust, that thou rebellest against me? 6Lo, thou trustest in the staff of this broken reed, on Egypt; whereon if a man lean, it will go into his hand, and pierce it: so is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all that trust in him. 7But if thou say to me, We trust in the Lord our God: is it not he, whose high places and whose altars Hezekiah hath taken away, and said to Judah and to Jerusalem, 8Ye shall worship before this altar? Now therefore give pledges, I pray thee, to my master the king of Assyria, and I will give thee two thousand horses, if thou be able on thy part to set riders upon them. 9How then wilt thou turn away the face of one captain of the least of my master’s servants, and put thy trust on Egypt for chariots and for horsemen? 10And am I now come up without the Lord against this land to destroy it? The Lord said unto me, Go up against this land, and destroy it.
11Then said Eliakim and Shebna and Joah unto Rabshakeh, Speak, I pray thee, unto thy servants in the Syrian language; for we understand it: and speak not to us in the Jews’ language, in the ears of the people that are on the wall. 12But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?
13Then Rabshakeh stood, and cried with a loud voice iin the Jews’ language, and said, Hear ye the words of the great king, the king of Assyria. 14Thus saith the king, Let not Hezekiah deceive you: for he shall not be able to deliver you. 15Neither let Hezekiah make you trust in the Lord, saying, The Lord will surely deliver us: this city shall not be delivered into the hand of the king of Assyria. 16Hearken not to Hezekiah: for thus saith the king of Assyria, Make an agreement with me by a present, and come out to me: and eat ye every one of his vine, and every one of his fig tree, and drink ye every one the waters of his own cistern; 17Until I come and take you away to a land like your own land, a land of corn and 18wine, a land of bread and vineyards. Beware lest Hezekiah persuade you, saying, The Lord will deliver us. Hath any of the gods of the nations delivered his land out 19of the hand of the king of Assyria? Where are the gods of Hamath and Arphad? where are the gods of Sepharvaim? and have they delivered Samaria out of my 20hand? Who are they among all the gods of these lands, that have delivered their land out of my hand, that the Lord should deliver Jerusalem out of my hand? 21But they held their peace, and answered him not a word: for the king’s command ment was, saying, Answer him not. 22Then came Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah, that was over the household, and Shebna the 1ascribe, and Joah, the son of Asaph the recorder, to Hezekiah with their clothes rent, and told him the words of Rabshakeh.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_36:2. The form ηֵ ?ιμ occurs only here and 2 Kings 18:17 as stat. absol. Yet comp. ηֵ ?μ, which differs in meaning Isaiah 26:1.—λαγ in the sense of “considerable for number,” comp. Numbers 20:20; 1 Kings 3:9; 1 Kings 10:2; 2 Kings 6:14.—ιςξγ, abbreviated compared with 2 Kings 18:17 b.; see introduction to this chapter. 2 Kings 18:18 begins with “And when they had called to the king,” which are wanting here in accordance with the tendency to abbreviate.
Isaiah 36:5. Instead of ΰξψϊι 2 Kings has ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ϊָּ. I regard the latter as the correct reading, and that in Isaiah to be a correction, occasioned by not knowing that ΰκγαψωׂ ?λּ ?ϊιν is parenthetical, and thus not understanding how Hezekiah could speak words that in the mouth of the Assyrian king could have good sense, but in Hezekiah’s none. According to the question Isaiah 36:4, “what confidence,” etc.? the contents of this confidence is set forth: “thou sayest namely: counsel and strength for war.” The words ΰκγΧωׁ ?Χ are parenthetical, and words of the Assyrian, by which he gives his opinion of the expression imputed to Hezekiah. This expression is put as an exclamation, thus as a clause without explicit predicate. This is a somewhat pathetic form of sentence.
It reveals an intention of making Hezekiah’s words appear to be empty pathos, absurd boastfulness. If the entire first clause of verse 5 were to be construed as the utterance of the Assyrian, then the second clause must begin withλִּ ?ι instead of ςϊδ. For then a reason would need to follow showing Hezekiah’s words to be empty boast. But if Isaiah 36:5 a contain in its chief clause Hezekiah’s words, then ςϊδ is perfectly in place. For then by means of it Hezekiah is summoned to establish his (so-called) boast. Come, now! in what dost thou trust that thou rebellest against me?
Isaiah 36:6. ςϊδ before δπδ, and μκ after αθηϊ are missing here for abbreviation’s sake.—ΰωׁ ?ψιρξκεβιis paratactic.
Isaiah 36:7. ϊΰξψ for ϊΰξψεο and the omission of αιψεωμιν at the end of the verse are further marks of simplifying and abbreviating.
Isaiah 36:8. μְ ?κָ after μϊϊ evidently means “to thy advantage.” It is dat. commodi: meaning, “thou mayest use these horses for your advantage against me, in case you can mount them with riders.”
Isaiah 36:9. δωιαλּ ?πιν elsewhere means “to turn away, refuse,” in reference to suppliants (comp. 1 Kings 2:16-17; 1 Kings 2:20). Only here is it used of turning away an attack. But comp. Isaiah 14:27.—λֶּ ?ηָ ?δ, which occurs first 1 Kings 10:15, of Solomon’s λּ ?ηεϊδΰψυ, i.e., governors of the land, has been since Benfey (Monatsnamen, p. 195), derived from the Sanscrit, from pakscha, socius, amicus. But Schrader (p. 88 sq.) places the Semitic origin of the word beyond doubt. He lays stress on its appearance in such ancient Hebrew documents, and maintains that this is proved by the Assyrian documents. “In Assyrian the word is used and modified like any other word of pure Semitic origin. From a singular pahat is formed a plural pahati; not less immediately from the root the abstract pihat = satrapy.” The word does not occouragain in Isaiah; but does in Jeremiah 51:23; Jeremiah 51:28; Jeremiah 51:57; Ezekiel 23:6; Ezekiel 23:23; Haggai 1:1; Haggai 1:14; Haggai 2:2; Haggai 2:21; Malachi 1:8.—Preceding εϊαθη there is no explicit verbal form on which the vav consecutive can support itself; but the Prophet connects it with the implied affirmation “thou canst thyself do nothing.”
Isaiah 36:10. 2 Kings 18:25 begins withoutεְ. The εςϊδ here is likely imitated from Isaiah 36:7-9. But Isaiah 36:10 is not parallel with what precedes. For the Assyrian here turns their weapons against them. Hence the reading in 2 Kings is the correct one. Moreover the first clause of Isa 36:10 has ςμΞδΰψυ instead of ςμΞδξχεν 2 Kings 18:25, which also appears to be a correction, occasioned either by the thought that Sennacherib did not come up merely against Jerusalem, or by the fact that δΰψυ stands also in the second clause, or both. That ςμ is exchanged here for ΰμ is of inferior significance (comp. Isaiah 39:9).
Isaiah 36:12. The consonants of the K’thibh, according to the view hitherto prevalent (comp. e.g., Fuerst in the Propylaea Masor�, p.1366), are to be pointed ηַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν (2 Kings 18:27 ηֲ ?ψֵ ?δֶ ?ν) which word implies a singular ηֶ ?ψֶ ?ΰ. But Delitzsch points ηֲ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν or ηֲ ?ψָ ?ιδֶ ?ν taking ηֲ ?ψִ ?ι as the ground form, which is quite possible. The word occurs beside only 2 Kings 6:25, where perhaps simply ηֲ ?ψִ ?ιιεֹ ?πִ ?ιν is to be read. The meaning is stercus, excrementum. For the Masorets the expression is indecent.
Hence they substitute φεִ ?ΰָ ?ϊָ ?ν (from φֹ ?ΰָ ?δ = ιְ ?φֹ ?ΰָ ?δ exeuntia, comp. Isaiah 4:4; Isaiah 28:8; Proverbs 30:12); as immediately afterwards for ωֵׁ ?ιβֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν (from ωַׁ ?ιִ ?ο Plur. ωֵׁ ?ιπִ ?ιν, urina, only here and 2 Kings 18:27) they put ξֵ ?ιξֵ ?ιψַ ?βְ ?μֵּ ?ιδֶ ?ν.
Isaiah 36:11-12. The differences between the present readings and 2 Kings are inconsiderable. In verse 11 “son of Hilkiah” is omitted, ΰμιπε before ιδεγιϊinstead of ςξπε (a correction because the latter seemed too familiar). In verse 12 ΰμιδν is omitted before Rabshakeh; we have δΰμ instead of δςμ before ΰγπικ (in order to restore likeness of expression when there is likeness of meaning; 2 Kings however would avoid the many ΰֵ ?μ)ηψΰιδν instead of ηψιδν (the ΰ in Isaiah being intended likely to make the etymology more noticeable). Here then appears a tendency to abbreviate and correct.
Isaiah 36:13-14. πָ ?ωָׁ ?ΰ, unused in Kal, may be used in the Hiph., also in the direct causative sense, and hence may mean “to cause πֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ΰ, i.e., fraudem, deception,” which explains the construction (here and Jeremiah 29:8) with the dative, along with the construction with the accusative (Genesis 3:13; Jeremiah 37:9; 2 Kings 19:10, etc.).—In Isaiah 36:13 the πιγαψ of 2 Kings 18:28 omitted as superfluous: we have, γαψι instead of γαψ because they are many words. Isaiah 36:14 does not end as 2 Kings 18:29 with ξιγε, which is both abbreviation and removal of the harshness of combining “let not Hezekiah deceive,” which are the words of the king and “from his hand,” which are spoken by the ambassador.
Isaiah 36:15. δςιψ gives an easier construction than ΰϊΞδςιψ2 Kings 18, though the latter is the correct reading. As to the third pers. fem. ϊπϊο see 1 Samuel 30:6; 2 Samuel 13:2; Psalms 33:9; Lamentations 3:37. On ιַ ?αְ ?θη comp. Jeremiah 28:15; Jeremiah 29:31.
Isaiah 36:16. ΰִ ?λְ ?μεּ εּ ?ωְׁ ?ϊεּ are imperatives by attraction of those preceding and supply the place of Futures.
Isaiah 36:17-18. The end of the verse shows considerable abbreviation compared with 2 Kings 18:32, which see. Isaiah omits the description of the land of exile as superfluous, and also the repetition of the warning against Hezekiah.—λּ ?ο beginning Isaiah 36:18, (occasioned by the omission last mentioned), stands here independent of any foregoing verb, of which there are other examples (Job 36:18; Jeremiah 51:46).—δִ ?ρִ ?ιϊ or δֵ ?ρִ ?ιϊ properly means “stimulare, to incite, set on,” from which develops the meaning “seduce, deceive” (comp. Joshua 15:18; 1 Samuel 26:19; 2 Samuel 24:1).—The omission of ηַ ?φֵ ?μ found in the parallel of 2 Kings 18:33 is again a plain proof of abbreviation.
Isaiah 36:19. If the text of the second clause be correct (εְ ?λִ ?ι here instead of the simple λִּ ?ι 2 Kings 18:34), the construction is bold and unusual. The subject of δφιμε is wanting and must be supplied from what precedes. It might be, say: εְ ?ΰַ ?ιֵ ?δΰμδιΰϊΞωׁ ?ξψεο or ιωׂ ?ψΰμ?—Isaiah omits the words δֵ ?πַ ?ςεְ ?ςִ ?εָּ ?δ that appear in 2 Kings 18:34. These words are in both texts, Isaiah 37:13 and 2 Kings 19:13. Delitzsch supposes they are patched into 2 Kings from Isaiah 37:13.
Tome it seems more probable that they were purposely omitted in our verse. For consider that Isaiah 37:10-13 Hezekiah is addressed. There it is said: “Let thy God not deceive thee; where is the king of Hamath,” etc.? Thus the sense there is: it will be no better for thee, king Hezekiah, than for the king of Hamath, etc. But Isaiah 36:14-20 the people are addressed: Let not Hezekiah deceive you by pointing you to Jehovah’s help. Where are the gods of Hamath, etc.?
Readers that construed the words δπςεςεδ as verbs (see on Isaiah 37:13) must have found it as improper to say: deos expulit et subvertit, as they found it proper to say: regem expulit et subvertit.Isaiah 36:20. The plural δφιμε does not conflict with ξι, for this interrogative is found only in the singular: this singular may be taken as collective.—λִּ ?ι, after a question referring to the future, may be taken in the sense of ut; but fundamentally it means quod, and has a causal sense: Who has delivered? Are there any way gods (beside the Assyrian gods) that deliver? because (according to your opinion) Jehovah will deliver Jerusalem.—[“The parallel 2 Kings 18:35 omits these before lands; another exception to the general statement that the narrative of Isaiah is an abridgement.—J. A. A.].
Isaiah 36:21. ειηψιωׁ ?ε instead of εδηψιֹ ?ωεδςν of 2 Kings 18:36. Hezekiah had commanded his representatives to make no response. With that ειδψιωׁ ?ε corresponds. The reading of 2 Kings is usually translated: “and they kept silence, the people,” ςν being construed in apposition. Rather than this strange construction I think a more probable rendering is: “and they hushed the people.” ηָ ?ψַ ?ωׁ means mutum esse, silere (Psalms 28:1; Psalms 35:22; Psalms 1:3, etc). Hiphil means first mutum reddere, ad silentium redigere aliquem.
Yet it is true that it occurs seldom in this sense (Job 11:3). Usually Hiphil is direct causative=“mutitatem facere, to make silence, to be silent.” Here, “they made the people be silent” would imply that many of them wanted to reply to the words of Isa 36:12 sqq., but that Hezekiah’s messengers, even before Rabshakeh had finished, had commanded silence and themselves made no response. According to this the perfect εδδψιωׁ ?ε does not merely continue the recital, but states an accompanying circumstance that had already occurred before Rabshakeh had done speaking. But the reviser of Isaiah’s text was not acquainted with this meaning of the Perfect [!]. He thought the word meant only to continue the recital. Therefore he changed it to the Imperfect with Vav consec.Isaiah 36:22. χψεςιαβγιν, the participle in the construct state retains the construction of its verb with the accusative; comp. 2 Samuel 13:31.
AND 1. In the fourteenth year (after the sickness of) Hezekiah Sennacherib conquered all Judea excepting the capital. He sent Rabshakeh from Lacish with a considerable array to demand the surrender of the latter. Rabshakeh first seeks to convince the messengers of Hezekiah that they could rely neither on Egypt (Isaiah 36:6), nor on Jehovah (Isaiah 36:7), nor on their own might (Isaiah 36:8-9), especially as the king of Assyria had undertaken his expedition against Judea by Jehovah’s express commission (Isaiah 36:10). These words he had spoken in the dialect of Judea. Hezekiah’s messengers having requested him to speak in Aramaic (Isaiah 36:11), Rabshakeh answered that his mission was properly just to the dwellers of Jerusalem hearkening there on the city wall (Isaiah 36:12).
Then he calls with a loud voice to them (Isaiah 36:13) not to let Hezekiah deceive them by any illusion about their own power, or about the aid of Jehovah (Isaiah 36:14-15). Let them rather give themselves up to the king of Assyria. He will for the present leave them in peaceful possession of their own (Isaiah 36:16), till He shall come for the purpose of deporting them to a good land like their own (Isaiah 36:17). They must the less expect help from Jehovah seeing no god had been able to protect his land from the power of Assyria (Isaiah 36:18-20). By Hezekiah’s command the messengers made no reply, but with rent garments, in token of dismay at what they heard, they conveyed the message to the king (Isaiah 36:21-22).
2. Now it came—took them.Isaiah 36:1. According to the Assyrian monuments Sennacherib (Assyrian Sin-ahi-irib or Sin-ahi-ir-ba, i.e., Sin (=Luna) multiplicat fratres, Heb. ΰַ ?ηִ ?ινδִ ?ψְ ?λָּ ?δ) became king in the year 705 B.C, on the 12th of the month Ab (Schrader, p. 331). He was the son and successor of Sargon, and reigned to the year 681. Sennacherib relates to us the events of his third campaign on two monuments with nearly identical inscriptions, viz.: an hexagonal clay cylinder, and the bulls at the portal of the palace at Kuyyundschik. Their contents is chiefly as follows.
Sennacherib moved first against Ph�nicia. King Elulδeus of Sidon fled to Cyprus. The Assyrians conquered all Ph�nicia, and Sennacherib installed Etobal as king. The kings Menahem of Samaria (?), Etobal of Sidon, Abdilit of Arvad, Urniski of Byblos, Mitinti of Ashdod, Puduil of Amnion, Kamosnadab of Moab, Malikram of Edom, the whole of the kings of the westland (?) did homage and brought presents. But Zidka of Ascalon would not do homage. Hence he was expelled and another put in his place.
Also the cities of his territory (?) Bet-Dagon, Joppa, Benebarak, Azur were conquered. The inhabitants of Ekron had imprisoned their king Padi, who held faithfully to the Assyrians, and “in the shadow of the night” had delivered him to Hezekiah. But the kings of Egypt and Meroe, as allies of the Palestinian opponents of Assyria, had led up a great army. In the vicinity of Altaku (Eltekeh Joshua 19:44; Joshua 21:23 in the territory of Dan, between Timnat and Ashdod) there was a battle. The Assyrians claimed the victory.
Thus it appears that what was undertaken against Judah formed merely an episode of this expedition. Sennacherib relates that he took forty-six of the fortified cities of Judah, and shut Hezekiah up in his capital “like a bird in its cage.” He then threw up fortifications against Jerusalem and caused the exit of the great gate to be broken through. The conquered cities he gave to Mitinti of Ashdod, Padi of Ekron, and Ismibil of Gaza. Thereupon Hezekiah was greatly alarmed and agreed to pay tribute, and by his messengers payed thirty (30) talents of gold and eight hundred (800) talents of silver. So far the Assyrian inscriptions.
One sees how accurately they agree with the Bible account, in our text and in 2 Kings 18. The Bible account says three hundred talents of silver (2 Kings 18:14). This difference is only apparent. For 800 Assyrian talents are exactly equal to 300 Palestinian (Schrader,l. c. p. 197, 25).
But with this agreement there is a considerable discrepancy in these two accounts in respect to chronology. Both accounts agree in giving the year 722 B.C, for the taking of Samaria by Sargon. But before and after this the statements diverge. According to the monuments Sennacherib became king only 705 B.C, while the Biblical account places this expedition which he himself calls his third in the year 714. This difference between the Assyrian and Biblical chronology is limited for the time after 722 to the date of expedition of Sennacherib against Palestine and Egypt. For, as Schrader (p. 300) expressly says, in respect to the time of Mannasseh both reckonings “agree satisfactorily:” [For the Author’s method of reconciling this discrepancy in date, see the general Introd. § 3, and the introduction to chapters 36–39]. The omission of three verses 2 Kings 18:14 sqq., relating to the payment of ransom show the designed abbreviation of this account.
3. And the king—the recorder.Isaiah 36:2-3. Schrader (p. 199) remarks on Rabshakeh that there occurs no mention on the monuments of the chief cup-bearer, as a high dignitary and officer of state. But rab-sak is mentioned. That however is not the chief cup-bearer. For sak means chief, captain, collective chiefs.
Therefore rab-sak is the chief of the captains (comp. rab sarisim, rab tabbachim), perhaps the chief of the general’s staff. Then the form ψַ ?αְ ?ωָׁ ?χֵ ?δ is a Hebraizing occasioned by accordance of sound with ξִ ?ωְׁ ?χֶ ?δGenesis 40:1 sqq. Chald. ξַ ?ωְׁ ?χֵ ?ι or ωָׁ ?χֵ ?ι which means pincerna, pocillator. The names Tartan and Rabsaris 2 Kings 18:17 are omitted here. Lacish, whence this detachment of troops came, is the modern Umm-Lβkhis, in the S. W., of Judea near the border of Philistia, on the road from Jerusalem to Gaza.
This was the extreme southern point to which Sennacherib penetrated at that time. On the approach of the Egyptian army he retired to Altaku (Eltekeh) that lay N. E. of Lacish. There is a bas-relief (Schrader, p. 170) with the inscription: “Sennacherib, the king of the nations, the king of the land of Assyria, sits on an exalted throne and receives the spoil of the city Lacish.”
And he stood,etc. The locality is described by exactly the same words that Isaiah 7:3 describe the place where Isaiah was to meet Ahaz. That now the Assyrians stand in such threatening attitude by the conduit of the upper pool is the fruit of Ahaz having so insolently rejected the promise given him at that time, and in the same place, and having preferred to call Assyria to his aid. We do not err, therefore, in understanding by this literal agreement of the naming of the place in both passages, that an intimation of the divine nemesis is intended. On Eliakim the chamberlain and Shebna the scribe see Isaiah 22:15; Isaiah 22:20 sqq. The ρֹ ?τֵ ?ψ “scribe” appears as a state officer first under David, 2 Samuel 8:17, where he is distinguished from several other officers.
He was the king’s secretary, who wrote all that the king’s service demanded. Thus his office would lead him to meddle with every branch of government, and we find him expressly mentioned in matters of finance (2 Kings 22:3 sqq.), and of war (2 Kings 25:19; Jeremiah 52:25). The ξַ ?ζְ ?λִּ ?ιψ (LXX. ὑπομνηματογράφος, ἐπὶτῶνὑπομνημάτων, Vulg.,a commentariis), is certainly not the monitor (Thenius), but the one that was charged with recording the res gestas of the king, and of the kingdom, and preserving them for posterity (comp. 2 Samuel 8:16; 2 Samuel 20:24; 2 Kings 4:3; 2 Chronicles 34:8). As is well-known, national archives are found not only among civilized but also among uncivilized people. Of Joah, Asaph’s son, nothing more is known. Both the names are Levitical, comp. 1 Chronicles 6:6; 1 Chronicles 29:12; 1 Chronicles 26:4.
In 2 Chronicles 34:8 is mentioned a Joah son of Joahaz, who was recorder to king Josiah.
4. And Rabshakeh—destroy it.Isaiah 36:4-10. On the Assyrian monuments the kings designate themselves, or are designated, “great king,” “mighty king,” “king of the nations.” The Assyrian seeks to prove to Hezekiah that his only recourse is to yield himself unconditionally to the great king. “That thou rebellest.” It may be asked: does this refer to the matter mentioned 2 Kings 18:7, or to that mentioned 2 Kings 18:14 sqq., viz.: the refusal to surrender the city in addition to the ransom? Both must be understood. For to the Assyrian, that refusal was only a symptom that the rebellious disposition was not sufficiently broken.
In showing further, how nugatory every thing was on which Hezekiah relied, he calls Egypt a bruised reed, that breaks when one rests on it and pierces the hand. This reproach was well founded. Isaiah himself says the same Isaiah 30:3; Isaiah 30:5; Isaiah 30:7 in other words. Ezekiel 29:6-7, employs this figure, amplifying it. In another sense and connection Isaiah uses the image of the bruised reed Isaiah 42:3, where ψφευ and ιωׁ ?αψ used together show that the former word does not mean “broken” but “bruised.” What the Assyrian says Isaiah 36:6 is an undeniable truth. But he omits making it general as the prophets did.
For what was true of Egypt was equally true of Assyria, and of any other world-power. They do no favor for nothing, but sell their aid so dear, that it becomes doubtful whether friend or foe harms the most. [The charge of relying on Egypt may be true, or it may be a malicious fabrication, or a shrewd guess from analogy.—J. A. Alexander.]
Isaiah 36:7. As proof that even Jehovah cannot be expected to help; the Assyrian appeals to the fact that Hezekiah has done away with all the high-places and altars of Jehovah, and has left remaining only a single spot for worship in Jerusalem. As is well-known Hezekiah did away with all high-places in Judea, even those that were monotheistic, consecrated to Jehovah (2 Kings 18:4, comp. J. G. Muller in Herz.R.-Encycl., VI. p. 176), and thus had stringently carried out the principle of the one, and only authorized central sanctuary.
In 2 Chronicles 32:12 it reads “ye shall worship before one altar, and burn incense upon it,” instead of, as here, “ye shall worship before this altar.” The Assyrian, ignorant of the higher commandment that had prompted Hezekiah’s obedience, saw in this conduct a reduction, an arrest of Jehovah-worship. Less probable is the explanation that the Assyrian has in mind what is related 2 Kings 16:10-17, and has confounded Ahaz and Hezekiah. For such confusion is hardly credible. Isaiah 36:8. He next holds up to contempt Hezekiah’s own power. His derisive proposition intimates both the abundance of Assyria’s cavalry and war chariots (comp.
Isaiah 5:28) and the weakness of Judah in this respect. ςָ ?ψַ ?α is “to pledge,” then “to pledge for others,” i.e., go security, and in fact in the double sense of a benefit to be done to a third party (e.g., ςָ ?ψְ ?αֵ ?πִ ?ι38:14, ΰֶ ?ςֶ ?ψְ ?αֶ ?αּ ?εּ ?Genesis 43:9) or of a performance incumbent on a third party. But there is a pledging when two or more bind themselves to a performance in common, even when the pledging is not specifically made prominent or is silently presumed. Thus the word acquires the meaning, “to enter into, become one, to mix oneself in with.” Here the notion sponsio appears evident: pledge thyself, i.e., unite thyself by a mutual pledge with the king of Assyria. But as under the present circumstances the one party pledged himself to conditions he thinks impossible to the other, the pledging acquires the significance of a wager, in which sense also Clericus has taken the word.
Isaiah 36:9. Two inferences are drawn from the representation of Isa 36:8; the positive, that Hezekiah cannot hope to resist the least captain of Assyria, and the negative, that this personal inability explains how Judah must be leaning on Egypt. The relation of τηϊΰηγ to what follows is not simple genitive of the subject (commander of the small servants, Knobel), but is a partitive genitive: of one captain from among the most inferior servants of my lord, i.e., who belongs to the most inferior servants of my lord. Isaiah 36:10. The Assyrian feigns to have received a commission direct from Jehovah to go against Judah and destroy it. That this was false appears from Isaiah 37:6; Isaiah 37:21 sqq., where the Lord Himself pronounces the words of the Assyrian blasphemous, and takes Judah in protection after a grand fashion.
The Assyrian may possibly have heard something of Isaiah’s prophecies, who, he may have known, was then in Jerusalem, which prophecies treated of a subjection of Judah to Assyria (comp. Isaiah 7:17 sqq., Isaiah 10:5 sqq.). These and similar prophetic utterances may have afforded the occasion for this pretext. But no prophecy “go up against this land and destroy it,” nor anything like it exists in Isaiah, or any other Prophet.
5. Then said Eliakim—words of Rabshakeh.Isaiah 36:11-22. Hezekiah’s messengers had so far hearkened in silence. But apprehensive of the effect of the words of Isa 36:10 on the people assembled on the wall, they beg the messenger of the Assyrian not to speak the Jewish tongue but to speak in Aramaic. The people might easily take this pretended mandate for reality. Had not the Lord Himself called Assyria “the rod of mine anger” (Isaiah 10:5)?
Discouragement might arise from this among the people, and paralyze every effort at self-defense. ιδεγιϊ means primarily the dialect of the tribe of Judah. It was thus spoken in Jerusalem and was the purest and best Hebrew. Rabshakeh spoke this dialect. A considerable time had elapsed since that fatal resort of Ahaz to Assyria spoken of in chap. 7, certainly more than twenty-five years. During this time the Assyrian rulers were in constant intercourse with Judah, and were properly attentive to Jewish affairs. This explains how there would be in their court persons that could speak the dialect of Judah.
Besides the Assyrian and Hebrew languages were daughters of the same Semitic stem, and an Assyrian would find no great difficulty in learning Hebrew. See the Assyrian Grammars of Oppert 1859 and of Menant, 1868. Eliakim would not have called the dialect of the northern Israelites, Jewish had Rabshakeh spoken that. For at that time the name Judah had not become the national name as it did after the exile. At the latter period ιδεγιϊ comprised all that was Hebrew, even what had perhaps attached itself to the tribe of Judah from the isolated elements of the other tribes (comp. Nehemiah 13:24).
By ΰψξιϊ Eliakim understood, not the mother-tongue of the Assyrian, but the Syro-Chaldaic-Aramaic, thus the language whose territory lay between that of the Hebrew and of the Assyrian and that was suited for mediating between them. According to Alex. Polyhistor. in Eusebius,Chron., arm. I. p. 43, Sennacherib erected a monument to himself with a Chaldaic inscription, and with the later Persian kings Aramaic seems to have been the government language for intercourse with the nations of western Asia (Ezra 4:7). Our passage shows that Aramaic would not be known to all people of Judah without study and of course.
Eliakim’s remonstrance only exposed a weak place, of which Rabshakeh immediately took advantage. He noticed, that his words were regarded as likely to produce an impression among the people prejudicial to Hezekiah’s intention, and at once he acts as if his mission were to the people, and not at all to Hezekiah, though Isaiah 36:4 and 2 Kings 18:18-19 show the contrary. He proceeds therefore to warn the people to save themselves from the dreadful fate that impended, and to beware of letting Hezekiah deceive them. In ςξλν, “with you,” end of Isa 36:12, there is emphasis implying reproach for those addressed. The Assyrian means: those sitting on the wall will fare well with us (comp. “come out to me” Isaiah 36:16), but they will have to endure the dreadfulest distress with you. Isaiah 36:16-17.
Rabshakeh makes definite proposals in the name of the king of Assyria, in opposition to the designs of Hezekiah against which he warns them. “Make with me a blessing,” i.e., an alliance of blessing, he says. αψλδ is not merely the blessing itself, but also, by metonymy, either what the blessing involves (comp. Genesis 12:2εδιδαψλδ), or what the blessing produces (e.g., a rich gift 1 Samuel 25:27, etc.). Thus here the alliance, the treaty is called αψλδ because, in the opinion of the Assyrian, it would be a source of blessing. The word occurs in this sense nowhere else. ιφΰ with ΰμ often occurs in the sense of deditio:1 Samuel 11:3; 1 Kings 20:31; Jeremiah 21:9; Jeremiah 38:2; Jeremiah 38:21. To eat his vine and his fig tree, and drink his waters (metonymic expressions, comp. on Isaiah 1:7; Isaiah 5:18) is a figurative description of a peaceful and undisturbed existence (comp. Micah 4:4; 1 Kings 5:5).
On Isaiah 36:17 Schrader remarks: “Such a recommendation of surrender to the Assyrian were even for an Assyrian a little maladroit.” I cannot see that. The fate that Rabshakeh proposed was relatively a mild one. Humanly speaking, there was no hope of deliverance. If the Assyrian would revenge the revolt of Hezekiah on the capital, who would hinder him? Even after a glorious defence, which was sure to be attended with much suffering, they must prepare for entire destruction attended with great cruelties. This or the proposition of Isa 36:16-17 were the alternatives to the Assyrian.
It certainly never entered into his mind to treat them with sentimental mildness. “A land of bread and vineyards” is a more comprehensive expression than “a land of corn and wine.” For “bread” (see Isaiah 28:28) represents here every sort of vegetable that gives bread, and in vine-yards not only vines grow, but also other noble trees (comp. λψνζιϊJudges 15:5).
Isaiah 36:18-20. Rabshakeh repeats the warning against illusive hopes of help from Jehovah, and would prove that they are illusive by appealing to facts that showed how the heathen gods had been unable to save their lands. The question where are the gods of Hamath and Arpad?etc., is not meant as denying the existence of these gods generally, but only to demonstrate their inability and unworthiness to let themselves be seen, i.e., to show themselves in a clear light. They are brought to shame and must hide themselves. On Hamath and Arpad see Isaiah 10:9. According to the Assyrian monuments (see Schrader, p. 152), Sargon, in the second year of his reign, therefore a year after the conquest of Samaria, conquered king Ilubid of Hamath, and took as the royal share of the spoils 200 chariots and 600 horsemen.
From this is inferred that he transported most of the rest of the inhabitants. And in fact we read 2 Kings 17:24 that, among others, people from Hamath were transplanted in Samaria. Arpad, that is never named except with Hamath, does not appear in the inscriptions after Sargon (Schrader, p. 204). It likely shared therefore the fate of Hamath. Rabshakeh does not mean to enumerate here the conquests of Sennacherib. But he would remind the men of Judah of examples of transplanted nations well-known to them.
By which Assyrian king it was done was unimportant. It was enough that Assyrian kings could do this. The words Isaiah 36:18-19, are, besides a fulfilment of the prophecy Isaiah 10:7-11.
Isaiah 36:21-22. Hezekiah’s prohibition of any reply was wise. A single incautious word might occasion great harm, as was in fact proved by Eliakim’s blundering interruption Isaiah 36:11. Every reply needed to be maturely considered. Those were serious and significant moments in which only he ought to speak who was qualified, and authorized to represent the entire nation.
Footnotes:[The reader versed in studies belonging to the general subject of Introduction will be reminded by the foregoing of the Urevangelium, the original Gospel, the fascination of German critics of the New Testament. Its foundation is conjecture, and nothing better than probability at best. Though one accumulate a mountain of such conjectural probabilities, they will no more sustain a fact or make a fact than a cloud will sustain a pebble or condense into a pebble. The same may be said of the Author’s original Isaiah history. On the general subject treated of in the foregoing, J. A.
Alexander, in his introduction to chapter 36, says: “The simple, common-sense view of the matter is, that since the traditional position of these chapters among the writings of Isaiah corresponds exactly to the known fact of his having written a part of the history of Judah, the presumption in favor of his having written both the passages in question cannot be shaken by the mere possibility, or even intrinsic probability of other hypotheses, for which there is not the least external evidence.” And again on Isaiah 38:1 he says: “Why may we not suppose that the overthrow of Sennacherib occurred in the interval between Hezekiah’s sickness and the embassy from Merodach-baladan? It is altogether natural that the Prophet, after carrying the history of Sennacherib to its conclusion, should go back to complete that of Hezekiah also”—TR.]
Or, secretary.the chancellor.confidest.I say it is mere lip work the counsel and strength for carrying on war.Heb. a word of lips.Or, but counsel and strength are for war.bruised.make a wager.for thee(i. e., for thy advantage).
And trustest thou, etc.?
in Aramaic.in Judaic.Or, seek my favor by a present.Heb. make with me a blessing.incite.(where were your gods) that delivered Samaria, etc.
2. ’S MESSAGE TO ISAIAH
Isaiah 37:1-71 And it came to pass, when king Hezekiah heard it, that he rent his clothes, and covered himself with sackcloth, and went into the house of the Lord. 2And he sent Eliakim, who was over the household, and Shebna the scribe, and the elders of the priests covered with sackcloth unto Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz. 3And they said unto him, Thus saith Hezekiah, This day is a day of trouble, and of rebuke, and of blasphemy: for the children are come to the birth, and there is not strength to bring forth. 4It may be the Lord thy God will hear the words of Rabshakeh, whom the king of Assyria his master hath sent to reproach the living God, and will reprove the words which the Lord thy God hath heard: wherefore lift up thy prayer for the remnant that Isaiah 7 left. 5So the servants of king Hezekiah came to Isaiah 6 And Isaiah said unto them, Thus shall ye say unto your master, Thus saith the Lord, Be not afraid of the words that thou hast heard, wherewith the servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed me. 7Behold, I will send a blast upon him, and he shall hear a rumor, and return to his own land; and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_37:3. ιενφγδ comp. Ps. 20:2; 1:15; Obad. 12:14; Nahum 1:7, etc.—The expression ιενϊελη ?δ is taken from Hosea 5:9.— ? ? ? ? ? ? ?πΰφδ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? from πָ ?ΰַ ?υ contemnere, aspernari (Isaiah 1:4; Isaiah 5:24; Isaiah 60:14. contemtus, opprobrium occurs only here. In Nehemiah 9:18; Nehemiah 9:26 πֶ ?ΰָ ?φָ ?δ is found in the sense of βλασφημία, blasphemy. Our present word must be taken in this sense (comp. Isaiah 37:4).—The expression the “children are come ςγΞξωׁ ?αψ” occurs again only 2 Kings 19:3. But comp. Hosea 13:13.—μγδinf. nom. again only Jeremiah 13:21.
Isaiah 37:4. ωׁ ?μη ,ΰωׁ ?ψωׁ ?μηε with double acc. like verbs of teaching, commanding: comp. Isaiah 55:11; Exodus 4:28, etc.—ΰμδινηι, except here and Isaiah 37:17, the expression always reads ΰΧηιιν (Deuteronomy 5:23; 1 Samuel 17:26; 1 Samuel 17:36; Jeremiah 10:10; Jeremiah 23:36). The constant absence of the article in the expression is noteworthy. Thus it appears to me to designate God, not as the only living God, but only in general as living God in contrast with the dead idols, whereby is not expressly excluded that there may be still other ΰΧηιιν (comp. δόξαςβλασφημεῖν Judges 8).—The two perfects εδελιη and επωׂ ?ΰϊ connect with the imperfect ιωׁ ?ξς. Many older expositors have explained εδελιη to be an infinitive, and have taken it as the continuation of μηψσ. But then one must make the word mean “to contemn,” which it does not.
It must therefore be construed as perfect. The meaning is direct causative: “exercise reproof,” (comp. Isaiah 2:4; Isaiah 11:4). The prefix αְּ before γαψιν has a causal sense: “and he will use reproof (judicial decision) (moved) by the words, etc.” Comp. Isaiah 50:1; Isaiah 57:17.—The perf. επωׂ ?ΰϊ formally connects with the Imperf. ιωׁ ?ξς although materially the reverse is the proper relation.—δπξφΰδδωׁ ?ΰψιϊ is the remnant in fact as opposed to that which ought to be. Comp.
Isaiah 13:15; Isaiah 22:3.
Isaiah 37:6. βγσ occurs only in Piel (Numbers 15:30; Psalms 44:17; Ezekiel 20:27; 2 Kings 19:6; 2 Kings 19:22); it means “to wound, insult, blaspheme.”
Differences between the text of Isaiah here and 2 Kings 18 appear in 2 Kings 18:2; 2 Kings 18:4; 2 Kings 18:6. Isaiah 37:6 has ΰμιδν instead of μָ ?δֶ ?ν because the former is the more usual, at least in these chapters (comp. 2 Kings 18:19; 2 Kings 18:22; 2 Kings 18:25-27; 2 Kings 19:3; 2 Kings 19:10; 2 Kings 20:1; 2 Kings 20:8; 2 Kings 20:14; 2 Kings 20:16; 2 Kings 20:19). The simple μְ after ΰξψ occurs only once, 2 Kings 18:22.
AND 1. And it came—Amoz.Isaiah 37:1-2. It is perhaps not unimportant to note that, except here, when Isaiah speaks of putting on sackcloth he uses the expression ηβψωׂ ?χ (Isaiah 3:24; Isaiah 15:3; Isaiah 22:12) and never employs the general article that occurs in Kings, and elsewhere also (2 Kings 6:30, comp. 1 Kings 21:27). The expression “elders of the priests” beside here and 2 Kings 19:2, occurs only Jeremiah 19:1. �hler (Herz.,R.-Encycl. XII. p. 182 sq.), distinguishes these priest-elders from the ωָׂ ?ψֵ ?ι or ψָ ?ΰωֵׁ ?ιδַ ?λֹּ ?δֲ ?πִ ?ιν (2 Chronicles 26:14; Ezra 10:5; Nehemiah 12:7), and understands by the latter the overseer of the priestly class, and by the former only “the most respected priests on account of their age.” The embassy to Isaiah as one sees from those composing it, was one commensurate with the importance of the subject, and also very honorable for Isaiah.
[“Hezekiah resorted to the temple, not only as a public place, but with reference to the promise made to Solomon (1 Kings 8:29) that God would hear the prayers of His people from that place when they were in distress.” On Isaiah 37:2. “The king applies to the Prophet as the authorized expounder of the will of God. Similar applications are recorded 1 Kings 22:9; 2 Kings 22:14; Jeremiah 37:3.”—J. A. Alex.].
2. And they said—in his own land.Isaiah 37:3-7. One may say that φψδ “anguish” relates only to the Jews, ϊεληδ “rebuke” is received from the Lord through the Assyrians, and the object of πΰφδ, “contempt,” is Israel and their God. Thus it appears, they intimate that the matter concerns, not them only, but also God, and that in an active and in a passive sense. [The metaphor in the last clause expresses, in the most affecting manner, the ideas of extreme pain, imminent danger, critical emergency, utter weakness, and entire dependence on the aid of others.—J. A. Alex.].
Judah had done all in its power to keep away the supreme power of Assyria. But the latter has taken the whole land (Isaiah 36:1); and moreover an immense sum of gold has been sacrificed (2 Kings 18:14). But the Assyrian demands the capital itself, and Judah is powerless to hold him back. There is no going backwards, i.e., what was done in vain to ward off the Assyrian cannot be made a thing not done; and there is no going forwards, i.e., there are no means left to ward off the worst. Therefore the very life is in peril. Such is the meaning of the figurative language.
In Isaiah 37:4 the messengers present their request. It begins timidly with ΰεμι,“peradventure.” It refers to two things: 1) that Jehovah will hear and punish the words of Rabshakeh, 2) that Isaiah will make supplication. The order may seem an inverted one. But they produce the things sought for, not in the order in which they are to be realized, but according to their importance. The most important is that Jehovah hears and punishes. The means to this is Isaiah’s intercession. [“The preterite ωׁ ?ξς denotes a past time only in reference to the contingency expressed by ιωׁ ?ξς.
Perhaps he will hear and then punish what he has heard. The reproach and blasphemy of the Assyrian consisted mainly in his confounding Jehovah with the gods of the surrounding nations (2 Chronicles 32:19), in antithesis to whom, as being impotent and lifeless, He is here and elsewhere called the living God.—J. A. Alex.]. Comp. Isaiah 8:9; Psalms 104:28; Psalms 115:4 sqq. “To reproach the living God,” strongly reminds one of the blasphemy of Goliath, 1 Samuel 17:26; 1 Samuel 17:36; 1 Samuel 17:45.
Such an one the Assyrian here appears. “The remnant extant” (see Text. and Gram.). The deportation of the Ten Tribes, and Isaiah 36:1 show that Jerusalem was at that time only a weak remnant of the theocracy.
[Isaiah 37:5 “is a natural and simple resumption of the narrative, common in all inartificial history. It affords no ground for assuming a transposition in the text, nor for explaining ειΰξψε Isaiah 37:3, as a subjunctive.”—J. A. Alex.]. Isaiah 37:6-7, contain Isaiah’s answer. The Assyrian messengers are contemptuously called πςψιν, i.e., “boys, striplings” of the king of Assyria.
The expression Behold, I am putting a spirit in him designates the subjective side of a resolve accomplished in the king of Assyria, and he shall hear a report the objective cause. It had manifestly been the purpose of the king of Assyria to go immediately at that time against Jerusalem. Sending Rabshakeh was the prelude to it. On the return of the latter with Hezekiah’s refusal, the advance on Jerusalem was instantly to be made. This is confirmed Isaiah 37:9-10 by the warning to Hezekiah not to cherish unwarranted expectations from the unlooked for diversion made by the Ethiopian army. Thus the Prophet says here, “I impart to him a spirit, i.e.
I occasion him a mind, a tendency of the will (comp. Isaiah 19:14; Isaiah 29:10, etc.), and he shall hear a report.” This is the first stage of the deliverance. It intimates that the Assyrian’s next intention now at once to advance on Jerusalem shall not be realized. But that only wards off the immediate danger. Perhaps to reprieve is not to relieve. Thus the Assyrian himself seems to have thought according to Isaiah 37:10-13.
But there is no danger. He shall not come before Jerusalem at all (Isaiah 37:33), but shall return into his land, and there fall by the sword. Let those believe that, “and I will fell him by the sword,” etc., is ascribed to Isaiah by the narrator post eventum, who cannot believe that there may be such a thing as a spirit of God, that can look freely into the future, and, when it seems good to him, can declare the future.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 36:4 sqq. “Haec proprie est Satanae lingua et sunt non Rabsacis sed ipsissimi Diaboli verba, quibus non muros urbis, sed medullam Ezechiae, hoc est, tenerrimam ejus fidem oppugnat.”—Luther. “In this address the chief-butler, Satan performs in the way he uses when he would bring about our apostacy. 1) He urges that we are divested of all human support, Isaiah 36:5; Isaiah 2) We are deprived of divine support, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 3) God is angry with us because we have greatly provoked Him by our sins, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 4) He decks out the splendor, and power of the wicked, Isaiah 36:8-9; Isaiah 5) He appeals to God’s word, and knows how to turn and twist it to his uses. Such poisonous arrows were used by Satan against Christ in the desert, and may be compared with this light (Matthew 4:2 sqq.). One needs to arm himself against Satan’s attack by God’s word, and to resort to constant watching and prayer.”—Cramer.
The Assyrian urges four particulars by which he would destroy Hezekiah’s confidence, in two of which he was right and in two wrong. He was right in representing that Hezekiah could rely neither on Egypt, nor on his own power. In this respect he was a messenger of God and announcer of divine truth. For everywhere the word of God preaches the same (Isaiah 30:1-3; Isaiah 31:1-3; Jeremiah 17:5; Psalms 118:8-9; Psalms 146:3, etc.). But it is a merited chastisement if rude and hostile preachers must preach to us what we were unwilling to believe at the mild and friendly voice of God. But in two particulars the Assyrian was wrong, and therein lay Hezekiah’s strength.
For just on this account the Lord is for him and against the Assyrian. These two things are, that the Assyrian asserts that Hezekiah cannot put his trust in the Lord, but rather he, the Assyrian is counseled by the Lord against Hezekiah. That, however, was a lie, and because of this lie, the corresponding truth makes all the deeper impression on Hezekiah, and reminds him how assuredly he may build on the Lord and importune Him. And when the enemy dares to say, that he is commissioned by the Lord to destroy the Holy Land, just that must bring to lively remembrance in the Israelite, that the Lord, who cannot lie, calls the land of Israel His land (Joel 4:2; Jeremiah 2:7; Jeremiah 16:18, etc.), and the people of Israel His people (Exodus 3:7; Exodus 3:10; Exodus 5:1, etc.).
2. On Isaiah 36:12. [“In regard to the indelicacy of this passage we may observe: 1) The Masorets in the Hebrew text have so printed the words used, that in reading it the offensiveness would be considerably avoided. 2) The customs, habits and modes of expression of people in different nations and times, differ. What appears indelicate at one time or in one country, may not only be tolerated, but common in another. 3) Isaiah is not at all responsible for the indelicacy of the language here. He is simply an historian. 4) It was of importance to give the true character of the attack which was made on Jerusalem. The coming of Sennacherib was attended with pride, insolence and blasphemy; and it was important to state the true character of the transaction, and to record just what was said and done. Let him who used the language, and not him who recorded it bear the blame.”—Barnes in loc.].
3. On Isaiah 36:18 sqq. “Observandum hic, quod apud gentes olim viguerit πολύθεια adeo, ut quaevis etiam urbs peculiarem habuerit Deum tutelarem. Cujus ethnicismi exemplum vivum et spirans adhuc habemus apud pontificios, quibus non inscite objici potest illud Jeremiae: Quot civitates tibi, tot etiam Dei (Jeremiah 2:28).”—Foerster.
4. On Isaiah 36:21. Answer not a fool according to his folly (Proverbs 26:4), much less the blasphemer, lest the flame of his wickedness be blown into the greater rage (Sir 8:3). Did not Christ the Lord answer His enemies, not always with words, but also with silence (Matthew 26:62; Matthew 27:14, etc.)? One must not cast pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6). After Foerster and Cramer.
5. On Isaiah 36:21. “Est aureus textus, qui docet nos, ne cum Satana disputemus. Quando enim videt, quod sumus ejus spectatores et auditores, tum captat occasionem majoris fortitudinis et gravius premit. Petrus dicit, eum circuire et quaerere, quem devoret. Nullum facit insidiarum finem. Tutissimum autem est non respondere, sed contemnere eum.”—Luther.
6. [On Isaiah 37:1-7. “Rabshakeh intended to frighten Hezekiah from the Lord, but it proves that he frightens him to the Lord. The wind, instead of forcing the traveler’s coat from him, makes him wrap it the closer about him. The more Rabshakeh reproaches God, the more Hezekiah studies to honor Him.” On Isaiah 37:3. “When we are most at a plunge we should be most earnest in prayer. When pains are most strong, let prayers be most lively. Prayer is the midwife of mercy, that helps to bring it forth.”—M. Henry, in loc.]
7. On Isaiah 37:2 sqq. Hezekiah here gives a good example. He shows all princes, rulers and peoples what one ought to do when there is a great and common distress, and tribulation. One ought with sackcloth, i. e., with penitent humility, to bring prayers, and intercessions to the Lord that He would look on and help.
8. On Isaiah 37:6 sq. “God takes to Himself all the evil done to His people. For as when one does a great kindness to the saints, God appropriates it to Himself, so, too, when one torments the saints, it is an injury done to God, and He treats sin no other way than as if done to Himself. He that torments them torments Him (Isaiah 64:9). Therefore the saints pray: ‘Arise, O God, plead thine own cause: remember how the foolish man reproacheth thee daily’ (Psalms 74:22).”—Cramer.
9. On Isaiah 37:7. “God raises up against His enemies other enemies, and thus prepares rest for His own people. Example: the Philistines against Saul who pursued David, 1 Samuel 23:27.”—Cramer.
10. On Isaiah 37:14. Vitringa here cites the following from Bonfin Rerum Hungar. Dec. III. Lib.
VI. p. 464, ad annum Isaiah 1444: “Amorathes, cum suos laborare cerneret et ab Vladislao rege non sine magna caede fugari, depromtum e sinu codicem initi sanctissime foederis explicat intentis in coelum oculis. Haec sunt, inquit ingeminans, Jesu Christe, foedera, quae Christiani tui mecum percussere. Per numen tuum sanctum jurarunt, datamque sub nomine tuo fidem violarunt, perfide suum Deum abnegarunt. Nunc Christe, si Deus es (ut ajunt et nos hallucinamur), tuas measque hic injurias, te quaeso, ulciscere et his, qui sanctum tuum nomen nondum agnovere, violatae fidei poenas ostende. Vix haec dixerat .… cum proelium, quod anceps ac dubium diu fuerat, inclinare coepit, etc.”[The desire of Hezekiah was not primarily his own personal safety, or the safety of his kingdom. It was that Jehovah might vindicate His great and holy name from reproach, and that the world might know that He was the only true God.
We have here a beautiful model of the object which we should have in view when we come before God. This motive of prayer is one that is with great frequency presented in the Bible. Comp. Isaiah 42:8; Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 43:13; Isaiah 43:25; Deuteronomy 32:39; Psalms 83:18; Psalms 46:10; Nehemiah 9:6; Daniel 9:18-19. Perhaps there could have been furnished no more striking proof that Jehovah was the true God, than would be by the defeat of Sennacherib. The time had come when the great Jehovah could strike a blow which would be felt on all nations, and carry the terror of His name, and the report of His power throughout the earth.
Perhaps this was one of the main motives of the destruction of that mighty army.”—Barnes, on Isaiah 37:2].
11. On Isaiah 37:15. “Fides Ezechiae verba confirmata magis ac magis crescit. Ante non ausus est orare, jam orat et confutat blasphemias omnes Assyrii. Adeo magna vis verbi est, ut longe alius per verbum, quod Jesajas ei nunciari jussit, factus sit.”—Luther.
12. On Isaiah 37:17. [“It is bad to talk proudly and profanely, but it is worse to write so, for this argues more deliberation and design, and what is written spreads further and lasts longer, and does the more mischief. Atheism and irreligion, written, will certainly be reckoned for another day.”—M. Henry].
13. On Isaiah 37:21 sqq. [“Those who receive messages of terror from men with patience, and send messages of faith to God by prayer, may expect messages of grace and peace from God for their comfort, even when they are most cast down. Isaiah sent a long answer to Hezekiah’s prayer in God’s name, sent it in writing (for it was too long to be sent by word of mouth), and sent it by way of return to his prayer, relation being thereunto had: ‘Whereas thou hast prayed to me, know, for thy comfort, that thy prayer is heard.’ Isaiah might have referred him to the prophecies he had delivered (particularly to that of chap. 10), and bid him pick out an answer from thence. The correspondence between earth and heaven is never let fall on God’s side.”—M. Henry.].
14. On Isaiah 37:31 sqq. “This is a promise of great extent. For it applies not only to those that then remained, and were spared the impending destruction and captivity by the Assyrians, but to all subsequent times, when they should enjoy a deliverance; as after the Babylonish captivity, and after the persecutions of Antiochus. Yea, it applies even to New Testament times from the first to the last, since therein, in the order of conversion to Christ, the Jews will take root and bring forth fruit, and thus in the Jews (as also in the converted Gentiles) will appear in a spiritual and corporal sense, what God at that time did to their fields in the three following years.”—Starke.
15. On Isaiah 38:1. “Isaiah, although of a noble race and condition, does not for that regard it disgraceful, but rather an honor, to be a pastor and visitor of the sick, I would say, a prophet, teacher and comforter of the sick. God save the mark! How has the world become so different in our day, especially in our evangelical church Let a family be a little noble, and it is regarded as a reproach and injury to have a clergyman among its relations and friends, not to speak of a son studying theology and becoming a servant of the church. I speak not of all; I know that some have a better mind; yet such is the common course. Jeroboam’s maxim must rather obtain, who made priests of the lowest of the people (1 Kings 12:31).
For thus the parsons may be firmly held in rein (sub ferula) and in political submission. It is not at all good where the clergy have a say, says an old state-rule of our Politicorum.” Feuerlein, pastor in Nuremberg, in his Novissimorum primum, 1694, p. 553. The same quotes Spener: “Is it not so, that among the Roman Catholics the greatest lords are not ashamed to stand in the spiritual office, and that many of them even discharge the spiritual functions? Among the Reformed, too, persons born of the noblest families are not ashamed of the office of preacher. But, it seems, we Lutherans are the only ones that hold the service of the gospel so low, that, where from a noble or otherwise prominent family an ingenium has an inclination to theological study, almost every one seeks to hinder him, or, indeed, afterwards is ashamed of his friendship, as if it were something much too base for such people, by which more harm comes to our church than one might suppose. That is to be ashamed of the gospel.”
16. On Isaiah 38:1. [“We see here the boldness and fidelity of a man of God. Isaiah was not afraid to go in freely and tell even a monarch that he must die. The subsequent part of the narrative would lead us to suppose that, until this announcement, Hezekiah did not regard himself as in immediate danger. It is evident here, that the physician of Hezekiah had not informed him of it—perhaps from the apprehension that his disease would be aggravated by the agitation of his mind on the subject. The duty was, therefore, left, as it is often, to the minister of religion—a duty which even many ministers are slow to perform, and which many physicians are reluctant to have performed.
No danger is to be apprehended commonly from announcing to those who are sick their true condition. Physicians and friends often err in this. There is no species of cruelty greater than to suffer a friend to lie on a dying bed under a delusion. There is no sin more aggravated than that of designedly deceiving a dying man, and flattering him with the hope of recovery, when there is a moral certainty that he will not and cannot recover. And there is evidently no danger to be apprehended from communicating to the sick their true condition. It should be done tenderly and with affection; but it should be done faithfully.
I have had many opportunities of witnessing the effect of apprising the sick of their situation, and of the moral certainty that they must die. And I cannot now recall an instance in which the announcement has had any unhappy effect on the disease. Often, on the contrary, the effect is to calm the mind, and to lead the dying to look up to God, and peacefully to repose on Him. And the effect of that is always salutary.” Barnes in loc.]
17. On Isaiah 38:2. It is an old opinion, found even in the Chald., that by the wall is meant the wall of the temple as a holy direction in which to pray, as the Mahometans pray in the direction of Mecca. But δχιψ cannot mean that. Rather that is correct which is said by Forerius: “Nolunt pii homines testes habere suarum lacrymarum, ut eas liberius fundant, neque sensu distrahi, cum orare Deum ex animo volunt.”
18. On Isaiah 38:8 :—
Non Deus est numen Parcarum carcere clausum.Quale putabatur Stoicus esse Deus.
Ille potest Solis cursus inhibere volantes,
At veluti scopulos flumina stare facit.”
—Melanchthon.
19. On Isaiah 38:12. “Beautiful parables that picture to us the transitoriness of this temporal life. For the parable of the shepherd’s tent means how restless a thing it is with us, that we have here no abiding place, but are driven from one locality to another, until at last we find a resting-spot in the church-yard. The other parable of the weaver’s thread means how uncertain is our life on earth. For how easily the thread breaks.” Cramer. “When the weaver’s work is progressing best, the thread breaks before he is aware. Thus when a man is in his best work, and supposes he now at last begins really to live, God breaks the thread of his life and lets him die. The rational heathen knew something of this when they, so to speak, invented the three goddesses of life (the three Parcas minime parcas) and included them in this little verse:
Clotho colum gestat, Lachesis trahit,
Atropos occatBut what does the weaver when the thread breaks? Does he stop his work at once? O no! He knows how to make a clever weaver’s knot, so that one cannot observe the break. Remember thereby that when thy life is broken off, yet the Lord Jesus, as a master artisan, can bring it together again at the last day. He will make such an artful, subtle weaver’s-knot as shall make us wonder through all eternity. It will do us no harm to have died.” Ibid.—Omnia sunt hominum tenui pendentia filo.
[“As suddenly as the tent of a shepherd is taken down, folded up, and transferred to another place. There is doubtless the idea here that he would continue to exist, but in another place, as the shepherd would pitch his tent in another place. He was to be cut off from the earth, but he expected to dwell among the dead. The whole passage conveys the idea that he expected to dwell in another state.” Barnes in loc.].
20. On Isaiah 38:17. [“Note 1) When God pardons sin, He casts it behind His back as not designing to look upon it with an eye of justice and jealousy. He remembers it no more, to visit for it. The pardon does not make the sin not to have been, or not to have been sin, but not to be punished as it deserves. When we cast our sins behind our back, and take no care to repent of them, God sets them before His face, and is ready to reckon for them; but when we set them before our face in true repentance, as David did when his sin was ever before him, God casts them behind His back. 2) When God pardons sin, He pardons all, casts them all behind His back, though they have been as scarlet and crimson. 3) The pardoning of sin is the delivering the soul from the pit of corruption. 4) It is pleasant indeed to think of our recoveries from sickness when we see them flowing from the remission of sin; then the cause is removed, and then it is in love to the soul.” M. Henry in loc.]
21. On Isaiah 38:18. [Cannot hope for thy truth. “They are shut out from all the means by which Thy truth is brought to mind, and the offers of salvation are presented. Their probation is at an end; their privileges are closed; their destiny is sealed up. The idea is, it is a privilege to live because this is a world where the offers of salvation are made, and where those who are conscious of guilt may hope in the mercy of God.” Barnes in loc.] God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). Such is the New Testament sense of these Old Testament words. For though Hezekiah has primarily in mind the preferableness of life in the earthly body to the life in Hades, yet this whole manner of representation passes away with Hades itself.
But Hezekiah’s words still remain true so far as they apply to heaven and hell. For of course in hell, the place of the damned, one does not praise God. But those that live praise Him. These, however, are in heaven. Since then God wills rather that men praise Him than not praise Him, so He is not willing that men should perish, but that all should turn to repentance and live.
22. On Isaiah 39:2. “Primo (Deus) per obsidionem et bellum, deinde per gravem morbum Ezechiam servaverat, ne in praesumtionem laberetur. Nondum tamen vinci potuit antiquus serpens, sed redit et levat caput suum. Adeo non possumus consistere, nisi Deos nos affligat. Vides igitur hic, quis sit afflictionum usus, ut mortificent scilicet carnem, quae non potest res ferre secundas.” Luther.
23. On Isaiah 39:7. “God also punishes the misdeeds of the parents on the children (Exodus 20:5) because the children not only follow the misdeeds of their parents, but they also increase and heap them up, as is seen in the posterity of Hezekiah, viz.: Manasseh and Amon.”—Cramer.
HINTS[The reader is referred to the ample hints covering the same matter to be found in the volume on 2 Kings 18-20. It is expedient to take advantage of that for the sake of keeping the present volume within reasonable bounds. Therefore but a minimum is here given of what the Author offers, much of which indeed is but the repetition in another form of matter already given.—Tr.]
1. On Isaiah 37:36. “1) The scorn and mockery of the visible world. 2) The scorn and mockery of the unseen world.” Sermon of Domprediger Zahn in Halle, 1870.
2. On the entire 38. chapter, beside the 22 sermons in ’S Novissimorum primum, there is a great number of homiletical elaborations of an early date; Walther Magirus, Idea mortis et vitae in two parts, the second of which contains 20 penitential and consolatory sermons on Isaiah 38. Danzig, 1640 and 1642. Daniel Schaller (Stendal) 4 sermons on the sick Hezekiah, on Isaiah 38. Magdeburg, 1611. Peter Siegmund Pape in “Gott geheilighte Wochenpredigten,” Berlin, 1701, 4 sermons. Jacob Tichlerus (Elburg) Hiskiae Aufrichtigkeit bewiesen in Gesundheit, Krankheit und Genesung, 18 sermons on Isaiah 38. (Dutch), Campen, 1636. These are only the principal ones.
3. On Isaiah 38:1. “I will set my house in order. This, indeed, will not be hard for me to do. My debt account is crossed out; my best possession I take along with me; my children I commit to the great Father of orphans, to whom heaven and earth belongs, and my soul to the Lord, who has sued for it longer than a human age, and bought it with His blood. Thus I am eased and ready for the journey.” Tholuck, Stunden der Andacht, p. 620.
4. On Isaiah 38:1. “Now thou shouldest know that our word ‘order his house’ has a very broad meaning. It comprehends reconciliation to God by faith, the final confession of sin, the last Lord’s Supper, the humble committing of the soul to the grace of the Lord, and to death and the grave in the hope of the resurrection. In one word: There is an ordering of the house above. In reliance on the precious merit of my Saviour, I order my house above in which I wish to dwell. Moreover taking leave of loved ones, and the blessing of them belongs to ordering the house. And finally order must be taken concerning the guardianship of children, the abiding of the widow, and the friend on whom she must especially lean in her loneliness, also concerning earthly bequests.” Ahlfeld, Das Leben im Lichte des Wortes Gottes, Halle, 1867, p. 522.
5. On Isaiah 38:2-8. This account has much that seems strange to us Christians, but much, too, that quite corresponds to our Christian consciousness. Let us contemplate the difference between an Old Testament, and a New Testament suppliant, by noticing the differences and the resemblances. I. The resemblances. 1) Distress and grief there are in the Old, as in the New Testament (Isaiah 38:3). 2) Ready and willing to help beyond our prayers or comprehension (Isaiah 38:5-6) is the Lord in the Old as in the New Testament.
II. The differences. 1) The Old Testament suppliant appealed to his having done nothing bad (Isaiah 38:3). The New Testament suppliant says: “God be merciful to me a sinner,” and “Give me through grace for Christ’s sake what it pleases Thee to give me.” 2) The Old Testament suppliant demands a sign (Isaiah 38:7-8; comp. Isaiah 38:22); the New Testament suppliant requires no sign but that of the crucified Son of man, for He knows that to those who bear this sign is given the promise of the hearing of all their prayers (John 16:23). 3) In Hezekiah’s case, the prayer of the Old Testament suppliant is indeed heard (Isaiah 38:5), yet in general it has not the certainty of being heard, whereas the New Testament suppliant has this certainty.
Footnotes:chancellor.Or, provocation.peradventure.with which the king commissioned him.administer punishment for the words.and thou wilt lift up a prayer.Heb. found.the boys.Or, put a spirit into him.I fell him.
3. THE WRITING OF TO
Isaiah 37:8-138 So Rabshakeh returned, and found the king of Assyria warring against Libnah: for he had heard that he was departed from Lacish. 9And he heard say concerning Tirhakah king of Ethiopia, He is come forth to make war with thee. And when he heard it, he sent messengers to Hezekiah, saying, 10Thus shall ye speak to Hezekiah king of Judah, saying, Let not thy God, in whom thou trustest, deceive thee, saying, Jerusalem shall not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria. 11Behold, thou hast heard what the kings of Assyria have done to all lands by destroying them utterly; and shalt thou be delivered? 12Have the gods of the nations delivered them which my fathers have destroyed, as Gozan, and Haran, and Rezeph, 13and the children of Eden which were in Telassar? Where is the king of Hamath, and the king of Arphad, and the king of the city of Sepharvaim, Hena, and Ivah?
TEXTUAL AND Isa_37:9. The variations from 2 Kings 19:9 are slight; ςμ here instead of ΰμ, and a second ειωׁ ?ξς instead of ειωׁ ?α 2 Kings 19; which latter is doubtless the correct reading. That second ειωׁ ?ξς seems to be merely a copyist’s error, unless the reviser of the Isaiah text overlooked the familiar adverbial meaning that the word has here.
Isaiah 37:10. On δωׁ ?ιΰ, comp. on Isaiah 36:14.—αεθηαε see on Isaiah 36:7.—μΰϊπϊκεΧ see on Isaiah 36:15.
Isaiah 37:11. μδηψιξν (see Isaiah 11:15; Isaiah 34:5) is that verbal form which we translate by the ablative of the gerund.
Isaiah 37:13. The words δπςεςεδ are difficult. The Masorets seem to have regarded them as verbs, seeing that they have punctuated the former as perf. Hiph., and the latter as perf. Piel. So also the Chald. (expulerunt eos et in captivitatcm duxcrunt) and Symmachus (ἀνεστάτωσενκαὶἐταπείνωσεν). But the context demands names of localities. The LXX. translates 2 Kings 19:13 ἈνὰκαὶἈουά; also the Vulg. both 2 Kings and our text.
In Isaiah 37:11-13 the variations from the text in 2 Kings 19 are inconsiderable. But such as they are they also give evidence of an effort at simplification and accommodation to the prevalent usus loquendi. For example Isaiah, ϊְּ ?μַ ?ωָּׂ ?ψ (according to sound) instead of 2 Kings ϊְּ ?μַ ?ΰωָּׂ ?ψ (which would correspond to the Assyrian Tul-Assuri, i.e., hill of Assyria).
AND 1. While the events narrated Isaiah 37:1-7 were taking place, Rabshakeh returned to report to his master, whom he found at Libnah. The news received there of the movement of the king of Ethiopia made it impossible to undertake anything against Jerusalem just then. In the event of a prolonged siege, Sennacherib might find himself in the bad situation of having the Jews in his front, and Tirhakah in his rear. This he must not risk. But to check the triumph of Hezekiah, he sends the message of Isa 37:10-13, which is virtually a repetition of Rabshakeh’s words Isaiah 36:18-20, except that while the latter warned the people against Hezekiah Sennacherib warns Hezekiah not to let his God deceive him.
2. So Rabshakeh—saying.Isaiah 37:8-9. Rabshakeh it seems did not tarry long before Jerusalem for a reply. The silence (Isaiah 36:21) that followed his words was itself an answer. He returned, therefore, to his master to report that neither in king nor people did he meet with any disposition to make a voluntary submission. Libnah, in the siege of which he found his master engaged, was an ancient Canaanite royal city (Joshua 10:29 sqq.).
It belonged (Joshua 15:42) to the low country of Judah, and was later (Joshua 21:13; 1 Chronicles 6:42) a Levitical and free city. It must have been near to Lacish (Joshua 10:29 sqq.), and between that place and Makkedah. Van de Velde supposes it is identical with the Tell of ‘Arβk-el-Menschξjeh, because “this is the only place in the plain between Sumeil (Makkedah) and Um-Lakhis, that can be recognized as an ancient fortified place” (Herz., R.-Encycl., XIV. p. 753). Isaiah 37:9. The subject of “he heard” beginning Isaiah 37:9 is, of course, Sennacherib. Tirhakah was the third and last king of the twenty-fifth or Ethiopic dynasty.
Sabako, or Sevechos, I. and II. were his predecessors. He resided in Thebes, where, on the left bank of the Nile, in the palace of Medenet-Habu, sculptures still exist, that represent Tirhakah wielding the war-mace over bearded Asiatics. See Wilkinson, “Popular Account of the Ancient Egyptians,” I. p. 393 sqq. According to Herod., II., 141, there appears as his contemporary, probably as subordinate king (comp. Ewald,Gesch., d. V.
Isr. III. p. 678), Sethon, a priest of Hephastos, who ruled over middle and lower Egypt. According to the Assyrian monuments, Sargon conquered Seveh (Sevechos) king of Egypt in the year 720 B. C. at Rephia (comp. on 20). Again in 715, the canon of regents mentions a payment of tribute by the Pharaoh of Egypt. In the arrow-headed inscriptions of Sennacherib’s time, the name of Tirhakah has not been found as yet.
But Asurbanipal (Sardanapalus), the grandson of Sennacherib, and successor of his son Esarhaddon, relates, that he directed his first expedition against the rebellious Tar-ku-u of Egypt and Meroe (Schrader, p. 202 sq.). As Sennacherib reigned till 681, and Esarhaddon till 668, the statement of Manetho, that Tirhakah arose 366 years before Alexander’s conquest of Egypt, agrees, of course, better with the Assyrian statement, according to which Sennacherib came to the throne in 705, and undertook the expedition against Egypt in 700, than with the chronology hitherto accepted, that places this expedition in 714 B. C.
3. Thus shall ye—and Ivah?Isaiah 37:10-13. [The design to destroy, not the people’s confidence in Hezekiah, but Hezekiah’s confidence in God, makes Sennacherib’s blasphemy much more open and direct than that of Rabshakeh.—J. A. Alex.]. The servant could in flattery ascribe conquests to his master (Isaiah 36:18-20) which the latter (Isaiah 37:11 sqq.), more honestly acknowledges as the deed of his predecessors. [“Others, with more probability, infer that the singular form, employed by Rabshakeh, is itself to be understood collectively, like “king of Babylon” in chap. 14”—J. A.
Alex.]. Gozan, in the form Guzanu, is often mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions, and that as a city (Schrader, p. 323, 9), and a province (ibid. p. 327, 11, 12; p. 331, 8). But opinions differ as to its location, some taking it for a Mesopotamian locality (Gesen., Knobel, on the authority of Ptolemaeus V.18, 4, also Schrader, p. 161, because, in an Assyrian list of geographical contents, Guzana is named along with Nisibis, and in our text with Haran and Rezeph. But others, on the authority of Arab geographers, seek for Gozan in the mountainous region northeast of Nineveh. There is a river Chabur there, flowing from the mountain region of Zuzan. This Chabur, a left branch of the Tigris, appears to be the ηָ ?αεֹ ?ψπְ ?δַ ?ψβּ ?εֹ ?ζָ ?ο mentioned 2 Kings 17:6; 2 Kings 18:11, and must be distinguished from the λְּ ?αָ ?ψ or Chaboras (Chebar) Ezekiel 1:3, etc., that is a branch of the Euphrates.
Comp. Delitzschin loc.Ewald,Gesch. d. V. Isr. III. p. 638, Isaiah 658: “The Nestorians, or the Lost Tribes,” by Asahel Grant. According to 2 Kings 17:6; 2 Kings 18:11, Gozan belongs to the lands into which the Israelites were deported.
Now we find these (Ezekiel 1:3; Ezekiel 3:15; Ezekiel 3:23; Ezekiel 10:15; Ezekiel 10:22) settled on the λְּ ?αָ ?ψ, i.e., Chebar. The subject is not yet cleared up. Haran, occurs often as Harran in the inscriptions as a Mesopotamian city (Schrader, p. 45). It is a very ancient city (Genesis 11:31; Genesis 12:5; Genesis 27:43, etc.), and well-known to Greeks and Romans under the name Κάῤῥαι, Carrae [famous for the great defeat of Crassus.—Tr.], (see Plutarch,vit. Crassi, 25, 27 sq.). Rezeph, too, is a Mesopotamian city, west of the Euphrates, that frequently appears in the inscriptions as Ra-sa-ap-pa or Ra-sap-pa.
Later it appears under the name Resafa, or Rosafa (comp. Ewald,l. c. III. p. 639). Regarding the “B’ne Eden in Telasser,” it must be noted that Ezekiel 27:23 mentions a people ςֶ ?γֶ ?ζ, that were merchants dealing between Sheba, i.e., Arabia and Tyre, along with ηָ ?ψָ ?ο and λַּ ?πֵּ ?δi.e., λַּ ?μְ ?πֵ ?δ or λַּ ?μְ ?πεֹ ?Isaiah 10:9). Moreover Amos 1:5 mentions a αιϊςγο that, as part of the people of Syria, was to emigrate to Kir. Telasser is mentioned only once in the inscriptions, where it is related, that Tiglath-Pileser brought an offering in Tul-Assuri to the god “Marduk (i.e., Merodach) that dwelt at Telassar” (Schrader, p. 203 sq.).
We must thus consider Eden and Telassar as Mesopotamian localities, though views differ much as to their precise locations. The question (Isaiah 37:13) “where is the king of Hamath,” etc., is a repetition of Isa 36:19, excepting that we have here “king” instead of “the gods.” It is moreover remarkable that here it reads: ξֶ ?μֶ ?γμָ ?ςִ ?ιψνΧ. The reason for this form of expression, if it is not a mere variation, is not clear. For analogies see Joshua 12:18; Numbers 22:4, and in the Chaldee Ezra 5:11. [“Another explanation of these words is that suggested by Luzzatto, who regards them as names of the deities worshipped at Hamath, Arpad and Sepharvaim, and takes ξμκ in the sense of idol or tutelary deity, which last idea is as old as Clericus. This ingenious hypothesis Luzzatto endeavors to sustain by the analogy of Adrammelech, and Anamelech, the gods of Sepharvaim (2 Kings 17:31), the second of which names he regarded as essentially identical with Hena. In favor of this exposition, besides the fact already mentioned that the names, as names of places, occur nowhere else, it may be urged that it agrees not only with the context in this place, but also with 2 Kings 18:34, in which the explanation of the words as verbs or nouns is inadmissible.”—J.
A. Alex.].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 36:4 sqq. “Haec proprie est Satanae lingua et sunt non Rabsacis sed ipsissimi Diaboli verba, quibus non muros urbis, sed medullam Ezechiae, hoc est, tenerrimam ejus fidem oppugnat.”—Luther. “In this address the chief-butler, Satan performs in the way he uses when he would bring about our apostacy. 1) He urges that we are divested of all human support, Isaiah 36:5; Isaiah 2) We are deprived of divine support, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 3) God is angry with us because we have greatly provoked Him by our sins, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 4) He decks out the splendor, and power of the wicked, Isaiah 36:8-9; Isaiah 5) He appeals to God’s word, and knows how to turn and twist it to his uses. Such poisonous arrows were used by Satan against Christ in the desert, and may be compared with this light (Matthew 4:2 sqq.). One needs to arm himself against Satan’s attack by God’s word, and to resort to constant watching and prayer.”—Cramer.
The Assyrian urges four particulars by which he would destroy Hezekiah’s confidence, in two of which he was right and in two wrong. He was right in representing that Hezekiah could rely neither on Egypt, nor on his own power. In this respect he was a messenger of God and announcer of divine truth. For everywhere the word of God preaches the same (Isaiah 30:1-3; Isaiah 31:1-3; Jeremiah 17:5; Psalms 118:8-9; Psalms 146:3, etc.). But it is a merited chastisement if rude and hostile preachers must preach to us what we were unwilling to believe at the mild and friendly voice of God. But in two particulars the Assyrian was wrong, and therein lay Hezekiah’s strength.
For just on this account the Lord is for him and against the Assyrian. These two things are, that the Assyrian asserts that Hezekiah cannot put his trust in the Lord, but rather he, the Assyrian is counseled by the Lord against Hezekiah. That, however, was a lie, and because of this lie, the corresponding truth makes all the deeper impression on Hezekiah, and reminds him how assuredly he may build on the Lord and importune Him. And when the enemy dares to say, that he is commissioned by the Lord to destroy the Holy Land, just that must bring to lively remembrance in the Israelite, that the Lord, who cannot lie, calls the land of Israel His land (Joel 4:2; Jeremiah 2:7; Jeremiah 16:18, etc.), and the people of Israel His people (Exodus 3:7; Exodus 3:10; Exodus 5:1, etc.).
2. On Isaiah 36:12. [“In regard to the indelicacy of this passage we may observe: 1) The Masorets in the Hebrew text have so printed the words used, that in reading it the offensiveness would be considerably avoided. 2) The customs, habits and modes of expression of people in different nations and times, differ. What appears indelicate at one time or in one country, may not only be tolerated, but common in another. 3) Isaiah is not at all responsible for the indelicacy of the language here. He is simply an historian. 4) It was of importance to give the true character of the attack which was made on Jerusalem. The coming of Sennacherib was attended with pride, insolence and blasphemy; and it was important to state the true character of the transaction, and to record just what was said and done. Let him who used the language, and not him who recorded it bear the blame.”—Barnes in loc.].
3. On Isaiah 36:18 sqq. “Observandum hic, quod apud gentes olim viguerit πολύθεια adeo, ut quaevis etiam urbs peculiarem habuerit Deum tutelarem. Cujus ethnicismi exemplum vivum et spirans adhuc habemus apud pontificios, quibus non inscite objici potest illud Jeremiae: Quot civitates tibi, tot etiam Dei (Jeremiah 2:28).”—Foerster.
4. On Isaiah 36:21. Answer not a fool according to his folly (Proverbs 26:4), much less the blasphemer, lest the flame of his wickedness be blown into the greater rage (Sir 8:3). Did not Christ the Lord answer His enemies, not always with words, but also with silence (Matthew 26:62; Matthew 27:14, etc.)? One must not cast pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6). After Foerster and Cramer.
5. On Isaiah 36:21. “Est aureus textus, qui docet nos, ne cum Satana disputemus. Quando enim videt, quod sumus ejus spectatores et auditores, tum captat occasionem majoris fortitudinis et gravius premit. Petrus dicit, eum circuire et quaerere, quem devoret. Nullum facit insidiarum finem. Tutissimum autem est non respondere, sed contemnere eum.”—Luther.
6. [On Isaiah 37:1-7. “Rabshakeh intended to frighten Hezekiah from the Lord, but it proves that he frightens him to the Lord. The wind, instead of forcing the traveler’s coat from him, makes him wrap it the closer about him. The more Rabshakeh reproaches God, the more Hezekiah studies to honor Him.” On Isaiah 37:3. “When we are most at a plunge we should be most earnest in prayer. When pains are most strong, let prayers be most lively. Prayer is the midwife of mercy, that helps to bring it forth.”—M. Henry, in loc.]
7. On Isaiah 37:2 sqq. Hezekiah here gives a good example. He shows all princes, rulers and peoples what one ought to do when there is a great and common distress, and tribulation. One ought with sackcloth, i. e., with penitent humility, to bring prayers, and intercessions to the Lord that He would look on and help.
8. On Isaiah 37:6 sq. “God takes to Himself all the evil done to His people. For as when one does a great kindness to the saints, God appropriates it to Himself, so, too, when one torments the saints, it is an injury done to God, and He treats sin no other way than as if done to Himself. He that torments them torments Him (Isaiah 64:9). Therefore the saints pray: ‘Arise, O God, plead thine own cause: remember how the foolish man reproacheth thee daily’ (Psalms 74:22).”—Cramer.
9. On Isaiah 37:7. “God raises up against His enemies other enemies, and thus prepares rest for His own people. Example: the Philistines against Saul who pursued David, 1 Samuel 23:27.”—Cramer.
10. On Isaiah 37:14. Vitringa here cites the following from Bonfin Rerum Hungar. Dec. III. Lib.
VI. p. 464, ad annum Isaiah 1444: “Amorathes, cum suos laborare cerneret et ab Vladislao rege non sine magna caede fugari, depromtum e sinu codicem initi sanctissime foederis explicat intentis in coelum oculis. Haec sunt, inquit ingeminans, Jesu Christe, foedera, quae Christiani tui mecum percussere. Per numen tuum sanctum jurarunt, datamque sub nomine tuo fidem violarunt, perfide suum Deum abnegarunt. Nunc Christe, si Deus es (ut ajunt et nos hallucinamur), tuas measque hic injurias, te quaeso, ulciscere et his, qui sanctum tuum nomen nondum agnovere, violatae fidei poenas ostende. Vix haec dixerat .… cum proelium, quod anceps ac dubium diu fuerat, inclinare coepit, etc.”[The desire of Hezekiah was not primarily his own personal safety, or the safety of his kingdom. It was that Jehovah might vindicate His great and holy name from reproach, and that the world might know that He was the only true God.
We have here a beautiful model of the object which we should have in view when we come before God. This motive of prayer is one that is with great frequency presented in the Bible. Comp. Isaiah 42:8; Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 43:13; Isaiah 43:25; Deuteronomy 32:39; Psalms 83:18; Psalms 46:10; Nehemiah 9:6; Daniel 9:18-19. Perhaps there could have been furnished no more striking proof that Jehovah was the true God, than would be by the defeat of Sennacherib. The time had come when the great Jehovah could strike a blow which would be felt on all nations, and carry the terror of His name, and the report of His power throughout the earth.
Perhaps this was one of the main motives of the destruction of that mighty army.”—Barnes, on Isaiah 37:2].
11. On Isaiah 37:15. “Fides Ezechiae verba confirmata magis ac magis crescit. Ante non ausus est orare, jam orat et confutat blasphemias omnes Assyrii. Adeo magna vis verbi est, ut longe alius per verbum, quod Jesajas ei nunciari jussit, factus sit.”—Luther.
12. On Isaiah 37:17. [“It is bad to talk proudly and profanely, but it is worse to write so, for this argues more deliberation and design, and what is written spreads further and lasts longer, and does the more mischief. Atheism and irreligion, written, will certainly be reckoned for another day.”—M. Henry].
13. On Isaiah 37:21 sqq. [“Those who receive messages of terror from men with patience, and send messages of faith to God by prayer, may expect messages of grace and peace from God for their comfort, even when they are most cast down. Isaiah sent a long answer to Hezekiah’s prayer in God’s name, sent it in writing (for it was too long to be sent by word of mouth), and sent it by way of return to his prayer, relation being thereunto had: ‘Whereas thou hast prayed to me, know, for thy comfort, that thy prayer is heard.’ Isaiah might have referred him to the prophecies he had delivered (particularly to that of chap. 10), and bid him pick out an answer from thence. The correspondence between earth and heaven is never let fall on God’s side.”—M. Henry.].
14. On Isaiah 37:31 sqq. “This is a promise of great extent. For it applies not only to those that then remained, and were spared the impending destruction and captivity by the Assyrians, but to all subsequent times, when they should enjoy a deliverance; as after the Babylonish captivity, and after the persecutions of Antiochus. Yea, it applies even to New Testament times from the first to the last, since therein, in the order of conversion to Christ, the Jews will take root and bring forth fruit, and thus in the Jews (as also in the converted Gentiles) will appear in a spiritual and corporal sense, what God at that time did to their fields in the three following years.”—Starke.
15. On Isaiah 38:1. “Isaiah, although of a noble race and condition, does not for that regard it disgraceful, but rather an honor, to be a pastor and visitor of the sick, I would say, a prophet, teacher and comforter of the sick. God save the mark! How has the world become so different in our day, especially in our evangelical church Let a family be a little noble, and it is regarded as a reproach and injury to have a clergyman among its relations and friends, not to speak of a son studying theology and becoming a servant of the church. I speak not of all; I know that some have a better mind; yet such is the common course. Jeroboam’s maxim must rather obtain, who made priests of the lowest of the people (1 Kings 12:31).
For thus the parsons may be firmly held in rein (sub ferula) and in political submission. It is not at all good where the clergy have a say, says an old state-rule of our Politicorum.” Feuerlein, pastor in Nuremberg, in his Novissimorum primum, 1694, p. 553. The same quotes Spener: “Is it not so, that among the Roman Catholics the greatest lords are not ashamed to stand in the spiritual office, and that many of them even discharge the spiritual functions? Among the Reformed, too, persons born of the noblest families are not ashamed of the office of preacher. But, it seems, we Lutherans are the only ones that hold the service of the gospel so low, that, where from a noble or otherwise prominent family an ingenium has an inclination to theological study, almost every one seeks to hinder him, or, indeed, afterwards is ashamed of his friendship, as if it were something much too base for such people, by which more harm comes to our church than one might suppose. That is to be ashamed of the gospel.”
16. On Isaiah 38:1. [“We see here the boldness and fidelity of a man of God. Isaiah was not afraid to go in freely and tell even a monarch that he must die. The subsequent part of the narrative would lead us to suppose that, until this announcement, Hezekiah did not regard himself as in immediate danger. It is evident here, that the physician of Hezekiah had not informed him of it—perhaps from the apprehension that his disease would be aggravated by the agitation of his mind on the subject. The duty was, therefore, left, as it is often, to the minister of religion—a duty which even many ministers are slow to perform, and which many physicians are reluctant to have performed.
No danger is to be apprehended commonly from announcing to those who are sick their true condition. Physicians and friends often err in this. There is no species of cruelty greater than to suffer a friend to lie on a dying bed under a delusion. There is no sin more aggravated than that of designedly deceiving a dying man, and flattering him with the hope of recovery, when there is a moral certainty that he will not and cannot recover. And there is evidently no danger to be apprehended from communicating to the sick their true condition. It should be done tenderly and with affection; but it should be done faithfully.
I have had many opportunities of witnessing the effect of apprising the sick of their situation, and of the moral certainty that they must die. And I cannot now recall an instance in which the announcement has had any unhappy effect on the disease. Often, on the contrary, the effect is to calm the mind, and to lead the dying to look up to God, and peacefully to repose on Him. And the effect of that is always salutary.” Barnes in loc.]
17. On Isaiah 38:2. It is an old opinion, found even in the Chald., that by the wall is meant the wall of the temple as a holy direction in which to pray, as the Mahometans pray in the direction of Mecca. But δχιψ cannot mean that. Rather that is correct which is said by Forerius: “Nolunt pii homines testes habere suarum lacrymarum, ut eas liberius fundant, neque sensu distrahi, cum orare Deum ex animo volunt.”
18. On Isaiah 38:8 :—
Non Deus est numen Parcarum carcere clausum.Quale putabatur Stoicus esse Deus.
Ille potest Solis cursus inhibere volantes,
At veluti scopulos flumina stare facit.”
—Melanchthon.
19. On Isaiah 38:12. “Beautiful parables that picture to us the transitoriness of this temporal life. For the parable of the shepherd’s tent means how restless a thing it is with us, that we have here no abiding place, but are driven from one locality to another, until at last we find a resting-spot in the church-yard. The other parable of the weaver’s thread means how uncertain is our life on earth. For how easily the thread breaks.” Cramer. “When the weaver’s work is progressing best, the thread breaks before he is aware. Thus when a man is in his best work, and supposes he now at last begins really to live, God breaks the thread of his life and lets him die. The rational heathen knew something of this when they, so to speak, invented the three goddesses of life (the three Parcas minime parcas) and included them in this little verse:
Clotho colum gestat, Lachesis trahit,
Atropos occatBut what does the weaver when the thread breaks? Does he stop his work at once? O no! He knows how to make a clever weaver’s knot, so that one cannot observe the break. Remember thereby that when thy life is broken off, yet the Lord Jesus, as a master artisan, can bring it together again at the last day. He will make such an artful, subtle weaver’s-knot as shall make us wonder through all eternity. It will do us no harm to have died.” Ibid.—Omnia sunt hominum tenui pendentia filo.
[“As suddenly as the tent of a shepherd is taken down, folded up, and transferred to another place. There is doubtless the idea here that he would continue to exist, but in another place, as the shepherd would pitch his tent in another place. He was to be cut off from the earth, but he expected to dwell among the dead. The whole passage conveys the idea that he expected to dwell in another state.” Barnes in loc.].
20. On Isaiah 38:17. [“Note 1) When God pardons sin, He casts it behind His back as not designing to look upon it with an eye of justice and jealousy. He remembers it no more, to visit for it. The pardon does not make the sin not to have been, or not to have been sin, but not to be punished as it deserves. When we cast our sins behind our back, and take no care to repent of them, God sets them before His face, and is ready to reckon for them; but when we set them before our face in true repentance, as David did when his sin was ever before him, God casts them behind His back. 2) When God pardons sin, He pardons all, casts them all behind His back, though they have been as scarlet and crimson. 3) The pardoning of sin is the delivering the soul from the pit of corruption. 4) It is pleasant indeed to think of our recoveries from sickness when we see them flowing from the remission of sin; then the cause is removed, and then it is in love to the soul.” M. Henry in loc.]
21. On Isaiah 38:18. [Cannot hope for thy truth. “They are shut out from all the means by which Thy truth is brought to mind, and the offers of salvation are presented. Their probation is at an end; their privileges are closed; their destiny is sealed up. The idea is, it is a privilege to live because this is a world where the offers of salvation are made, and where those who are conscious of guilt may hope in the mercy of God.” Barnes in loc.] God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). Such is the New Testament sense of these Old Testament words. For though Hezekiah has primarily in mind the preferableness of life in the earthly body to the life in Hades, yet this whole manner of representation passes away with Hades itself.
But Hezekiah’s words still remain true so far as they apply to heaven and hell. For of course in hell, the place of the damned, one does not praise God. But those that live praise Him. These, however, are in heaven. Since then God wills rather that men praise Him than not praise Him, so He is not willing that men should perish, but that all should turn to repentance and live.
22. On Isaiah 39:2. “Primo (Deus) per obsidionem et bellum, deinde per gravem morbum Ezechiam servaverat, ne in praesumtionem laberetur. Nondum tamen vinci potuit antiquus serpens, sed redit et levat caput suum. Adeo non possumus consistere, nisi Deos nos affligat. Vides igitur hic, quis sit afflictionum usus, ut mortificent scilicet carnem, quae non potest res ferre secundas.” Luther.
23. On Isaiah 39:7. “God also punishes the misdeeds of the parents on the children (Exodus 20:5) because the children not only follow the misdeeds of their parents, but they also increase and heap them up, as is seen in the posterity of Hezekiah, viz.: Manasseh and Amon.”—Cramer.
HINTS[The reader is referred to the ample hints covering the same matter to be found in the volume on 2 Kings 18-20. It is expedient to take advantage of that for the sake of keeping the present volume within reasonable bounds. Therefore but a minimum is here given of what the Author offers, much of which indeed is but the repetition in another form of matter already given.—Tr.]
1. On Isaiah 37:36. “1) The scorn and mockery of the visible world. 2) The scorn and mockery of the unseen world.” Sermon of Domprediger Zahn in Halle, 1870.
2. On the entire 38. chapter, beside the 22 sermons in ’S Novissimorum primum, there is a great number of homiletical elaborations of an early date; Walther Magirus, Idea mortis et vitae in two parts, the second of which contains 20 penitential and consolatory sermons on Isaiah 38. Danzig, 1640 and 1642. Daniel Schaller (Stendal) 4 sermons on the sick Hezekiah, on Isaiah 38. Magdeburg, 1611. Peter Siegmund Pape in “Gott geheilighte Wochenpredigten,” Berlin, 1701, 4 sermons. Jacob Tichlerus (Elburg) Hiskiae Aufrichtigkeit bewiesen in Gesundheit, Krankheit und Genesung, 18 sermons on Isaiah 38. (Dutch), Campen, 1636. These are only the principal ones.
3. On Isaiah 38:1. “I will set my house in order. This, indeed, will not be hard for me to do. My debt account is crossed out; my best possession I take along with me; my children I commit to the great Father of orphans, to whom heaven and earth belongs, and my soul to the Lord, who has sued for it longer than a human age, and bought it with His blood. Thus I am eased and ready for the journey.” Tholuck, Stunden der Andacht, p. 620.
4. On Isaiah 38:1. “Now thou shouldest know that our word ‘order his house’ has a very broad meaning. It comprehends reconciliation to God by faith, the final confession of sin, the last Lord’s Supper, the humble committing of the soul to the grace of the Lord, and to death and the grave in the hope of the resurrection. In one word: There is an ordering of the house above. In reliance on the precious merit of my Saviour, I order my house above in which I wish to dwell. Moreover taking leave of loved ones, and the blessing of them belongs to ordering the house. And finally order must be taken concerning the guardianship of children, the abiding of the widow, and the friend on whom she must especially lean in her loneliness, also concerning earthly bequests.” Ahlfeld, Das Leben im Lichte des Wortes Gottes, Halle, 1867, p. 522.
5. On Isaiah 38:2-8. This account has much that seems strange to us Christians, but much, too, that quite corresponds to our Christian consciousness. Let us contemplate the difference between an Old Testament, and a New Testament suppliant, by noticing the differences and the resemblances. I. The resemblances. 1) Distress and grief there are in the Old, as in the New Testament (Isaiah 38:3). 2) Ready and willing to help beyond our prayers or comprehension (Isaiah 38:5-6) is the Lord in the Old as in the New Testament.
II. The differences. 1) The Old Testament suppliant appealed to his having done nothing bad (Isaiah 38:3). The New Testament suppliant says: “God be merciful to me a sinner,” and “Give me through grace for Christ’s sake what it pleases Thee to give me.” 2) The Old Testament suppliant demands a sign (Isaiah 38:7-8; comp. Isaiah 38:22); the New Testament suppliant requires no sign but that of the crucified Son of man, for He knows that to those who bear this sign is given the promise of the hearing of all their prayers (John 16:23). 3) In Hezekiah’s case, the prayer of the Old Testament suppliant is indeed heard (Isaiah 38:5), yet in general it has not the certainty of being heard, whereas the New Testament suppliant has this certainty.
Footnotes:fighting.had decamped.and thou wilt be delivered.
4. ’S
Isaiah 37:14-2014 And Hezekiah received the letter from the hand of the messengers, and read it: and Hezekiah went up unto the house of the Lord, and spread it before the Lord. 15, 16And Hezekiah prayed unto the Lord, saying, O Lord of hosts, God of Israel, that dwellest between the cherubim, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth: thou hast made heaven and earth. 17Incline thine ear, O Lord, and hear; open thine eyes, O Lord, and see: and hear all the words of Sennacherib, which hath sent to reproach the living God. 18Of a truth Lord, the 19kings of Assyria have laid waste all the Nations, and their countries, And have cast their gods into the fire: for they were no gods, but the work of men’s hands, wood and stone: therefore they have destroyed them. 20Now therefore, O Lord our God, save us from his hand, that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that thou art the Lord, even thou only.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_37:14. ρτψιν, properly scripta, stands, like the Latin litcrae, for one writing (comp. 1 Kings 21:8; 2 Kings 10:1, where verse 2 ρτψ interchanges with ρτψιν; 2 Kings 20:12, comp. Isaiah 39:1). The singular suffix following refers to the singular notion ρτψ, scriptum.Isaiah 37:15. The contents of this verse forms in 2 Kings 19 the beginning of Isa 37:15, and instead of μΰξψΰμΞιδεδ, which is the more usual form of speech, it reads in 2 Kings μτπιιΧειΰξψ.
Isaiah 37:16. ΰϊδδεΰδΰμδιν. Grammatically it is, of course, not impossible to take ηεΰ as predicate and δΰμδιν as in apposition with it. But then δεΰ is in effect a formal, rhetorical emphasis of the predicate. But if δεΰ is construed in apposition with the subject, then it is materially significant. For then it acquires meaning “talis,” and refers emphatically to the being of God as the inward ground of His works. This emphatic sense (= talis) δεΰ has in reference to men Jeremiah 49:12.
Isaiah 37:17. ςιπκ, according to the punctuation and according to 2 Kings 19:16, ςֵ ?ιπֶ ?ικָ, is to be construed as plural. τχη is used only of opening the eyes and the ears Isaiah 42:20, comp. Daniel 9:18.
Isaiah 37:18. Instead of ΰϊΞλμΞδΰψφεϊ we read in 2 Kings 19:17 ΰϊΞδβειν. If the reading in Isaiah be correct, then the following εΰϊΞΰψφν can only mean that the Assyrians have destroyed their own land, and that “by depopulation in consequence of constant War” [comp. Isaiah 14:20.—Tr.]. But ΰξπν introduces a concession of the truth of what the Assyrian says, who boasts only of what they have done to other nations. It must then be admitted that 2 Kings has the more correct reading.
There appears to be an alteration in Isaiah, probably occasioned by the δηψιαε less used of nations than of lands, and possibly also by the μλμΞδΰψφεϊ Isaiah 37:11.—δηψια, which reminds of δηψιν Isaiah 37:11, means properly “to make withered,” then generally “to waste, desolate,” In its radical meaning and primarily it is used of lands, then also of nations (Isaiah 49:17; Isaiah 60:12; Jeremiah 50:27). [ΰψφεϊ is used here in the sense of nations, as the singular seems sometimes to denote the inhabitants of the earth or land. This would at the same time account for the masculine suffix in ΰψφν.—J. A. Alex. The Author’s hypothesis to account for the variation in Isaiah’s text is noticed by J. A.
Alex., as urged by Gesenius, as is the case with much beside that the Author has to present on the same subject. In reference to the present instance J. A. Alex. says: “Besides its fanciful and arbitrary character as a mere make-shift, and its gratuitous assumption of the grossest stupidity and ignorance as well as inattention in the writer, it is sufficiently refuted by the emphatic combination of the same verb and noun Isaiah 60:12,—(which) proves that such a writer could not have been so shocked at the expression as to make nonsense of a sentence merely for the purpose of avoiding it. The reader will do well to observe, moreover, that the same imaginary copyist is supposed, in different emergencies, to have been wholly unacquainted with the idioms of his mother tongue [comp. Dr.
Naegelsbach above at Isaiah 36:21 on δηψιωׁ ?ε, and at Isaiah 37:9 on ειωξς], and yet extremely sensitive to any supposed violation of usage. Such scruples and such ignorance are not often found in combination. A transcriber unable to distinguish sense from nonsense would not be apt to take offence at mere irregularities or eccentricities in the phraseology or diction of his author.” The wisdom of this remark will no doubt in most minds outweigh the considerations that the Author offers, in the progress of his commentary on the present section, in proof of our text being second hand.—Tr.].
Isaiah 37:19. ειΰαγεν describes, according to the succession of verbs δηψιαε—επϊο, the concluding result.
Isaiah 37:20. ΰϊδιδεδ. In 2 Kings 19:19 the reading is ιδεδΰμδιν, and according to the accents these words belong together, whether construed as predicate or apposition with the subject ΰϊδ. Moreover the author of the Isaiah text seem to have combined them, and for this reason to have treated ΰμδιν as superfluous. But it is certainly the most natural to separate the two words and take ΰμδιν as predicate so that we obtain the sense: “that thou Jehovah alone art God.” Then the Isaiah text must be so understood, and ιδεδ be taken as in apposition with the subject ΰϊδ, while the notion God is supplied from the context: “that thou Jehovah, alone art (it, viz. God).”
AND 1. And Hezekiah—saying.Isaiah 37:14-15. We learn here for the first that the messengers were to deliver a written message, for Isaiah 37:9-10 spoke only of an oral commission. The spreading out of the letter was a symbolic transaction. It verified on the one hand, the reality of the present necessity, on the other, it would, as it were, itself cry to heaven, the blasphemy of it should itself call down the divine vengeance. It recalls all the passages where mention is made of impiety that cried to heaven: comp. e.g., Genesis 4:10; Job 16:18; Job 24:12; Job 31:33; Habakkuk 3:11.
2. O LORD—thou only.Isaiah 37:16-20. That the Cherubim are only symbolic and not personal angel forms, as Lange would have it (Genesis 3:24) is hard to believe. What Ezekiel saw (Isaiah 1:4 sqq.; Isaiah 9:3; Isaiah 10:2 sqq.), were not mere symbols, for symbols are likenesses, in which from a known greatness one infers the unknown. That partially agrees with the Ezekiel visions. For the rest these are of a transcendental nature.
They open to us glimpses into the depths of the divinity, consequently into realities in fact, but into such before which we stand as before one that speaks in tongues. We must modestly refer the cherubim to the class of riddles that will not be resolved until the next life. It is a reflection of those heavenly functions of the cherubim, as they are described in Ezekiel, when we see the cherubim forms appear on the ark of the covenant as the bearers of the presence of God in the midst of the congregation of the Old Testament (Exodus 25:18 sqq.). From the Kapporeth, from out the space between the two cherubim (ibid.22) the Lord will reveal Himself. Hence He is repeatedly designated as the ιωׁ ?αδλψαιν (1 Samuel 4:4; 2 Samuel 6:2; 2 Samuel 22:11; 1 Chronicles 13:6; Psalms 80:2; Psalms 99:1). The thou art the God, even thou Hezekiah took from the glorious prayer of thanksgiving of his ancestor David (2 Samuel 7:28) in which the latter made known his faith in the glorious promise given to his house (ibid.
Isaiah 37:12 sqq.). [See Text. and Gram.]. In reference to God, comp. Psalms 44:5. Moreover one needs to examine closely in its context every single passage which may besides be drawn hither (Deuteronomy 32:39; Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 43:13; Isaiah 43:25; Isaiah 48:12; Isaiah 51:12; Nehemiah 9:6-7), see on Isaiah 41:4. Hezekiah evidently is at pains right thoroughly to emphasize the aloneness of God. Rabshakeh and Sennacherib himself (Isaiah 37:12) had most incisively expressed the heathen idea that every land has its gods.
In contrast with this Hezekiah most decisively makes prominent that Jehovah is not merely a God, but the God alone for all nations of the earth: and that because he made heaven and earth (Genesis 1:1; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 51:13, etc.).
The causal clause for they were no gods,etc. Isaiah 37:19, gives at once the reason why those victories of the Assyrians were possible, and the negative ground of comfort for Israel’s hope. They could desolate those lands and destroy their gods, because the latter were only men’s work of wood and stone. But therein lay the reason for Israel’s hope. For Israel’s God was something very different: therefore the victory over those gave no ground for inferring that Assyria would conquer also the God of Israel. Isaiah 37:20 contains the prayer itself.
[“The adverb now is equivalent to therefore, or since these things are so. The fact that Sennacherib had destroyed other nations, is urged as a reason why the Lord should interpose to rescue His own people from a like destruction: and the fact that He had really triumphed over other gods, as a reason why He should be taught to know the difference between them and Jehovah.”—J. A. Alex.].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 36:4 sqq. “Haec proprie est Satanae lingua et sunt non Rabsacis sed ipsissimi Diaboli verba, quibus non muros urbis, sed medullam Ezechiae, hoc est, tenerrimam ejus fidem oppugnat.”—Luther. “In this address the chief-butler, Satan performs in the way he uses when he would bring about our apostacy. 1) He urges that we are divested of all human support, Isaiah 36:5; Isaiah 2) We are deprived of divine support, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 3) God is angry with us because we have greatly provoked Him by our sins, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 4) He decks out the splendor, and power of the wicked, Isaiah 36:8-9; Isaiah 5) He appeals to God’s word, and knows how to turn and twist it to his uses. Such poisonous arrows were used by Satan against Christ in the desert, and may be compared with this light (Matthew 4:2 sqq.). One needs to arm himself against Satan’s attack by God’s word, and to resort to constant watching and prayer.”—Cramer.
The Assyrian urges four particulars by which he would destroy Hezekiah’s confidence, in two of which he was right and in two wrong. He was right in representing that Hezekiah could rely neither on Egypt, nor on his own power. In this respect he was a messenger of God and announcer of divine truth. For everywhere the word of God preaches the same (Isaiah 30:1-3; Isaiah 31:1-3; Jeremiah 17:5; Psalms 118:8-9; Psalms 146:3, etc.). But it is a merited chastisement if rude and hostile preachers must preach to us what we were unwilling to believe at the mild and friendly voice of God. But in two particulars the Assyrian was wrong, and therein lay Hezekiah’s strength.
For just on this account the Lord is for him and against the Assyrian. These two things are, that the Assyrian asserts that Hezekiah cannot put his trust in the Lord, but rather he, the Assyrian is counseled by the Lord against Hezekiah. That, however, was a lie, and because of this lie, the corresponding truth makes all the deeper impression on Hezekiah, and reminds him how assuredly he may build on the Lord and importune Him. And when the enemy dares to say, that he is commissioned by the Lord to destroy the Holy Land, just that must bring to lively remembrance in the Israelite, that the Lord, who cannot lie, calls the land of Israel His land (Joel 4:2; Jeremiah 2:7; Jeremiah 16:18, etc.), and the people of Israel His people (Exodus 3:7; Exodus 3:10; Exodus 5:1, etc.).
2. On Isaiah 36:12. [“In regard to the indelicacy of this passage we may observe: 1) The Masorets in the Hebrew text have so printed the words used, that in reading it the offensiveness would be considerably avoided. 2) The customs, habits and modes of expression of people in different nations and times, differ. What appears indelicate at one time or in one country, may not only be tolerated, but common in another. 3) Isaiah is not at all responsible for the indelicacy of the language here. He is simply an historian. 4) It was of importance to give the true character of the attack which was made on Jerusalem. The coming of Sennacherib was attended with pride, insolence and blasphemy; and it was important to state the true character of the transaction, and to record just what was said and done. Let him who used the language, and not him who recorded it bear the blame.”—Barnes in loc.].
3. On Isaiah 36:18 sqq. “Observandum hic, quod apud gentes olim viguerit πολύθεια adeo, ut quaevis etiam urbs peculiarem habuerit Deum tutelarem. Cujus ethnicismi exemplum vivum et spirans adhuc habemus apud pontificios, quibus non inscite objici potest illud Jeremiae: Quot civitates tibi, tot etiam Dei (Jeremiah 2:28).”—Foerster.
4. On Isaiah 36:21. Answer not a fool according to his folly (Proverbs 26:4), much less the blasphemer, lest the flame of his wickedness be blown into the greater rage (Sir 8:3). Did not Christ the Lord answer His enemies, not always with words, but also with silence (Matthew 26:62; Matthew 27:14, etc.)? One must not cast pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6). After Foerster and Cramer.
5. On Isaiah 36:21. “Est aureus textus, qui docet nos, ne cum Satana disputemus. Quando enim videt, quod sumus ejus spectatores et auditores, tum captat occasionem majoris fortitudinis et gravius premit. Petrus dicit, eum circuire et quaerere, quem devoret. Nullum facit insidiarum finem. Tutissimum autem est non respondere, sed contemnere eum.”—Luther.
6. [On Isaiah 37:1-7. “Rabshakeh intended to frighten Hezekiah from the Lord, but it proves that he frightens him to the Lord. The wind, instead of forcing the traveler’s coat from him, makes him wrap it the closer about him. The more Rabshakeh reproaches God, the more Hezekiah studies to honor Him.” On Isaiah 37:3. “When we are most at a plunge we should be most earnest in prayer. When pains are most strong, let prayers be most lively. Prayer is the midwife of mercy, that helps to bring it forth.”—M. Henry, in loc.]
7. On Isaiah 37:2 sqq. Hezekiah here gives a good example. He shows all princes, rulers and peoples what one ought to do when there is a great and common distress, and tribulation. One ought with sackcloth, i. e., with penitent humility, to bring prayers, and intercessions to the Lord that He would look on and help.
8. On Isaiah 37:6 sq. “God takes to Himself all the evil done to His people. For as when one does a great kindness to the saints, God appropriates it to Himself, so, too, when one torments the saints, it is an injury done to God, and He treats sin no other way than as if done to Himself. He that torments them torments Him (Isaiah 64:9). Therefore the saints pray: ‘Arise, O God, plead thine own cause: remember how the foolish man reproacheth thee daily’ (Psalms 74:22).”—Cramer.
9. On Isaiah 37:7. “God raises up against His enemies other enemies, and thus prepares rest for His own people. Example: the Philistines against Saul who pursued David, 1 Samuel 23:27.”—Cramer.
10. On Isaiah 37:14. Vitringa here cites the following from Bonfin Rerum Hungar. Dec. III. Lib.
VI. p. 464, ad annum Isaiah 1444: “Amorathes, cum suos laborare cerneret et ab Vladislao rege non sine magna caede fugari, depromtum e sinu codicem initi sanctissime foederis explicat intentis in coelum oculis. Haec sunt, inquit ingeminans, Jesu Christe, foedera, quae Christiani tui mecum percussere. Per numen tuum sanctum jurarunt, datamque sub nomine tuo fidem violarunt, perfide suum Deum abnegarunt. Nunc Christe, si Deus es (ut ajunt et nos hallucinamur), tuas measque hic injurias, te quaeso, ulciscere et his, qui sanctum tuum nomen nondum agnovere, violatae fidei poenas ostende. Vix haec dixerat .… cum proelium, quod anceps ac dubium diu fuerat, inclinare coepit, etc.”[The desire of Hezekiah was not primarily his own personal safety, or the safety of his kingdom. It was that Jehovah might vindicate His great and holy name from reproach, and that the world might know that He was the only true God.
We have here a beautiful model of the object which we should have in view when we come before God. This motive of prayer is one that is with great frequency presented in the Bible. Comp. Isaiah 42:8; Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 43:13; Isaiah 43:25; Deuteronomy 32:39; Psalms 83:18; Psalms 46:10; Nehemiah 9:6; Daniel 9:18-19. Perhaps there could have been furnished no more striking proof that Jehovah was the true God, than would be by the defeat of Sennacherib. The time had come when the great Jehovah could strike a blow which would be felt on all nations, and carry the terror of His name, and the report of His power throughout the earth.
Perhaps this was one of the main motives of the destruction of that mighty army.”—Barnes, on Isaiah 37:2].
11. On Isaiah 37:15. “Fides Ezechiae verba confirmata magis ac magis crescit. Ante non ausus est orare, jam orat et confutat blasphemias omnes Assyrii. Adeo magna vis verbi est, ut longe alius per verbum, quod Jesajas ei nunciari jussit, factus sit.”—Luther.
12. On Isaiah 37:17. [“It is bad to talk proudly and profanely, but it is worse to write so, for this argues more deliberation and design, and what is written spreads further and lasts longer, and does the more mischief. Atheism and irreligion, written, will certainly be reckoned for another day.”—M. Henry].
13. On Isaiah 37:21 sqq. [“Those who receive messages of terror from men with patience, and send messages of faith to God by prayer, may expect messages of grace and peace from God for their comfort, even when they are most cast down. Isaiah sent a long answer to Hezekiah’s prayer in God’s name, sent it in writing (for it was too long to be sent by word of mouth), and sent it by way of return to his prayer, relation being thereunto had: ‘Whereas thou hast prayed to me, know, for thy comfort, that thy prayer is heard.’ Isaiah might have referred him to the prophecies he had delivered (particularly to that of chap. 10), and bid him pick out an answer from thence. The correspondence between earth and heaven is never let fall on God’s side.”—M. Henry.].
14. On Isaiah 37:31 sqq. “This is a promise of great extent. For it applies not only to those that then remained, and were spared the impending destruction and captivity by the Assyrians, but to all subsequent times, when they should enjoy a deliverance; as after the Babylonish captivity, and after the persecutions of Antiochus. Yea, it applies even to New Testament times from the first to the last, since therein, in the order of conversion to Christ, the Jews will take root and bring forth fruit, and thus in the Jews (as also in the converted Gentiles) will appear in a spiritual and corporal sense, what God at that time did to their fields in the three following years.”—Starke.
15. On Isaiah 38:1. “Isaiah, although of a noble race and condition, does not for that regard it disgraceful, but rather an honor, to be a pastor and visitor of the sick, I would say, a prophet, teacher and comforter of the sick. God save the mark! How has the world become so different in our day, especially in our evangelical church Let a family be a little noble, and it is regarded as a reproach and injury to have a clergyman among its relations and friends, not to speak of a son studying theology and becoming a servant of the church. I speak not of all; I know that some have a better mind; yet such is the common course. Jeroboam’s maxim must rather obtain, who made priests of the lowest of the people (1 Kings 12:31).
For thus the parsons may be firmly held in rein (sub ferula) and in political submission. It is not at all good where the clergy have a say, says an old state-rule of our Politicorum.” Feuerlein, pastor in Nuremberg, in his Novissimorum primum, 1694, p. 553. The same quotes Spener: “Is it not so, that among the Roman Catholics the greatest lords are not ashamed to stand in the spiritual office, and that many of them even discharge the spiritual functions? Among the Reformed, too, persons born of the noblest families are not ashamed of the office of preacher. But, it seems, we Lutherans are the only ones that hold the service of the gospel so low, that, where from a noble or otherwise prominent family an ingenium has an inclination to theological study, almost every one seeks to hinder him, or, indeed, afterwards is ashamed of his friendship, as if it were something much too base for such people, by which more harm comes to our church than one might suppose. That is to be ashamed of the gospel.”
16. On Isaiah 38:1. [“We see here the boldness and fidelity of a man of God. Isaiah was not afraid to go in freely and tell even a monarch that he must die. The subsequent part of the narrative would lead us to suppose that, until this announcement, Hezekiah did not regard himself as in immediate danger. It is evident here, that the physician of Hezekiah had not informed him of it—perhaps from the apprehension that his disease would be aggravated by the agitation of his mind on the subject. The duty was, therefore, left, as it is often, to the minister of religion—a duty which even many ministers are slow to perform, and which many physicians are reluctant to have performed.
No danger is to be apprehended commonly from announcing to those who are sick their true condition. Physicians and friends often err in this. There is no species of cruelty greater than to suffer a friend to lie on a dying bed under a delusion. There is no sin more aggravated than that of designedly deceiving a dying man, and flattering him with the hope of recovery, when there is a moral certainty that he will not and cannot recover. And there is evidently no danger to be apprehended from communicating to the sick their true condition. It should be done tenderly and with affection; but it should be done faithfully.
I have had many opportunities of witnessing the effect of apprising the sick of their situation, and of the moral certainty that they must die. And I cannot now recall an instance in which the announcement has had any unhappy effect on the disease. Often, on the contrary, the effect is to calm the mind, and to lead the dying to look up to God, and peacefully to repose on Him. And the effect of that is always salutary.” Barnes in loc.]
17. On Isaiah 38:2. It is an old opinion, found even in the Chald., that by the wall is meant the wall of the temple as a holy direction in which to pray, as the Mahometans pray in the direction of Mecca. But δχιψ cannot mean that. Rather that is correct which is said by Forerius: “Nolunt pii homines testes habere suarum lacrymarum, ut eas liberius fundant, neque sensu distrahi, cum orare Deum ex animo volunt.”
18. On Isaiah 38:8 :—
Non Deus est numen Parcarum carcere clausum.Quale putabatur Stoicus esse Deus.
Ille potest Solis cursus inhibere volantes,
At veluti scopulos flumina stare facit.”
—Melanchthon.
19. On Isaiah 38:12. “Beautiful parables that picture to us the transitoriness of this temporal life. For the parable of the shepherd’s tent means how restless a thing it is with us, that we have here no abiding place, but are driven from one locality to another, until at last we find a resting-spot in the church-yard. The other parable of the weaver’s thread means how uncertain is our life on earth. For how easily the thread breaks.” Cramer. “When the weaver’s work is progressing best, the thread breaks before he is aware. Thus when a man is in his best work, and supposes he now at last begins really to live, God breaks the thread of his life and lets him die. The rational heathen knew something of this when they, so to speak, invented the three goddesses of life (the three Parcas minime parcas) and included them in this little verse:
Clotho colum gestat, Lachesis trahit,
Atropos occatBut what does the weaver when the thread breaks? Does he stop his work at once? O no! He knows how to make a clever weaver’s knot, so that one cannot observe the break. Remember thereby that when thy life is broken off, yet the Lord Jesus, as a master artisan, can bring it together again at the last day. He will make such an artful, subtle weaver’s-knot as shall make us wonder through all eternity. It will do us no harm to have died.” Ibid.—Omnia sunt hominum tenui pendentia filo.
[“As suddenly as the tent of a shepherd is taken down, folded up, and transferred to another place. There is doubtless the idea here that he would continue to exist, but in another place, as the shepherd would pitch his tent in another place. He was to be cut off from the earth, but he expected to dwell among the dead. The whole passage conveys the idea that he expected to dwell in another state.” Barnes in loc.].
20. On Isaiah 38:17. [“Note 1) When God pardons sin, He casts it behind His back as not designing to look upon it with an eye of justice and jealousy. He remembers it no more, to visit for it. The pardon does not make the sin not to have been, or not to have been sin, but not to be punished as it deserves. When we cast our sins behind our back, and take no care to repent of them, God sets them before His face, and is ready to reckon for them; but when we set them before our face in true repentance, as David did when his sin was ever before him, God casts them behind His back. 2) When God pardons sin, He pardons all, casts them all behind His back, though they have been as scarlet and crimson. 3) The pardoning of sin is the delivering the soul from the pit of corruption. 4) It is pleasant indeed to think of our recoveries from sickness when we see them flowing from the remission of sin; then the cause is removed, and then it is in love to the soul.” M. Henry in loc.]
21. On Isaiah 38:18. [Cannot hope for thy truth. “They are shut out from all the means by which Thy truth is brought to mind, and the offers of salvation are presented. Their probation is at an end; their privileges are closed; their destiny is sealed up. The idea is, it is a privilege to live because this is a world where the offers of salvation are made, and where those who are conscious of guilt may hope in the mercy of God.” Barnes in loc.] God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). Such is the New Testament sense of these Old Testament words. For though Hezekiah has primarily in mind the preferableness of life in the earthly body to the life in Hades, yet this whole manner of representation passes away with Hades itself.
But Hezekiah’s words still remain true so far as they apply to heaven and hell. For of course in hell, the place of the damned, one does not praise God. But those that live praise Him. These, however, are in heaven. Since then God wills rather that men praise Him than not praise Him, so He is not willing that men should perish, but that all should turn to repentance and live.
22. On Isaiah 39:2. “Primo (Deus) per obsidionem et bellum, deinde per gravem morbum Ezechiam servaverat, ne in praesumtionem laberetur. Nondum tamen vinci potuit antiquus serpens, sed redit et levat caput suum. Adeo non possumus consistere, nisi Deos nos affligat. Vides igitur hic, quis sit afflictionum usus, ut mortificent scilicet carnem, quae non potest res ferre secundas.” Luther.
23. On Isaiah 39:7. “God also punishes the misdeeds of the parents on the children (Exodus 20:5) because the children not only follow the misdeeds of their parents, but they also increase and heap them up, as is seen in the posterity of Hezekiah, viz.: Manasseh and Amon.”—Cramer.
HINTS[The reader is referred to the ample hints covering the same matter to be found in the volume on 2 Kings 18-20. It is expedient to take advantage of that for the sake of keeping the present volume within reasonable bounds. Therefore but a minimum is here given of what the Author offers, much of which indeed is but the repetition in another form of matter already given.—Tr.]
1. On Isaiah 37:36. “1) The scorn and mockery of the visible world. 2) The scorn and mockery of the unseen world.” Sermon of Domprediger Zahn in Halle, 1870.
2. On the entire 38. chapter, beside the 22 sermons in ’S Novissimorum primum, there is a great number of homiletical elaborations of an early date; Walther Magirus, Idea mortis et vitae in two parts, the second of which contains 20 penitential and consolatory sermons on Isaiah 38. Danzig, 1640 and 1642. Daniel Schaller (Stendal) 4 sermons on the sick Hezekiah, on Isaiah 38. Magdeburg, 1611. Peter Siegmund Pape in “Gott geheilighte Wochenpredigten,” Berlin, 1701, 4 sermons. Jacob Tichlerus (Elburg) Hiskiae Aufrichtigkeit bewiesen in Gesundheit, Krankheit und Genesung, 18 sermons on Isaiah 38. (Dutch), Campen, 1636. These are only the principal ones.
3. On Isaiah 38:1. “I will set my house in order. This, indeed, will not be hard for me to do. My debt account is crossed out; my best possession I take along with me; my children I commit to the great Father of orphans, to whom heaven and earth belongs, and my soul to the Lord, who has sued for it longer than a human age, and bought it with His blood. Thus I am eased and ready for the journey.” Tholuck, Stunden der Andacht, p. 620.
4. On Isaiah 38:1. “Now thou shouldest know that our word ‘order his house’ has a very broad meaning. It comprehends reconciliation to God by faith, the final confession of sin, the last Lord’s Supper, the humble committing of the soul to the grace of the Lord, and to death and the grave in the hope of the resurrection. In one word: There is an ordering of the house above. In reliance on the precious merit of my Saviour, I order my house above in which I wish to dwell. Moreover taking leave of loved ones, and the blessing of them belongs to ordering the house. And finally order must be taken concerning the guardianship of children, the abiding of the widow, and the friend on whom she must especially lean in her loneliness, also concerning earthly bequests.” Ahlfeld, Das Leben im Lichte des Wortes Gottes, Halle, 1867, p. 522.
5. On Isaiah 38:2-8. This account has much that seems strange to us Christians, but much, too, that quite corresponds to our Christian consciousness. Let us contemplate the difference between an Old Testament, and a New Testament suppliant, by noticing the differences and the resemblances. I. The resemblances. 1) Distress and grief there are in the Old, as in the New Testament (Isaiah 38:3). 2) Ready and willing to help beyond our prayers or comprehension (Isaiah 38:5-6) is the Lord in the Old as in the New Testament.
II. The differences. 1) The Old Testament suppliant appealed to his having done nothing bad (Isaiah 38:3). The New Testament suppliant says: “God be merciful to me a sinner,” and “Give me through grace for Christ’s sake what it pleases Thee to give me.” 2) The Old Testament suppliant demands a sign (Isaiah 38:7-8; comp. Isaiah 38:22); the New Testament suppliant requires no sign but that of the crucified Son of man, for He knows that to those who bear this sign is given the promise of the hearing of all their prayers (John 16:23). 3) In Hezekiah’s case, the prayer of the Old Testament suppliant is indeed heard (Isaiah 38:5), yet in general it has not the certainty of being heard, whereas the New Testament suppliant has this certainty.
Footnotes:seated on the, etc.to.living divinity.Heb. lands.Heb. given.and.thou Jehovah alone (art it).
5. ISAIAH’S MESSAGE TO THE DANGER BY
Isaiah 37:21-3521then Isaiah the son of Amoz sent unto Hezekiah, saying, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Whereas thou hast prayed to me against Sennacherib king of Assyria: 22this is the word which the Lord hath spoken concerning him;
The Virgin, the daughter of Zion hath despised thee,
And laughed thee to scorn;
The daughter of Jerusalem hath shaken her head at thee.
23 Whom hast thou reproached and blasphemed?
And against whom hast thou exalted thy voice,
And lifted up thine eyes on high?
Even against the Holy One of Israel.
24 By thy servants hast thou reproached the Lord, and hast said,
By the multitude of my chariots am I come up
To the height of the mountains, to the sides of Lebanon;
And I will cut down the tall cedars thereof, and the choice fir trees thereof;
And I will enter into the height of his border, and the forest of his Carmel.
25 I have digged and drunk water;
And with the sole of my feet have I dried up all the rivers of the besieged places.
26 Hast thou not heard long ago, how I have done it;
And of ancient times, that I have formed it?
Now have I brought it to pass,
That thou shouldest be to lay waste defenced cities into ruinous heaps,
27 Therefore their inhabitants were of small power,
They were dismayed and confounded:
They were as the grass of the field, and as the green herb,
As the grass on the housetops,
And as corn blasted before it be grown up,
28 iBut I know thy abode, and thy going out, and thy coming in,
And thy rage against me.
29 Because kthy rage against me, and thy tumult, is come up into mine ears,
Therefore will I put my hook in thy nose,
And my bridle in thy lips,
And I will turn thee back by the way by which thou camest.
30 And this shall be a sign unto thee,
Ye shall eat this year such as groweth of itself;
And the second year that which springeth of the same:
And in the third year sow ye, and reap,
And plant vineyards, and eat the fruit thereof.
31 And the remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah
Shall again take root downward,
And bear fruit upward:
32 For out of Jerusalem shall go forth a remnant,
And they that escape out of Mount Zion:
The zeal of the Lord of hosts shall do this.
33 Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning the king of Assyria,
He shall not come into this city,
Nor shoot an arrow there,
Nor come before it with shields,
Nor cast a bank against it.
34 By the way that he came, by the same shall he return,
And shall not come into this city, saith the Lord.35 For I will defend this city to save it
For mine own sake, and for my servant David’s sake.
AND Isa_37:21. ωׁ ?μη is here, not merely “to send” generally, but to send a message, as appears from μΰξψ: comp. Genesis 38:25; 2 Samuel 14:32; 1 Kings 9:5; 2 Kings 5:8, etc.—The clause ΰωׁ ?ψδϊτμμϊεβεΧ can be construed grammatically as the premise to the apodosis ζδδγαψεβεΧ Isaiah 37:22, or as a relative explanatory clause to ιδεδΰμδιιΧ Isaiah 37:21. The latter is possible because in Hebrew, by a prepositive ΰωׁ ?ψְ even the casus obliqui of the pronouns of the first and second persons can receive a relative meaning. Comp. Isaiah 41:8-9; Isaiah 64:10; Genesis 45:4. But the latter explanation seems to me unsuitable because a clause like “I to whom thou hast prayed,” does not sound well in the mouth of God.
For does not that assume that Hezekiah might have prayed to some other? But the harshness of the first explanation, according to which in the premise Jehovah Himself speaks, while in the conclusion He is spoken of, is an objection to it. Hence the reading of 2 Kings 19:22, at the end, ωׁ ?ξςϊι, which the Isaiah text omits as needless, is the more correct; especially as there appears to be an intentional echo of God’s promise to Solomon 1 Kings 9:3.
Isaiah 37:22. The accents designate the verb αָּ ?ζָ ?δ as Milra. According to that, it would be either part. fem. from αּ ?εּ ?ζ, or 3 pers. masc. Kal from αָּ ?ζָ ?δ. The latter would be grammatically possible, so far as αζδ can be regarded as prepositive predicate. But, although αεζ and αζδ mean the same, still the latter is more frequently joined with the accusative and the former with the dative.
For αζδ occurs with μ only 2 Samuel 6:16 (1 Chronicles 15:29), whereas αεζ mostly appears joined with μְ (Proverbs 6:30; Proverbs 11:12; Proverbs 13:13; Proverbs 14:21; Proverbs 23:9; Proverbs 30:17; Zechariah 4:10; Son 8:1; Son 8:7). Besides these αεζ occurs only Proverbs 1:7; Proverbs 23:22. As the Masoretic pointing is not binding, I would rather regard our αζδ as 3 pers. fem. Kal. from αεζ, corresponding to μςβδ.—Also μςβ is mostly joined with μְ; Psalms 2:4; Psalms 59:9; Psalms 80:7; Proverbs 17:5; Proverbs 30:17; Jeremiah 20:7, etc.—δπιςψΰωׁ a gesture of derision as in Psalms 22:8; Psalms 109:25; Job 16:4; Lamentations 2:15.
Isaiah 37:23. ηψσ and βγσ comp. Isaiah 37:4; Isaiah 37:6.—χγεֹ ?ωׁ ιΧ is a specifically Isaianic expression.
Isaiah 37:24. This verse contains a number of variations on 2 Kings 19:23, that, from the stand-point of our author, represent emendations.—On χεξδ see Isaiah 10:33.—In ιςψλψξμε of an adjective notion is made a substantive. For λγξμ has here its appellative meaning: “fruitful field or garden.”
Isaiah 37:25. ιΰγιξφεψ comp. on Isaiah 19:1; Isaiah 19:6.
Isaiah 37:26. μξγηεχ is, like ξιξιχγν (simplified from μξιξι 2 Kings 19:25), to be referred to what follows. Properly the prep, ξο before ψηεχ would suffice; but the Hebrew favors the cumulation of prepositions (comp. 2 Samuel 7:19; Job 36:9; 2 Chronicles 26:15. etc.). By the prefixed μְ is expressed the thought that the divine doing relates to a period beginning far back.—On ιξιχγν comp. Isaiah 23:7; Isaiah 51:9.—By ςϊδδαΰϊιδ (comp. Isaiah 46:11) the Prophet affirms that precisely what the Assyrian pretended he had done by his own power, was only the accomplishment of Jehovah’s thought. Hence εϊδι must also be construed as 2 pers. masc. and referred to the Assyrian. διη with μְ following is used in the sense of “to serve for something” as in Isaiah 5:5; Isaiah 44:15.—δωׁ ?ΰεϊ is Hiph. from ωׁ ?ΰδ strepere, tumultuari.
But the word means also the noise, the cracking of something falling in, and hence not only Kal (Isaiah 6:11) and the corresponding Niph. (ibid.) and Hiph. (our text and 2 Kings) have the meaning “to fall in ruins, to be laid waste,” but also the substantive ωָׁ ?ΰεֹ ?ο means interitus, pernicies Psalms 40:3; Jeremiah 44:11).—The words βμινπφιν, according to Heb. usage, express the result of the destruction in the form of apposition with the thing to be destroyed; comp. Isaiah 6:11; Isaiah 24:12. πִ ?φִּ ?ιν is part. Niph. from πφδ, and occurs in the sense of “waste” only here and Jeremiah 4:7.
Isaiah 37:27. The expression χφψιΞιγ “short-handed,” i. e., weak, original in Numbers 11:23, occurs again only Isaiah 50:2; Isaiah 59:1, the adjective χָ ?φֵ ?ψ only here.—ηϊεεαωׁ ?ε as in Isaiah 20:5.—Everywhere else the expression “grass of the field” reads ςֵ ?ωֶׂ ?αδַ ?ωָׂ ?γֶ ?δ as in Genesis 2:5; Genesis 3:18, etc.—ιψχγωΰ only here; comp. Psalms 37:2.—In 2 Kings 19:26 the fourth comparison is ωְׁ ?γֵ ?τָ ?δ “blasting,” or “blasted field,” instead of ωְׁ ?γִ ?ξָ ?δ “a field.” It is no doubt a stronger figure, and as a climax, more in place. It is far more likely that it is the primitive reading and that our text is secondary.
Isaiah 37:29. On ιςο first depends the infin., which then as in Isaiah 30:12, continues in the verb fin.—Instead of ωַֽׁ ?ΰֲ ?πַ ?πְֽ ?κָ 2 Kings 19:27 has ωַֽׁ ?ΰֲ ?πָֽ ?πְֽ ?κָ. [In some editions it is precisely the reverse.—Tr.]. Are both Infin. as Olshausen (§ 187, a and § 251, b, p. 552) maintains; or is only the former, as Ewald seems to assume (§ 157, b, comp. §120, a) [also Green, see § 122, 1 and 187, 1, d—Tr.]? To me the latter seems more probable, for I do not see why, when ωַֽׁ ?ΰֲ ?πַ ?ο is infin., it would be pointed ωַֽׁ ?ΰֲ ?πָ ?πּ ?κָ whereas this is quite easily explained if ωַֽׁ ?ΰֲ ?πָ ?πְ ?κָ be derived from the adjective ωַֽׁ ?ΰֲ ?πָ ?ο “quiet.”
Isaiah 37:30. ΰָ ?λεֹ ?μ in the inf. absol. presents the verbal notion without determining the time or manner. The Prophet thereby affirms simply what actually is, what occurs according to nature.—ωָׁ ?ηִ ?ιν is ἅπ. λεγ. 2 Kings 19:29 has ρָ ?ηִ ?ιωׂ. The latter word is devoid of any etymological basis, as there is no root ρָ ?ηַ ?ωׁ either in Hebrew or the kindred dialects. Moreover there is no agreement about the root of the form ωׁ ?ηιν. There is no root ωָׁ ?ηַ ?ν in Hebrew. Of various explanations, that may deserve the preference which connects ωׁ ?διν with the Arabic schahis, which means “scattered, standing thin,” unless perhaps the fundamental meaning is “to divide itself, to cut loose from,” so that ωׁ ?ηιν would mean “that which separates itself from the root, grows out of it.” ωׁ ?ηιν would then be the sprouts of the root (Aquila and Theod. translate αὐτοφυῆ).—The imperative in ζψςεεβεΧ involves so for an exhortation that the Prophet would say to the Israelites to lay aside all anxiety about the enemy for the third year, and carry on agriculture confidently.—Instead of εΰλεμ K’ri has εְ ?ΰִ ?λְ ?μεּ which is also the reading of 2 Kings 19:29, and seems to be the more original.
For εΰλεμ may be suspected of being imitated from the same word beginning the verse, and moreover it would involve a certain emphasis which, accurately considered, would be out of place here. It would = “and—in short—eat your fruit;” thus it would recapitulate and say in brief. It can, however, naturally refer only to λψξιν (comp. Isaiah 65:21; Jeremiah 29:5; Jeremiah 29:28; Amos 9:14).
Isaiah 37:32. The word φαΰεϊ is wanting in K’thibh of 2 Kings 19:31. The books of Kings have this word of the divine name only three times, viz., 1 Kings 18:15; 1 Kings 19:10; 1 Kings 19:14; 2 Kings 3:14 in the history of the prophets Elijah and Elisha. In Isaiah, on the other hand, it is of frequent occurrence; see Isaiah 9:6 (7) the parallel passage and on Isaiah 1:9.
Isaiah 37:33. ωָׁ ?ν here stands for ωָׁ ?ξָּ ?δ as in 1 Samuel 2:14; 1 Kings 18:10; Jeremiah 19:14.—χִ ?γֵּ ?ν is never used in the transitive sense = “to make come before, cause to meet,” so as to construe the word with a double accusative of the place and the nearer object. But as after other verbs the instrument can be designated by the accusative (comp. Isaiah 1:20), as well as the use of αְּ, so also χִ ?γְּ ?ν can be used with αְּ (comp. Deuteronomy 23:5; Isaiah 21:14; Psalms 95:2) and with the simple accus. instrum. as in Psalms 21:4. We have here a double accusative of the place and of the instrument.
Isaiah 37:34. ιαΰ intimates that the Assyrian must be thought of as not in the land, but on the way to Jerusalem.
Isaiah 37:35. On βπεϊι see on Isaiah 31:5; Isaiah 38:6.
AND 1. To Hezekiah’s prayer (Isaiah 37:16-20) the Lord gives an answer through Isaiah, which announces the triumph of Jerusalem (Isaiah 37:22), convicts the Assyrian of blasphemy against God, in that he spoke haughtily against the Holy One of Israel, and ascribed to himself the glory of conquests in which he was only the instrument (Isaiah 37:23-27). But the Lord knows him thoroughly, and will make him know himself by unmistakable treatment (Isaiah 37:28-29). To Judah a sign is given, that it is to be free forever from the Assyrian (Isaiah 37:30-32). For the immediate future it is announced that the Assyrian shall not even come near Jerusalem, but shall return home by the way he came; and God is declared to be the protector of Jerusalem (Isaiah 37:33-35).
2. Then Isaiah—at theeIsa_37:21-22. See Text. and Gram. Jerusalem shall see the Assyrian retreating with aims unaccomplished. Then it will look after him (ΰηψִ ?ικ) with derision. [“Hitzig supposes that the shaking of the head, with the Hebrews as with us, was a gesture of negation, and that the expression of scorn consisted in a tacit denial that Sennacherib had been able to effect his purpose. Thus understood, the action is equivalent to saying in words, no, no! i. e., he could not do it. A similar explanation is given by Hentgstenberg, on Psalms 22:8.”—J. A. Alex. For another view see Baehr, on 2 Kings 19:21.—Tr.].
3. Whom hast thou reproached—besieged places.
Isaiah 37:23-25. The question extends to “thine eyes;” and thus “against the Holy,” etc., is the answer to all the preceding questions (Vitringa, Gesen., Delitz.). Others construe “against the Holy,” etc., with the foregoing words “and lifted up,” etc., as the answer; so that the question ends with “voice.” But against the latter it may be urged that the question and answer do not correspond; the question is not answered, and the answer given refers to something about which nothing is asked. According to our construction it is asked: “Whom hast thou blasphemed, and against whom hast thou insolently raised voice and eyes (comp. Psalms 18:28; Psalms 101:5; Proverbs 6:17; Proverbs 21:4)?” The answer is: “against the Holy,” etc.; wherein, according to familiar usage, the form of the answer corresponds to the final member of question. This appears more evident in 2 Kings 19:22, as ςμΞχγεωׁ ιΧ connects more exactly with ςμΞξιδΧ [“Ewald carries the interrogation through the verse, and renders ε at the beginning of the last clause, that or so that, while Hitzig makes the whole of that clause an exclamation.
This construction is more natural—the answer begins with the next verse where he is expressly charged with blasphemy against Jehovah.”—J. A. Alex.].
Isaiah 37:24-25 express more exactly how he has blasphemed. It was done by his servants. (The “hand of” figurative expression for “organ, service, means” generally Isaiah 20:2; Jeremiah 37:2; Jeremiah 50:1; Haggai 1:1; Haggai 1:3; Haggai 2:1). The emphatic thought is that servants of men have blasphemed the Lord of the world.
This blasphemy consisted mainly (Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 36:15; Isaiah 36:18) in representing trust in Jehovah as folly, and in the inference that, because they had conquered heathen nations, it was logically necessary that the people of God might be conquered, and thus in placing Jehovah on a level with idols. Moreover what they did, they supposed they had done by their own might, and that what was to be done yet could be done in the same way. Isaiah expresses this thought in Isaiah 37:24-25, with close adherence to the circumstances, so as to divide as it were the task of the Assyrian into two parts. The first part was the conquest of the Syrian, Ph�nician and Palestinian districts. All these lands lie about Lebanon. One traveling from Nineveh by Carchemish to Ph�nicia must in any case go past Lebanon, which, by its lofty, snow-covered summits, gives distant notice of the locality of these lands.
Lebanon therefore may serve as an emblem. Moreover in the Scriptures it is not uncommon to represent Zion under the image of Lebanon (comp. Jeremiah 22:6-7; Jeremiah 22:23; Ezekiel 17:3), partly because in general Lebanon is the image of what is lofty and admirable (comp. Isaiah 2:13; Isaiah 10:33 sq.; Isaiah 35:2; Isaiah 60:13; Hosea 14:6 sqq.; Zechariah 11:1 sq.), partly and especially because the king’s palace in Zion had grown on Lebanon, i. e., was built of cedars of Lebanon, (comp. 1 Kings 7:2 “house of the forest of Lebanon,” or “house of the forest,” Isaiah 22:8). It is inconceivable that Sennacherib or one of his predecessors ever scaled Lebanon with horse and chariot, and destroyed the cedars. The Prophet rather makes him boast that he had conquered the lands of Lebanon.
And Hamath, Arphad, Syria, Ph�nicia, the kingdom of the Ten Tribes, the greater part of Judah and Philistia, were actually in his possession. With reference to this, one might well represent him as saying: I have ascended up the heights of the mountains, up the sides (properly the shanks, comp. on Isaiah 14:13) of Lebanon. The chief work seemed done, the chief summits were surmounted. It only remained to penetrate into the inmost part, and there destroy the ornament of Lebanon, its glorious standing timber of cedar and cypress. By ςμιδι the Prophet manifestly refers to what has been accomplished, i. e., the occupation of the Lebanon districts. But εΰλγϊ and εΰαεΰ refer to what remains to be done.
Only Jerusalem remained for Sennacherib to conquer (comp. on Isaiah 36:1). Thus the best, the real ornament, the central point of the Palestinian Lebanon lands was not yet his. Jerusalem with its temple and its king’s palace, the two Lebanon houses (because with both cedars of Lebanon had so much to do, comp, 1 Kings 6:9 sqq.; Isaiah 7:2 sqq.) might well be compared to the crown of Lebanon with its ornament of cedars. Such is the understanding of Thenius and Baehr, with whom I agree. The expression “tall-growth of its cedars, choice of its cypress,” quite agrees with the Latin mode of expression, by which can be said e.g.cibum partim unguium tenacitate arripiunt, partim aduncitate rostrorum” (Cic.Deor. Nat.
II. 47, 122). Comp. Friedr. Naegelsbach’sLatein. Stilistik, § 74; Isaiah 1:16; Isaiah 22:7; Isaiah 25:12; Isaiah 30:30. The Prophet does not ascribe to the Assyrian the intention of destroying the height of the cedars, while he would leave them their other qualities, but that he would utterly cut down the high cedars as they are.—On αψεωׁ, the cypress, comp. on Isaiah 14:8. “The height of his end or border” is also no more than his highest summit.
The notion height is not already expressed in “the uttermost,” as Baehr supposes. For a mountain has an uttermost in every direction. One may therefore speak of an uttermost in the direction upward, and of a height of the uttermost.—The forest of his garden-land is then the forest that, as it were, forms the garden of Lebanon, that adorns Lebanon like a pleasure park. The most luxuriant, glorious standing forest of Lebanon is meant.
In Isaiah 37:25 the Prophet speaks of the second task presented to Sennacherib, which was to conquer Egypt. That concerned a certain campaign, not in a mountainous region, but in a level land, partly waste and without water, partly abounding in water. While Sennacherib stood on the south of Palestine the great army had no superabundance of water. When, e. g., we read of Moses’ request to Edom (Numbers 20:17 sqq.) it cannot seem strange that the Prophet imputed to Sennacherib the boastful assertion that so far he has provided his mighty host with water in a strange land, that he has dug wells, because the existing ones were insufficient, and had drunk away their water from the inhabitants. For such is the meaning of ξινζψιν2 Kings 19:24, which our author has omitted for the sake of simplicity. Had the Assyrian traversed the desert et-Tih, digging wells would, of course, have been a still greater necessity.
But on the border of it, whither Sennacherib penetrated, it may have been needful. He boasts, moreover, that where there is much water, and the water is a bulwark for the inhabitants, as the Nile with its canals is to Egypt, he will easily destroy this bulwark. For by the sole of his tramp shall the streams of Egypt be dried up. Thus his warriors will dry up the streams of Egypt like a puddle, merely by the tramp of their feet. The expression “sole of the tramp” is found only here. It is metonymy.
Still in respect to the act of stepping, “step” and “foot” are often interchanged. Comp. Psalms 140:5 with Psalms 116:8; Psalms 17:5 with Psalms 38:17, etc. [“The drying up of the rivers with the soles of the feet is understood by Vitringa as an allusion to the Egyptian mode of drawing water with a tread-wheel (Deuteronomy 11:10).”—J. A. Alex.].
4. Hast thou not heard—thou camest?Isaiah 37:26-29. The Assyrian imagined that he pushed, and he was pushed. He regarded all he did as the product of his own free fancy, and of his power to do. The Prophet however says to him that he had only been an instrument in the hands of God. With “hast thou not heard,” the Prophet, so to speak, appeals to the better understanding of the Assyrian.
Has it not somehow, if not from without, still from within, come to thy hearing (comp. Psalms 62:12) that it is not as thou thinkest? Does not thy conscience, the voice of God within thee say that it was not thou that hast planned and carried out all this, but that I, the Almighty God, long ago (Isaiah 22:11; Isaiah 25:1) laid it out and have accomplished it? Therefore the Assyrian was to be a thorough destroyer of things. But when God destroys the things, He intends always a corresponding effect on the persons. The latter is the thought of Isa 37:27.
Their inhabitants (i. e., of the cities named Isaiah 37:26), as short-handed, (i. e., weak), are dismayed and confounded. Then with strong figures this effect is more nearly characterized. The sorely visited inhabitants are compared to the “grass of the field,” “the green herb,” “the grass on the house tops” (in shallow soil, weak rooted; the expression again only Psalms 129:6), “the grain field before the standing fruit” (i. e., all blade and no stalk), and thus soft and tender like grass.—But not only is the foregoing true of the Assyrian as the instrument of God’s purpose, but all his doing and not doing has been directed by the Lord without his knowing it: what he proposed at home, his march forth, his coming into the Holy Land, and his hostile raging against the people of God, all was under the notice of the Lord, and must run the course determined by Him. “Sitting, going forth, coming home,” are expressions for the total activity of a man (comp. Deuteronomy 28:6; Psalms 121:8; Psalms 139:2). ψβζ stands for every vehement emotion whether of fear, of anger, or of joy (comp. Isaiah 5:25; Isaiah 13:13; Isaiah 14:9; Isaiah 14:16; Isaiah 23:11; Isaiah 28:21, etc.). The Hithp. occurs only here and Isaiah 37:29.
Because the Assyrian with this δϊγβζ had sinned against the Lord and rebelled, and would not hear of his being dependent on the Lord, but only the report of his proud security came to the Lord, he must feel his dependence in the most incisive way. He must return home by the way he came, as it were, led by a ring through the nose like a wild beast (comp. Ezekiel 19:4; Ezekiel 19:9; Ezekiel 29:4; Ezekiel 38:4), or by a bridle between the lips, like a tame beast. On the ruins of Chorsabad are figures of prisoners whom the “royal victor holds to a rope by means of a ring fastened in their lips.” Comp. Thenius on 2 Kings 19:28.
5. And this shall—do this.
Isaiah 37:30-32. The Prophet turns to Hezekiah. In Isaiah 37:22; Isaiah 37:29 he had in a general way held out the prospect of the pitiful retreat of the Assyrian out of the Holy Land. Now he names a sign to the king that shall be a pledge of the promise given and place it in the right light. It may be asked: how can this sign, that requires two years for its accomplishment, be a pledge for an event that is to take place at once; according to 2 Kings 19:35, even that very night? I believe that two things are to be considered here.
First: Israel receives the promise, not merely of a momentary, but of a definite deliverance from the power of Assyria. This appears, evident from our prophecy itself. The scorn with which Zion greets the retreat of the Assyrian (Isaiah 37:22) would be ill-timed if he could return to take vengeance. According to Isaiah 37:29 he is so thoroughly led off that he is certain to have no wish to come back. According to Isaiah 37:33; Isaiah 37:35 he is not to come before Jerusalem. It is not said, however, that this shall not happen only this time and in the present danger.
The Assyrian shall never come any more. Assyria is done away. The Theocracy has nothing more to fear from it. We have shown above that this thought occurs in chaps. 28–33, especially in 33. It cannot surprise one that a promise so all-important, that Assyria shall nevermore hurt the Theocracy, is guaranteed by a sign requiring years for its realization. A promise to be fulfilled after some hours properly requires no pledge.
In the second place: it is to be noticed that there is no exact statement in our prophecy as to the way in which Assyria is to be expelled from Judah. It is neither said that it shall be so suddenly, nor in this fashion. Hence the question might arise after the event, whether this sudden expulsion is to be explained by accidental or natural causes, or as the operation of divine omnipotence. Did the Lord give a sign and the sign come about, it would prove that that first mighty blow carried out against Assyria was also intended by the Lord. But it may be asked: how can a series of events serve for a sign, which in fact take a very natural course, which could not happen otherwise? It might be urged that it took mighty little prophetic insight to know that no regular seeding and harvest could be possible before the third year.
That is true. Yet only He for whom there is properly no future could know beforehand that in the third year there would certainly be a seeding and harvest. For it was quite possible that the Assyrian invasion would last for years still. What the Prophet predicts here is the favorable aspect of the future that was in general possible. Better could not happen. I construe Isaiah 37:30 essentially as Drechsler does, and think that the subject has been needlessly made hard.
According to the Assyrian monuments, the expedition of Sennacherib against Syria, Palestine and Egypt occupied only the one year, 700 B. C. For in the year 699 we find him on another theatre of war, employed against Suzub of Babylon. Comp. the canon of Regents in Schrader, p. 319, and our remarks on Isaiah 39:1. If, then, this campaign lasted no longer than a year, still it certainly demanded the whole of the time of a year suitable for warfare. Therefore Sennacherib certainly was in Palestine in Spring before the harvest, and when it was ripe seized on it, for his immense army.
He conquered in fact the whole land, and shut up Hezekiah in Jerusalem “like a bird in its cage.” But he must have remained in Canaan till late in the year. For when one considers that in this year he made the conquest of Ph�nicia, several Philistine cities (Beth-Dagon, Joppa, B’ne-Barak, Azur), forty-six fortified cities of Judah, besides countless castles and smaller places, and then also fought a considerable battle with the Ethiopic army, there is presented a labor for whose accomplishment three-quarters of a year does not appear too much time. But with that the invasion lasted so long that the season for preparing a harvest had passed by; especially when it is considered that the inhabitants needed first to assemble again, put their houses to rights, and provide beasts of labor, as their stock must certainly have fallen a prey to the enemy. Comp. Isaiah 32:10; Isaiah 32:12-13 and Isaiah 33:8-9, which may be taken as a suitable description of the condition brought about by this invasion. For the year after the invasion, therefore, there was no product of the land to be expected in general, but such as would spring up of itself.
Not before the third year could there be regular cultivation and a corresponding harvest. And, as already said, that was much, in fact, the best that could happen as things then were. For that end it would be necessary that the Assyrian by the end of the second year should no more be in the land, and have no more power to hinder field-labor. According to this explanation, we have no need of assuming a Sabbatic year, nor a year of jubilee, nor a return of the Assyrian out of Egypt to Palestine, nor an invasion lasting three years, nor that agriculture in Palestine at that time was carried on in the same ceremonious way that, according to Wetstein (in Delitzsch, p. 389 sq.), is the case now-a-days. Naturally, during the invasion, in the first year, there was no fruit of harvest to eat, since the Assyrian had carried it off, but only ρτιη (Leviticus 25:5; Leviticus 25:11; Job 14:19). The word comes from ρτη, which undoubtedly means effundere, profundere, infundere (Habakkuk 2:15; Job 30:7; Isaiah 5:7), in Niph. and Hithp.: “to pour” (of rivers), “to mouth, debouch,” i. e., se adjungere, adjungi (Isaiah 14:1; 1 Samuel 26:19). ρτιη, therefore, is effusio, “the outpour, what is poured out, spilt.” Thus all field produce is meant that comes from spilling at seeding or harvest, or that comes from such spilt fruit.
In the present case it would be first the former, like crumbs from the rich man’s table, and then the latter, of which the Israelites would get the benefit. On ωׁ ?ηιν see Text. and Gram. See in Gesen. and Knobel proof that in warm countries grain propagates itself partly by spilt seeds and partly by shoots from the root. [The stooling of winter wheat is familiar to agriculturists.—Tr.]
But the Prophet has not only deliverance from ruin to announce to Judah, but also new growth. The escaped (τμιθδ, comp. Isaiah 4:2; Isaiah 10:20; Isaiah 15:9) of the house of Judah (αιϊιΧ again only Isaiah 22:21), the remnant (comp. Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 11:16), shall add on root downwards (Isaiah 27:6). It shall, however, also bear fruit upwards, thus be a firm-rooted and fruitful tree. It is true that Judah somewhat more than an hundred years later was uprooted.
Still it was not, like Israel, quite and forever wrested away from its indigenous soil, but only transplanted for a while, to be replanted again, in order to go and meet a new and final judgment, with which, however, was also combined a transition into a new and higher stage of existence. And precisely for this higher stage of existence the remnant, according to our passage and former statements of the Prophet (Isaiah 4:3; Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 10:20 sqq.), formed the point of connection. By Isaiah 37:32 a the Prophet explains how this revivescence of Judah shall be brought about. All Judah fell into the hand of the enemy, and by him was hostilely treated and desolated. Only the capital remained unhurt. Therefore in it had been preserved an untouched nucleus, formed partly of the inhabitants of Jerusalem themselves, partly of such men of Judah as had taken refuge in the capital.
Hence the Prophet can say: “out of Jerusalem shall go forth a remnant, and the escaped from mount Zion.” For of course the repeopling and restoration of the land must proceed from Jerusalem, as from the intact core and heart of the land. On the last clause of Isa 37:32 see on Isaiah 9:6. The words here are evidently intended in a consolatory sense, and to intimate that what the Lord has promised, He will perform with zeal.
6. Therefore thus saith—David’s sake�.
Isaiah 37:33-35. In these verses, what was given in the foregoing in a general way is now definitely formulated and applied to the present situation. The Prophet affirms most positively that Jerusalem shall not be besieged by the Assyrian. It is commonly assumed that the Assyrian of course enclosed Jerusalem, and that he met the fearful overthrow narrated Isaiah 37:36 before its walls. But when Sennacherib received intelligence of the approach of the Ethiopian army, he was at Libnah. From there he retired a little further north to Altakai (Eltekeh), where occurred the battle.
Evidently he avoided encountering the Ethiopian near, and especially obliquely south of Jerusalem, so as not to tempt the Jews to aid the enemy, and to avoid having to sustain their attack on his rear. But it is thought that the “great army’ (Isaiah 36:2) with which Rabshakeh appeared before Jerusalem remained there while he returned to the king (Isaiah 37:8). The text, however, says nothing of this, and moreover, it is internally not probable. For with the prospect of encountering so great a host as the army of Egypt and Ethiopia doubtless was, Sennacherib would not have weakened himself by sending away a great part of his own army. He might have sent a small corps of observation: but the 185,000 men of which Isaiah 37:36 speaks certainly did not lie before Jerusalem. There is therefore a climax in Isaiah 37:33.
First it says, Sennacherib shall not come into the city. Then, he shall not shoot an arrow into it. In sieges among the ancients, the shield played a great part as a protection against spears, stones, etc., that were hurled down from the walls, as also against melted pitch (comp. Herz.Real-Encycl. IV. p. 392 sqq.). ρμμδ, “the besiegers’ wall” (2 Samuel 20:15; Jeremiah 6:6; Ezekiel 4:2, etc.). Isaiah 37:35 is causal as to its contents.
The first clause names, as the reason of the Assyrian’s expulsion, Jehovah’s purpose to protect Jerusalem. But the reason for this protection is the promise given to David (2 Samuel 7:12 sqq.; comp. 1 Kings 15:4) whereby the honor of the Lord itself was at stake (comp. Isaiah 43:25; Isaiah 48:11) and thus the preservation of Jerusalem was necessary. It is true that Jerusalem was destroyed, after all, at a later period, and the kingdom of David demolished; but this occurred under circumstances that did not exclude a restoration. Had Judah been destroyed at that time by Sennacherib, it would have had the same fate as the kingdom of Israel.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 36:4 sqq. “Haec proprie est Satanae lingua et sunt non Rabsacis sed ipsissimi Diaboli verba, quibus non muros urbis, sed medullam Ezechiae, hoc est, tenerrimam ejus fidem oppugnat.”—Luther. “In this address the chief-butler, Satan performs in the way he uses when he would bring about our apostacy. 1) He urges that we are divested of all human support, Isaiah 36:5; Isaiah 2) We are deprived of divine support, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 3) God is angry with us because we have greatly provoked Him by our sins, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 4) He decks out the splendor, and power of the wicked, Isaiah 36:8-9; Isaiah 5) He appeals to God’s word, and knows how to turn and twist it to his uses. Such poisonous arrows were used by Satan against Christ in the desert, and may be compared with this light (Matthew 4:2 sqq.). One needs to arm himself against Satan’s attack by God’s word, and to resort to constant watching and prayer.”—Cramer.
The Assyrian urges four particulars by which he would destroy Hezekiah’s confidence, in two of which he was right and in two wrong. He was right in representing that Hezekiah could rely neither on Egypt, nor on his own power. In this respect he was a messenger of God and announcer of divine truth. For everywhere the word of God preaches the same (Isaiah 30:1-3; Isaiah 31:1-3; Jeremiah 17:5; Psalms 118:8-9; Psalms 146:3, etc.). But it is a merited chastisement if rude and hostile preachers must preach to us what we were unwilling to believe at the mild and friendly voice of God. But in two particulars the Assyrian was wrong, and therein lay Hezekiah’s strength.
For just on this account the Lord is for him and against the Assyrian. These two things are, that the Assyrian asserts that Hezekiah cannot put his trust in the Lord, but rather he, the Assyrian is counseled by the Lord against Hezekiah. That, however, was a lie, and because of this lie, the corresponding truth makes all the deeper impression on Hezekiah, and reminds him how assuredly he may build on the Lord and importune Him. And when the enemy dares to say, that he is commissioned by the Lord to destroy the Holy Land, just that must bring to lively remembrance in the Israelite, that the Lord, who cannot lie, calls the land of Israel His land (Joel 4:2; Jeremiah 2:7; Jeremiah 16:18, etc.), and the people of Israel His people (Exodus 3:7; Exodus 3:10; Exodus 5:1, etc.).
2. On Isaiah 36:12. [“In regard to the indelicacy of this passage we may observe: 1) The Masorets in the Hebrew text have so printed the words used, that in reading it the offensiveness would be considerably avoided. 2) The customs, habits and modes of expression of people in different nations and times, differ. What appears indelicate at one time or in one country, may not only be tolerated, but common in another. 3) Isaiah is not at all responsible for the indelicacy of the language here. He is simply an historian. 4) It was of importance to give the true character of the attack which was made on Jerusalem. The coming of Sennacherib was attended with pride, insolence and blasphemy; and it was important to state the true character of the transaction, and to record just what was said and done. Let him who used the language, and not him who recorded it bear the blame.”—Barnes in loc.].
3. On Isaiah 36:18 sqq. “Observandum hic, quod apud gentes olim viguerit πολύθεια adeo, ut quaevis etiam urbs peculiarem habuerit Deum tutelarem. Cujus ethnicismi exemplum vivum et spirans adhuc habemus apud pontificios, quibus non inscite objici potest illud Jeremiae: Quot civitates tibi, tot etiam Dei (Jeremiah 2:28).”—Foerster.
4. On Isaiah 36:21. Answer not a fool according to his folly (Proverbs 26:4), much less the blasphemer, lest the flame of his wickedness be blown into the greater rage (Sir 8:3). Did not Christ the Lord answer His enemies, not always with words, but also with silence (Matthew 26:62; Matthew 27:14, etc.)? One must not cast pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6). After Foerster and Cramer.
5. On Isaiah 36:21. “Est aureus textus, qui docet nos, ne cum Satana disputemus. Quando enim videt, quod sumus ejus spectatores et auditores, tum captat occasionem majoris fortitudinis et gravius premit. Petrus dicit, eum circuire et quaerere, quem devoret. Nullum facit insidiarum finem. Tutissimum autem est non respondere, sed contemnere eum.”—Luther.
6. [On Isaiah 37:1-7. “Rabshakeh intended to frighten Hezekiah from the Lord, but it proves that he frightens him to the Lord. The wind, instead of forcing the traveler’s coat from him, makes him wrap it the closer about him. The more Rabshakeh reproaches God, the more Hezekiah studies to honor Him.” On Isaiah 37:3. “When we are most at a plunge we should be most earnest in prayer. When pains are most strong, let prayers be most lively. Prayer is the midwife of mercy, that helps to bring it forth.”—M. Henry, in loc.]
7. On Isaiah 37:2 sqq. Hezekiah here gives a good example. He shows all princes, rulers and peoples what one ought to do when there is a great and common distress, and tribulation. One ought with sackcloth, i. e., with penitent humility, to bring prayers, and intercessions to the Lord that He would look on and help.
8. On Isaiah 37:6 sq. “God takes to Himself all the evil done to His people. For as when one does a great kindness to the saints, God appropriates it to Himself, so, too, when one torments the saints, it is an injury done to God, and He treats sin no other way than as if done to Himself. He that torments them torments Him (Isaiah 64:9). Therefore the saints pray: ‘Arise, O God, plead thine own cause: remember how the foolish man reproacheth thee daily’ (Psalms 74:22).”—Cramer.
9. On Isaiah 37:7. “God raises up against His enemies other enemies, and thus prepares rest for His own people. Example: the Philistines against Saul who pursued David, 1 Samuel 23:27.”—Cramer.
10. On Isaiah 37:14. Vitringa here cites the following from Bonfin Rerum Hungar. Dec. III. Lib.
VI. p. 464, ad annum Isaiah 1444: “Amorathes, cum suos laborare cerneret et ab Vladislao rege non sine magna caede fugari, depromtum e sinu codicem initi sanctissime foederis explicat intentis in coelum oculis. Haec sunt, inquit ingeminans, Jesu Christe, foedera, quae Christiani tui mecum percussere. Per numen tuum sanctum jurarunt, datamque sub nomine tuo fidem violarunt, perfide suum Deum abnegarunt. Nunc Christe, si Deus es (ut ajunt et nos hallucinamur), tuas measque hic injurias, te quaeso, ulciscere et his, qui sanctum tuum nomen nondum agnovere, violatae fidei poenas ostende. Vix haec dixerat .… cum proelium, quod anceps ac dubium diu fuerat, inclinare coepit, etc.”[The desire of Hezekiah was not primarily his own personal safety, or the safety of his kingdom. It was that Jehovah might vindicate His great and holy name from reproach, and that the world might know that He was the only true God.
We have here a beautiful model of the object which we should have in view when we come before God. This motive of prayer is one that is with great frequency presented in the Bible. Comp. Isaiah 42:8; Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 43:13; Isaiah 43:25; Deuteronomy 32:39; Psalms 83:18; Psalms 46:10; Nehemiah 9:6; Daniel 9:18-19. Perhaps there could have been furnished no more striking proof that Jehovah was the true God, than would be by the defeat of Sennacherib. The time had come when the great Jehovah could strike a blow which would be felt on all nations, and carry the terror of His name, and the report of His power throughout the earth.
Perhaps this was one of the main motives of the destruction of that mighty army.”—Barnes, on Isaiah 37:2].
11. On Isaiah 37:15. “Fides Ezechiae verba confirmata magis ac magis crescit. Ante non ausus est orare, jam orat et confutat blasphemias omnes Assyrii. Adeo magna vis verbi est, ut longe alius per verbum, quod Jesajas ei nunciari jussit, factus sit.”—Luther.
12. On Isaiah 37:17. [“It is bad to talk proudly and profanely, but it is worse to write so, for this argues more deliberation and design, and what is written spreads further and lasts longer, and does the more mischief. Atheism and irreligion, written, will certainly be reckoned for another day.”—M. Henry].
13. On Isaiah 37:21 sqq. [“Those who receive messages of terror from men with patience, and send messages of faith to God by prayer, may expect messages of grace and peace from God for their comfort, even when they are most cast down. Isaiah sent a long answer to Hezekiah’s prayer in God’s name, sent it in writing (for it was too long to be sent by word of mouth), and sent it by way of return to his prayer, relation being thereunto had: ‘Whereas thou hast prayed to me, know, for thy comfort, that thy prayer is heard.’ Isaiah might have referred him to the prophecies he had delivered (particularly to that of chap. 10), and bid him pick out an answer from thence. The correspondence between earth and heaven is never let fall on God’s side.”—M. Henry.].
14. On Isaiah 37:31 sqq. “This is a promise of great extent. For it applies not only to those that then remained, and were spared the impending destruction and captivity by the Assyrians, but to all subsequent times, when they should enjoy a deliverance; as after the Babylonish captivity, and after the persecutions of Antiochus. Yea, it applies even to New Testament times from the first to the last, since therein, in the order of conversion to Christ, the Jews will take root and bring forth fruit, and thus in the Jews (as also in the converted Gentiles) will appear in a spiritual and corporal sense, what God at that time did to their fields in the three following years.”—Starke.
15. On Isaiah 38:1. “Isaiah, although of a noble race and condition, does not for that regard it disgraceful, but rather an honor, to be a pastor and visitor of the sick, I would say, a prophet, teacher and comforter of the sick. God save the mark! How has the world become so different in our day, especially in our evangelical church Let a family be a little noble, and it is regarded as a reproach and injury to have a clergyman among its relations and friends, not to speak of a son studying theology and becoming a servant of the church. I speak not of all; I know that some have a better mind; yet such is the common course. Jeroboam’s maxim must rather obtain, who made priests of the lowest of the people (1 Kings 12:31).
For thus the parsons may be firmly held in rein (sub ferula) and in political submission. It is not at all good where the clergy have a say, says an old state-rule of our Politicorum.” Feuerlein, pastor in Nuremberg, in his Novissimorum primum, 1694, p. 553. The same quotes Spener: “Is it not so, that among the Roman Catholics the greatest lords are not ashamed to stand in the spiritual office, and that many of them even discharge the spiritual functions? Among the Reformed, too, persons born of the noblest families are not ashamed of the office of preacher. But, it seems, we Lutherans are the only ones that hold the service of the gospel so low, that, where from a noble or otherwise prominent family an ingenium has an inclination to theological study, almost every one seeks to hinder him, or, indeed, afterwards is ashamed of his friendship, as if it were something much too base for such people, by which more harm comes to our church than one might suppose. That is to be ashamed of the gospel.”
16. On Isaiah 38:1. [“We see here the boldness and fidelity of a man of God. Isaiah was not afraid to go in freely and tell even a monarch that he must die. The subsequent part of the narrative would lead us to suppose that, until this announcement, Hezekiah did not regard himself as in immediate danger. It is evident here, that the physician of Hezekiah had not informed him of it—perhaps from the apprehension that his disease would be aggravated by the agitation of his mind on the subject. The duty was, therefore, left, as it is often, to the minister of religion—a duty which even many ministers are slow to perform, and which many physicians are reluctant to have performed.
No danger is to be apprehended commonly from announcing to those who are sick their true condition. Physicians and friends often err in this. There is no species of cruelty greater than to suffer a friend to lie on a dying bed under a delusion. There is no sin more aggravated than that of designedly deceiving a dying man, and flattering him with the hope of recovery, when there is a moral certainty that he will not and cannot recover. And there is evidently no danger to be apprehended from communicating to the sick their true condition. It should be done tenderly and with affection; but it should be done faithfully.
I have had many opportunities of witnessing the effect of apprising the sick of their situation, and of the moral certainty that they must die. And I cannot now recall an instance in which the announcement has had any unhappy effect on the disease. Often, on the contrary, the effect is to calm the mind, and to lead the dying to look up to God, and peacefully to repose on Him. And the effect of that is always salutary.” Barnes in loc.]
17. On Isaiah 38:2. It is an old opinion, found even in the Chald., that by the wall is meant the wall of the temple as a holy direction in which to pray, as the Mahometans pray in the direction of Mecca. But δχιψ cannot mean that. Rather that is correct which is said by Forerius: “Nolunt pii homines testes habere suarum lacrymarum, ut eas liberius fundant, neque sensu distrahi, cum orare Deum ex animo volunt.”
18. On Isaiah 38:8 :—
Non Deus est numen Parcarum carcere clausum.Quale putabatur Stoicus esse Deus.
Ille potest Solis cursus inhibere volantes,
At veluti scopulos flumina stare facit.”
—Melanchthon.
19. On Isaiah 38:12. “Beautiful parables that picture to us the transitoriness of this temporal life. For the parable of the shepherd’s tent means how restless a thing it is with us, that we have here no abiding place, but are driven from one locality to another, until at last we find a resting-spot in the church-yard. The other parable of the weaver’s thread means how uncertain is our life on earth. For how easily the thread breaks.” Cramer. “When the weaver’s work is progressing best, the thread breaks before he is aware. Thus when a man is in his best work, and supposes he now at last begins really to live, God breaks the thread of his life and lets him die. The rational heathen knew something of this when they, so to speak, invented the three goddesses of life (the three Parcas minime parcas) and included them in this little verse:
Clotho colum gestat, Lachesis trahit,
Atropos occatBut what does the weaver when the thread breaks? Does he stop his work at once? O no! He knows how to make a clever weaver’s knot, so that one cannot observe the break. Remember thereby that when thy life is broken off, yet the Lord Jesus, as a master artisan, can bring it together again at the last day. He will make such an artful, subtle weaver’s-knot as shall make us wonder through all eternity. It will do us no harm to have died.” Ibid.—Omnia sunt hominum tenui pendentia filo.
[“As suddenly as the tent of a shepherd is taken down, folded up, and transferred to another place. There is doubtless the idea here that he would continue to exist, but in another place, as the shepherd would pitch his tent in another place. He was to be cut off from the earth, but he expected to dwell among the dead. The whole passage conveys the idea that he expected to dwell in another state.” Barnes in loc.].
20. On Isaiah 38:17. [“Note 1) When God pardons sin, He casts it behind His back as not designing to look upon it with an eye of justice and jealousy. He remembers it no more, to visit for it. The pardon does not make the sin not to have been, or not to have been sin, but not to be punished as it deserves. When we cast our sins behind our back, and take no care to repent of them, God sets them before His face, and is ready to reckon for them; but when we set them before our face in true repentance, as David did when his sin was ever before him, God casts them behind His back. 2) When God pardons sin, He pardons all, casts them all behind His back, though they have been as scarlet and crimson. 3) The pardoning of sin is the delivering the soul from the pit of corruption. 4) It is pleasant indeed to think of our recoveries from sickness when we see them flowing from the remission of sin; then the cause is removed, and then it is in love to the soul.” M. Henry in loc.]
21. On Isaiah 38:18. [Cannot hope for thy truth. “They are shut out from all the means by which Thy truth is brought to mind, and the offers of salvation are presented. Their probation is at an end; their privileges are closed; their destiny is sealed up. The idea is, it is a privilege to live because this is a world where the offers of salvation are made, and where those who are conscious of guilt may hope in the mercy of God.” Barnes in loc.] God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). Such is the New Testament sense of these Old Testament words. For though Hezekiah has primarily in mind the preferableness of life in the earthly body to the life in Hades, yet this whole manner of representation passes away with Hades itself.
But Hezekiah’s words still remain true so far as they apply to heaven and hell. For of course in hell, the place of the damned, one does not praise God. But those that live praise Him. These, however, are in heaven. Since then God wills rather that men praise Him than not praise Him, so He is not willing that men should perish, but that all should turn to repentance and live.
22. On Isaiah 39:2. “Primo (Deus) per obsidionem et bellum, deinde per gravem morbum Ezechiam servaverat, ne in praesumtionem laberetur. Nondum tamen vinci potuit antiquus serpens, sed redit et levat caput suum. Adeo non possumus consistere, nisi Deos nos affligat. Vides igitur hic, quis sit afflictionum usus, ut mortificent scilicet carnem, quae non potest res ferre secundas.” Luther.
23. On Isaiah 39:7. “God also punishes the misdeeds of the parents on the children (Exodus 20:5) because the children not only follow the misdeeds of their parents, but they also increase and heap them up, as is seen in the posterity of Hezekiah, viz.: Manasseh and Amon.”—Cramer.
HINTS[The reader is referred to the ample hints covering the same matter to be found in the volume on 2 Kings 18-20. It is expedient to take advantage of that for the sake of keeping the present volume within reasonable bounds. Therefore but a minimum is here given of what the Author offers, much of which indeed is but the repetition in another form of matter already given.—Tr.]
1. On Isaiah 37:36. “1) The scorn and mockery of the visible world. 2) The scorn and mockery of the unseen world.” Sermon of Domprediger Zahn in Halle, 1870.
2. On the entire 38. chapter, beside the 22 sermons in ’S Novissimorum primum, there is a great number of homiletical elaborations of an early date; Walther Magirus, Idea mortis et vitae in two parts, the second of which contains 20 penitential and consolatory sermons on Isaiah 38. Danzig, 1640 and 1642. Daniel Schaller (Stendal) 4 sermons on the sick Hezekiah, on Isaiah 38. Magdeburg, 1611. Peter Siegmund Pape in “Gott geheilighte Wochenpredigten,” Berlin, 1701, 4 sermons. Jacob Tichlerus (Elburg) Hiskiae Aufrichtigkeit bewiesen in Gesundheit, Krankheit und Genesung, 18 sermons on Isaiah 38. (Dutch), Campen, 1636. These are only the principal ones.
3. On Isaiah 38:1. “I will set my house in order. This, indeed, will not be hard for me to do. My debt account is crossed out; my best possession I take along with me; my children I commit to the great Father of orphans, to whom heaven and earth belongs, and my soul to the Lord, who has sued for it longer than a human age, and bought it with His blood. Thus I am eased and ready for the journey.” Tholuck, Stunden der Andacht, p. 620.
4. On Isaiah 38:1. “Now thou shouldest know that our word ‘order his house’ has a very broad meaning. It comprehends reconciliation to God by faith, the final confession of sin, the last Lord’s Supper, the humble committing of the soul to the grace of the Lord, and to death and the grave in the hope of the resurrection. In one word: There is an ordering of the house above. In reliance on the precious merit of my Saviour, I order my house above in which I wish to dwell. Moreover taking leave of loved ones, and the blessing of them belongs to ordering the house. And finally order must be taken concerning the guardianship of children, the abiding of the widow, and the friend on whom she must especially lean in her loneliness, also concerning earthly bequests.” Ahlfeld, Das Leben im Lichte des Wortes Gottes, Halle, 1867, p. 522.
5. On Isaiah 38:2-8. This account has much that seems strange to us Christians, but much, too, that quite corresponds to our Christian consciousness. Let us contemplate the difference between an Old Testament, and a New Testament suppliant, by noticing the differences and the resemblances. I. The resemblances. 1) Distress and grief there are in the Old, as in the New Testament (Isaiah 38:3). 2) Ready and willing to help beyond our prayers or comprehension (Isaiah 38:5-6) is the Lord in the Old as in the New Testament.
II. The differences. 1) The Old Testament suppliant appealed to his having done nothing bad (Isaiah 38:3). The New Testament suppliant says: “God be merciful to me a sinner,” and “Give me through grace for Christ’s sake what it pleases Thee to give me.” 2) The Old Testament suppliant demands a sign (Isaiah 38:7-8; comp. Isaiah 38:22); the New Testament suppliant requires no sign but that of the crucified Son of man, for He knows that to those who bear this sign is given the promise of the hearing of all their prayers (John 16:23). 3) In Hezekiah’s case, the prayer of the Old Testament suppliant is indeed heard (Isaiah 38:5), yet in general it has not the certainty of being heard, whereas the New Testament suppliant has this certainty.
Footnotes:regarding that that thou hast prayed to me respecting Sennacherib.against.after.reviled.Heb. By the hand of thy servants.Heb. the tallness of the cedars thereof, and the choice of the fir trees thereof.summit.his most luxuriant forest.Or, and his fruitful field.of Egypt.Or, fenced and closed.Or, Hast thou not heard how I have made it long ago, and formed if of ancient times? should I now bring it to be laid waste, and defenced cities to be ruinous heaps?heard I from far back I have done it, from ancient days I have formed, etc.And.Heb. short of hand.a field before the stalk.Or, sitting.thy raging.(haughty) security.Heb. the escaping of the house of Judah that remaineth.add.Heb. the escaping.into it.Heb. shield.
6. THE .
Isaiah 37:36-3836 Then the angel of the Lord went forth, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred and fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses. 37So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh. 38And it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him with the sword; and they escaped into the land of Armenia: and Esar-haddon his son reigned in his stead.
AND 1. Then the angel—in his stead.
Isaiah 37:36-38. In 2 Kings 19:35 it is said: “And it came to pass that night that the angel,” etc. If these additional words were supplied by some later copyist or glossarist, it is incomprehensible how they do not appear in both texts. For whoever made the addition must have wished to be credited. But in order to credibility both documents must agree in this respect. Or if it be assumed that these words were originally in the Isaiah text, but were omitted by some one who could not harmonize them with the view of Isa 37:29; then the question arises: why did not the same one omit the words at 2 Kings 19.?
We must therefore hold that the words in 2 Kings 19 are genuine, and that the Author of our text omitted them, as he has done much beside, because they appeared to him superfluous or obscure. Of course, on a first view, this datum may appear strange. The events narrated in Isaiah 37:9-35 are unmarked by any data to indicate the time they required. Thus it may appear that they followed in quick succession, and that there is left no room for the battle between Sennacherib and Tirhaka, if the 185,000 were destroyed the night following Isaiah’s response. Yet that battle must have occurred between the announcement of Tirhaka’s approach (Isaiah 37:9) and the destruction of the 185,000.
According to the inscriptions on the hexagon cylinder (Schrader, p. 171) and on the Kujundschick bulls (ibid. p. 184), the battle of Altaku took place even before the payment of tribute by Hezekiah. But Schrader is undoubtedly correct in remarking (p. 190): “he (Sennacherib) purposely displaces the chronological order and concludes with the statement of the rich tribute, as if this stamped its seal on the whole, whereas we know from the Bible that this tribute was paid while the great king was encamped at Lacish, and before the battle of Altaku (2 Kings 18:14).” The Assyrian documents, therefore, cannot prevent us from placing the battle in the period between Isaiah 37:9-36. But it could not have been attended with decisive results. For had Sennacherib sustained a decisive defeat, he must have retreated, and the destruction of the 185,000 would not have been necessary. On the contrary, had he conquered, then the Egyptians must have retreated, of which we have no trace. Moreover the Assyrian account of the battle sounds pretty modest.
For though it speaks of a defeat of the Egyptians, and of the capture of “the charioteer and sons of the Egyptian king, and of the charioteer of the king of Meroe,” yet there is wanting that further statement of the number of prisoners taken, the chariots captured, etc., statements that otherwise never fail to be made. Schrader also concludes from this that it must have been a Pyrrhus victory, if a victory at all. According to Isaiah 31:8, Assyria was even not to fall by the sword of man. The Lord had reserved him for Himself.
If the battle of Altaku occurred as we have said, then it follows that the events narrated, Isaiah 37:9-36, cannot have occurred in such very rapid succession. “In that night,” 2 Kings 19:35, therefore does not refer to a point of time immediately near the total events previously narrated. It seems to me to relate only to the day in which Isaiah gave his response. When Sennacherib heard of the approach of Tirhaka (Isaiah 37:9) he did not necessarily send off at once his message to Hezekiah. He had likely more important matters on hand. It sufficed for his object if he sent his messengers two or three days later. Then the messengers would require several days to reach Jerusalem.
If, then, on the same day [of its receipt] Hezekiah spread the letter of the Assyrian before the Lord, still it is not at all to be assumed that the response immediately followed. That could not follow sooner than the Lord commissioned the Prophet. But the Lord postponed His response to the moment when the fulfilment could follow on the heels of the promise. It is apparent that, after days of anxious waiting, the facts of the comforting assurance and of the unspeakably glorious help, coming blow on blow, must have had a quite overpowering effect. It is, after all, but the Lord’s wise and usual way, in order to exercise men in faith and patience, to let them wait for His answer, that, when they have stood the trial, He may then let His help burst in on them mightily, to their greater joy (comp. Psalms 22:3; Proverbs 13:12; Jeremiah 42:7; 1 Samuel 14:37; 1 Samuel 14:41 sq., etc.).
The mention of “the angel of the Lord” calls to mind the destruction of the first-born in Egypt (Exodus 12:12 sqq.), and the plague in Jerusalem (2 Samuel 24:15 sqq.). In these three places the angel is said “to smite” (δִ ?λָּ ?δExodus 12:12 sq.; 2 Samuel 24:17 or πָ ?βַ ?σExodus 12:13; Exodus 12:23; 2 Samuel 24:21; 2 Samuel 24:25). He is therefore designated as ξַ ?ωְׁ ?ηִ ?ιϊ “destruction” (Exodus 12:13; Exodus 12:23; 2 Samuel 24:21; 2 Samuel 24:25). But in 2 Samuel 24:15 the destruction wrought by the angel is expressly called γֶּ ?αֶ ?ψ, “pest,” which word is employed by Amos 4:10, probably with reference to that destruction of the first-born. Thus, then, in our passage a pest is to be understood as the sword with which the angel smote the host of Assyria; to the rejection of other explanations, such as a tempest, a defeat by the enemy, or forsooth poisoning (comp. Winer, R.
W. B., Art. Hezekiah). Even that plague in David’s time carried off in a short space (probably in less than a day, according as one understands ςϊξεςγ2 Samuel 24:15) 70,000 men in Palestine. Other examples of great pest-catastrophes in ancient and modern times, none of which however equal what is told here, see in Gesen. and Delitzsch. What is told here receives indirect confirmation from Herod. (II. 141), who narrates that “Sanacharibos, king of the Arabians and Assyrians” was compelled to retreat before king Sethos at Pelusium, because swarms of field mice had gnawed away the leather work of the Assyrian arms.
As a monument of this victory there stands in the temple of Hephaestos [Vulcan], whose priest Sethos was, a stone statue of this king with a mouse on his hand, and the superscription “ἐςἐμέτιςὁρέωνεὐσεβἠςἕστω.” This superscription Herodotus accounts for, by narrating that this king in his necessity before the battle prayed to his god, and received the assurance of divine help. If this be perhaps a trace that the overthrow of Sennacherib was recognized as evidently a demonstration of divine help, so, too, the mouse is probably a reminiscence of the rescuing plague. For the hieoroglyphics employ the mouse as the symbol of wasting and dsestruction; so that the narrative of Herodotus contains probably only the signification of the mouse supporting statue ascribed to it by those of later times. This combination was first made by J. D. Michaelis, who has been followed by Gesen. [?], Hitzig, Thenius [Barnes, J.
A. Alex., per contra see Baehr, 2 Kings 19]. Comp. Leyrer in Herz., R.-Encycl. XI. p. 411.
Though the plague is a natural agent, still the great number carried off in one night is something wonderful. It appears inadmissible to me to assume with Hensler and others (Delitzsch, too,) a longer prevalence of the plague. The deliverance of Israel was not to come about by the sword of Egypt, nor by a natural event of a common sort. Both Israel and the heathen must recognize the finger of God, that every one may fear Him and trust in Him alone. Comp. Isaiah 10:24 sqq.; Isaiah 14:24-27; Isaiah 17:12-14; Isaiah 29:1-8; Isaiah 30:7-15 sqq., 30 sqq.; Isaiah 31:1-9; Isaiah 33:1-4; Isaiah 33:10 sqq., 22 sqq.
The subject of ειωׁ ?λιξε is the surviving Assyrians, as those who actually in the morning came upon the corpses. In ξϊιν is evidently to be made prominent the notion of inability to act, especially to fight. The strong warriors of Sennacherib were become motionless, harmless corpses. The ειρςειμκειωα, as has often been remarked, recalls Cicero’sabiit, evasit, excessit, erupit. The three verbs depict the haste of the retreat. In “and dwelt at Nineveh” the verb ειωׁ ?α has manifestly the meaning of remaining, comp.
Genesis 21:16; Genesis 22:5; Genesis 24:55; Exodus 24:14, etc. In fact, after this overthrow, Sennacherib reigned still twenty years, and undertook five more campaigns. But these were all directed toward the north or south of Nineveh. He came no more to the west (Schrader, l. c. p. 205). What is narrated, therefore, in Isaiah 37:38, did not occur till twenty years after this.
According to Oppert (Exped. scient. en Mesop. II. p. 339) πִ ?ρְ ?ψֹ ?κְ means “binder, joiner,” and as the prayers that have been found addressed to him have for their subject chiefly the blessing of marriage, the conclusion seems justified that Nisroch corresponded to Hymen of the Greeks and Romans. Schrader assents to this view, only that, according to him, the root “sarak” in Assyrian means “to vouchsafe, to dispense,” rather than “to bind,” so that πργκ would more properly be “the good, the gracious” or “the dispenser.” An inscription of Asurbanipal, the son and successor of Esar-haddon, in which he narrates his mounting the throne in the month Iyyar, calls this month “the month of Nisroch, the lord of humanity” (Schrader, p. 208). In the list of gods found in the library of Asurbanipal (comp. on Isaiah 46:1, and Schrader in the Stud. and Krit., 1874, II. p. 336 sq.), the name of Nisroch is not found. While Sennacherib worshipped in the house of his god, his two sons slew him. An awful deed: parricide and sacrilege at the same moment, each aggravating the other.
Such was the end of the haughty Sennacherib who had dared to blaspheme the God of Israel. He, who had boasted that no god nor people could resist him, must fall before the swords of his sons. He that regarded himself unconquerable by the help of his idols, must suffer death in the temple and in the presence of his idol. [How different the experience of Hezekiah in the temple of Jehovah, and the fate of Sennacherib in the temple of his idol!—Tr.]. Hendewerk cites, as parallel instances of monarchs murdered while at prayer, the cases of Caliph Omar, and the emperor Leo V. No mention has been discovered thus far, in the Assyrian inscriptions of the murder of Sennacherib, whereas they do inform us of the murder of his father Sargon. Polyhystor, among profane historians, relates (in Euseb.Armen.
Chron. ed. Mai, p. 19) the murder of Sennacherib. But he only names Ardumusanus, i.e., Adrammelech as the murderer. Abydenus, on the other hand (ibid. p. 25) makes Nergilus the son of Sennacherib succeed the latter. This one was murdered by his brother Adramelus, and the latter in turn by his brother Axerdis. Here Adramelus is evidently = Adrammelech, Axerdis = Esarhaddon.
Nergilus, however, according to Schrader’s sagacious conjecture, = Sarezer. For Sarezer in Assyrian is Sar-usur, i.e., protect the king. But to this Imperative is prefixed the name of the god that protects, so that the complete name may sound, sometimes Bil-sar-usur, sometimes, Asur-sar-usur, sometimes Nirgal-sar-usur, etc. But the name may also be used in an abbreviated form, viz.: with the omission of the name of the god: so that thus this Sarezer when the name in full was spoken, may have been Nirgal-sar-usur.Abydenus then may have preserved the first half of this name, while the Bible preserved the latter half (Schrader, p. 206) Adrammelech occurs as the name of a god 2 Kings 17:31. The word in Assyrian is Adar-malik, i.e. Adar is prince. (Schrader, p. 168).
According to Armenian tradition, the two sons of Sennacherib were to have been offered in sacrifice by their father (see Delitzschin loc.). According to the book of Tobit (Isaiah 1:18 sqq.), Sennacherib wreaked his vengeance for the overthrow he suffered on the captives of the Ten Tribes. On the other hand he was a hated person by the Jews, whence also they held his murderers in high honor. Later Rabbins were of the opinion that these became Jews, and in the middle ages their tombs were pointed out in Galilee (comp. Ewald, Hist. d. V.
Isr. III. p. 690, Anm.). Our text says the parricides escaped to the land of Ararat, i.e., Central Armenia The Assyrian for Ararat is Ur-ar-ti. The word often occurs in the lists of government as the designation of Armenia (comp. Schrader, p. 10, 324, lines 37–40, 42, 44; p. 329, lines 31, 39). According to Armenian historians, the posterity of those two sons of the king long existed in the two princely races of the Sassunians, and Arzerunians.
From the latter descended the Byzantine Emperor Leo the Armenian, from whom in turn a long row of Byzantine rulers were descended. “Not less than ten Byzantine Emperors, if such were the case, may be regarded as the posterity of Sennacherib: so that thus the prophecy of Nah 1:14 received its fulfilment only very late. Delitzsch, in loc.; Ritter, Erdkunde, X. p. 585 sq. Esar-haddon in Assyrian is Asur-ah-iddin, i.e., Asur gives a brother (Schrader, p. 208). According to the canon of regents (ibid. p. 320), Esarhaddon ascended the throne in the year 681 b. c. Ewald places the date of Isaiah’s entrance on his office under Uzziah in the year 757, his death under Manasseh in the year 695 (Gesch. d. V.
Isr. III. p. 844, 846). Delitzsch, following Duncker sets the beginning of Esar-haddon’s reign in the year 693, and admits that in this case Isaiah must have been almost ninety years old. Now in as much as, according to the very certain data of the Assyrian documents, Isaiah, if he lived when Esar-haddon’s reign began, must have become almost 100 years old, one must recognize at least in Isaiah 37:37 sq., an addition by a later hand, which also Delitzsch admits. [The reader that desires to inform himself more particularly on these questions of chronology, and to see a defence of Isaiah’s data, is hereby referred to Birk’sComm. on Isa., Appendix III., “The Assyrian Reigns in Isaiah.” The same article will serve as an introduction to the English literature on the subject.—Tr.].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 36:4 sqq. “Haec proprie est Satanae lingua et sunt non Rabsacis sed ipsissimi Diaboli verba, quibus non muros urbis, sed medullam Ezechiae, hoc est, tenerrimam ejus fidem oppugnat.”—Luther. “In this address the chief-butler, Satan performs in the way he uses when he would bring about our apostacy. 1) He urges that we are divested of all human support, Isaiah 36:5; Isaiah 2) We are deprived of divine support, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 3) God is angry with us because we have greatly provoked Him by our sins, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 4) He decks out the splendor, and power of the wicked, Isaiah 36:8-9; Isaiah 5) He appeals to God’s word, and knows how to turn and twist it to his uses. Such poisonous arrows were used by Satan against Christ in the desert, and may be compared with this light (Matthew 4:2 sqq.). One needs to arm himself against Satan’s attack by God’s word, and to resort to constant watching and prayer.”—Cramer.
The Assyrian urges four particulars by which he would destroy Hezekiah’s confidence, in two of which he was right and in two wrong. He was right in representing that Hezekiah could rely neither on Egypt, nor on his own power. In this respect he was a messenger of God and announcer of divine truth. For everywhere the word of God preaches the same (Isaiah 30:1-3; Isaiah 31:1-3; Jeremiah 17:5; Psalms 118:8-9; Psalms 146:3, etc.). But it is a merited chastisement if rude and hostile preachers must preach to us what we were unwilling to believe at the mild and friendly voice of God. But in two particulars the Assyrian was wrong, and therein lay Hezekiah’s strength.
For just on this account the Lord is for him and against the Assyrian. These two things are, that the Assyrian asserts that Hezekiah cannot put his trust in the Lord, but rather he, the Assyrian is counseled by the Lord against Hezekiah. That, however, was a lie, and because of this lie, the corresponding truth makes all the deeper impression on Hezekiah, and reminds him how assuredly he may build on the Lord and importune Him. And when the enemy dares to say, that he is commissioned by the Lord to destroy the Holy Land, just that must bring to lively remembrance in the Israelite, that the Lord, who cannot lie, calls the land of Israel His land (Joel 4:2; Jeremiah 2:7; Jeremiah 16:18, etc.), and the people of Israel His people (Exodus 3:7; Exodus 3:10; Exodus 5:1, etc.).
2. On Isaiah 36:12. [“In regard to the indelicacy of this passage we may observe: 1) The Masorets in the Hebrew text have so printed the words used, that in reading it the offensiveness would be considerably avoided. 2) The customs, habits and modes of expression of people in different nations and times, differ. What appears indelicate at one time or in one country, may not only be tolerated, but common in another. 3) Isaiah is not at all responsible for the indelicacy of the language here. He is simply an historian. 4) It was of importance to give the true character of the attack which was made on Jerusalem. The coming of Sennacherib was attended with pride, insolence and blasphemy; and it was important to state the true character of the transaction, and to record just what was said and done. Let him who used the language, and not him who recorded it bear the blame.”—Barnes in loc.].
3. On Isaiah 36:18 sqq. “Observandum hic, quod apud gentes olim viguerit πολύθεια adeo, ut quaevis etiam urbs peculiarem habuerit Deum tutelarem. Cujus ethnicismi exemplum vivum et spirans adhuc habemus apud pontificios, quibus non inscite objici potest illud Jeremiae: Quot civitates tibi, tot etiam Dei (Jeremiah 2:28).”—Foerster.
4. On Isaiah 36:21. Answer not a fool according to his folly (Proverbs 26:4), much less the blasphemer, lest the flame of his wickedness be blown into the greater rage (Sir 8:3). Did not Christ the Lord answer His enemies, not always with words, but also with silence (Matthew 26:62; Matthew 27:14, etc.)? One must not cast pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6). After Foerster and Cramer.
5. On Isaiah 36:21. “Est aureus textus, qui docet nos, ne cum Satana disputemus. Quando enim videt, quod sumus ejus spectatores et auditores, tum captat occasionem majoris fortitudinis et gravius premit. Petrus dicit, eum circuire et quaerere, quem devoret. Nullum facit insidiarum finem. Tutissimum autem est non respondere, sed contemnere eum.”—Luther.
6. [On Isaiah 37:1-7. “Rabshakeh intended to frighten Hezekiah from the Lord, but it proves that he frightens him to the Lord. The wind, instead of forcing the traveler’s coat from him, makes him wrap it the closer about him. The more Rabshakeh reproaches God, the more Hezekiah studies to honor Him.” On Isaiah 37:3. “When we are most at a plunge we should be most earnest in prayer. When pains are most strong, let prayers be most lively. Prayer is the midwife of mercy, that helps to bring it forth.”—M. Henry, in loc.]
7. On Isaiah 37:2 sqq. Hezekiah here gives a good example. He shows all princes, rulers and peoples what one ought to do when there is a great and common distress, and tribulation. One ought with sackcloth, i. e., with penitent humility, to bring prayers, and intercessions to the Lord that He would look on and help.
8. On Isaiah 37:6 sq. “God takes to Himself all the evil done to His people. For as when one does a great kindness to the saints, God appropriates it to Himself, so, too, when one torments the saints, it is an injury done to God, and He treats sin no other way than as if done to Himself. He that torments them torments Him (Isaiah 64:9). Therefore the saints pray: ‘Arise, O God, plead thine own cause: remember how the foolish man reproacheth thee daily’ (Psalms 74:22).”—Cramer.
9. On Isaiah 37:7. “God raises up against His enemies other enemies, and thus prepares rest for His own people. Example: the Philistines against Saul who pursued David, 1 Samuel 23:27.”—Cramer.
10. On Isaiah 37:14. Vitringa here cites the following from Bonfin Rerum Hungar. Dec. III. Lib.
VI. p. 464, ad annum Isaiah 1444: “Amorathes, cum suos laborare cerneret et ab Vladislao rege non sine magna caede fugari, depromtum e sinu codicem initi sanctissime foederis explicat intentis in coelum oculis. Haec sunt, inquit ingeminans, Jesu Christe, foedera, quae Christiani tui mecum percussere. Per numen tuum sanctum jurarunt, datamque sub nomine tuo fidem violarunt, perfide suum Deum abnegarunt. Nunc Christe, si Deus es (ut ajunt et nos hallucinamur), tuas measque hic injurias, te quaeso, ulciscere et his, qui sanctum tuum nomen nondum agnovere, violatae fidei poenas ostende. Vix haec dixerat .… cum proelium, quod anceps ac dubium diu fuerat, inclinare coepit, etc.”[The desire of Hezekiah was not primarily his own personal safety, or the safety of his kingdom. It was that Jehovah might vindicate His great and holy name from reproach, and that the world might know that He was the only true God.
We have here a beautiful model of the object which we should have in view when we come before God. This motive of prayer is one that is with great frequency presented in the Bible. Comp. Isaiah 42:8; Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 43:13; Isaiah 43:25; Deuteronomy 32:39; Psalms 83:18; Psalms 46:10; Nehemiah 9:6; Daniel 9:18-19. Perhaps there could have been furnished no more striking proof that Jehovah was the true God, than would be by the defeat of Sennacherib. The time had come when the great Jehovah could strike a blow which would be felt on all nations, and carry the terror of His name, and the report of His power throughout the earth.
Perhaps this was one of the main motives of the destruction of that mighty army.”—Barnes, on Isaiah 37:2].
11. On Isaiah 37:15. “Fides Ezechiae verba confirmata magis ac magis crescit. Ante non ausus est orare, jam orat et confutat blasphemias omnes Assyrii. Adeo magna vis verbi est, ut longe alius per verbum, quod Jesajas ei nunciari jussit, factus sit.”—Luther.
12. On Isaiah 37:17. [“It is bad to talk proudly and profanely, but it is worse to write so, for this argues more deliberation and design, and what is written spreads further and lasts longer, and does the more mischief. Atheism and irreligion, written, will certainly be reckoned for another day.”—M. Henry].
13. On Isaiah 37:21 sqq. [“Those who receive messages of terror from men with patience, and send messages of faith to God by prayer, may expect messages of grace and peace from God for their comfort, even when they are most cast down. Isaiah sent a long answer to Hezekiah’s prayer in God’s name, sent it in writing (for it was too long to be sent by word of mouth), and sent it by way of return to his prayer, relation being thereunto had: ‘Whereas thou hast prayed to me, know, for thy comfort, that thy prayer is heard.’ Isaiah might have referred him to the prophecies he had delivered (particularly to that of chap. 10), and bid him pick out an answer from thence. The correspondence between earth and heaven is never let fall on God’s side.”—M. Henry.].
14. On Isaiah 37:31 sqq. “This is a promise of great extent. For it applies not only to those that then remained, and were spared the impending destruction and captivity by the Assyrians, but to all subsequent times, when they should enjoy a deliverance; as after the Babylonish captivity, and after the persecutions of Antiochus. Yea, it applies even to New Testament times from the first to the last, since therein, in the order of conversion to Christ, the Jews will take root and bring forth fruit, and thus in the Jews (as also in the converted Gentiles) will appear in a spiritual and corporal sense, what God at that time did to their fields in the three following years.”—Starke.
15. On Isaiah 38:1. “Isaiah, although of a noble race and condition, does not for that regard it disgraceful, but rather an honor, to be a pastor and visitor of the sick, I would say, a prophet, teacher and comforter of the sick. God save the mark! How has the world become so different in our day, especially in our evangelical church Let a family be a little noble, and it is regarded as a reproach and injury to have a clergyman among its relations and friends, not to speak of a son studying theology and becoming a servant of the church. I speak not of all; I know that some have a better mind; yet such is the common course. Jeroboam’s maxim must rather obtain, who made priests of the lowest of the people (1 Kings 12:31).
For thus the parsons may be firmly held in rein (sub ferula) and in political submission. It is not at all good where the clergy have a say, says an old state-rule of our Politicorum.” Feuerlein, pastor in Nuremberg, in his Novissimorum primum, 1694, p. 553. The same quotes Spener: “Is it not so, that among the Roman Catholics the greatest lords are not ashamed to stand in the spiritual office, and that many of them even discharge the spiritual functions? Among the Reformed, too, persons born of the noblest families are not ashamed of the office of preacher. But, it seems, we Lutherans are the only ones that hold the service of the gospel so low, that, where from a noble or otherwise prominent family an ingenium has an inclination to theological study, almost every one seeks to hinder him, or, indeed, afterwards is ashamed of his friendship, as if it were something much too base for such people, by which more harm comes to our church than one might suppose. That is to be ashamed of the gospel.”
16. On Isaiah 38:1. [“We see here the boldness and fidelity of a man of God. Isaiah was not afraid to go in freely and tell even a monarch that he must die. The subsequent part of the narrative would lead us to suppose that, until this announcement, Hezekiah did not regard himself as in immediate danger. It is evident here, that the physician of Hezekiah had not informed him of it—perhaps from the apprehension that his disease would be aggravated by the agitation of his mind on the subject. The duty was, therefore, left, as it is often, to the minister of religion—a duty which even many ministers are slow to perform, and which many physicians are reluctant to have performed.
No danger is to be apprehended commonly from announcing to those who are sick their true condition. Physicians and friends often err in this. There is no species of cruelty greater than to suffer a friend to lie on a dying bed under a delusion. There is no sin more aggravated than that of designedly deceiving a dying man, and flattering him with the hope of recovery, when there is a moral certainty that he will not and cannot recover. And there is evidently no danger to be apprehended from communicating to the sick their true condition. It should be done tenderly and with affection; but it should be done faithfully.
I have had many opportunities of witnessing the effect of apprising the sick of their situation, and of the moral certainty that they must die. And I cannot now recall an instance in which the announcement has had any unhappy effect on the disease. Often, on the contrary, the effect is to calm the mind, and to lead the dying to look up to God, and peacefully to repose on Him. And the effect of that is always salutary.” Barnes in loc.]
17. On Isaiah 38:2. It is an old opinion, found even in the Chald., that by the wall is meant the wall of the temple as a holy direction in which to pray, as the Mahometans pray in the direction of Mecca. But δχιψ cannot mean that. Rather that is correct which is said by Forerius: “Nolunt pii homines testes habere suarum lacrymarum, ut eas liberius fundant, neque sensu distrahi, cum orare Deum ex animo volunt.”
18. On Isaiah 38:8 :—
Non Deus est numen Parcarum carcere clausum.Quale putabatur Stoicus esse Deus.
Ille potest Solis cursus inhibere volantes,
At veluti scopulos flumina stare facit.”
—Melanchthon.
19. On Isaiah 38:12. “Beautiful parables that picture to us the transitoriness of this temporal life. For the parable of the shepherd’s tent means how restless a thing it is with us, that we have here no abiding place, but are driven from one locality to another, until at last we find a resting-spot in the church-yard. The other parable of the weaver’s thread means how uncertain is our life on earth. For how easily the thread breaks.” Cramer. “When the weaver’s work is progressing best, the thread breaks before he is aware. Thus when a man is in his best work, and supposes he now at last begins really to live, God breaks the thread of his life and lets him die. The rational heathen knew something of this when they, so to speak, invented the three goddesses of life (the three Parcas minime parcas) and included them in this little verse:
Clotho colum gestat, Lachesis trahit,
Atropos occatBut what does the weaver when the thread breaks? Does he stop his work at once? O no! He knows how to make a clever weaver’s knot, so that one cannot observe the break. Remember thereby that when thy life is broken off, yet the Lord Jesus, as a master artisan, can bring it together again at the last day. He will make such an artful, subtle weaver’s-knot as shall make us wonder through all eternity. It will do us no harm to have died.” Ibid.—Omnia sunt hominum tenui pendentia filo.
[“As suddenly as the tent of a shepherd is taken down, folded up, and transferred to another place. There is doubtless the idea here that he would continue to exist, but in another place, as the shepherd would pitch his tent in another place. He was to be cut off from the earth, but he expected to dwell among the dead. The whole passage conveys the idea that he expected to dwell in another state.” Barnes in loc.].
20. On Isaiah 38:17. [“Note 1) When God pardons sin, He casts it behind His back as not designing to look upon it with an eye of justice and jealousy. He remembers it no more, to visit for it. The pardon does not make the sin not to have been, or not to have been sin, but not to be punished as it deserves. When we cast our sins behind our back, and take no care to repent of them, God sets them before His face, and is ready to reckon for them; but when we set them before our face in true repentance, as David did when his sin was ever before him, God casts them behind His back. 2) When God pardons sin, He pardons all, casts them all behind His back, though they have been as scarlet and crimson. 3) The pardoning of sin is the delivering the soul from the pit of corruption. 4) It is pleasant indeed to think of our recoveries from sickness when we see them flowing from the remission of sin; then the cause is removed, and then it is in love to the soul.” M. Henry in loc.]
21. On Isaiah 38:18. [Cannot hope for thy truth. “They are shut out from all the means by which Thy truth is brought to mind, and the offers of salvation are presented. Their probation is at an end; their privileges are closed; their destiny is sealed up. The idea is, it is a privilege to live because this is a world where the offers of salvation are made, and where those who are conscious of guilt may hope in the mercy of God.” Barnes in loc.] God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). Such is the New Testament sense of these Old Testament words. For though Hezekiah has primarily in mind the preferableness of life in the earthly body to the life in Hades, yet this whole manner of representation passes away with Hades itself.
But Hezekiah’s words still remain true so far as they apply to heaven and hell. For of course in hell, the place of the damned, one does not praise God. But those that live praise Him. These, however, are in heaven. Since then God wills rather that men praise Him than not praise Him, so He is not willing that men should perish, but that all should turn to repentance and live.
22. On Isaiah 39:2. “Primo (Deus) per obsidionem et bellum, deinde per gravem morbum Ezechiam servaverat, ne in praesumtionem laberetur. Nondum tamen vinci potuit antiquus serpens, sed redit et levat caput suum. Adeo non possumus consistere, nisi Deos nos affligat. Vides igitur hic, quis sit afflictionum usus, ut mortificent scilicet carnem, quae non potest res ferre secundas.” Luther.
23. On Isaiah 39:7. “God also punishes the misdeeds of the parents on the children (Exodus 20:5) because the children not only follow the misdeeds of their parents, but they also increase and heap them up, as is seen in the posterity of Hezekiah, viz.: Manasseh and Amon.”—Cramer.
HINTS[The reader is referred to the ample hints covering the same matter to be found in the volume on 2 Kings 18-20. It is expedient to take advantage of that for the sake of keeping the present volume within reasonable bounds. Therefore but a minimum is here given of what the Author offers, much of which indeed is but the repetition in another form of matter already given.—Tr.]
1. On Isaiah 37:36. “1) The scorn and mockery of the visible world. 2) The scorn and mockery of the unseen world.” Sermon of Domprediger Zahn in Halle, 1870.
2. On the entire 38. chapter, beside the 22 sermons in ’S Novissimorum primum, there is a great number of homiletical elaborations of an early date; Walther Magirus, Idea mortis et vitae in two parts, the second of which contains 20 penitential and consolatory sermons on Isaiah 38. Danzig, 1640 and 1642. Daniel Schaller (Stendal) 4 sermons on the sick Hezekiah, on Isaiah 38. Magdeburg, 1611. Peter Siegmund Pape in “Gott geheilighte Wochenpredigten,” Berlin, 1701, 4 sermons. Jacob Tichlerus (Elburg) Hiskiae Aufrichtigkeit bewiesen in Gesundheit, Krankheit und Genesung, 18 sermons on Isaiah 38. (Dutch), Campen, 1636. These are only the principal ones.
3. On Isaiah 38:1. “I will set my house in order. This, indeed, will not be hard for me to do. My debt account is crossed out; my best possession I take along with me; my children I commit to the great Father of orphans, to whom heaven and earth belongs, and my soul to the Lord, who has sued for it longer than a human age, and bought it with His blood. Thus I am eased and ready for the journey.” Tholuck, Stunden der Andacht, p. 620.
4. On Isaiah 38:1. “Now thou shouldest know that our word ‘order his house’ has a very broad meaning. It comprehends reconciliation to God by faith, the final confession of sin, the last Lord’s Supper, the humble committing of the soul to the grace of the Lord, and to death and the grave in the hope of the resurrection. In one word: There is an ordering of the house above. In reliance on the precious merit of my Saviour, I order my house above in which I wish to dwell. Moreover taking leave of loved ones, and the blessing of them belongs to ordering the house. And finally order must be taken concerning the guardianship of children, the abiding of the widow, and the friend on whom she must especially lean in her loneliness, also concerning earthly bequests.” Ahlfeld, Das Leben im Lichte des Wortes Gottes, Halle, 1867, p. 522.
5. On Isaiah 38:2-8. This account has much that seems strange to us Christians, but much, too, that quite corresponds to our Christian consciousness. Let us contemplate the difference between an Old Testament, and a New Testament suppliant, by noticing the differences and the resemblances. I. The resemblances. 1) Distress and grief there are in the Old, as in the New Testament (Isaiah 38:3). 2) Ready and willing to help beyond our prayers or comprehension (Isaiah 38:5-6) is the Lord in the Old as in the New Testament.
II. The differences. 1) The Old Testament suppliant appealed to his having done nothing bad (Isaiah 38:3). The New Testament suppliant says: “God be merciful to me a sinner,” and “Give me through grace for Christ’s sake what it pleases Thee to give me.” 2) The Old Testament suppliant demands a sign (Isaiah 38:7-8; comp. Isaiah 38:22); the New Testament suppliant requires no sign but that of the crucified Son of man, for He knows that to those who bear this sign is given the promise of the hearing of all their prayers (John 16:23). 3) In Hezekiah’s case, the prayer of the Old Testament suppliant is indeed heard (Isaiah 38:5), yet in general it has not the certainty of being heard, whereas the New Testament suppliant has this certainty.
Footnotes:Heb. Ararat.
II.—THE WAY FOR THE WITH BABYLON. ’S AND , AND THE EMBASSY FROM BABYLON THIS Isaiah 38, 391. ’S AND
38a) The Sickness. Isaiah 38:1-31 In those days was Hezekiah sick unto death. And Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz came unto him, and said unto him, Thus saith the Lord, Set thine house in order: for thou shalt die, and not live. 2Then Hezekiah turned his face toward the wall, and prayed unto the Lord, 3and said, Remember now, O Lord, I beseech thee, how I have walked before thee in truth and with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in thy sight. And Hezekiah wept sore.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_38:1. In μξεϊ we have a constructio prζgnans, in as much as the preposition depends on a notion of movement onward, nearing, that is latent in the verb ηָ ?μָ ?δ. Unless μְ be regarded as a particle denoting design; he was sick in order to die, in which case the consequence would be represented as intention, as elsewhere similarly the reason is substituted as an object in clauses with αֵּ ?ι ,ςַ ?μ ,λֵּ ?ο. It is said in like manner Judges 16:16, εַ ?ϊִּ ?χְ ?φַ ?ψπַ ?τְ ?ωׁ ?εֹ μָ ?ξεּ ?ϊ. In the parallel place 2 Chronicles 32:24 ςַ ?γΞμָ ?ξεּ ?ϊ stands for our μָ ?ξεּ ?ϊ, which corresponds essentially with the first of the two explanations given above.——The expression “to command his house,” for “to make his last will known to his house” is found again only 2 Samuel 17:23, where, however, the preposition ΰֶ ?μ is used instead of μְ. The expression λιΞξϊΰϊδεμΰϊηιδ denotes the dying as certain, surely determined, by using the positive affirming participle (which presents death as abstract, timeless fact, thus a fact determined as to substance, though undetermined as to form, comp.
Genesis 20:3) and the negative clause εμΰϊηιδ that excludes the contrary. As analogous to the meaning “to remain living,” comp. ηִ ?ιָּ ?δ = “to retain alive,” Isaiah 7:21 and the comment.
The differences between our text and 2 Kings 20:1-3 are inconsiderable as to sense, and yet are characteristic: ηζχιδε omitted at the beginning of Isa 38:2, and μΰξψsubstituted at the end for our ειΰξψ beginning Isaiah 38:2. Here our passage again gives evidence of an amended text. The absence of a subject for ειρα, when previously Hezekiah and Isaiah and Jehovah had been named, and Hezekiah in fact the furthest from the predicate, lets it be possible (though only grammatically) to think of Isaiah or Jehovah as subject. And the emphatic ειΰξִ ?γ Isaiah 38:3 corresponds to the importance of the brief prayer much better than the short μΰξψ, that is only equivalent to our quotation marks. Thus we see here again that 2 Kings has the more original text. For it is inconceivable that the correcter and completer text has been changed into that which is less correct and complete. [The foregoing reasoning on the differences of the two texts must strike most readers as simply the fruit of a foregone conclusion.
When, moreover, one takes the latter statement concerning ειΰξψ and μΰξψ and compares the two texts at Isaiah 37:15 and 2 Kings 19:15, this impression is confirmed. See the Author’s comm. on Isaiah 37:15 under Text. and Gram. There we find precisely the reverse of what the Author remarks here on the occurrence of the two words in the parallel texts. In using μΰξψ Isaiah 37:15, instead of the ειΰξψ found in 2 Kings, does the Isaiah text do injustice to the importance of the solemn prayer of Hezekiah in the Temple? And does he fail to observe how much better “the emphatic ειΰξψ corresponds to that importance?” The reader is also referred to the comparison between Isaiah 7:1 (in loc.) and 2 Kings 16:5. When all the details of this argument, (viz. for the text of 2 Kings being more original and the Isaiah text being amended from that, and so still more remote from a genuine Isaiah text), have been gone over, we may anticipate that the conclusion of most students will agree with the opinion of J.
A. Alex., (see his comment on Isaiah 37:17-18), who characterizes most of it as “special pleading” and “perverse ingenuity.”—Tr.].
AND 1. In the fourteenth year of his reign, Hezekiah fell dangerously ill. It was no doubt a proof of especial divine grace when Isaiah announced to him his approaching end, and thereby gave him time to command his house. But Hezekiah was terrified at the intelligence. He prayed weeping to the Lord, and appealing to his life spent in the fear of God.
2. In those days——wept sore.
Isaiah 38:1-3. We have, above in the introduction to chaps. 36–39sufficiently shown what is the relation of chaps. 38–39 to the two that precede it. It can no longer be a matter of doubt that the time of Hezekiah’s sickness preceded the overthrow of Sennacherib. The former as certainly belonged to the year 714 as the latter to the year 700. The transposition of the chapters, which was for the sake of the connection of the subject matter in them with the general contents of the book, occasioned the belief that the overthrow of Sennacherib also happened in the year 714. In consequence of this, expositors only differ in this respect, that some put all the events narrated 36–37 before those narrated 38–39 while others put the sickness of Hezekiah before 36–37 but the embassy after them.
An end is made to all this by the fact, now put beyond doubt, that Sennacherib only began to reign in the year 705, and made his first and only campaign against Ph�nicia, Judea and Egypt in the year 700. For these reasons “in those days” Isaiah 38:1 and “at that time,” Isaiah 39:1 are equally unauthentic and not genuine. Both must owe their origin to emendation. [See introduction before 36 Comp. Smith’sDict. of the Bible, article Hezekiah.].
It cannot be certainly determined what was the nature of Hezekiah’s sickness. Many have inferred from δַ ?ωְּׁ ?ηִ ?ιο Isaiah 38:21; 2 Kings 20:7, that he had the plague, and have associated this with the plague in the Assyrian camp. (Isaiah 37:36), and even used this as proof that Hezekiah’s sickness occurred after Sennacherib’s overthrow. But ωְׁ ?ηִ ?ιο, (ωָׁ ?ηַ ?ο a root unused in Hebrew, but meaning in the dialects (“incaluit, calidus fuit”) stands not only for the plague boil (bubo), but also for other burning ulcers, as it occurs in reference to leprosy (Leviticus 13:18 sqq.), and other inflammable cutaneous diseases (Exodus 9:9 sqq.; Deuteronomy 28:27; Deuteronomy 28:35; Job 2:7). If δωׁ ?ηιο Isaiah 38:21 be not taken collectively, so that there was only one boil, then the next meaning would be a carbuncle (i.e., a conglomeration of ulcerous roots). In respect to God’s promises and threatenings being, as it were, dependent on the subjective deportment of men, for their realization, comp. Jeremiah 18:7 sqq.; where especially the ψֶ ?βַ ?ς, connecting with the celerity with which the potter transforms the clay, denotes the celerity with which the Lord, under circumstances alters His decrees.
Comp. my remarks in loc. Hezekiah turned his face to the wall because at that moment he neither wished to see the face of men, nor to show his countenance to men. He would, as much as possible, speak with his God alone. It was different with Ahab, 1 Kings 21:4. μֵ ?αωָׁ ?μֵ ?ν is animus integer, i.e., a whole, full, undivided heart (1 Kings 8:61; 1 Kings 11:4). It is an Old Testament speech, that Hezekiah makes. A Christian could not so speak to God.
Hezekiah applies to himself the standard that Psalms 15 offers, and that Christ proposes in the Sermon on the mount (Matthew 5:21 sqq.).
Footnotes:Heb. Give charge concerning thy house.Heb. With great weeping.b) The RecoveryIsa_38:4-84 Then came the word of the Lord to Isaiah, saying, 5Go, and say to Hezekiah, Thus saith the Lord, the God of David thy father, I have heard thy prayer, I have seen thy tears: behold, I will add unto thy days fifteen years. 6And I will deliver thee and this city out of the hand of the king of Assyria: and I will defend 7this city. And this shall be a sign unto thee from the Lord, that the Lord will do this thing that he hath spoken; 8Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_38:5. On the construction of δππιιερισ see on Isaiah 28:16; Isaiah 29:14.
Isaiah 38:21. The word γְּ ?αֵ ?μָ ?δ, st. constr. γְּ ?αֶ ?μֶ ?δ, beside the text, and 2 Kings 20:7, occurs only 1 Samuel 30:12; 1 Chronicles 12:40. The Greek word παλάθη, which means a cake of dried fruits, especially of figs, seems to have been derived from γְּ ?αֵ ?μָ ?δ through the Aram. γְּ ?αֶ ?μְ ?ϊָּ ?ΰ.
The 3 pers. plur. ιִ ?ωְ ?ΰεּ has for subject those who naturally performed the service in question. We use in such cases the indefinite subject they (Germ. “man”): (comp. Jeremiah 3:16 sq.; Isaiah 34:16).—ξָ ?ψַ ?η occurs elsewhere only in the substantive form ξָ ?ψεֹ ?ηַ (contritus scil, testiculos contritos habens, Leviticus 21:20). The meaning is “to crush, triturate.” It is thus a constructio pr�gnans: let them crush figs (and lay them) on the boil. On ωׁ ?ηιο, See on Isaiah 38:1.
In 2 Kings 20:7 at the end of the verse it reads εַ ?ιֶּ ?ηִֽ ?ι, “and he lived,” i.e., recovered, instead of as here εַ ?ιֶ ?ηִֽ ?ι. “that he may live.” Our text appears to be an effort to remove a difficulty. For εַ ?ιֶּ ?ηִֽ ?ι seems primarily to mean that Hezekiah immediately recovered. But that such was not the case is seen from the king’s asking: “what shall be the sign that the Lord will heal me, and that I shall go up to the temple the third day?” (2 Kings 20:8). It was, therefore, no instantaneous cure: and this our text would intimate by ειֱ ?ηִֽ ?ι. But the word in 2 Kings 20:7 is only an anticipation of the narrator, who states the effect immediately after the application of the means although other events intervened.
Isaiah 38:21-22, are an epitome of 2 Kings 20:7-8, with the omission of what is less essential. But it is to be noted, as a further proof of the second-hand nature of our text, that the words “what is the sign,” etc. 2 Kings 20:8 have there their proper foundation in that the promise is expressly given (2 Kings 20:5) that the king should go up to the temple, whereas that item is wanting in our Isaiah 38:5.—Whether or not our Isaiah 38:21-22 were intentionally or accidentally put where they are by some later copyist cannot be certainly determined, and is in itself indifferent. But it seems to me most natural to assume that some later person, with the feeling that there was a disturbing gap, thought he must supply it from 2 Kings. An interpolation between Isaiah 38:6-7 would have involved a change in his actual text, thus he supplemented at the end. As they are found in the LXX. the addition must be very ancient. They are important, too, as proof in general that the text in our chaps. has suffered alterations; and especially that the dates have been changed.
On the text at Isaiah 38:8 b. An important difference is to be noted between this and 2 Kings 20:9-11. Our text assumes an actual going backward of the sun, probably, as is also assumed by many expositors, because it was thought that this miracle must be put on a level with the sun standing still at Gibeon (Joshua 10:12). In the Book of Sirach (Sir 48:23) it is expressly said: “in his days the sun went backward and he lengthened the king’s life.” The older and original text of the Book of Kings knows nothing of this construction. AND 1. Then came the word——was, gone down.
Isaiah 38:4-8. In 2 Kings 20:4 we are told that the word of the Lord came to the Prophet when he had hardly left the king, when he had not yet traversed the ςִ ?ιψϊִּ ?ιλֹ ?πָ ?δ, or, as the K’ri and the ancient versions have it probably more correctly, ηָ ?φֵ ?ψϊִּ ?ιλֹ ?πָ ?δ, i.e., the inner court of the residence. Therefore actually ψֶ ?βַ ?ς (Jeremiah 18:7), i.e., suddenly, Jehovah recalled the announcement so categorically made Isaiah 38:1. Just that so harsh sounding announcement had brought forth that fervent sigh of prayer from the depths of Hezekiah’s heart. Precisely this was intended. Necessity must teach Hezekiah to pray.
The Lord calls Himself “the God of thy father David” in order to give Hezekiah one more comforting pledge of deliverance. For He intimates that He will be still the same to him that He had been to David. The Lord had heard the prayer, He had seen the tears. Both were well pleasing to Him, He regarded both. And thus He promises the king that He will add yet fifteen years to his life.
I cannot accord with all that Baehr remarks on our passage (see the vol. on 2 Kings 20:4 sqq.). But I agree with him when he says: “The Prophet announces to the suppliant that God has heard him, and promises him not only immediate recovery, but, in fact, that he shall reign as long again as he has already reigned.” Accordingly Hezekiah must already have reigned fifteen years. This could easily be the case if the historian (Isaiah 36:1) reckoned the fourteen years from the first day of the calendar year, beginning after Hezekiah’s becoming king, while the Lord reckoned so favorably for Hezekiah that He counted the fragment of the first calendar year when he began to reign and the fragment of the current year as a whole year. Then is explained how by divine reckoning Hezekiah reigned 15+15 years, and by human reckoning only 14+15. In 2 Kings 20:5 the additional promise for the immediate future is given: “Behold, I will heal thee: on the third day thou shalt go up unto the house of the Lord.” This is manifestly omitted in our text because included in the larger promise. The promise of Isa 38:6 is of course conceivable even after the overthrow of Sennacherib.
For the latter was to the Assyrians, though a serious, yet by no means an annihilating blow. They could recover themselves after it, and fall on Judah with augmented force and redoubled rage. But our passage stands primarily in undeniable connection with Isaiah 37:35, especially when we regard it in the construction of 2 Kings (comp. 2 Kings 19:34 with Isaiah 20:6, where only ΰֶ ?μ for ςַ ?μ and the μδεωׁ ?ιςδ wanting in Isaiah 20:6 makes the difference). If we are correct in construing the temporal relations of 38, 39, to 36, 37 (see on Isaiah 38:1), then our passage is older than Isaiah 37:35. But the latter passage promises deliverance from Sennacherib in words evidently taken on purpose from our passage, so that the promise there given to Hezekiah appears as a renewal and repetition of that he had received already fourteen years before. In addition to this, both our passage and Isaiah 37:35 have their common root in Isaiah 31:5.
There as here βπιο and δφιμ occur together; there, too, βπιο is illustrated by the touching image of a hovering bird. There it is expressly said that, not Egypt shall protect the people of Israel, but Jehovah has reserved this care for Himself. And this deliverance of Judah from Assyria was in fact definitively and forever decided by the defeat of Sennacherib. Assyria, as we have already seen, is done away. The deportation of Manasseh (2 Chronicles 33) was more a benefit for Judah than a punishment. One may say: Sennacherib’s losing his army, not by the sword of Egypt, but by the hand of the Lord, is the true and proper fulfilment of the promises, Isaiah 31:5; Isaiah 37:35; Isaiah 38:6.
For these reasons I believe that our passage is to be referred to Sennacherib’s defeat and, because that was decisive for Judah’s relations to Assyria, to no later event. But then our passage also puts a decisive weight in the scale in favor of the assertion that the events narrated 38 precede the events narrated 36 and 37.
In our text are wanting after Isaiah 38:6 the words that 2 Kings 20:7-8 are found in the proper place, viz.: “And Isaiah said, Take a lump of figs,” etc. Instead we have in Isaiah 38:21-22 an epitome of what is there said. We will, therefore, anticipate here the exposition of these verses. The Prophet proceeds at once to the fulfilment of the promise of Isa 38:5-6. To this end he orders a piece of figcake to be laid on the diseased spot. γαμδ means a round (sometimes four-cornered) cake of dried summer figs, that were pounded in a mortar and put up in this form for better preservation and transportation (see Winer,R.-W.-B. art. Feigenbaum [Smith’sBib.
Diet. art. Figs]). It is well known that anciently, as now-a-days, too, figs were applied as an emollient to hasten the gathering of a boil. Comp. Gesenius on Isaiah 38:1 and Baehr on 2 Kings 20:7. Already Jerome mentions the opinion that the sweet fig was a contrarium, i. e., an aggravation of the evil, and adds: “Ergo, ut Dei potentia monstraretur, per res noxias et adversas sanitas restituta est.” According to Seb.
Schmidt,Hebraei communiter et Christianorum quidam (e.g., Grotius) share this opinion. We are told in the Scriptures of countless miraculous cures in which divine omnipotence made no use of natural means. Why such means were still sometimetimes employed (comp. Mark 7:33; Mark 8:23; John 9:6 sq.) we will hardly be able to fathom. If the means used in the present case were already known at that time as a cure of this disease, why did not the physicians apply it? Or was this cure still unknown at that time?
Or did the physicians not understand the disease correctly? Or had the Lord, beside the object of the bodily cure, some other higher objects to which that means stood in a relation to us unknown? Such are the questions that men raise here, but can hardly answer to satisfaction.
Asking and giving signs is nothing unusual in the Old Testament, and especially in the life of our Prophet. The more the life of faith stands in the grade of childhood, the more frequent it is. Christ would give no sign on demand (Matthew 12:38 sqq.; Isaiah 16:1 sqq.; Luke 11:16; John 2:18; John 6:30). But Moses received and gave them in abundance (Exodus 4). Also in the times of the judges and of the kings they were frequent (Judges 6:17; Judges 6:36 sqq.; 1 Samuel 2:34; 1 Samuel 10:1 sqq.). Isaiah himself was more than once the medium of such signs (Isaiah 7:11 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.; Isaiah 20:3 sq.; Isaiah 37:30).
They are sometimes threatening, sometimes comforting in their promissory contents, and are, accordingly, given now to the wicked as a warning, now to the pious for comfort and to strengthen their hopes. Thus Hezekiah here receives the second comforting sign. That his life shall be prolonged the Lord makes known to him by means of an implement used for measuring time. At Hezekiah’s request the Lord actually causes the shadow on the sun-dial to go backward ten steps or degrees. Here we must note the not inconsiderable difference between our text and that of 2 Kings 20:9 sqq. According to our text, the Prophet does not propose to the king the choice whether the shadow shall go forwards or backwards; moreover he does not call on the Lord to do the miracle.
But the Prophet declares at once that he will (of course by the power of God) turn the shadow back. Finally our text says, Isaiah 38:8, that the sun returned back the ten degrees that it had gone down, whereas 2 Kings 20 speaks only of the return of the shadow (εַ ?ιָּ ?ωֶׁ ?αΰֶ ?ϊΞδַ ?φֵּ ?μεβεΧ). The last mentioned difference is so far especially important because it intensifies the miracle. We have hitherto learned, in the character of an abstract that the Isaiah text bears, to recognize a mark of its later origin. This magnifying the miraculous may be regarded as a further symptom of the same thing. See Text. and Gram.It is now admitted by all that by ξςμεϊ we are to understand a sun-dial.
The ancient notion found in the LXX. in Josephus (Antiqq. X. 2, 1), the Syr., various Rabbis, Scaliger (Praef. ad can. chronol.) was that the steps were a simple flight of stairs exposed transversely to the sun. But to this it is objected that one may imagine the withdrawal of the shadow from ten stair-steps, but not the going down. For the sun must stand so that the upright faces or risers of the stair cast their shadows on the flat steps. But then all the flats must be shaded equally from the top to the bottom. One may of course picture that the ten lower steps lost their shade, but not that the shadow descended ten steps further, as all the steps must already have their shadow.
This ascent or descent of the shadow is only possible where there is one object to cast the shadow, and serve as an indicator, whatever may be its form. Hence all expositors understand a sun-dial to be meant. [The words in the Hebrew literally mean “the degree or steps of Ahaz in (or by) the sun.” ξςμεϊ, like the Latin gradus, first means steps, and then degrees. The nearest approach to the description of a dial is in the words: “degrees of Ahaz,” which certainly do not obviously mean a dial. As investigation shows, there is no historical necessity for assuming that a dial could not be meant, and that we must assume that the shadow here meant was the shadow cast upon the stairs of Ahaz. “The only question is, whether this (latter) is not the simplest and most obvious explanation of the words, and one which entirely exhausts their meaning. If so, we may easily suppose the shadow to have been visible from Hezekiah’s chamber, and the offered sign to have been suggested to the Prophet by the sight of it. This hypothesis relieves us from the necessity of accounting for the division into ten, or rather twenty degrees, as Hezekiah was allowed to choose between a procession and a retrocession of the same extent.” J.
A. Alex. A neighboring wall might have cast its shadow on such a stair, which might be called the shadow of the stair, as God’s shadow is called “thy shadow.” φִ ?μְּ ?κָ, Psalms 121:5; comp. φִ ?μָ ?ν, Numbers 14:9. The stair may have served designedly or undesignedly for a rude or even comparatively accurate gauge of time, or it may not.—Tr.]
We learn from Herodotus (II. 109) that the Greeks received the sun-dial from the Babylonians, and he says expressly that the Greeks learned from them τὰδυώδεκαμέρεατῆςἡμέρης. Thus the Babylonians seem already to have known the division into twelve day and twelve night hours. The sun-indicator of Ahaz may also have had this division. For the mention of ten degrees does not warrant the inference that it was divided according to the decimal system. The sun-dial could easily pass from the Babylonians to the Syrians, and from the latter to the Jews. Ahaz was disposed to introduce foreign novelties (comp. 2 Kings 16:10 sqq.), and may have introduced this with other things from Syria.
But this is only conjecture. The same is true of any thing that may be offered concerning the form of Ahaz’s sun-dial [see Barnesin loco;Smith’sBib. Dict.].
As the Prophet offered the choice of letting the shadow rise or fall ten degrees, it must have been at a time of day that allowed room for both on the dial. Of course this room was measured by the length of time represented by the degrees. Did they represent hours or a like larger measure, then a gnomon arranged for only twelve would not have sufficed. But what was proposed could have been done did the degrees mark half or quarter hours. Delitzsch says: “If the performance of the sign took place an hour before sundown, then the shadow, going back ten degrees, of half an hour each, came to where it was at noon.” But how then could the shadow at 5 o’clock, P. M., go also ten degrees further down?
Could the dial mark the tenth hour after noon? It is thus more probable that the Prophet came to the king nearer mid-day. [According to the old view defended above, it would be, say halfway, between sunrise and meridian.—Tr.]
The expression ρςμεϊ is manifestly used with different meanings. It designates first the degrees or steps, however they may have been marked. And, in my opinion, it has this sense four out of the five times that it occurs in our passage. Moreover φμξςμεϊ seems to me to be “the shadow of the degrees,” not “the shadow of the gnomon.” For it is not correct to say: “the shadow of the gnomon that is gone down on the gnomon of Ahaz.” For if ξςμεϊ be taken in the concrete sense, meaning that particular gnomon, that would be to distinguish what in fact is identical. But if the word be taken generally=the sun-dial shadow that is on every dial in general, then ξςμεϊ is quite superfluous. Hence I think that ξςμεϊ means here the degrees, and “the shadow of the degrees” is the shadow that, connected with the degrees, marks the hours, be it that the degrees themselves cast the shadow, or that the shadow strikes the degrees (be they lines, points, circles, or the like), and thereby marks the position of the sun or the time of day.
Moreover, the third, fourth and fifth time the word means “degrees.” For in these it is only said that the sun has retrograded over the same degrees on which it went down. But the expression ξςμιϊΰηζ is manifestly to be taken as a metonomy, as far as it is pars pro toto. The language had no name for the novelty. It had only a word for the chief features of it, and thus that became the name of the whole. ΰωׁ ?ψξςμεϊ is both times the accusative of measure. αωׁ ?ξωׁ stands in an emphatic antithesis: by means of the sun’s movement, thus in consequence of a natural cause, the shadow had gone down; but I, says the Prophet in the consciousness of the will and power of Jehovah, I bring it about that, contrary to nature, it must return ten degrees. This could happen indirectly by refraction of the sun’s rays (comp. Keil on 2 Kings 20:9), or perhaps directly by an optical effect.
It remains a miracle any way. [See Barnesin loc. for a full presentation of this subject.] Various natural explanations see in Winer,R.-W.-B. Art. Hiskia.Thenius (on 2 Kings 20:9) supposes an eclipse of the sun, which, according to Seyffarth, took place September 26th, 713 B. C. But this date does not sufficiently agree with our event, nor would an eclipse explain the retrocession of the shadow. I believe that the Lord desired to give to His anointed, at a very important epoch of his personal and official life, the assurance that He, the Lord, could as certainly restore the sands of Hezekiah’s life that were nearly run out, and strengthen them to renew their running, as He now lets the shadow of the sun-dial return a given number of degrees.
Footnotes:add.word.auf der Stufenuhr Achas’ vermoege der Sonne, or, on the degrees, or steps of Ahaz with the sun.—J. A. Alex.Heb. degrees by, or, with the sun.[This use of Sir 48:23 conflicts with the appeal the Author makes to the same text in his Introduction, § 4 (at the end), in support of the genuineness of the Isaiah text. If it there serves to prove that an entire section, viz., the historical part, 36–39 is Isaiah’s own work, it must certainly prove as much for the particular language that Sirach actually refers to.—TR].
c) Hezekiah’s Psalm of Thanksgiving Isaiah 38:9-20 No one doubts the genuineness of this song. That it was not composed during the sickness, appears from the second half, which contains thanks for recovery. But it is probable, too that the song was no involuntary burst of joyful and grateful feeling, such as might well forth from the heart in the first moments after deliverance. For, as Delitzsch has remarked, the song bears evident marks of art, and of choice, and partly of antiquated expression. Such forms of expression are: τֻּ ?χַּ ?γְ ?ϊִּ ?ι (again only Exodus 38:21) and ηֶ ?γֶ ?μ (ἅπ. λεγ.) Isaiah 38:11; γּ ?εֹ ?ψ in the sense of “dwelling” (perhaps again Psalms 49:20), ψֹ ?ςִ ?ι (adjective form only here), χִ ?τֵּ ?γ and γַּ ?μָּ ?δ meaning “licium” (ἅπ. λεγ.) Isaiah 38:12; ωִׁ ?εָּ ?δ meaning “composuit animum” (again only Psalms 131:2) Isaiah 38:13; ρεּ ?νςָ ?βεּ ?ψ (again only Jeremiah 8:7) and ςָ ?ωְׁ ?χָ ?δ (ἅπ. λεγ.) Isaiah 38:14; Hithp. δִ ?γַּ ?γָּ ?δ (again only Psalms 42:5) Isaiah 38:15; ηָ ?ωַׁ ?χ Isaiah 38:17 and πִ ?βֵ ?ο Isaiah 38:20 with the accusative instead of the usual construction with αְּ ?μִ ?ι ;αּ as substantive=interitus, and joined with ωַׁ ?ηַ ?ϊ (only here) Isaiah 38:17. Added to this are echoes from Job, especially in the first, lamenting part of the song: πִ ?ρַּ ?ς Niph.
Isaiah 38:12 (again only in Job 4:21). ιαφςπι Isaiah 38:12, comp. Job 6:9 (Isaiah 27:8); ϊωׁ ?μιξπι Isaiah 38:12, comp. Job 23:14. ξιενςγΞμιμδ Isaiah 38:12, Job 4:20; γַּ ?μּ ?εּ εβιΧ Isaiah 38:14, comp. Job 16:20; ςψαπι Isaiah 38:14, comp. Job 17:3; ημν Isaiah 38:16, comp. Job 39:4.
Compare the list by Delitzsch in Drechsler’s Komm. II. p. 620 sq. It is, therefore, conjectured, not without reason, that the learned king, well acquainted with the ancient literature of his people, produced this song later as he had time and leisure for it, as a monument both of his art and learning. Apart from the superscription Isaiah 38:9, the song has evidently two parts; a lament (Isaiah 38:10-14), and a joyful thanksgiving (Isaiah 38:15-20.
____________________
α) . Isaiah 38:99 The writing of Hezekiah, king of Judah, when he had been sick, and was recovered from his sickness.
AND It is doubtful if ξִ ?λְ ?ϊָּ ?ν = ξִ ?λְ ?ϊָּ ?α. For although b. and m. are in general kindred sounds, still an interchange specially of the roots λָּ ?ϊַ ?α and λָּ ?ϊַ ?ν never occurs. For neither πִ ?λְ ?ϊַּ ?ν (Jeremiah 2:22, see my remarks in loc.) nor the noun λֶּ ?ϊֶ ?ν has anything to do with λָּ ?ϊָ ?α. We have besides, as derived from the unused root λָּ ?ϊַ ?ν only ξִ ?λְ ?ϊָּ ?ν in the superscriptions of Psalms 16, 56-60. Why should the exchange of α and ξ be made just for this species of Psalm? Why was not ξλϊα used in the superscription of those Psalms as well as for our passage, if both words are actually of like meaning?
Beside ξλϊα occurs elsewhere, and means either abstractly the writing, mode of writing (Exodus 32:16; Exodus 39:30; Deuteronomy 10:4; 2 Chronicles 36:22; Ezra 1:1), or in the concrete sense, a something written, piece of scripture, copy (2 Chronicles 21:12; 2 Chronicles 35:4). Here, too, it means a writing, a written document or record. The word would give us to know that another source for this song lay before the author than for other parts of chapters 36–39. The Book of Kings does not contain the song of Hezekiah. From that therefore the author could not take it. There lay before him a document that was either held to be a writing of Hezekiah’s or actually was such.
In fact we may take the word “writing” in the sense of original manuscript. For the unusual word, ξλϊα, doubtless chosen on purpose, and on purpose put first, intimates that not only the contents of the writing came from Hezekiah, but also that the manuscript of it was his. It may be remarked as a curiosity, that Grotius conjectures that the song was dictated to the king by Isaiah, thus was properly the production of the latter. Excepting this no one has doubted Hezekiah’s authorship. He is known to have been a very active man in the sphere of art and literature. He was the restorer of the Jehovah-cultus in general, and of the instrumental and vocal temple music of David in particular (2 Chronicles 29).
According to Proverbs 25:1, he had a college or commission, called the ΰַ ?πְ ?ωֵׁ ?ιηִ ?ζְ ?χִ ?ιָ ?δ, which appears to have been charged with collecting and preserving ancient documents of the national literature. See Delitzsch in Drechsl.Komm. II.2, p. 221. From the words αημϊε and ειηιξημιε we see that the sickness and recovery are treated as a total. In the second of these periods, inexactly defined, the song originated. The second period is named, not by the infinitive as the first, but by means of the verb. fin., according to that frequent Hebrew usage, in which the discourse quickly returns from subordinate to the principal form.
Comp. Isaiah 18:5.
β) THE Isaiah 38:10-1410 I said in the cutting off of my days,
I shall go to the gates of the grave:
I am deprived of the residue of my years.
11 said, I shall not see the Lord,Even the Lord, in the land of the living:
I shall behold man no more
With the inhabitants of the world.
12 Mine age is departed, and is removed from me as a shepherd’s tent;
I have cut off like a weaver my life:
He will cut me off with pining sickness:
From day even to night wilt thou make an end of me.
13 I reckoned till morning, that, as a lion,
So will he break all my bones:
From day even to night wilt thou make an end of me.
14 Like a crane or a swallow, so did I chatter:
I did mourn as a dove;
Mine eyes fail with looking upward:
O Lord, I am oppressed; undertake for me.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_38:10. Views differ very much about γְּ ?ξִ ?ιιξι. The Ancient Versions guess at it. The LXX. have ἐνὕψει (they probably read ψξι); the Vulgate, “in dimidio” (if this was not for the sake of resemblance in sound between γξι and dimidium, then it was from a calculation that the point of culmination is at the same time solstitium). The Syrian, also, by reason of the same combination, has in mediis diebus meis;” Targ. Jonatan has in moerore dierum meorum; Aqu. and Symm. have ἐνἀσθενεἰᾳ (they take the root γָּ ?εָ ?δ = γָּ ?ξָ ?δ); the Arabּ and various Rabbins translate “in ademtione, excisione dierum meorumְ ?” in which they proceed from the meaning “to destroy,” which γָּ ?ξָ ?δ certainly has, especially in the Niph. (comp.
Hosea 10:15; Isaiah 6:5; Isaiah 15:1, etc.). Many modern expositors, following the precedent of Eberh. Scheid (Diss. philol. exeg. ad Cant. Hisk. Lugd. Bat. 1769), translate the word as do the Vulg. and Syr., viz., in dimidio, medio (comp. αַּ ?ηֲ ?φִ ?ιιָ ?ξַ ?ι Psalms 102:25).
This meaning is supported by reference to the supposed still-stand of the sun in the midst of its course; but it is over ingenious and entirely isolated here. For in other places of its occurrence γξι undoubtedly means: “being still, pause” (Isaiah 62:6-7; Psalms 83:2). Most expositors now adopt this sense (Gesenius, Maurer, Umbreit, Drechsler, Knobel, Delitzsch). Yet they differ also; some understanding by the stillness the political still-stand consequent on Sennacherib’s defeat (Gesen. Maur., Drechsler), or that promised to follow the hoped-for retreat of the Assyrians (Knobel). Others refer to the expression αִּ ?ιξֵ ?ιηָ ?ψְ ?τִּ ?ι (“in the days of my harvest” Job 29:4), and suppose the meaning to be “the time of manly maturity when the spirit of men begins to be clearer and quieter” (Umbr.), or “the quiet course of healthful life” (Del.).
Thus all these expositors take γξι in a good sense, i. e., of quiet, happy condition, of rest of spirit, of vigor of life, vigor. But I cannot think it has this positive meaning. One must not transfer to γξδ the sense of πεּ ?ηַ. The root γָּ ?ξָ ?δ has the predominant meaning “not to be, to bring to nought, to annihilate,” whether this comes from the notion of making like (the earth), or elsewhere. For γξδ means “to destroy,” once in Kal. (Hosea 4:5), always in Niph. (Hosea 4:6; Hosea 10:7; Hosea 10:15; Isaiah 15:1; Isaiah 6:5; Jeremiah 47:5; Obadiah 1:5; Zephaniah 1:11); in Piel in the solitary instance of this conjugation (2 Samuel 21:5). Kal. occurs beside only in the sense of negative rest, of being no more, ceasing (cessare): Jeremiah 14:17; Lamentations 3:49.
And also γξι, in the three instances where it occurs (Isaiah 62:6-7; Psalms 83:2), is primarily only a designation for ceasing to speak, being silent, as Delitzsch himself remarks on Isaiah 62:6. Accordingly I think that γξιιξι means rather “being still, standing still, the quenching of life-power.” Thus the king would say: “as I noted that the clock of my life gradually stopped, I thought: now it goes in the gate of Hades.” It is plain that, with this construction γξιιξι must be referred to ΰξψϊι, whereas those who construe γξι positively must refer it to ΰμλδ. For it is self-evident that one whose life-clock stops must enter the gates of Hades, whereas it needs to be made emphatic that one, still in the vigor of life, must make up his mind to this fatal entry. The Masorets understood the words in the latter sense; hence the pause in ΰֵ ?μֵֽ ?λָ ?δ indicated by Tiphhha. One is necessitated thereby to construe δμκ emphatically “to go off,” and the connection with αωׁ ?ςψιωׁ ?Χ as a pregnant construction, which is needless with our exposition. The cohortative form in ΰμλδ seems to me to mean that the speaker, as it were, spurs himself on to do what he must do, but does unwillingly (comp.
Ewald, 228, a).—Pual τֻ ?χַ ?γ occurs again only Exodus 38:21, where it means “to be mustered, inscribed, inventoried.” It is plain that it cannot mean this here. Hence some take it=“made to miss, deprived of, frustrari.” But Delitz. justly remarks that then it ought to read δָ ?τְ ?χַ ?γְ ?ϊִּ ?ι (comp. on Isaiah 29:6). Gesen. translates: “I am missed through the rest of my years,” grammatically correct but flat. The most inviting is the rendering: “I am fined the residue of my years,” which is grammatically possible since τָּ ?χַ ?γ occurs with the accusative of the person meaning “to visit, punish” (Jeremiah 6:15; Jeremiah 49:8; Psalms 59:6).
Isaiah 38:11. Concerning ιָ ?δּ see on Isaiah 12:2.—If the words ςνιωׁ ?αιηγμ are taken as parallel with αΰψυδηιιν, then of course one must cast doubt upon ηγμ (ἅπ. λεγ.) as Cheyne, Delitzsch, Diestel and others do, and read ηָֽ ?μֶ ?γ, i. e., “world in the sense of earthly presence” (αίὼνοὗτος) Psalms 17:14; Psalms 49:2; Psalms 89:48. But if we are correct in referring αΰψυδηΧ to the object and not to the predicate (see comm. below), and if, according to the principle of parallelism, the same construction obtain in the second half of the verse, then the position of ςεֹ ?γ after ΰָ ?γָ ?ν and then also the difficulty of connecting δηΧαΰψυ and also ΰγνςνηγμ, show that ςνιωׁ ?αιηγμ is not to be joined to the object but to the predicate, that therefore there is an antithetical parallelism. Therefore ηָֽ ?γֶ ?μ is correct, and is to be taken the sense μὴεἶνει of a relative not being, or being no more.
Isaiah 38:12. If γּ ?εֹ ?ψ be taken in its usual sense of “�tas, time, life-time” (Drechsler) there ensues the disadvantage that the predicates πρςεπβμδ do not fit to it. For they contain the notion breaking off, removal in respect to space, which is applicable to dwelling-space, room, but not to the time of dwelling. Hence most expositors recur to the dialects wherein γεψ (likely because of a relation to βּ ?εּ ?ψ) has very constantly the sense of “dwelling.” Thus in Chaldee βּ ?εּ ?ψ is a very common word for “dwelling;” Dan. 2:38; 3:31; 4:9, 18, 32. Thence come the expressions of the Targum γַּ ?ιָּ ?ψ “the inhabitant,” γִּ ?ιψַ ?ΰ “the dwelling.” In Syriac, too, dairo, dajoro, dairono is “the dwelling;” and in Arabic dar. It seems that the radical idea “rotundum, orbis” has in Hebrew developed more to the meaning “circuit, periodus, period, age,” whereas in the dialects it has been restricted more to the meaning of the round tent-dwelling.
Still there are not wanting examples to prove that in Hebrew also the word has retained its original sense of “being round” in reference to things of space. Thus Isaiah 22:11 γּ ?εּ ?ψ means “ball;” Isaiah 29:3 λַּ ?γּ ?εּ ?ψ=circumcirca; Ezekiel 24:5 ξְ ?γεּ ?ψָ ?δ = γּ ?εּ ?ψ “the wood-pile in round layers.” Indeed Psalms 49:20 γּ ?εֹ ?ψ very likely means specifically “dwelling.” It is very probable that Hezekiah, a learned prince and well acquainted with the ancient monuments of the national tongue, in solemn poetry, availed himself of an antiquated expression.—πָ ?ρַ ?ς used for pulling up the tent-pegs, Isaiah 33:20; Niph. Found again only Job 4:21, and with the same meaning.—πβμδ from βָּ ?μָ ?δ “to uncover,” “to clear out the land, evacuare,” then specifically “migrare,” Niph.=“migrare factus, deportatus.—ψֹ ?ςִ ?ι is an adjective formation from ψֹ ?ςֶ ?δ=pastoricius: it occurs only here. That χָ ?τַ ?γ (ἅπ. λεγ.) does not mean “to cut off” seems probable to me also. For all kindred roots χτυ ,χτζ ,χτΰ, as also the derivative χִ ?τּ ?εֹ ?γ “the porcupine,” indicate that it means “to contract, wrap together, lay together.” Thus many moderns translate: “I have wound up my life.” But if one so understands it: “I regard my life as wound up,” i. e., done, finished, I have finished with life, then it seems to me not to suit the first person, nor the primary sense of χτγϊι. My rendering (see Exeg. and Crit. below) makes plain why we find the first and then the third person. ιαφςπι (reminds strongly of Job 6:9, comp.
Isaiah 27:8).—ξιενςγΞμιμδ recall Job 4:20; and ϊωׁ ?μιξπε Job 23:14.
Isaiah 38:13. ωִׁ ?εָּ ?δ is “componere, complanare.” We had the word with a physical sense Isaiah 28:25; here it has a moral sense like Psalms 131:2, where it means composui et compescui animum. In our text πτωׁ ?ι is wanting. It is seen from this that the poet uses the word in that direct causative sense, so frequent in Hebrew, according to which ωִׁ ?εָּ ?δ can mean, not only “to make alike, even, mild, quiet,” but also “to effect equality, evenness (aequitatem animi), equanimity, quietness.”—λָּֽ ?ΰֲ ?ψι, (pointed with the art. like Psalms 22:17), though referred by the Masorets to ωׁ ?ειϊι still manifestly, as to sense, belongs to what follows. For the lion is no example of that animum componere.—The retrospective λֵּ ?ο after a λְּ immediately preceding occurs here like it does directly after, at the beginning of Isa 38:14.
Isaiah 38:14. The words λρενςβεψ are difficult. First, as to ρεּ ?ν it is to be remarked that Jeremiah 8:7, the only other place where the words occur, K’ri would read ρִ ?ιν. This shows that the word has nothing to do with ρεּ ?ν “horse,” whatever may be the etymology of the latter word. The conjecture of Velthusen (Beitrag zur Aufklaerung des Dankliedes Hiskiae zur Befoerderung theol. Kenntnisse von J.
A. Cramer, P. I. p. 61 not.), seems to me reasonable, that the Masorets, beside the pronunciation sus, intimate another sόs or sis, because the latter better corresponds to the sound-mimicry of the word. For it is very probable that the bird receives its name from the sound it makes (like cuckoo, Uhu “owl,” etc.).—ςβεψ. There is no root ςָ ?βַ ?ψ in Hebrew. It is regarded as coming by transposition from βָּ ?ςַ ?ψ increpare, but which in Ethiopic is said to mean “to sigh,” in Arabic “to implore plaintively.” Boettcher (Aehrenlese, p. 33) takes ςβεψ for a softened ςָ ?λεּ ?ψ=“disturbed, troubled,” and this “as the peculiar mark of the restless swallow that flies back and forth.” But this does not suit Jeremiah 8:7, where it is pure arbitrariness to omitεְ.—It is, certainly no accident that in many languages the crane is designated by a word containing the sound g (k) and r, and it shows that all these denominations are ’ονοματοποιητικά.
The name in Arab, is Kurki; Aram., kurkeja; Greek, γέρανος; Lat. grus, etc. This meaning suits very well Jeremiah 8:7, but is less suitable in our text.—λρινςβεψ is the same as λριναςβεψ (Fuerst): The asyndeton (the like occurs Nahum 2:12; Habakkuk 3:11) gives emphasis: “like a swallow, (still more) like a crane I sigh.” There are cases where, not the species, but the individual forms the basis of comparison. Thus the rule that would require it, to read λַּ ?ρּ ?εּ ?ν if ςβεψ is co-ordinate and not subordinate, cannot be strictly carried out. Beside the examples just given, comp. Numbers 23:24; Numbers 24:9; Numbers 24:6; Job 16:14.—ηָ ?πָ ?δ is used for the note of the dove also Isaiah 59:11, comp. Ezekiel 7:16; Nahum 2:8.—ςָֽ ?ωְׁ ?χָ ?δΞμִּ ?ι; so punctuated ςωׁ ?χδ can only be perf. 3d per. fern., and the fem. is to be construed as neuter.
But ςωׁ ?χ occurs no where else in an intransitive sense. Hence, and for the sake of antithesis to ςψαπι (as Luzzatto well remarks, see in Delitzsch), it is better to read ςָ ?ωְָׁ ?χֽ ?δ, which must then be taken as substantative=“oppressio, anxiety.”—γָּ ?μַ ?μ “to hang down limp,” Job 28:4, then, generally, “languidum, debilem esse,” comp. Isaiah 19:6; Psalms 79:8; Psalms 116:6; Psalms 142:7)—ςψαπι is sponde pro me. The construction with the accusative of the person like Genesis 43:9; Genesis 44:32; Proverbs 11:15.
AND 1. The poet depicts how he felt in the moment of extreme peril of life, when he thought he must enter the gates of Hades, and, as it were, pay the penalty of the remnant of his days (Isaiah 38:10). Then he believed he would for ever be robbed of the blessing that is enjoyed in contemplating the works of Jehovah and in the companionship of men, by his exile in the land of unsubstantial shades (Isaiah 38:11). He sees his body already broken up and removed away like the tent of a wandering shepherd; he was in the midst of the labor of weaving his life and rolling it up, like the weaver his web on the weaver’s beam; but in the midst of this labor he sees his life suddenly cut off. By day still untouched, it is mortally smitten before night comes (Isaiah 38:12). In anxious expectation he drags on till morning.
But that brings only new suffering. Like a lion the disease falls upon him to crush his bones, and anew it seems as if between day and night his life must end (Isaiah 38:13). Mortally sick, he can only utter weak murmurs and groans, like the complaining sounds of the swallow, the crane, the dove. Yet his languishing eyes look upwards; he has great anguish, but he is able still to call on the Lord to be surety for him (Isaiah 38:14).
2. I said——of the world.Isaiah 38:10-11. ΰπι before ΰξγϊι, beginning Isaiah 38:10, seems to stand in antithesis to εΰξψ, Isaiah 38:15. I thought, the poet would say, that all was up; but the Lord thought otherwise. ΰξψ stands for what one says, i. e., thinks inwardly to himself (comp. Genesis 26:9; Genesis 44:28; 1 Samuel 20:3, etc.).
The expression gates of Hades occurs only here: comp. Psalms 9:14; Psalms 107:18; Job 38. By the rest of my days Hezekiah means, of course, the extent of life he hoped for according to the natural conditions of life. It is the same as is expressed in “the half of my days” (Psalms 102:25; Jeremiah 17:11). Having mentioned the evil that was in prospect (10a), and named the good in a general way of which he was to be deprived (10b), Hezekiah proceeds in Isaiah 38:11 to specify the particulars of this good. He puts first that he shall no more see Jah, namely, Jah in the land of the living.
But can one any way see Jah? With the bodily eye, certainly not, and least of all in the land of the living. But to see Jehovah means nothing else than to observe and enjoy the traces of His being and essence. For “to see” stands here, as often, in the wider sense of perception of the senses generally (comp. Psalms 37:13; Psalms 34:13; Jeremiah 29:32; Ecclesiastes 3:13; Ecclesiastes 9:9, etc.). [It is both more obvious and more edifying, and more to the honor of Hezekiah, to explain this seeing Jehovah by a reference to Psalms 63, especially Isaiah 38:2; Isaiah 38:6; coll. Isaiah 38:20 of the text.
The whole Psalm mutat. mutand. may be taken as the amplification of our Isaiah 38:11 a; or, vice versa,11a may be taken as Hezekiah’s epitome of Psalms 63, which may have been his solace in the languishing night-watches. It is strong confirmation of this explanation of “the seeing,” that Isaiah communicates to Hezekiah his near recovery by promising that in three days he shall enjoy what he here represents as the prime blessing of life: “the third day thou shalt go up unto the house of the Lord” (2 Kings 20:5). The promise may be completed in the words of Psa 63:2 : “to see (μψΰεϊ) Jehovah’s power and glory, as thou hast seen Him in the sanctuary.” According to the exposition that follows, “the third day” might be from the beginning of the disease.—Tr.]
The clause in the land of the living is a limitation and nearer definition. Not that he means that Jehovah is not to be observed in the land of the dead, and as if that land lay outside of Jehovah’s power and dominion. How contrary to Old Testament Scripture that sentiment would be appears from Amos 9:2; Job 26:6; Psalms 139:8 : Proverbs 15:11. Hence the poet defines his meaning: “I thought never more to see theJah who reveals Himself in the land of the living.” This is the first and greatest good that the deceased loses. But he loses also the companionship of men. And this, again, is not to be understood absolutely, but relatively.
For in Hades the dead person is with other dead men. But they are even no right and proper men any more, but only shades. Comp. Naegelsbach:Homer Theol. VII. § 25, p. 398 sqq.; Die nachhomer. Theol. des griech.
Volksglaubens VII. § 25, p. 413 sqq. (see Text. and Gram.).
3. Mine age——for me.Isaiah 38:12-14. The king depicts in these verses, by a succession of images, the progress of his sickness to its culmination, then the turn brought about by his believing prayer, γεψι means “my dwelling” and not “mine age” (see Text. and Gram.). By this Hezekiah evidently means his body (comp. 2 Corinthians 5:1; 2 Corinthians 5:4; 2 Peter 1:13-14). Though in the body still, he contemplates the separation of body and soul as already accomplished. Comparing the body to a shepherd’s tent, which after a while is struck, so his tent he regards as already struck and removed.
The next image is drawn from the weaver (see Text, and Gram.). I understand the words thus: I sit at the loom and roll up my life continuously on the weaver’s beam; He cuts me off from the thrum (γμδ, i.e., the ends of the threads attached to the beam). The Lord, by His cutting off, interrupts the labor of Hezekiah, who is, so to speak, weaving his life. “From day to night thou finishest me.” This seems to depict the feeling of the poet at the close of his first day of suffering. Such was the rapid progress of the disease that it seemed about to do its work in one day. By evening, indeed, he was not dead, but only by the greatest effort the patient wards off despair. “I composed myself to the morning” (on ωׁ ?ειϊι see Text. and Gram.). On the following day the torments of the disease continue.
He feels its power like that of a lion that crunches the bones of its prey (comp. Proverbs 25:15, where is a different sense). A second time he thinks the evening will end his sufferings, and awaits the issue with murmurings and groanings comparable to the querulous notes of the swallow, crane and dove.
The second clause of Isa 38:14 forms the turning point. With painful longing, under severe oppression, the poet lifts his eyes to the Lord. His prayer is only a short one. He regards himself as a debtor hard pressed by his creditor, and prays the Lord to be surety for him. ςψαπι is, moreover, a literal quotation from Job 17:3. Hezekiah thinks of suffering Job, and concludes a similar event with the same appeal.
γ) THE Isaiah 38:15-2215 What shall I say?
He hath both spoken unto me, and himself hath done it:I shall go softly all my years
In the bitterness of my soul.
16 O Lord, by these things men live,
And in all these things is the life of my spirit:
So wilt thou recover me, and make me to live.
17 Behold, for peace I had great bitterness:
But thou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption:
For thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back.
18 For the grave cannot praise thee,
Death can not celebrate thee:
They that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth.
19 The living, the living, he shall praise thee, as I do this day:
The father to the children shall make known thy truth.
20 The Lord was ready to save me:
Therefore we will sing my songs to the stringed instruments
All the days of our life in the house of the Lord.21 For Isaiah had said, Let them take a lump of figs, and lay it for a plaister upon
22 the boil, and he shall recover. Hezekiah also had said, What is the sign that I shall go up to the house of the Lord?
TEXTUAL AND Isa_38:15. The Hiph. δִ ?γַּ ?γָּ ?δ (denoting the solemn walk of those visiting the temple), occurs again only Psalms 42:6. To take it as meaning the walk of life seems to me unwarranted in view of that passage, and in the entire absence of any supporting passage. The same may be said of taking ςַ ?μ here, as in other passages after verbs or nouns denoting cumulation (Isaiah 38:5; Isaiah 32:10; Leviticus 15:25), in the sense of “according to.” Nor may we take ςμ=“spite of,” which it never means. It is here simply causal.
Isaiah 38:16. The suffix in ςμιδν can only refer to the two notions ΰξψεςωׂ ?δ. The plur. masc, need not surprise: comp. Ezekiel 18:26; Ezekiel 33:18-19.—ςַ ?μ joined to ηָ ?ιָ ?δ denotes the ground or cause of life; and it is to be noted that a Hebrew regards as the basis of life what we regard as the means of living. Hence that from which one lives in the usual sense, i. e., his support, is joined with ςַ ?μ (Genesis 27:40; Deuteronomy 8:3). Much more δָ ?ιָ ?δ may stand with ςַ ?μ when the absolute foundation of life is to be designated.
The plural ιηιε has for subject the living generally, for which we may use “one.”—Among the many explanations, more or less forced, of the following clause, the most admissible seems to be that of Gesenius, afterwards amplified by Drechsler. It takes all from εμλμ to δηιιπι as one clause, and thus has the double advantage of obtaining for εμλμ a suitable reference and for the verbs at the close a suitable connection. “And to the totality, i. e., the completeness, full power of the life of my spirit mayest thou by the same both strengthen and make me live.” αָּ ?δֶ ?ο refers to ΰξψεςωׂ ?δ Isaiah 38:15. The change of gender is common in Hebrew. The insertion of αδο between λμ and διι corresponds to the frequent insertion of ςεγ after λμ, a form of expression that occurs once in Hosea 14:3 in reference to πִ ?ωָׂ ?ΰ and in Isaiah even Isaiah 40:12 in reference to ηָ ?μַ ?ν .αַּ ?ωָּׁ ?μִ ?ιωׁ with that meaning that alone suits here occurs only in this Hiph. and again in Kal, Job 39:4. The meaning of Kal is “pinguis, fortis fuit;” thus Hiph. would mean “to make fat, strong, healthy.” Instead of δηιιπι the Vulg. and Talmud seem to have read ϊηιιπι. One Codex reads thus, and many expositors adopt it.
In fact there is no alternative but either to read ϊַּ ?ηֲ ?ιֵ ?ιπִ ?ι [Lowth], or to take εְ before ϊημιξπι in that demonstrative retrospective sense in which we had it Isaiah 37:26; Isaiah 17:14; Isaiah 9:4, and which, in fact, occurs generally in clauses that are expanded either extensively or intensively. Comp. 2 Samuel 14:10; Proverbs 23:24; Numbers 23:3; Isaiah 56:6 sqq. According to this the εְ would refer to the remote εּ ?μְ ?λֹ ?μ. But εδηιιπι would denote emphatically the chief result contemplated by the poet. Hezekiah was convalescent when he composed this song. He could therefore wish that he might be restored to the full power of his spirit.
But if, instead of this imperative, one reads ϊηιιπι, then the double Vav before the verbs=et—et, as in Isaiah 38:15. The sense remains essentially the same.
Isaiah 38:17. μωׁ ?μεν is not = αωׁ ?μεν. But the meaning is “for peace, for good it was bitter to me.” It is not to be objected to this that then διδ ought not to be wanting, for, apart from its absence being quite normal here (comp. Isaiah 38:20), ξַ ?ψ may itself be regarded as a verb [“preterite Kal of ξεψ, not elsewhere used, though the Hiph. is of frequent occurrence.”—J. A. Alex.]. (Comp. Isaiah 24:9; Job 22:2; Rth 1:20).
But it is more likely that ξψ is adjective used as noun as in Rth 1:13; Lamentations 1:4. Comp. ςωׁ ?χδμι, Isaiah 38:14.—According to our construction of μωׁ ?μεν we must regard εΰϊδηωׁ ?χϊ a causal clause expressive of the situation.—ηָ ?ωַׁ ?χ=“to be lovingly attached” (Deuteronomy 7:7; Deuteronomy 10:15, etc.); but while elsewhere construed with αְּ, it is here (comp. πִ ?βֵ ?ο Isaiah 38:20, with the accusat. though elsewhere always with αּ, joined with the accusat. of the object, and beside this with ξִ ?ο to designate the terminus a quo of the way of deliverance (construct. pr�gnans) [coll. Hebrews 5:7, καὶεἰσακουσθεὶςἀπὸτῆςεὐλαβείας—Tr.].—The combination ωׁ ?ηϊαμι “the pit of destruction,” occurs only here; even the substantive use of αμι does not occur elsewhere.
Isaiah 38:18. μΰ before ωׁ ?ΰεμϊΧ, by a familiar usage, (Isaiah 23:4; 1 Samuel 2:3, etc.) extends to the following clause.—The ιεγψιαεψ (comp. Isaiah 14:19; Psalms 28:1; Psalms 88:5, etc.) are not those going down, but those gone down. For in Hebrew the Participle is in itself devoid of tense signification, which must be ascertained from the nature of what is affirmed or from the context. Here the hopelessness is during the endless stay in Hades.
Isaiah 38:19. δεγις with ΰμ arises from the direct causative use of this Hiph. For δεγις = “to make, prepare γַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ, knowing, knowledge.” Accordingly he for whom the knowledge is prepared, i. e., to whom it is imparted must be in the dative. The object of knowledge is designated by ΰֶ ?μ in accordance with the frequent use of this preposition with verbis decendi (comp. Genesis 20:2; 1 Samuel 4:19; 2 Kings 19:9, etc.).
Isaiah 38:20. In ιδεημδεωׁ ?ιςπι we are to supply δָ ?ιָ ?δ (comp. Isaiah 38:17; Isaiah 21:1; Isaiah 37:26). We must not translate: “Jehovah was there to save me,” for Hezekiah certainly did not feel the saving hand of God as something that withdrew after accomplishing its work. He felt it as something still present. He still needed it, as appears from Isaiah 38:16. This is precisely the sense of this periphrastic construction, that it does not represent the verbal notion simply, but with the additional notion of continued occupation with something.—πִ ?βֵּ ?ο is pulsare, and is used of playing stringed instruments (1 Samuel 16:16; 1 Samuel 16:23, etc.). Hence πְ ?βִ ?ιπεֹ ?ϊ is to be understood of instrumentum pulsatile, (not cantus), as in the superscriptions of many Psalms 4, 6, 54, etc.; Habakkuk 3:19.
AND 1. In this second part of his song Hezekiah expresses his gratitude to the Lord. “What shall I say?” he begins, as if he could not find the proper word to express in a suitable manner what he had been permitted to experience. In two brief words, he first expresses comprehensively what he has to say. “He promised it, and has also done it!” But I, as long as I live, will walk before the Lord, in gratitude for His imparting to me by means of bitter suffering so much joy (Isaiah 38:15). Such is, as it were, the theme. In what follows the details are amplified. First, the king expresses the great truth that God’s word and act are the foundation of life for all, and adds the petition that God would by word and act, also fully restore him to life (Isaiah 38:16).
This petition forms the transition to further thanksgiving. The poet acknowledges that his suffering had inured to his salvation: the Lord had precisely in the depth of suffering made him to know the height of His love. But how could such salvation accrue to the sinner? Because the Lord graciously forgave his debt (Isaiah 38:17). But also because it is in a measure important to the Lord Himself to preserve man alive. For in Hades there is no thanksgiving to God nor any more trusting in Him (Isaiah 38:18).
Only the living can do this, and that both for themselves, and by handing down the praise of the divine faithfulness to their posterity (Isaiah 38:19). Because he knows the Lord to be near as his redeemer and Saviour, he will, in the church and in the house of the Lord, let his song sound as long as he lives (Isaiah 38:20). Verses 21, 22, which are here out of place, were explained above at Isaiah 38:6.
2. What shall I say—my soul.Isaiah 38:15. The sentiment is, that there is properly an infinite amount to say. What shall the poet select from mass of material. One may compare 2 Samuel 7:20. Hezekiah resolves to make two things prominent: 1) that the Lord was as good as His word. 2) that he, for his part, will give solemn thanksgiving as long as he lives.
The construction εΰξψεδεΰςΧ must not be taken as giving a reason. The antithesis of “saying” and “doing” reveals that we have here two correlative members, and that εְ before ΰξψ does not point backward, but forward. The εְ ?—εְ is here simply=et-et. In the second number δεּ ?ΰ “idem” is added for emphasis. For the “truth” that is so lauded Isaiah 38:18-19 only exists when the performer is identical with the promiser (comp. Numbers 23:19).
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
2. THE EMBASSY
Isaiah 39:1-81 At that time Merodach-baladan, the son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent letters and a present to Hezekiah: for he had heard that he had been sick, and was recovered. 2And Hezekiah was glad of them, and showed them the house of his precious things, the silver, and the gold, and the spices, and the precious ointment, and all the house of his armour, and all that was found in his treasures: there was nothing in his house, nor in all his dominion, that Hezekiah showed them not.
3Then came Isaiah the prophet unto king Hezekiah, and said unto him, What said these men? and from whence came they unto thee? And Hezekiah said, They are come from a far country unto me, even from Babylon. 4Then said he, What have they seen in thine house? And Hezekiah answered, All that is in 5mine house have they seen: there is nothing among my treasures that I have not shewed them. Then said Isaiah to Hezekiah, Hear the word of the Lord of hosts: 6Behold, the days come, that all that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers have laid up in store until this day, shall be carried to Babylon: nothing shall be left, saith the Lord. 7And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt beget, shall they take away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon. Then said Hezekiah to Isaiah, Good is the word of the Lord which 8thou hast spoken. He said moreover, For there shall be peace and truth in my days.
AND On Isaiah 39:1. The text of 2 Kings 20:12 sqq., reads αְּ ?ψֹ ?ΰγַ ?κְ αַּ ?μְ ?ΰֲ ?γָ ?ο instead of ξְ ?ψֹ ?ΰγַ ?κְ. According to the monuments the reading of Isaiah appears to be decidedly the correct one. For the name in Assyrian is “Marduk-habal-iddina,” i. e. Merodach gave a (or the) son (Schrader, p. 213). The form αψΰγκ seems to have sprung from the attraction of sound of the three following words, which begin with α.
What has been said shows that Merodach-Baladan does not mean “Merodacus Baladani filius,” as our text and 2 Kings seem to understand it. [This imputed misunderstanding seems quite gratuitous in the Author.—Tr.]. We have here, also, an evidence of a later writer who was indifferently acquainted with the subject.—On ρτψιν comp. on Isaiah 37:14,—Our text differs from 2 Kings 20:12, in reading ειωׁ ?ξς and ειηζχ. Both seem to me traceable to correction. The editor of the text in Isaiah might take offence at the double λִּ ?ι, and thus have replaced the first by εְ. But he also stumbled at its only being said 2 Kings: “he had heard that Hezekiah was sick.” For it seemed to him that the wonderful recovery of Hezekiah, and the proof it gave of his being a ruler under the protection of a mighty god, had as much to do with the Babylonian’s sending an embassy.
On Isaiah 39:2. Here, too, the two texts differ. The ειωׁ ?ξς of 2 Kings 20:13, is the more difficult reading, compared with which ειωׂ ?ξη appears an emendation: being the easier and more natural reading.
On Isaiah 39:3. At the end of the verse our text has ΰμι after αΰε, which is wanting in 2 Kings 20:14.
On Isaiah 39:5. Our text has φαΰεϊ at the end, which is wanting 2 Kings 20:16. It may be here the same as in the case of chapּ Isaiah 37:32, compared with 2 Kings 19:31.
On Isaiah 39:6. Our text has ααμ, 2 Kings 20:17, ααμδ.
On Isaiah 39:7. Our text has ιχηε; 2 Kings 20:18 only K’ri has this reading, whereas K’thibh reads ιχη. Certainly the latter is the more difficult, and ιχηε appears as an emendation. The sing may be taken either as the predicate of an indefinite subject (one) or, more correctly, as seems to me, as predicate of a definite subject, which, however, is present only in idea, viz.: the king of Babylon.
On Isaiah 39:8. 2 Kings 20:19 has δֲ ?μֹ ?ΰΰν where our text has simply δμΰΰν does not occur elsewhere. Ewald (§ 324 b), takes it in the sense of “yea, if only.” But that is neither grammatically justified, nor does it give a clear meaning. According to my view of the context (see Exeg. and Crit. below) δμΰ = nonne. I, therefore, take ΰִ ?ν not as a particle expressive of desire, as many do, but it has its conditional meaning,—“if, in so far as.” The λִּ ?ι in the text of Isaiah has essentially the same meaning, as Delitzsch also has admitted. For it says, that between the sentiments that Hezekiah had betrayed in reference to the ambassadors and his affirmation “good is the word,” etc., there was no contradiction, because, in fact, while he lived peace and fidelity would certainly be undisturbed. At least, our text can be so understood.
Whether its author really meant this, is another question. For it were possible, too, that he substituted for the obscure δμΰΰν the general, indefinite λι perhaps only in its pleonastic sense, that introduces the oratio recta.
AND 1. As the text needs no special comment, it may be well for the better understanding of the circumstances involved, to present briefly the chief points of Babylonian history relating to them, according to the data of the Assyrian monuments as far as the latter have been deciphered. Our chapter speaks of two Baladans, viz.: Merodach-Baladan, who sent the embassy and Baladan his father. Yet there appears in this a misunderstanding. According to the Assyrian monuments (comp. Lenormant,les premieres civilizations, Paris, 1874, Tom.
II, in the essay “un patriote babylonien,” p. 210) our Merodach-Baladan was a son of Jakin. Comp. also the ostentatious inscription of Tiglath-Pileser mentioned above at Isaiah 21:1, which states that he received the homage of “Merodach-Baladan, son of Jakin, king of the sea, in the city of Sapiga.” We remarked above at Isaiah 21:1, that by tihamtu (ϊְּ ?δεֹ ?ν, “sea, sea-land”) is to be understood south Chaldea, the watery region at the mouth of the united rivers Tigris and Euphrates. Merodach-Baladan, when he did homage to Tiglath-Pileser, was king of Bit-Jakin (such was the name of the residence and of the small territory of his father), and so remained till the year 721. In the year 721, when Sargon ascended the throne, this energetic man, who was an enthusiast for the independence of Babylon, succeeded in mounting the throne of all Chaldea in Babylon. The canon of Ptolemy names Mardocempad, under this year as king of Babylon, a name that is universally regarded as identical with Merodach-Baladan. Sargon states, that in the first complete year of his reign (i. e., in the year 721), after having in the year 722 completed the conquest of Samaria, he marched against Merodach-Baladan.
But his undertaking was not successful. For Merodach-Baladan maintained himself, and reigned, according to the Canon, yet twelve years as acknowledged king of Babylon. Not till the year 710 did Sargon again take the field against him. The struggle extended into the year 709, ending in the dethronement of Merodach-Baladan (see the interesting description of this campaign in Lenormant,l. c. p. 243 sqq.). In this year Sargon himself mounted the throne of Babylon. The Canon, from the year 709 onwards, names Ἀρκέανος, i. e, Sarrukin or Sargon, as king of Babylon.
But the courage of Merodach-Baladan was not yet broken. He fled back into his own hereditary land Bit-Jakin, a narrow strip of land on the Persian gulf, extending from Schat-el-arab to Elam. Sargon marched against him again and stormed first the strongly fortified position where Merodach-Baladan awaited him, then the city Dur-Jakin, his opponent’s last refuge on the mainland. Merodach-Baladan escaped with great difficulty. But still he did not submit. Sargon was compelled, in the beginning of the year 705, to send his son Sennacherib against the obstinate rebel.
But not long after, Sennacherib received in camp the intelligence of the murder of his father by a certain Belkaspai, probably a patriotic Chaldean and adherent of Merodach-Baladan’s.
Then there followed a period of two or three years, filled up with the strifes of various pretenders to the crown, and hence designated by the Canon as καιρὸςἀβισίλευτος. Thus it appears by the account of Polyhistor in Eusebius (chron. armen. ed.Mai, p. 19), that after Sargon’s death, his son and a brother of Sennacherib ascended the Babylonian throne. But after a short term this one was obliged to give place to a certain Hagisa, who, after not thirty days’ reign, was killed by Merodach-Baladan. That this was our Merodach-Baladan can scarcely be doubted. The implacable enemy of the Assyrians boldly raised his head anew. Sennacherib marched against him and conquered him at Kis, a city that Nebuchadnezzar afterwards incorporated in the city territory of Babylon by means of his great wall.
Sennacherib gave the throne of Babylon to a certain Belibus or Elibus, the son of a “wise man,” whom, says the king, “they had brought up in the company of the small boys in my palace.” Hence this Belibus was not an independent pretender, as would seem according to Polyhistor, but a subordinate king recognized by Sennacherib after the expulsion of Merodach-Baladan. According to the Canon of regents (Schrader, p. 319), this expedition against Merodach-Baladan fell in the year 704 B. C. In the year 700 Sennacherib accomplished his unfortunate expedition against Judah and Egypt, according to the entirely credible testimony of the Assyrian monuments. The news of his defeat appears to have been the signal for a new insurrection to the Chaldean patriots. For in the following year (699), according to the Taylor-cylinder (Schrader, p. 224), we find Sennacherib on the march against the rebellious Babylonians.
Merodach-Baladan had allied himself with a young prince Suzub, son of Gatul, of the race of Kalban, and Belibus found it best to enter into negotiations with these opponents. For this, according to Berosus, he was deposed and carried prisoner to Assyria. Sennacherib first attacked Suzub, whose troops were defeated; he himself escaped. Then Sennacherib turned against Merodach-Baladan, who gave way before the threatening danger. He fled by ship to the city Nagit-Raggi, situated on an island in the Persian gulf. The territory of Bit-Jakin was desolated.
Sennacherib made his son Esar-Haddon king of Akkad and Sumir, i. e., Babylon (699). After that were eleven years of quiet. During this period, Merodach-Baladan, whom the king of Elam, Kudhir-Nakhunta, had made lord of a strip of the coast, had moved the discontented elements of Babylon and Chaldea to emigrate in mass into his land. This led Sennacherib to build a fleet in Nineveh (they were called “Syrian ships” because Ph�nician seamen manned them), with which he attacked the island and the coast possessed by Merodach-Baladan, and entirely devastated them (see the remarks on Isaiah 43:14). At this point Merodach-Baladan disappears from history. It is related that the in fluential Babylonians then forsook him.
On the other hand, they moved the king of Elam to send that Suzub to Babylon. Suzub, indeed, ascended the throne of Babylon. Their purpose was to cut Sennacherib from his own land. But the latter returned in time and defeated his opponents in two battles. He took Suzub prisoner, but spared his life. This happened in the year 687.
But in the following year Suzub escaped from prison, was again proclaimed king in Babylon, and, in alliance with Umman-Menan, king of Elam, the successor of Kudhir-Nakhunta, and with Nabusnmiskim, the eldest son of Merodach-Baladan, he opposed a considerable army to Sennacherib at Kalul on the Tigris. Sennacherib conquered again, and still again in another battle, by which he utterly destroyed the power of his opponents. He then resolved utterly to destroy Babylon: and this resolve was actually executed (685). Yet only four years after, the city was rebuilt. Sennacherib died 681, and his son and successor determined to put an end to the everlasting strife with the Babylonians by an opposite policy. He raised Babylon to equal rank with Nineveh, and made it his residence.
The eldest son of Merodach-Baladan, Nabusu-miskun, was taken prisoner at the battle of Kalul and beheaded by Sennacherib. His brother next of age to him, Nabozirnapsatiasir, reigned after him in the land Bit-Jakin. A third brother, Nahib-Marduk, submitted to the Assyrians on the condition that he be put in possession of the land Bit-Jakin. Esar-Haddon, in the year 676, actually invaded the land and conquered it. Probably Nabozirnapsatiasir then lost his life (Lenormant, l. c., p. 303). Nahir-Marduk’s son, Nabobelsum, returned to the sentiments of his grandfather.
He took part in the insurrection made by Samulsumukin, the second son of Esar-Haddon and viceroy of Babylon, against his elder brother Asurbanipal, great king of Assyria (651). Asurbanipal conquered. Samulsumukin burned himself in his palace in Babylon (648). After many negotiations, and finally after an expedition that devastated the whole land of Elam, the king of Elam, Ummanaldas, was obliged to promise that he would surrender Nabobelsum. The latter procured his death at the hands of a master of the horse. Asurbanipal, when the head of the corpse was sent to him, had it preserved in salt.
A small bas-relief, found in the palace of Kujundschik, displays Asurbanipal banqueting in a garden with his wives, and the head of Nabobelsum hanging before him on a tree. Only thirty-five years later Nineveh was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar and Cyaxares (605)!
According to our chapter, the embassy of Merodach-Baladan to Hezekiah fell in the time when the former reigned undisputed king of Babylon. As shown above, this was a period of twelve years, reaching from 721–709. It must not be supposed that Merodach-Baladan would not have sought the friendship of Hezekiah had he not heard of his victory over Sennacherib. An inscription of Sargon’s (Lenormant, l. c., 231) says of Merodach-Baladan: “For twelve years had he sent embassies contrary to the will of the gods of Babylon, the city of Bel, the judge of the gods.” These twelve years are manifestly the twelve years of Merodach-Baladan’s undisputed reign. During this period the latter had sought allies for the event of war breaking out again. Is it to be wondered if, under these circumstances, he should send such an embassy to Hezekiah?
According to 2 Chronicles 32:31, the messenger came from Babylon to Hezekiah “to inquire of the wonder that was done in the land.” The context shows that Hezekiah’s miraculous recovery and the miracle of the sun-dial are meant. It is, therefore, probable that the report of this miracle penetrated to distant lands. If it came to astrological Babylon, what wonder if the king of this city had his attention drawn to the king of Judea, especially as it was known of this people that more than once they had been an opponent or an ally of the Assyrians that was not to be despised.
2. At that time—shewed them not.Isaiah 39:1-2, The author would say that Hezekiah gave ear to the words of those ambassadors (see Text. and Gram.). Probably there is in this an intimation that they already made propositions of a political nature not displeasing to Hezekiah. And as he was pleased to hear what they said, so he wished them to see the things that gave him joy. There appears to me, therefore, in this antithesis of hearing and showing, to be a hint of Hezekiah’s sin. πλϊ is an obscure word both as to derivation and meaning. In Genesis 37:25; Genesis 43:11πְ ?λΰֹ ?ϊ either means spices in general, or, which is more likely, a particular sort of spice (storax—or tragacanth gum.
Comp. Leyrer in Herzog’sReal-Eycyclop. XIV p. 664). Many expositors are disposed to recognize in our πλϊδ (K’ri, 2 Kings 20:13, πλϊε) the same word, and to understand by αιϊπΧ a spice magazine; on which Leyrer, l. c., remarks that this would imply a great monopoly carried on by the kings of Judah in this particular. Others generalize the meaning and regard “spicery house” as a denominatio a potiori for “provision house” in general. Others, finally, derive πְ ?λεֹ ?ϊ, not from πָ ?λָ ?ΰ (“to beat, pound,” hence πλΰϊ, “that which is pounded in a mortar”), but from a root λּ ?εּ ?ϊ, not used in Hebrew, but which is kindred to λִּ ?εּ ?ν, “to gather, preserve,” and in Arabic means (Pi. kajjata) “to cram, stuff full.” Of this πλϊ would be a Niphal form (Isaiah 30:12), and mean “provision, treasure.” Thus Hitzig, Knobel, Fuerst (Lex. under λּ ?εּ ?ν and λּ ?εּ ?ϊ), Delitzsch (comp.
Ewald, Gesch. d. V. Isr. III. p. 690, Anm. 1). The items that follow, in which, beside gold, silver and spiceries (αωׂ ?ξιν, the most general expression for aromatic substances, comp. Leyrer, L. c., p. 661) are particularly named, of course correspond best with a word of such general significance as “provision.” Still the subject is not satisfactorily cleared up.
On “the precious ointment,” Movers (who translates αιϊπλϊ “styrax house”) makes the following remark: “Here Jewish expositors, no doubt on the best grounds, understand the balsam oil got from the royal gardens, comp. 2 Chronicles 32:27. Olive oil, that was obtained in all Judea, was not stored in the treasuries along with gold, silver and aromatics, but in special store-houses, 2 Chronicles 32:28” (Phφn. II. 3, p. 227 Anm.). αιϊλμιν is likely “the arsenal,” as λμιν often signifies all sorts of war implements, and the arsenal doubtless was of prime importance to those ambassadors. In this case λμιν is identical with the αιϊδιςψ of Isaiah 22:8. It appears that Hezekiah in this display observed a climax descendens, beginning with the precious articles of luxury and ending with the things of practical need. ΰεφψεϊ (probably the store-houses like e. g. Joe 1:17; 2 Chronicles 11, etc.) to contain stores in case of siege.
It is to be noted that had this embassy come after the over throw of Sennacherib, Hezekiah would verilv have had nothing to show “in his dominion” outside of Jerusalem. For the whole land outside of the capital had been in the power of the enemy, who would have left little worth seeing. “His store-house, the spiceries, the fine oil,” do not intimate specially war-booty. Moreover it would then need to read: Hezekiah showed them the spoil he had taken from the Assyrians. Comp. on Isaiah 39:6.
3. Then came Isaiah—my days.Isaiah 39:3-8. Apart from the internal probability of it, one may conclude from ιαΰε that Isaiah came to the king with the inquiry of Isa 39:3 while the ambassadors were still in Jerusalem. For this Imperfect can only have the meaning that the coming was in a certain sense still an incompleted transaction, although the king had then shown them every thing (Isaiah 39:4). The Prophet regarded them as advenas, arrivals, and that is a quality they have as long as they are in Jerusalem (comp. Isaiah 37:34 with 2 Kings 19:33; Joshua 9:8 with Genesis 42:7).
But it also seems very probable to me that the Prophet addressed his inquiries to the king in the presence of the ambassadors, and that “these men” is to be understood δεικτικῶς. This suits entirely the free and exalted position that the prophets assumed as the immediate messengers and instruments of Jehovah, even toward the kings themselves. Comp. on Isaiah 7:14. If thereby those ambassadors enjoyed the opportunity of observing for once a genuine prophet of the true God in the exercise of his office, and if thereby the true God Himself drew near to them, it was one of those revelations of His being such as the Lord at times vouchsafed to the heathen, e. g., Moses before Pharaoh, Balaam before Balak, Elisha before Naaman, Daniel before the kings of Babylon. To the question what said these men? Hezekiah gives no answer, and Isaiah presses it no further.
Their very presence there and the reception they found were adequate proof that Hezekiah allowed himself to treat with them, that once again, as he had done by the Egyptian alliance (27–32), he had extended to the world-power at least the little finger. That, in his answer, he lays stress on the far country, betrays an attempt to excuse himself. One cannot show men the door who come from a distance to show one honor and friendship. And Hezekiah ought not to do that. Neither ought he to indulge in vain boasting nor to seek false supports. O, had he only known how ill-timed both were in the case of Babylon!
He would surely, without violating the duties of hospitality, have, yet avoided with anxious care every approach to more intimate relations. That he adds the name Babylon so briefly to the preceding “they are come from a far country unto me” seems to betray a certain embarrassment, a presentiment of having committed a fault. [See remarks of tr. below.]
We stand here on a boundary of immeasurable importance. Assyria is done away, but Babylon rises aloft. Ahaz had formally introduced Assyria by seeking its help. Here Babylon offers itself. With cat-like friendliness it creeps up. Hezekiah ought to have maintained an attitude of polite refusal.
His vanity betrayed him into boasting and coquetting. Still by just this he yielded himself to the world-power. The Theocracy was later, under Zedekiah, ground to pieces between. Egypt and Babylon. Only by leaning solely and wholly on the Lord could it maintain itself between the southern and the northern world-power, between the Nile kingdom on the one hand, and the Euphrates-Tigris kingdom on the other. Hezekiah had unfortunately indulged in intimacies both with Egypt and with Babylon.
The necessary consequence was that the Theocracy succumbed to the mightier of these. Hence it is announced to him that the precious things, of which he had made a boastful display, must go to Babylon, yea, that the posterity that was to issue from him who as yet was childless, would once do chamberlain service in the palace of the kings of Babylon. With this the Prophet points to a new and fatal future. Here, between the first and second parts of Isaiah, we stand on the bridge between Nineveh and Babylon. For what Nineveh was for the first part of Isaiah, Babylon is for the second.
Let it be particularly noted that Isaiah says: that which thy fathers have laid up in store until this day (Isaiah 39:6). Had Hezekiah’s treasures been emptied by the event narrated 2 Kings 18:14 sqq., the Prophet could not have spoken so. For then what the fathers had gathered came into the hands of Sennacherib; and whether, after the defeat of the latter, all was found again, one must doubt very much. Sennacherib, who knew that he would not be pursued, could take all the spoils with him. Therefore the expression: “what thy fathers have laid up shall be carried captive to Babylon” favors the view that Hezekiah showed the ambassadors the gatherings of his fathers, that therefore this embassy did not come after the defeat of Sennacherib. [If the foregoing has any force, it would equally prove that the Babylonish captivity must have preceded the invasion of Sennacherib, “for then, after the latter event, what the fathers had gathered cams into the hands of Sennacherib,” etc., as just above.—TR.]
That ρָ ?ψִ ?ιν is not simply the “eunuch” appears from Genesis 37:36; Genesis 39:1. The word often stands for court officer, chamberlain generally (1 Kings 22:9; 2 Kings 8:6; 2 Kings 9:32; 2 Kings 25:19, etc.). It is clear that απικ must not be understood of direct generation, and that is agreeable to usage. Hezekiah’s son Manasseh went, indeed, as prisoner to Babylon (2 Chronicles 33:11), but he did not act as chamberlain. Yet the prophecy was fulfilled by what is related Daniel 1:3.
Hezekiah humbly submits himself to the declaration of the Lord. The expression Good is the word,etc. involves in general the sense of approval and acquiescence (comp. 1 Kings 18:24), especially that of submission under a severe judgment, but one that is recognized as just (comp. 1 Kings 2:38; 1 Kings 2:42). For the meaning of λִּ ?ι(δμΰΰν, 2 Kings 20:19), see Text. and Gram. I fall back on the conjecture given above, that the ambassadors were present at this interview. If one then considers that the prophecy of Isa 39:6-7 presupposes war between Babylon and Judah, and that this poorly corresponds with the assurances of friendship just interchanged between Hezekiah and the ambassadors, he can see that the word of the Prophet would embarrass these parties. It would the king, because it must seem strange that he, at the moment when an honorable embassy had brought him offers of peace and friendship, should call the announcement of the termination of the friendship (though it should turn to his disadvantage) a “good word.” It might appear as if he, Hezekiah, were a weather-cock, an unreliable man, who in turning about knew how to transform himself from a friend into an enemy.
To ward off this evil appearance from himself, Hezekiah speaks these words, which are primarily, addressed to the ambassadors. He would say: is it not self-evident that I call the prophetic word good only on the assumption that peace and truth shall continue while I live? By this construction disappears also the objection that has been made to Hezekiah, as if he betrayed by this expression a sentiment like that depraved motto: “apres moi le deluge.”
It may be seen from 1 Kings 21:27 sqq. that the Lord lets Himself be moved by a penitent mind to postpone punishment beyond the lifetime of the man whom it primarily threatens.—ωׁ ?μενεΰξϊ occurs again Jeremiah 33:6; comp. Isaiah 14:13; Esther 9:30. It means here, manifestly, peace and faithfulness in the sense of political peaceableness and fidelity to alliances.The only Scripture that can seem to give positive support to the (so commonly accepted) injurious view of Hezekiah’s conduct in the case before us Isaiah 2 Chronicles 32:25; 2 Chronicles 32:31. 2 Chronicles 32:31 clearly relates to the transactions of our text. But Isaiah 3225 as clearly does not, and must not be brought in to shed light on them. It is in the context separated from them by the statement of 2 Chronicles 32:26, viz.: that “Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his heart, both he and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of the Lord came not upon them in the days of Hezekiah.” What follows this verse is but descriptive proof of the last statement in it, and included in this proof Isaiah 2 Chronicles 32:31. See the comm. of Dr.
O. Zoeckler in the Lange, B. W. in loc. p. 27. The rendering of the Eng. Ver. “Howbeit” for ελο 2 Chronicles 32:31 is forced, and that by the pressure of the very opinion here combated. It means “And so” or “in this manner.” The particle introduces the additional statement of the trial Hezekiah underwent, and refers to the prosperity just described as having providentially led to it.
Ver.31 does not imply reproach of Hezekiah or anything contrary to what may be included under the statement of 2 Chronicles 32:26. ςζαε, God “left him,” does not. For it remains to be determined to what he left him. The context must supply this, and we must not understand simply divine desertion in general, especially as that conflicts with all the recorded facts. The verse itself only supplies the event of the Babylonian embassy, and we may include of course Isaiah’s interpretation of it. To that the Lord left Hezekiah. Comp. 2 Chronicles 12:5 “and therefore I have left (ςζαϊι) you in the hand of Shishak.” It is gratuitous to infer that God left Hezekiah to the workings of his own heart, It is equally so to infer that, because God so left Hezekiah, therefore Hezekiah must first have left God, as in the case just cited.
Without leaving God or his own humility (2 Chronicles 32:26) Hezekiah might be thus left of God to this extraordinary providence. Comp. Psalms 22:1 with Matthew 27:46. μπρεϊεεβεΧ “to try him,” etc., does not imply reproach any more than the trial of Abraham Genesis 22:1. The sentiment of these words and even the very words are drawn from Deuteronomy 8:2; Deuteronomy 8:16. As an obvious quotation from the most familiar part of the Law, the only proper completion of their sentiment must be found in the completion of the quotation. That must be; “to know what was in his heart to know whether he would keep his (God’s) commandment or not.” The records of Isa 39:8, and 2 Kings 20:19 furnish the only documentary information of what was revealed by this trial to be in Hezekiah’s heart.
It was nothing but resignation and acquiescence in the will of God, the only form of obedience and keeping God’s commandment that the case admitted. It is, therefore, not only gratuitous to infer that the trial revealed the sinful vanity of Hezekiah’s heart, it is contrary to the very record. That he showed his treasures is thought to be evidence of such vanity. But this is only prejudice growing out of the very assumptions now combated. Why should this hospitality be so bad in Hezekiah, when that of Solomon to the queen of Sheba, substantially the same, is mentioned only with approval, and is even elevated to typical importance?
As for the rest of Hezekiah’s answer Isaiah 39:8 b; 2 Kings 20:19 b, “Good is the word of the Lord,” etc., it may be interpreted best in the light of Deu 8:16. A promise of good is given there for the latter days of those that stand the proof of God’s trials and keep His commandments. Hezekiah had the consciousness of such integrity (Isaiah 38:3), he therefore gratefully rested in the expectation of such good for his latter days; in which he was also justified by the terms of Isaiah’s prophecy, if not by some more explicit announcement (2 Chronicles 32:26).
The event of the Babylonian embassy, as it appears in our book, must be viewed as subservient to the ends of prophecy. It is told for the sake of the prophecy in Isaiah 39:5-7. Our Author himself well remarks (at the beginning of the introduction to chapters 36–39), that our chapters “show how ‘from afar’ (ξψδεχ) was begun the spinning of the first threads of that web of complications, that were at last so fatal.” The event of the embassy was providentially ordered for prophetic purposes. It may be compared to such events as Melchizedec, Esau selling his birth-right, the queen of Sheba’s visit, the birth of Maher-shal-al, the wise men of the east at the crib of Christ, the inquiring Greeks, John 12:20-24. The questions of Isaiah, and the replies of Hezekiah as recorded, bring out precisely the traits needed for the prophecy about to be made. The “from a far country” was a providentially indited expression, like that of Caiaphas John 11:49, sqq.
Previous prophecy, likely familiar to Hezekiah, had made known that a visitation of wrath was coming on Judah “from far” Isaiah 10:3, Isaiah 30:27. Now this event strangely brings to Jerusalem and its king representatives of the very people that were to be the instruments of this wrath, and the Prophet appears, and identifies them and their destiny. And from this onward the Babylonians become more distinctly the theme of prophecy. Hezekiah submits, not like one receiving a well merited rebuke, but like Moses when the people were turned back from Kadesh-Barnea. All that the Author says about negotiations looking to alliance between Hezekiah and Babylon, does not pretend to be more than shrewd conjecture. As it does not find one word of corroboration in the Scripture, it would be well to make little or no account of it.
Comp. the Author’s conjectures on Isaiah 7:10-16, and the additions by TR. That follow—TR.]
Footnotes:Or, spicery.
Or, jewels.Heb. vessels or, instruments.chamberlain. [In his conjectural interpretation of Hezekiah’s conduct and its relation to Isaiah’s prophecy the Author has only built on a foundation dating back to the earliest traditionary exposition. And the building, one must admit, agrees with the foundation. He has only built further than others, but in the same style. Yet, when so much is built, and of such a sort, one is constrained to look at the foundation to see if such a structure is justified. The Author admits that he resorts to conjecture; his confidence is in the natural reasonableness of it. But his work may be challenged down to the very foundation as, not only without warrant in Scripture, but actually against Scripture.
See Baehr, on 2 Kings 20 p. 211. And if this appear to be so, then the judgment of expositors against Hezekiah, though it be the judgment of ages, must be reversed.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 36:4 sqq. “Haec proprie est Satanae lingua et sunt non Rabsacis sed ipsissimi Diaboli verba, quibus non muros urbis, sed medullam Ezechiae, hoc est, tenerrimam ejus fidem oppugnat.”—Luther. “In this address the chief-butler, Satan performs in the way he uses when he would bring about our apostacy. 1) He urges that we are divested of all human support, Isaiah 36:5; Isaiah 2) We are deprived of divine support, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 3) God is angry with us because we have greatly provoked Him by our sins, Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 4) He decks out the splendor, and power of the wicked, Isaiah 36:8-9; Isaiah 5) He appeals to God’s word, and knows how to turn and twist it to his uses. Such poisonous arrows were used by Satan against Christ in the desert, and may be compared with this light (Matthew 4:2 sqq.). One needs to arm himself against Satan’s attack by God’s word, and to resort to constant watching and prayer.”—Cramer.
The Assyrian urges four particulars by which he would destroy Hezekiah’s confidence, in two of which he was right and in two wrong. He was right in representing that Hezekiah could rely neither on Egypt, nor on his own power. In this respect he was a messenger of God and announcer of divine truth. For everywhere the word of God preaches the same (Isaiah 30:1-3; Isaiah 31:1-3; Jeremiah 17:5; Psalms 118:8-9; Psalms 146:3, etc.). But it is a merited chastisement if rude and hostile preachers must preach to us what we were unwilling to believe at the mild and friendly voice of God. But in two particulars the Assyrian was wrong, and therein lay Hezekiah’s strength.
For just on this account the Lord is for him and against the Assyrian. These two things are, that the Assyrian asserts that Hezekiah cannot put his trust in the Lord, but rather he, the Assyrian is counseled by the Lord against Hezekiah. That, however, was a lie, and because of this lie, the corresponding truth makes all the deeper impression on Hezekiah, and reminds him how assuredly he may build on the Lord and importune Him. And when the enemy dares to say, that he is commissioned by the Lord to destroy the Holy Land, just that must bring to lively remembrance in the Israelite, that the Lord, who cannot lie, calls the land of Israel His land (Joel 4:2; Jeremiah 2:7; Jeremiah 16:18, etc.), and the people of Israel His people (Exodus 3:7; Exodus 3:10; Exodus 5:1, etc.).
2. On Isaiah 36:12. [“In regard to the indelicacy of this passage we may observe: 1) The Masorets in the Hebrew text have so printed the words used, that in reading it the offensiveness would be considerably avoided. 2) The customs, habits and modes of expression of people in different nations and times, differ. What appears indelicate at one time or in one country, may not only be tolerated, but common in another. 3) Isaiah is not at all responsible for the indelicacy of the language here. He is simply an historian. 4) It was of importance to give the true character of the attack which was made on Jerusalem. The coming of Sennacherib was attended with pride, insolence and blasphemy; and it was important to state the true character of the transaction, and to record just what was said and done. Let him who used the language, and not him who recorded it bear the blame.”—Barnes in loc.].
3. On Isaiah 36:18 sqq. “Observandum hic, quod apud gentes olim viguerit πολύθεια adeo, ut quaevis etiam urbs peculiarem habuerit Deum tutelarem. Cujus ethnicismi exemplum vivum et spirans adhuc habemus apud pontificios, quibus non inscite objici potest illud Jeremiae: Quot civitates tibi, tot etiam Dei (Jeremiah 2:28).”—Foerster.
4. On Isaiah 36:21. Answer not a fool according to his folly (Proverbs 26:4), much less the blasphemer, lest the flame of his wickedness be blown into the greater rage (Sir 8:3). Did not Christ the Lord answer His enemies, not always with words, but also with silence (Matthew 26:62; Matthew 27:14, etc.)? One must not cast pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6). After Foerster and Cramer.
5. On Isaiah 36:21. “Est aureus textus, qui docet nos, ne cum Satana disputemus. Quando enim videt, quod sumus ejus spectatores et auditores, tum captat occasionem majoris fortitudinis et gravius premit. Petrus dicit, eum circuire et quaerere, quem devoret. Nullum facit insidiarum finem. Tutissimum autem est non respondere, sed contemnere eum.”—Luther.
6. [On Isaiah 37:1-7. “Rabshakeh intended to frighten Hezekiah from the Lord, but it proves that he frightens him to the Lord. The wind, instead of forcing the traveler’s coat from him, makes him wrap it the closer about him. The more Rabshakeh reproaches God, the more Hezekiah studies to honor Him.” On Isaiah 37:3. “When we are most at a plunge we should be most earnest in prayer. When pains are most strong, let prayers be most lively. Prayer is the midwife of mercy, that helps to bring it forth.”—M. Henry, in loc.]
7. On Isaiah 37:2 sqq. Hezekiah here gives a good example. He shows all princes, rulers and peoples what one ought to do when there is a great and common distress, and tribulation. One ought with sackcloth, i. e., with penitent humility, to bring prayers, and intercessions to the Lord that He would look on and help.
8. On Isaiah 37:6 sq. “God takes to Himself all the evil done to His people. For as when one does a great kindness to the saints, God appropriates it to Himself, so, too, when one torments the saints, it is an injury done to God, and He treats sin no other way than as if done to Himself. He that torments them torments Him (Isaiah 64:9). Therefore the saints pray: ‘Arise, O God, plead thine own cause: remember how the foolish man reproacheth thee daily’ (Psalms 74:22).”—Cramer.
9. On Isaiah 37:7. “God raises up against His enemies other enemies, and thus prepares rest for His own people. Example: the Philistines against Saul who pursued David, 1 Samuel 23:27.”—Cramer.
10. On Isaiah 37:14. Vitringa here cites the following from Bonfin Rerum Hungar. Dec. III. Lib.
VI. p. 464, ad annum Isaiah 1444: “Amorathes, cum suos laborare cerneret et ab Vladislao rege non sine magna caede fugari, depromtum e sinu codicem initi sanctissime foederis explicat intentis in coelum oculis. Haec sunt, inquit ingeminans, Jesu Christe, foedera, quae Christiani tui mecum percussere. Per numen tuum sanctum jurarunt, datamque sub nomine tuo fidem violarunt, perfide suum Deum abnegarunt. Nunc Christe, si Deus es (ut ajunt et nos hallucinamur), tuas measque hic injurias, te quaeso, ulciscere et his, qui sanctum tuum nomen nondum agnovere, violatae fidei poenas ostende. Vix haec dixerat .… cum proelium, quod anceps ac dubium diu fuerat, inclinare coepit, etc.”[The desire of Hezekiah was not primarily his own personal safety, or the safety of his kingdom. It was that Jehovah might vindicate His great and holy name from reproach, and that the world might know that He was the only true God.
We have here a beautiful model of the object which we should have in view when we come before God. This motive of prayer is one that is with great frequency presented in the Bible. Comp. Isaiah 42:8; Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 43:13; Isaiah 43:25; Deuteronomy 32:39; Psalms 83:18; Psalms 46:10; Nehemiah 9:6; Daniel 9:18-19. Perhaps there could have been furnished no more striking proof that Jehovah was the true God, than would be by the defeat of Sennacherib. The time had come when the great Jehovah could strike a blow which would be felt on all nations, and carry the terror of His name, and the report of His power throughout the earth.
Perhaps this was one of the main motives of the destruction of that mighty army.”—Barnes, on Isaiah 37:2].
11. On Isaiah 37:15. “Fides Ezechiae verba confirmata magis ac magis crescit. Ante non ausus est orare, jam orat et confutat blasphemias omnes Assyrii. Adeo magna vis verbi est, ut longe alius per verbum, quod Jesajas ei nunciari jussit, factus sit.”—Luther.
12. On Isaiah 37:17. [“It is bad to talk proudly and profanely, but it is worse to write so, for this argues more deliberation and design, and what is written spreads further and lasts longer, and does the more mischief. Atheism and irreligion, written, will certainly be reckoned for another day.”—M. Henry].
13. On Isaiah 37:21 sqq. [“Those who receive messages of terror from men with patience, and send messages of faith to God by prayer, may expect messages of grace and peace from God for their comfort, even when they are most cast down. Isaiah sent a long answer to Hezekiah’s prayer in God’s name, sent it in writing (for it was too long to be sent by word of mouth), and sent it by way of return to his prayer, relation being thereunto had: ‘Whereas thou hast prayed to me, know, for thy comfort, that thy prayer is heard.’ Isaiah might have referred him to the prophecies he had delivered (particularly to that of chap. 10), and bid him pick out an answer from thence. The correspondence between earth and heaven is never let fall on God’s side.”—M. Henry.].
14. On Isaiah 37:31 sqq. “This is a promise of great extent. For it applies not only to those that then remained, and were spared the impending destruction and captivity by the Assyrians, but to all subsequent times, when they should enjoy a deliverance; as after the Babylonish captivity, and after the persecutions of Antiochus. Yea, it applies even to New Testament times from the first to the last, since therein, in the order of conversion to Christ, the Jews will take root and bring forth fruit, and thus in the Jews (as also in the converted Gentiles) will appear in a spiritual and corporal sense, what God at that time did to their fields in the three following years.”—Starke.
15. On Isaiah 38:1. “Isaiah, although of a noble race and condition, does not for that regard it disgraceful, but rather an honor, to be a pastor and visitor of the sick, I would say, a prophet, teacher and comforter of the sick. God save the mark! How has the world become so different in our day, especially in our evangelical church Let a family be a little noble, and it is regarded as a reproach and injury to have a clergyman among its relations and friends, not to speak of a son studying theology and becoming a servant of the church. I speak not of all; I know that some have a better mind; yet such is the common course. Jeroboam’s maxim must rather obtain, who made priests of the lowest of the people (1 Kings 12:31).
For thus the parsons may be firmly held in rein (sub ferula) and in political submission. It is not at all good where the clergy have a say, says an old state-rule of our Politicorum.” Feuerlein, pastor in Nuremberg, in his Novissimorum primum, 1694, p. 553. The same quotes Spener: “Is it not so, that among the Roman Catholics the greatest lords are not ashamed to stand in the spiritual office, and that many of them even discharge the spiritual functions? Among the Reformed, too, persons born of the noblest families are not ashamed of the office of preacher. But, it seems, we Lutherans are the only ones that hold the service of the gospel so low, that, where from a noble or otherwise prominent family an ingenium has an inclination to theological study, almost every one seeks to hinder him, or, indeed, afterwards is ashamed of his friendship, as if it were something much too base for such people, by which more harm comes to our church than one might suppose. That is to be ashamed of the gospel.”
16. On Isaiah 38:1. [“We see here the boldness and fidelity of a man of God. Isaiah was not afraid to go in freely and tell even a monarch that he must die. The subsequent part of the narrative would lead us to suppose that, until this announcement, Hezekiah did not regard himself as in immediate danger. It is evident here, that the physician of Hezekiah had not informed him of it—perhaps from the apprehension that his disease would be aggravated by the agitation of his mind on the subject. The duty was, therefore, left, as it is often, to the minister of religion—a duty which even many ministers are slow to perform, and which many physicians are reluctant to have performed.
No danger is to be apprehended commonly from announcing to those who are sick their true condition. Physicians and friends often err in this. There is no species of cruelty greater than to suffer a friend to lie on a dying bed under a delusion. There is no sin more aggravated than that of designedly deceiving a dying man, and flattering him with the hope of recovery, when there is a moral certainty that he will not and cannot recover. And there is evidently no danger to be apprehended from communicating to the sick their true condition. It should be done tenderly and with affection; but it should be done faithfully.
I have had many opportunities of witnessing the effect of apprising the sick of their situation, and of the moral certainty that they must die. And I cannot now recall an instance in which the announcement has had any unhappy effect on the disease. Often, on the contrary, the effect is to calm the mind, and to lead the dying to look up to God, and peacefully to repose on Him. And the effect of that is always salutary.” Barnes in loc.]
17. On Isaiah 38:2. It is an old opinion, found even in the Chald., that by the wall is meant the wall of the temple as a holy direction in which to pray, as the Mahometans pray in the direction of Mecca. But δχιψ cannot mean that. Rather that is correct which is said by Forerius: “Nolunt pii homines testes habere suarum lacrymarum, ut eas liberius fundant, neque sensu distrahi, cum orare Deum ex animo volunt.”
18. On Isaiah 38:8 :—
Non Deus est numen Parcarum carcere clausum.Quale putabatur Stoicus esse Deus.
Ille potest Solis cursus inhibere volantes,
At veluti scopulos flumina stare facit.”
—Melanchthon.
19. On Isaiah 38:12. “Beautiful parables that picture to us the transitoriness of this temporal life. For the parable of the shepherd’s tent means how restless a thing it is with us, that we have here no abiding place, but are driven from one locality to another, until at last we find a resting-spot in the church-yard. The other parable of the weaver’s thread means how uncertain is our life on earth. For how easily the thread breaks.” Cramer. “When the weaver’s work is progressing best, the thread breaks before he is aware. Thus when a man is in his best work, and supposes he now at last begins really to live, God breaks the thread of his life and lets him die. The rational heathen knew something of this when they, so to speak, invented the three goddesses of life (the three Parcas minime parcas) and included them in this little verse:
Clotho colum gestat, Lachesis trahit,
Atropos occatBut what does the weaver when the thread breaks? Does he stop his work at once? O no! He knows how to make a clever weaver’s knot, so that one cannot observe the break. Remember thereby that when thy life is broken off, yet the Lord Jesus, as a master artisan, can bring it together again at the last day. He will make such an artful, subtle weaver’s-knot as shall make us wonder through all eternity. It will do us no harm to have died.” Ibid.—Omnia sunt hominum tenui pendentia filo.
[“As suddenly as the tent of a shepherd is taken down, folded up, and transferred to another place. There is doubtless the idea here that he would continue to exist, but in another place, as the shepherd would pitch his tent in another place. He was to be cut off from the earth, but he expected to dwell among the dead. The whole passage conveys the idea that he expected to dwell in another state.” Barnes in loc.].
20. On Isaiah 38:17. [“Note 1) When God pardons sin, He casts it behind His back as not designing to look upon it with an eye of justice and jealousy. He remembers it no more, to visit for it. The pardon does not make the sin not to have been, or not to have been sin, but not to be punished as it deserves. When we cast our sins behind our back, and take no care to repent of them, God sets them before His face, and is ready to reckon for them; but when we set them before our face in true repentance, as David did when his sin was ever before him, God casts them behind His back. 2) When God pardons sin, He pardons all, casts them all behind His back, though they have been as scarlet and crimson. 3) The pardoning of sin is the delivering the soul from the pit of corruption. 4) It is pleasant indeed to think of our recoveries from sickness when we see them flowing from the remission of sin; then the cause is removed, and then it is in love to the soul.” M. Henry in loc.]
21. On Isaiah 38:18. [Cannot hope for thy truth. “They are shut out from all the means by which Thy truth is brought to mind, and the offers of salvation are presented. Their probation is at an end; their privileges are closed; their destiny is sealed up. The idea is, it is a privilege to live because this is a world where the offers of salvation are made, and where those who are conscious of guilt may hope in the mercy of God.” Barnes in loc.] God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). Such is the New Testament sense of these Old Testament words. For though Hezekiah has primarily in mind the preferableness of life in the earthly body to the life in Hades, yet this whole manner of representation passes away with Hades itself.
But Hezekiah’s words still remain true so far as they apply to heaven and hell. For of course in hell, the place of the damned, one does not praise God. But those that live praise Him. These, however, are in heaven. Since then God wills rather that men praise Him than not praise Him, so He is not willing that men should perish, but that all should turn to repentance and live.
22. On Isaiah 39:2. “Primo (Deus) per obsidionem et bellum, deinde per gravem morbum Ezechiam servaverat, ne in praesumtionem laberetur. Nondum tamen vinci potuit antiquus serpens, sed redit et levat caput suum. Adeo non possumus consistere, nisi Deos nos affligat. Vides igitur hic, quis sit afflictionum usus, ut mortificent scilicet carnem, quae non potest res ferre secundas.” Luther.
23. On Isaiah 39:7. “God also punishes the misdeeds of the parents on the children (Exodus 20:5) because the children not only follow the misdeeds of their parents, but they also increase and heap them up, as is seen in the posterity of Hezekiah, viz.: Manasseh and Amon.”—Cramer.
HINTS[The reader is referred to the ample hints covering the same matter to be found in the volume on 2 Kings 18-20. It is expedient to take advantage of that for the sake of keeping the present volume within reasonable bounds. Therefore but a minimum is here given of what the Author offers, much of which indeed is but the repetition in another form of matter already given.—Tr.]
1. On Isaiah 37:36. “1) The scorn and mockery of the visible world. 2) The scorn and mockery of the unseen world.” Sermon of Domprediger Zahn in Halle, 1870.
2. On the entire 38. chapter, beside the 22 sermons in ’S Novissimorum primum, there is a great number of homiletical elaborations of an early date; Walther Magirus, Idea mortis et vitae in two parts, the second of which contains 20 penitential and consolatory sermons on Isaiah 38. Danzig, 1640 and 1642. Daniel Schaller (Stendal) 4 sermons on the sick Hezekiah, on Isaiah 38. Magdeburg, 1611. Peter Siegmund Pape in “Gott geheilighte Wochenpredigten,” Berlin, 1701, 4 sermons. Jacob Tichlerus (Elburg) Hiskiae Aufrichtigkeit bewiesen in Gesundheit, Krankheit und Genesung, 18 sermons on Isaiah 38. (Dutch), Campen, 1636. These are only the principal ones.
3. On Isaiah 38:1. “I will set my house in order. This, indeed, will not be hard for me to do. My debt account is crossed out; my best possession I take along with me; my children I commit to the great Father of orphans, to whom heaven and earth belongs, and my soul to the Lord, who has sued for it longer than a human age, and bought it with His blood. Thus I am eased and ready for the journey.” Tholuck, Stunden der Andacht, p. 620.
4. On Isaiah 38:1. “Now thou shouldest know that our word ‘order his house’ has a very broad meaning. It comprehends reconciliation to God by faith, the final confession of sin, the last Lord’s Supper, the humble committing of the soul to the grace of the Lord, and to death and the grave in the hope of the resurrection. In one word: There is an ordering of the house above. In reliance on the precious merit of my Saviour, I order my house above in which I wish to dwell. Moreover taking leave of loved ones, and the blessing of them belongs to ordering the house. And finally order must be taken concerning the guardianship of children, the abiding of the widow, and the friend on whom she must especially lean in her loneliness, also concerning earthly bequests.” Ahlfeld, Das Leben im Lichte des Wortes Gottes, Halle, 1867, p. 522.
5. On Isaiah 38:2-8. This account has much that seems strange to us Christians, but much, too, that quite corresponds to our Christian consciousness. Let us contemplate the difference between an Old Testament, and a New Testament suppliant, by noticing the differences and the resemblances. I. The resemblances. 1) Distress and grief there are in the Old, as in the New Testament (Isaiah 38:3). 2) Ready and willing to help beyond our prayers or comprehension (Isaiah 38:5-6) is the Lord in the Old as in the New Testament.
II. The differences. 1) The Old Testament suppliant appealed to his having done nothing bad (Isaiah 38:3). The New Testament suppliant says: “God be merciful to me a sinner,” and “Give me through grace for Christ’s sake what it pleases Thee to give me.” 2) The Old Testament suppliant demands a sign (Isaiah 38:7-8; comp. Isaiah 38:22); the New Testament suppliant requires no sign but that of the crucified Son of man, for He knows that to those who bear this sign is given the promise of the hearing of all their prayers (John 16:23). 3) In Hezekiah’s case, the prayer of the Old Testament suppliant is indeed heard (Isaiah 38:5), yet in general it has not the certainty of being heard, whereas the New Testament suppliant has this certainty.
III.—THE SECOND PARTTHE TOTAL TO COME, WITH FROM THE EXILE AND WITH THE OF A NEW HEAVEN AND A NEW EARTH
Isaiah 40-66This second principal part is occupied with the redemption of Israel. And the Prophet contemplates this redemption as a total, although from its beginning, which coincides with redemption from the Babylonian exile, to its conclusion, it takes up thousands of years. For to the gaze of the Prophet, that, which in point of time, is most remote, is just as near as that which is nearest in point of time. He sees degrees, it is true; but the intervals of time that separate the degrees one from another he is unable to measure. Things of the same kind he sees along side of one another, although as to fact, the single moments of their realization take place one after another. Consequences that evolve out of their premises only after a long time he contemplates along with the latter.
Thus it happens that the representations of the Prophet have often the appearance of disorder. To this is joined still another thing. Although, in general, the Prophet’s view point is in the midst of the people as already suffering punishment and awaiting their redemption out of it, thus the viewpoint of the Exile, yet at times this relative (ideal, prophetic) present merges into the absolute, i.e., actual history of his own time where both have an inherent likeness. But this inherent likeness becomes especially prominent where the punishment of sin is concerned, which is the concern of both epochs in common, that is the epoch in which the Prophet lived, and the epoch of the Exile.
These are the chief points of view, which must be held fast in order to make it possible to understand this grand cycle of prophecy.
The twenty-seven chapters that compose this cycle subdivide into three parts containing each nine chapters. (This was first noticed by Friedrich Rueckert, Be. Propheten όbers. u. erlδutert, 1831.)
The first Ennead (chapters 40–48), has Kores (Cyrus) for its middle point; the second (chapters 49–57), the personal Servant of Jehovah; the third (chapters 58–66), the new creature.
In regard to the critical questions, see the Introduction.
[In regard to the above division the following may be appropriate which Dr. J. A. Alexander says concerning the division proposed by himself, and which does not materially differ from the one above, though it makes three heads of what above is comprised in the first (40–48). “These are the subjects of the Prophet’s whole discourse, and may be described as present to his mind throughout; but the degree in which they are respectively made prominent is different in different parts. The attempts which have been made to show that they are taken up successively, and treated one by one, are unsuccessful, because inconsistent with the frequent repetition and recurrence of the same theme. The order is not that of strict succession, but of alternation.
It is still true, however, that the relative prominence of these great themes is far from being constant. As a general fact, it may be said that their relative positions in this respect answer to those they hold in the enumeration above given. The character of Israel, both as a nation and a church, is chiefly prominent in the beginning, the Exile and the Advent in the middle, the contrast and change of dispensations at the end. With this general conception of the Prophecy, the reader can have very little difficulty in perceiving the unity of the discourse, and marking its transitions for himself. Abridged Ed. Vol.
II. p. 18..
____________________
A.—KORES
Isaiah 40-48The first Ennead of chaps. 40–46 has two characteristic elements that distinguish it from the two following Enneads: 1) The Promise of a Hero that will come from the east, that will redeem Israel out of the Babylonian captivity, and who in fact is called by his name “Kores” Isaiah 44:28; Isaiah 45:1 : 2) The affirmation that Jehovah, from the fulfilment of this fact predicted by Him, must also necessarily be acknowledged as the only true God, as also, on the other hand, from the inability of idols to prophesy and to fulfil must evidently be concluded that they are no gods. One sees from this that the Prophet wishes primarily to attain a double object by the first nine chapters of this book of consolation: First, Israel shall have the prospect presented of bodily deliverance by Cyrus; but Second, its deliverance also from the worship of idols shall be made possible by means of that promise. For the Lord intends to make it so evident that the deliverance by Cyrus is His work, and at the same time His victory over the idols that Israel can no longer resist acknowledging Him as alone divine. These two aims manifestly go hand in hand. But now a Third is added to them. Cyrus and Israel are themselves prophetic types that point to a third and higher one.
Each of them represents one factor of the development of salvation. In that third both factors find their common fulfilment. Cyrus is only the initiator of the redemption. He brings to an end the seventy years’ exile, and opens up the era of salvation. But the salvation which he immediately brings is still only a faint twilight. On the other hand, in himself considered, Cyrus is a grand and glorious appearance.
He beams like the sun in the heavens, that is unobscured by clouds, and that, indeed, not only in our prophecy, but also in profane history. In this respect he prefigures the element of glory that must appear in the fulfiller of redemption. In Isaiah 45:1 He is called ξָ ?ωִׁ ?ιηַ (Messiah, anointed). He is therefore the messiah in a lower degree. Lowliness, reproach, suffering, nothing of this sort is found in him. On the contrary Israel is the lowly, despised, much enduring servant of Jehovah, who, however, in his lowliness is still strong, and in the hand of Jehovah a mighty instrument, partly to punish the heathen nations, and partly to save them.
This particular also attains its conclusion in Him who fulfils the redemption. Therefore He is called Messiah and Servant of Jehovah in one person. He unites both in one: the glory and the lowliness, the kingly form and the servant form. Thus it happens, that in 40–48 beside the promise of Cyrus (as far as it relates to the deliverance out of the Babylonian exile), and the proof of divinity (drawn from prophecy and fulfilment) which form the peculiar subjects of these chapters, we see those two other elements appear in a preparative way; the element of glory represented by Cyrus, and the form of the servant of God by the people Israel. Those first named subjects are concluded in 40–48. For after 48 nothing more is said either about Cyrus or about prophecy and fulfilment.
But that in Cyrus and in the people (regarded as the servant of Jehovah) which is typical has its unfolding in the two following Enneads, of which the former is chiefly devoted to the servant of God, and the latter to the glory of the new creation. Thus, therefore, we may say: the first Ennead forms the basis of the two that follow, in as much as it carries out to completion the two fundamental factors of the initiation of the redemption by Cyrus, and the proof of the divinity of Jehovah drawn therefrom, but partly, too, in that it lays the foundation for the representation of Him who in the highest degree is the Servant of God and King.
Let us now observe how the Prophet carries out in detail the plan which we have just sketched in its outlines.
In chap. 40 after the prologue, the Prophet presents first the objective then the subjective basis of the redemption. For this chapter, after a general introduction (Isaiah 40:1-11) referring to the whole book, and thus also to the subsequent parts of chap. 40, contains first a presentation of the absolute power and wisdom of God, from which follows also the impossibility of representing Him by any natural image (Isaiah 40:12-26). If then redemption is objectively conditioned by the omnipotence and wisdom of God, so it is subjectively by that trust that Israel must repose in its God (Isaiah 40:27-31). This chap. contains, therefore, three parts, and has wholly the character of a foundation.
To chapter 41 we give the superscription: First appearance of the redeemer from the east and of the servant of Jehovah, as also the first and second realization of the prophecy relating to this as proof of the divinity of Jehovah. For in chapter 41 the Prophet begins by bringing forward as the principal person of his prophetic drama the form of him who as beginner of the redemption has to stand in the foreground of the first Ennead. He does not yet name him, but he draws him with traits not to be mistaken, and designates him as the one called of God, and his calling a test of divinity which it is impossible for idols to give (Isaiah 41:1-7). Immediately after the redeemer the Prophet lets the redeemed appear, viz.: the people Israel, whom he introduces as “servant of Jehovah” in contrast with the glorious potentate from the east, for in him must appear that other typical element, poverty and lowliness, which still does no detriment to his strength. The Prophet characterizes this servant of Jehovah primarily as the chosen one of God, whom God will not reject but will strengthen to victory (Isaiah 41:8-13), then again as poor and wretched, who, notwithstanding, will be a mighty instrument of judgment and rich in salvation and knowledge (Isaiah 41:14-20). After he has thus described the redeemer and the redeemed servant of God, he employs in conclusion precisely this prophecy of redemption a second time as the basis of an argument which has for its conclusion the sole divinity of Jehovah, and the nothingness of idols (Isaiah 41:21-29).
In Chapter 42 the third principal person appears on the scene, viz., the personal Servant of God to whom both the chief personages before mentioned pointed; the first of them prefiguring His glory, the second His lowliness. He is represented first as meek, who at the same time will be a strong refuge of righteousness (Isaiah 42:1-4); then as the personal representative of a new covenant, who shall mediate for all nations light and right; and at the same time this is the third prophecy which the Lord presents as pledge of His divine dignity (Isaiah 42:5-9). These two strophes are like a ladder that leads up to the culmination. For chapter 42 is a pyramidal structure. In verses 10–17 the Prophet has reached the point of the pyramid. In them the expression “Servant of God” is no longer used.
And yet the discourse is concerning the same that Isaiah 40:1 was designated as the Servant of Jehovah. He appears here in His unity with Jehovah in which He Himself is El-Gibbor [God a mighty one]. As such, He issues out of Israel into the blind heathen world in order partly to judge, partly to bring them to the light of knowledge and of salvation. From this elevation the following strophes recede again. And in Isaiah 40:18-21 the Servant of Jehovah, who appears here again under this name, is portrayed as one, who can indeed make others see and hear, but Himself, as one blind and deaf, goes to meet His destruction, yet precisely thereby secures the favor of God, and becomes the founder of a new Tora (law). Unhappily this new institution of salvation is not accepted by unbelieving Israel.
For this reason the Prophet sees Israel as a people robbed, plundered, and languishing in kennels and prisons (Isaiah 42:22-25). From his heart he wishes that Israel might take warning from this threatening in time, and the sooner the better. But, alas, the Prophet knows that Israel, spite of the Exile, in which it has already so emphatically experienced the chastening hand of its God, will not yet lay to heart this warning. With this the second discourse concludes.
Having in 41–42 introduced especially the chief persons of the redemption, viz.: the redeemer from the east, then the redeemed or servant (people) of God, finally the personal Servant of God, in whom the two former combine, the Prophet now portrays in 43 chiefly the redemption itself. He gives first a survey of the chief particulars of the redemption (Isaiah 40:1-8). Having Isaiah 40:1 assigned the reason for the redemption, he depicts it, Isaiah 40:2, as one that shall come to pass spite of all difficulties; in Isaiah 40:3-4, as such that it must come to pass though even heathen nations must be sacrificed for the sake of it; in Isaiah 40:5-7 as all-comprehending, i.e., as such that it will lead back into their home out of all lands of the earth the members of the people of Israel; finally, in Isaiah 40:8, is indicated the condition that Israel must fulfill in order to partake of this salvation, viz.: that it must have open eyes and ears in a spiritual sense. To this representation of the redemption in general, the Prophet adds (Isaiah 40:9-13) the statement, that recurs thus for the fourth time, that prophecy and fulfilment are a test of divinity, and that Israel in its capacity as servant of God is called to be witness by furnishing this test. After carrying out this thought, that recurs so like a refrain, the Prophet turns again to the chief thought of chapter 43. He describes the return home of Israel especially out of the Babylonian captivity.
Yet not without finding in the Lord’s manner of bringing this about a reference to the distant Messianic salvation, in respect to its exercising also a transforming influence upon nature (Isaiah 40:14-21). In the fourth strophe of the chapter (Isaiah 40:22-28) the Prophet treats the thought of the inward, moral redemption, viz.: the redemption also from sin. He lets it be known here that this inward redemption will by no means follow close on the feet of the outward redemption from exile. For Israel has never kept the law. The Lord has already hitherto borne Israel’s sin, and will in future blot out the guilt of it. But the Israel that contemns the grace of God in proud self-righteousness will have to be destroyed.
The Lord, however, will break the power of sin by the rich effusion of the holy and holy-making Spirit upon that seed of Israel that shall be chosen to serve the Lord as His servant; and this is the thought of the fifth strophe that includes Isaiah 44:1-5.
Having portrayed in 41. the first redeemer and then the redeemed, i.e., the servant (people) of God, then in 42 the antitype of both, the second Redeemer and Servant of God in a personal sense, then in 43 the redemption itself, and all this in such a way that, interspersed, He has appealed four times, in a refrain like repetition, to the ability of Jehovah to prophesy in contrast with the inability of idols, as proof of His divinity, the Prophet now Isaiah 44:6 sqq., makes a decided use of this last element for which He has made such preparation. This entire chapter is an edifice whose substructure consists of the members of just that argumentation, that whoever can prophesy is God, and the crowning point of which appears to us in naming the name “Kores” (Cyrus), the way for naming it being now well prepared, and the motive sufficient. That is to say, in Isaiah 44:6-20, for the fifth time, in a drawn-out recapitulation extending through three strophes, it is set forth that Jehovah, as the only true God, can alone prophesy, and that He is God He will now prove by a grand prophetic transaction for the salvation of Israel. Accordingly, in the first strophe (Isaiah 44:6-11) the Prophet shows that Israel possesses the stronghold of its salvation in its living, everlasting God, who can prophesy, and has prophesied, which Israel also as a witness must testify to, whereas the senseless makers of idols must go to destruction. In the second strophe (Isaiah 44:12-17), in order to set forth the senselessness of idol worship most convincingly, the manufacture of idols is described in a drastic way. In the third strophe (Isaiah 44:18-20) in order on the one hand to explain the possibility of such senseless acts as making idols, the deep reason of it is pointed to, viz.: the blindness of men’s hearts and minds; on the other hand however the Prophet points to the destructive effects of this insane behaviour.
In the fourth strophe (Isaiah 44:21-28) the Prophet attains finally the culmination. He first deduces briefly the consequences from the foregoing. Before all he reminds that Israel is Jehovah’s servant, i.e., property, which the Lord has bought for Himself by graciously blotting out his guilt. This ransomed servant may return home (note the highly significant ωׁ ?εּ ?λָ ?δ Isaiah 44:22). Then there is a second brief reminder of Jehovah’s omnipotent divinity, and, in contrast with it, of the necessary disgrace of idols and their soothsayers. In contrast with the latter it is finally declared with all emphasis: Jehovah makes true the word of His prophets.
Therefore Israel will and must have a happy return home, and Cyrus shall the prince be called who shall accomplish this decree of Jehovah.
With this we have the culmination of the cycle of prophecy in chapters 40–48 and in respect of space have reached the middle of it. For, if, we leave aside 40, as a general laying of a foundation, and remember that the prophecy relating to Cyrus begins with 41, we have here at the close of 44, four discourses behind us, and still four discourses before us.
In chapter 45, the prophecy remains at the elevation which it attained at the close of chapter 44. We may therefore designate this discourse as the culmination of the cycle of prophecy in 40–48 and its contents as “Cyrus and the effects of his appearance.” For we are informed in Isaiah 45:1-7 what shall he brought about by Cyrus, whom the Lord has chosen and designates as His anointed (ξָ ?ωִׁ ?ιηַ), and what three-fold object will be secured thereby. But we learn Isaiah 45:8-13 that Cyrus is the beginner and founder of the era of salvation promised to Israel, although according to appearance this seems not to be, and the faint-heartedness of Israel requires the assurance that Cyrus is certainly called to accomplish the outward restoration of the holy people and of the holy city. The Prophet even gives the further assurance, that, beside that northern world-power directly ruled by Cyrus, even the southern, i.e., Egypt with the lands of its dominion, convinced by the salvation accruing to Israel from Cyrus, shall be converted to Jehovah and will join itself to His people (Isaiah 45:14-17). Finally, however, in consequence of the saving effect proceeding from Cyrus, this greatest advantage shall eventuate, viz.: that Israel, when it sees the heathen north and south converted to Jehovah, shall at last and definitively abjure idols, and give itself up wholly and entirely to its God, so that from that time on humanity entire shall have become a spiritual Israel (Isaiah 45:18-25). In the seventh discourse (chapter 46), as also in the eighth (chapter 47) the obverse side of this picture of the future brought about by Cyrus is shown.
In 46. namely, we have presented first the downfall of the Babylonian idols; but connected with this, also the gain that Israel shall derive from this, for its knowledge of God. That is to say, Israel will come to see that there is a great difference between Jehovah who carries His people, and those idols that are carried by beasts of burden into captivity (Isaiah 46:1-4). In fact Israel will know, too, which just such a difference exists between Jehovah and the images that are meant to represent Him (of which Isaiah 40:18; Isaiah 40:25 has discoursed), for the latter also are idols that need to be carried (Isaiah 46:5-7). Israel will actually draw the conclusion that the Lord here presses home for the sixth time, viz.: that the God who can prophesy and fulfill, who, in particular, has correctly announced beforehand the ravenous bird from the east, must be the right God (Isaiah 46:8-11). But the Prophet foresees that not all Israelites will draw from the facts so far mentioned that advantage for their religious life that, according to Jehovah’s intention, they ought. Will not this make problematical the realization of the promised salvation?
He replies to this question, “No.” For the righteousness and salvation of God must come in spite of the hard-heartedness of Israel (Isaiah 46:12-13). The eighth discourse is occupied wholly with Babylon. It paints in drastic images the deep downfall of it, exposes the reasons (the harshness against Israel transcending the measure that God would have, and the secure arrogance Isaiah 47:1-7), and shows the uselessness of all the means employed to rescue Babylon, both those derived from the worship of demons and those which the connections with other nations seem to offer (Isaiah 47:8-15). The ninth discourse, finally, (48) is recapitulation and conclusion. After an address to Israel that displays the motives that prompt Jehovah’s interest in the nation (Isaiah 48:1-2) the Prophet makes prominent for the seventh time the importance of prophecy for the knowledge of God. He points Israel to the fulfilment of the old prophecies, that they had experienced and verified in order to move them to faith in the new that concern the redemption from exile (Isaiah 48:3-11).
Then the chief contents of this new prophecy is repeated: what idols cannot, Jehovah can do, for He promises and brings on a redeemer that shall accomplish the will of God on Babylon (Isaiah 48:12-15). But Israel is summoned to go out of Babylon as out of an opened prison house, and to proclaim to all the world that the Lord by Cyrus has led His people out of Babylon and home, as He did by Moses out of Egypt (Isaiah 48:20-21). We join these verses close on Isaiah 40:15 because the contents of both passages demand it. The verses 16 and 17–19 are two insertions. The first, which is very obscure, appears to be a side remark of the Prophet’s, to the effect that the wonderful things discoursed in 40–47 were to himself not known from the beginning, but learned only in the moment of their creation (in a prophetic sense, comp. on Isaiah 48:6), but now by the impulse of the Spirit he has made them known. Verses 17–19 are of a retrospective nature.
They contain the lament of the Lord that Israel did not sooner give heed to His commands; for thereby it would have partaken of the blessing given to the patriarchs without the chastening agency of the Exile. Isaiah 40:22 finally (which occurs again as to the words at the close of chap. 58, and in respect to sense at the close of chap. 66) is a refrain-like conclusion intended (in contrast with the consolatory words that begin the entire book of consolation chapters 40–66 and its principal parts) to call to mind the important truth, that this consolation is not unconditionally offered to all. For the wicked can have no share in it.
This, in its essentials, is my opinion of the plan and order of chapters 40–48.
Footnotes:[The Author uses this Hebrew form of the name throughout the following context. We substitute for it the common form.—TR.].
I.—THE FIRST The Prologue: the Objective and Subjective basis of RedemptionIsaiah 401. THE OF THE SECOND PART AND OF THE FIRST
Isaiah 40:1-111 Comfort ye, comfort ye my people,
Saith your God.
2 Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her,
That her warfare is accomplished,
That her iniquity is pardoned:
For she hath received of the Lord’s hand
Double for all her sins.
3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness,
Prepare ye the way of the Lord,
Make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
4 Every valley shall be exalted,
And every mountain and hill shall be made low:
And the crooked shall be made straight,
And the rough places plain:
5 And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed,
And all flesh shall see it together:
For the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.
6 The voice said, Cry. And he said, What shall I cry?
All flesh is grass,
And all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field:
7 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth:
Because the spirit of the Lord bloweth upon it:
Surely the people is grass.
8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth:
But the word of our God shall stand forever.
9 O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain;
O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings,
Lift up thy voice with strength;
Lift it up, be not afraid;
Say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God!
10 Behold, the Lord God will come with strong hand,
And his arm shall rule for him:
Behold his reward is with him,
And his work before him.
11 He shall feed his flock like a shepherd:
He shall gather the lambs with his arm,
And carry them in his bosom,
And shall gently lead those that are with young.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_40:1. The rhetorical form of anadiplosis (epanalepsis, epizeuxis) occurs, indeed, principally in the second part (Isaiah 40:1; Isaiah 41:27; Isaiah 43:11; Isaiah 43:25; Isaiah 48:11; Isaiah 48:15; Isaiah 51:9; Isaiah 51:12; Isaiah 51:17; Isaiah 52:1; Isaiah 52:11; Isaiah 57:6; Isaiah 57:14; Isaiah 57:19; Isaiah 62:10; Isaiah 65:1). But it occurs also not unfrequently in passages of the first part that are the acknowledged productions of Isa. (Isaiah 8:9; Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 18:7; Isaiah 21:11; Isaiah 28:10; Isaiah 28:13; Isaiah 29:1. Comp., beside Isaiah 15:1; Isaiah 21:9; Isaiah 24:16; Isaiah 26:3; Isaiah 26:15; Isaiah 27:5; Isaiah 38:11; Isaiah 38:17; Isaiah 38:19. Agreeably to the character of this section, the Piel πִ ?ηַ ?ν occurs oftener in the second part: Isaiah 40:1; Isaiah 49:13; Isaiah 51:3; Isaiah 51:12; Isaiah 51:19; Isaiah 52:9; Isaiah 61:2; Isaiah 66:13 (Pual Isaiah 54:11; Isaiah 66:13). Piel occurs twice in the first part: Isaiah 12:1; Isaiah 22:4.
The passages Isaiah 49:13; Isaiah 51:3; Isaiah 51:12; Isaiah 52:9; Isaiah 66:13, are manifest echoes of the present passage—ςν with the suffix referring to Jehovah, as it suits the contents of the second part, is found there oftener than in the first: comp. Isaiah 3:12; Isaiah 10:2; Isaiah 10:24; Isaiah 32:13; Isaiah 32:18, with Isaiah 40:1; Isaiah 43:20; Isaiah 47:6; Isaiah 51:4; Isaiah 51:16; Isaiah 52:5 sq.; Isaiah 28:5; Isaiah 30:26; Isaiah 58:1; Isaiah 65:10; Isaiah 65:19, etc.
The expression ιΰξַ ?ψΰΧ, as an introductory formula, is peculiar to Isaiah; for it is found only in Isaiah, and that in both parts: Isaiah 1:11; Isaiah 1:18; Isaiah 33:10; Isaiah 40:1; Isaiah 40:25; Isaiah 41:21; Isaiah 66:9 (comp. Kleinert, Echtheit der jesajan, Weissag, I. p. 239 sqq.). The Imperfect ιΰξψ corresponds to the aim of chapters 40–66. Comp., the formula with which the Prophet introduces the prophecies he addresses to the present church (ωִׁ ?ξְ ?ςεּ ?γְ ?αַ ?ψιΧ Isaiah 1:10; πְ ?ΰֻ ?νιΧ Isaiah 1:24; δַ ?ψָּ ?αָ ?ψΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψηָ ?ζָ ?δεπεΧ Isaiah 2:1, etc., comp. Isaiah 7:3; Isaiah 7:7; Isaiah 7:10; Isaiah 8:1; Isaiah 8:5; Isaiah 8:11; Isaiah 14:28; Isaiah 20:2, etc.). ιΰξψ, taken exactly, is for us an untranslatable verbal form, that, according to its original sense, designates the thought neither as present nor future, nor in any way as one to be estimated by time measure, but one to be estimated by the measure of its mode of existence. That is, the Imperfect designates, not that which has objectively come into actual existence, but what is only present some way subjectively.
In other words, ιΰξψ, standing at the beginning of the second part, characterizes it as addressed to an ideal church. In itself, indeed, ιΰξψ can mean, “he will speak.” Thus it is taken by Stier, v. Hofmann (Schriftbew. II. 1. p. 91, Ausg. v. J. 1853), and Klostermann (Zeitschrift f. Luth.
Th. u. K. 1876, I. p. 24 sqq.); the last named of whom, however, errs in thinking that the following discourse Isaiah 40:3-11 gives the Imperfect the direction toward the future. For what follows, and is separated by intermediate members can never determine the specific sense of a Hebrew verbal form. ιΰξψ can, also in itself mean frequent repetition (Delitzsch). But all these significations are too special. The subjective force of the Imperfect is capable of various signification according to the context. Here at the beginning we are much too little au fait, to assign to the word a construction as definite as those expositors would do.
Here we know from the ιΰξψ only this much, that what follows is to be regarded, not as something that has just gone forth, something to be executed at once for the present church, but as an ideal word of God according to its point of departure and aim.—We have said above that ςν with a suffix referring to Jehovah occurs much oftener in the second part than in the first. The same is to be said of ΰμδιν with the suffix referring to Israel. ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δַ ?ι occurs twice in the first part (Isaiah 7:13; Isaiah 25:1), five times in the second (Isaiah 40:27; Isaiah 49:4-5; Isaiah 57:21; Isaiah 61:10); ΰμδιπε six times in the first part (Isaiah 50:10; Isaiah 25:9; Isaiah 26:13; Isaiah 35:2; Isaiah 36:7; Isaiah 37:20), eight times in the second (Isaiah 40:3; Isaiah 40:8; Isaiah 42:17; Isaiah 52:10; Isaiah 55:7; Isaiah 59:13; Isaiah 61:2; Isaiah 61:6); ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δֶ ?ικָ in the first part properly only once in the sense here under review (Isaiah 7:11; beside this Isaiah 37:4; Isaiah 37:10), six times in the second (Isaiah 41:10; Isaiah 41:13; Isaiah 43:3; Isaiah 48:17; Isaiah 51:15; Isaiah 55:5); ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δַ ?ιִ ?κְ occurs not at all in the first part, on the other hand nine times in the second (Isaiah 51:20; Isaiah 51:22; Isaiah 52:7; Isaiah 54:6; Isaiah 60:9; Isaiah 60:19; Isaiah 62:3; Isaiah 62:5; Isaiah 66:9); ΰμδιλν in the first part only Isaiah 35:4, in the second Isaiah 40:1; Isaiah 40:9; Isaiah 59:2; ΰμδιε in the sense meant here only Isaiah 50:10; Isaiah 58:2; ΰμδιδ and ΰμδιδν occur in this sense in neither part. It is quite natural that the affectionate words of endearment should occur oftener in the book of comfort than in the book of threatening.
Isaiah 40:2. The question might be raised whether λִּ ?ι is to be construed as a causal particle. But in that case χψΰε must be referred to what precedes, and that, say, in the sense of χִ ?ψְ ?ΰεּ ξַ ?μְ ?ΰεּ (Jeremiah 4:5) in order that it may not stand as flat and superfluous. This construction is not allowable here because χψΰε must be closely connected with the preceding γαψεςμΞμα.
We must therefore refer χψΰε to what follows, and λִּ ?ι, in the sense of “that,” introduces the objective clause.—φָ ?αָ ?ΰ only here and Daniel 8:12 is used as feminine. The reason seems to me to lie in this, that in both passages the word is conceived as collective, i. e., as designation, not of a single conflict, but of a multitude of conflicts, of a long continued period of conflict.—ξμΰ of time (comp. Genesis 25:24; Genesis 29:21; Jeremiah 25:12) occurs again in Isaiah only Isaiah 65:20 in the Piel.—The expression αִּ ?τְ ?μַ ?ιִ ?ν occurs elsewhere only Job 11:6; the singular, also, λֶּ ?τֶ ?μ, duplicatio, only Job 41:4.
Isaiah 40:3. Piel ιִ ?ωַׁ ?ψ, “make straight,” occurs again only Isaiah 45:2; Isaiah 45:13.—(ςψαδ, regio arida, apart from Isaiah 35:1; Isaiah 35:6, occurs in part first only Isaiah 33:9; whereas in part second, beside the present it occurs Isaiah 41:19; Isaiah 51:3.—ξρμδ occurs in the same sense as here Isaiah 11:16; Isaiah 19:23; Isaiah 62:10; comp. Isaiah 33:8; Isaiah 49:11; Isaiah 59:7. It occurs beside Isaiah 7:3; Isaiah 36:2. It is “the highway, embankment road, chaussee.”
Isaiah 40:4. ωָׁ ?τֵ ?μ a word of frequent recurrence, especially in the second introduction: Isaiah 2:9; Isaiah 2:11-12; Isaiah 2:17; Isaiah 5:15; then Isaiah 10:33; Isaiah 29:4; Isaiah 32:18; also the antithesis of δַ ?ψ andπִ ?αְ ?ςָ ?δ in parallelism occurs very often in part first: Isaiah 2:14; Isaiah 10:32; Isaiah 30:17; Isaiah 30:25; Isaiah 31:4, and somewhat oftener still in part second: Isaiah 40:4; Isaiah 40:12; Isaiah 41:15; Isaiah 42:15; Isaiah 54:10; Isaiah 55:12; Isaiah 65:7.—ςָ ?χֹ ?α in the present sense only here; comp. Jeremiah 17:9—ξִ ?ιωׁ ?εֹ ?ψ Isaiah 11:4 in the ethical sense; Isaiah 42:16.—ψֶ ?λֶ ?νἅπ. λεγ., from ψָ ?λַ ?ν alligavit Exodus 28:28; Exodus 39:21, like jugum from jungere. “the joining,” particularly the union between two mountains, “the yoke.”
Isaiah 40:5. αִּ ?χְ ?ςָ ?δ again in Isaiah only Isaiah 41:18; Isaiah 63:14.—The expression λְּ ?αεֹ ?γιΧ is found in Isaiah again only Isaiah 35:2; Isaiah 58:8; Isaiah 60:1. πִ ?πְ ?μָ ?δλαεγιΧ does not occur again in Isaiah. The expression seems to connect with πִ ?ψְ ?ΰָ ?δλαεγιΧ in the Pentateuch: Exodus 16:10; Leviticus 9:6; Numbers 14:10, etc.—λμΞαωׂ ?ψ found again only Isaiah 49:26; Isaiah 66:16; Isaiah 66:23-24; with following ιηַ ?γ again only in Job 34:15.—The clause εψΰε to ιηγε is to be referred to what precedes, and not to what follows. For if ψΰε were to be taken in the sense of spiritual seeing, of knowing, still it would be a secondary thought that all flesh shall know that revelation as one that was announced beforehand. The chief thing will be that they will verify with their own eyes that revelation. And this seeing shall win them to the Lord. Moreover ψΰε evidently corresponds to the preceding πִ ?πְ ?μָ ?δ.
Therefore the pronominal object must be supplied to ψΰε as is often the case. The causal clause λιτιιΧγΧ relates to all that precedes.
Isaiah 40:6. Notice the verbal form ΰξψ with a simple Vav copulativum. It does not say εַ ?ιֹּ ?ΰξַ ?ψ. That would be to present this saying as a new chief member of the consecutio rerum, of the succession of facts that naturally unfold themselves. That might and perhaps would have happened were it a merely earthly transaction that is treated. To represent such in the completeness of its successive points, it must have read: εָ ?ΰֶ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?ςχεֹ ?μ ֹ ?ΰξֵ ?ψεַ ?ιֹּ ?ΰξַ ?ψξָ ?δΰֶ ?χְ ?ψָ ?ΰεַ ?ιַּ ?ςַ ?οεπεΧ.
But the Prophet translates us into the spirit world where time and space cease. There what with us develops one after another is side by side. For this reason the Prophet here makes use of a form of speech which otherwise serves only to fill out some trait or to mention accompanying circumstances: comp. Isaiah 6:3; Isaiah 21:7; Isaiah 29:11 sq.; Isaiah 65:8.—αωׂ ?ψ ְ ?λָּ ?μΞδַ ?αָּ ?ωָׂ ?ψ is meant collectively or as designation of the genus: whereas in λμΞαωׂ ?ψ Isaiah 40:5 (each flesh) it has individual signification.
Isaiah 40:7. The perfects ιָ ?αֵ ?ωׁ and πָ ?αֵ ?μ must not be compared with the aoristus gnomicus of the Greeks (nor even Isaiah 26:9; comp. my remarks in loc). For only that Hebrew verbal form that has, too, the notion of succession, therefore includes that of time, viz.: the imperf., with Vav cons., can be compared with the Greek aorist. Here, as in Isaiah 26:9, the perf., designates timeless objectivity and reality. λι is not “for,” but “when.” Were it taken in the sense of “for,” then the nature of the wind would be designated as the constant cause of the withering of vegetation. But it withers also when its time comes, without wind. But when a hot desert wind (Isaiah 18:4; Jeremiah 4:11) blows, then it withers especially quick. πָ ?ωַׁ ?α flavit, inflavit, occurs in Kal only here.
Hiph. Genesis 15:11; Psalms 147:18.—There is much uncertainty about the origin of the particle ΰָ ?αֵ ?ο. Gesen. (Thes. p. 668 under μָ ?λֵ ?ο), Fuerst. (Lex. under ΰλο and λο) and Ewald § 205 d seem to me to be right in maintaining that ΰλο, on account of its derivation from λֵּ ?ο, has resident in it an argumentative meaning. Thus Fuerst. regards it primarily as “a strengthened = λֵּ ?ο therefore in a resumptive apodosis.” He refers in proof to Exodus 2:14 and to our passage. And in fact Exodus 2:14 seems to involve the drawing of a conclusion. For after Moses perceived the defiant answer of the Hebrew man, he cries out: ΰָ ?λֵ ?ζπεֹ ?ψַ ?ςηַ ?γָּ ?αָ ?ψ.
Would not this be most correctly rendered: “is the matter therefore really known?”—It is clear that the omission of Isa 40:7 in the Alexand. and Vatic, text of the LXX. is owing to arbitrariness, if not to oversight. Koppe, Gesenius, Hitzig, who regard the whole verse, or at least 7 b as a gloss, as “a very diluted, sense-disturbing thought,” as “an ejaculation of a reader,” only prove thereby how little they have understood the sense and connection of the prophetic discourse.
Isaiah 40:8. The words ιαωׁ ηφιψ are taken verbatim from Isaiah 15:6, like παμφιυ from Isaiah 28:1, where we find φִ ?ιυπֹ ?αֵ ?μ. The expression γαψιχεν occurs in Isaiah 8:10, comp. Isaiah 7:7.
Isaiah 40:9. Piel αωׂ ?ψ is exclusively peculiar to part second: Isaiah 41:27; Isaiah 52:7; Isaiah 60:6; Isaiah 61:1, a fact that need occasion no surprise. For it is natural, that the word, which means εὐαγγελίζειν, should be found chiefly in the εὐαγγέλιον of the Old Testament.—δָ ?ψִ ?ινχεֹ ?μ Isaiah 13:2, Isaiah 58:1.—αַּ ?λֹּ ?ηַ comp. αְּ ?λֹ ?ηַ ιָ ?γַ ?ι Isaiah 10:13. With that exception λֹּ ?ηַ occurs only in the second part: (Isaiah 37:3); Isaiah 40:26; Isaiah 40:29; Isaiah 40:31; Isaiah 41:1; Isaiah 44:12; Isaiah 49:4; Isaiah 50:2; Isaiah 63:1.—The expression ΰַ ?μϊִּ ?ιψָ ?ΰ is very frequent not only in Isaiah but also in the whole Old Testament; Isaiah 7:4; Isaiah 8:12; Isaiah 10:24; Isaiah 35:4; Isaiah 37:6; Isaiah 40:9; Isaiah 41:10; Isaiah 41:13-14; Isaiah 43:1; Isaiah 43:5; Isaiah 44:2; Isaiah 51:7; Isaiah 54:4; Isaiah 54:14.—δπδΰμδιλν strongly reminds one, and just by reason of what follows, of Isaiah 35:4. Comp. beside Isaiah 25:9. The expression is found in no other Prophet.
Isaiah 40:10. αְּ ,αְּ ?ηָ ?ζָ ?χ essentiae. ηζχ occurs again Isaiah 27:1; Isaiah 28:2.—ΰγπιιδεδ occurs ten times in the first part: Isaiah 3:15; Isaiah 7:7; Isaiah 10:24, etc., and thirteen times in the second part: Isaiah 48:16; Isaiah 49:22; Isaiah 50:4-5; Isaiah 50:9, etc.—The clause εζψςξωׁ ?μδμε is not co-ordinate with the foregoing chief clause, but subordinate to it. It is a clause expressive of situation (comp. Ewald, § 306, c; 341 a, sqq.), that more precisely explains the notion χζηα—μεֹ ?is properly Dat. commodi, not mere Dat. ethicus as in ςֲ ?μִ ?ιּ μָ ?κְ Isaiah 40:9, which is, moreover, to be seen from the masculine μֹ ?ε. For were it Dat. ethicus, then, corresponding to the gender of ζψς, it must read μָ ?δּ.
Isaiah 40:11. It is remarkable that the verb ψָ ?ςָ ?δ is never used in part first in the sense of “to pasture,” the action of the shepherd, although ψֹ ?ςִ ?ιξ “shepherds” occurs Isaiah 31:4 (Isaiah 38:12), (comp. Isaiah 5:17; Isaiah 11:7; Isaiah 14:30; Isaiah 27:10; Isaiah 30:23). In part second, also, the word means “pasture” in the active sense only once: Isaiah 61:5, three times “pasture” of beasts: Isaiah 44:20; Isaiah 49:9; Isaiah 65:25.—ψֹ ?ςֶ ?δ “shepherd” in part second: Isaiah 44:28; Isaiah 56:11; Isaiah 63:11.—ςγψ “the flock” found again Isaiah 17:2; Isaiah 32:14.—θְ ?μָ ?ΰִ ?ιν=θְ ?μָ ?ιִ ?ιν, from θְ ?μִ ?ι occurs in Isaiah only here (comp. 1 Samuel 15:4). Beside this θָ ?μֶ ?δ Isaiah 65:25.—ηֵ ?ιχ occurs again only Isaiah 65:6-7.—The word ςָ ?μεֹ ?ϊ is joined Genesis 33:13 with φΰο and αχψ; is used therefore of sucking beeves and sheep, 1 Samuel 6:7; 1 Samuel 6:10 of sucking beeves alone, Psalms 78:71 as here used of both without addition. The word occurs only here in Isaiah. But comp ςεּ ?μ, “the suckling” Isaiah 49:15; Isaiah 65:20.—πִ ?εִ ?ζִ ?μ, which has in Genesis 47:17 the meaning “to bring through,” sustentare, 2 Chronicles 32:22, the meaning “to protect, hedge about,” and also Isaiah 51:18 the meaning “careful guiding,” occurs in Isaiah beside here and the passage just named, only Isaiah 49:10.
AND 1. We have here before us the Prologue both of the first discourse and of the entire prophetic cycle of Isa 40:12 to Isaiah 66:24. For the representation of Jehovah as the comforter after protracted suffering (Isaiah 40:1-2), as the true One, whose word abides when all that is earthly is destroyed (Isaiah 40:6-8), and as the true shepherd that leads His people with paternal care (Isaiah 40:11) corresponds to what follows (Isaiah 40:12 and onwards), wherein Jehovah is portrayed as the infinite, incomparable, almighty God, and the restorer of His people, so that we find in our passage the keynote of the whole of part second of Isaiah’s prophecies. Their contents are predominantly consolatory; but our passage is like the outline of the thoughts of peace therein unfolded. The outward form of the discourse, moreover, bears the imprint of this inward correspondence. The entire second part is dominated by the fundamental number three.
For it is composed of three subdivisions, of which each consists of three times three, therefore nine discourses. But our Prologue consists first of an introduction that contains twice three clauses. By three imperatives, namely (“comfort ye,” “speak ye,” “cry”) it is announced that the Lord has a comforting message for His people, and by three clauses, each of which begins with λִּ ?ι (“that,” “that,” “for”) is stated what is the contents of this joyful message (Isaiah 40:1-2). Hahn was the first to maintain (what Delitzsch, too, finds “not without truth,” p. 408) that these three clauses beginning with λִּ ?ι correspond to the three calls that follow (Isaiah 40:3-11) and to the three parts of the book, not only in respect to number but also their contents. . That there is a correspondence in respect to number can hardly be doubted. But that the contents corresponds to the three times three corresponding degrees can only be made out by great ingenuity.
After the prologue of the prologue, there follow, as remarked, three calls, each of which comprises three Masoretic verses. But by the similar beginnings of the three calls, and by their internal arrangement, it appears certain that the Masoretic division into verses corresponds in general here to that division into periods intended also by the author. Only in regard to the first δπδ (behold) at the close of Isa 40:9 (comp. below) there may be a divergence. Each of the three calls begins with a vivid dramatic announcement. And here, in fact, occurs a remarkable gradation. The first call is introduced by the simple χεμχεψΰ (“Hark! a call”).
The second call begins with the extended formula, containing a summons to call χεμΰξψχψΰεΰξψξδΰχψΰ. The third call, finally, begins with a still more comprehensive formula of summons. It contains three members: 1) go up on a high mountain evangelist Zion; 2) raise with might thy voice evangelist Jerusalem; 3) raise it, fear not, say to the cities of Judah. Herewith it is worthy of notice that the third member itself has again three verbs (“raise, “be not afraid,” “say”). There follows then on this threefold formula of summons a threefold δπδ (behold) Isaiah 40:9-10. Here, perhaps, the Masoretic division into verses may not quite correspond to the meaning of the Prophet.
For if the first δπδ corresponds to the two that follow, then the clause introduced by it ought rather to be referred to what follows. Verse 9, accordingly, ought to end with the word Judah. The concluding verse (11) also contains three members: 1) he shall feed his flock like a shepherd; 2) he shall gather——bosom; 3) shall gently lead——with young. According to this the division into threes is not absolutely carried out in the prologue, but only just so far as it could be done without spiritless, outward mechanism, and tiresome monotony, and with such delicacy that it reveals itself only to close observation and not at all in a disagreeable way. Thereby the Prophet has proved himself to be a real artist. Moreover this tripartite division has its complete analogy in Isaiah’s style in that twofold division that we noticed in the second introduction and in chaps. 24–27.
In regard to the order of thought, the three calls contain a threefold specification of that general announcement of salvation contained in Isaiah 40:1-2. The first call (Isaiah 40:3-5) expresses the thought that now is the time to get out of the way every outward and inward obstacle that may obstruct the promised revelation of glory. The second call (Isaiah 40:6-8) declares that all earthly glory—even of the elect people—must be destroyed before and in order that Jehovah’s promise of glory may be fulfilled in its complete sense. The third call, finally, (Isaiah 40:9-11) summons Israel, which is in exile, to rally to its Lord, who comes as Redeemer, and to commit itself to His faithful, parental guidance.
2. Comfort——all her sins.
Isaiah 40:1-2. With three emphatically comforting words the Prophet begins. For the twice-repeated πηξε, that stands significantly at the head, as the stamp, so to speak, of the entire second part, is not alone comforting. The object “my people,” that depends on it, is quite as much so. Although judged and exiled, Israel had not ceased to be Jehovah’s people, the elect peculiar people. It is usual to understand the prophets to be the ones addressed.
But it was not possible for every Israelite to hear the voice of a prophet directly. Hence there lies also in the words a summons to carry the prophetic word further. Every one shall help to comfort. Each one shall contribute his part, so that the comforting word of God may come to all the members of the people. Not once only will the Lord assure Israel of His consolation. With emphasis in Isaiah 40:2 He summons the same ones whom He had already commanded in Isaiah 40:1 to comfort His people, to speak to the heart of Jerusalem (personification and metonymy at the same time, comp.
Isaiah 4:4; Isaiah 40:9; Isaiah 41:27). The phrase γαψςμΞμα (to speak out over the heart, to charm the heart, to cover with words, to sooth, to quiet) occurs elsewhere eight times in the Old Test.: Genesis 34:3; Genesis 50:21; Judges 19:3; Rth 2:13; 2 Samuel 19:8; 2 Chronicles 30:22; 2 Chronicles 32:6; Hosea 2:16. Whereas “speak ye to the heart” implies affecting address, χΰψε (call ye) involves rather the notion of loud, strong and clear speaking. By every means the conviction must be brought to the people that now the time of grace is at hand.—φָ ?αָ ?ΰ, militia, “warfare” is used here figuratively as in Job 7:1; Job 10:17; Job 14:14. As in general the trials and troubles of this life can be set forth as conflicts (comp. Ephesians 6:11 sqq.; 1 Timothy 6:12; 2 Timothy 2:3 sqq.; 2 Timothy 4:7), so here the whole time of Israel’s affliction and suffering and especially the exile is designated as a time of conflict.
The second clause λιπψφδςεπδ (“for her guilt is thoroughly tasted”), is difficult. First of all it must be noted that the Prophet has here in mind the passages Leviticus 26:34; Leviticus 26:41; Leviticus 26:43. It is said there that when the judgment of exile shall come upon the people Israel the land will be desert, and by that means shall enjoy the rest which it could not enjoy so long as the land was inhabited by a disobedient people that would not observe the prescribed Sabbath seasons (ΰֵ ?ϊΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψμֹ ?ΰΞωָׁ ? ?ֽ ?αְ ?ϊָ ?δαְּ ?ωַׁ ?αְּ ?ϊֹ ?ϊֵ ?ιλֶ ?ναְּ ?ωִׁ ?αְ ?ϊְּ ?λֶ ?νςָ ?μֶ ?ιδLeviticus 26:35). The land will then enjoy its time of rest (ϊִּ ?ψְ ?φֵ ?δΰֶ ?ϊΞωַׁ ?αְּ ?ϊֹ ?ϊֶ ?ιδָ Isaiah 40:34). ψָ ?φָ ?δ with the accusative is “to have pleasure in something, enjoy something, delectari aliquare.” The Hiph. δִ ?ψְ ?φָ ?ϊ that stands parallel with ϊִּ ?ψְ ?φֶ ?δ is nothing else than a direct causative Hiphil which means “delectationem agere, to pursue pleasure,” thus signifies continued, undisturbed enjoyment; as e. g. δִ ?ωְׁ ?χִ ?ιθ is not merely quietum facere but quietum agere (Isaiah 7:4), and like expressions, such as δִ ?μְ ?αִּ ?ιοδִ ?ωְׁ ?ξִ ?ιο, etc., signify not merely “make fat, make white,” but a continued activity whose product is “to be fat, to be white.” In contrast with this thought that the land shall enjoy its period of rest stands now the other (Leviticus 26:41; Leviticus 26:43) that the people in exile shall enjoy their guilt: “the land also shall be left of them, and shall enjoy her sabbaths, while she lieth desolate without them; and they shall accept of the punishment of their iniquity (εְ ?δֵ ?νιִ ?ψְ ?φεּ ΰֶ ?ϊΞςֲ ?εֹ ?πָ ?ν “they shall enjoy their fault,” Isaiah 40:43). This expression “enjoy their guilt,” is manifestly ironical. Whereas the absence of the wicked people is for the land a benefit, an enjoyment, the people in exile must enjoy the fruit of their disobedience.
They must at last taste how bitter and bad it is to forsake the Lord (Jeremiah 2:19), after having been unwilling to believe that apostacy from the Lord was ruinous. If now ψָ ?φָ ?δςָ ?εֹ ?ο is frui culpa, delectari culpa, then πִ ?ψְ ?φָ ?δςָ ?εο is the passive of it, and means “the fault is enjoyed, thoroughly tasted.” Niph. πִ ?ψְ ?φָ ?δ, it is true, occurs in many places where it is used of the favorable acceptance of sacrifices. But there it means “enjoyed,” “accepted as lovely enjoyment,” “to be pronounced welcome.” Moreover this use is found only in Leviticus 1:4; Leviticus 7:18; Leviticus 19:7; Leviticus 22:23; Leviticus 22:25; Leviticus 22:27.
If ςָ ?εֹ ?ο ever had the meaning “guilt offering,” then the matter would be quite simple. For then ςεπδπψφδ would mean “their guilt offering is favorably accepted.” But it never has this meaning. We can only say therefore that the Prophet construes πψφδ in the sense of “is enjoyed,” so that it forms the antithesis of ιψφψςεπν, Leviticus 26:41; Leviticus 26:43.
That mournful time when Israel must enjoy the bitter fruits of its sin is now gone. The peculiar ironical antithesis of “the land shall enjoy her sabbaths,” and “they shall enjoy their fault,” has the effect that we are necessitated to hear now of an enjoyed, thoroughly tasted guilt-broth into which they have broken crumbs for themselves and have now eaten it up. The third clause beginning with λִּ ?ι is best construed as an objective clause parallel with the two preceding objective clauses. For if it were a causal clause, as Hahn would have it, it must be so indicated by an unmistakable causal particle opposed to the two objective particles preceding. But that the Perfect μχηδ is not to be taken in a future sense (“in time to come receives,” Hahn) is plain from the parallelism with the foregoing Perfects. Nor can αִּ ?τְ ?μַ ?ιִ ?ν mean the double amount of salvation (Hahn, comp.
Isaiah 61:7), for neither μχηδ, nor αλμΞδθΰϊιδ suits that. The former does not for the reasons already given; the latter does not because it must in that case read ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ. For how Hahn can say that the sins are the means by which Jerusalem comes into possession of a double amount of salvation is incomprehensible. If Jerusalem had not committed these sins, would it then have been the worse off for it? The Prophet can therefore only mean to say that Jerusalem has received double punishment, has been chastised with double rods. Then αְּ is the preposition of recompense, as the recompense may be regarded as the means in order to acquiring the thing [“comp.
Genesis 29:18, αְּ ?ψָ ?ηֵ ?μ, properly by means of Rachel, as the price is the means by which one acquires the work or the wares,” From Dr. N.’s Gramm.—Tr.].
But how can it be said that Jehovah has laid on double the punishment deserved? How does this agree with His justice? One must remember first that the executors of the judgments against Israel did not merely restrict themselves to the measure of chastisement determined by Jehovah, but ex propriis intensified it, and thus brought on Israel a measure of punishment pressed down and shaken together (Isaiah 10:7; Jeremiah 50:7; Jeremiah 50:11; Jeremiah 50:17, etc.). Yet if Jehovah permitted this, He is still accountable for it, seeing He could hinder it. And Jeremiah 16:18 : “And first I will recompense their iniquity and their sin double” shows that this severe measure was intended by God. But was it really too severe?
Delitzsch is right in saying that the expression is not to be taken in a juristic sense. It is rather to be taken rhetorically. It is an hyperbola, meant to set forth the compassionating love of God in the clearest light. For this love is at once so high and so humble that it accuses and excuses itself as if it had done too much in the way of punishment. Thereby, too, it betrays the motive for that overflowing salvation it proposes to display. For if one has given others so much pain, he will gladly make it up by so much the greater benefaction.
It is to be noticed that in Isaiah 40:1-2, first the Prophet speaks. For by means of “saith your God” he takes up the word himself in order to introduce the Lord as speaking the remaining words to ςεπδ. In the latter half of Isa 40:2 the Prophet himself again speaks, as appears from “the hand of the Lord.” The Prophet therefore partly cites the verba ipsissima of Jehovah, partly states what the Lord has done. This is the usual manner of prophetic announcements. It is necessary to note this here, because in what follows there is joined in climax fashion an unusual form of announcement.
2. The voice——hath spoken it.
Isaiah 40:3-5. The Prophet hears a voice. He does not say whence or from whom the voice came. This is unusual. For if now and then in other cases the prophets hear terrestrial or super-terrestrial voices, still in every case the source of it is explained. The context makes known whence and why the voice sounds (comp.
Isaiah 21:11; Ezekiel 1:28; Daniel 10:9). Here one learns only that a voice sounded. This is manifestly a rhetorical embellishment. The Prophet would make prominent thereby the importance of what follows by saying that it was important to him in an especially solemn way by a special superterrestrial voice. χεμχεψΰ can in itself mean: “a voice cries” (comp. e. g. Micah 6:9). But it is more drastic and consonant with other analogies to take the words as an exclamatory phrase and as a genitive relation (comp.
Isaiah 6:4; Isaiah 13:4; Isaiah 52:8; Isaiah 66:6). A heavenly messenger, then, brings the command to prepare for the Lord the way through the desert (Isaiah 40:3-4). This command has evidently a double sense. For in the first place the people shall in fact be redeemed out of exile and be brought back home. And Jehovah Himself will conduct this return, as appears beyond doubt from Isaiah 40:9-11. But the Lord will lead them in order that the journey of the people may be made easy and prosperous without obstacle or attack (comp.
Isaiah 41:17 sqq.; Isaiah 43:1 sqq., 14 sqq.; Isaiah 48:20 sq.; Isaiah 49:9 sqq.; Isaiah 55:12 sq.; Isaiah 57:14). Such is certainly the immediate sense of our passage. In fact, the whole context, especially In its immediate connection with the comforting prologue, proves that it contains a promise and not an exhortation to repentance. With this agrees Isaiah 40:5, which plainly declares that Isaiah 40:3-4 announce the fulfilment, evident to all the world, of a promise given long before by the Lord. But of course it cannot be doubted that the old figurative meaning given already by John the Baptist is also justified. For in the first place it comports with the universal and everywhere to be assumed principles of the divine pedagogy, that that physical desolation of the way homewards were not possible without an ethical desolation of the ways of the heart.
And in the second place, since the language is such that it can mean both, this possibility of doublemeaning makes it a natural conjecture that such was actually intended. In the third place it is to be noticed that this first voice announces the chief matter, redemption and return home, in a general way. The second (Isaiah 40:6-8) gives explanation respecting the when of its accomplishment. The third (Isaiah 40:9-11) defines the manner of fulfilment, and contains only in this respect those two points, one after the other, which in Isaiah 40:3-5 we observe in one another. For what is that “behold your God,” Isaiah 40:9, but the announcement that the Lord by repentance and faith will come to His people? And what are Isaiah 40:10-11 but the statement that the Lord Himself as a parental guide will come home with His people?
αξγαψ Isaiah 40:3 is referred by the LXX., the Vulg. and the Evangelists (Matthew 3:3 : Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4) to what precedes. This is not only contrary to the accents, but to the very sound of the words, since αξγλψ evidently corresponds to the following αςψαδ, and must be construed like the latter. John the Baptist, in the application of these words, calling himself a φωνὴβοῶντοςἐντῇἐρήμῳ (John 1:23), followed the LXX. He found in that sound of words familiar to his hearers, which our passage has in that translation, a fitting expression for what he would say, without meaning to give thereby an authentic interpretation of the original text (comp. Tholuck, The Old Testament in the New, 1868, p. 5). For when Delitzsch says: “One may, indeed ought, as it appears, to represent to himself that the caller, going out into the desert, summons men to make a road in it,” I can find no point of support for this statement in the Hebrew text.
The command to make a road in the desert does not of necessity sound out of the desert itself. If the matter itself presents no necessity for this view, I see nothing else in the Hebrew text to indicate that the voice which the Prophet heard sounded out from the desert. Therefore the meaning which the Baptist, following the LXX., gives to the words χεμχεψΰαξγαψ seems to me to belong to the category of those free citations that occur so often in the New Testament in reference to Old Testament passages, and which constitute one of those departments of biblical hermeneutics that still remain the most obscure. Of course from our point of view no objection arises against the meaning and application given by the Evangelists (especially Luke 4:3-6) to the words that follow αξγαψ.
The Piel τִ ?πָּ ?δ, used elsewhere also of clearing out a house (Genesis 24:31; Leviticus 14:36) occurs again in reference to ways, in the sense of “making clear, light, opening a road;” Isaiah 57:14; Isaiah 62:10; Malachi 3:1, the last of which passages is likely a reference to the present. The subject of Isa 57:14 and Isaiah 62:10 is also that road on which the people shall return out of exile to their home. If the customary route from Babylon to Canaan did not pass through the desert, yet the properly nearest one did. And from ιַ ?ωְׂ ?ψεּ and Isaiah 40:4 it is seen that Israel was to go along, not only the most convenient, but also the directest way home. From Egypt, also, the people had to traverse the desert in order to reach Canaan. The notion “desert” plays an important part in all the pictures of the future that relate to the deliverance out of exile.
How consonant to Isaiah’s style it is to represent, that on their return home also from the second exile Israel will wander through the desert, may be seen from Isaiah 11:15-16. The meaning of ιִ ?ωַׁ ?ψ is evidently that the way of the people shall go out straight, and thus be as short as possible. To be such, it must make no deviations either in horizontal or vertical directions. The former appears to be the meaning of Isa 40:3 b; the latter is made prominent Isaiah 40:4. The valleys (the form πֶּ ?ιΰ only here) shall raise themselves (πִ ?ωָׂ ?ΰ used antithetically with ωָׁ ?τֵ ?μ11, 12; comp. Isaiah 2:2; Isaiah 2:13-14; Isaiah 6:1; Isaiah 30:25; Isaiah 33:10; Isaiah 52:13; Isaiah 57:7; Isaiah 57:15), and all mountains and hills shall lower themselves [ωׁ ?τμ, see Text. and Gr.] the rugged places shall become even and the connection of mountains [ψλνBergjoch see Text. and Gram.] shall become valley depths.
The Prophet would say, therefore, that the obstacles that would prevent the coming of the Lord into the heart of His people, and thereby hinder the coming of the people into their land, shall be rid away. And should not thereby the glory of Jehovah become manifest to the world? When the nations see how gloriously the people Israel serve their God and how gloriously He serves His people, will they not make efforts to attain the righteousness and salvation of this people and seek the Lord who is the author of both (comp. Isaiah 2:2 sq.)? The great, glorious promise, which the Prophet has just announced, must be fulfilled, for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it, and the mouth of the Lord does not lie. The expression occurs in Isaiah again Isaiah 1:20; Isaiah 58:14.
Comp. on Isaiah 1:2.
4. The voice——stand forever.
Isaiah 40:6-8. The rhetorical dress of this second call, contains in relation to the first a climax. For there it is simply said: “voice of one crying.” But here: “voice of one saying, cry! And answer: what shall I cry?” Thus a second voice here precedes the voice of the one calling, and summons him to cry. This is indeed primarily rhetorical embellishment. Yet this embellishment has its material reason.
In the first place, not only is the importance of the call set in the clearest light, but also its divine source, as we have already seen was also the aim of χεμχψΰ Isaiah 40:3. In the second place we have this additional, that the caller must be summoned to call. The reason for this seems to me to be, that the second call expresses properly as its immediate thought something unpleasant. It is like a shadow that not only suddenly, but also almost incomprehensibly breaks in on the full light of the foregoing announcement of consolation. For is it not an oppressive thought, that not only all glory of the kingdoms of this world (that alone were indeed consolation for Israel), but also that all merely earthly glory of the elect people is subject to change? Is it not a deep humiliation that comes also on the people of God, that it is said to them, they must be divested of all their own human strength and adornment, and thus first share the fate of the totality of profane flesh, before the divine promise can be fulfilled to them?
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
II.—THE SECOND The First Appearance of the Redeemer from the East and of the Servant of Jehovah, and also the First and Second Conversion of the Prophecy relating to this into a Proof of the Divinity of Jehovah.Isaiah 411. THE FIRST CHIEF FIGURE: THE CALLED FROM THE EAST. THE FIRST OF THE AS A TEST OF
Isaiah 41:1-71 Keep silence before me, O islands; and let the people renew their strength;
Let them come near; then let them speak:
Let us come near together to judgment.
2 Who raised up the righteous man from the east,
Called him to his foot,
Gave the nations before him,
And made him rule over kings?
He gave them as the dust to his sword,
And as driven stubble to his bow,
3 He pursued them, and passed safely;
Even by the way that he had not gone with his feet.
4 Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning?
I the Lord, the first,
And with the last; I am he.
5 The Isles saw it, and feared;
The ends of the earth were afraid,
Drew near, and came.
6 They helped every one his neighbour;
And every one said to his brother,Be of good courage.
7 So the carpenter encouraged the goldsmith,
And he that smootheth with the hammer him that smote the anvil,
Saying, it is ready for the sodering:
And he fastened it with nails, that it should not be moved.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 41:1. χψα–δηψιω. Isaiah 41:2. ξζψδ–δςιψ. Isaiah 41:3. ψγσ. Isaiah 41:4. ΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψֹ ?πִ ?ιν–ψִ ?ΰωׁ ?εֹ ?ο–γּ ?εֹ ?ψ–τςμ. Isaiah 41:5.–ηψγΰָ ?ϊָ ?δ. Isaiah 41:6. ηַ ?ζַ ?χ–ςָ ?ζַ ?ψ. Isaiah 41:7. δμν–τθιωׁ ?–ξημιχ–φψֵֹ ?σ–ηָ ?ψָ ?ωIsaiah 41:1. We have a pregnant construction in, δηψιωׁ ?εΰμι comp. Job 13:13.
Isaiah 41:2. The perfect ξִ ?ιδֵ ?ςִ ?ιψώ is only the prophetic perfect, representing the fact of awaking, not as one actually past, but as actually certain, i. e., all the same as happened. It indicates thus the objective reality, but not the time, as indeed generally the Hebrew modi express primarily not the time but the modality of being. The same is true of δςιώεϊι Isaiah 41:25.—What is the object of δֵ ?ςִ ?ιψ? Modern expositors, since Vitringa, so far as I see, are all of them of the opinion that the words φγχιχψΰδεμψβμε, to be construed as a relative clause, are the object: him whom right (salvation, victory) meets at his feet. This exposition rests on the Masoretic punctuation But this does not give an absolute rule.
It has the great disadvantage that it compels us to take ιχψΰ in the sense of ιִ ?χְ ?ψֶ ?δ and μψβμε, accordingly, in the sense of “before him,” “ante pedem ejus.” Now the first would present no difficulty, since χψΰ occurs often enough in the sense of χψδ. But the latter is very serious since μְ ?ψֶ ?βֶ ?μ in all other places of its occurrence means “to follow on the feet of.” In Genesis 30:30 it stands directly in antithesis with μְ ?τָ ?πַ ?ι: “little hadst thou before me, but it spreads out to a multitude behind me” (on my foot μְ ?ψַ ?βְ ?μִ ?ι). Deuteronomy 33:3 ϊֻּ ?λּ ?εּ μְ ?ψַ ?βְ ?μֶ ?κָ is “they turned after thy foot-print,” (comp. Schrader in loc). Compare the usage in 1 Samuel 25:42; Job 18:11; Habakkuk 3:5. Only in these passages does ψֶ ?βֶ ?μ occur with μְ denoting place.
Thus the objection to taking μψβμε in the sense of “obviam, towards,” is certainly justified. Then we must take χψΰ and μψβμε in their common meaning, “to call,” and “after him.” Moreover we must take φγχ as object of δςιψ as all the ancient translations and many later expositors have done. The LXX.: τίσἐξήγειρενἀπὸἀνατολῶνδικαιοσύνην, ἐκάλεσεναὐτὴνκατὰπόδαςαὐτοῦ; Vulg. quis suscitavit ab oriente justum, vocavit eum, ut sequeretur se, etc.—The expression ιϊομτπιε reminds one of Deu 28:7; Deuteronomy 28:24-25.—If we take ιַ ?ψְ ?γְּ as Hiph. of ψָ ?γָ ?δ “conculcare,” then it means “conculcare faciet.” Of course ξְ ?μָ ?λִ ?ιν is object: he will make him trample down kings.” But it might be taken as Kal. (ιַ ?ψְ ?γְּ instead of ιֵ ?ψְ ?γְּ on account of the pause). The only difference in sense would be: “he will himself trample down.”—ιϊολςτψεβεΧ. It seems to me over-ingenious, when Delitzsch construes the λְּ as the mere intimation of a comparison that is left to the reader’s fancy to be completed. All depends on making ηψαε and χωׁ ?ϊε subject.
That it does not read ϊִּ ?ϊֵּ ?ο because ηֶ ?ψֶ ?α and χֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ϊ are feminine, makes not the least difficulty. For the ideal subject is “he” that holds the sword and bow. Comp. Isaiah 17:5; Isaiah 51:5. Rueckert, Knobel and others needlessly supply ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ before ιϊο. After ιϊο one may supply ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν, as often the pronominal object is omitted (comp.
Genesis 2:19; Genesis 6:19 sqq., and especially 1 Kings 22:6; 1 Kings 22:15, where also the object is omitted after πϊο); or, still more simply, one may regard λςτψ and λχωׁ as the immediate object of ιϊο: “his sword shall make like dust, his bow like scattered chaff,” i. e., sword and bow when set to work will produce that effect, likeness to dust and chaff.—Note the assonance in ιַ ?ψְ ?γְּ and πִ ?γָּ ?σ ,ιִ ?ψְ ?γְּ ?τֵ ?ν and χַ ?ωׁ ,ιִ ?ψְ ?γְּ ?τֵּ ?ν and χַ ?ωְׁ ?ϊּ ?εֹ.
Isaiah 41:3. ωָׁ ?μεֹ ?ν either adjective or adverbial accusative.—I believe that ιַֽ ?ςֲ ?αֹ ?ψ and ιָ ?αεֹ ?ΰ stand in antithesis. For, as is well known, αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ often has the sense of going back in antithesis to verbs meaning “to go thither, go out.” Thus ιφΰ and αεΰ are often used in antithesis; comp. Joshua 6:1; 1 Kings 3:7. Hence they are used of the rising and setting of the sun (Genesis 19:23; Isaiah 13:19, and Genesis 15:12; Genesis 15:17; Genesis 18:11, etc.). Comp. Isaiah 37:28; Numbers 27:17 : 1 Samuel 29:6; 1 Kings 15:17; 2 Chronicles 1:10, etc.).
But αεΰ also stands in antithesis to other verbs in this sense; thus Psalms 126:6. “Forth goes the bearer of the seeding, hither comes with rejoicing the bearer of his sheaves.” Consider in addition that probably αψβμιε corresponds to μψβμε Isaiah 41:2. For αְּ ?ψֶ ?βֶ ?μτΧ is to the question “where?” the same that μְ ?ψֶ ?βִ ?μτΧ is to the question “whither?” Thus to go αְּ ?ψַ ?βְ ?μֵ ?ιτΧ very often means “to go on the track of one” (comp. Exodus 11:8; Judges 4:10; Judges 8:5; 1 Samuel 25:27; 2 Samuel 15:17, etc.). One may, indeed, translate αψβμιε in our text: “he will not measure backwards with his feet the way;” for in itself it may very well mean that (comp. Numbers 20:19; Deuteronomy 2:28; Judges 4:15; Judges 4:17; Proverbs 19:2, etc.). But every one feels that this sense here were superfluous.
It might be urged in reference to taking αεΰ in the sense of redire, that then, too, αψπμιε were superfluous. But the antithesis of ςָ ?αָ ?ψ and αּ ?εִ ?ΰ is not so pregnant as that of ιφΰ and αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ, and hence the Prophet’s intended meaning of this word is not so plainly recognizable, and indeed, so far, as I know, no one has recognized it. Thus, to give a hint to the reader of the sense he would convey by ιαεΰ, the Prophet adds αψβμιε.
Isaiah 41:4. When δεּ ?ΰ stands emphatically for God, as it does here, it always refers backward, either to an unnamed and unnameable something in the preceding context, yet known as assumed, that involves the notion the One-All who upholds all things and comprehends everything. So it seems to me to be used Deuteronomy 32:39; Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 48:12. In such a case δεּ ?ΰ is predicate. Or it so refers back to that great Unnamed, that is known to be taken for granted, that it appears as in apposition with the subject. Then it = talis. δεּ ?ΰ is used thus of men, Jeremiah 49:12, and after ξִ ?ι Isaiah 50:9, etc.
But it stands for God in this sense, 2 Samuel 7:28; Isaiah 37:16; Nehemiah 9:6-7. But it can also be predicate in this way, that it only introduces the predicate notion as one already known. Then it is = ille, is, and always has a participle after it (ego sum ille, qui, comp. Isaiah 51:9-10, ΰַ ?ϊְּ ?Ξδִ ?ιΰ Isaiah 43:25; Isaiah 51:12.—But further δεּ ?ΰ appears also to be the simple connecting “it,” which says that the preceding statement appertains as predicate to the subject represented by ΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δ or ΰֲ ?πִ ?ι Isaiah 43:13; Jeremiah 14:22; Psalms 44:5. But finally δεּ ?ΰ serves the purpose of affirming the identity of the predicate clause with the predicate of a preceding clause that is expressed or implied. Then it acquires the meaning idem.
So here and Psalms 102:28 (comp. Job 3:19; Hebrews 13:8). In our passage δεּ ?ΰ manifestly affirms that Jehovah is with those that are last that one that He was as the first, i. e., the same.
Isaiah 41:5. ΰιιν see Isaiah 41:1; and on χφεϊδΰψυ see Isaiah 40:28.
Isaiah 41:7. Drawing the accent back in δεμν to avoid the collision of two tone syllables is normal, but the change of Tsere to Seghol is not normal (comp. Isaiah 49:7; Isaiah 66:3; Num. 17:23; 24:22; Ezekiel 22:25). The latter is probably occasioned by the effort to better imitate the beat of the hammer strokes.—τַּ ?ςַ ?ν in the sense of “anvil” only here.—One need not construe ΰֹ ?ξֵ ?ψ participle. It may stand in the sense of a finite verb (comp. Isaiah 2:6; Isaiah 24:2; Isaiah 29:8; Isaiah 32:12).—γֶּ ?αֶ ?χ adhaesio, agglutinatio signifies that whereby the work of the φψσ is joined to that of the ηψωׁ; μְ ?= “in reference to” (Isaiah 5:1; Genesis 20:13, etc.).
AND 1. God has a twofold object in view: 1) He would announce that He will raise up for His people a deliverer from the East; this is the chief contents of the first Ennead. 2) By this act of deliverance He would demonstrate His divinity in contrast with the nothingness of idols. This twofold object He attains by summoning the heathen nations to a trial in which He gives the proofs of His divinity (Isaiah 41:1-5); but they on their part do not respond, for the powerlessness of their idols is shown by a brief reference to the manner in which they originate (Isaiah 41:6-7).
2. Keep silence——judgment.
Isaiah 41:1. With reverential silence (comp. on ιβωׁ ?εεΧ) must the islands (comp. on Isaiah 40:15) come to the Lord. For that He is the speaker appears from Isaiah 41:1-2, and especially from Isaiah 41:4. The expression ιημιτּ ?ελη, “ they shall renew their strength,” stands here so near to Isaiah 40:31, that we must regard it as a link that binds the two chapters together. The Lord would intimate by these words that the task the nations will have to perform before the judgment, is a difficult one, that therefore they must “in respect to strength make change,” i. e., renew strength, put on new strength. [“As if He had said: they that hope in Jehovah shall renew their strength; but those that refuse renew theirs as they can.”—J. A.
A.] The Lord demands politeness, reverence from the nations even before the controversy is decided, so certain is He that He will gain it. They must not come on with rude noise, but modestly and then speak. μξωׁ ?τθ, “to judicial trial,” is used here as in Isaiah 54:17; Numbers 35:12; Joshua 20:6; Judges 4:5; 2 Samuel 15:2; 2 Samuel 15:6. If Jehovah is Himself a party, who is then the judge? To this question Rosenmueller (with whom Delitzsch agrees) well replies: “Vocantur gentes in judicium ad tribunal non Dei sed rationis.”
3. Who raised——with his feet.
Isaiah 41:2-3. With these words the Lord deposeth before the judgment a proof of His divinity. It does not consist merely in the fact that the deeds of the hero announced here shall give their right to the people of God, i. e., deliverance from the unrighteous tyranny of the heathen, while He will destroy the latter; but above all it consists in the fact that the Lord prophesies the appearance of the hero, and thus stakes His honor on the fulfilment of it. For that this hero brings deliverance to the people may be accident, an effect of His fancy, of arbitrariness, of a ruler’s caprice. In hat would therefore lie no strict proof of the divinity of Jehovah. But if Jehovah prophesies the appearance and doing of that hero, and it happens accordingly, then it is proved that the Lord is a living, omniscient, and almighty God.
One may not object that “what is future and unfulfilled would be without present power to prove” (Delitzsch). For the text has nothing to do with an historical, actual disputation with heathen, in which, of course, a prophecy would be no proof. But the supposed disputation is only a rhetorical form that the Prophet uses in order to make the Israelites sensible of their folly and wrong, who, though they knew the living divinity of Jehovah, and that idols were without life, turned to the latter notwithstanding. This meaning appears by a comparison with Isaiah 41:21 sqq. For there the idols are very expressly challenged to prophesy future events, and from their powerlessness to do so is inferred their nothingness. And hence it appears to me that the verses 1–7 stand first as theme.
The redemption, that in them is only intimated, is more particularly described, Isaiah 41:8-20, while Isaiah 41:21-29 amplify in respect to the way in which the appearance of the deliverer will be a proof for Jehovah who had foretold it, and against the idols which were unable to foretell it. Thus I do not believe that the argumentation of the Prophet presupposes the victorious career of Cyrus as begun, either in an ideal or in a real sense. It is wholly a thing of the future, and must be so contemplated. For how otherwise could the Prophet prophesy it?
It is plain that Cyrus is the hero referred to, and not Abraham, or Christ, or even the Apostle Paul, as, until Vitringa, was the opinion of the ancient expositors. The way for naming this name, which is produced at last in Isaiah 44:28, is prepared with much art. The hints of its coming may be compared to the gleams of light that, beginning feebly, and increasing in strength and extent, precede the sunrise. The first hint is that the East is to be the point whence the grand appearance shall issue. Persia in fact lies east of Babylonia. It accords also with the purpose of beginning small that the Prophet does not once name a definite, personal object of δςιψ.
We must take φγχ as that object (see Text and Gram.) Regarding the meaning of φγχ, I would repeat the remark already made, that the Old Testament righteousness is not the antithesis of grace, but of violent oppression, and hence that a φγιχ, “righteous man,” is one who, though he has the power to the contrary, still lets right reign, and thereby both uses gentleness and dispenses happiness, salvation, and blessing [see comm. on Isaiah 1:21; Isaiah 1:26, Tr.]. Israel in exile was oppressed by its enemies, and though in respect to Jehovah this was a deserved punishment, still their enemies had, ex propriis, aggravated it, and thereby done a wrong to Israel (comp. Isaiah 10:5 sqq.). If now the hero from the East acts justly toward Israel, he shows himself to be a mild lord, and helps Israel to its rights against the oppression of the heathen, and thereby to happiness and salvation. Hence I believe that all these meanings are implied in φֶ ?ψֶ ?χ. But they can only become operative through a person, a φγιχ, “righteous man.” To this latent notion in φγχ, of a righteous man, the following suffixes [pronouns] must be referred.
It suits the purpose of the Prophet already noticed, to let the person of the deliverer appear by degrees and unfold itself. One may say that his personality develops itself here, as it were, out of an impersonal germ. This one awakened to do righteousness the Lord calls after Him (comp. Isaiah 42:6, which passage the Masorets perhaps had in mind when they connected φγχ with ιχψΰδε), i. e., he leads him further and fur ther [μψβμε, see Text. and Gramm.]. Is there thus in ιχψΰδεμψΧ a formal definition of δςιψ, so in ιϊε there is a definition as to matter. The words last named say what the hero, by extending his power, will do.
All these clauses stand under the influence of the interrogative ξִ ?ι. Nations are properly not things that one gives away, and kings rule and are not themselves ruled. But here is an exception. Jehovah gives to this hero nations to do as he pleases with them, and subjects kings to him so that they must serve him. His sword made them as dust, etc., describes the degree to which they are given to him which was before said in ιϊο and ιψγ. His sword and bow, once set to work, will do such work that the result will be the likeness of dust and chaff (see Text. and Gram.) On χַ ?ωׁ see on Isaiah 40:24; πִ ?γַּ ?σ comp.
Isaiah 19:7. But not merely a battle in one place shall occur, but also pursuit of the fugitives. He, the conquering hero, shall go on well-preserved (ωׁ ?μεν), and always forwards, never backwards (see Text. and Gram. on ΰψδαψβμιε, etc.). He will not go back in his own foot-prints (il ne reviendra pas sur ses pas). [J. A. A. agrees with Ewald, “the clause describes the swiftness of his motions, as flying rather than walking on foot,” and cites in support Daniel 8:5.—Tr.].
4. Who hath wrought——and came.
Isaiah 41:4-5. The Lord has announced a majestic appearance of world-wide significance. But, though it is something still future, He has let it appear as an image of the past before the eyes of those that were summoned. Hence, as Isaiah 41:2 He asked: “who has awakened?” so He now asks, using the past tense, who has prepared and made this? Of course the same that foreknew and predicted it, and who could do this because He is the One who from the beginning called the generations of men into existence, and hence can say of Himself: I Jehovah the first and I am still with the last (see Text. and Gram.). The Lord summoned the heathen to a controversy (Isaiah 41:1).
He has laid down the proof of His divinity (Isaiah 41:2-4). Now it is the turn of the heathen to produce a similar performance on the part of their idols. Notice that the Prophet opposes the heathen nations to God, and not their idols. This is quite natural. For the idols have no actual existence. Hence it comes that the heathen must defend the cause of their idols; whereas Israel’s God defends the cause of His people.
Therefore, obedient to the summons of Isa 41:1, the heathen nations approach. They see the proof that the Lord has presented in His own favor, and with dismay, for they know at once that they cannot match the performance with any thing similar. And so they approach trembling, as it were, to look at this trial-sample of Jehovah’s on all sides. That they would have said something is not declared. Speechless they keep silence before the majesty of the Lord.
5. They helped——be moved.
Isaiah 41:6-7. It is too incredible that the heathen, seized with fear, and in order to find help against the threatening appearance of the predicted hero, turn in haste to the fabrication of idol images (Delitz.), or that they nailed fast those threatened by Cyrus (Hitzig). No, these verses would show, by the manner in which idols originate, that they cannot possibly triumph in the controversy to which they are challenged (Isaiah 41:1). How can such productions of men’s hands maintain themselves against Him who can speak of Himself as in Isaiah 41:4? I accordingly connect Isaiah 41:6 with what follows, and not with what precedes. For Isaiah 41:5 evidently corresponds to Isaiah 41:1.
For there the nations are required to approach reverently and in silence; for this very reason they are unable to respond to the “they shall speak” (Isaiah 41:1): there the nations are called on to get strength, and Isaiah 41:5 we see them draw near, afraid and trembling; “they drew near” and “came” of Isaiah 41:5 corresponds to “they shall approach,” “we will draw near” (πχψαδιβωׁ ?ε) of Isaiah 41:1. With this the cyle of thought beginning with Isaiah 41:1 is concluded. Thus Isaiah 41:5 looks backwards; Isaiah 41:6 forwards. The latter says in general the same that Isaiah 41:7 a says in reference to particular relations. Both verses have for their chief idea that idol-making is a fatiguing labor, costing not only much money (Isaiah 40:19), but also much sweat, in which one must encourage and aid the other in order to get it done. What a shameful difference then between idols and Jehovah.
The ηָ ?ψָ ?ωׁ, “smith,” prepares the body of the image; the φֹ ?ψֵ ?σ, “founder,” makes ready the covering. The former strengthens the latter by good preparatory work and cheering words. “The smoother with the hammer” seems to me to be identical with the φψσ, for the metal would surely be smoothed by him who moulded it. On the other hand, the δεֹ ?μֶ ?ντַ ?ςַ ?ν, “the smiter on the anvil,” is identical with the ηψωׁ; for he that works at the anvil makes the iron body, makes the nails, and fastens the image with them. “The smoother with the hammer” is the subject of ΰֹ ?ξֵ ?ψ, for he has made the soldering, and by the call “it is good” he cheers “the smith” to continue and complete the work that consists in fastening the image with nails to the place where it is to be set up. “It is good,” comp. Exodus 2:2; Genesis 1:4; Genesis 1:8, etc. ξַ ?ρְ ?ξְ ?ψִ ?ιν, “clavi,” only here in Isaiah. Comp. Jeremiah 10:3-5, which passage is evidently copied after ours and Isaiah 40:19 sq.; Isaiah 44:9-17; Isaiah 46:6 sq. μΰιξεθ, comp. Isaiah 40:20.
Footnotes:shall renew.
Then shall come, they shall speak.
We will come.
Heb. Righteousness.
His sword shall make them as dust, his bow, etc.
Heb. in peace.
He returns not the way on his foot-prints.
he that called.
Heb. Be strong.
the smith.
Or, founder.
Or, the smiting.
Or, Saying of the soder, It is good.
2. THE SECOND CHIEF FIGURE: THE SERVANT OF JEHOVAH ISRAEL CHOSEN IN ABRAHAM AND CALLED IN VICTORY
Isaiah 41:8-138 But thou, Israel, art my servant,
Jacob whom I have chosen,
The seed of Abraham my friend.
9 Thou whom I have taken from the ends of the earth,
And called thee from the chief men thereof,
And said unto thee, Thou art my servant;
I have chosen thee, and not cast thee away
10 Fear thou not; for I am with thee:
Be not dismayed; for I am thy God:
I will strengthen thee; yea, I will help thee;
Yea, I fwill uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousness.
11 Behold, all they that were incensed against thee
Shall be ashamed and confounded
They shall be as nothing;
And they that strive with thee shall perish.
12 Thou shalt seek them, and shalt not find them,
Even them that contended with thee:
They that war against thee
Shall be as nothing, and as a thing of nought.
13 For I the Lord thy God will hold thy right hand,
Saying unto thee, Fear not; I will help thee.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 41:8. ΰֹ ?δֵ ?α—αָּ ?ηַ ?ψ Isaiah 41:9. ΰָ ?φִ ?ιμ. Isaiah 41:10. ΰָ ?ξַ ?υ—ωָׁ ?ςָ ?δ. Isaiah 41:11 λָּ ?μַ ?ν. Isaiah 41:12. ΰֶ ?τֶ ?ν.
Isaiah 41:9. On χφεϊδΰψυ see Isaiah 40:28.
Isaiah 41:10. ϊωׁ ?ϊς, Hithp. from ωָׁ ?ςָ ?δ stands here in the sense of “to look anxiously about.”—λιΰπιΰμδιγ occurs only here; see Isaiah 41:13; Isaiah 51:15.—On ςָ ?ζַ ?ψ see. Isaiah 41:6.
Isaiah 41:11. πηψιν again only Isaiah 45:24.—ΰַ ?πְ ?ωֵׁ ?ιψִ ?ια only here in Isaiah; comp. Judges 12:2; Job 31:35; Jeremiah 15:10.
Isaiah 41:12. ξַ ?φּ ?εּ ?ϊ jurgium, ἅπ. λεγ.; comp. Isaiah 58:4, and πφδ rixari, Isaiah 37:26.—ΰπωׁ ?ιξμִ ?ηΧ only here in Isa. comp. Isaiah 42:13; Jeremiah 50:30; Ezekiel 27:10.
Isaiah 41:13. ξηζιχιξιπγ only here; comp. Isaiah 45:1; Isaiah 51:18.
AND 1. But thou Israel——away.
Isaiah 41:8-9. In the preceding section (Isaiah 41:1-7) the Prophet has introduced the principal figure of the prophetic cycle, chaps. 40–48. With this is immediately connected another: the Servant of Jehovah in a national sense.
But thou Israel is evidently contrasted with “islands and people,” Isaiah 41:1. The Prophet turns to Israel with well-founded and glorious consolation. The Lord calls His people Israel my servant. We encounter here for the first time this significant notion of the ςֶ ?αֶ ?γιδεδ. Yet not the subjective, but the objective side of the notion is made prominent. The nation is not so named because it has chosen the Lord for its God out of the great mass of gods that, according to heathen ideas, are in existence, therefore not because “Jehovah was its national god in contrast with other nations, the servants of Baal, Moloch,” etc. (Hitzig).
On the contrary, they are so named because the Lord has chosen Israel for His possession, His instrument, His servant. For a servant is the property of his lord, and Israel is the “peculiar people” (Exodus 19:5; Deuteronomy 7:6; Deuteronomy 14:2; Psalms 135:4; Malachi 3:17). But Israel is chosen in its ancestor Abraham, whom, already, the Lord calls “my servant” Genesis 26:24, which passage easily comes to mind, since Isaiah 41:10 is evidently a citation from it. Thus Abraham was not only chosen for his person, though what he was personally by God’s grace, fitted him to be for all times a pattern of the right sort of “servant of Jehovah,” even in subjective respects. Hence he is called My friend. For love is the fulfilling of the law, and involves faith (Genesis 15:6; Deuteronomy 6:5).
In 2 Chronicles 22:7 Abraham has the same title; also in James 2:23. In Arabic his regular surname is Chalil-Allah, i.e., “confidant of God.” Abraham was chosen that by his seed all the nations of the earth might be blessed. And after Isaac and Jacob, this seed was to be the “great nation” that the Lord would make of Abraham (Genesis 12:2), and to which He would give the land of his pilgrimage (ibid. Genesis 41:7; Genesis 13:15; Genesis 15:18, etc). Accordingly Israel is the servant of Jehovah primarily as the seed of Abraham. This is purely an objective honor and dignity, belonging to the nation by reason of the election of their ancestor, but of which, of course, it must make itself worthy by worshipping Jehovah alone as its God, and serving Him with its entire being and possessions.
On the parallelism of Israel and Jacob see Isaiah 40:27.
With great emphasis the Prophet repeats in various forms the thought that Israel is Jehovah’s chosen servant. Whom I have taken, [or “grasped”] δηζχϊι (see Isaiah 41:6-7) expresses that the Lord stretched out His hand after Israel to seize it (comp. Isaiah 41:13; Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 45:1; Isaiah 51:18) and bring it to Him; thus that He alone was active in this, while Israel was passive. By the ends of the earth the Prophet, whose viewpoint is Palestine, means the distant lands of the Euphrates. Concerning the situation of Ur Kasdim see Schrader, D. Keilinschr. u. d.
A. T. p. 383. The monuments prove that the present ruin of Mugheir (on the right bank of the Euphrates south-east from Babylon) was Ur. ΰφιμ is probably related both to ΰφιμExodus 24:11, nobilis, princeps—properly the extremest, extremus, thus in some sense also summus, comp. ιַ ?ψְ ?λְּ ?ϊֵ ?ιδΰψυ, and also to ΰֵ ?φֶ ?μlotus, juxta. It occurs only here. Yet twice again, Isaiah 41:9, it is affirmed that in choosing Israel Jehovah alone was active. Once by I have called thee, and then by I have chosen thee.
Finally the thought is confirmed by the negative expression I have not cast thee away. Evidently underlying this last is the thought that the Lord might indeed have rejected Israel, in fact that He was near doing it (comp. Deuteronomy 7:7 sq.), but that He did not do it. Therefore, spite of considerations that existed, He has still on reflection and on purpose chosen Israel.
2. Fear thou not——I will help thee.
Isaiah 41:10-13. Having set forth the election of Israel in Abraham as emphatically the basis of the relation between Himself and His people, the Lord now infers the consequences. These are positive and negative: Israel need not fear, the Lord helps them; their enemies must be destroyed. The words fear not for I am with thee are quoted from Genesis 26:24 with only ςִ ?ξְּ ?κָ for ΰִ ?ϊְּ ?γָ. On “fear not” comp. Isaiah 40:9.
The context shows that ΰξφϊι is used here as in Isaiah 44:14; Psalms 80:18 with the meaning “to make firm, sure, viz., the choice of one object out of several.” The idea is not an invigoration imparted to Israel, but the election made sure (comp. 2 Peter 1:10, βεβαίανποιεῖθαιτὴνἐκλογήν). ϊָּ ?ξַ ?γְ is also used in a similar sense. Comp. Isaiah 42:1 and Matthew 12:18, where ϊξκ is rendered αἱρετίζειν, The expression ιξιοςγχι occurs only here. It can only mean the right hand that does right in the Old Testament sense, on which comp. Isaiah 41:2. The relation of the three verbs of the second clause of Isa 41:10 seems to me to be the following: ΰξυ signifies the sure election, from which follows, on the one hand, the helping, on the other, the not letting go again.
The correlative of this promise is the threat (Isaiah 41:11) of destruction to their enemies. This thought is presented in various forms in what follows (Isaiah 41:11-12). Isaiah 41:11 a it appears as a theme, and Isaiah 41:11 b–12b give it a three-fold amplification: first the opponents are called ΰπִ ?ωιψια (contestants, opponents in general), and it is said “they shall be nothing and shall perish;” then they are called ΰπωׁ ?ιξφεϊ (rixatores, objurgatores) that one shall seek and not find; finally they are called ΰΧξμηξδ (enemies in war, hostes), and it is said of them that, not only they are not to be found, but that they shall absolutely no more exist. In conclusion, Isaiah 41:13, the protecting and helping presence already promised Isaiah 41:10 is repeated to the nation as the ground of its expecting victory. That Isaiah 41:13 has the character of a confirmatory repetition appears from δָ ?ΰֹ ?ξֵ ?ψεβεΧ. For δΰξψ expressly refers to the comforting words “fear not,” “I have helped thee,” as having been used by the Lord (Isaiah 41:10).
Footnotes:omit art.
seized.
their borders.
Look not around.
have made thee (i. e thine election) sure.
omit will.
They shall be as nothing and destroyed thy adversaries.
Heb. the men of thy strife.
Heb. the men of thy contention.
Heb. the men of thy war.
3. THE SERVANT OF GOD, WEAK AND LOWLY, YET IN GOD THE STRONG PEOPLE OF ISRAEL, RICHLY BLESSED WITH AND DIVINE
Isaiah 41:14-2014 Fear not, thou worm Jacob, and ye men of Israel;
I will help thee, saith the Lord,
And thy redeemer, the Holy One of Israel.
15 Behold, I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument
Having teeth:
Thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small,
And shalt make the hills as chaff.
16 Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them away,
And the whirlwind shall scatter them:
And thou shalt rejoice in the Lord,
And shalt glory in the Holy One of Israel.
17 When the poor and needy seek water, and there is none,
And their tongue faileth for thirst,
I the Lord will hear them,
I the God of Israel will not forsake them.
18 I will open rivers in high places,
And fountains in the midst of the valleys:
I will make the wilderness a pool of water,
And the dry land springs of water.
19 I will plant in the wilderness the cedar, the shittah tree,
And the myrtle and the oil tree;
I will set in the desert the fir tree,
And the pine, and the box tree together:
20 That they may see, and know,
And consider, and understand together,
That the hand of the Lord hath done this,
And the Holy One of Israel hath created it.
TEXTUAL AND See the List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 41:14. χγεωׁ ιωׂ ?ψΰμ–βָּ ?ΰַ ?μ–πְ ?ΰֻ ?νιΧ–ξְ ?ϊִ ?ιν–ϊּ ?εֹ ?μַ ?ςַ ?ϊ. Isaiah 41:16 δָ ?μַ ?μ–ξְ ?ςָ ?ψָ ?δ–ζָ ?ψָ ?δ Isaiah 41:18 ξεֹ ?φָ ?ΰ–ΰֲ ?βַ ?ν. Isaiah 41:19. ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?ζαְּ ?ψεֹ ?ωׁ ?–δֲ ?γַ ?ν–ωִׁ ?θָּ ?δ–. Isaiah 41:20. αָּ ?ψָ ?ΰ–ωָׂ ?λַ ?μ.
Isaiah 41:14. It is to be noted that the Lord addresses Israel as a weak woman, Isaiah 41:14-15 a in the second pers. fem.; whereas Isaiah 41:15 b, 16, the one dashing down the enemies is right away addressed in the masculine as a man. [This seems over-refinement. The fern, form of the verb and suffixes are prompted by the principal noun ϊּ ?εֹ ?μַ ?ςַ ?ϊ; in the masculine forms following, the idea of the person addressed is resumed, according to common usage.—Tr.].
Isaiah 41:17. δςπιινεδΰαιεπιν put first shows that they are to be regarded as casus absoluti. It is still uncertain whether πָ ?ωָׁ ? ?ֽ ?ϊָּ ?δ is derived from πָ ?ωַׁ ?ϊ ,πָ ?ωָׁ ?δ or from ωָׁ ?ϊַ ?ϊ. The latter seems to me the least likely, since it means ponere, fundare, stabilire, from which the meaning defecit, exaruit can be got only by straining. We must comp. Isaiah 19:5; Jeremiah 51:30. I had rather, with Olshausen, assume a root πָ ?ωַׁ ?δ=exaruit, defecit, kindred to πָ ?ωָׁ ?δ.
Then πָ ?ωָֽׁ ?ϊָּ ?δ would be third person fern. Kal, in pausal form, with Dagesch affectuosum.——In the second clause of Isa 41:17, ΰֲ ?πִ ?ι is the common subject of the two clauses, with both ιδεδ and ΰμδιιΧ in apposition, and it is to be noted that the latter stands in parallelism for the former, as indeed the God of Israel is actually called Jehovah.
Isaiah 41:20. After ιָ ?ωִׂ ?ιξεּ is to be supplied, not only μֵ ?α (comp. Isaiah 41:22), but ςַ ?μμֵ ?α (Isaiah 42:25; Isaiah 47:7; Isaiah 57:1; Isaiah 57:11; comp. Isaiah 44:19). Thus the proper order of thought is restored: that they see, know, take to heart and gain an insight into. Moreover this form of expression occurs in Isaiah only in the places cited. The omission of μֵ ?α occurs in various senses, Psalms 50:23; Job 4:20; Job 23:6; Job 34:23; Job 37:15; Judges 19:30.
AND 1. The Servant of God is here still the people Israel; but what is properly characteristic of this notion is made prominent, viz.: the suffering and lowliness. But at the same time the Prophet does not omit to say very emphatically that this poor servant of God will be also a mighty and irresistible instrument of judgment in the hand of Jehovah. Thus Israel is addressed “worm Jacob,” “little people” Israel,” and that with the use of a feminine verbal form, whom, however, the Lord will help to rid itself of its enemies (Isaiah 41:14-16), and will bless with abundance of good things (Isaiah 41:17-19), in order that all may know that He alone is God (Isaiah 41:20).
2. Fear not——of Israel.
Isaiah 41:14-16. The expressions “little worm,” “little people” are evidently intended to paint the wretchedness and weakness of Israel. The former recalls Psalms 22:6 “I am a worm, and no man,” and also the description of the suffering servant of God, Isaiah 53:2 sqq. Comp. too, Job 25:6. Yet one cannot but see in this “worm Jacob” the transition of the servant of God to the “form of a servant,” and thus recognize an intimation that the suffering people of God is also a type of the suffering Saviour. The expression ξϊιιωׂ ?ψΰμ also, which recalls ξְ ?ϊֵ ?ιξִ ?ξְ ?τָּ ?ψ, i.e., a few people, that may be counted (Genesis 34:30; Deuteronomy 4:27; Psalms 105:12; 1 Chronicles 16:19, comp. ωָׁ ?εְ ?ΰJob 11:11 : Psalms 26:4), involves the meaning of weakness, inconsiderableness, lowliness. βָּ ?ΰַ ?μ is the antithesis of ξָ ?λַ ?ψ (comp.
Leviticus 25:25; Leviticus 25:48). The word frequently occurs in a juristic sense; but frequently, too, of Jehovah, who as next of kindred, so to speak, redeems His people that has been sold into the hand of their enemies.
Yet what a contrast! The Lord makes this worm Jacob a mighty instrument of judgment against the nations. ηψευ, that occurs Isaiah 10:22 in a figurative sense, and Isaiah 28:27 as designation of the threshing roller itself, signifies here a quality of the latter, viz.: the being sharp. Sharp, new, and double-edged (τιτιεϊ only here in Isaiah, comp. Psalms 149:6) shall the roller be. As such a roller lacerates the bundles of grain, and as the similarly formed harrow crushes the clods, so shall Israel rend and crush mountains and make hills like chaff, etc. This prophecy has not been fulfilled by the fleshly Israel, or at least only in a meager way, the best example being the Maccabees. But by the spiritual Israel it has had glorious fulfilment in spiritual victories.
3. The poor——created it.
Isaiah 41:17-20. From the preceding Isaiah 41:14-16, which are parallel with these, it appears that these verses do not promise to the returning exiles merely the needful refreshment through the desert, thus connecting say with Isaiah 40:10-11. Isaiah 41:14-16 do not describe something that the exiles are to effect before they can betake themselves home; and just as little do Isaiah 41:17 sqq., speak of something relating only to the return. Isaiah 41:14-20 describe the condition of salvation in general, which Israel shall experience after the exile. Isaiah 41:17 sqq., can only refer to the return from exile so far as that belongs to that condition. Taking the wretched that seek water, etc., as parallel with “worm Jacob,” etc., we understand Isaiah 41:17-20 to describe all the conditions that caused the existence of Israel before its redemption to appear like a life in the desert. As in Isaiah 41:14 sq. the “worm” is suddenly transformed into a mighty threshing sled, so here dry places are suddenly transformed into richly watered places, covered with glorious vegetation.
Isaiah 41:18-19 say how the Lord will hear the prayers of the languishing. He will open the earth (comp. Psalms 105:41) (τָּ ?ϊַ ?η, by metonomy, the cause instead of the effect, as often, comp. Isaiah 14:17; Jeremiah 40:4) to let streams burst forth even on bald hills, and in valleys, etc. ξεֹ ?φָ ?ΰ “place of issue” Isaiah 58:11, comp. Psalms 107:35 and Isaiah 35:1; Isaiah 35:7.
In describing the vegetation seven trees in all are named, which perhaps is not accidental. ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?ζ, “cedar” is generic: ωִׁ ?θָּ ?δ (from ωָׁ ?πָ ?θ, “to be pointed, to prick “Arabic sant, Egyptian schonte, comp. Herz. R.-Encycl. XV p. 95, and Jerome on our passage) “the acacia;” only here in Isa. δֲ ?γַ ?ν “the myrtle,” that grows as a tree in Anterior-Asia, and in Greece (see Victor Hehn, Kulturplanzen u. Hausthiere, p. 143 sqq.: Herz. R.-Encycl.
X. 142). By ςֵ ?υωֶׁ ?ξֶ ?ο, in contrast with ζֵ ?ιϊωׁ ?ξο (Deuteronomy 8:8), is commonly understood the wild olive, oleaster, ἀγριέλαιος (Romans 11:17; Romans 11:24). The LXX. translates κυπάρισσον; Celsus supposes resinous trees in general. This last would be a good way of getting over the difficulty, seeing the expression is strange for the wild olive. For it gives no oil, being partly without fruit (see Hehn, l. c. p. 45) partly yields fruit that is applicable for making salve and not oil (Herz. B.-Encycl.
X p. 547). But as in Nehemiah 8:15ςֲ ?μֵ ?ιζַ ?ιִ ?ϊ and ςֲ ?μֵ ?ιςֵ ?υωֶׁ ?ξֶ ?ο are mentioned together as needful for constructing the leafy booths, one must suppose the wild olive is meant. The expression occurs only 1 Kings 6:23; 1 Kings 6:31-33, where the ςφιωׁ ?ξο are mentioned as material for the cherub-figures, and the doors and posts of the Holiest. The following words “the fir,” etc., occur verbatim Isaiah 60:13. αְּ ?ψεֹ ?ωׁ “the cypress” (according to MoversPhoen. I. p. 575 sqq. Berot, Berut is the name of the divinity of nature that was supposed to dwell in trees).
Comp. Hehn, l. c. p.192 sqq. The words ϊγδψ and ϊΰωׁ ?εψ remain to the present unexplained. They occur again only 60. 13 which is to be regarded as a repetition of the present passage, γָּ ?δַ ?ψ is a Hebrew word. We read ξεּ ?νγֹ ?δֵ ?ψ “the galloping horse,” Nahum 3:2, and Judges 5:22 paints ξִ ?γַּֽ ?δְַ ?ψεֹ ?ϊγַּ ? ?ֽ ?δְַ ?ψεֹ ?ϊΰַ ?αִּ ?ιψָ ?ιε almost like quadrupedante putrem sonitu quatit ungula campum. But dahr in Arabic means “tempus, seculum.” It is the Hebrew γּ ?εֹ ?ψ (comp. ξεּ ?μ and ξεּ ?ψ ,ξָֹ ?δַ ?μ and πεּ ?ψ ,ξָ ?δַ ?ψ and πָ ?δַ ?ψ, etc.).
However one may mediate the notions “currere, cursus” and “tempus, seculum,” whether by the notion of haste or that of circuit, still the meaning of lasting, continuance, longevity seems also to belong to the sphere of the root γָּ ?δַ ?ψ. And perhaps this is still more the case in the dialects than in Hebrew itself; comp. the Chaldee ϊְּ ?γִּ ?ιψָ ?ΰcircuitus, perpetuitas=ϊָּ ?ξִ ?ιγ, with which it would agree that ϊγδψ, which does not elsewhere occur in Hebrew, is probably a cognate foreign word, i.e., belonging to a kindred dialect. The plane-tree appears not to be indigenous in Palestine, for it is no where mentioned among trees that grow there. If ςψξεο is really the plane-tree, it signifies a tree not growing in Palestine as appears from the context of the two places of its occurrence (Genesis 30:37; Ezekiel 31:8). ϊγδψ might thus, in the Prophet’s day, be a name for the plane-tree borrowed from some kindred dialect, and that was given to it because of its longevity. Descriptions of giant specimens of the plane-tree such as that of Hehn, l. c. p.198 sqq., prove that it attains a great age, and prodigious size. Hehn says: “The praise of the plane-tree fills all antiquity.” Again: “Greece received the plane-tree and the fashion of esteeming it from Asia, where the plane-tree like the cypress from ancient times was regarded with religious veneration by the tree-loving Iranians and the Iranian races of Asia-Minor.” According to this, one might almost think it strange if the plane-tree were omitted from mention with the cypress in an enumeration of the glorious trees that were to adorn the desert road of Israel returning from the Iranian territory (for that we may include also the idea of the return was mentioned above).
Hence I am inclined, until better instructed, to regard the ϊγδψ, with Saadia, Gesenius, Delitzsch and others, as the planetree. ϊְּ ?ΰַ ?ωּׁ ?εּ ?ψ, from ΰָ ?ωַׁ ?ψ “rectus, erectus fuit, is held by the ancients to be either “the box-tree “or “the sherbin cedar.” Hehn, against the meaning box-tree, appeals to Theophrast who ranks the πύξος among the φιλόψυχρα, i.e., among the vegetation that cannot endure a warm climate. A designation like “recta, erecta” suits the cedar admirably, and as the name sherbin undoubtedly stands for the cypressus oxycedrus (see Gesen. Comm.; Niebuhr, Description of Arabia, p. 149; Delitzschin loc.), we may for the present be content with the meaning “Sherbin.”
All these glorious acts will the Lord accomplish for the purpose of bringing His people to the full, deep and abiding knowledge that He has effected such things, and that thus He alone is to be revered as God. The Lord had often before wonderfully delivered His people, and they had often returned to Him then as their God. But this knowledge had never been right comprehensive and thorough. They had always in a little while turned again to idols. When the Lord terminates the great Babylonian captivity, then the nation will renounce idols forever and serve the Lord alone. This also came to pass. ιַ ?ηְ ?γָּ ?ε (comp.
Isaiah 40:5) relates to the subject: all shall know it. But if the Prophet means by these “all” primarily the redeemed, those poor and wretched (Isaiah 41:17) that needed these wonders of God, still in this emphatic ιηγε there seems to be also a reference to all in the widest sense to whom this knowledge would be proper. αψΰη comp. Isaiah 45:8.
Footnotes:Or, few men.
omit will.
supply is.
Heb. mouths.
scatter.
omit When.
seeking.
bare hills.
acacia.
wild olive.
cypress.
plane-tree.
sherbin-cedar.
4. THE SECOND OF INTO A TEST OF
Isaiah 41:21-2921 Produce your cause, saith the Lord;
Bring forth your strong reasons, saith the King of Jacob.
22 Let them bring them forth, and show us what shall happen:
Let them show the former things, what they be,
That we may Consider them, and know the latter end of them;
Or declare us things for to come.
23 Show the things that are to come hereafter,
That we may know that ye are gods:
Yea, do good, or do evil,
That we may be dismayed, and behold it together.
24 Behold, ye are of nothing,
And your work of nought:
An abomination is he that chooseth you.
25 I have raised up one from the north, and he shall come:
Prom the rising of the sun shall he call upon my name:
And he shall come upon princes as upon mortar,
And as the potter treadeth clay.
26 Who hath declared from the beginning, that we may know?
And beforetime, that we may say, He is righteous?
Yea, there is none that showeth, yea, there is none hthat declareth,
Yea, there is none that hheareth your words.
27 The first shall say to Zion, Behold, behold them:
And I will give to Jerusalem one that bringeth good tidings.
28 For I beheld, and there was no man;
Even among them, and there was no counsellor,
That, when I asked of them, could answer a word.
29 Behold they are all vanity;
Their works are nothing:
Their molten images are wind and confusion.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurring of the words: Isaiah 41:21. ψִ ?ια–χָ ?ψְ ?αεּ. Isaiah 41:22. δαΰεϊ—ΰηψιϊ. ver.23. ΰϊιεϊΰָ ?ηεֹ ?ψ––. Isaiah 41:25. θִ ?ιθ––ψָ ?ξַ ?ν––ιεֹ ?φֵ ?ψ––ηֹ ?ξֶ ?ψ. Ver 26. ξֵ ?ψֹ ?ΰωׁ Isaiah 41:28. ιεֹ ?ςֵ ?υ Isaiah 41:29. ϊֹ ?δεּ ?––ψεּ ?ηַ ?––ΰֶ ?τֶ ?ν––ΰָ ?εֶ ?οπֶ ?ξֶ ?κְ ?––Isaiah 41:21. ςַ ?φֻּ ?ξָ ?δ is ἅπ. λεγ. The root meaning is robora, comp. ςָ ?φεּ ?ν “strong,” ςֲ ?φεּ ?ξִ ?ιν “strength, might,” Psalms 10:10, ϊַּֽ ?ςֲ ?φεּ ?ξν “fires,” Ps. 68:36.
Isaiah 41:23. ΰַ ?σ with εְ in the second clause appears not merely to have the meaning sive—sive, but there lies in ΰσ something intensive in relation to what precedes, that we may best express by “yea.”—That εְ acquires the meaning “or,” appears from alternative questions “whether—or,” “num—an” being regularly expressed in Hebrew by ΰִ ?ν–εְ ?ΰִ ?ν, and also that, exceptionally, simply εְ connects the two clauses (Jeremiah 44:28; Ewald § 352 b).—The Kal πִ ?ψְ ?ΰֶ ?δ (so K’thibh is to be read, whereas K’ri is to be pronounced εְ ?πֵ ?ψֶ ?ΰ) occasions surprise. Perhaps we should read πֵ ?ψָ ?ΰ (first pers. plur. imperf. Niph., comp. ιֵ ?ψָ ?ΰ Exodus 34:3; εַ ?ιֵ ?ψָ ?ΰ Genesis 12:7; Genesis 17:1, etc.). As this first pers. plur. imp. Niph. happens not to occur again in the Old Testament, perhaps the Masorets preferred to point the consonants like the first pers. plur. imperf. Kal., which often occurs in the full form, but which also fails to occur in the apocopated form.
Isaiah 41:24. I translate ξֵ ?ΰֶֽ ?τַ ?ς ,ξֵ ?ΰַ ?ιִ ?ο here “out of the nothing,” whereas Isaiah 40:17 I maintained the comparative meaning of ξִ ?ο 1 think that we are justified in this by the difference of the verbs used in the two places. There πֶ ?ηְ ?ωַׁ ?α was predicate, here it is the notion of being. There the rhetorical, exaggerated “more than nothing” was more suitable; here it suits better to take ξο as indicative of origin.—There is no need of treating ΰτς as a copyist’s error for ξֵ ?ΰֶ ?τֶ ?ν as many recent commentators do. The serpent name ΰֶ ?τְ ?ςֶ ?δ (Isaiah 30:6; Isaiah 59:5) i.e., “ sibilans, the whistler,” is proof enough that there is a verb τςδ, kindred in sense to δֶ ?αֶ ?μ, “breath, wind” (see on ΰτςδ Isaiah 42:14). From this may be derived ΰֶ ?τְ ?ςַ ?ι, from which ΰֶ ?τַ ?ς, like ΰֶ ?ξֶ ?ωׁ from ΰַ ?ξְ ?ωַׁ ?ιΰֶ ?ωֶׁ ?κְ, from ΰַ ?ωְׁ ?λַּ ?ι.
Isaiah 41:25. εַ ?ιַּ ?ΰϊ contracted from εַ ?ιַּ ?ΰַ ?ϊ, occurs only here, whereas the form εַ ?ιִּ ?ϊֵ ?ΰ (from ιֶֽ ?ΰֱ ?ϊֶ ?δ Proverbs 1:27; Job 37:22) occurs Deuteronomy 33:21.—χψΰαωׁ ?ν is undoubtedly used in the sense of calling on God in worship. In itself the expression means “to call with the name,” not in the name; for αְּ is used here as instrumental. This appears from the fact that the expression elsewhere means a) “to call, name (one) with their name:” Exodus 35:30; Numbers 32:42; Isaiah 45:4 (I called to thee by means of thy name), or, with omission of the personal object, Isaiah 43:1; Isaiah 45:3, etc.—b) “to shout, proclamare, proclamationem facere, κηρύσσειν, to give an announcing, instructing call by means of the name.” Thus, as I think, in those obscure passages, Exodus 33:19; Exodus 34:5, with which also Isaiah 45:5 connects. Here God sends forth a call in Moses’ ears, which is done by naming the Jehovah-name and giving its meaning, ibid Isaiah 41:6.––––I do not think that ρְ ?βָ ?αִ ?ιν is a specific Persian word. The word schihne, to which appeal is made, is modern Persian. The word is used Jeremiah 51:23; Jeremiah 51:28; Jeremiah 51:57; Ezekiel 23:6; Ezekiel 23:12; Ezekiel 23:23, and occurs in these passages as designation for Babylonian, Assyrian and Persian dignitaries.
Thus the word appears to have been, I may say, international. Ezra uses it once Ezra 9:2; Nehemiah oftener: Nehemiah 2:16; Nehemiah 4:8; Nehemiah 5:7, etc. Later it even passed over into the vocabulary of recent Hebrew. Since Ezekiel speaks of Assyrian ρβπιν, we may assume that there were such, and as Babylon and Persia obtained dominion after Assyria, we may conjecture that the name came to them from Assyria. Then it cannot seem strange that Isaiah uses the word. ξָ ?πָ ?ο is, however, really an Assyrian word. “The root sakan (ωָׁ ?αַ ?ο), connected with αεּ ?ο, is in Assyrian the usual word for ‘to place, appoint,.” Sakan, accordingly, denotes properly the one appointed, commissioned, then the. representative, vicegerent. Thus Schrader l. c. p.270.
Moreover, the word corresponds to the ξφτεο and ξξζψη–ωׁ ?ξωׁ. For one sees also from ξβπιν, that the raised-up ruler will be one who issues from the region of the Iranian tongue.
Isaiah 41:26. ξִ ?μְּ ?τָ ?πִ ?ιν only here.
Isaiah 41:28. ξֵ ?ΰֵ ?μֶּ ?δ is constr. Pr�gnans: for the preposition ξִ ?ο depends on a verb that is only ideally present. We must derive the notion “seeking out” from εְ ?ΰֵ ?ψֶ ?ΰ.
AND 1. We showed above that with our Prophet the promise of deliverance out of exile, and the turning of this promise to account as proof of divinity, go hand in hand. Having now described in Isaiah 41:1-20 the redeemer (Isaiah 41:2-3) and the redeemed (Isaiah 41:8-16) and the destined salvation (Isaiah 41:17-20), the Prophet goes on here to turn them to account in the way referred to. He had made a beginning of this in Isaiah 41:4-7 after the first mention of the saviour from the East, but did not carry out the thought there. It appears as if he would there content himself with a passing reference in contrast with the fright of the heathen at the alarming demands made on their faith in idols. But now, having presented all that related to the deliverance from exile, he proceeds in earnest.
He pays no more regard to that reluctance proceeding from a bad conscience. He sets forth with all seriousness that the Lord regards His prediction of the deliverance as a proof of His divinity, and the inability of idols to predict anything, or in fact to do anything, as a proof of their nothingness. The more exact development consists in this, that here Jehovah challenges the idols themselves directly to a contest, and that, more plainly than in Isaiah 41:2 sq., He proffers His prediction as a proof of His divinity. Although the idols do not at all relish the contest, still they must come on and take up the gauntlet (Isaiah 41:21-23). On their failure to tell anything they are pronounced to be nothing (Isaiah 41:24). Then Jehovah repeats the prediction of a deliverer from the East (Isaiah 41:25), and again shows that not the idols have foretold this (Isaiah 41:26), but that He, Jehovah, would give this deliverer to His people for a saviour, and at the same time as a pledge of the fulfilment of further promises that reach into a still more remote future (Isaiah 41:27).
Finally the Prophet himself resumes the discourse, in order to establish the nothingness of his idolatrous quasi colleagues. For if the idols are nothing, so, too, must their interpreters show that they are know-nothings.
2. Produce your cause——chooseth you.
Isaiah 41:21-24. The Lord challenges the idols to come on and bring to a practical decision this cause, long pending in thesi, and produce the proofs that they have for their cause. One thinks involuntarily of Elijah’s challenge to the priests of Baal, 1 Kings 18:21 sqq. Jehovah is often called King of the chosen people (comp. on Isaiah 43:15); but the expression King of Jacob occurs only here (comp ΰֲ ?αִ ?ιψιςχλGenesis 49:24; Isaiah 49:26; Isaiah 60:16; Psalms 132:2; Psalms 132:5, and ξωֵׁ ?μαιςχαPsalms 59:14). In Isaiah 41:22 the Lord addresses Israel, claiming them for His side, and identifying His and their cause. ιַ ?βִּ ?ιωׁ ?εּ connects as repetition with δβιωε Isaiah 41:21. What they shall produce is their ςφξεϊ “bulwarks.” In what this producing proof shall consist is further explained by the words ϊχψιπδΞειβιγε (see Isaiah 45:21).
By δψְ ?ωׁ ?πεϊ commentators understand either prius praedicta (Gesenius: “say what ye have formerly prophesied”), or the immediate future in contrast with the more remote, which they say is expressed by δαΰεϊ and ΰϊιεϊμΰηεψ. But in my opinion the former conflicts with the article, and the latter with usus loq. which forbids the distinction between ψΰωׁ ?πεϊ and αΰεϊ as near and remote future. I think that ψΰωׁ ?πϊ in contrast with δαΰεϊ can mean nothing but the past contrasted with the future. The immediate and proper meaning of the word is undoubtedly “first, beginning, original things.” Thus Genesis 41:20δַ ?τָּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊδψΧ are “the cows that first appeared.” Thus everywhere ψΰωׁ ?βεϊ are the first or beginning things or facts; whether prophecies or other things must be determined in each case by the context. Comp. Isaiah 42:9; Isaiah 43:9; Isaiah 43:18; Isaiah 46:9; Isaiah 48:3.
Here the Lord demands of the idols, that they shall either give correct information of the past, thus, as it were, of the roots or foundations of the course of the world, so that one may thereby infer what the future will be, or they shall foretell the future directly. The Prophet, as appears to me, assumes here that we may foretell the future directly and indirectly, as e.g., it is the same whether I say: the fruit of this tree will be apples; or the roots are those of an apple tree. For if the latter be true, then the fruit must be apples. The correct knowledge of the future depends on a correct knowledge of the past. Both have riddles revealed only to the omniscience of God, and hence both are tests of divinity. Such, I think, is the Lord’s meaning when He calls on the idols to produce the fundamental things of the past, and that according to their inmost being (ξָ ?δδֵ ?αָּ ?δ).
If they do this correctly, then it will be possible for attentive reflection (πָ ?ωִׂ ?ιξָ ?δμαֵּ ?πεּ only here in Isaiah; comp. Exodus 9:21; Job 1:8; Job 2:3; Ezekiel 44:5) to know correctly the issue, thus the conclusion that falls in the future. Comp. especially Isaiah 46:10 sq., where the Lord names as a prerogative of His divinity the power to foretell from the beginning he final issue, from ancient time what has not yet come to pass. By ΰεֹ, “or else,” the alternatives offered to the idols to foretell the future directly, if they will.
Isaiah 41:23, the Prophet proceeds, summing up the idea of ψΰωׁ ?πεϊ and αΰεϊ, both which relate to he future; Shew the things that are to be hereafter, i.e., whose realization is fixed for a more remote period. The concluding clause and we will know, etc., states ironically what must result if the idols meet the demand: they will then be recognized as gods. But the Lord proceeds, moderating His demand to the utmost, in order to strike his opponents only the harder: yea, do good or do evil (a proverbial expression, comp. Jeremiah 10:5; Zephaniah 1:12). Let them anyway do something. It is not meant; let them prophesy good or bad.
The idea of their prophesying at all is dismissed with πψςδ—“that we may know,” etc. The clause επωׁ ?ϊςδεΧ (“to look eye in eye in conflict,” like δϊψΰδ2 Kings 14:8; 2 Kings 14:11) presents the conclusion from what precedes. If the idols accept the challenge, then there may be a contest. If not, then eo ipso they are defeated. The idols neither accept nor decline; hence the Lord concludes with the contemptuous words of Isa 41:24. Are the idols nothings, then of course, those that choose them (comp. on Isaiah 41:8) are an abomination to the Lord.
The expression ϊּ ?εςֵ ?αָ ?δ, especially combined with ιδεδ, is very frequent in Deut. (Deuteronomy 12:31; Deuteronomy 17:1; Deuteronomy 18:12; Deuteronomy 22:5, etc.) especially in reference to idolatry.
3. I have raised up——confusion.
Isaiah 41:25-29. Having proved the inability of idols to prophesy, the Lord produces a prophecy, that is a pledge of His divinity. Thus He risks all on this prophecy. His honor perishes if it is not fulfilled. As He does not fear the latter, but utters it with absolute confidence, He gives for the present, not indeed a judicial proof of His divinity, but still He raises a legal presumption in favor of it (pr�sumtio juris, which, as is known, is something very different from a presumption (conjecture) in the common sense). And that even is something great, for it suffices for those that are honestly willing to know the truth.
In Isaiah’s time still the people wavered between Jehovah and idols. Isaiah’s endeavor was to bring them to a decision for the Lord. These prophecies (40–66), meant for future consolation, were intended to affect also the present, i.e., to move the nation to believe in the Lord. If, then, Isaiah in Hezekiah’s time stood up so confidently for Jehovah, as he does here, every one at all susceptible of the truth must have said to himself: the Prophet would not dare so to speak were he not conscious of being warranted to do so. For he risks the utter ruin of his and his God’s cause, if this prophecy turn out to be an imposture. The prophecy, Isaiah 41:25, is somewhat oracular in form.
In contents it has that obscurity peculiar to all images of the future, which rise so distant from the beholder that one is unable to detect their connection with the present, and thus the successive, organic genesis of their forms. It is further worthy of notice that the prophecy, Isaiah 41:25, connects with Isaiah 41:2-3. I have raised up, Isaiah 41:25, is like an answer to “who raised up,” Isaiah 41:2; from the north and from the rising define more particularly the simple “from the rising,” Isaiah 41:2; he shall call on my name corresponds to “called him to his foot,” Isaiah 41:2; and the following words that begin with ιαεΰ, as Isaiah 41:3 closes, describe the irresistibleness of him that is called essentially in the same way as Isaiah 41:2 b, 3, with only this difference, that Isaiah 41:2 speaks of nations and kings in general, whereas Isaiah 41:25 the word ρβπιν (“satraps”) points even more plainly to the theatre where the one called performs. That δςιψεϊι, Isaiah 41:25, is without an object, corresponds to the terseness proper to the oracular style. The object is easily supplied, partly from Isaiah 41:2, partly from the following, ειΰϊεβεΧ. That the one promised is called from the North, but comes from the East, is not to be pressed.
The Prophet would only intimate that his point of departure is not merely the East, as might appear from Isaiah 41:2, but also from the North. We know how this occurred in the case of Cyrus. He arose as ruler of the (by him) united kingdoms of Media and Persia, the former of which lay north, the latter east of Babylon. ιχψΰαωׁ ?ξι, He shall call on my name (see Text. and Gram.) mentions another characteristic of the one called. That Cyrus actually did this appears from 2 Chronicles 36:23; Ezra 1:2 sqq. He must have received vivid impressions of the reality of the God of Israel. Comp. on this Pressel in Herz., R.-Enc.
III, p. 232. We will not inquire whether Cyrus, in calling Jehovah “the God of heaven,” identified Him with Ahuramazda or not (comp. Zoeckler on 2 Chronicles 36:23). But it is historically attested in the most credible manner, and is in itself perfectly comprehensible, that God, who in general let the heathen go their own way (Acts 14:16), should in an exceptional way give them extraordinary revelations of His being. In the period preceding the Christian era He did this in two significant epochs through Israel, in consequence of its missionary vocation, viz., in the two exiles, the Egyptian and the Babylonian. In both instances the revelation came to the dominant world-power at the moment of its highest prosperity.
In regard to Egypt comp., e.g., Lepsius (Chronol. d. Egypter, I., p. 359), who calls the period of Moses and of the departure of the Israelites “the most illustrious time of all Egyptian history.” In regard to Babylon the same thing appears from the fact that Nebuchadnezzar is designated as the golden head (Daniel 2:38). The Lord would not let Himself be without witness to those who knew no limits to their power, for their own sakes partly, partly for His own name’s sake, partly for the sake of mankind in general, partly for the sake of Israel. The Lord would show His power to Pharaoh, that His name might be declared throughout all the earth, and to accomplish His judgments on all the gods of Egypt (Exodus 9:16; comp. Isaiah 8:10; Isaiah 8:19; Isaiah 14:4; Isaiah 14:17-18; Isaiah 14:25). And that this purpose was achieved appears from the confessions of Pharaoh himself, of his servants, and of his army (Exodus 9:20; Exodus 9:27; Exodus 10:7; Exodus 10:16; Exodus 14:25).
As regards the Babylonian Exile, the entire first half of the book of Daniel is meant to show how Jehovah so marvellously glorified Himself on those nations and their kings, that they cannot escape acknowledging Him as the true God (comp. my work: Jeremiah and Babylon, p. 2 sqq.), at least for the moment (for we know nothing of any outward, observable abiding effect—at most the adoration of the Magi, Matthew 2, might be appealed to here. What (according to Daniel 2:47; Daniel 3:28 sq.; Daniel 4:34; Daniel 5:17 sqq.; Daniel 6:25 sqq.), Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar and Darius the Mede knew, was any way preliminary to the knowledge on the basis of which Cyrus issued his edict, Ezra 1:2 sqq. Certainly we cannot impute to Cyrus less knowledge than that ascribed to his predecessors in the passages cited. If we were right in saying that “he shall call on my name” corresponds to “has called him to his foot,” Isaiah 41:2, then this is to be defined, that according to Isaiah 41:2 the Lord called Cyrus, and according to Isaiah 41:25 Cyrus called on the Lord. It is further said of Cyrus that he will come on satraps as on mortar, etc. αֹּ ?εΰ, in the sense of hostile coming like Isaiah 28:15; Psalms 35:8; Job 15:21; Job 20:22; Proverbs 28:22. In all these passages αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ stands with the accusative (localis).
The Prophet, Isaiah 41:26, assumes the standpoint of the fulfilment. He represents to himself that then the inquiry will naturally arise: who hath declared this from the beginning, that we may know, i.e., that we might know beforehand the coming of these things (Isaiah 41:22-23)? And who announced it from early time, so that now we might say: right? φγιχ is what corresponds to a norm: not only a moral, or some special juridical norm, but also the norm of truth. Hence ΰֱ ?ξֶ ?ϊ, Isaiah 43:9, stands in a precisely similar connection. Yet the last-named meaning is supported by no other example. Hence it seems to me likely that the Prophet joins with it the sense of moral Rightness.
A god whose prophecy fails is morally condemned. But if it comes to pass, he is morally justified; he is no liar, but truly what he gives himself out to be (comp. Isaiah 14:21). But again there has never been any announcement and bringing to the ears on the part of the idols, nor hearing on the part of men (Isaiah 41:22-23). ΰσ (comp. Isaiah 40:24), recurring thrice, paints with a certain breadth the absence on every hand of what was requisite.
Isaiah 41:27, the Prophet defines more particularly the salvation that the one called of God shall bring to the people of God. It was said, Isaiah 41:25, in general, that he would call on the name of the Lord, and destroy the hostile powers. Now he is defined to be the first-fruit of the salvation destined for Zion. The LXX. translate ἀρχὴνΣιὼνδώσω. Peschito: primordia Sionis haec sunt. As far as I can see, all expositors construe ψִ ?ΰωׁ ?εִ ?ο as nominative and relating to Jehovah; and either supply ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, or connect ψְ ?ωׁ ?εο with ΰֶ ?ϊֵּ ?ο.
The words δπδδαν are by some put in the mouth of Jehovah, by others in Zion’s mouth, by others in that of the ξְ ?αַ ?ωֵׂ ?ψ, and the suffixes (pronouns) are referred now to the exiles, now to the deliverer, now to facts of redemption, now to the idols. I refer ψΰωׁ ?εο to Cyrus. In an eminent sense he was the beginner of the redemption. Israel’s decline lasted till the close of the Exile. With difficulty (Daniel 9:25), slowly, and with great alternations, it mounts up; but still it mounts up. The believers that looked for the restitution of Israel in all its promised glory directly after the seventy years, under the anointed son of David, struggle with many assaults of doubt, as they observe only very meagre beginnings of a redemption (comp.
Daniel 10:1-3, and Auberlen, D. Proph. Daniel, p. 132 sq.) But the laws of prophetic perspective were hid from them, which sees the end already in the beginning, though long periods of vicissitude separate one from the other. Cyrus is called ξְ ?ωִׁ ?ιηַ ιδεδ, Isaiah 45:1. He was not the proper and true Messiah, but he was the first after the great period of judgment. He was the first-fruit—messiah, the beginner of the restoration of Israel.
His edict, Ezra 1:2 sqq., was the first step toward realizing for Israel that ωׁ ?εּ ?α (“return”), that Isaiah, Jeremiah, and all their successors represent as the sum total of bodily and spiritual redemption for Israel. I construe δִ ?πֵּ ?δδִ ?πָּ ?ν as an exclamation of the Prophet, by which he points to the consequences of that first-fruit—redemption. For the notion “first” includes that of “following” or “consequences.” In spirit the Prophet sees these before him, and points to them with a brief δπδδπν. He calls Cyrus a ξְ ?αַ ?ωֵּׂ ?ψ: what more joyful news could the Lord propose for His people than that they may return home to rebuild Jerusalem? αִּ ?ωַּׂ ?ψ, comp. on Isaiah 40:9.
As Isaiah 41:26 is related to Isaiah 41:25, so Isaiah 41:28-29 are related to Isaiah 41:27. Each of these prophetic lamps shines in strong contrast with the picture of the nothingness of idols that acts as a foil. Only it seems to me that so far there is a difference, in that Isaiah 41:26 the Prophet has in mind the idols themselves, whereas in Isaiah 41:28-29 he has in mind their worshippers, especially their priests (see below). Isaiah 41:28 has three gradations. The first clause is obscure; it speaks only of the looking around and the non-existence of something, but one knows not what one has looked about for. The second clause makes known those among whom the Prophet has looked, and what he was looking for.
He seeks a ιεֹ ?ςֵ ?υ “counsellor, one, however, that can prophetically resolve the riddles of the future. This is made plain in the third clause: but there was no counsellor of whom I could inquire and who could give me answer. The reason of this is given Isaiah 41:29 : the gods that should inspire the answer in their worshippers are no gods but the manufacture of those who worship them. Thus Isaiah 41:29 speaks of those that make the idols, and not of the idols themselves. And because “they all” (αֻּ ?μָּ ?ν) are identical with the ΰֵ ?μֶּ ?δ (“them) of Isaiah 41:28, among whom no counsellor is found, therefore Isaiah 41:28 speaks not of the idols, but of their servants, and especially of those who, on account of their office, should be qualified to give counsel and render a decision, thus the priests and prophets. And because it is not to be supposed that the Lord looks for a counsellor and giver of decrees, therefore the subject of εְ ?ΰֵ ?ψָ ?ΰ (“I looked about”) Isaiah 41:28, is not Jehovah, but the Prophet.
Thus the chapter concludes with an apostrophe of the true Prophet to the false ones, and ΰֵ ?μֶ ?δ is said δεικτικῶς. With this reference to the manufacture of idols, the Prophet returns to the thought with which he also closed the first strophe (Isaiah 41:6-7).
AND ETHICAL1. The second part of Isaiah lays unusual stress on the inability of idols to prophesy. As this, on the one hand, is a proof of the nothingness of idols, so on the other, Jehovah’s ability to foretell the future is made a proof of His divinity. Hence, when the Lord challenges the idols to a contest in prophesying, and then on His part stands forth with an imposing prophetic performance, that has for its subject the deliverance of Israel from the Exile, one sees that two objects are combined, viz.: He comforts His people, and He proves His divinity. Thus we see that the Prophet’s view-point is partly at the end of the Exile and partly before the Exile. The former because he sees the deliverer quite clearly and distinctly before him; the latter because it is all important for him to display his Lord as knowing the remote future, and thus as true God.
Thus he would win Israel by representing on the one hand the omniscence of their God, and on the other His faithful love and power. And this object was attained. Israel would assuredly not have buried their gross idolatry in the Exile, had they not verified both the threatenings and the promises of Jehovah’s Prophet in the most signal manner. But this grand effect could only be produced by the promises being recognized on all sides as genuine, old prophecies. Prophecies that gave themselves out for old, but hitherto hidden must have raised doubts, and contradicted themselves. For it is expressly said Isaiah 45:19; Isaiah 48:16 that these things were not spoken in secret.
2. [On Isaiah 41:1. “The same reasons will apply to all approaches which are made to God. When we are about to come before Him in prayer or praise; to confess our sins and to plead for pardon; when we engage in argument respecting His being, plans, or perfections; or when we draw near to Him in the closet, the family, or the sanctuary, the mind should be filled with awe and reverence. It is well, it is proper, to pause and think of what our emotions should be, and of what we should say before God. Comp. Genesis 28:16-17.”—Barnes.
3. On Isaiah 41:6-7. “Do sinners thus animate and quicken one another in the ways of sin? And shall not the servants of the living God both stir up one another to, and strengthen one another in, His service?”—M. Henry.]
4. On Isaiah 41:8 sqq. The Lord here founds His comforting promise on the election in Abraham. Compare with this the saying of John Baptist: “Begin not to say within yourselves, we have Abraham to our father; for I say unto you that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham,” etc., Luke 3:8-9. This sounds contradictory. But one must distinguish between the individual and the whole.
Not every individual generation, in general no individual part, great or small, of the totality of Israel can insist on the election of Abraham, and regard itself as exempt and unimpeachable on that account. For history teaches that great judgments have come on individuals and on the nation almost to their annihilation. But, of course, a remnant will always remain, if only just large enough to afford seed for a new generation. The Lord says this expressly in the great inaugural vision, Isaiah 6:11-13, and such, too, is the meaning of that significant Shear-Jashub (Isaiah 10:20 sqq.). The Apostle Paul has this meaning when he says: “The gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” Romans 11:29.
5. On Isaiah 41:9-10. “A rich treasure of manifold comfort: 1) that God strengthens us; 2) that God calls us; 3) that He accepts us as servants; 4) that He chooses us; 5) that He does not reject us; 6) that He is with us; 7) that He is our God; 8) that He helps and preserves us. This ought to be turned to good account by everyone whatever may chance to be His need.”—Cramer.6. On Isaiah 41:14 sqq. What a contrast! A poor little worm, and a new threshing instrument with double-edged points that rends mountains to pieces!
When was the church of either the Old or New Testament ever such a threshing instrument? First of all, the Babylonian Empire was threshed to pieces that Israel might be free. Afterwards many kingdoms and nations were threshed in pieces and made subject to the Roman Empire that the church of the New Testament might grow and spread abroad. Afterwards the Roman Empire itself was threshed in pieces to gain for the church a new, fresh, healthy soil in the Germanic nations. But finally the Germanic nations will in turn be threshed in pieces that the church may become the free, pure kingdom of Christ ruling over all. So the church, the poor little worm Jacob, rends in pieces one form of the world-power after another, until it issues from the last as the glorious bride of the Lord.7.
On Isaiah 41:21 sqq. “It was customary to expect of seers and prophets such a deep look into the obscurity of the past and present, as Saul imputed to his Seer (1 Samuel 9), as well as prevision into the future; which, in the Hellenic world, is illustrated in the Homeric Kalchas, as a knower of what exists, of what was, as well as of what will be (Hom. Ilias. I. 70)” Ed. Mueller. Parallelen zu den Weiss. u. Typen des A.
T. aus dem hell. Alterth. in Jahrbόcher d. Klass. Philol. VIII. Suppl.
Band. I. Heft. p. 108.
HINTS1. On Isaiah 41:8-13. God chose Abraham, and in Abraham the Israel of the Old Testament, and in Israel of the Old Testament the Israel of the New Testament. This fact of the election certifies to the church the sure pledge of its final conquest, for 1) the Lord cannot forsake the congregation of the elect; 2) He must make an end of those that contend against them.
2. On Isaiah 41:14-16. The church as it seems, and as it Isaiah 1) It seems to be a worm, a poor crowd; 2) It is really a. strong in the Lord (Isaiah 41:14 b—16 a); b, joyful in the Lord (Isaiah 41:16 b).
3. On Isaiah 41:17-20. He that is exposed to trials, who trusts in God, is not to be bewailed, since for Him; 1) life is indeed a desert; 2) but the desert becomes a paradise by the miraculous hand of God; 3) the miraculous hand of God summons him to grateful recognition.
4. On Isaiah 41:21-29. Against the modern heathenism, that in the place of the living, personal God would set abstractions that operate mechanically and unconsciously, one may prove the existence of the personal God by reference to the prophecies that were undoubtedly given and have been fulfilled. Only the living God can prophesy and fulfil. For 1) Divine omniscience is needed to foreknow the future; 2) Divine omnipotence and wisdom are needed to fulfil what has been foretold.
5. On the entire 41 chapter see Johann Christian Holzhen, Pastor in Mortitz, “Pastor divinitus electus et legitime vocatus, the divinely elected and legitimately called preacher.” A sermon, or rather tract in twelve chapters. Lόbeck, 1695, 8vo.
Footnotes:Heb. Cause to come, near.
bulwarks.
Heb. set our heart upon them.
make us hear.
And we will confront one another, and inspect with one another.
Or, worse than nothing.
Or, worse than a viper.
wind.
hassatraps.
Right.
showed: declared: heard.
A first-fruit to Zion—see, see it comes—a messenger of joy I will give to Jerusalem.
But.
Heb. return.
III.—THE THIRD The third chief figure: The personal servant of God in the contrastive, principal features of his manifestationIsaiah 421. THE MEEK SERVANT OF GOD
Isaiah 42:1-41 Behold my servant, whom I uphold;
Mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth;
I have put my spirit upon him:
He shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
2 He shall not cry, nor lift up,
Nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.
3 A bruised reed shall he not break,
And the smoking flax shall he not quench:
He shall bring forth judgment unto truth.
4 He shall not fail nor be discouraged,
Till he have set ajudgment in the earth:
And the isles shall wait for his law.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 42:1. δֵ ?οψָ ?φָ ?δ–αָּ ?ηִ ?ιψ–ϊָּ ?ξַ ?κְ ?– Isaiah 42:3. λֵ ?ηָ ?δ–τִּ ?ωׁ ?ϊָּ ?δ Isaiah 42:4. ιָ ?ηַ ?μ–ϊּ ?εֹ ?ψָ ?δIsaiah 42:1. With ψφϊδπτωׁ ?ι one looks for αּ ?εֹ (comp. Micah 6:7, etc). Evidently the preceding αּ ?εֹ continues in force.
Isaiah 42:4. ΰμιλδδ corresponds to the second clause of Isa 42:3; μΰιψευ to the first clause. From this it appears that ιָ ?ψεּ ?υ is not from ψεּ ?υ, but from ψָ ?φַ ?ιυ. The pronunciation of the imperf. Kal with u occurs also in other ς֨ ?ς֨ ?verbs (ιָ ?ψεּ ?ο Proverbs 29:6. ιָ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?γ Psalms 91:6), and it is remarkable that the imperfect forms of ψφυ occur only with the pronunciation u, Psalms 18:30; 2 Samuel 22:30; Ecclesiastes 12:6.
AND 1. As in chap. 41 the form of Cyrus, who is servant of Jehovah without being called so, and the form of Israel, who is servant of Jehovah and is so called, have their roots, so the form of Him who is servant of Jehovah in the highest sense, the form of the Messiah has its root in chap. 24. Thus the Prophet allows the types of his prophetic forms to appear in succession, and in a way that sketches them for us at first only in general outline. Here now he lets a servant of Jehovah appear, whom, after the first strokes that draw his form, we might regard as identical with the servant of Jehovah mentioned Isaiah 41:8. For all that is said in our Isaiah 42:1, applies well enough to the people of Israel. But can Isaiah 42:2-3 be said of them?
Here is mentioned One, who could, if He would, but He will not. He could cry, and break the bruised reed, and quench the glimmering wick, for He had the right and the might to do it. That is the Lord Himself, that comes to visit His people in meekness and lowliness. And yet He does appear as a Judge, loud and terrible, as appears from Isaiah 42:13. For this chapter is full of contrasts. Isaiah 42:1-4 contrast with Isaiah 42:10-17; Isaiah 42:5-9 with Isaiah 42:18-21.
Contrasts appear, too, within the individual strophes; e. g., Isaiah 42:4 a. contrasts with 4 b.
2. Behold my servant—for his law.Isaiah 42:1-4. ϊָּ ?ξַ ?κְ in itself can mean “to seize, hold fast.” Here, however, it is not an act of violence that is spoken of, but an act of love. The Servant of Jehovah supports Himself on Jehovah, and Jehovah supports, holds and bears His Servant (comp. Isaiah 42:6; John 8:29). The words “in whom I am well pleased,” Matthew 3:17; Matthew 17:5; 2 Peter 1:17, heard at the baptism and the transfiguration of Christ, seem to connect with our ψφϊδεβεΧ and also with ηָ ?τֵ ?υ ver 21. The idea of anointing seems to underly the expression I have put My Spirit upon Him. (The expression occurs only here in Isaiah; for Isaiah 37:7 belongs in another category; still comp.
Isaiah 11:2; Isaiah 61:1). The use of the holy anointing oil (also of incense) is often signified by πϊοςμ in Leviticus 2:1; Leviticus 2:15; Leviticus 14:17-18; Leviticus 14:28-29. This construction is confirmed by Isaiah 61:1. By the anointing with the Holy Spirit, the Servant of God is qualified to bring right to the nations. ξωׁ ?τθ here can mean neither judicial transaction, nor judicial sentence; it can only mean standard of right. But what sort appears partly from the nature of the thing itself, partly from the parallel passages. The heathen, too, had standards of right in general.
But they lacked the true source of right, the knowledge of Him who alone is truth; they lacked the νόμοςτη̄ςἀληθείας . Not merely the juridical norm of right in the absolute sense, i. e., religion (HengstenbergChristol. on our text, Delitzsch, Reinke) is to be understood. This absolute standard of right, hitherto the prerogative of Jehovah and His people, the Servant of Jehovah will carry forth to all nations (comp. Isaiah 2:3; Micah 4:2; Isaiah 51:4; Psalms 147:19-20). Thus δεֹ ?φִ ?ιΰ signifies the publishing of what has hitherto been hid, revelation (Habakkuk 1:4).
In Isaiah 42:2-3 it is added in praise of the Servant of the Lord that He will not cry in the streets, nor break the bruised reed. If He is to be praised for this, then He must have been able to do what He abstained from doing. Evidently a contrast presents itself here. It is not that the Servant of the Lord cannot do what He would even like to do. But the contrary: He could; but He will not. He abstains from the use of His power; He divests Himself.
By this even it is intimated that His power must be great. Otherwise there would not be so much made of His refraining from using it. Is it credible that such humble abstinence from the use of power that they enjoyed could ever be mentioned to the praise of Isaiah, or of the prophets generally, or of the people of Israel generally, or of the spiritual Israel, or of Cyrus, or of Uzziah, or Hezekiah or Josiah [the various persons supposed by different commentators to be meant by the Servant of Jehovah.—Tr.]? When did Israel ever have great power in reference to the heathen, and in humble love abstain from its use? Or when had ever a prophet or king of Israel the high position of a teacher of mankind, and filled it with humble self-denial? And of Cyrus it cannot be said that he was called to give to the heathen the νομοςτη̄ςἀληθείας.
There is only One, that stood as Teacher of all nations, and who, spite of His great dignity, could say of Himself: “Come unto Me all ye that labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you, and learn of Me; for I am meek and lowly of heart, and ye shall find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy, and My burden is light” (Matthew 11:28-30). It is as if the Lord had our passage in mind when He spoke these words. For not only do His words: “I thank Thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth” (ibid, Isaiah 42:29) recall Isaiah 42:5 of our chapter, that describes God as the One “that created the heavens, and stretched them out.” But, what is still more important, we find there the same contrast as the basis of Christ’s words, that rules over also our passage. The almighty Lord of heaven and earth does not ask after the wise and prudent, He has revealed Himself to those under age.
And Christ Himself! How significant that He introduces the words to the weary and heavy laden quoted above, with the words: “All things are delivered unto Me of My Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal Him” (ibid. Isaiah 42:27). Does He not say here in a most emphatic way, that He is a meek, lowly and patient teacher although the greatest power and the highest knowledge are delivered to Him? Besides the evident connection of our passage with Matthew 11:25-30, that we have thus remarked, the evangelist Matthew himself declares expressly in what immediately follows (Matthew 12:15-21) that he saw in the conduct of the Lord at that time the fulfilment of the words of our Prophet. That He healed the sick, and yet forbad to have it published, that He would only serve (comp.
Matthew 20:28), and sought not His honor and His advantage (John 8:50; John 5:30), that seems to Matthew to correspond to the picture of the Servant of the Lord that Isaiah drew in our chapter.
The expression πָ ?ωָׂ ?ΰ meaning πωׁ ?ΰχιμ occurs Numbers 14:1; Job 21:12, and in Isa. in part first (Isaiah 3:7) and in part second (Isaiah 42:2, 41). The omission being idiomatic, it need not be supplied from the following χεֹ ?μεֹ. The statement that the Servant of Jehovah shall not cry nor lift up His voice is understood in various ways. It is said, on the contrary, Isaiah 42:13-14, that He will cry. This belongs to the contrasts with which the chapter abounds. The meaning of Isa 42:2-3 is, therefore, not that the Servant of the Lord will in general not cry, and will break nothing whatever.
Rather, as His anointing with the Spirit implies, He will only not roar and rage as do the powers of this world, nor do violence to the weak and wretched. On the contrary He will show Himself gentle and kind to the poor and weak, which is precisely the Old Testament meaning of φַ ?γִּ ?ιχ. What is already bruised (“nicked,” χָ ?πֶ ?δψָ ?φεּ ?υ comp. Isaiah 36:6; Isaiah 58:6; Deuteronomy 28:33) He will not finish by breaking, and the feebly glimmering wick He will not extinguish. τִ ?ωְׁ ?ϊָּ ?δ is the wick made from linen (τִּ ?ωְׁ ?ϊֶּ ?δ which however does not occur, comp. Gesen.Thes. p. 1136). The double statement of Isa 42:3 contains a λιτότης.
For it is inconceivable that He, whose being is light and life, intends only the non-extinguishment of the wick or the non-fracture of the reed. Rather He intends both as the beginning of new life.
The clause μΰξϊιεφιΰξΧ stands alone as a positive statement in antithesis to the foregoing negatives. The LXX. translates: είςἀλ́θειανἐξοίσεικρίσιν. Matthew 12:20 reads:ἕωςἄνἐκβάλη̣εἰςνῖκοςτήνκρίσιν . The latter translation seems to come from a confusion with Habakkuk 1:4. For there it reads:εμֹ ?ΰιֵ ?φֵ ?ΰμָ ?πֶ ?φַ ?ηξωׁ ?τָ ?θ. But in Aramaic πְ ?φַ ?η means vicit;πֶ ?φְ ?ηָ ?πָ ?ΰ ,πִ ?φְ ?ηָ ?πָ ?ΰ is victoria;πַ ?φִ ?ιηָ ?ΰvictor.μֶֽ ?ΰֱ ?ξֶ ?ϊ which occurs no where else in the Old Testament, can only mean secundam veritatem (Vulg.inμְ ?ξִ ?ωְ ?λָּ ?θ ,μְ ?φֶ ?ψֶ ?χ32:1.
One might suppose that the expression meant the same as ξωׁ ?τθιεφιΰμβειν Isaiah 42:1. But it is to be noticed that Isaiah 42:1 it is the nations to whom the Servant of Jehovah brings forth right, whereas Isaiah 42:3 it is to those compared to the bruised reed and glimmering wick. Moreover in Isaiah 42:1 the addition μΰξϊ is wanting. Both considerations justify our assuming a modification of the sense in Isaiah 42:3. To the heathen, who do not know Him, God will reveal the standard of right, by the use of which they will find the right. But for the poor and wretched He will procure a right decree corresponding to the truth, He will help them to their rights; something that elsewhere also is made to be an essential part of the glory of the Messianic kingdom (Isaiah 1:21; Isaiah 1:26 sq.; Isaiah 9:6).
But δεֹ ?φִ ?ιΰ expresses here the proceeding, issuing of the decree of a judge, in which sense ιָ ?φָ ?ΰ occurs twice in Habakkuk 1:4. Per ducere, to carry into effect, to conduct to the end, cannot be the meaning of δεφιΰ.
By Isaiah 42:4, the Prophet would obviate a misunderstanding, by preparing a transition that makes prominent a contrastive side of the Servant of Jehovah, which appears even in the second, but still more decidedly in the third strophe. For instance, it might perhaps be inferred from Isaiah 42:2-3 that the Servant of Jehovah were only meek and lowly, that thus He were made only of weak stuff, that His being would lack the firmness, the manly force, the ability to be angry and punish. To obviate this false inference the Prophet says, though the Servant of Jehovah will be such as described Isaiah 42:2-3, still He will Himself be no bruised reed, [ιψευ from ψָ ?φַ ?υ see Text. and Gram]. Spite of his gentleness, He shall be firm as a rock (Isaiah 17:10; Isaiah 26:4), on which all attacks of His enemies shall dash to pieces, and He shall carry out His counsel victoriously. The conjunction φψ signifies here, as often (Genesis 28:15; Psalms 112:8), continuance until the object is attained; the meaning of this form of expression being always that a ceasing will not take place till the end in view is attained (against Gesen.Thes. p. 992, and Hengstenberg,Authentie d. Daniel, p. 67).
What follows does not enter into the consideration. The standard of right that the Servant of Jehovah will establish on the earth is the same mentioned Isaiah 42:1. It is afterwards called ϊּ ?εֹ ?ψָ ?δ “law,” which is only nearer definition added on. That is, it is only made plainer that this standard of right will be a religious one, a counterpart of the law of Sinai. As Delitzsch remarks, the Servant of Jehovah will add to the Sinaitic the Zionitic Torah (comp. Isaiah 2:3).
The position of ιιημε at the end of the clause indicates that we are not to consider it as dependent on ςַ ?γ. But the Prophet would say: when the standard of right is established by the Servant of Jehovah as Torah, as religious law, then will the isles (meaning here the remotest regions of the heathen world) turn themselves to it in hope and trust (comp. Isaiah 51:4-5).
Footnotes:reveal right.Or, dimly burning.Heb. quench it,according to truth.Heb. broken.2. THE SERVANT OF GOD AS THE BEARER OF A NEW . THE THIRD OF AS PROOF OF
Isaiah 42:5-95 Thus saith God the Lord,He that created the heavens, and stretched them out;
He that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it;
He that giveth breath unto the people upon it,
And spirit to them that walk therein:
6 I the Lord have called thee in righteousness,
And will hold thine hand,
And will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people,
For a light of the Gentiles;
7 To open the blind eyes,
To bring out the prisoners from the prison,
And them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.
8 I am the Lord: that is my name:
And my glory will I not give to another,
Neither my praise to graven images.
9 Behold, the former things are come to pass,
And new things do I declare:
Before they spring forth I tell you of them.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 42:5. αεψΰ—λδΰξψ. Isaiah 42:6. πφψ—ΰηζχ. Isaiah 42:7. λֶּ ?μֶ ?ΰ.
Isaiah 42:5. On πθδωׁ ?ξιν comp. Isaiah 40:22. The form πεθιδνwith ι is to be explained, not indeed according to Isaiah 54:5, but after the analogy of those forms of μηΧ in which the original ι reappears. On ψָ ?χַ ?ς comp. on Isaiah 40:19; Isaiah 44:24. As the word properly means to hammer out broad (comp. φΰφΰιδ,( ψָ ?χִ ?ιςַ ?(τὰἔκγονα, λֹּ ?μΰֲ ?ωֶ ?ψϊּ ?εֹ ?φֵ ?ΰδָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ Genesis 1:12 sqq., a word that occurs only in Job and Isa.; comp. Isaiah 22:24) taken strictly does not suit it. But in ψχφ there lies ideally the notion of spreading out and φΰφΰιδ depends on that.
Isaiah 42:6. ΰַ ?ηְ ?ζֵ ?χ, the abbreviated jussive form, here exceptionally in the first person [See Green’s Gr. § 97.2 a]. In regard to its being joined with αּ see Isaiah 4:1; Isaiah 45:1; Isaiah 51:18; Isaiah 56:2; Isaiah 56:4; Isaiah 56:6; Isaiah 64:6; comp. Isaiah 41:13).——That φָ ?ν and πβֹ ?ιִ ?ν have not the article, accords with the prophetic style, and is not to be pressed.
AND 1. This strophe consists of a preface, principal part, and conclusion. In respect to Isaiah 42:1-4 there is a climax. The introduction Isaiah 42:5 is a considerable leap. There the Prophet designates the Lord as the one that has created heaven and the earth, and all that is on it. This affords the basis for what follows.
The same God that could do this, and He only, is able also to deliver them. He, too, can say of the redeemer His Servant: I have called Thee, will uphold, protect and make Thee the bearer of a new covenant, and a light to all nations (Isaiah 42:6). This new covenant and enlightening the nations shall consist in opening blind eyes, and delivering prisoners from prison (Isaiah 42:7), which is to be understood in both a spiritual and a physical sense. The strophe concluds (Isaiah 42:8-9) by the emphatic statement that He, Jehovah announces this beforehand for the sake of His own honor, and especially to show (Isaiah 42:8) the difference between Himself and idols. As He has fulfilled earlier prophecies, so now He gives new ones in order, by their eventual fulfilment, to prove His divinity.
2. Thus saith God——therein.Isaiah 42:5. It seems to me that δָ ?ΰֵ ?μ put first is, like Genesis 46:3, meant to designate emphatically the true God, who alone has power, in contrast with the powerless false gods (Isaiah 42:8). δΰμ placed before ιδεδ as here, does not occur elsewhere. Comp. Isaiah 5:16. αεψΰ see List: except in Isaiah only twice: Amos 4:13; Ecclesiastes 12:1. αεψΰωׁ ?ξιν, Isaiah 45:18 (Isaiah 65:17). φַ ?ν, which has δμλιναδ for parallel, signifies accordingly the people of the earth generally. The order of thought here makes it evident that the chief features of the Mosaic account of the creation float before the Prophet’s eye: creation of the heavens; spreading out the earth, the imparting of πְ ?ωָׁ ?ξָ ?δ (comp. Genesis 2:7) and ψεּ ?ηַ (Genesis 7:22) to men.
3. I the Lord——prison house.Isaiah 42:6-7. Having reminded his hearers who God is as in Isaiah 42:5, the Prophet lets the Lord announce Himself as the one who will give the world a redeemer in His Servant. He that can create, etc., can also do this. One is reminded of those passages where Jesus Christ proves His power to forgive sins by pointing to His miracles: Matthew 9:2 sqq.; Mark 2:3 sqq.; Luke 5:18 sqq.). That the one called is the Servant of God, is evident from the context. χψΰϊικ recalls Isaiah 41:2; Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 41:9.
But the Lord has called His Servant αφγχ. If the Old Testament φγχδ “righteousness” has for its antithesis ηָ ?ξָ ?ν or ςωֶׁ ?χּ, i.e., violence, unrighteousness, then a righteous man, φַ ?γִּ ?ιχ, is one who in every respect wills only what is right and proper. He will neither do violence to the poor and weak, nor regard the person of the mighty and violent man; He will neither condemn the penitent and contrite, nor let the impenitent go unpunished. Thus His treatment of the penitent sinner is as just as it is of the impenitent. He could destroy the former if He would; for He has the power. Who would call Him to account?
But is then grace, that dispenses pardon on the ground of a subjective or objective performance, not also just? That is, does not God in a higher sense exercise righteousness, when He forgives the contrite who implores grace on the ground of the atoning-sacrifice that even God Himself has made for him? Thus it is not at all partial favor, measuring with unequal measure, when God calls His Servant into the world as redeemer. Rather, in Him grace displays itself as combined in one with righteousness. Unrighteous grace there is not in God any way. Thus Isaiah can say of Cyrus that God has raised him up in righteousness (Isaiah 45:13).
By “I have called thee the appearance of the Servant is signified as something that has already taken place. The verbs that follow signify as future what the Lord purposes to do with His Servant. He will take Him by the hand and (which expresses the object of so doing) protect Him, and make Him for a covenant of the people, and for a light of the Gentiles.
When Hermann Schultz (Alttestamentl. Theol. II. p. 75) says, that there is here not the remotest mention of a future personality, I should like to know how he may reconcile that with Isaiah 42:9. One sees from the Futures ΰϊπκ ,ΰφψκ ,ΰηζχ and still more plainly from Isaiah 42:9, that the Prophet points away to a remote future that has not even begun to bud. And the “covenant of the people,” too, must be a new one, and not one in existence already. For were it an old, already existing one, how did the Lord come to say that He would make His Servant for this covenant?
In fact it must be a very new covenant, vastly superior to the old one, since, according to Isaiah 42:7, it can “open blind eyes, and bring out the prisoners from prison,” which the old covenant could not do. Neither the total of Israel, nor the ideal Israel, nor the order of prophets can set in operation what is promised in Isaiah 42:7; or if this were something that they could do, then it does not belong here. we justly expect something great here, a work of salvation, an act of redemption, in fact something greater than is promised Isaiah 42:2-3, for the strophe Isaiah 42:5-9 forms the ladder to what follows, which presents to view the highest good. Either Isaiah does not speak of the Messiah at all, (which indeed Knobel maintains with entire consistency), or he speaks of Him already here. The opinion that Isaiah here does not yet understand the Messiah under “the Servant of Jehovah,” that the Servant of Jehovah appears as an individual only later, say from Isaiah 52:14 on, comes from the failure to observe the character of 40–42 which prepare the foundation for what follows. In Joshua 3:14 even the ark of the covenant is called δΰψεοδαψιϊ. When even such an inanimate vessel is called the covenant, why may that not be said of the Lord Himself, who, in fact, is the sole living and personal bond that unites divinity and humanity.
As Christ calls Himself the way (John 14:6), or the resurrection (John 11:25), so, too, He may be called the covenant. Thus, e.g., ξַ ?ν“tributum” (Joshua 16:10, etc.), signifies Him that tributum affert, ωָׁ ?μεֹ ?ν (Psalms 120:7) Him that pacem agit. Thus αψιϊφν is He that mediates the covenant to the people. But this is no other than the Messiah. I do not comprehend how V. Fr.
Oehler (D. Knecht Jehova’s, I. p. 50) can say: “Israel in the Messianic time needs no more an Abraham, a Moses as mediator of a covenant of the people with Jehovah, but the people as regenerated, as conscious of its destiny, as perfect servant of Jehovah is itself the covenant.” Israel has, indeed, no need of an Abraham or Moses; but Christ it does need, and without Him, too, it could never be “the perfect servant of Jehovah.”
By φָ ?ν is meant Israel, as appears both from the added αψιϊ and from the antithetical βειν (comp. Isaiah 49:6). Salvation comes from the Jews (John 4:22). The sunrise from on high (Luke 1:78) appears in Israel and proceeds thence to the heathen. For the recurrence of the phraseology here see Isaiah 49:6; Isaiah 49:8, comp. Isaiah 51:4. The covenant, that the Servant of Jehovah is to mediate is called Isaiah 54:10 a covenant of peace, and Isaiah 55:3; Isaiah 61:8, an everlasting covenant (comp. Isaiah 59:21; Isaiah 61:4; Isaiah 61:6).
In Isaiah 42:7, the Prophet specifies the contents of the general notions “covenant of the people,” “light of the Gentiles.” If τχηςΧςΧ (comp. Isaiah 35:5; Isaiah 29:18) connects primarily with ΰεψβειν, and appears attracted by this thought, so δεφιΰξξρβψΰριψ relates primarily to ςָ ?ν, thus to Israel. Why may one not think first of Israel in reference to the deliverance from imprisonment, seeing the entire second part of Isaiah is primarily a book of consolation for Israel in captivity? But to prevent our thinking that the opening of eyes refers only to the heathen, and the leading out of prison only to Israel, the Prophet adds a third clause, that combines both factors, and thus intimates that also those sitting in darkness shall be freed, and those languishing in prison be enlightened. From this appears how unjust to the text a rough, outward construction like Knobel’s is. For did the heathen, then, share Israel’s captivity in Babylon?
Certainly not. But there is a blindness and a captivity under which both Israel and the heathen labored (comp. Acts 26:17-18). At the same time it must not be denied, that also acts of physical deliverance are to be regarded as degrees of the fulfilment of our prophecy, e.g., from the chains of prison and darkness, like the deliverance from the Babylonish Exile, and those acts of healing that the personal Servant of Jehovah did during His life on earth (comp. Isaiah 9:1; Matthew 4:14-16, with ibid. Isaiah 42:23).
Light and freedom, therefore light and right (for freedom is his right whom the prison holds not or holds no longer) will the Servant of Jehovah bring to the world. Should not one think here of the Urim and Thummim of the High-Priest (Exodus 28:30), and consequently construe this offering of light and right as the priestly activity of the Servant of Jehovah? The expression dwellers in darkness occurs only here and Psalms 107:10. Comp. Isaiah 9:1.
4. I am the Lord——of them.—
Isaiah 42:8-9.The verses 6, 7 form the pith of the strophe; which is prefaced (Isaiah 42:5) by words that let us infer its significance, and is concluded by just such words (Isaiah 42:8-9). The words ΰπֹ ?ιιδεδ, that directly follow the pith of the strophe, seem to correspond to the words of similar meaning with which (Isaiah 42:6) it immediately begins. They are therefore in apposition with ΰπιιδεδ at the beginning of Isa 42:6, and to be translated “I Jehovah” (not “I am Jehovah”). Verily it must be something great which the Lord twice announces with the words, “I, Jehovah, do it.” It must be something that only Jehovah can do; thus something far beyond the power of a man or of any other creature. Jehovah, however, can do it because He is called ιδεδ, i, e., according to Exodus 3:14, the eternally existent, the absolutely existent (in δεΰωׁ ?ξι, appears even a reminiscence of ζδωׁ ?ξι, Exodus 3:15), who just thereby is distinguished from all other beings, that either have no real existence at all, as idols, or that have not the source of their existence in themselves. Did the Lord not do what He has promised, Isaiah 42:6-7, His name would lie.
He would not then be what He calls Himself; He were a liar and deceiver, like those that unjustly assume the name “god.” Thus He pledges the honor of His name for the fulfilment of what is promised, Isaiah 42:6-7. But the Lord must do this not only to be consistent with Himself; He does it also in order that His honor may not unlawfully be taken by another. Did He promise and not fulfil, He would not be distinguished from idols. Indeed, in a certain sense, He would be less than idols. For not to be able to prophesy at all (Isaiah 41:21) were better than to prophesy and not fulfil. In a quite similar sense Isaiah 48:11.
But, moreover the Lord may not risk the coming to pass of the great things spoken of, Isaiah 42:6-7, without His having previously foretold them, lest Israel say as in Isaiah 48:5, “mine idol hath done them,” etc. Thus, as in Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 41:22 sqq., by prophesying them, He vindicates the future things as His plan and His work, and proves His divinity. But as He does not now first begin to prophesy, but had done it already in the remote past, so He can now point, not only to the future fulfilment of what is now prophesied, but also to the actual fulfilment of what was formerly prophesied. Thus present fulfilment is security for that which is to be. Accordingly, by δψΰωׁ ?πεϊ, Isaiah 42:9, I cannot, with Delitzsch and others, understand the immediate future, but only that foretold in the past. If the ψΰωׁ ?πεϊ were “the appearance of Cyrus and the movements of the nations connected therewith,” then instead of αָּ ?ΰεּ it must read αָּ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ (comp.
Isaiah 41:22). How can fulfilments still future, any way, be the pledge of others also future? I understand, therefore, by the former things the totality of prophecies made from the days of the Patriarchs to the catastrophe of Assyria, and in part fulfilled, and by new things (comp. Isaiah 48:6) all that the Prophet has to say concerning the future salvation that begins with Cyrus. These are the things which the Prophet, with the actual or the ideal present in view, designates as not recognizable even in their buds (comp. Isaiah 43:19).
Footnotes:I the Lord.THE SERVANT OF GOD AS A STRONG GOD
Isaiah 42:10-1710 Sing unto the Lord a new song,
And his praise from the end of the earth,
Ye that go down to the sea, and all that is therein;
The isles, and the inhabitants thereof
11 Let the wilderness and the cities thereof lift up their voice,
The villages that Kedar doth inhabit:
Let the inhabitants of the rock sing,
Let them shout from the top of the mountains.
12 Let them give glory unto the Lord,And declare his praise in the islands.
13 The Lord shall go forth as a mighty man,
He shall stir up jealousy like a man of war:
He shall cry, yea, roar;
He shall prevail against his enemies.
14 I have long time holden my peace;
I have been still and refrained myself:
Now will I cry like a travailing woman;
I will destroy and devour at once.
15 I will make waste mountains and hills,
And dry up all their herbs;
And I will make the rivers islands,
And I will dry up the pools.
16 And I will bring the blind by a way that they knew not;
I will lead them in paths that they have not known:
I will make darkness light before them,
And crooked things straight.
These things will I do unto them., and not forsake them.
17 They shall be turned back, they shall be greatly ashamed,
That trust in graven images,
That say to molten images,
Ye are our gods.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 42:10. ξμΰε –ξχφδδΰψυ. Isaiah 42:11. φָ ?εַ ?η. Isaiah 42:13. φָ ?ψַ ?η, Hiph.—βָ ?αַ ?ψ Hithp. Isaiah 42:14. —ηָ ?ψַ ?ωׁ ?—ηָ ?ωָׁ ?δ—ξςεμνωָׁ ?ΰַ ?σ—ΰτςδ—ΰָ ?τַ ?τ. Isaiah 42:15. Almost all the words. Ver 16. ξιωׁ ?εψ—ξςχωׁ ?ιν.
Isaiah 42:10. ξχφδδΰψς depends on ωִׁ ?ιψεּ. But that Hebrew usage is to be noted which puts the terminus a quo where we put the terminus in quo. Comp. Isaiah 17:13; Genesis 1:7. Thus our way of expressing it would be “at the end of the earth.” But when even the furthest off praise the Lord, certainly those lying between are not excluded.——The words ιεψγιδινεξμΰε strongly remind one of Psa 96:11; Psalms 98:7, where it reads ιִ ?ψְ ?ςַ ?νδַ ?ιָ ?νεּ ?ξְ ?μֹ ?ΰεֹ, which is the more remarkable seeing these Psalms belong to those that begin with ωׁ ?ιψεμιΧωׁ ?ιψηγωׁ Lowth conjectures for this reason that we ought instead of ιεψγι to read here ιִ ?ψְ ?ςַ ?ν (ιָ ?ψֹ ?ο ,ιָ ?ψִ ?ιςַ or the like). But ιψςν would not suit the following ΰιινειωׁ ?αιδν.
Isaiah 42:12. The expression ωִ ?ινλְּ ?αεֹ ?γ, beside the present, occurs only Joshua 7:19; comp. Psalms 66:2.
Isaiah 42:14. δָ ?ωָׁ ?δ (compּ δָ ?ρָ ?δ) is more “to be quiet”, while ηָ ?ψַ ?ωׁ agreeably to the fundamental meaning incidere, insculpere, means primarily “to be deaf and dumb” (comp. κωφός from κόπτω , obtusus, the dull, dumb), hence “to be silent.” The imperfects ΰηψιωּׁ and ΰϊΰτχ signify, (by reason of δηωׁ ?ιϊι that represents the silence generally as an accomplished fact), the single acts of keeping still that constantly followed each other in the past.——ΰֶ ?τְּ ?ςֶ ?δ, ἄπ . λεγ. The root τָּ ?ςָ ?δ occurs only in the serpent-name ΰֶ ?τְ ?ςֶ ?δ (Isaiah 30:6; Isaiah 59:5; Job 20:16), in the substantive ΰֶ ?τַ ?ς (Isaiah 41:24 which see) and in the name of the midwife τּ ?εּ ?ςָ ?δ (Exodus 1:15). Both that serpent name and the kindred roots τָּ ?ΰָ ?δ,τεּ ?ηַ involve the meaning “to breathe, blow.” In Chald., however, τָּ ?ςָ ?δ means directly “to cry,” and is especially used of the bleating of sheep. Thence come the substantives τְּ ?ςִ ?ιָ ?δ “vociferatio,” and τָּ ?ςַ ?ιְ ?ϊָ ?ΰ mulier clamosa. We will likely come nearest the truth if we take τָּ ?ςָ ?δ to mean the loud groaning, joined with lamentation, of the travailing woman, which, too, offers an admirable explanation of the name τּ ?εּ ?ςָ ?δ for a midwife. There is, moreover, an assonance in ΰτςδ and ΰϊΰτχ, that continues in ΰωׁ ?ν and ΰωׁ ?ΰσ To derive ΰωּׁ ?ν from ωָׁ ?ξֵ ?ν vastatem esse, because in Ezekiel 36:3 ωַׁ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ϊεְ ?ωָׁ ?ΰֹ ?σ are found conjoined, is forbidden both by grammar and the context. It is rather derived from πָ ?ωַׁ ?ν, an unused root, indeed, but one that occurs in the substantive πְ ?ωָׁ ?ξַ ?δ.
Isaiah 42:17. With ιαωׁ ?ε, instead of the inf. absol., we have a noun of the same stem as in Isaiah 22:17-18; Isaiah 14:19; Isaiah 14:22; Isaiah 29:14; Isaiah 33:4; Isaiah 46:10.
AND 1. Chapter 42 is evidently constructed as an ascending and descending climax. The present strophe forms the point of it; the two preceding ones lead up to it; the two that follow lead down from it. Why should Isaiah 42:10-17 not refer to the Servant of Jehovah, when both before and after (comp. Isaiah 42:19) He is the chief subject? True, He is not mentioned in the third strophe.
But is not He that leads the blind the same as He that opens the eyes of the blind and liberates the prisoners (Isaiah 42:7)? And is there not a manifest contrast presented between Him that does not cry (Isaiah 42:2) and Him that cries and roars (Isaiah 42:13)? And does not the negative, Isaiah 42:4, form the transition to the positive statement that the Servant of Jehovah will be also the opposite of one that does not cry, and that does not let His voice be heard in the streets? It must indeed be an exceeding glorious fact, for whose praise the whole earth (Isaiah 42:12) is summoned. Yea, that is the wonder, that the one described in Isaiah 42:2-3 as quiet and meek, is at the same time Jehovah Himself, who goes forth as an angry warrior against His enemies (Isaiah 42:13). He has long kept silence: did He not even suffer the whole heathen world to go its own way (Acts 14:16).
At last, however, He rouses Himself. Like a travailing woman, amid mighty sorrows He brings about a new order of things (Isaiah 42:14). He makes heathendom wither; but the heathen that have preserved a susceptibility for the truth He leads, like blind men restored to sight, in new ways of salvation hitherto unknown (Isaiah 42:15-16). He will certainly accomplish this to the confusion of those that continue to trust in false gods (Isaiah 42:17).
2. Sing unto–—islands.Isaiah 42:10-12. A new song is becoming for the new matter; like new skin bottles for new wine (Matthew 9:17). The expression a new song occurs, Psalms 33:3; Psalms 40:4; Psalms 96:1; Psalms 98:1; Psalms 144:9; Psalms 149:1 : “sing unto the Lord a new song” occurs, Psalms 33:3; Psalms 96:1; Psalms 98:1. It is to be noted, too, that the more ancient of these Pss. (Psalms 33, 96, 98) have all of them, I may say, an ecumenical character, in that all treat of the mutual relation of Jehovah and of all creation, i.e., of the power of Jehovah over all that is created, and of the duty of the latter to worship and praise the Lord.Psalms 40:4; Psalms 144:9 express only the author’s purpose to sing a new song to the Lord. But Psalms 149, certainly a late song and an imitation, has a very particularistic character.
One may say, therefore, that here, like in chapter 12, the author strikes up the psalm tone. He summons those to praise who are on the sea, and those that are in the sea, as immediately after he directs the same summons to the isles and their inhabitants, to the wilderness and its towns. The ιεψγιδιν are not those that go down to the sea, but those that sail down the sea, as appears plainly from Psalms 107:23, the only other place where the expression occurs. For the sea, optically regarded, may be conceived as an elevation (comp. Luke 5:4); thus, as really seen, the sea presents itself as flowing. Flowing water, however, cannot mount up.
It seems to me far fetched, when Delitzsch supposes that Ezion-Geber is the Prophet’s point of view in calling out. I rather think that by those sailing down the sea and isles, which he conceives as between his point of view and “the ends of the earth,” the Prophet would signify the west. Behind him lie the desert and the villages of the Arabs (αְּ ?πֵ ?ιχֶ ?γֶ ?ν) on the east; on the left he has the rock city (ρμς), and on the right mountains, i.e., to the south the mountain of Edom, to the north Lebanon. Regarding ιִ ?ωְׂ ?ΰεּ see on Isaiah 42:2. It is well known that in the desert, too, there were and are cities (fortified places). Comp., e.g..Joshua 15:61-62; Joshua 20:8.
The ϊφψιν(comp. Leviticus 25:31) are opposed on the one hand to cities, on the other to the mere tent encampments; like Hadarνje (stationary Arabs) are distinguished from Wabarξje (tent Arabs) (Delitzsch). On Kedar comp. at Isaiah 21:16. There were hardly dwellers in the rooks numerous enough, in an appellative sense, to make it worth while naming them here, where only grand genera are mentioned. But the Prophet might very well, in order to signify the South, think of the great rock city of Edom (Petra, comp. on Isaiah 16:1). But I do not think he intends by “mountains” only the mountains near Petra; for then the North would be entirely omitted.
Hence I think we must understand the great mountains to the north of Palestine. As object of the crying out, Isaiah 42:12 again expressly mentions the honor and praise of Jehovah. The islands are named as representing the remotest regions.
3. The Lord shall go——forsake them.Isaiah 42:13-16. As in the preceding strophe we distinguished a kernel, and a preface and conclusion, forming, so to speak, a shell for it, so we must do here. From the extent of the preface and its elevated tone, we observe that the kernel must be something highly significant. Isaiah 42:13-16 cease to speak of the Servant of Jehovah. But He reappears, Isaiah 42:22.
Instead appears Jehovah Himself, Isaiah 42:13. And things are affirmed of Jehovah that partly agree, partly form a strange contrast with what before and after is imputed to the Servant of Jehovah. When it is said, Isaiah 42:7, that the Servant of Jehovah will open the eyes of the blind and free the prisoner, is that essentially different from what we read, Isaiah 42:16, of leading the blind, etc.? Do these blind remain blind? What, then, has the Lord to do with blind persons! Or are the ways that He leads them not ways of freedom and salvation?
But if, Isaiah 42:2-3, the Servant of Jehovah appears as one that does not cry, but is meek and gentle, how comes it that, Isaiah 42:13-14, Jehovah is portrayed as an impetuous warrior, that cries and groans? And this appears in the climax-strophe of our chapter to which the preceding strophes lead up, and from which those following lead down I cannot believe that the third of the five strophes of our chapter can treat of a foreign subject. It must be the same, though the form makes it difficult to detect the unity. And in fact it was difficult for the Prophet himself, a very riddle, to comprehend the unity of Jehovah and His Servant, just as it must assuredly have been also an inexplicable mystery that the Son of David should at the same time be Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:5). I do not say, therefore, that Isaiah here produces a doctrine in an unhistorical way, that must remain hidden from himself. But I do say that the Spirit of God intimates here a relation of Jehovah to His Servant, which, of course, only presents itself to us in entire clearness in the New Testament history; but which, now we stand in this clear light, we can and ought thereby to detect in its Old Testament envelope.
Oehler begins the article Messias in Herz.,R-Enc., with these words: “According to the view of Old Testament prophecy, the completion of salvation is brought about by the personal coming of Jehovah in His glory. He Himself appears amid the rejoicing of the whole creation for the restoration of His kingdom on earth. Psalms 96:10 sqq.; Psalms 98:7 sqq.,” etc. It is remarkable that Oehler, in support of his thought, cites precisely those Pss. which, as above shown, have such resemblance to our passage. It is admitted by expositors that these Pss. have generally a near relation to Isaiah 40-66 (comp. Moll on Psalms 96.sqq.).
May we not have in Psalms 96, 98 the oldest commentary on our passage, a testimony that already in the time after the Exile our passage was referred to the Messiah, therefore that the unity of the Messiah and Jehovah was recognized?
The Prophet, then, here describes the Servant of Jehovah from another side. He, the quiet, and meek One, is at the same time El-Gibbor, and hence it may be said of Him: Jehovah goes forth like a mighty man.—But as being El-Gibbor he is no more called Servant of Jehovah; for the El Gibbor has laid aside the form of a servant. Further on this see below under Doctrinal and Ethical, p. 461, § 9. An ΰιωׁ ξμηξεϊ is a man that carries on many wars (comp. 2 Samuel 8:10; 1 Chronicles 18:10). The expression He shall stir up jealousy (sc. in Himself) recalls passages like Psalms 78:38; Daniel 11:25; Haggai 1:14; Isaiah 59:17. The intensive ΰσ, comp.
Isaiah 43:7. The enemies against whom Jehovah goes forth are manifestly the same that as conquered, yet at the same time blessed, are to offer praise and thanks to the Lord (Isaiah 42:10-12). The entire heathen world is meant. This is confirmed by Isaiah 42:17 that speaks of the confusion of those that persist in serving idols in spite of their knowledge of God.
It is quite preposterous, with Hahn, to assume a dividing line between Isaiah 42:13-14. Isaiah 42:14 sqq. first gives us light concerning what the Lord intends according to Isaiah 42:13. They contain the words that announce the object of the expedition of Him that goes forth. From everlasting the Lord had kept silence—Did the text treat only of the deliverance of Israel from exile, ξςεμν might then be referred to the beginning of it, and then the Exile would be represented as an immeasurable period during which the Lord had kept silence (comp. on Isaiah 62:11). But the reference is not merely to Israel’s deliverance, but to a deliverance in which all humanity, the heathen included, and even all nature, shall participate, as appears most plainly from the rejoicing of the same Isaiah 42:10-12. For the same reason the “for ever” cannot begin with the elevation of Israel into a nation, i.e., the departure out of Egypt.
If the Lord has in mind the heathen world, then it must be in reference to them that He has so long kept silence. How long was this? Without doubt since in Abraham He separated a tiny little part of mankind to be a special sphere for a preparatory revelation, while the great mass that was left He “suffered to walk in their own ways,” Acts 14:16. He had not, indeed, omitted now and then to remind the heathen of Himself, and the double exile of His servant, the people Israel, especially served this purpose. But, in general, the heathen world is that part of mankind that was actually to experience what must become of human nature when God surrenders it, uninfluenced by revelation, wholly to the free unfolding of its natural powers. In reference to these, the Lord may well say: I kept silence from the remotest time.
In contrast with this silence of milleniums will the Lord,i.e., the Servant of Jehovah identical with Jehovah, enter finally upon His conquest of the heathen world. By this He effects something quite new. He calls into being a new covenant with mankind. Hence He represents this new, hitherto unheard of deed as a birth that is accomplished only by means of great effort and acute pains. And may not, in fact, the spread of Christianity among the heathen, with all the pains, dangers and conflicts that attended it, be compared with the painful breaking forth of a fruit from the womb of a mother? This is one of the passages where to Jehovah is imputed action proper to women, and particularly a mother (comp.
Isaiah 46:3 sq.; Isaiah 49:15).
If the heathen are intended here, then by I will make waste mountains and hills, and dry up the rivers and pools, Isaiah 42:15, are meant heathen heights and heathen waters. Mountain heights are often enough representatives of the civilization of which they are the locality, and great waters representative of the populations that dwell about them. Therefore we must construe Isaiah 42:15-16 figuratively, just as we did Isaiah 42:13-14, and understand by mountains and rivers the heathen world. If by mountains and waters be understood the land of exile in a physical sense, would not that conflict with what was said Isaiah 41:18 sq.? Would not the people of God suffer by this drying up? But what is meant by the Servant of Jehovah drying up the heathen world?
I think that by that the Lord means a spiritual drying up. At the time the Servant of Jehovah goes forth into the heathen world, the latter will have survived itself. It will have become inwardly powerless and sapless. It will exist like a withered tree, like the bed of a stream having water only in its deepest places, whereas the shallower parts appear like islands—like a dried up lake. Only call to mind utterances like Pilate’s “what is truth” (John 18:38) for proof of this cheerless, dried up state of heathendom. I will make the rivers islands reminds of Psa 107:33.
Isaiah 42:16. I cannot understand Israel to be intended by the blind here; for they are not such in either a physical or a spiritual sense. Nor would blindness alone be mentioned to describe a general condition of misery (comp. Isaiah 41:17; Isaiah 35:5; Isaiah 29:18). I think, therefore, that those heathen are meant, whom the Lord leads out of the shrivelled up heathendom into the light which His Servant brings into the world.These are opposed to the ones (Isaiah 42:17) that persist in idolatry. It is, therefore, spiritual and not physical blindness that is meant (comp.
Isaiah 43:8). The same Servant of Jehovah whose office and calling are to open eyes in general, will do this for the heathen too, leading them ways they knew not: for the knowledge of the true God and of His salvation had been shut up from them. But those that are so led cease to be blind. Hence the Prophet continues: I will make darkness light before them,i.e., the previous darkness shall give place to light, consequently they will have gained powers of sight. To this corresponds what follows: and (I will make) crooked things (ways) (comp. Isaiah 59:8) to a flat field.
When this is done, they will no more go astray in crooked roads, but will walk straight and right ways. What I may call the imposing introduction Isaiah 42:10-12 having prepared us for something great, the last clause of Isa 42:16 in turn testifies to the greatness and marvel of the things that have been held in prospect from Isaiah 42:13 on. Lest it be thought more has been promised than can be performed, the Lord gives an express assurance of the contrary. Notice the definite article. Not things in general: no, it is the things. It is His whole, great work in nuce, His entire plan of salvation that is drawn in its fundamental features from Isaiah 42:13 on.
Both the Perfects and the positive affirmation followed by the negative (εμΰςζαϊιν) are meant to confirm the certainty of the eventual fulfilment.
Isaiah 42:17. But this salvation will not be the portion of all blind heathen. Therefore it reads, too, Isaiah 42:16, ςִ ?εְ ?ψִ ?ιν, not ηָ ?ςִ ?εְ ?ψִ ?ιν. Many will remain blind. Of these it is said: They shall be turned back, etc.
Footnotes:on.Heb. the fulness thereof.his zeal.Or, behave himself mightily.blind ones.Heb. swallow, or, sup up.lakes.blind ones.crooked ways to a flat field.Heb. into straightness.4. THE SERVANT OF THE LORD HIMSELF DEAF AND BLIND
Isaiah 42:18-2118 Hear, ye deaf;
And look, ye blind, that ye may see.
19 Who is blind, but my servant?
Or deaf, as my messenger that I sent?
Who is blind as he that Isaiah 18 perfect,
And blind as the Lord’s servant?
20 Seeing many things, but thou observest not;
Opening the ears, but he heareth not.
21 The Lord is well pleased for his righteousness’ sake;
He will magnify the law, and make it honorable.
AND 1. Is then the Servant of Jehovah ever reproached? And if Israel is deaf and blind toward the word of the Lord, can it as deaf and blind be called the servant of the Lord? Indeed, according to his very being, the latter cannot shut himself up against the spirit and word of Jehovah. It was said, Isaiah 42:3, that the Servant of Jehovah will reveal the right and law of God by a discipline of lowliness and gentleness; according to Isaiah 42:7 He will open blind eyes and deliver from the fetters of sin and error. And shall, Isaiah 42:18 sqq., by the same expression “Servant of Jehovah,” be designated also Israel, that is even deaf and blind with respect to God’s revelation?
Moreover how utterly disconnected an earnest complaint against the nation must appear here, after the glorious promise of Isa 42:13-17! Delitzsch supposes that the blind to whom, Isaiah 42:16, freedom is promised, provoked not only the compassion but also the displeasure of the Lord, because it was their own fault that they did not see. To them is the call to rid themselves of the ban that rests on them. But the blind of Isa 42:16 do not stay blind. According to 16b the darkness becomes light before them. How does that accord with Isaiah 42:18-20?
In my opinion the two strophes Isaiah 42:18-25 present the reverse side or descending climax of the chapter, of which the other, or light side of the Servant of Jehovah, was given in Isaiah 42:1-17. It is a new contrast that we observe here. He that opens the eyes of others is Himself blind. The crying mighty-man, Isaiah 42:13, corresponds to the quiet Servant of Jehovah, Isaiah 42:2; so here the Servant that is Himself blind, Isaiah 42:19, corresponds to Him that opens eyes for others, Isaiah 42:7. The strophes correspond crosswise; the first to the third, the second to the fourth, and each time it is contrasts that correspond. How entirely one misconceives the unity of this chapter who fails to recognize in the Servant of Jehovah Isaiah 42:18 the same that was already observed in Isaiah 42:1-9!
The deaf and blind of the People of Israel, or rather the People Israel as consisting of deaf and blind, i.e., as one generally sick and wretched, is summoned (Isaiah 42:18) to give heed for its salvation to a double wonder that happens with the Servant of Jehovah. He is Himself so blind and deaf that no one equals Him in blindness and deafness (Isaiah 42:19)! He that had healed many blind eyes, Himself observes nothing (Isaiah 42:20)! This is the first wonder. But in this one, apparently Himself so sick, the Lord has pleasure for His righteousness’ sake. By virtue of the same, He will give the world a new, glorious law (Isaiah 42:21); and this is the second wonder.
2. Hear ye deaf—honorable.Isaiah 42:18-21. The deaf and blind here are, any way, such as hear and see if they will. Otherwise how can they be summoned to see and hear. And when (Isaiah 42:20) they are summoned to notice that He Himself does not hear, and yet opens ears, etc., and yet is an object of divine approval, and gives the world a new and more glorious law, then only those can be meant who should be witnesses of these marvellous contrasts in the life of the personal Servant of Jehovah. To these is intimated that in these contrasts is contained the mystery of their deliverance.
But they are deaf and blind who will not see (Isaiah 6:9-10; Matthew 13:13 sqq.). It is the hardened nation Israel which therefore fares as we read afterwards Isaiah 42:22.—μִ ?ψְ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ, Isaiah 42:18, is to be referred to both the foregoing verbs (zeugmatically) in the general sense of observing. As I find chapter 42. draws the fundamental traits of the personal Servant of Jehovah in general, so here, as appears to me, those traits are especially sketched that are further developed in chapter 53. We remarked at Isaiah 42:16 a difference between blindness mentioned alone, and mentioned with other deficiencies. In the latter case the deficiencies named may be regarded as representing distress and wretchedness generally. Such is the case here.
It is not meant that the Servant of Jehovah will be only blind and deaf, just as at Isaiah 42:7 it was not meant that He would only heal the blind and free the prisoner. It is natural that those deficiencies should be named as attaching to the Servant of Jehovah, from which He is said to free others. Accordingly, to correspond with Isaiah 42:7, He should be described as blind and languishing in prison. But the latter trait the Prophet does not observe in the image of the future presented to him. Indeed, he describes the Servant of Jehovah, as blind and deaf: thus as a man, as one on whom all heavy sorrows come down like a tempest, as a picture of grief, and beside as one who runs blindly into his destruction (comp. Matthew 16:22) and in the greatest danger remains dumb as a deaf man.
He sees these defects attaching to the Servant of Jehovah in a degree unequalled by any other man. In a word: the Prophet beholds the Servant of Jehovah, not only as the one despised and forsaken of men, as the man of sorrows and acquainted with sickness (Isaiah 53:3), but at the same time as the physician that can heal others and not Himself (Luke 4:23; Luke 23:39; Matthew 27:40; Matthew 27:42). And the reason for this strange appearance? Isaiah indicates it Isaiah 53:4 sqq. Seb. Schmidt signifies it with the words: “coecus est atque surdus imputative.” Only here is the Servant of Jehovah called messenger, “angel of the Lord.” It calls to mind on the one hand “I will send my angel” Genesis 24:7; Genesis 24:40, and on the other Malachi 3:1. ξְ ?ωֻׁ ?μָּ ?ν, which occurs only here as participle (as nom. propr. it occurs often: 2 Kings 22:3; 2 Kings 21:19, etc.), must be construed according to the analogy of δָ ?ωְׁ ?μַ ?ν (Job 5:23), as in pacem, amicitiam receptus.The words of Isa 42:20 are difficult.
Those that understand the People of Israel to be meant by the Servant of Jehovah must take τָּ ?χֹ ?ηַ ΰָ ?ζְ ?πַ ?ιִ ?ν in the sense of “to have open ears.” Thus Umbreit translates: “with open ears He hears not;” Delitzsch: “opening the ears still He does not hear;” V. Fr. �hler: “open ears has He, and He hears not.” But, in the first place, τָּ ?χַ ?η, which only here is used of ears, being everywhere else used of eyes, never means “to have eyes.” But it must mean “to have” if taken in antithesis to εμΰιωׁ ?ξς: for he that hears not, though he has ears, does not use his ears. But one who does not use the ears he has can never be called a τָֹּ ?χֵ ?ηַ ΰζπιν. τָּ ?χַ ?η elsewhere always means to open the eyes of others or one’s own eyes for the purpose of actual and intensive use. Thus Genesis 3:5 : “And your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall know good and evil;” comp. Genesis 3:7; 2 Kings 6:17; 2 Kings 6:20“Lord open His eyes that he may see.” Comp. 2 Kings 4:35; 2 Kings 19:16 (Isaiah 37:17); Isaiah 35:5; Jeremiah 32:19; Zechariah 12:4; Daniel 9:18; Psalms 146:8; “Lord open (make see) the blind;” Proverbs 20:13; Job 14:3; Job 27:19. Finally, the adjective τִּ ?χֵּ ?ηַ is one that opens his eyes well, a seeing person: Exodus 4:11; Exodus 23:8.
From this it appears that τָּ ?χֹ ?ηַ ΰζπιν and εμΰιωׁ ?ξς would involve a contradiction if by “ears” be understood his own ears who opens them. For to open his own ears and yet not hear is impossible. In the second place, it may not at all be accidental that τָּ ?χַ ?ηonly in our passage is used of opening ears. Already in Isaiah 42:7 we had it in reference to opening eyes; and it is affirmed of the Servant of Jehovah. May not the Prophet, by using τָּ ?χֹ ?ηַ and not τָּ ?ϊֹ ?ηַ in Isaiah 42:20, have intended, perhaps, to give a hint that the subject of τχηΰζπιν is identical with that of τχηςιςιν? Moreover the feminine ψַ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ϊ Isaiah 42:20 points back to ςִ ?εְ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ Isaiah 42:7, and strengthens the conjecture that the Prophet would warn against referring Isaiah 42:20 to any other person than the subject of Isa 42:7.
If we have correctly understood the second clause of Isa 42:20, we have gained the foundation for the understanding of the first. K’thibh is to be read ψָ ?ΰִ ?ιϊָ, the K’ri ψָ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ. The latter is inf. absol. Kal (like ωָׁ ?ϊεֹ ?ϊ22:13; ςָ ?ψεֹ ?ϊHabakkuk 3:13). Both of these forms only make sense when one takes τχηΰΧ=“to have ears.” For then the form ψΰιϊ must also some way signify “to have eyes” or “to see,” and both can be said of the servant of Jehovah only in the national sense. But if τχηΰΧ means “to open ears,” if it stands parallel with Isaiah 42:7, and if the personal Servant of Jehovah is the subject of both declarations, then also ψΰιϊ cannot describe the seeing as the action of the Servant of Jehovah.
It must refer to the seeing of others which the Servant of Jehovah brings about. But then one must doubt the correctness of both the text and the margin. Either ψΰεϊ is to be pointed ψֹ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ (comp. Isaiah 30:20; Jeremiah 20:4; Jeremiah 42:2, etc.), or a δ has been dropped from before it. The latter could easily happen because of the foregoing verse closing with δ. The reading then would be δַ ?ψְ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ (infin.
Hiph. “to make see,” Deuteronomy 3:24; Deuteronomy 1:33; Exodus 9:16, etc.). [The Author’s labored exposition seems to originate and find its sole justification in the contradiction developed above: “to open one’s ears and not to hear is impossible;” and then, if this be the sense, that one must understand the Servant of Jehovah in a national and not a personal sense, and thus surrender the identity of subject in the chapter. But the logical contradiction cannot be greater than that presented in Isaiah 6:9, and in (the exaggeration even of) the same language as quoted by our Lord in Matthew 13:13. While adhering to the Author’s general view of the whole chapter, and of this “strophe” in particular, we may adhere also to the rendering of Isa 42:20 in the Eng. Version, with which Umbreit and Delitzsch (see above) agree. Why may not the contrasts of this chapter, that the Author points out (see e.g., under Isaiah 42:15-16), be intensified into paradoxes and contradictions? If the Spirit of God in the Prophet has uttered the riddle of the identity of the Servant of Jehovah, and Jehovah Himself, the solution of which can only be seen in the clear light of the New Testament (see under Isaiah 42:12), why not also the riddle of Isa 42:20?
Why (like the New Testament realizations to which the Author refers under Isaiah 42:19; Isaiah 42:22) is not the verification of the paradoxes of Isa 42:20 to be found in, say, Acts 1:7, and Mark 13:32. “Of that day and that hour knoweth no man—neither the Son, but the Father,” and in the mystery of Christ going intelligently to meet death (Mark 8:31) and yet on the eye of its accomplishment praying to escape it like one that knows not (Luke 22:42; Hebrews 5:7)?—Tr.].
Like one blind the Servant of Jehovah runs to His destruction, who yet causes so many others to see. Although warned (Matthew 16:22), still He gives no heed to what may benefit or hurt His own person. ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ψ, has here, as often, the meaning “observavit, attendit” (comp. Hosea 4:10; 1 Samuel 26:15; 2 Samuel 18:12, etc., according to the fundamental meaning of the word, “rectis et intentis occulis intuitus est,” “to gaze, stare at,” comp. ωָׂ ?ξַ ?ψ ,ρָ ?ξַ ?ψ, riguit, horruit.ωָׁ ?ξִ ?ιψ “thorn,” see Gesen.Thes. p. 1442). The change of person is not unfrequent in Isaiah 1:29; Isaiah 14:30; Isaiah 33:2; Isaiah 33:6; Isaiah 41:1.
Isaiah 42:22. Thus the Servant of Jehovah seems to pay the penalty of His folly by a fate that makes Him appear as one despised of men and esteemed as of no value. But different is His relation to Jehovah, who has pleasure in Him for His righteousness’ sake. The pronominal object in the third person is omitted, as often happens. The prophetic discourse is brief and obscure. But it finds its echo, and at the same time its significance is cleared up in those passages of the New Testament, wherein the Father expressly points to the Son as the object of His approval (comp.
Isaiah 42:1 and Matthew 3:17; Matthew 17:5; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:23; 2 Peter 1:17). And why should not Jehovah take pleasure in Him whom no one could charge with sin, yet who, notwithstanding, surrendered His holy soul to death, in order to fulfil the Father’s decree of salvation ? When it is further said: He will magnify the law and make it honourable, it is self-evident that not that Torah is meant whose end the Servant of Jehovah will be, but that which shall proceed from Him (Isaiah 42:4; Isaiah 51:4; Isaiah 2:3). We will therefore take the Servant of Jehovah as the subject of “magnify” and “make honorable,” though the sense were not essentially different if Jehovah were regarded as subject. Great and glorious will the new, Zionitic Torah be; as much greater and more glorious than the old Sinaitic, as its Mediator, means and object will be infinitely greater (Galatians 3).
For the recurrence of words used in this strophe see List.
Footnotes:send.endowed with salvation (Heilbegabte).
Many eyes see.
Ears he opens.
Or, him.5. THE SERVANT OF JEHOVAH A STONE OF TO ISRAEL
Isaiah 42:22-2522 But this is a people robbed and spoiled;
They are all of them snared in holes,
And they are hid in prison houses:
They are for a prey, and none delivereth;
For a spoil, and none saith, Restore.
23 Who among you will give ear to this?
Who will hearken and hear for the time to come?
24 Who gave Jacob for a spoil,
And Israel to the robbers?
Did not the Lord, he against whom we have sinned?
For they would not walk in his ways,
Neither were they obedient unto his law.
25 Therefore he hath poured upon him
The fury of his anger, and the strength of battle:
And it hath set him on fire round about, yet he knew not;
And it burned him, yet he laid it not to heart.
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
IV.—THE FOURTH Redemption or Salvation in its Entire Compass Isaiah 43:1 to Isaiah 44:51. THE CHIEF OF
Isaiah 43:1-81 But now thus saith the Lord that created thee, O Jacob,
And he that formed thee, O Israel,
Fear not: for I have redeemed thee,
I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine.
2 When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee;
And through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee:
When thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned;
Neither shall the flame kindle upon thee.
3 For I am the Lord thy God,
The Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour:
I gave Egypt for thy ransom,
Ethiopia and Seba for thee.
4 Since thou wast precious in my sight,
Thou hast been honorable, and I have loved thee:
Therefore will I give men for thee,
And people for thy life.
5 Fear not: for I am with thee;
I will bring thy seed from the east,
And gather thee from the west;
6 I will say to the north, Give up;
And to the south, Keep not back:
Bring my sons from far,
And my daughters from the ends of the earth;
7 Even every one that is called by my name:
For I have created him for my glory, I have formed him;
Yea, I have made him.
8 Bring forth the blind people that have eyes,
And the deaf that have ears.
TEXTUAL AND See List for recurrence of the words: Isaiah 43:1. –εςϊδαָּ ?ψָ ?ΰ which occurs in reference to Israel again, Isaiah 43:7; Isaiah 43:15; Isaiah 65:18.—βΰμ–ιφֹ ?ψּ see on Isaiah 41:14—χψΰαωׁ ?ν see on Isaiah 41:25. Isaiah 43:2. αָּ ?ςַ ?ψ–αָּ ?εָ ?δ–ωׁ ?θτ, see Isaiah 42:25. Isaiah 43:3. λֹּ ?τֶ ?ψ. Isaiah 43:4. λַּ ?αַ ?γ–ιָ ?χַ ?ψ Niph.
Isaiah 43:1. On ΰμϊιψΰ see on Isaiah 40:9.—μιΰϊδ occurs only here.
Isaiah 43:3. In the causal clause, ΰπι is subject, ιδεδ apposition with it, ΰμδικ predicate. χγεωׁ ιωׂ ?ψΰμ is also in apposition with ΰπι, and ξεωׁ ?ιςκ is predicate. This construction is demanded partly for the sake of symmetry, partly the sense requires that in the first member ΰμδιγ be predicate. For just in the notion of divinity lies the notion of capacity to give protection and help.
Isaiah 43:4. ξֵ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, for which stands ξִ ?τְּ ?πֵ ?ιΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ (Exodus 19:18; Jeremiah 44:23). occurs in this causal sense, only here. When the apodosis is formed with the Vav. cons. and the imperf., it intimates that the notion of giving is conceived of as only eventual: because thou art dear to me, so I would (if need be) give men (generally and in indefinite number) in thy stead, and nations (undetermined which and how many, in antithesis with the definite, Isaiah 43:3 b), for thy soul. Comp. Ewald, § 136 sq.—Thus Isaiah 43:4 b in relation to Isaiah 43:3 b contains an intensification.
Isaiah 43:6-7. It corresponds to the close connection between these two verses to construe Isaiah 43:7 formally as in apposition with Isaiah 43:6, whence we must reject the exposition of Hitzig and Hahn, who take λμδπχψΰ as a statement put first absolutely.—αψΰϊιεεβεΧ, that the participle merges into the verb. fin. happens according to the well known Heb. usus loq. AND 1. Having spoken in chapters 41, 42 of the Deliverer (in the first and second stage) and of those delivered, the Prophet now deals with the Deliverance in its entire extent. In this discourse he gives first (Isaiah 43:1-8) a general view by enumerating the chief ingredients of the deliverance: it rests on the divine redemptive-decree (Isaiah 43:1); nothing shall prevent it (Isaiah 43:2); no price is too great for it; for the sake of it nations even would be sacrificed, which shows the value of Israel in the Lord’s eyes (Isaiah 43:3-4); it is to embrace all Israel, all the scattered members to be called in from all parts of the earth (Isaiah 43:5-7); but finally it is attached to a subjective condition, viz., spiritual receptivity (Isaiah 43:8).
2. But now—thy life.Isaiah 43:1-4. With “and now” the Prophet turns from the troubled pictures of the future, presented at the close of the preceding chapter, to joyful and comforting outlooks. The Lord had created and formed (Isaiah 44:2; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 45:11 (Isaiah 49:5); Isaiah 64:7), Israel, in as much as he had caused them to grow up to a nation by means of their ancestors from Adam on successively. χψΰαωׁ ?ν, as in Isaiah 40:26; Isaiah 45:3-4, signifies the more exact acquaintance. By reason of the fact that the Lord Himself made Israel and from the beginning prepared him as an instrument of His purposes, He calls to the nation living in exile, not to fear, for three things are determined: that Israel shall be delivered, be called to the Lord (comp. Isaiah 48:12) and belong to him alone.
Thus the Perfects—I have redeemed thee—I have called thee—are praeterita prophetica, and the last three clauses contain an ascending climax. Israel must not suffer itself to be deceived about this promise. It is very possible that, even after receiving it, the nation may pass through great trials—that, as it were, it must pass through waters—even there will the Lord be with it; that it must even pass through rivers (allusion to the Red Sea, Exodus 14, and the Jordan, Joshua 3)—the streams will not overflow them. Fire itself will as little hurt them. The ground for this security is the same that prompts the call fear not. Jehovah, Israel’s God, is also Israel’s protector.
In what sense does Jehovah give other nations as a ransom for Israel?Hahn understands it to mean that other nations are given to destruction as satisfaction for the injustice done Israel. But why does Jehovah give to destruction, not the nations themselves that carried Israel into exile, but other nations? According to Knobel’s idea, Cyrus is conceived as having some claim on the Jews belonging to the Babylonish kingdom. For letting them go free, satisfaction is offered to him in new conquests in Egypt, Ethiopia, and Meroe. But the Persian kingdom did not lose the Jews as subjects. Palestine belonged to it, and those returning back to it belonged to it.
The relation must be more exactly defined thus: the world-power, conceived of in a sense as a bird of prey, shall have offered to it Egypt, Ethiopia and Seba to devour, as indemnity for the mildness it has used to Israel contrary to its nature. It is true Cyrus did not himself make war on Egypt. What Xenophon says on this subject he characterizes as merely hearsay (μετὰταῦταἡεἰςΑἴγυπτονστρατείαλέγεταιγενέσθαικαὶκαταστρέψασθαιΑἴγυπτον, Cyrop. VIII. 6, 20 coll. Isaiah 1:1; Isaiah 1:4). Herodotus relates that Cyrus only had a purpose of making war on Egypt (ἐπεῖ ?͂χεστρατηλατέεινἐπιτοὺςΑἰγυπτίους, I. 153).
The actual conquest of Egypt was made by Cambyses his son, who also at least attempted the conquest of Ethiopia (Herod. III. 25). It may be said of him, that in Egypt he made havoc in the brutal manner of a genuine world-power. Egypt’s being subjected to this was probably a nemesis for much that it had practised on other nations before, and especially also on Israel. According to Genesis 10:6-7, Cush was the older brother of Mizraim, and Seba the oldest son of Cush. It cannot be doubted that the Prophet understood by Cush and Seba the lands that bounded Egypt on the south.
By Cush, therefore, must certainly be understood African Ethiopia (Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 18:1; Isaiah 20:3; Isaiah 37:9). Seba is Meroe, the city lying between the White and Blue Nile, which Herodotus calls the μητρόπολιςτῶντε͂νἄλλωνΑἰθιόπων (II. 29). Comp. Stade,De vatt.Is. aeth. p. 13. Isaiah mentions the Sabeans in only one other place (Isaiah 45:14), and there as here after Egypt and Ethiopia. λּ ?τֶ ?ψ, properly “covering” then = λִּ ?τεּ ?ψ “expiation, ransom, indemnity,” occurs only here in Isaiah. This statement that other nations shall be offered up as satisfaction for Israel, expresses the high value that Israel has in God’s eyes, and makes plain in what a glorious sense Jehovah calls Himself Israel’s God and Redeemer.
He discharges this office with such consistency and energy that, if need be, He will give such great nations as those named in Isaiah 43:3, as the price of their deliverance. If it be asked, why He undertakes such an office? He replies: because Israel is precious in my eyes, honorable, and I have loved thee. Love, then, is the ground that determines Jehovah to assume that protectorate. ξֵ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ see Text, and Gram.3. Fear not—have ears.Isaiah 43:5-8. The “fear not” connects what follows with the “fear not” Isaiah 43:1, as a new phase of the salvation bringing future.
The verses 1–4 speak of the deliverance in respect to its ground (Isaiah 43:1), under all circumstances (Isaiah 43:2), and at any price (Isaiah 43:3-4). In this section the particular is made prominent, that all members of the holy nation, no matter how distant nor in what direction, shall be brought back home (comp. Isaiah 11:11 sq.). In Isaiah 43:5 b and 6a the four points of the compass are severally enumerated. Give up, and keep not back manifestly involve a contrast with “none saith, Restore” Isaiah 42:22. This latter expression is qualified by our passage.
The condition it describes is not to be forever, but only to a certain period of time. χַ ?αֵּ ?υ, on the ground of its use Deuteronomy 30:3-4 is the conventional expression for the return of Israel from the Exile (Isaiah 11:12; Isaiah 54:7; Micah 2:12; Jeremiah 29:14; Ezekiel 11:17, etc.). In the second half of Isa 43:6 a subject is addressed that we must conceive of as the combination of the four quarters of the heavens. The entire earth, then, is meant. Hence, too, the feminine, which previously already was applied to the North and South, as parts of the entire earth. In δαιΰι, as related to ΰαιΰ Isaiah 43:5, there is an intensifying of the thought: not only the Lord brings, the lands themselves must co-operate in this bringing Israel back (Isaiah 14:2). Isaiah 43:7 gives the reason for the foregoing thought.
All the members of the nation must be gathered for this reason, because they all bear Jehovah’s name, and were made for His honor (see Text, and Gram.). δπχψΰαωׁ ?ξι is “He that is called by means of my name,” i.e., who is called a belonging of Jehovah’s (Isaiah 65:1). For the Temple is not itself called “Jehovah” because Jehovah’s name is named upon it (Jeremiah 7:10); and just as little is one that is called by means of Jehovah’s name, Himself called Jehovah. Comp. the remarks on Isaiah 4:2 and Isaiah 41:25. This bearing of Jehovah’s name is, as it were, a stamp that denotes that the one so marked was called into being (αψΰ), formed (ιφψ) and finished (comp. Isaiah 43:1; Isaiah 43:21) to the honor of Jehovah. How shall such an one be destroyed, in whose preparation the Lord has so greatly concerned Himself?
Isaiah 43:8, is by many connected with what follows. But that would require us to construe δεֹ ?φִ ?ιΰ in as imperative, which would be utterly abnormal. Beside, (and that is the chief thing), neither “bring forth, nor the designation of the nation as being blind yet having eyes find an adequate motive in the context.
Three things I think must be insisted on: 1) that our passage looks back to Isaiah 42:7. There it was said of the Servant of Jehovah, that He was destined to open blind eyes, and to lead (μδεφιΰ) prisoners out of prison; 2) That where three predicates, “blind, deaf, imprisoned” are joined to one and the same subject, the sense is quite different from what it would be if only one of these predicates were joined to one subject. For the former case affirms only the accumulation of every sort of suffering upon one and the same subject; whereas the latter case really concerns in some sense or other the special condition of sickness named (see on Isaiah 42:16). 3) It makes a great difference whether I say: “they have eyes and see not,” or “they are blind and have eyes.” For the former signifies that although they have eyes they still do not see; the latter that their blindness does not hinder them from seeing, i.e., their blindness is only relative in respect to kind, degree or time. Accordingly, I construe Isaiah 43:8 as concluding the first strophe of this chapter. And this conclusion is in the words of the Prophet himself, by which he intimates that the Lord, by accomplishing what is promised Isaiah 43:1-7, realizes at the same time what is held out Isaiah 42:7. The Lord delivers Israel but of its sufferings of all sorts in which it has languished like the blind in bonds of blindness, like the deaf in the prison of deafness, because this people, wretched as a blind or deaf person, still spiritually sees and hears, i.e., has turned its spiritual eye to the countenance of its God, and its spiritual ear to His word.
If elsewhere Israel is reproached for not seeing with eyes that might see, and not hearing with ears that might hear (Isaiah 6:9-10; Matthew 13:13 sq.), so here to its praise it is said that, spite of physical blindness, and deafness, or spite of all physical wretchedness figuratively represented by blindness and deafness, it will be still spiritually healthy and thereby ripe for and susceptible of deliverance. And with this is intimated also that spiritual redemption is to be an ingredient of the future, thus the redemption from sin, of which the last two strophes speak more extendedly (Isaiah 43:22 to Isaiah 44:5).
_______________
2. THE AND A PROOF OF
(Fourth application of prophecy in this sense) Isaiah 43:9-139 Let all the nations be gathered together,
And let the people be assembled:
Who among them can declare this, and shew us former things?
Let them bring forth their witnesses, that they may be justified:
Or let them hear, and say, It is truth.
10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord,And my servant whom I have chosen:
That ye may know and believe me
And understand that I am he:
Before me there was no God formed,
Neither shall there be after me.
11 I, even I, am the Lord;And beside me there is no Saviour.
12 I have declared, and have saved,
And I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you:
Therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord,eThat I am God.
13 Yea, before the day was I am he;
And there is none that can deliver out of my hand:
I will work, and who shall let it?
TEXTUAL AND Isa_43:9. In the succession of the verbal forms πχαφε (perf.) and ιΰρτε (imperf.), it seems to me the meaning is, that the former would express the fact of all nations being assembled, the latter, however, the hypothetical wish, that, if any nation be wanting, it also be summoned. That such is the sense appears from the fact that λֹּ ?μ does not stand before μΰξιν. For it follows therefrom that to the assembled total shall be opposed only casual single individuals. Hence it seems to me unnecessary to construe πχαφε as imperative.
Isaiah 43:12. The clauses here are simply connected paratactically by εְ. But their more exact logical relation is as follows: δβγϊιεδεωׁ ?ςϊι is to be regarded as principal clause, to whose two members other two subordinate clauses correspond, each of whish has likewise two members. εδωׁ ?ξςϊιεΰιοαλνζψ corresponds to the first member of the principal clause as an explication of it; but εΰϊνςγιεβεΧ corresponds to the second member as assigning the ground for it.
Isaiah 43:13. ξִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ν occurs again only Ezekiel 48:35 as marking a time that connects with an ideal beginning. Everywhere else it leans on a real terminus a quo. The construction ξִ ?δְ ?ιεֹ ?ϊιεֹ ?ν, “since days are,” i.e., ever in the past, is justified neither by usage nor the context. For one looks for something new. But the thought that Jehovah is of old is already adequately expressed Isaiah 43:10. One may compare ξִ ?ιָּ ?ξִ ?ιν (Judges 15:1; Ezekiel 38:8), which properly means “from days onward,” i.e., from a point of time onwards, till the entrance of which an indefinite number of days elapse.
Therefore ξִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ν is not “from to-day on.” Else why should it not read: ξִ ?οδַ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?νδַ ?ζֶּ ?δ? Comp. Ezekiel 39:22; Haggai 2:15; Haggai 2:18-19. But it properly means, “from a period with which ends an ideally present ιεֹ ?ν, onwards.” This ιεֹ ?ν is the period of deliverance indicated in what precedes.
TEXTUAL AND 1. In all the foregoing chapters Jehovah, as the only true God, is contrasted with the idols; and especially from chapter 41 on it is made prominent as proof of the divinity of Jehovah, that He is able to declare the remote past and the remote future and the connection of both. In the same way the Prophet here joins on to the comforting promise of Isa 43:1-8, an argument that uses the promise of redemption as a proof of the divinity of Jehovah.
2. Let all the nations—after me.Isaiah 43:9-10. The Prophet institutes a grand and bold comparison. On the one side he sees all the great heathen world assembled and on the other only Israel. (See Text and Gram.). And now he lets the Lord address to the former an inquiry, whether among their tremendous multitude there is even one prophetic spirit that can prophesy as He has prophesied in Isaiah 43:1-8. Who among them can (will) declare this.
This “who” does not refer directly to some divinity conceived of as among the crowd of people, but to some prophet, rather, thought of as organ of a divinity. But “this” can only refer to what has just been foretold Isaiah 43:1-8. But how can such a prophecy be looked for out of the midst of the heathen world? Were a genuine prophetic spirit in the midst of it, then, spite of all antipathy to Israel, it must still be able to see the fact and announce it beforehand just as well as Jehovah Himself. For the genuine prophet must see the facts of the future simply as they will occur in reality. But the God of Israel will also let facts of an earlier date avail.
If, then, the idol-prophets can cite in their favor earlier prophecies proceeding from them, they may be allowed to do so. Former things, comp. on Isaiah 40:22; Isaiah 42:9. But in either case, he that designates an historical fact as the fulfilment of a prophecy of his, must prove that this prophecy actually proceeded from him. He must produce witnesses for this. These witnesses can, indeed, be chosen now, but may only be summoned to give their testimony at the time of the fulfilment. For only at the time named is their testimony possible and necessary.
Possible, for only then can the prophecy and fulfilment be compared and the latter be seen to correspond with the former; necessary, for only at the time of the fulfilment does the necessity appear for inquiring who is the author of the prophecy in question. Let them bring forth their witnesses, therefore, refers to the time of the fulfilment; when this has followed, then they shall produce their witnesses, in order, by their declarations, to be recognized as just, i.e, as veracious and as representatives of a real divine power. ιφγχε cannot possibly mean “to say the truth” (Hitzig), for at that moment, those that produce the witnesses, have no more to say. Rather it must then appear whether what they have said at an earlier time be the truth. Therefore φָ ?γַ ?χ is here, as in Isaiah 43:26; Isaiah 45:25, simply “to be righteous.” Hence, and because ΰֱ ?ξֶ ?ϊ (comp. Isaiah 41:26φγιχ) is the declaration of the judge and not of the witness, the subject of let them hear and say must be those before whom the witnesses appear. For this reason we translate: “let one hear and say.”
From the side of the heathen world comes no response to the challenge of Isa 43:9. It is in no condition to respond. The Lord then turns to Israel to declare that He will perform what the others are unable to perform. Ye are My witnesses, he says. By this He would say: I say it now to you in advance, in order that, when it once comes to pass, ye may testify that I foretold it. And My Servant, is taken by many as a second subject: ye and My Servant be My witnesses.
But then the Servant must be a subject distinct from the people Israel. Would one understand by this the personal Servant of Jehovah, it were against this that the Servant cannot yet be present at the time of Cyrus, for Cyrus himself is in fact related to Him as prophetic type. Or would one understand by that other subject the believing nucleus of the nation, then that would need to be otherwise expressed. An expression must be chosen that would distinguish that Servant from the mass of the nation. But such a distinction is nowhere in the context, which deals primarily only with the antithesis of Israel and the heathen world. The latter is a mass of people without God, and hence without prophecy; but Israel is the people of Jehovah and the place of His revelation.
For this reason precisely it is the instrument that the Lord has chosen in order also to reveal Himself to the heathen. In “and My servant,” etc., there lies, therefore, the idea that Israel as the servant of Jehovah is at the same time according to the nature of things His witness in the sense indicated above. But Jehovah demands that Israel shall become witness, not for His interest, but for Israel’s own interest. By the facts that they verify they are to draw for themselves the conclusion that Jehovah alone is the true God. The Prophet expresses this by the words: that ye may know and believe Me,etc.ϊγςε may either (zeugmatically) take the object of ϊΰξπε, or it can have the absolute meaning “to acquire knowledge, sapere” (Isaiah 44:18; Isaiah 45:20; Isaiah 32:4). Even faith presumes a certain knowledge, for one cannot believe in that of which he knows absolutely nothing.
But faith is equally the condition of a correct knowledge of divine things. For without loving self surrender to God, an understanding of His being is impossible. And then the Prophet may with equal right designate faith as the product and as the condition of knowledge. On I am He see on Isaiah 41:4. In there was no God formed there is of course no implied assumption that Jehovah was formed, but rather the contrary assumption underlies it, that Jehovah is the sole and only true God, a thought that is implied in I am He. If this be so, then besides Him there can only be fabricated gods, dei ficticii (comp.
Isaiah 44:10). Had there been a god before Him it could only have been a fictitious god. But as there was no sort of god before Him, so, too, none was made before Him. And since whatever is made must have a beginning, and necessarily, too, must have an end, so must all these fictitious gods cease to be. Therefore none can survive Jehovah.
3. I, even I——let it.Isaiah 43:11-13. These verses conclude the foregoing series of thoughts by recapitulating the chief particulars, and adding several important inferences. I, I am Jehovah: that such is the proper rendering appears from the fact that the Jehovah-name manifestly corresponds to the latter part of Isa 43:10, the sentiment of which is comprehended in that name. For if before the Lord there was no god, and there will be none after Him, then He is the One that was and shall be the eternally Existent, i.e., Jehovah (comp. Exodus 3:14).
And, because this entire part of Isaiah deals with the deliverance of Israel and the ground and consequences of it, it is added: and beside Me there is no Saviour comp. Isaiah 43:3; Isaiah 45:21, and the List). Therefore Israel must take care not to look for its salvation from any other. As ξεֹ ?ωׁ ?ις, “Saviour,” refers back to Isaiah 43:3, so δβγϊι and δωׁ ?ξςϊι “I have declared——I have shewed” refer to Isaiah 43:9. According to the argument in Isaiah 43:9, prophecy and fulfilment are proof of divinity. This proof Jehovah gives.
I announce, He says, and I save. The perfects present the thought apodictically as a fact accomplished. The salvation, indeed, is still future, and must be waited for. But the announcement is, in respect to time, in the past, and, as an actual deed of Jehovah’s, can now already be proved. Hence this particular is not only repeated in δωׁ ?ξςϊι “I have declared,” but also supported by an argumentum a non existente altero. Jehovah must have announced because no other, or strange god (ζָ ?ψ as in Deuteronomy 32:16; Psalms 44:21; Psalms 81:10), was in Israel.
In this there is an assumption that there exist real, super-terrestrial powers beside Jehovah. But none of the kind have power in Israel. The idols that Israel worshipped are not reckoned, for they are to be regarded as nothing (Isaiah 41:23 sq.). On the logical connection of Isa 43:12 see Text and Gram. We remarked before that δεωׁ ?ςϊι, I have saved refers to a future deed that is to be waited for. But there is a guaranty of its fulfilment.
Israel is even set up as testimony, Isaiah 43:10, and the Lord will and can do that to which Israel testifies, for He is God, the Strong One (ΰֵ ?μ comp. Isaiah 46:9 and the List). Thus the sense of Isa 43:12 is as follows: that I am the proclaimer of salvation follows because beside Me there was no one that could proclaim it; and that I will carry out also what I have proclaimed is guaranteed by your being in evidence and by My strength.
Isaiah 43:13 refers to the future following the period of the promised deliverance (see Text, and Gram.). Thus the Lord does not content Himself here with prophesying to the time of the deliverance. He goes further He gives assurance that after it has come also, He will remain the same. Therefore δεΰ in this place is idem (comp. Isaiah 41:4). Israel is redeemed. The words none delivereth from My hand cannot apply to it here, as the similar words do, indeed, Isaiah 42:22. Rather, after Israel’s deliverance, only the heathen are in the hand of God as objects of His judgment. Therefore these words concern them. But finally, as the end of all history, it will appear that all thoughts and counsels of God must inevitably find their accomplishment. “Sein Werk kann niemand hindern.” Comp. Isaiah 14:27.
____________________
3. THE AND RETURN OF ISRAEL, FROM THE
Isaiah 43:14-2114 Thus saith the Lord,Your redeemer, the Holy One of Israel;
For your sake I have sent to Babylon,
And have brought down all their nobles,
And the Chaldeans, whose cry is in the ships.
15 I am the Lord, your Holy One,
The Creator of Israel, your king.
16 Thus saith the Lord,Which maketh a way in the sea,
And a path in the mighty waters;
17 Which bringeth forth the chariot and horse, the army and the power;
They shall lie down together, they shall not rise:
They are extinct, they are quenched as tow.
18 Remember ye not the former things,
Neither consider the things of old.
19 Behold, I will do a new thing;
Now it shall spring forth; shall ye not know it?
I will even make a way in the wilderness,
And rivers in the desert.
20 The beast of the field shall honor me,
The dragons and the owls:
Because I give waters in the wilderness,
And rivers in the desert,
To give drink to my people, my chosen.
21 This people have I formed for myself;
They shall show forth my praise.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 43:14. αְּ ?ψִ ?ιηַ ?–ψִ ?πָּ ?δ. Isaiah 43:16.πְ ?ϊִ ?ιαָ ?δ–ςַ ?ζ. Isaiah 43:17. λָּ ?αָ ?δ–γָּ ?ςַ ?κְ. Isaiah 43:18. χγξπιεϊ–δϊαεπο–ψΰωׁ ?πεϊ. Isaiah 43:19.–ηγωׁ ?δπδψεϊ–ιωׁ ?ιξεο. ver.20. ϊַּ ?πִּ ?ιν. comp. Isaiah 13:22.αָּ ?ηִ ?ιψ–δωׁ ?χδ. Isaiah 43:21. ρִ ?τֵּ ?ψ–ϊδμδ.
Isaiah 43:14. The context shows that ωׁ ?μηϊι is the praeter. propheticum.——The following words are very difficult. The correct understanding of αψιηιν is of first importance. Most expositors render it “fugitives.” But who are the fugitives? According to some they are the πάμμικτοςὄχλος of the world’s emporium (Delitzsch), “the concurrent nations in the commercial city of Babylon” (Gesenius). This construction takes proper account of the εְ before λωׂ ?γιν, by distinguishing the fugitives from the Chaldeans.
But why call those foreigners precisely fugitives? Why not say then βֵ ?ψִ ?ιν or ςֶ ?ψֶ ?α (Jeremiah 50:37), or the like? And do not the Chaldeans flee, too? How then could the foreigners be distinguished from the Chaldeans just by the designation “fugitives?” This objection lies even more against Delitzsch’s construction than against that of Gesenius. For according to Delitzsch λֻּ ?μָּ ?ν is the chief notion, αψιηιν only an attribute joined on in the form of apposition. But then how in the world does the notion λֹּ ?μ come to designate the foreigners in distinction from the Chaldeans?——Since Jerome, many (Abenesra, Abarbanel, Castalio, Forerius, Seb.
Schmidt, Umbreit, etc.) have read αְּ ?ψִ ?ιηִ ?ιν=“bars,” and understood that breaking down bars is meant. Then it would be declared that the prison of the Israelites would be opened. Gesenius testifies “that the departure from the points in such a case were a small matter.” And, of course, it might easily happen, especially in the unpointed text, that barichim would be spoken instead of berichim. But in general the reading αָּ ?ψִ ?ιηִ ?ιν has the evidences in its favor, and we cannot permit ourselves to depart from it needlessly. Others, as Hahn, understand the Chaldeans themselves to be meant by αψιηιν. But if this word and λωׂ ?γιν be object of δεψγϊι, then εְ before the latter is inexplicable.
I therefore (on the ground of Deu 28:68, see Comment below) construe λωׂ ?γιν as acc. loci, to the question, whither? The Prophet might have written, indeed, λַּ ?ωְׂ ?γִּֽ ?ιξָ ?δ, which occurs often enough. But, influenced by Deuteronomy 28:68, he writes here λωׂ ?γιν as ξִ ?φְ ?ψַ ?ιִ ?ν is written there. αΰπιεϊ is used in both places with a similar construction and meaning. εְ connects, not the word, but the entire clause, as e.g., Jeremiah 50:44.——ψִ ?πָּ ?ϊָ ?ν is subject of the clause whose predicate consists in the words λωׂ ?γιναΰιεϊψִ ?πָּ ?δ means “shout;” mostly in a joyful sense, but it occurs, too, in regard to lamentation, especially with suffixes: Jeremiah 14:12; Psalms 106:44. To this exposition of the last member of Isa 43:14, the foregoing εδεψγϊι forms a fitting introduction. For this δεֹ ?ψִ ?ιγ takes place, according to our signification, both in the neuter and in the local sense: with the αψιηιν there is a going downwards not only down the Euphrates, but from their previous elevation.
Isaiah 43:15 is to be construed as apposition with the subject of ωׁ ?μηϊι and δεψγϊι Isaiah 43:14.
Isaiah 43:16. It comes to substantially the same thing whether the participles πεֹ ?ϊֵ ?ο and ξεֹ ?φִ ?ιΰ are rendered by the preterite or present. Still I prefer the former, because Isaiah 43:17 b and Isaiah 43:18 better agree with it.——ξַ ?ιִ ?νςַ ?ζִּ ?ιν occurs again only Nehemiah 9:11.
Isaiah 43:17. ξεφιΰ, elsewhere the Hiph., is the standing expression for leading Israel out of Egypt (comp. Exodus 20:2; Deuteronomy 5:6; Deuteronomy 13:6, etc.). Here it is used of the Egyptians. It is even the Lord, that occasioned also the marching out of the Egyptian army.——ψλαΞερεν, which rhymes with ηιμεςζεζ, recalls Exodus 14:9; Exodus 15:1; Exodus 15:19; Exodus 15:21. Elsewhere it generally reads ρενεψλα (Deuteronomy 20:1; Joshua 11:4; 1 Kings 20:1; 2 Kings 6:15; Ezekiel 39:20). The transposition in our text, which is for the sake of the rhyme, occurs again only Psalms 76:7 ηιμ, too, occurs in the Song of Moses, Exodus 15:4.——ςִ ?ζּ ?εּ ?ζ “robustus, validus,” beside here, occurs only Psalms 24:8 where it is paired with βִּ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ψ——Imperf. ιωׁ ?λαε signifies the continuance, αμΞιχεξε (comp. Isaiah 26:14; on the use of αμ see on Isaiah 26:8) is future; the perfects γָּֽ ?ςֲ ?λεּ and λָּ ?αεּ signify the completed fact.
Isaiah 43:19. ηγωׁ ?δ only here in a neutral sense in the sing., beside Jeremiah 31:22 : ηγωׁ ?εϊ Jeremiah 42:9; Jeremiah 48:6. It is known that δֲ ?μֹ ?ΰ is often used in the sense of an emphatic affirmative. Comp. e.g., 1 Samuel 20:37; 1 Kings 11:41, etc. It is used very often for δִ ?πֵּ ?δ. Not only does the LXX. very often translate it by ἰδού (Deuteronomy 3:11; Joshua 1:9, etc.), but the parallel passages in Chronicles often have δִ ?πֵּ ?δ where the Books of Kings have δֲ ?μֹ ?ΰ. Comp. 1 Kings 15:23 with 2 Chronicles 16:11; 1 Kings 22:46 with 2 Chronicles 20:34, etc.Isaiah 43:20.
Isaiah uses only here the expression δωׁ ?γδηιϊ. Before him, on the ground of many passages in the Pentateuch (Genesis 2:19 sq.; Genesis 3:1; Genesis 3:14; Exodus 33:11; Leviticus 26:22; Deuteronomy 7:22, etc.), it appears in Hosea (Hosea 2:14; Hosea 2:20; Hosea 4:3; Hosea 13:8) and Job (Job 5:23; Job 39:15; Job 40:20). Isaiah 56. we read ηַ ?ιְ ?ϊεֹ ωָׂ ?γַ ?ι——ιςπδαπεϊ again Isaiah 13:21; Isaiah 34:13, and in Job 30:29; Micah 1:5; Jeremiah 50:39.——λιπϊϊι is=“that,” or “because I have given.”
AND 1. This third strophe corresponds to the first. As the first represents how the Lord will bring back His people into their land, from all quarters of the earth and through all possible dangers, so the present strophe represents how this restoration shall happen out of Babylon and through the wilderness lying between Chaldea and Palestine. Thus the first strophe is general in its contents; the third is specific.
2. Thus saith——your king.Isaiah 43:14-15. As the first promissory strophe (Isaiah 43:1) began with thus saith, so this one in both its parts, the negative (Isaiah 43:14) and the positive (Isaiah 43:16). The Lord, Israel’s Holy One, Creator and King, announces that He will send, to Babylon and bring the Chaldeans down from the elevation they have scaled, and lead them back to the littleness of their original home on the lower Euphrates, to which they will set out with the cry “to Chaldea on the ships.” This is the first negative act; the opening of the prison and putting aside the prison keeper. Glorious act of deliverance! that at the same time proves the God of Israel to be the only Holy One. For your sake I have sent to Babylon, says the Lord, and indicates that the proper intent of the sending was the deliverance of Israel, though the messenger had no presentiment of performing a divine mission in the interest of Israel.
Who this messenger was appears from Isaiah 41:2-3; Isaiah 41:25. It is Cyrus. We know that Isaiah foresaw a Babylonish exile of his people from 13, 14, Isaiah 21:9 sq; Isaiah 39:6-7. Especially I have sent, reminds one strongly for substance of Isa 13:2 sqq. See Text and Gram. It appears to me that we are justified by Job 26:13 and Isaiah 27:1 in giving αָ ?ψִ ?ιηִ ?ιν the meaning “fugitives” (see Text and Gram.).
Only in those passages and here does the word occur. As regards the clause, and the Chaldeans, etc., I think that here, too, the Prophet makes allusion to an older passage of Scripture, that sheds light on his meaning. That is Deuteronomy 28:68; where we read εֶֽ ?δֱ ?ωִׁ ?ιιְ ?κָ ιְ ?δεָֹ ?δξִ ?φְ ?ψַ ?ιִ ?νλָּֽ ?ΰֳ ?πִ ?ιεֹ ?ϊ As is known, Deuteronomy 28. contains that emphatic exhortation to obey the law of the Lord, based on promised blessings and threatened curses. It concludes with the threat that “Jehovah shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships,” to be sold there into bondage. It is worthy of notice that ξִ ?φְ ?ψַ ?ιִ ?ν must be construed as acc. localis to the question, whither? It might have read ξִ ?φְ ?ψַ ?ιְ ?ξָ ?δ, which, if not the more correct, were still the more frequent mode of expression.
Now it seems to me, that the Prophet in cur text would intimate that, what the Lord threatened against Israel would be fulfilled on the Babylonians. We have showed above Isaiah 23:13 that the Chaldeans (in Babylonian Kaldi or Kaldaai, Schrader, p. 43) were a nation settled in very ancient time in South-Babylon and reaching to the Persian Gulf. In course of time they rose to a dominant position in Babylon itself: in fact for a considerable time the ruling dynasty belonged to their race. Moreover that lower Euphrates region abounded in swamps, and hence offered numerous hiding-places. We know this especially from the history of Merodach-Baladan, of which, at chap. 39. we gave a sketch from Francois Lenormant. [The Author’s recapitulation of points of that sketch may be omitted. Tr.] From the particulars given there, it appears that when the Chaldeans could no longer maintain themselves in Babylon, their next step would be to take refuge in ships.
For them, flight into the recesses of the lower Euphrates and of the Schatt-el-arab, was at the same time a return into their proper home. Under such circumstances there was certainly sufficient motive for their raising the cry: λωׂ ?γνλΰπιεϊ=“into Chaldea on the ships.” Such was the cry when Babylon, which had only become so strong by the colossal walls of Asarhaddon and Nebuchadnezzar, but had often enough before been taken by the Assyrian kings, was no longer tenable. On this construction see Text. and Gram.As Isaiah 43:14 begins with a thought that gives the reason for what follows, so it is followed also by another and similar one in Isaiah 43:15 as a conclusion. As an independent statement, Isaiah 43:15 would be superfluous and clumsy. It has sense and significance only in closest connection with Isaiah 43:14. Jehovah is often called Israel’s king: Isaiah 41:21; Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 33:22; Isaiah 43:15.
3. Thus saith——as tow.Isaiah 43:16-17. Now the positive part of the promise is given. To the liberated Israelites is extended what they need for the long and difficult journey home. Already in the words “to Chaldea on ships” we found the Prophet’s thoughts directed toward Egypt. This direction becomes now still more manifest. He presents the miraculous deliverance of Israel at the Red Sea as a guaranty of the promised deliverance from the Babylonish exile. The same God, he says, that prepared a way through the Red Sea, where there was too much water, will know how to make a way through the arid desert, where there is too little water. Comp. in general Isaiah 51:10; Isaiah 63:11-13; Isaiah 11:16.
4. Remember ye——my praise. Isaiah 43:18-21. Although the Lord fortifies the promise about to follow by recalling His performance at the Red Sea, still, by the demand no more to remember those old events, He lets the Israelites understand that what is promised and future will be infinitely more glorious than what is past (comp. Jeremiah 23:7). Not that He would have those mighty deeds of old sink into absolute oblivion.
He means only a relative forgetting. He would only give a standard by which may be measured the glory of what is new. From this, already, we may see that the Lord by no means intends only the corporeal return from the Exile. Already introduced in Isaiah 43:18 as Himself speaking, the Lord announces Isaiah 43:19 that He is about to create a new thing.—Already, he says, it is germinating (comp. Isaiah 42:9); i. ., the causes that are to bring about that new thing exist already. And of course, as Isaiah must have lived to see Judah give itself into the hand of the world-power, so he saw therewith the bud of the Exile, and also of the deliverance out of it (Isaiah 6:11 sqq.; Isaiah 7:17; Isaiah 10:5 sqq.).
But the implicit reality will also realize itself explicitly. Hence is said: ye shall certainly know it. For such is the sense of the negative question: shall ye not know it (see Text. and Gram.). In naming this new thing, the Lord does not describe it completely. He only mentions one characteristic trait. Ex ungue leonem.
But this one trait from many is chosen, not only because of its inherent significance, but also, on the one hand, with reference to what was mentioned, Isaiah 43:16-17, by way of guaranty, and on the other, because there is present already here the thought that comes to expression, Isaiah 43:3. On the brink of the Red-Sea, also, it was water that seemed to prevent Israel’s deliverance. They could not walk through the deep sea. There the Lord helped Israel threatened by too much water, by making a way through the sea. In the day when “the new thing” shall come about Israel will be confronted by a dearth of water. Freed from Babylonian captivity, they will resolve to return home.
But an arid desert must be traversed! Now there is too little water. “But the Lord will help as before. He will make in the desert a way (Isaiah 35:1-2; Isaiah 35:7; Isaiah 40:3 sq.; Isaiah 41:18 sq.), by furnishing it with a bounding stream of water. Comp. Isaiah 48:21; Isaiah 49:10. On ΰַ ?σ see on Isaiah 26:8.
How glorious this help will be, that Israel is to enjoy by the watering of the desert, may be seen from the very beasts of the field rendering honor to God for it.—It weakens the force of this description to understand (with Hahn) the beasts to represent heathen nations. For it is something higher when the very beasts own and praise the hand of God. We must rather think of Isa 11:6 sqq., and how there, immediately after the description of the universal state of peace, the prospect of the home-return of Israel out of the Assyrian exile is presented as the antitype of the home return out of Egypt (Isaiah 11:11-16, where note especially Isaiah 43:16). And Isaiah 35:8-9 is also to be drawn into comparison here, where that way of return is called a holy way, and it is said that no lion shall be there, and that most ravenous of beasts shall not walk on it. This passage, compared with Isaiah 11:6 sqq. and our text, thus receives its complement and explanation, to the effect that wild beasts shall indeed be there, but will change their nature, and as regenerated, so to speak, will own and praise God. But by this we become aware that the Lord thinks not merely of physical water, but, as in Isaiah 44:3, also of spiritual water and streams of the Spirit.
For these necessarily belong to the condition of peace. The physical water of the desert is thus at the same time type of the spiritual streams of water of the last time. The beasts praise God for being permitted to participate in the blessings imparted to the people of Israel. But (Isaiah 43:21) especially this people themselves that the Lordformed for Himself (comp. Isaiah 43:1; Isaiah 43:7; ζεּ see on Isaiah 42:24) shall recount His praise. This signifies the acme of the new time, the time of salvation that begins with the deliverance out of the Babylonian exile.
But that that acme will not be attained without backsliding on the part of the nation, and even greater manifestations of grace on the part of God, appears from the following context. [This brings us back to the main proposition of the chapter, namely, that Jehovah had not only made them what they were, but had made them for the purpose of promoting His own glory, so that any claim of merit on their part, and any apprehension of entire destruction, must be equally unfounded.”—J. A. A.].
____________________
4. ISRAEL’S FROM SIN CANNOT BE ITS OWN WORK
Isaiah 43:22-2822 But thou hast not called upon me, O Jacob;
But thou hast been weary of me, O Israel.
23 Thou hast not brought me the small cattle of thy burnt offerings;
Neither hast thou honoured me with thy sacrifices.
I have not caused thee to serve with an offering,
Nor wearied thee with incense.
24 Thou hast bought me no sweet cane with money,
Neither hast thou filled me with the fat of thy sacrifices:
But thou hast made me to serve with thy sins,
Thou hast wearied me with thine iniquities.
25 I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake,
And will not remember thy sins.
26 Put me in remembrance: let us plead together:
Declare thou, that thou mayest be justified.
27 Thy first father hath sinned,
And thy teachers have transgressed against me.
28 Therefore I have profaned the princes of the sanctuary,
And have given Jacob to the curse,
And Israel to reproaches.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 43:24. χָ ?πֶ ?δ—ψָ ?εָ ?δ. Isaiah 43:25. ξָ ?ηָ ?δ comp. Isaiah 44:22. Isaiah 43:26-28. All the terms.
Isaiah 43:22. εְ init. is adversative. χָ ?ψָ ?ΰ used of calling on God, occurs more frequently with prepositions. Still it is found elsewhere also with the accusative (Psalms 14:4; Psalms 17:6; Psalms 88:10; Psalms 91:15). Many (Maurer, Hitzig, Ewald, Hendewerk, Umbreit, Knobel, Delitzsch) construe the second clause λιιβςϊεβεΧ as a conclusion: that thou shouldest have wearied thyself with me. But in that case 1) the foregoing clause should contain an inquiry; 2) the dependent clause with λִּ ?ι should relate to something future. Neither is the case.——ιָ ?βַ ?ς means “laborare, desudare, defatigatam esse.” The last in passages like Isaiah 40:28; Isaiah 57:10; Jeremiah 45:3; Psalms 6:7. Hence Hiph. “defatigare, to make weary,” (Isaiah 43:23-24). Hence I agree decidedly with those that translate: “for thou art weary of me.”
Isaiah 43:23. ωֶׂ ?δ, for which there is no plural form, is collective [meaning the young of both sheep and goats, hence exactly rendered in the English Version, “small cattle.”—Tr.].—ζαηικ is accus. of the means.——ςָ ?αַ ?γ is the technical term for service rendered to God in worship. Comp. Exodus 10:26, and the expression ςֲ ?αֹ ?γָ ?δ.
Isaiah 43:24. ΰַ ?κְ. cannot be referred exclusively to the notion “with;” otherwise it must read ΰַ ?κְ ΰֹ ?ϊִ ?ιδֶֽ ?ςֱ ?αַ ?γְ ?ϊָּ It must be referred to the entire following clause.
Isaiah 43:25. The double ΰπλι makes emphatic that the wiping out of sin is solely in God’s power. δεּ ?ΰ stands emphatically after ΰπλι. But it is not predicate as in Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 43:13; Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 46:4; Isaiah 48:12, but in apposition with the subject as in Isaiah 7:14. Thus the sense is: I—I such an one. In this lies a reference back to the emphatic use of δεּ ?ΰ twice already in this chapter.——ξָ ?ηָ ?δ.is rendered by the LXX. by ἐξαλεἰΦω, as also in Psalms 51:3; Psalms 51:11; Psalms 69:29, etc,——μξςπι as in Isaiah 37:35; Isaiah 48:9; Isaiah 48:11.
Isaiah 43:28. It seems to me presumptuous and needless to read εָֽ ?ΰֲ ?ηַ ?μֵּ ?μ and εָ ?ΰֶ ?ϊְּ ?πָ ?δ. This were, indeed, the easier reading, but for that very reason suspicious. The more difficult reading necessitates a deeper penetration into the sense. I construe εַ ?ΰֲ ?ηַ ?μֵ ?μ and εְ ?ΰֶ ?ϊְּ ?πָ ?δ as simply future, and both εְ as simply copulative.——There are likely only rhetorical reasons for using the cohortative form ΰϊπδ instead of ΰֶ ?ϊֵּ ?ο. At least this form is very usual precisely with πϊοַ. It occurs thirty times in the Old Testament, including the forms with Vav. consec. I doubt if it occurs as often with any other verbs.
AND 1. But thou——sacrifices.Isaiah 43:22-24 a. In Isaiah 43:21 the Lord has expressed a glorious hope for the future. But he reflects here that the past history of Israel lets this hope appear unfounded. The outward return from the Exile is not sufficient to qualify Israel for that praise of God (Isaiah 43:21). As long as Israel is under the outward ceremonial law, it is also under the dominion of sin. The Lord Himself must first blot out the guilt of sin by an offering that only He can make, and break the power of sin by an outpouring of holy streams of the Spirit. Only a regenerated Israel will be able to do what is expected in Isaiah 43:21.
The following clauses do not mean that Israel has never fulfilled the duties of divine service therein mentioned, but only that they have not fulfilled them, i.e., not fully satisfied the requirements. The long period from the giving of the law to Isaiah’s time, that ought to have been a period of uninterrupted fulfilment of the law, was in fact a period of prevalent transgression of the law. Hence the Prophet can well say, Israel has not brought the Lord the gifts of divine service that they ought to have brought.
In ωֶׁ ?δ, small cattle, collective, there may be an allusion to the daily morning and evening sacrifice, in which a year-old lamb must be brought (Exodus 29:38 sqq.; Numbers 28:3 sqq.). What a perverted world, when the Lord must Himself perform the work that Israel ought to have done by their divine service!
μαπδ is the fragrant gum of a tree found in Arabia, Persia, India and the eastern coast of Africa, but not definitely identified by modern botanists (see Leyer, Herz.R.-Encycl. XVII. p. 602 sq.). The Israelites used it partly as an ingredient of incense (Exodus 30:34), partly as an accompaniment to the meat offering, and the shew-bread (Leviticus 2:1 sq., (Leviticus 2:15 sq.; Leviticus 24:7). The expression μΰχπιϊ Isaiah 43:24, when we compare the foregoing parallel enumerations, seems manifestly to be prompted by the assonance with χָּ ?πֶ ?δχָ ?πֶ ?δ is mentioned Exodus 30:23 with the addition αֹּ ?ωֶׂ ?ν as an ingredient of the holy anointing oil (Leyrer,ibid. XIV. p. 663 sq.; XIII. p. 322); according to the Rabbins (ibid. XII. p. 507) it was also an ingredient of the holy incense.
It is almost universally agreed that it is the calamus (ibid. XIV. p. 664). Delitzsch says “the calamus forms no stalk, much less a reed;” but it is to be considered that it has a stem formed underneath by the leaves overlaying one another. And these leaves are, each for itself, reeds open at the sides. Hence the calamus is reckoned among reeds. Besides, not our common calamus is meant, but the Asiatic, indigenous to tropical Asia, and which is still used there in preparing fragrant oils and incense (Leyrer,ibid.).
The expression: with the fat of thy sacrifices thou hast not intoxicated (Isaiah 34:5) me is anthropopathic. The effect of the fumes of fat on men being imputed to God. [ψָ ?εָ ?δ in the Hiph means “to drench.” In this case “to drench with fumes of fat,” i.e., be-smoke.—Tr.].
2. But thou——thy sins.
Isaiah 43:24-25.Having said what Israel did not do, it is now said what they have only done: Only this hast thou done, thou hast laden me, etc. An antithesis is implied that we would better express by “but thou hast (see Text and Gram.). These words declare how the Lord has hitherto borne Himself with reference to His people’s burden of guilt. He patiently submitted to the painful service of bearing this burden. These “sins” and iniquities are the “sins that are past through the forbearance of God” (Romans 3:25; comp. Isaiah 9:22).
In Isaiah 43:25, however, the Lord says what He will do in the future:He will blot out their transgressions. He will not eternally drag Himself along with this burden; He will take it out of the world. And He says He will do it for His own sake. There is that in Himself that impels Him to this: It is love. It does not rest till it has found the ways and means of gratifying itself without trenching on justice. The Lord must have in mind here that sacrifice which did what all sacrifices of the Old Testament were unable to do.
Acts 3:19, and Colossians 2:14 seem to be founded on our passage. In the latter it appears that Paul recognized as the basis of the expression the representation of a delible writing. On “blot out” and “will not remember” comp. Psalms 51:3; Psalms 51:11; Psalms 25:7; Psalms 79:8; Jeremiah 31:34, etc.3. Put me——reproaches.
Isaiah 43:26-28. The Lord’s exceeding gracious language Isaiah 43:22-25 does not by any means suit the taste of Israel. The Prophet sees in spirit that Israel does not acknowledge its unrighteousness and will not accept the Lord’s proposed sacrifice (Isaiah 43:25). Israel is self-righteous. The Lord does not peremptorily rebuke the assertion of it. He again gives the nation an opportunity to prove it, if possible.
Hence He demands an enumeration of the facts calculated to confute the Lord and to prove their assertion. δζλιψπι is = “remind me,” viz.: by naming the facts. On the ground of these facts there shall be justification; and if the enumeration holds good, Israel shall be just (justified). But Israel can produce nothing that will bear sifting. On the other hand (Isaiah 43:27) the Lord adduces facts. He confines Himself to naming capital facts, that warrant a conclusion a majori ad minus. Without doubt the first father of Israel means Abraham.
For Adam is the father of the whole human race. Abraham’s conduct in reference to Pharaoh and Abimelech (Genesis 12:11 sqq.; Isaiah 20:1 sqq.), is of itself enough to prove that he sinned. ξֵ ?μִ ?ιυ is “the spokesman, interpreter, medium” (comp. Genesis 42:23; Job 33:23; 2 Chronicles 32:31). Theocratic office-bearers are meant, who were mediums between God and the people. For this reason they are called just after princes of the sanctuary. They were, indeed, the pillars and props of the Theocracy.
It was just their sins (comp. Jeremiah 22-23), because of their commanding influence, that contributed most to their own and the nation’s fall.
The debate, therefore, does not turn to the advantage of Israel. In conclusion, the Lord must pronounce the judgment: I will profane the princes of the sanctuary (comp. e.g., Jeremiah 52:24), but Israel itself I must give up to the curse and reproaches by the heathen. (See Text and Gram.). According to the foregoing exposition, the Prophet (Isaiah 43:21) points to a glorious last-time of salvation that begins with deliverance from the Exile, but in such a way that, from this beginning onwards to the completion of it, there occurs a long and changeful period. In reference to this period he distinguishes four particulars: 1) that the natural, fleshly Israel, as ever, is incapable of serving the Lord and of properly proclaiming His praise; 2) that the Lord Himself will blot out Israel’s sin; 3) that Israel, in proud self-righteousness, does not accept this gracious gift of the Lord; 4) that, consequently, His worship will be profaned, i.e., done away, and the nation itself will be given up to the curse of destruction and outward reproach. When “the princes of the sanctuary” are profaned, then the sanctuary itself, the cultus of Jehovah, the Old Testament covenant in general, will be desecrated, i.e., done away and dissolved. For as Gesenius justly remarks: “foedus res sacra est, idque qui profanat etiam violat et dissolvat.” Israel rejected Christ.
They accepted neither Himself, nor, after His death, the gospel of the cross. For this the old covenant was broken and the Temple destroyed, the nation dispersed into all lands. But this happened only to the fleshly Israel. There remains a remnant, an ὲκλογή, and these, according to Isaiah 44:3, will obtain the baptism of the Spirit, and thereby the qualification to fulfil Isaiah 43:21.
Footnotes:Or, person.And.
He bringeth.All the nations gather together, and the peoples are to be assembled.let us hear.oneOr, nothing formed of God.let hear, declared.And.thereafter I am he.delivers.Heb. turn it back.And lead them downwards as fugitives all, And “to Chaldea on the ships” is their cry.Heb. bars.that made.brought.I do.Surely I will.jackals.Or, ostriches.Heb. daughters of the owl.For.
Heb. lambs, or, kids,calamus.Heb. made me drunk, or, abundantly moistened.Heb. interpreters.And I will profane.Or, holy princes.will give.
5. THE OF THE BY FROM SIN IS THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT
Isaiah 44:1-51 Yet now hear, O Jacob my servant;
And Israel, whom I have chosen:
2 Thus saith the Lord that made thee,
And formed thee from the womb, which will help thee;
Fear not, O Jacob, my servant;
And thou, Jesurun, whom I have chosen.
3 For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty,
And floods upon the dry ground:
I will pour my spirit upon thy seed,
And my blessing upon thine offspring:
4 And they shall spring up as among the grass
As willows by the water courses.
5 One shall say, I am the Lord’s;
And another shall call himself by the name of Jacob;
And another shall subscribe with his hand unto the Lord,And surname himself by the name of Israel.
TEXTUAL AND See list for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 44:1. εςϊδ. Isaiah 44:2. ςωֶׂ ?κָ ?—εֹ ?φֱ ?ψκ—αֶּ ?θֶ ?ο—ΰμΞϊιψΰ.. Isaiah 44:4. ααιο.
Isaiah 44:2. ξαθο is to be connected with ιφψκ, as appears from Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 49:5. ιφψκis an elliptical relative clause.—ιωֻׁ ?ψεּ ?ο. That this word springs from ιωְׂ ?ψַ ?ΰֵ ?μ, , or that it is identical with ιωׂ ?ψ the first part of ιωׂ ?ψΰμ (Jerome, who translates ιωׂ ?ψΰμ by rectus Dei and ιωׂ ?ψεο by rectissimus; Aqu. Symm., Theod., εὐθύς, εὐθύτατος) is an ungrammatical view. But it appears also to have been shared by those that have translated Jeshurun directly by Israel (Targ., Pesch., Ar.). This they seem to have done because they saw in it, not only an indirect equivalent for the name Israel, but also (because of the supposed identity of ιωׂ ?ψ and ιωׁ ?ψ), a direct equivalent. It is now admitted that ιωׁ ?ψεο has nothing to do directly with ιωׂ ?ψΰμ, but is derived from an essentially different root ιָ ?ωַׁ ?ψ.
As the word is used only of Israel, and that not as an adjective but as a name for Israel, we must regard it as a cognomen, and as so called Kunje (comp. on ιְ ?λַ ?πֶּ ?δ Isaiah 44:5), consequently as a proper name. But, as is well known, there is greater freedom and variety used in all languages in the formation of proper names than in the formation of appellatives. This is because proper names have regard to individual peculiarities, which is not the case with appellative designations, which merely correspond to abstract modes that are always alike. Thus ιωׁ ?ψεο has originated from ιָ ?ωָׁ ?ψ by appending the nominal ending εּ ?ο, which, as the characteristic and at the same time the final syllable, has attracted the final syllable of the root. ιωׁ ?ψεο is therefore the notion ιָ ?ωָׁ ?ψ in that peculiar aspect which the ending εּ ?ο imparts to it. But what is this peculiar meaning of εּ ?ο? It occurs on the whole not often.
It only appears in the appellatives φִ ?ιεּ ?ο, statutum, statua, monumentum, in the five proper names, ωַׁ ?μּ ?εּ ?ο ,πεο ,ιωׁ ?ψεο ,(ιְ ?γεּ ?ϊεּ ?ο) ιְ ?γִ ?ιϊεּ ?ο ,ζְ ?αֻ ?μεּ ?ο, and in the word λִּ ?ιεּ ?ο (Amos 5:26) of which it is not known definitely whether it is a proper name or an appellative. But the ending εּ ?ο is manifestly derived from εֹ ?ο, by changing the vowel. The latter ending is exceeding common both in appellatives and in proper names. Several words have both endings: thus Nun, father of Joshua, is also named πεֹ ?ο 1 Chronicles 7:27. The tribal designation from ζְ ?αֻ ?μεּ ?ο is ζλְ ?μֻ ?εֹ ?πִ ?ι (Numbers 26:27; Judges 12:11-12), and in Greek the word is pronounced regularly Ζαβουλών. φִ ?ιεּ ?ο has a near relation in φִ ?ιεֹ ?ο. For not only is Mt.
Zion called Zehjun in Syriac and Arabic, but also it is even not impossible that the original meaning of φִ ?ιεֹ ?ο coincides with that of φִ ?ιεּ ?ο. For Zion might very suitably be designated as something “firmly set up, firmly founded, a ξεּ ?ρָ ?γξεּ ?ρָ ?γ, Isaiah 28:16.” There is great variety in the meaning of words in εֹ ?ο. It ought not to have been so positively contradicted that the ending εο is also used to designate diminutives. What Ewald (Gram., §167) adduces on that subject is still worthy of consideration. φַ ?εּ ?ψָ ?εֹ ?ο occurs only in Son 4:9, where it is manifestly a term of endearment, and where one may translate “thou hast taken away my heart by one of thine eyes, by a picture (as if formed by a turner) of thy little neck” (properly Halzpartiechen). ωְׁ ?λִּ ?ιλּ ?εֹ ?ο (Genesis 49:18) from ωָׁ ?λַּ ?σ serpsit, reptavit, is called a diminutive by Gesenius, meaning “little sneak.” ζֵ ?ψֵ ?ςֹ ?βִ ?ιν which occurs Daniel 1:16 for ζֵ ?γֹ ?ςִ ?ιν ibid. Isaiah 44:12, can hardly mean anything else than small vegetables, i.e., something inconsiderable as means of nourishment. It is universally admitted that ΰִ ?ιωׁ ?εֹ ?ο, “the pupil,” means the little man in the eye; and also ωַׂ ?δֲ ?ψπִ ?ιν (Isaiah 3:18; Judges 8:26) is generally taken to mean lunulae.
If, finally, Ben-Gorion, whom Ewald cites, is correct in stating that Josippon is diminutive of Joseph, I cannot see what one can object to the assumption that the Heb., among its diminutive forms, forms some in Ξεֹ ?ο. Moreover Isaiah 44:5 manifestly corresponds to Isaiah 44:2, and as the words ver.5 ζδιχψΰαωׁ ?νιςχα, correspond to the words ΰμΞϊιψΰςαψιιςχα Isaiah 44:2, so the words ιωׂ ?ψΰμιλπδεαωׁ ?ν Isaiah 44:5. refer to the words ιωׁ ?ψεοαηψϊιαε Isaiah 44:2, (comp. the remarks on Isaiah 44:5). From this results that the Prophet regards ιωׁ ?ψεο as the λִ ?πּ ?εּ ?ι for ιωׂ ?ψΰμ. Isaiah 44:5. Piel λִּ ?πָּ ?δ, besides here, occurs only Isaiah 45:4 and Job 32:21-22. In Job the meaning is manifestly “to flatter.” In Isaiah 45:4 the word stands, as here, parallel with χψΰ, and can likewise mean only “to name honorably.” In later Hebrew the word means “cognominare, titulo appellare” in general, and λִּ ?πּ ?εּ ?ι is “cognomen, agnomen,” when even not exactly an honorable one.
Thus ΰֲ ?γֹ ?πַ ?ι and ΰֱ ?μδִ ?ιν are the λּ ?πּ ?εּ ?ιιν for ιδεδ. Among Hebrew grammarians the pronoun is called λπει, because it is a word standing in place of a noun. Comp. Buxtorf, Lex. talm. et rabb, p. 1054. With this certainly connects the Arabic Kunje, which however has more the meaning of a familiar name of flattery or one given in jest (comp. Ewald’s Gr., pp. 662, 665).
AND 1. This strophe connects closely with the foregoing one as its necessary conclusion. The prospect disclosed Isaiah 43:21, that not merely the brute world, but also the people of God will proclaim the praise of the Lord, cannot be realized at once after the return from Exile. For the fleshly Israel still predominates. They cannot proclaim the praise of Jehovah; they will not, in their self-righteousness, acknowledge their sin, and will not accept the sacrifice that God, in His grace, offers to make for their sin. For this they are given up to the curse of destruction.
But Israel is by no means done away as a whole by this. On the contrary, the moment has come when the Lord will fulfil to the people of His choice, i.e., the election, the ἐκλογή of His people (Isaiah 44:1-2), the promise given Isaiah 43:19-21. For then the Lord will send down, not earthly abundance of water, but streams of the Spirit, on the spiritual Israel, composed of those of Israel and of the heathen that are qualified to receive (Isaiah 44:3), and these streams will enable the spiritual Israel to cleave to the Lord in a fresh life of the Spirit, and thus to perform what was predicted Isaiah 43:21.
2. Yet now hear——have chosen.Isaiah 44:1-2. It is first of all to be remarked how the Lord no longer addresses His people merely by the name “Jacob” or “Israel,” but with the ten-derest expressions, and how He accumulates these expressions. We see that He is no longer dealing with the natural Israel, but with the remnant, the ἕκλογή. But now depends on Isaiah 43:28. But now, i.e., after fleshly Israel has contemned the sacrifice for its sins, and has on that account been rejected, the moment has come when the Lord prepares the true Israel for the accomplishment of His will.
This Israel He first addresses as Jacob My servant. Thus we see that here, not the total, but only the noble nucleus of the nation is designated as “Servant of the Lord.” For He calls this nucleus Israel whom I have chosen (Isaiah 41:8-9; Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 49:7). This is the first address, and meant only to call the attention of the one addressed. Then follows the second address, which begins with naming the speaker, who is designated as Jehovah, the Creator and Former of Israel from the womb, and their Helper. From all the facts and names accumulated in the two verses, the conclusion is drawn that Israel ought not to be afraid. The words Isaiah 43:28 seem to give the occasion for this.
Jeshurun [ Jesurun is an erroneous orthography.—Tr.], which occurs first [and the only passages beside.—Tr.] Deuteronomy 32:15; Deuteronomy 33:5; Deuteronomy 33:26, is undoubtedly a designation of the people of Israel (see Text and Gram.). If we may take it as a term of endearment or flattery, we may then understand it to mean “pious little one, pious little nation, Frφmmchen.” It is to be noted that the second address (Isaiah 44:2), like the first (Isaiah 44:1) concludes with I have chosen him.—From this appears what emphasis the Prophet lays on the idea of the election.3. For I will pour——of Israel.Isaiah 44:3-5. Here the Lord says to His beloved people why they need not be afraid. In the judgment that is to consume the fleshly Israel, the spiritual Israel is to remain unharmed. The latter is in fact called to perform what the other could not do: proclaim the praise of Jehovah (Isaiah 43:21).
It is enabled to do so by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The Prophet here returns to the sphere of thought of Isa 43:20. There a rich blessing of water was promised to the nation returning home through the desert. We have seen that the Prophet here again contemplates together the whole period of salvation. We are aware of this from his seeing also the irrational brutes qualified and impelled to thanksgiving to God. But this elevated goal Israel does not attain at once.
Rather in this period, beginning with the deliverance from the Exile and concluding with the reign of peace, the outward Israel descends deep down into the abyss of destruction. But the “election” will remain, and to it will be given that outpouring of streams of living water, of which the blessing of water during the journey in the desert was only a type. With Isaiah 44:3 a the Prophet makes the connection with that type. I may say, he places one foot in the physical and the other in the spiritual, and thus forms a bridge from one to the other. Not as if to the “elect” will be imparted first the physical and then the spiritual blessing. But only for the purpose of making us recognize the connection with Isaiah 43:20, the Prophet speaks first physically.
But, as the following intimation shows, he means already in Isaiah 44:3 a spiritual water. φָ ?ξֵ ?ΰ (not φְ ?ξֵ ?ΰָ ?δ) seems, in antithesis to ιַ ?αָּ ?ωָׁ ?δ “the thirsty,” to mean a living being, and ιαωׁ ?δ (comp. Genesis 1:9-10) “the dry ground.” πεζμιν“fluentes, fluenta” (comp. Exodus 15:3; Psalms 78:16; Psalms 78:44) only here in Isaiah. When the Prophet says on thy seed, thine offspring he addresses the ideal totality of the nation (comp. Joe 3:1). The blessing, which we are primarily to understand as spiritual and belonging to eternal well-being, is the effect of the Spirit, and appears outwardly in joyous, fruitful prosperity.
Hence φξηεεβεΧ. The LXX. and Targ. appear to have read λְּ ?αֵ ?ιο. And at first sight one might prefer this reading to the ααιο of the text (which occurs only here) were it better supported and not the easier. It seems to me that the Prophet, by the grass, does not mean the Israelites themselves, to whom “seed” and “offspring” do refer. He rather conceives of the Israelites as higher and nobler plants, say, flowers or trees, growing out of the midst of the grass, and by the grass means the converted heathen. He further compares them to Arab-trees (ςψαιν, Isaiah 15:7, according to Wetzstein in Delitzsch, p. 459.
Rem., not willows, but a poplar tree that grows like willows, and along with such, by flowing water) by the water-courses (comp. Isaiah 30:25; Psalms 1:3), which, less common than the willow, rise conspicuous among the trees and bushes growing by the water.
Thus the Prophet prepares for what he would say Isaiah 44:5. He shows, namely, that to the spiritual Israel, whom he addresses Isaiah 44:1-2, belong not only such as are Israelites by corporeal descent. Not all are Israel that are of Israel (Romans 9:6 sqq.); and just as little are the heathen on account of their descent excluded from Israel. Our Prophet, in fact, often enough utters the promise that the heathen shall come to Israel and be incorporated in Israel (Isaiah 2:2 sqq.; Isaiah 11:10; Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6; Isaiah 49:18 sqq.; Isaiah 54:1 sqq.; Isaiah 55:5; Isaiah 56:5 sqq; Isaiah 60:3; Isaiah 65:1, etc.). Thus I see in Isaiah 44:5 an exposition of the thought that the believing Israelites sprout up in the midst of the grass, and that they thus shall be distinguished from the grass, and yet stand upon one foundation of life with it. For Isaiah 44:5 does not speak of Israelites, but of such as turn to Jehovah and to His people. But the language concerning these would be wholly disconnected if Isaiah 44:4 did not in “among the grass” contain a transition to the thought in question.
Notice that Isaiah 44:5 has two chief parts, of which each has two subdivisions. The first subdivision of each part contains a declaration of surrender to Jehovah; the second subdivision contains each time a recognition of Israel as a people of prominent importance. The first subdivisions begin with ζֶ ?δ, the fourth does not. As one cannot avoid inquiring why the Prophet should refrain from a fourth ζδ, it appears that he would say: not all will make prominent in their confessions either Jehovah or the nation, but many will do both. Thus among these heathen there shall be so far a difference, that some in their declaration of adhesion will mention more especially the God of the people, others the people of God, while still others will mention both in equal degree. Thus one will say I am the Lord’s, another will let a loud call be heard by means of the name of Jacob, i.e., he will loudly praise Jacob (comp. on Isaiah 41:5).
Finally a third will do both: he will sign away his hand, i.e., what he can do, effect, perform (compare the expression πָ ?ϊַ ?οιָ ?γJeremiah 1:15; 2 Chronicles 30:8, etc.) to the Lord (λָּ ?ϊַ ?αliteris consignare also with μְ of definition, e.g., in λָּ ?ϊεּ ?αμַ ?ηַ ?ιּ ?ιν4:3). This explanation appears simpler to me than the other two that translate either “to write, etch on the hand,” or “to write with the hand.” Thus one may say in Latin: literis manum suam Jovae consignabit, in order to signify surrender by means of a legal obligation. Of the same person it is said further, that “he will make an award of honor by means of the name of Israel,” i.e., that he will honorably name the name of Israel. See Text and Gram. The intimate relation between God and His people is assumed here. He that confesses the Lord must confess His people, and vice versa.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 43:1. “Here are presented to us for our comfort all three articles of the Christian faith concerning the Creation, Redemption, and Sanctification. For 1) if God created us He will not forsake the work of His hands (Psalms 138:8). 2) If He has redeemed us, no one will seize His sheep out of His hand (John 10:28). 3) If He has called us and named us by our name, we are allowed to rejoice that our names are written in heaven (Luke 10:20)”—Cramer.2. On Isaiah 43:2. “God delivers out of perils of water. Examples: Noah (Genesis 8:15). Moses who was cast into the water in a little ark covered with pitch (Exodus 2:6).
The children of Israel who were led through the Red Sea (Exodus 14:16). Jonah in the whale’s belly (Jonah 2:11). The disciples with the Lord in the boat (Matthew 8:26). Peter who walked on the water (Matthew 14:30). Paul shipwrecked, and along with whom were rescued two hundred and seventy-six souls (Acts 27:37). God delivers also from perils of fire.
Examples: Daniel’s companions in the fiery furnace (Daniel 3:24 sqq.). Lot, whom with his family the holy angel led out of Sodom (Genesis 19:17).”—Cramer.3. [On Isaiah 43:4. “He would cause other nations to be destroyed, if it were necessary, in order to effect their deliverance, and to restore them to their own land. We learn here, (1) That nations and armies are in the hand of God and at His disposal. (2) That His people are dear to His heart, and that it is His purpose to defend them. (3) That the revolutions among nations, the rise of one empire, and the fall of another, are often in order to promote the welfare of His church, to defend it in danger, and deliver it in time of calamity. (4) That His people should put the utmost confidence in God as being able to defend them, and as having formed a purpose to preserve and save them.”—Barnes.——“The righteous is delivered out of trouble, and the wicked cometh in his stead,” Proverbs 11:8].
4. On Isaiah 43:3-4. “There are various views of this: a. Some suppose we are to understand it thus; the Egyptians imagined they would blot out the people of Israel, but they were punished themselves; b, others apply it to the times of Hezekiah, when the Egyptians and Ethiopians were chastised by Shalmaneser; c, others suppose it was fulfilled by Nebuchadnezzar in the time of Zedekiah; d, others by the Romans, when the Jewish republic was spared and these nations encountered misfortune; e, still others regard it as yet future, and that it is to be fulfilled on anti-christian nations, which they infer from Isaiah 44:5-7.”
“Several examples of such a warding off of punishment from the Jewish nation, which on the other hand were suffered to fall on heathen nations, are to be noticed in the history of the Jews. Still this is not to be understood as if these nations suffered for the sins of Judah. The wrath of God that should have come upon Judah, came on the heathen because of their own sins, but Judah was then spared out of grace (Proverbs 21:18). God forgave the penitent Jews their sin, but He punished the sin of the impenitent heathen.”—Starke.5. On Isaiah 43:5-8. What the Prophet says here primarily of the return of Israel from all the lands of its exile, applies also to that return that takes place when poor, straying heathen souls are led back from dead idols to the living God, their Saviour and Redeemer.
Then they are the ones that the Lord has made and prepared for His glory (Acts 13:48; Romans 8:29 sq.) Such are the blind people that still have eyes, and the deaf that still have ears. For blind and deaf they are in as far as by nature and their birth they belong to the blind and deaf heathen world. But they have eyes and ears in as far as the Lord has opened their hearts and given them a penetration by which they see and hear better than those who, although surrounded by light through possession of the means of grace, still do not know what belongs to their peace (Matthew 13:13 sqq.; John 9:39 sqq.).
6. On Isaiah 43:9-13. The Prophet here gives a proof of the existence of God, which at the same time involves a proof of the non-existence of idols. It cannot be denied in thesi, that a knowledge of the future lies beyond the sphere of human ability, and that if it occurs, it can only happen by virtue of a superhuman penetration that overleaps the limits of time and space. Prediction is not an art. All depends on what is foretold being fulfilled at the right time and in the right way.
The agreement of prophecy and fulfilment can only be verified after the fulfilment takes place. Hence it is necessary that at the moment named the prophecy be attested as genuine, not fortuitous, not fabricated post eventum. Hence the Lord says (Isaiah 44:10): “ye are my witnesses.” And in fact, in all its notorious history, in its remarkable indestructibility, by virtue of which it moves through the entire universal history, while all other ancient nations have disappeared, Israel is a living witness for the existence of Him who calls Himself at once the God of Israel and the Creator of heaven and earth. For it is foretold that to this nation shall happen judgment, dispersion, continued existence in dispersion and a gathering together again out of dispersion. Over thousands of years ago it was foretold, and what to the present could be fulfilled has been fulfilled. What but divine knowledge and power can have so fitted the prophecy to the fulfilment and the fulfilment to the prophecy?
Therefore the existence of a divine providence is proved by the history of Israel. But what other God should be the author of this providence than He that said not only, “ye are my witnesses” (Isaiah 44:10), but also, “I declared when there was no strange god among you?” (Isaiah 44:12). One is reminded of the anecdote of Frederick the Great, who, having demanded a striking proof of the truth of the religion revealed in the Bible, received from one of the guests at table the answer, “Your majesty, the Jews.”
[7. On Isaiah 43:10. “Neither shall there be after me.” “This expression is equivalent to that which occurs, Revelation 1:11, “I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last;” and it is remarkable that this language, which obviously implies eternity, and which in Isaiah is used expressly to prove the divinity of Jehovah, is, in Revelation 1:11, applied no less universally to the Lord Jesus Christ.”—Barnes.On Isaiah 44:13.“ ‘Who can hinder it.’ The doctrine taught here is, (1) That God is from everlasting—for if He was before time, He must have been eternal. (2) That He is unchangeably the same—a doctrine which is, as it is here designed to be used, the only sure foundation for the security of His people—for who can trust a being who is fickle, changing, vacillating? (3) That He can deliver His people always, no matter what their circumstances. (4) That He will accomplish all His plans; no matter whether to save His people, or to destroy His foes. (5) That no one—man or devil—can hinder Him. How can the feeble arm of a creature resist God? (6) That opposition to Him is as fruitless as it is wicked. If men wish for happiness they must fall in with His plans, and aid in the furtherance of His designs.”—Barnes.]
8. On Isaiah 43:19 to Isaiah 44:5. We have here again a brilliant illustration of the grandeur of the prophetic view of history. The Prophet sees in spirit that with the deliverance from the Babylonish captivity a new thing will begin, in comparison with which the deliverance from Egyptian bondage with all its miracles will only appear as something inferior. For with the beginning of that period of salvation, the Prophet sees, too, the end. The waters with which the Lord will refresh those returning from Babylon flow from the same source as the water of regeneration, of the παλιγγενεσία, of the renewal of nature.
And yet! What a tremendous period separates both, and what must Israel not go through till, from the drink out of that earthly fountain in the desert, it has attained to the well of heavenly water of life! It must first slough off the entire “fleshly Israel,” It has already performed the entire Old Testament ceremonial service in an unsatisfactory manner. Indeed, had it done this most perfectly, it could only have satisfied the needs of blotting out sin in an ideal, typical way. But Israel was far from performing even the outward letter of the law by that sort of service. The Lord must take all the guilt of His people on His own shoulders.
What Israel did itself was as good as nothing. And the Lord, in His long-suffering, not only put up with this, He will even do more. He will undertake Himself the entire and complete blotting out of the guilt of His people. But the people are self-righteous and trust in their own work. They maintain that they have done what they ought, although the Lord can prove that not even their chiefs and prominent representatives have been righteous. Since then the nation, persisting, stiff-necked, in its self-righteousness, does not accept the sacrifice, that the Lord, in His infinite grace, brings for the purpose of making atonement,—this outward, fleshly Israel, with all its outward ceremonial service, which is used only to feed its self-righteousness, must be broken up and destroyed.
Then, out of the ruins of the fleshly Israel, the spiritual Israel will issue as from a cast off shell, and it will be susceptible of the gracious gifts of its God. To it then will be imparted the streams of the Spirit which bring about the regeneration of all natural and personal life, and will enable Israel to sanctify the name of its God, as predicted in Isaiah 43:21.
[On Isaiah 43:25. “We may learn from this verse; (1) That it is God only who can pardon sin. How vain then is it for man to attempt it! How wicked for man to claim the prerogative! And yet it is an essential part of the papal system that the Pope and his priests have the power of remitting the penalty of transgression. (2) That this is done by God solely for His own sake. It is not (a) because we have any claim to it—for then it would not be pardon, but justice. It is not (b) because we have any power to compel God to forgive—for who can contend with Him, and how could mere power procure pardon?
It is not (c) because we have any merit—for then also it would be justice—and we have no merit. Nor is it (d) primarily in order that we may be happy—for our happiness is a matter not worthy to be named compared with the honour of God. But it is solely for His own sake—to promote His own glory—to show His perfections—to evince the greatness of His mercy and compassion—and to show His boundless and eternal love. (3) They who are pardoned should live to His glory, and not to themselves [Isaiah 44:21; Isaiah 44:5]. (4) If men are ever pardoned they must come to God—and to God alone. They must come not to justify themselves, but to confess their crimes.”—Barnes.].
10. On Isaiah 44:1-2. “God has two arguments wherewith to comfort: 1) When He reminds His own what He did for them in the past; 2) what He will yet do for them in the future.”—Cramer.
11. On Isaiah 44:3. Comparing here the bestowment of the Spirit to pouring water on dry land, happens primarily out of regard to the special connection of our passage, which treats of the return of Israel through the desert. As in Isaiah 43:19-20 abundance of water is promised for physical refreshment, so here streams of the Spirit for spiritual refreshment. Outpouring of the Spirit is promised elsewhere also for the purpose of cleansing, fructifying, refreshing (Ezekiel 36:25; John 7:37 sqq.). When, however, the Holy Spirit appears elsewhere as a fiery energy (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Acts 2:3) it is to designate it as the principle of divine light and life-heat. Whether by the baptism of fire is to be understood also the fire of judgment (Matthew 3:12; 1 Corinthians 3:13-15) as Origen and Ambrose think, we will leave uninvestigated here.
HINTS1. On Isaiah 43:1-4. A glorious word of comfort for the individual Christian and for Christian communions. All grounds of comfort are therein enumerated. We learn 1) what the Lord is to us (Isaiah 44:3 God, Saviour, Isaiah 44:4 He loves us). 2) What we are to the Lord (Isaiah 44:1 His creatures, redeemed ones, and not such as disappear in the great mass, but whom He knows by name, and whom as a precious possession He keeps ever in sight). 3) He delivers us out of manifold distresses (Isaiah 44:2 out of all). 4) The price He pays for our deliverance (Isaiah 44:3-4; conscious enemies, or their unconscious instruments may go to destruction to save us, e.g., in ancient times the Egyptians in the Red Sea, in modern, the French against Germany, 1870–71. 5) To what He has destined us (Isaiah 44:4, because so dear, thou must be glorious). On Isaiah 43:1-2. “Thou art mine! saith the Lord.
By that He signifies 1) a well-acquired; 2) an inviolable right of possession.” Koegel in “Aus dem Vorhof ins Heiligthum,” 1876, Vol. II. p. 196.
2. On Isaiah 43:5-8. Missionary Sermon. The Lord here addresses the spiritual Israel, to whom we and all out of every nation belong, who are born of God. Missions are properly nothing else than a gathering of the hidden children of God, scattered here and there, to the communion of the visible church (John 11:52). Contemplate 1) The mission territory a, in its outward extent (all nations Isaiah 44:5 b, 6); b, in its inward limitation (Isaiah 44:7-8; all are called, only those are chosen who are marked with the name of the Lord, are prepared for His glory, among the blind and deaf are such as see and hear). 2) Mission work: a, its difficulty (Isaiah 44:5, “fear not” implies that, humanly speaking, there is reason for fear); b, the guaranty of its success (Isaiah 44:5, “I am with thee”).
3. On Isaiah 43:22. [Proofs of weariness in religion. (1) Casting off prayer: thou hast not called upon me, O Jacob. Jacob was a man famous for prayer (Hosea 12:4); to boast the name of Jacob, and yet live without prayer, is to mock God and deceive ourselves. If Jacob does not call upon God, who will. (2) They grudged the expense of devotion. They were for a cheap religion. They had not brought even the small cattle; much less the greater, pretending they could not spare them, they must have them for the maintenance of their families; still less would they pay for a foreign article like missions; bought no sweet cane. (3) What sacrifices they did offer were not meant for God’s honor, neither hast thou honored me, etc.; being offered carelessly, or hypocritically, or perfunctorily, or ostentatiously, or perhaps even to idols, these were dishonouring to God. (4) The aggravation of this; as God appointed the service it was no burdensome thing, I have not caused thee to serve, etc.
God’s commands are not grievous. After M. Henry].
4. On Isaiah 43:24-25. Passion sermon. The righteousness that avails with God. 1) Israel does not obtain it (it has not even fulfilled the ceremonial law; and not merely the nation in general left the law unfulfilled, but also its chiefs and teachers: and as with Israel so with mankind in general. 2) Christ procures it; for: a, He the guiltless, out of pure love takes on Himself the heavy burden of suffering, which beginning in Gethsemane ends on Golgotha; b, thereby He blots out our transgressions and reconciles us to the Father.
5. On Isaiah 44:1-5. Pentecost (Whitsuntide) sermon. The Church of Christ can grow, flourish, and bear fruit only by the Spirit of Christ. Hence is necessary the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. This Isaiah 1) to be hoped for with certainty, because promised by the Lord (in proportion to the need and to the receptivity the Holy Spirit will ever be imparted to the church); 2) infallibly efficient in producing all the good fruits that must adorn the vineyard of the Lord (Isaiah 44:4-5).
6. On Isaiah 44:1-5. “The period of confirmation an Advent of Jesus to the children.” Praise and thanks to God, there is much new life born in the period while those that are to be confirmed are under instruction, and much grows up in later time out of the seed scattered then. This time ought also to open the children’s mouths for them to confess their salvation and their Saviour. That poor “yes” that the children speak at their confirmation at the altar is not enough. Nor does it suffice for us to confess our being Christians by attending church and partaking of the Lord’s Supper. The congregation that has become dumb must learn to speak again.
We must boast again the unspeakable benefit of free grace. We must have a confessing church again. The confession must go with us into our life.” Ahlfeld, Das Leben im Lichte des Wortes Gottes, Halle, 1867, p. 150.
Footnotes:poplars.
shall shout out the name of JacobV.—THE FIFTH Prophecy as proof of divinity comes to the front and culminates in the name Kores Isaiah 44:6-281. JEHOVAH ISRAEL’S BY HIS . WHOSE MADE-GODS CANNOT COME TO SHAME
Isaiah 44:6-116 Thus saith the Lord the King of Israel,
And his redeemer the Lord of hosts;
I am the first, and I am the last;
And beside me there is no God.
7 And who, as I, shall call,
And shall declare it, and set it in order for me,
Since I appointed the ancient people?
And the things that are coming, and shall come,
Let them shew unto them.
8 Fear ye not, neither be afraid:
Have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it?
Ye are even my witnesses.
Is there a God beside me?
Yea, there is no God; I know not any.
9 They that make a graven image are all of them vanity;
And their delectable things shall not profit;
And they are their own witnesses;
They see not, nor know;
That they may be ashamed.
10 Who hath formed a God,
Or molten a graven image that is profitable for nothing?
11 Behold, all his fellows shall be ashamed:
And the workmen, they are of men;
Let them all be gathered together, let them stand up;
Yet they shall fear, and they shall be ashamed together.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 44:8. ψָ ?δָ ?δΞτָּ ?ηַ ?γ. Isaiah 44:9. ιָ ?ςַ ?μ–ηָ ?ξεּ ?γ–ϊֹּ ?δεּ Hiph.
Isaiah 44:6-7. Isaiah 44:7 is related to Isaiah 44:6 b as the conclusion to the reason. But ver 7 is to be construed so that the words εξιλξπιιχψΰξωׂ ?εξιςν–ςεμν shall be taken together, and the words ιβιγδειςγλδμι construed as a parenthesis. χψΰ, agreeably to the context, and since it has nothing to do with teaching or with announcing past things, is=“to proclaim, announce, call out aloud, publicly.” As appears to me, χָ ?ψָ ?ΰ is used partly for the sake of variety, the synonymous expressions having been used δִ ?βִּ ?ιγ thrice in Isaiah 44:7-8, δִ ?ωְׁ ?ξִ ?ιςַ (comp. Isaiah 43:12) once at least, but partly and chiefly, because χψΰ involves in a greater degree the notion of sounding. It is related to those other expressions named like our “calling” to “giving notice, letting hear.” The latter may take place by a very light voice or even without any use of the voice.—ιβιγΧειςΧμι, as we have said, is a parenthesis; but εְ introduces the demonstrative conclusion after the relative premise ξιιχψΰ (comp. e.g. Numbers 23:3). The premise is only interrupted for rhetorical reasons, being the result of the pathos with which the Prophet speaks. ςָ ?ψַ ?κְ certainly has here, not merely the meaning “to lay before, to lay down,” but it involves also the notion of “doing similarly.” The Vav. before ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ has as often, the meaning “and indeed.” μָ ?ξεֹ after ιַ ?βִּ ?ιγεּ is dat. ethicus, with strong approximation to the dativ. commodi.
Isaiah 44:8. The question δֲ ?ιֵ ?ωׁ εβεΧ is equivalent to a denial (comp. questions with ξָ ?δ or ξִ ?ι Job 16:6; Job 31:1; Son 8:4, etc.).—The expression ΰֱ ?μεֹ ?δַּ does not occur again in Isaiah.
Isaiah 44:9. ηξεּ ?γ is “exoptatum, deliciae” (part. pass.; only here in Isaiah; comp. Job 20:20; Psalms 39:12). But I construe “the wished-for, desired,” in the sense of “jewel, valuable.”—αμΞιεςιμε recalls αְּ ?μִ ?ιַּ ?ςμ, thus it has hardly the merely negative meaning of inability, but also the positive meaning of something destructive, hurtful.—The words εςγιδνδξδ are variously explained. The Masoretic points over δξδ denote that it is critically suspicious. But it suits the context very well, if only the idols themselves be not regarded the witnesses: they, the idols, are their own witnesses, i.e., they testify against themselves (Delitzsch). For the notion against themselves would need to be more clearly expressed.
Rather the idol-makers are the witnesses for their idols as Israel is for Jehovah. Therefore δֵ ?ξָּ ?δ is subject to the predicate ςγιδν, and not merely a resumption of ςγιδν construed as the subject, of ιψΰεεβεΧ.
Isaiah 44:10. ξι is here, as often, at the point of passing from the interrogative to the relative sense, and hence acquires an iterative meaning. For the question “who is there, who?” which, as it were, challenges in every direction, has the sense of “whosoever, quicunque.” Comp. e.g. Exodus 24:14; Jeremiah 49:19.—I construe μαμϊιεΧ as a conclusion, whose predicate is self-evident from the foregoing clause: “whosoever forms a god (he does, forms or moulds it) for nothing.” If ξι be construed as a direct interrogative, it has the appearance as if the Prophet doubted whether there were such people. For if one understands the inquiry in the sense of “reluctant wonder” (Knobel), and makes the answer to be that no rational person would do this, then the question would not be “who forms?” but “what rational person forms?”
Isaiah 44:11. According to the context the clause εηψωׁ ?ινεΧ must, it seems to me, be construed as causal. For δξδξΰγν is not the parallel of ιαωׁ ?ε it does not express the notion of destruction, but of what is the explanation of the destruction. Therefore I translate: “for they are (properly: they are in fact, comp. Isaiah 24:5; Isaiah 38:17 : Isaiah 39:1, etc.), smiths of men,” i.e., of human origin.
AND 1. The Prophet has announced (chap. 41), the first deliverer for the first time, and then along with him the one to be delivered, viz., the servant of God in the national sense. In contrast with both of these he has presented the second and greatest deliverer, the Servant of God in a personal sense (42). In chap. 43 he has portrayed the deliverance in its chief characteristics. Now in chap. 44 he gives the fullest effect to that element of his discourse, viz., the proof of divinity by means of prophecy, which so far he has produced already four times like a refrain, yet only as a prelude.
In three strophes Jehovah announces Himself in contrast with the dead idols as the true, living, omniscient, almighty God, who has predetermined Israel’s deliverance, and now foretells it so that Israel can no more doubt His divinity. For, at the close of this chapter the Prophet names with the greatest distinctness even the name of the prince who is called to be the deliverer of Israel. The first three strophes are but the substructure for this culmination that is to crown the building, that is, for the great prophetic act that is accomplished in naming the name “Kores.” In the first half of the present strophe (Isaiah 44:6-8) the Prophet makes prominent the difference between Jehovah and idols, by contrasting the omniscience and omnipotence of Jehovah with the nescience and impotence of idols. In the second half, also consisting of three verses (8–11), the Prophet exposes the folly of idolatry.
2. Thus saith—know not any.
Isaiah 44:6-8. The Lord justifies the consoling language “fear ye not,” etc., Isaiah 44:8, by first presenting Himself as the One that will help Israel, and can help. He is willing to help as being Israel’s King, He can help as being the eternal God who has proved this His eternal divinity. Note how the Lord encloses the predicates of His existence relative to Israel in the predicates of His divine existence. He first calls Himself Jehovah, the absolutely existent. For this is the foundation.
Then He calls Himself Israel’s King and Redeemer. This is His historical revelation relative to time and salvation, which is enclosed by His eternal divine existence as by a ring. The latter is completed by the notion “Jehovah of hosts.” For by this is intimated that the Lord is not only God per se, but has revealed this divinity already in a super-terrestrial sphere of dominion. How consoling for Israel that He, who is God per se, but has shown already that He can be such also for others by a super-terrestrial kingdom of glory, calls Himself Israel’s King and Redeemer! The Lord was King of Israel while Israel existed as a nation (comp. Deuteronomy 33:5; Psalms 74:12).
The nation’s demand for a human king is expressly called an insult to Jehovah as heavenly King (1 Samuel 8:7; 1 Samuel 12:12). And also after Israel had received an earthly royalty, Jehovah still remains forever its proper, true and eternal King, from whom all earthly power of ruling emanates (Isaiah 33:22). But the king is the natural deliverer of his people. His own interest and honor demand that his people shall not be ruined (see e.g.Psalms 79:9; Psalms 106:8). This King has at His disposal for protecting Israel invisible powers, great in strength and numbers, viz., the heavenly hosts (comp. Deuteronomy 33:3, and Schroederin loc.; 2 Kings 6:16 sqq.; Hebrews 1:14).
After this preface the Lord proceeds with what He has in mind. He calls Himself the first and the last (Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 48:12) beside whom there is no God (Isaiah 43:11; Isaiah 44:8; Isaiah 45:6; Isaiah 45:21). For only He can be God who is before all and after all. But the Lord assuredly does not call Himself the first and the last in the sense of temporal succession, as if He were only the first to come into existence and the last to remain; for that would only establish a difference as to degree, between Him and creatures. No, the Lord is at the same time beginning and end, Alpha and Omega. He encircles not only Israel (comp. on Isaiah 44:6 a), but all the world’s history as a ring.
To Him everything, beginning and end, is absolutely present.
Therefore, too, He can prophesy, and therefore prophesying by means of a decree is proof of His eternity, i.e., of His divinity. (On the relation of Isa 44:7 to 6b see Text. and Gram.). ςνΞςεμν “everlasting people;” [English Version ancient people.] I do not believe that this means the human race. The Lord describes Himself in the whole context as the God of Israel; He will comfort Israel. It may be said that God prophesied from the beginning of the world, and that humanity in a certain sense may be described as ςνΞςεμν. Yet it is very doubtful whether in that case ςָ ?ν would not require a nearer definition as in Isaiah 42:5. Isaiah 40:7, to which appeal is made, refers decidedly to Israel, as we have shown. The dead may be called ςρΞςεμν (Ezekiel 26:20) because they are a special part of mankind, in respect to space dwelling in a land of their own, and in respect to time of immeasurable duration.
But Israel, too, may be called an everlasting people, for to it alone, of all nations, is promised an everlasting covenant (Exodus 31:16; Leviticus 24:8; Isaiah 24:5; Isaiah 55:3; Isaiah 61:8, etc.), an everlasting sanctuary (Ezekiel 37:26), an everlasting priesthood (Exodus 40:15; Numbers 25:13, etc.), and kingdom (2 Samuel 7:13; 2 Samuel 7:16; Psalms 89:4 sqq.); indeed it is expressly said “thou hast confirmed to thyself thy people Israel to be a people unto thee forever” (μְ ?ςָ ?νςַ ?γΞςεֹ ?μָ ?ν) 2. Sam. Isaiah 7:24; comp. 1 Chronicles 17:22. And in fact Israel is, in a good sense, the everlasting [wandering] Jew, the only nation that does not lose itself in the sea of nations, like a river, that does not mingle its waters with the lake through which it flows. And in the end the spiritual Israel will absorb all nations, and its sanctuary and priesthood and kingdom every other sanctuary, priesthood and kingdom, to the end that the throne and sanctuary of Israel’s King and High-priest may exist alone through eternity.
The Lord has challenged the idols in Isaiah 44:7 a to produce their ancient prophecies, if they had any to show; in the second half of the verse he challenges them to produce any new ones they have. These new ones are designated as ΰֹ ?ϊִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ϊ and as such ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψϊָּ ?αֹ ?ΰπָ ?δ. I do not believe that by this immediate future and remoter future things are distinguished (see on Isaiah 41:22-23). But which will come is the nearer definition of ΰϊιεϊ. They are not to name any sort of so-called future thing, but such as shall also come, i.e., actually come to pass (see Text. and Gram.). They shall foretell for their own advantage (μξε see Text. and Gram.); for it were for the interest of those addressed to be able to perform what is asked of them.
Isaiah 44:8. If Jehovah, who calls Himself King and Redeemer of Israel, and who has founded this people for an everlasting existence, has furnished the proof of His divinity by a demonstration of His omniscience, then Israel need not fear. Jehovah has long in advance (ξֵ ?ΰָ ?ζ as in Isaiah 16:13; Isaiah 45:21; Isaiah 48:3 sqq., comp. ξֵ ?ψֹ ?ΰωׁ ?41:26) foretold their distress and the deliverance from it, and Israel must testify that such is the fact (Isaiah 43:10). Therefore the Lord can prophesy, and the fact (only affirmed Isaiah 44:6 b) is demonstrated, viz., His sole divinity. In the second clause of Isa 44:8 the Prophet seems to have in mind Psalms 18:32.
2. They that make—ashamed together.Isaiah 44:9-11. The lash is now laid on the folly of those that make idols, and then themselves appear as their witnesses, whereas in fact they see nothing of the future, from which appears the powerlessness of the idols, and the inevitable result that their worshippers must come to shame. The words are throughout in contrast with what (Isaiah 44:6-8) the Lord affirms of Himself. The idols themselves are guiltless. How can the poor blocks help men making idols of them?
But the makers of idols are guilty, hence the Lord addresses them (ιֹ ?φְ ?ψֵ ?ιΞτֶ ?ρֶ ?μ, the expression only here). See Text. and Gram. Jehovah is the Maker (ιֹ ?φֵ ?ψ) of Israel (Isaiah 44:2); the idol-makers are the makers (ιֹ ?φְ ?ψִ ?ιν) of their gods. These idol-makers are vanity (ϊֹּ ?δεּ), they sink back into chaos, or rather they produce nothing better than chaos; while Israel is the everlasting people ςνΞςεμν). The idol-makers are witnesses of their idols, i.e., they testify in their own case. Israel is the impartial witness of Jehovah; the idols are powerless, useless images; Jehovah is the Rock and Redeemer of His people.
The idols themselves see and know nothing, consequently their worshippers and witnesses know nothing (ιָ ?γַ ?ς in the absolute sense=“to have knowledge,” as Isaiah 45:20; Isaiah 56:10); to Jehovah, as the first and last, all is present, the beginning and the end, and what lies between. Therefore Israel must not fear, for it knows with the greatest certainty that it has in prospect a glorious deliverance. Isaiah 44:10-11 form the transition to Isaiah 44:12 sqq. wherein idol-manufacture is described; Isaiah 44:10 already presenting the fundamental thought that a shaped and moulded god is a contradictio in adjecto, hence a useless thing. Isaiah 44:11 describes the proper fate of idol-makers, already intimated by profitable for nothing. By ηαψιν many understand the companions, helpers of the idol-makers. But are not they identical then; and why make them specially prominent?
It is better to understand that the companions or followers of the idols are intended (comp. ηֲ ?αεּ ?ψςֲ ?φַ ?αִּ ?ινΰֶ ?τְ ?ψַ ?ιִ ?νHosea 4:17). Yet I would restrict the meaning to those servants of idols that are at the same time their manufacturers. These are the actual allies of the idols. For by the quantity and quality of their productions idolatrous worship is made to flourish (e.g., Demetrius in Ephesus, Acts 19:24). Against this sentence the idol-makers might fancy they could oppose successful resistance by harmoniously standing up together en masse. But they mistake.
They will still lose heart, and, instead of one by one, will only come to shame together.
Footnotes:And who is as I, who proclaims aloud—so he shall tell it and do it like me—since I set an everlasting people.
And future things even what shall come to pass.
Heb. Rock.
Heb. desirable.
2. THE OF IDOLS AND THE FOLLY OF THEIR PROVED BY THE WAY THEY ARE
Isaiah 44:12-1712 The smith with the tongs
Both worketh in the coals, and fashioneth it with hammers,
And worketh it with the strength of his arms:
Yea, he is hungry, and his strength faileth:
He drinketh no water, and is faint.
13 The carpenter stretcheth out his rule; he marketh it out with a line;
He fitteth it with planes,
And he marketh it out with the compass,
And maketh it after the figure of a man,
According to the beauty of a man;
That it may remain in the house.
14 He heweth him down cedars,
And taketh the cypress and the oak,
Which he strengtheneth for himself among the trees of the forest:
He planteth an ash, and the rain doth nourish it.
15 Then shall it be for a man to burn:
For he will take thereof, and warm himself;
Yea, he kindleth it, and baketh bread;
Yea, he maketh a god, and worshippeth it;
He maketh it a graven image, and falleth down thereto.
16 He burneth part thereof in the fire;
With part thereof he eateth flesh;
He roasteth roast, and is satisfied:
Yea, he warmeth himself, and saith,
Aha, I am warm, I have seen the fire:
17 And the residue thereof he maketh a god, even his graven image:
He falleth down unto it, and worshippeth it,
And prayeth unto it, and saith,
Deliver me; for thou art my god.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_44:12. The words ηψωׁ αψζμξςφγ as they now stand mock every effort at exposition. For if we take ηָ ?ψַ ?ωׁ as a verb [so J. A. A.], which conflicts with the parallel ηψωׁ ςφιν Isaiah 44:13, and translate “ex ferro bipennim facit” (Targ.), or if we take connectedly ηψωׁ αψζμ as faber farrarius, and let ξςφγ depend on a latent verb ηָ ?ψַ ?ωׁ (“the smith prepares an axe,” Gesen.), or on the following τςμ (“the smith—a hatchet he works up in the glowing coals, viz., into an idol,” Hitzig), or let it be subject with μεֹ supplied (“the iron smith has a great chisel,” Delitzsch), or if we connect the three words and translate: “the master, in iron of the axe he works in the glowing coals,” Hahn; “the forger of edge-tools—he works with coals,” Knobel,—in any case we encounter grammatical difficulties, or we obtain an unsatisfactory sense. The LXX. translates: ὅτιὤξυνετέκτωνσίδηρον, σκεπάρνῳεἰργάσατοαὐτό.
Now this ὣξυνε is nothing else than the foregoing ιַ ?ηַ ?γ. For ηָ ?γַ ?ψ means “to be pointed;” Hiph. δֵ ?ηֵ ?γ “to point, sharpen.” Now Cheyne thinks that a word such as δֵ ?ηֵ ?γ has been lost from the beginning of Isa 44:12; Delitzsch believes that ηִ ?γֵּ ?γ has dropped out. But nothing at all has fallen out. Only the Masoretic point Soph-pasuk is to be put after ιֵ ?αωׁ ?εּ. Then ιַ ?ηַ ?γ is quite simply the imperf. Hiph. of ηָ ?γַ ?γ, which imperf. occurs in only one other place, viz., Proverbs 27:17, where it reads:
αַּ ?ψְ ?ζֶ ?μαְּ ?αַ ?ψְ ?ζֶ ?μιָ ?ηַ֑ ?γεְ ?ΰִ ?ιωׁ ιַ ?ηַ ?γτְּ ?πֵ ?ιΞψֵ ?ςֵ ?δεּ, i.e., “iron on iron sharpens, and a man sharpens the countenance of his neighbor.” Of course, according to rule the consonants must be pointed ιָ ?ηֵ ?γ. And it is quite possible that this, or ιַ ?ηֵ ?γ (ad. f. ιַ ?ϊֵּ ?ν Green, § 140, 5) is the original reading of our text. As the imperf. Hiph. of δֵ ?ηֵ ?γ is a very rare form, while ιַ ?ηַ ?γ “una,” is a very frequent word, confounding of the former with the latter is easily explained; and as ιַ ?ηַ ?γ does not suit in Isaiah 44:12, but does suit in Isaiah 44:11, it was natural to place the Soph-pasuk after it. In Proverbs 27:17, also, the Masorets have both times taken ιַ ?δַ ?γ in the sense of una, (comp. Ewald, Lehrb., p. 559).
But this construction is very harsh, because ιַ ?ηַ ?γ must then not only be taken as a preposition, but is, moreover, in a strange manner joined with the prefix αְּ (instead of ςִ ?ν or ςַ ?μ). Most probably, therefore, we are to read ιַ ?ηֵ ?γ in this place, or (less correctly as apocopated Hiph. from ηָ ?γַ ?γ = ηָ ?γָ ?δ, see Zoeckler on Proverbs 27:17) ιַ ?ηַ ?γ.
The ηַ ?ψַ ?ωׁ αψζμ, as remarked, is in parallelism with the ηָ ?ψַ ?ωׁ ςφιν Isaiah 44:13 (comp. ηָ ?ψַ ?ωׁ ΰֶ ?αֶ ?ζ Exodus 28:11). Therefore ηָ ?ψַ ?ωׁ is stat. constr. from ηָ ?ψωׁ (see List).—ξַֽ ?ςֲ ?φָ ?γ (from the rad. inus. ςָ ?φַ ?γ, which like ηφγ in the dialects, χφς ,ηφδ ,ηφα ,ηφυ has the sense of cutting) is an edge-tool; not necessarily a hatchet.—τָּ ?ςַ ?μ is used here absolutely=“to do work;” a use, indeed, that is rare, but comp. Isaiah 43:13=“I effect.” Moreover the word is mainly poetic, and hence a freer use of it is possible.—τֶּ ?ηָ ?ν (again only Isaiah 54:16; Proverbs 26:21) is the fire-coal.—ξχαεδ only here in Isaiah; comp. Isaiah 51:1.
Isaiah 44:13. ωֶׂ ?ψֶ ?ψ. ἅπ. λεγ. “red chalk.”—ξχφςεϊ, ἅπ. λεγ. from χָ ?φַ ?ς “abscindere,” therefore also an edge-tool; Targ. ΰִ ?ζְ ?ξִ ?μַ ?ιָּ ?ΰ, σμίλη, scalprum, tool of the sculptor.—ξְ ?ηεּ ?πָ ?δ from ηεּ ?β “circulare, ἅπ. λεγ. “the circle.”—ϊָּ ?ΰַ ?ψ is originally=ϊּ ?εּ ?ψ “circuire” (hence of the course of the boundaries of the land, Joshua 15:9; Joshua 15:11; Joshua 18:14; Joshua 18:17). Piel is then “circuitum facere,” “to make outlines, to outline.” It occurs only here.—If the reading ιְ ?ϊָֽ ?ΰֳ ?ψֵ ?δεּ at the end of the first clause, is correct, and there is therefore a difference between it and the same word following, then it seems to me very much to correspond with the context to take the latter as denominativum from ϊֹּ ?ΰַ ?ψ in the sense of “to make beautiful.” Thus, e.g., ωׁ ?εֹ ?ψֵ ?ωׁ “to make roots” (Isaiah 40:24) stands along with ωֵׁ ?ψֵ ?ωׁ “to eradicate,” ρֹ ?ςֵ ?ψ “to make a storm (ρַ ?ςַ ?ψ), to storm forth,” along with ρֵ ?ςֵ ?γ “to drive forth.” In that case our form were decidedly to be pronounced j’ thτŏ ?rehu.
Isaiah 44:14. I cannot believe that μִ ?λְ ?ψֹ ?ϊ here is to be taken in the sense of the conjugatio periphrastica. Isaiah 44:14 describes how a forest is planted out and grown large. Thus also Hahn. This statement of the aim is simply put first, and εַ in ειχּ ?η refers backwards.—μλψϊΰֲ ?ψָ ?ζִ ?ιν is said, not as if only cedars were planted. That would conflict with what follows where other sorts of trees are named.
But only the noblest sort stands for all, as if one were to say: to have apples to eat I set out an orchard. The meaning there is not that the orchard consisted only of apple-trees. ϊִּ ?ψְ ?ζָ ?δ, ἅπ. λεγ., commonly supposed to mean “the ilex, rock-oak” (the evergreen oak of the south ”). ΰַ ?μּ ?εֹ ?ο the oak generally. ΰַ ?ξֵּ ?υ “to make firm,” “fix,” in the sense of “choosing,” comp. Isaiah 41:10; Psalms 80:16; Psalms 80:18. ΰֹ ?ψֶ ?ο (with π minusc.) also ἅπ. λεγ. It is strange that the planting of trees is said to be for the purpose of “felling cedars,” and that then no cedars are named among the planted trees Hence one is tempted to conjecture that a ζ was mistaken for π finale minusc, and that it ought to read ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?ζ. But in Assyrian “irini Labnβna” is the common designation for the Cedars of Lebanon. Along with that is found also for cedars irsi (Schrader, Keilinschr. u. d.
A. T., p. 271 sq), so that in both languages ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?ζ and ΰֹ ?ψֶ ?ο have kindred meaning, and the conjecture of Schrader seems well-founded, that both expressions signify only different species of the genus Pinus (the cedar resembles our larch). Hence those are right who, following the LXX. and the Vulg., prefer the meaning “pinus” to that of “ornus.”
Isaiah 44:15. According to what precedes, the notion “tree” in general is the subject of εδιּ ?δ.—πָ ?ωַׂ ?χ again only Psalms 78:21; Ezekiel 39:9.—ρָ ?βַ ?γ see List. μָ ?ξεֹ is used here as singular, as probably Isaiah 53:8; Deuteronomy 33:2. Comp. Ewald, § 247, d.
Isaiah 44:16. ψָ ?ΰִ ?ιϊִ ?ιΰεּ ?ψ as videre mortem, Psalms 89:49; vitam, Ecclesiastes 9:9; somnum, Ecclesiastes 8:16; famem, Jeremiah 5:12, etc.
AND The truth, already uttered in the foregoing strophe, that making a god is a senseless performance, is here put in the strongest light. The Prophet describes in a drastic manner what a monstrous contrast there is between the honor that men put upon the idol and the elements from which its originates. He first describes, briefly the origin of a metal idol. It is the product of the combined labor of edge-tools, hot-coals, hammering and human sweat. Hard work that, and such as makes one hungry and thirsty. What sort of a god is that which must be fashioned with bitter sweat and from such difficult, coarse and hard material!
What a contrast with the God who is spirit (Isaiah 44:12). More particularly he describes how a wooden idol comes into existence. The artist in wood has easier work. He stretches the line so as to have a stick of the desired size. Next, with red chalk, he draws the outline of the figure, which he then executes with his tool, giving it, with the aid of the circle, beauty of form. Thus the block, by the art of the master, takes an outward human form, as is proper in order to live in human society.
But the block cannot be elevated beyond this. Inwardly it remains still a block. ϊτΰψϊ in parallelism with ϊαπιϊ seems to me to involve a progress in thought: not merely according to the human copy generally, but he makes it according to what is splendor, glory of mankind, i.e., the work of art may even represent the human form quite in its lofty ideal, still it gives only the external outline. Evidently the Prophet, by ηψωׁ ςφιν meant, not a bungler, but a real artist (Isaiah 44:13).
But now the Prophet goes back to the origin of the stuff itself of which the wood-idol is made.
He describes how trees are planted so as to make a forest, how the rain gives them increase (Isaiah 44:14): then how such a tree is felled, in order to make a fire with part of it, for heating and cooking, and with another to make an idol (Isaiah 44:15). Thus, recapitulating, of the tree, one half of which is used for heating, and the other half for preparing food, what remains is made into an idol that is worshipped and is summoned for aid as the only refuge. One would suppose that if one half were used for warming and the other for cooking, there would be nothing left. But Isaiah 44:17 speaks of a remnant (ωׁ ?ΰψιϊ). By this the Prophet would manifestly intimate that not even one of the two chief halves of the trunk is applied to making the idol, but only spare wood, say, the stump in the ground. [“This incongruity has no existence in the original: because, as all the other modern writers are agreed, the first and second ηֶ ?φְ ?ιεֹ of Isaiah 44:16 are one and the same half, and the other is not introduced till the next verse.”—J. A. A.] Earth-born block, watered by rain, essentially destined for heating and cooking, only formed into an idol image by the way—such things gods!
All the interpreters since Calvin quote the striking parallel from Horace (Sat. I. 8):
Olim truncus eram ficulnus, inutile lignum,
Cum faber, incertus scamnum faceretne Priapum,
Maluit esse Deum.
Footnotes:The artist in iron sharpens his tool and worketh, etc.
Or, with an axe.
linered-chalk.
To hew, etc., he took.
Ana made choice.
Or, taketh courage.
a cedar.
2. CAUSE AND EFFECT OF
Isaiah 44:18-2018 They have not known nor understood:
For he hath shut their eyes, that they cannot see;
And their hearts, that they cannot understand.
19 And none considereth in his heart,
Neither is there knowledge nor understanding to say,
I have burned part of it in the fire;
Yea, also I have baked bread upon the coals thereof;
I have roasted flesh, and eaten it:
And shall I make the residue thereof an abomination?
Shall I fall down to the stock of a tree?
20 He feedeth on ashes: a deceived heart hath turned him aside,
That he cannot deliver his soul, nor say,
Is there not a lie in my right hand?
TEXTUAL AND Isa_44:18. It seems strange that θη is pointed with Pattahh instead of Kametz. For no root θָ ?ηַ ?η from which θַ ?η might come is used; but from θεּ ?ηַ, which occurs often especially in Ezekiel, the third pers. perf. must sound θָ ?η (comp. Leviticus 14:42). The context gives no intimation of Jehovah being the author of the ΙΙώρωσις (comp. Romans 9).
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
VI.—THE SIXTH The Crowning Point of the Prophecy. Cyrus and the Effects of his AppearanceIsaiah 451. THE DEEDS OF CYRUS. THEIR REASON AND AIM
Isaiah 45:1-71 Thus saith the Lord to his anointed,
To Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden,
To subdue nations before him;
And I will loose the loins of kings,
To open before him the two leaved gates;
And the gates shall not be shut;
2 I will go before thee,
And make the crooked places straight:
I will break in pieces the gates of brass,
And cut in sunder the bars of iron:
3 And I will give thee the treasures of darkness,
And hidden riches of secret places,
That thou mayest know that I, the Lord,
Which call thee by thy name,
Am the God of Israel.
4 For Jacob my servant’s sake,
And Israel mine elect,
I have even called thee by thy name:
I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.
5 I am the Lord, and there is none else,
There is no God beside me:
I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
6 That they may know from the rising of the sun,
And from the west, that there is none beside me.
I am the Lord, and there is none else.
7 I form the light, and create darkness:
I make peace, and create evil:
I the Lord do all these things.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_45:1. ψַ ?γ infin. for ψֹ ?γ; only here in Isaiah; comp. Psalms 144:2.—Regarding the structure of the sentence, notice that first the Prophet speaks, but immediately surrenders the word to the Lord; then both infinitive clauses μְ ?ψַ ?γεβεΧ and μִ ?τְ ?ϊֹּ ?ηַ εβεΧ according to common usage change to the finite verb.
Isaiah 45:2. ΰεωׁ ?ψ, Piel as Isaiah 40:3; Isaiah 45:13; Proverbs 3:6; Proverbs 11:5; Proverbs 25:21; the reading of K’thibh ΰεωֵׁ ?ψ is suspected here, as in Psalms 5:9, because the Jod in all other forms of this verb, (comp. Proverbs 4:25 and the foregoing citations) is treated, not as quiescent, but as a strong consonant.
Isaiah 45:3. ΰεφψεϊηωׁ ?κ and ξθξπιξρϊψιν are expressions that occur only here; see List.—In the last clause ΰπι is subject, ιδεδ in apposition with it, δχεψΰαωׁ ?ξκ is predicate and ΰμδιεΧ supplemental apposition with the subject. All emphasis here rests on δχεψΰαωׁ ?ξκ.
Vers, 4, 5. The imperfects ΰֲ ?λַ ?πְּ ?κָ and ΰֲ ?ΰַ ?ζֶּ ?ψְ ?κָ stand with a past sense, because the whole context, dominated by εΰχγΰ, translates the reader into the past, or because the Vav. Consec. in εΰχψΰ also dominates the subordinate verbs.
Isaiah 45:6. ξξζψηεβεΧ is subject; the δ at the end of ξςψαδ is suffix, comp. Isaiah 23:17-18; Isaiah 34:17, since occidens elsewhere is always ξַ ?ς ?ֽ ?ψֲ ?αָ.
Isaiah 45:7. The participles αεψΰ ,ςωׂ ?δ ,αεψΰ ,ιεφψ stand in apposition with the subject of the foregoing clause.
AND 1. We are here pretty near the middle of the prophetic cycle, chapters 40–48. All that precedes was a gradual ascent to the culmination point, to which the name of Cyrus, Isaiah 44:28, immediately leads over. On this elevated point the Prophet pauses in chap. 45, in order to represent the deeds of Cyrus, the reason and aim of his calling, and in a comprehensive view to exhibit the effects of his appearance. He calls Cyrus the anointed of the Lord whom the Lord has grasped by the hand, and to whom He will bring in subjection nations and kings, Himself going before and removing all obstacles, and handing over to him all hidden treasures (Isaiah 45:1-2). This the Lord prophesies and fulfils for a threefold reason: 1) That Cyrus himself may know Jehovah, that the God of Israel, who centuries before called him to be His instrument, mentioning his name, is the true God (Isaiah 45:3); 2) that Israel might be delivered by him (Isaiah 45:4-5); 3) that all nations also might acknowledge Jehovah as the only God, Creator of light and darkness, good and evil (Isaiah 45:6-7).
2. Thus saith—secret places.
Isaiah 45:1-3 a. All that the Prophet from chap. 40 on has said concerning the infinite power, wisdom, and glory of Jehovah, and in contrast concerning the nothingness of idols, was intended to prepare for the great act that is accomplished by the mention of the name of Cyrus. And, when we recall the things there declared of Jehovah, shall not such an one be able to call Cyrus, as a particularly important and chosen instrument, centuries in advance, with the mention of his name? No one will deny that He can do this if He can do the other things the Prophet has affirmed of Him from chap. 40 on. Those who controvert the former because they also regard the other things affirmed as impossible, in other words: those who deny a personal, omniscient, and almighty God, must at least admit that the author of these discourses, whoever he may have been, believed in such a God. Therefore he represents his God as prophesying something great and quite extraordinary.
Did he then write something not divinely prophesied, but something already happened ex eventu, would that not be a wicked sporting with the holy name of God? Is it not blasphemy? But does what we read in chapters 40–66 give the impression of having been the work of an impostor and blasphemer? If now the living, personal God could know the name of Cyrus centuries beforehand and put it on record, the only question is whether He can have willed to do this? Of this we will speak below in considering the three reasons the Prophet himself assigns for God’s so willing (comp. the μְ ?ξַ ?ςַ ?ο thrice, Isaiah 45:3-4; Isaiah 45:6).
Cyrus is not called “Servant of Jehovah,” although in a certain sense he was such. On the other hand Israel, both the nation in general and the spiritual Israel is never called “Messiah,” “anointed,” whereas the Saviour of Israel is called both. From this I must infer that in “Servant of the Lord” there lies as much the idea of lowliness as there lies the idea of royal dignity and elevation in “anointed” or Messiah. Hence Israel is called only “servant of the Lord,” Cyrus only “anointed,” but the Redeemer bears both names, inasmuch as He was both the lowly servant and the anointed king. Moreover Cyrus is the sole heathen king whom the Scripture calls “anointed.” We learn from this that the work of the Holy Spirit who gives the anointing, must in him have been, not merely indirect, but direct and especially intensive. The word ξωׁ ?ιδ in fact occurs only here in Isaiah, and therefore only in reference to Cyrus. δηζιχ is used here as in Isaiah 41:9; Isaiah 41:13; Isaiah 42:6.
Jehovah strengthens Cyrus by holding him by the right hand, and thereby he subdues the nations to him and thereby he looses the loins of kings. The latter expression is figurative. The girdle binds and holds the strength of the man (Isaiah 11:5; Proverbs 31:17). By removing the girdle the strength is weakened, and also the sword that hangs at the girdle is taken from the warrior. Moreover the expression “to open the loins” (comp. Isaiah 5:27) is metonymic like τָ ?ϊַ ?ηΰֲ ?ρִ ?ιψִ ?ιν (Isaiah 14:17).
If the strength of men is broken, they can neither hold the doors of their houses, nor hold the gates of their cities closed against the hero, although it is not to be denied that the unclosed gates may have also other reasons. [Are not gates closed and barred the girdles that bind the loins of kings?—Tr.] J. Dav. Michaelis (Anmerk. f. Ungel p. 235) calls attention to the fact that Cyrus actually found the gates leading out to the river from the shore unclosed, and Herodotus remarks that had not this been the case, the Babylonians could have caught the Persians as in a weir-basket (I., 191). Notice that the words from μψγ to ξμλινΰτϊη recall the first half of Isa 41:2, b. I will go before thee, so the Lord begins his direct address to Cyrus, that of Isa 45:1 being in the 3d pers.
This is probably an allusion to that promise that Moses gives Joshua (Deuteronomy 31:8), “the Lord He it is that doth go before thee,” and to Deborah’s word to Barak, Judges 4:14. Certainly it is a great word that the Lord here speaks to Cyrus. By this He makes the cause of the latter His own. He will make level the loca tumida (δָ ?γεּ ?ψ again only Isaiah 63:1, “the swelled up, proud, self-inflated”), i.e., the obstacles that pile up like mountains, and will break down all resistance, even of brazen doors and bars of iron. Here too J. D.
Mich. calls attention to the fact that Babylon had a hundred brazen doors, but not in Isaiah’s time. For Nebuchadnezzar was the first to fortify the city in this way (according to Megasthenes in Eusebius, Praep. ev. IX. 41, comp. Herod. I., 179). The second half of Isa 45:2 is reproduced in Psalms 107:16.
Isaiah 45:3 a. The ancients give great accounts of the prodigious treasure that Cyrus obtained in Sardis and Babylon (Herod. 1:84, 88 sq., 183; Cyrop. VII. 2, 5 sqq., 4, 12 sq., 5, 57; VIII. 2, 15; Pliny, Hist. nat, 33, 2 sq., 15). Gesenius cites the Englishman Brerewood (in his book De ponderebus et mensuris, Cap. 10) as computing the sum of this gold and silver [taken from Cr�sus of Sardis alone—Tr.] at £126,224,000. And Babylon was celebrated above all cities in point of riches (comp. Jeremiah 50:37; Jeremiah 51:13; Βαβυλώνἡπολύχρυσος (Aesch. Pers. 2), but Sardis as the πλουσιωτάτητῶνἐντῇἈσίᾳμετὰΒαβυλῶνα [Cyrop. VII. 2, 11).
3. That thou mayest know—these things. Isaiah 45:3 b–7. What we have read Isaiah 45:1-3 a is prophecy. The prophecy alone without fulfilment were empty talk. The fulfilment without the prophecy were a fact whose author could not be recognized.
Only when the fact is previously announced by its author does it prove the author of the prophecy and fulfilment to be an omniscient and omnipotent being, and, accordingly, the true God. This chief aim is realized in a three-fold respect: 1) in reference to Cyrus, 2) to Israel, 3) to all nations. Hence μξςο follows thrice, introducing each time the statement of a purpose. First. We read Isaiah 45:3 b, that thou mayest know that I (am) the Lord which called thee by thy name, the God of Israel (see T. and Gr.). Therefore Jehovah had regard to Cyrus directly and personally.
This man is so important to him that he makes a special arrangement for bringing him to the knowledge that the God of Israel is the true God. All the emphasis here is on “which call thee by thy name.” Precisely this fact, that he found his name in such a remarkable connection with grand events, must have made the deepest, impression on Cyrus. But the book containing this wonderful call to him must of necessity prove its antiquity. Cyrus would easily suspect deception, and would be aware of this being possibly a flattering imposture meant to purchase his favor for the Jews. The proofs of genuineness that he might demand could easily be presented, e.g. witnesses (comp. Isaiah 43:9-10; Isaiah 44:8-9), old men, not Jews, who fifty years and more before had read these prophecies in the books of the Jews.
Cyrus then must regard it as a fact that the God of the Jews had him personally in view, and destined him to greatness, and had called him by name. Why may not divinity that knows all things, know also the names of all His creatures? Was that less possible than that Cyrus knew the names of all his soldiers (see Rambachin loc)? If the latter was a fact, then Cyrus knew by experience how valuable it is to a man, who fancies he is lost in the great mass, to be known by the one highest in authority, and to be called by name.
Second. Jehovah must be recognized by Cyrus as the true God in the interest of the people of Israel. For this distinction put on Cyrus of being named by God by all his names, name and surname, and that before he, Cyrus, could know anything of the Lord, this was to be for the special advantage of that people whom Jehovah here calls His servant and His elect (see on Isaiah 42:1). The construction εָ ?ΰχψΰ is like εַ ?ιַּ ?χּ ?η, Isaiah 44:14, which see. χψּ ?ΰαωׁ ?ν and λπη are conjoined as in Isaiah 44:5. If ωֵׁ ?ν is the principal name, and λπδ denotes an attributive, additional name, then may likely be meant the honorable predicates ψֹ ?ςֶ ?δ and ξָ ?ωִׁ ?ιηַ that are given to Cyrus, Isaiah 44:28; Isaiah 45:1.—μΰιγςϊπι, which recurs Isaiah 45:4-5, like a refrain, stands, in a certain sense, in antithesis with μξςοϊγς, Isaiah 45:3. The Lord knew and named Cyrus before Cyrus knew the Lord (or even could know, Jeremiah 1:5) in order that Cyrus might learn to know the Lord.
The chief object, which dominates the subordinate aims, appears in Isaiah 45:5. He who called Cyrus is with emphasis called Jehovah, the only true God. This is so done that ΰπιιδεδ is put as in apposition with the subject of εΰχψΰ and ΰλακ of Isaiah 45:4. This ΰπιιδεδ stands parallel with the same words Isaiah 45:3; Isaiah 45:6, so that thus the assignment of the chief object recurs with each assignment of the subordinate object. In Isaiah 45:5ιδεδ and ΰμδιν correspond in the parallelism; the former manifestly making prominent its appellative meaning: I the absolutely Existent (in the sense of Exo 3:14).—I girded thee is in antithesis with the ungirding of kings, Isaiah 45:1. Moreover, the Prophet had evidently in mind the passage, Hosea 13:4.
The third subordinate aim is (Isaiah 45:6-7) that all nations may know Jehovah as the only true God. Here, too, as already remarked, the chief object is made prominent in I am the LORD in both verses. East and west, i.e. all nations of the entire earth shall know the Lord. From this we see that Cyrus is conceived of as the medium of a world-historical progress of the true knowledge of God that shall be coincident with the rehabilitation of the Theocracy. The book of Daniel gives evidence of revelations of God that had the same object. As the appearance of Christ did not effect the entire disappearance of heathenism, just as little and even much less could those manifestations of the true God in the centres of heathenism produce any enduring effect.
But they could operate inwardly and secretly, and prepare for the appearance of the Saviour of the world. The appearance of the Magi (Matthew 2) is a proof of this.
Most expositors admit that this strong emphasizing of monotheism has relation to the Persian dualism. Would the Lord bring Cyrus to a correct knowledge of him as the only true God, it could not be without pointing to the fundamental error of the Persian view of the world. If hence one would admit that Cyrus regarded the God of Israel as identical with his own chief divinity, and recognized in the name Jehovah only another word, and that a kindred one in sense, for Ahura-mazda (comp. Fr. W. Schultz on Ezra 1:2), and generally looked on the worship of the Israelites, with its absence of images, as being like that of the Persians, still one must beware of supposing that the Prophet of Jehovah would awake in the mind of Cyrus the view that Jehovah was the same as Ahura-mazda.
Our passage shows plainly that to Cyrus it would be said, Jehovah stands high above Ahura-mazda. The latter was only creator of light. But Jehovah says of Himself here: I form the light, and create darkness. That primarily light and darkness in a physical sense are meant, appears from what follows. For it is more natural to think that peace and evil say something additional, than that they merely explain “light” and “darkness” (Isaiah 9:1). The latter moreover would not suit because “light” and “darkness” as designations of light-substance, are per se much more comprehensive notions than “peace” and “evil,” and it cannot be meant that the Lord creates light and darkness only in the sense of salvation and evil.
On the other hand, from the fact that He does not say θεֹ ?α and ψָ ?ς, but ωׁ ?μεν and ψς, it is seen that nothing is meant to be affirmed concerning the origin of moral evil. The Lord would evidently present Himself, not as the absolute author of evil and good, but as the Judge of them, who prepares salvation for the pious, and destruction for the bad. To conclude, the Prophet once more emphasizes the fundamental thought of his discourse, with the words: I the LORD do all these things.
Footnotes:Or, strengthened.
uneven.
Forming—creating—making peace—creating—making.
2. THE FUTURE FOUNDED THROUGH CYRUS IN WITH THE FAINT- OF ISRAEL
Isaiah 45:8-138 Drop down, ye heavens, from above,
And let the skies pour down righteousness:
Let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation,
And let righteousness spring up together;
I the Lord have created it.
9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker!
Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth.
Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou?
Or thy work, He hath no hands?
10 Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou?
Or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth?
11 Thus saith the Lord,
The Holy One of Israel, and his Maker,
Ask me of things to come concerning my sons,
And concerning the work of my hands command ye me.
12 I have made the earth,
And created man upon it:
I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens,
And all their host have I commanded.
13 I have raised him up in righteousness,
And I will direct all his ways:
He shall build my city, and he shall let go my captives,
Not for price nor reward,
Saith the Lord of hosts.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 45:8. τָ ?ψָ ?δ–ιֶ ?ωַׁ ?ς. Isaiah 45:11. ιεφψ–χְ ?γεֹ ?ωׁ ιωׂ ?γΰμ.
Isaiah 45:8. The subject of ιτψε is neither the ιֶ ?ωַׁ ?ς taken collectively (Gesen., Ewald, Knobel, et al.), nor ιֶ ?ωַׁ ?ς, together with the following φγχδ (Hitzig, Delitzsch), but the before named heaven and earth. The heaven is treated as the masculine fructifying potency and the earth as the one conceiving and bearing.—αָּ ?ψָ ?δ does not mean provenire, but proferre (comp. φέρω, fero, baren, baeren, to bear).—δִ ?φְ ?ξִ ?ιηַ, it is true, is elsewhere used either of God (Genesis 2:9; Psalms 104:14, etc.), or of the earth (Genesis 3:18, etc.). But it is grammatically possible to use it in the sense of “to make φֶ ?ξַ ?η, to germinate, to sprout,” and therefore to apply it to the sprouting plant itself (in a causative sense). The ancient versions, too, understood it so, if perhaps ϊִּ ?φְ ?ξַ ?η did not actually stand in the original text; thus the LXX. ἀνατειλάτωδικαιοσύνη (or δικαιοσύνην); Vulg, justitia oriatur; Syr. egerminet; Targ. reveletur; Ar. crescat. The meaning is similar to that in Psalms 85:12. ΰֱ ?ξֶ ?δξֵ ?ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υϊִּ ?φְ ?ξַ ?ηεְ ?φֶ ?γֶ ?χξִ ?ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ιִ ?νπִ ?ωְׁ ?χָ ?σ.
Isaiah 45:9. Repeat διΰξψ before τςμκ.
Isaiah 45:10. ϊηιμιο the sole example in Isaiah of the archaic feminine ending ιִ ?ο: comp. Olshausen, § 262, e, Anm.; § 244, e.
Isaiah 45:11. ωְׁ ?ΰָ ?μεִּ ?πι is imperative; comp. Psalms 137:3, where the perfect form ωְׁ ?ΰֵ ?μεּ ?πεּ is used. The context altogether demands this.—Just so ϊְּ ?φַ ?εֻּ ?πִ ?ι must be taken as imperative.—φִ ?εָּ ?δ with accusative of the person and ςַ ?μ of the object occurs Isaiah 10:6; 2 Samuel 7:11; 1 Chronicles 22:12; Nehemiah 7:2, etc. Comp. the somewhat extended construction 1 Samuel 13:14; 1 Samuel 25:30; 2 Samuel 6:21.
Isaiah 45:12. In ΰֲ ?πִ ?ιιָ ?γַ ?ι the personal pronoun is to be regarded as strengthening the suffix. For according to Ezekiel 33:17 it is possible for the pron. separatum that intensifies the suffix to be put before.—φִ ?εָּ ?δ stands partly with double accusative, partly with the accusative of the person and a preposition or an infinitive following (Genesis 1, 2) or μֵ ?ΰξֹ ?ψ. But when it stands with the simple accusative, with no mention of what is commanded, it means “to appoint, to order, to commission,” and is used both of persons and of things. Thus it could be said here λμφαΰνφειϊι, whether one thinks of the φαΰ of heaven personally (comp. Isaiah 24:21) or impersonally (Isaiah 48:5).
AND 1. With the mention of the name of Cyrus and the description of his doings the Prophet has attained the culmination of his prophetic cycle. He pauses now a while on this elevation, first to sum up the future that is to follow the appearance of Cyrus in a word of prophecy that presents a glorious Messianic prospect (Isaiah 45:8); but he contrasts with this Israel’s faint-hearted unbelief, that despairingly wrangles with the Creator (Isaiah 45:9-10). Opposed to this unbelief the Lord admonishes them to inquire of Him respecting the future, and to commend to Him the care of His people (Isaiah 45:11), urging this not with new grounds of comfort, but only repeating emphatically the old, viz.: that He who can make heaven and earth (Isaiah 45:12) has also raised up Cyrus to build His city and release His prisoners without receiving an outward reward (Isaiah 45:13).
2. Drop down——created it.
Isaiah 45:8. These words characterize in general the consequences that will follow the appearance of Cyrus on the theatre of the world’s history. It is Messianic salvation that he will bring. It was not in vain that Isaiah 45:1 He was called Messiah. He is such really, though only in a lower, typical degree. If the Exile is the (relatively) lowest point of Israel’s humiliation, then deliverance out of Exile is the beginning of their salvation.
And even if later the way of salvation still sinks down low, even below the level of the Babylonian exile, still on the whole it ascends. By the will and power of God, Cyrus is the pole on which this turning to salvation rests, and is accomplished. With one look the Prophet (Isaiah 45:8) surveys the entire future and observes, as the pith of it, an all-comprehending salvation, that involves also the regeneration of nature. For blessing is not to bloom only in single places of the earth, but all heaven is to influence fruitfully the whole earth, so that, therefore, all nature will, as it were, become a single field bearing the fruit of salvation. Under the figure of rain is represented, in oriental fashion, the fructifying influence of the heaven on the earth (comp. Deuteronomy 32:2).
According to the laws of parallelism, that which operates from above is expressed by two notions—heaven and clouds. These two notions are not co-ordinated, but subordinated. For precisely by the clouds does heaven pour out its fructifying moisture. In the second clause, as often, there is a change in the person. Although in consequence of this, each of the two clauses stands independent, thus the construction does not point to a common object, still righteousnessmust be regarded as that which drops or drizzles down from above, especially as clouds is but a nearer definition of “heavens.” But by “righteousness” is not at all to be understood the fruits of blessing that appear on earth, but much rather the pure, spiritual, heavenly life-potencies that have their foundation in the holy being of God, and hence may be called “righteousness.” The earth, moistened and fecundated shall open up (causative Kal=to make an opening, viz.: for the germs awakened by fecundation, comp. Psalms 106:17).
Therefore heaven and earth are in common to bring forth salvation, i.e., good in the objective sense, and “righteousness,” i.e., subjective being good, moral salvation (compare the relationship of Heil and heilig) shall germinate. (See Text. and Gram.). The prospects opened up by the Prophet are as sure and reliable as they are glorious, as is intimated by I the LORD have created it.
3. Woe unto him—brought forth.
Isaiah 45:9-10.—The Prophet knows that this great salvation must develop slowly and with great alternations, and that hence many, in the moments of apparent standing still or even of retrogression, will become faint-hearted. Elsewhere also he reproves this despondency: Isaiah 40:27; Isaiah 51:12 sq. The whole book of the chapters 40–66 is a book of consolation. Hence it begins Isaiah 40:1 with the double “comfort ye.” But the Prophet knows the human heart too well not to know, that among those for whom this book of consolation is written, there are many who will be content neither with the quality nor quantity of the comfort that is offered, and who strive with their Maker as if no comfort were there. Against these he justly utters a woe, for nothing offends God so much as unbelief. Thus there is an incisive contrast between Isaiah 45:8 and Isaiah 45:9 sqq.
In Isaiah 45:8 we see the future beaming in clear light. But this clear light exists not for those who, when things are not as they wish, immediately despair, because they see no human help, and will not see the divine help. Yet what is man in comparison with God? Nothing more than an image of clay in comparison with the potter (ιεֹ ?φֵ ?ψ comp. Jeremiah 18:1-5; Jeremiah 19:1 sqq.). This comparison is all the more fitting in view of Gen 2:7, where man has just this resemblance.
He is a δֶ ?ψֶ ?ωׂ ΰֲ ?γָ ?ξָ ?δ “potsherd of earth,” and in fact this is the original and foundation stuff common to all men, and not of some specially weak one. In the weakness of others, each should become thoroughly conscious of his own weakness. Thus it is an aggravating circumstance in him who would strive with God that he is a potsherd among potsherds (comp. ξֵ ?ΰָ ?γָ ?ν44:11), and not an isolated sherd. An isolated case might more easily be excused for self-deception. And if man is a potsherd and God his Maker, then he may as little strive with God as the clay, could it speak, may say to the potter what makest thou (i.e., thou makest not the right thing; thou misshapest me), or as any work which thou, O man, formest, may say: he hath no hands, i.e., no power or capacity to form. This clause generalizes the thought by extending it to any human work.
The suffix κּ assumes that God would involve him who would strive with Him in an absurdity by a demonstratio ad hominem: will then thy work, whatever it may be, say to thee whoever thou mayest be: he can do nothing? ιγιν “hands” by metonymy for that to which the hand is applied, viz., the exercise of power and skill (comp. Isaiah 28:2 : Psalms 76:6; also the analogous use in passages like Joshua 8:20, and of ζְ ?ψεֹ ?ςַ comp. Isaiah 48:14). The expression seems to be of a proverbial nature. Delitzsch cites the Arabian lβ jadai lahu, it is not in his power. Paul makes a well known use of this passage Romans 9:20 sq.
Comp. Wis 15:7 sq.
Isaiah 45:10. The Prophet, by another comparison, expresses the disconsolate murmuring of the desponding creature, which, like Isaiah 45:9, also consists of two members. It happens (comp. Job 3:1 sqq.; Isaiah 10:18 sq.; Jeremiah 20:14 sqq.) that one oppressed by sufferings wishes he had never been born. This is also the idea of Isa 45:10, only modified so that to the despairing one is imputed a complaint against his parents that they have begotten him.
4. Thus saith the Lord——of hosts.
Isaiah 45:11-13. To this sinful, blasphemous conduct the Prophet now opposes what the true Israelite ought to do in times of the Theocracy’s apparent ruin: he ought to inquire of the Lord and commend to the Lord the destiny of his people. Yet the Lord will and cannot help this unbelief by new and would-be better grounds of comfort. He can only repeat the old, viz., that he who made the world has now in the person of Cyrus irrevocably appointed the instrument of the deliverance. The Holy One of Israel and his Maker.—So the Lord is named Isaiah 45:11 in a way well be-fitting the context. For it becomes His holiness to keep His word, and His character as Maker to remain consistent and not suffer His work to come to disgrace.
Beside the expression ιεφψ, “former,” “Maker” is occasioned by the comparison of Isa 45:9. This holy God and Almighty Creator therefore commands the Israelite who is in deepest distress to turn to him in respect to the dark future, and to inquire of him.—For such was of old His will (Exodus 33:7; Numbers 27:21; 2 Kings 1:6; 2 Kings 1:16), and also the custom and practice in Israel (Joshua 9:14; Judges 1:1; 1 Samuel 28:6; 1 Samuel 28:15, etc.) Even this may be done in a very improper way, Isaiah 58:2.—ΰϊιεϊ, comp. Isaiah 41:23; Isaiah 44:7. Concerning my children and the work of my hands (allusion to ιεφψε) command ME (see Text. and Gram.). The commission, the office of caring for Israel they should give to the Lord.
Isaiah 45:12. That in these hands Israel will be well secured must appear from the fact that these same hands prepared heaven and earth. Thus here also, as constantly before and after (Isaiah 40:12; Isaiah 40:21; Isaiah 40:28; Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 45:18; Isaiah 48:13; Isaiah 51:13) the Lord proves His ability to accomplish deliverance by a reference to His character as Creator. Doubtless in My hands there is an allusion to Isaiah 45:9 b (see Text. and Gram.). There it is assumed that no human workmanship can say of him that formed it: he has no hands. In allusion to this, the Lord calls Israel here (Isaiah 45:11) the work of His hands. It is impossible that it can mean: I, i.e., not My feet, mouth or other organ, but My hands have spread out the heavens; but He would say: not the hands of another, but My hands have done this (ΰπιιγι and φִ ?εִּ ?δ, see Text. and Gram.).
The almighty Creator is also the almighty Redeemer. And He is such through Cyrus, the raising up of whom (Isaiah 41:2; Isaiah 41:25) even now to Him stands as an accomplished fact. All faint-heartedness that comes from, any sinking of Israel in the world-power, whether apprehended or experienced, the Prophet represses by the announcement that the Lordhas raised up a deliverer in righteousness (comp. on Isaiah 42:6). Because this one shall realize all God’s intentions, the Lord, too, will make level all his ways (Isaiah 45:2). And so he will rebuild the holy city (Isaiah 44:26; Isaiah 44:28) and let the prisoners go (Isaiah 52:3). He will do so not for price or any outward advantage.
In fact one cannot see what motive of policy, or of national economy or worldly motive of any kind could have determined Cyrus to restore the Israelitish nation and its religious worship. It has been said that he would make room for other exiles. But then why did he not send the latter to Judea? And why did he make the return of the Jews optional? This last consideration shows that he had no interest to promote by it. Indeed this restoration may be pronounced a political mistake.
There was some truth in the reproach that Jerusalem was “a rebellious city and hurtful unto kings and provinces—of old time” (Ezra 4:15). For the world-power must ever feel that the kingdom of God in the midst of it is a disturbing and hurtful element. Add to this the surrender of the holy vessels (Ezra 1:7 sqq.), and the requisition to help the Jews “with silver, and with gold, and with goods, and with beasts” (Ezra 1:4), and one must confess that the conduct of Cyrus was very surprising and inexplicable by natural causes. This sort of sending away reminds one very much of that from Egypt (Exodus 12:31 sqq.). In both cases the letting go free was not man’s work, but God’s work.
Footnotes:A potsherd among the.
put; after come.
Or, make straight.
level.
3. THE WORLD-POWER IS ALSO TO JEHOVAH
Isaiah 45:14-1714 Thus saith the Lord,
The labour of Egypt, and merchandise of Ethiopia
And of the Sabeans, men of stature,
Shall come over unto thee, and they shall be thine:
They shall come after thee; in chains they shall come over,
And they shall fall down unto thee, they shall make supplication unto thee,
Saying, Surely God is in thee; and there is none else,
There is no God.
15 Verify thou art a God that hidest thyself,
O God of Israel, the Saviour,
16 They shall be ashamed, and also confounded, all of them:
They shall go to confusion together
That are makers of idols.
17 But Israel shall be saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation:
Ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end.
AND 1. The Prophet having discharged the painful duty of reproving Israel’s pusillanimity (Isaiah 45:8; Isaiah 45:13), now turns to the pleasant task of showing what will be the effect of the salvation instituted in the northern world-power on the world-power lying south of Palestine. The holy nation lay in the middle between these two world-powers. Again and again it had suffered from the friendship and the enmity of both. It had oscillated back and forth between them both, seeking support against the enmity of the one in the friendship of the other. Both, too, had contended with each other for Palestine, and more or less made Palestine their battle-field.
Recall Tirhaka and Sennacherib, Pharaoh Necho and Nebuchadnezzar. Now Israel is in bondage to Babylon as it was in its youth to Egypt. But it is to be delivered from the Babylonian bondage by Cyrus. Will it also thereby be delivered from the assaults of the sinful world-power? Already in Isaiah 43:3 the Prophet presented the prospect of the northern world-power being in a certain sense indemnified by the surrender of the southern for mildness displayed towards Israel. And in reality Egypt became a prey to Cambyses.
But the Prophet sees still more. He sees Egypt, Ethiopia, and Seba not merely in chains, but turning in their chains to Israel to worship the God of Israel (Isaiah 45:14). They [but see below, Tr.] recognize Him as the true God, who had hitherto remained hidden (Isaiah 45:15). They recognize that idolatry was a false way, and that all idol-makers have come to shame (Isaiah 45:16), whereas Israel may confidently expect through Jehovah everlasting salvation and honor (Isaiah 45:17). From this it appears that the Prophet makes the southern world-power join together with Israel in honoring Jehovah, and hence also with the northern world-power, just as happens in Isaiah 19:23 sqq. If the South and the North, united by Israel, have become brothers, then the chains fall of themselves.
2. Thus saith——in chains shall they come over.
Isaiah 45:14 a. To understand this passage we must take Egypt, Ethiopia, and Seba, not as representing the heathen world in general [Barnes, J. A. Alex., Delitzsch and others, Tr.], but as representing specially the southern world-power that was the rival of the northern. For why should just the nations about the Nile represent the heathen world? The general heathen world has its turn, Isaiah 45:22.
The present text deals with an eminently important centre of the heathen world, viz., with that which corresponds to what in the south is now friendly to Israel. In Isaiah 43:3 the subjection of those nations of the Nile to Cyrus is announced. Hence they appear here as bearing chains. But the dominion of the messiah Cyrus is to be one of universal peace and blessing (Isaiah 45:8). In a prophetic sense, i.e., potentially it shall be such, in consequence of the influence that the world-power itself will experience from the spirit of the kingdom of God in the person of Cyrus. Hence the Prophet sees here in the subjugation of those nations of the Nile also the bridge to their conversion.
They are the same thoughts that we find above, chap. 19, from Isaiah 45:19 on. There it is said, Isaiah 45:23, that Egypt shall serve Assyria. But Assyria denotes the northern world-power, which was then represented by Assyria, was later represented by Babylon, and then by Cyrus. But Egypt will also worship Jehovah. The Prophet only indicates in general how this will come about. We see in both passages that Israel is the medium.
From our passage, in connection with Isaiah 43:3, we learn that, proceeding from Israel, first Cyrus comes to the knowledge of Jehovah, then from Cyrus (whether directly or indirectly does not appear) Egypt, so that these three, Israel in the middle, on the left the north (Assyria), on the right the south (Egypt), shall be as a glorious tritone and a blessing to the whole earth (Isaiah 19:24-25). As in general, taking spoil and receiving tribute are signs and fruits of victory, so in many places the Messiah or His types are represented as those to whom nations, hitherto hostile but now converted, bring their treasures or tribute (comp. Psalms 45:13; Psalms 68:30; Psalms 68:32; Psalms 72:10; Psalms 72:15; Isaiah 60:6; Matthew 2:11). Thus it is said here that Egypt’s acquisitions of labor (ιְ ?βִ ?ιַ ?ς, “labor,” metonym. for what is acquired; again only Isaiah 55:2), and Ethiopia’s and Seba’s acquisitions of commerce (ξָ ?ηָ ?ψ, “mercatura,” also metonym., comp. Isaiah 23:3), shall come to Israel. The Egyptians were originally strictly exclusive, hence from the first not a commercial people, but they had branches of industry, Isaiah 19:9.
Ethiopia was of old famed for great riches, comp. Herod. III., 17 sqq., and Gesen.in loc. On Seba see Isaiah 43:3. There is no ground for separating Ethiopia and the Sabeans, and connecting “merchandize” only with the former. For 1) it is grammatically allowable to subordinate one word in the construct state to several words (Genesis 14:19; Psalms 115:15; 2 Chronicles 2:7, etc.); 2) Ethiopia and Seba are the same people, both may equally be called “men of stature;” 3) the plural ιςαγε does not conflict, because in compound subjects the predicate is very often ruled, not by the grammatical subject, but by the primary logical idea (comp.
Isaiah 2:11 with Isaiah 5:15; Genesis 4:10; Jeremiah 2:34, etc.). Thus here, as undoubtedly appears from what follows, the chief matter with the Prophet is the passing over of the men, not of their treasures. Hence he says ιςαψε and hence he expresses still this thought by three verbs following. Concerning men of stature, comp. on Isaiah 18:2. Herod. III.
Isaiah 20 : “The Ethiopians are said to be the tallest and finest-looking of all men.” Solin., cap. Isaiah 30 : Aethiopes duodecim pedes longi (Gesen.). The Egyptians and Ethiopians will, indeed, still come in chains. They are conquered, but precisely by their defeat they have learned to know the nothingness of their idols (Isaiah 45:16), and the divinity of Jehovah. But by their confession (Isaiah 45:14 b–17) they acquire a claim to release from the chains.
3. And they shall fall——without end. Isaiah 45:14 b—17. “And they shall fall,” etc., does not say that they shall worship Israel, but that they shall worship in the direction of the land of Israel, for they know the Temple and the throne of the true God to be there (comp. Daniel 6:10). In what follows we learn the contents of their prayer. The three brief but weighty words ΰַ ?κְ αָּ ?γΰֵ ?μ, “surely God is in thee, form the fundamental thought.
It is understood of course that “in thee” refers to the same person as the feminine suffixes in ςμικ and ΰμικ, viz.: to Israel or Zion. The knowledge that the right God is in Zion (Psalms 84:8) is herewith expressed positively. 1 Corinthians 14:25, is a quotation of our text. The same is expressed negatively and there is none else, there is no God. But this last thought must be made very emphatic. Hence ΰֶ ?τֶ ?ν is added to strengthen εΰιοςεγ, of which the present is the only instance. If ΰτν (comp. ΰָ ?τֵ ?ν16:4; Isaiah 29:20 and ΰַ ?τְ ?ρֵ ?ιΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ Isaiah 45:22, etc.), means cessatio, finis, then, beside other modifications of this meaning, it can be construed, as acc. localis, and may also have the sense of in fine.
But then it says (comp. on Isaiah 47:8; Isaiah 47:10): “That not at that (unthinkable) point where God ceases, does another appear.” In other words: ΰֶ ?τֶ ?ν involves, indeed, the sense of praeter, praeterea. Therefore one does not need to take ΰτνΰμδιν as a genitive relation; but construe: “and there is not still in fine or in loco cessandi (viz.: of the before mentioned ΰֵ ?μ) a God.”
In Isaiah 45:15 the heathen address the God of Israel directly. [“It is far more natural to take the verse as an apostrophe, expressive of the Prophet’s own strong feelings in contrasting what God had done and would yet do, the darkness of the present and the brightness of the future. If these things are to be hereafter, then O Thou Saviour of Thy people, Thou art indeed a God that hides Himself, that is to say, conceals His purposes of mercy under the darkness of His present dispensations.”—J. A. Alex. So, too, Barnes, and Delitzsch. The latter says “The exclamation in Romans 11:33, ‘O the depth of the riches,’ etc., is a similar one.”—Tr.].
They now pray to Him themselves as was intimated by ιωϊηεε and ιϊτμμε. First of all they utter the conviction that Jehovah is a God who hides Himself (comp. Isaiah 29:14; 1 Samuel 23:19; 1 Samuel 26:1), i.e., a God who has hitherto been hidden from them. [The LXX. favors this interpretation. It reads: “for thou art God, though we did not know it, O God of Israel the Saviour.”—Tr.]. In that lies a trace of the knowledge never quite extinguished among the heathen, that beyond and above the multitude of gods representing the forces of nature, there is a highest Being ruling over all. The language recalls, at least as to sense, the θεὸςἅγνωστος of the Athenians, Acts 17:23.
It seems to me, therefore, that the designation of God as ξρϊϊψ suits much better in the mouth of the heathen than of Israel. ΰָ ?αֵ ?ο see List. This hitherto concealed God is identical with the God of Israel (thus for the latter no concealed God), and also a “saving” God, i.e., that is willing to help and can help and actually does help. In verse 15ΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δ is subject, ΰμξρϊϊψ predicate, ΰμδιιωׂ ?ψΰμ apposition with the subject, and ξεωׁ ?ις as second predicate put after in the form of an apposition. In ξεωׁ ?ις (see List) there lies also an antithesis to the heathen idols and in so far a transition to Isaiah 45:16.
The necessary reverse side of the correct knowledge of God is to know the false gods as such. Isaiah 45:16 expresses this knowledge by emphasizing that they come to confusion. The gods of Egypt could not help Egypt; for Egypt succumbed to that power that opposed it by the commission and power of the God of Israel. They are ashamed and also confounded, see Isaiah 45:17; Isaiah 41:11 and the borrowed passages Jeremiah 31:19; Ezra 9:6. The expression they go to confusion (which equally affirms their going into disgrace, and going about in disgrace) occurs only here. φιψ (from φָ ?ψ = ιָ ?φַ ?ψ), “the image,” occurs in this sense only here, and Psalms 49:15. The Lord having been called “Saviour” in Isaiah 45:15, and Isaiah 45:16 having said that idols are not this, it is now said, Isaiah 45:17, of Israel that Jehovah has showed Himself such a Saviour and how He has done so.
For Israel is saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation (acc. modalis;Hebrews 9:12). Finally the speakers turn their discourse to Israel as in the beginning of it (“surely God is in thee”). These shall not experience what the others have with their idols: Ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end. The plural ςεμξιν occurs Isaiah 26:4; Isaiah 51:9, and excepting Psalms 77:6, only in later writings. The expression ςγςεμξιςγ occurs only here. Shall those who have learned so to speak be still kept in chains by Israel?
Footnotes:are.
They go.
4. AFTER THE WORLD-POWERS, ISRAEL, TOO, FINALLY IDOLS AND GIVES ITSELF WHOLLY TO ITS GOD, SO THAT NOW ALL HUMAN KIND HAS BECOME A ISRAEL
Isaiah 45:18-2518 For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens;
God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it,
He created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited;
I am the Lord ; and there is none else.
19 I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth:
I said not unto the seed of Jacob, Seek ye me in vain:
I the Lord speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.
20 Assemble yourselves and come;
Draw near together, ye that are escaped of the nations:
They have no knowledge that set up the wood of their graven image,
And pray unto a god that cannot save.
21 Tell ye, and bring them near;
Yea, let them take counsel together:
Who hath declared this from ancient time?
Who hath told it from that time?
Have not I the Lord? and there is no God else beside me;
A just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.
22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth:
For I am God, and there is none else.
23 I have sworn by myself,
The word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness,
And shall not return,
That unto me every knee shall bow,
Every tongue shall swear.
24 Surely, shall one say,
In the Lord have I righteousness and strength:
Even to him shall men come;
And all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed.
25 In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified,
And shall glory
TEXTUAL AND See List for recurrence of the words used, particularly: Isaiah 45:20. πָ ?πַ ?ωׁ Hithp.—τָ ?μַ ?μ—τֶ ?ρֶ ?μ Hithp. see Isaiah 45:14.
Isaiah 45:23. φγχδγαψ may not be construed as one notion (“word of truth”), for then it must read γְּ ?αַ ?ψφΧ. Nor may one take φγχδ as nominative in an attributive sense (“as righteousness, a word”) connecting it with γָּ ?αָ ?ψ, for that would be a contorted, unnatural expression. “Out of the mouth of righteousness” [J. A. Alex., Del.], is indeed grammatically correct, but this personifying of righteousness and this distinction of it as a speaking person from Jehovah Himself were something very peculiar. For are not the one swearing and the one speaking this word that cannot be frustrated one and the same? We must construe τִ ?ι parallel with αִּ ?ι and πωׁ ?αςϊι as a noun with the suffix of the first person.
But then φγχδ must be taken as accusative. It is the accusat. adverbialis, that stands for the substantive with a preposition and expresses the modality, of whatever sort it may be. Thus, as is well known, substantives often stand, as ΰֱ ?ξֶ ?ϊ (Jeremiah 23:28), ωֶׁ ?χֶ ?γ (Psalms 119:78), ηֵ ?θְ ?ΰ (Isaiah 31:7), δֶ ?αֶ ?μ (Job 21:34), ξֵ ?ιωָׁ ?ψִ ?ιν (Psalms 75:3), etc.—ιφΰ and ιωׁ ?εα stand in pointed antithesis. εְ before ιωׁ ?εα stands according to the peculiar Hebrew paratactic mode of expression. In our idiom we would say: which will not go back,—or, less exactly: that will not go back.
Isaiah 45:24. μִ ?ι=“in regard to me,” comp. Isaiah 5:1; Isaiah 41:7; Genesis 20:13.—ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψ = “they say,” comp. Isaiah 25:9; Isaiah 65:8, etc.—ιָ ?αεֹ ?ΰ = “let one come.” It is the same impersonal construction as in ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψ comp. Isaiah 6:10; Isaiah 10:4; Isaiah 14:32; Isaiah 18:5; Isaiah 33:20, etc. It is indeed not impossible that a εְ before ιαεΰ has fallen out because of the following ε before ιαωׁ ?ε; but grammatical reasons by no means compel such an assumption.
AND 1. With these words the Prophet concludes his contemplation of the future salvation that is connected with Cyrus. It is assuredly not an accident that only after Cyrus and the northern world-power represented by him and after the southern world-power are noticed, does he turn to Israel in order to announce also to it what shall be its part in that future salvation. Here, too, the chief point is again the knowledge of Jehovah as the only true God. Jehovah, who made the heavens, even that suffices to prove Him to be the God; Jehovah, who also formed the earth, of which He is also the orderer and disposer, but who according to His goodness prepared the earth as a friendly dwelling for men, justly says of Himself: I am the absolute Being, and another beside Me there is not (Isaiah 45:18). But this same Jehovah has chosen a people out of mankind for His particular inheritance and property, and from the first He has clearly and publicly proclaimed what He purposes to do with this people.
And He has in that plainly expressed that, as with the creation He had in mind the salvation of mankind, so, too, He had in mind the salvation of this people, as the reward that a just and right thinking lord gives his servants, when He made those arrangements in which this people were to serve as means and instrument (Isaiah 45:19). This people is to receive salvation through Cyrus. This having happened, Israel delivered from the heathen may be summoned to acknowledge idolatry to be a foolish and ruinous error (Isaiah 45:20). After being summoned, too, to give information and to settle by consultation what they have lived through and experienced, they must confess: Jehovah foretold all that would come about; as He foretold so it has turned out. Jehovah alone is the true God (Isaiah 45:21). The world-powers and Israel having so acknowledged Jehovah, He can now call to all mankind: turn to Me as to Him who blesses you (Isaiah 45:22).
Thus will be fulfilled what the Lord hath sworn and announced as not to be frustrated, that to Him every knee shall bow and every tongue shall swear (Isaiah 45:23). All will then acknowledge that only in Jehovah is salvation, and that hostility to Him brings only ruin (Isaiah 45:24). All mankind, become one in the glory and praise of the Lord, will then have become “seed of Israel.”
2. For thus saith the Lord——none beside Me.Isaiah 45:18-21. “For,” beginning Isaiah 45:18, connects with Isaiah 45:17. There it is said “Israel is saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation.” This, spoken by the heathen, is here confirmed by the Lord as correct, by saying that of course He did not call Israel to a fruitless service (μΰϊδεαχωׁ ?επι Isaiah 45:19), but promised him a just reward. For now the Lord turns to Israel to say to him wherein the blessing promised to them in Cyrus will culminate. The Prophet knows that Israel still inclines to idolatry, that fundamental evil of the natural man. But he also knows that Israel, utterly broken by the Exile, and wholly convinced, by the way of prophecy and fulfilment, of Jehovah’s being the only God, will, from the time of their deliverance by Cyrus, renounce idolatry.
We know that the Exile made a decisive turning-point in the religious life of the Israelites. Coarse idolatry they renounced from that time on. Yet the inward as well as the outward deliverance by Cyrus was only a beginning. But in this beginning the Prophet sees already the completion, according to his complex way of regarding history. Thus in Isaiah 45:18 he tells how that “everlasting salvation” will come about. A fundamental condition is for Israel to attain to the lively knowledge expressed by the words: I am the Lord, and there is none else.
The foundation of this is double; what pertains to the history of the world and what to the history of salvation. The former consists in this, that Jehovah before all made the heavens, which is proof enough that He alone is God. For He who made the world to come, the abode of spirits, of elohim, must He not Himself be Elohim? yea, as the Creator of the elohim world, he is exalted above all elohim, therefore the Elohim κατ’ ἐξοχήν (comp. e.g., Psalms 97:9). Such is the sense of the parenthesis: “He is God,” Isaiah 45:18. In the second place the Lord proves His sole divinity by the fact that He formed the earth, and made it (ready), comp. Isaiah 43:7.
As to “that created the heavens” there is added in parenthesis a nearer definition, so there is to “that formed the earth and made it.” In both cases the parenthesis begins with δεּ ?ΰ. The first consists of two words; the second of two words δεΰλεππδ, “He established it,” and a nearer explanation. For at first sight this λּ ?εππδ seems redundant after ιφψ and ςωδ. But we learn from the following words to ιְ ?φָ ?ψָ ?δ that λּ ?εֹ ?πֵ ?ο is not used in the sense of fundare, which is its common meaning elsewhere, but in the sense of ἑτοιμάζειν (LXX.) “to equip, prepare” (comp. Deuteronomy 32:6, where, too, λεπο follows ςωׂ ?δ; and especially the Hiphil of like meaning, Isaiah 14:21; Genesis 43:16; 1 Kings 5:32; 6:19, etc.). By this is expressed the final equipment or adaptation to an object, in contrast with the original making.
That such is the sense is expressly said by the words μΰϊηεεπεΧ “not empty did He create it.” For these words affirm that the object of “creating” and “forming” was not that the earth might remain ϊδε “empty,” but that it might become fit for dwelling, and the Prophet designates by λּ ?εֹ ?πֵ ?ο the activity that prepares, sets in order the product of the “creating,” “forming,” “making.” Thus men prepare a friendly dwelling for their children, friends, dear guests. Therefore this “preparation” is a proof of the goodness and kindness of our God.
But for this I am Jehovah and there is none beside there is also a foundation in what pertains to the history of salvation. God had sought out Israel as a peculiar treasure to be the medium of His thoughts of salvation, and lifted them high up and then cast them down. He did not choose them that they might end in wild chaos, any more than He made the earth to be empty. He had never required this people to seek Him in vain, for nothing, as it were in the emptiness (so to speak, to trace out, find out the hidden, Isaiah 45:15). But He had said: “what is right and proper, shall be to you.” φֶ ?γֶ ?χ here is not the abstract, subjective righteousness, but the concrete, objective right, as in the expressions τָ ?ςַ ?μφγχ (Psalms 15:2, etc.) ςָ ?ωׁ ?δφγχ (lsa. Isaiah 64:4, etc). γαψ comp.
Isaiah 33:15. Also ξιωׁ ?ψιν is to be taken in the concrete and objective sense (comp. Isaiah 33:15). This promise: “what is right shall be yours,” God did not make in secret (αַּ ?ρֵּ ?ϊֶ ?ψ48:16; Psalms 139:15) so that it can come under no investigation, and cannot be proved to have actually happened. For He did not speak in, say, caves and hiding-places, such as the heathen oracles let themselves be heard from, but He spoke before all the world. If now the Lord has given His people the promise of a good time and happy dwelling after the chaos, and the promise is fulfilled exactly as it runs, there is the proof that Jehovah is omniscient.
As by the creation He has shown Himself the Almighty and the All-good to all mankind, so, by the promise given to Israel and by its fulfilment He showed Himself to the people whose history is that of redemption to be the Omniscient and All-good. But as the All-good, All-mighty and All-knowing He is the God, Jehovah, the Absolute.
According to Isaiah 45:19 the Prophet assumes that all will come to pass as promised so publicly, and that by means of Cyrus. For Isaiah 45:20 sqq. we find ourselves translated into the time after the emancipation. Hence the Israelites are called escaped of the nations, and he that helped them to this title can be no other than Cyrus. Therefore in the time of the deliverance effected by Cyrus the redeemed are to assemble, and come and draw near in order to elicit the facts resultant from the preceding course of history. The resultant is negative and positive. The negative is stated Isaiah 45:20 b, viz.They know nothing those carrying the wood of their graven image, and praying to a god that will not save.—ιָ ?γַ ?ς, comp.
Isaiah 44:9; Isaiah 44:18; Isaiah 56:10, a kind of causative Kal, comp. on ϊτϊη Isaiah 45:8, therefore properly: not to exercise knowledge. πָ ?ωָׂ ?ΰ, comp. Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7. ιεֹ ?ωׁ ?ιַ ?ς, comp. Lamentations 4:17.——By this is expressed, that after the deliverance by Cyrus Israel will at last definitely come to the knowledge of the folly and nothingness of idolatry.——We learn in Isaiah 45:21 the positive result of that counseling. But the announcement of it is again introduced by a solemn summons to use the needful deliberation (comp. Isaiah 41:22-23). Tell ye, and bring near means as much as bring on information.
The thought is completed by adding another verb. The necessary facts must first be produced; then counsel may be taken about them (change of person as in Isaiah 45:8; Isaiah 41:1, etc.). The Lord himself announces the result. In the consultation he made his right felt, and what he said must be accepted, for it was the truth. It was as follows: Who has caused this (viz. what is intimated Isaiah 45:19, and whose fulfilment, after Isaiah 45:19, is assumed) to be heard of old, and long ago declared it? Not I, Jehovah?etc., Isaiah 45:21.
Therefore, here again the Lord proves His divinity from His omniscience. One might say, that this is that divine attribute that can be most easily inspected even by those not eye-witnesses. For let the prophecy as such and the fulfilment be verified, and the necessary conclusion for every one is a superhuman knowing, willing and ability, even for such as are ever so remote in respect to time and place. When the Lord designates Himself here especially as a just God, it is with reference to Isaiah 45:13; Isaiah 45:19. He calls Himself Saviour in contrast with a god that cannot save, Isaiah 45:20.
3. Look unto me——shall glory, Isaiah 45:22-25. In this concluding word the Lord, by the expression all ye ends of the earth, comprehends all previously named, viz. the nations of the northern (Isaiah 45:6) and of the southern (Isaiah 45:14 sqq.) world-power, along with Israel. One might be tempted to take Isaiah 45:22-25 as an independent section, parallel with Isaiah 45:14-21. But then it would doubtless have begun, like the others mentioned, with “thus saith the Lord.” Moreover we see from all the seed of Israel, Isaiah 45:25, that after Israel has been entirely converted to the Lord, the Prophet sees in all mankind still only a seed of Israel. It is perhaps highly significant that only after the northern and southern world-power, or after the fulness of the Gentiles represented by them, does he let the escaped of the nations become partakers of the salvation inaugurated by Cyrus.
Is that not an intimation of the fact so emphatically confirmed by Paul (Romans 11)? Thus by all the ends of the earth we are not to understand those nations that remained beside those mentioned in Isaiah 45:6; Isaiah 45:14 sqq. and 18 sqq. For those thus mentioned by the Prophet represented already all mankind. Therefore the same are meant, only here they are mentioned comprehensively instead of singly as before. All together they constitute the entire (all the) seed of Israel in a spiritual sense. To all of these, after salvation is prepared for them and they for salvation, the Lord addresses the final, decisive word of calling: turn unto me and be saved.
Of the Imperatives the first is commanding, the second promissory. The inviting call reminds of Mat 22:4 : “I have prepared my dinner, etc.,——all things are ready, come unto the marriage.”——δεωׁ ?ςε (comp. Isaiah 30:15) is=be saved, become partakers of the perfect and everlasting salvation (Isaiah 45:17).—The causative clause: for I am God,etc., Isaiah 45:22 b, proves the possibility, yea the necessity of the salvation, by reference to the irrefragable truth, doubted since the fall, but now acknowledged on all hands (Isaiah 45:6; Isaiah 45:14 sqq., 21) that Jehovah alone is God. Only God can warrant everlasting salvation. Jehovah alone is God. Ergo!——When all turn to Jehovah and find in Him salvation, then, too, the eternal decree of God is fulfilled that all shall bow to him and serve him.—This decree has great importance as appears from: I have sworn by myself, and he could swear by no greater (Hebrews 6:13 sqq.).
The oath thus acquires an abstract right, so that under no circumstances can it go back, be revoked or declared null. αιπωׁ ?αςϊι as in Genesis 22:16; Jeremiah 22:5; Jeremiah 49:13; comp. Isaiah 44:26.——I had rather translate φγχδ (see Text. and Gram.): “for the sake of righteousness,” or “of right.” This word, being an emanation of the divine righteousness, bears in itself the guaranty of its realization, and therefore cannot go back (comp. the very similar passage, Isaiah 55:11). The contents of the oath is that every knee shall bow to the Lord, and to Him (μִ ?ι belongs also to the second clause; comp. Isaiah 19:18) every tongue shall swear. Therefore the προσκύνησις, as outward expression of homage (Psalms 95:6), and the ἐξομολόγησις (Romans 14:11; Philippians 2:10-11), as expression of the confession that God is the All-wise, All-righteous and Almighty, shall be accorded to Him as His divineright, that He does not suffer to be wrested from him. But every oath by God involves the confession, not only that there is a God, but also that this God knows the truth, and has the will and the power to avenge the untruth.
An oath is, indeed, a divine worship (Goeschel).——The Prophet, moreover, is very far from believing that (to say it with one word) the conversion of the heathen and of Israel will be sudden and universal. Rather this conversion will progress by successive stages, and many—will make decided resistance. To this Isaiah 45:24 refers.
Isaiah 45:24. In this verse we perceive the cheering call of the converted to their still hesitating or even decidedly resisting brethren (see Text, and Gram.). First, they point to their own experience: Only in Jehovah are righteous deeds and strength.φγχεϊ (comp. Isaiah 33:15; Isaiah 64:5 and Psalms 11:7; Psalms 103:6; Judges 5:11, etc.), are juste facta. The speaker would say, therefore: displays of righteousness (i.e., of a disposition conformed to the will of God) and strength (i.e., the power to do great things and bear hard things) are only in Jehovah, i.e., are only possible where God gives ability. Second, there is joined to this the exhortation to come to Jehovah as the only source of right inward life.
Regarding the expressions ςָ ?γָ ?ιε and ΰֵ ?μָ ?ιε, the Prophet would evidently intimate by ςַ ?γ that Jehovah represents the loftiest goal of human effort, and that it concerns us to penetrate as far as to Him. The notion of “progredi ad fastigium quoddam” (Gesen.), is expressed in many modifications by ςַ ?γ. Comp. 2 Samuel 23:19; Job 11:7; Nahum 1:10; 1 Chronicles 4:27, etc. Finally, those converted do not fail to add a threat for those that oppose themselves: and all that are incensed against Him shall be ashamed. The same expression again only Isaiah 41:11; Son 1:6. It seems to me that the expression “those inflamed with anger” points to the psychological fact, that in the hearts of those filled with hatred the display of love provokes anger and not love.
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
VII.—THE SEVENTH The overthrow of the Babylonian idols, and the gain that Israel shall derive from it for its knowledge of GodIsaiah 461. ISRAEL SHALL KNOW ITS GOD FROM THE BETWEEN HIM WHO BEARS AND THE IDOLS THAT ARE BORNE
Isaiah 46:1-41 Bel boweth down, Nebo stoopeth,
Their idols were upon the beasts, and upon the cattle:
Your carriages were heavy loaden;
They are a burden to the weary beast.2 They stoop, they bow down together;
They could not deliver the burden,
But themselves are gone into captivity.
3 Hearken unto me, O house of Jacob,
And all the remnant of the house of Israel,
Which are borne by me from the belly,
Which are carried from the womb:
4 And even to your old age I am he;
And even to hoar hairs will I carry you:
I have made, and I will bear;
Even I will carry, and I will deliver you.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 46:1. πְ ?ωֻׂ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ –χָ ?ψַ ?ν–αָּ ?ψַ ?ς Isaiah 46:3. ωִׁ ?ξְ ?ςεּ.
Isaiah 46:1. αγς and χψν mean “to bow, bend one’s-self, to fall down.” χָ ?ψַ ?ν is kindred to the unused root λָּ ?ψַ ?ωׂ from which comes λְּ ?ψֵ ?ωׂ “belly,” (Bauch, comp. beugen) Jeremiah 51:34.—It is likely no accident that after λָּ ?ψַ ?ςαμ the discourse does not continue with χָ ?ψַ ?νπαε, but we have instead the particip. χֹ ?ψֵ ?ν. It seems to me nearly accordant with Isaiah’s way, to assume that he intends by this participle an allusion to λֹּ ?ψֶ ?ωׁ, an allusion whose justification is still more strengthened by the addition of λָּ ?ψַ ?ς and λָּ ?ψַ ?ωׂ. Then the sense becomes, that to λֹּ ?ψֶ ?ωׁ who attacks, there will be a corresponding χֹ ?ψֵ ?ν (λּ ?ψֵ ?ωׁ) and a λָּ ?ψַ ?ς on the part of the attacked.—ξωׂ ?ΰμςιτּ ?δ an appositional added clause; the fem, is likely occasioned by the preceding ηιδ and αδξδ; unless one takes the fern, in a neuter sense.
Isaiah 46:2. ξָ ?μַ ?θ originally signifies “to be smooth, slippery” (comp. ξָ ?ψַ ?θ and τָ ?μַ ?θ), the Piel then means “to make smooth, slippery,” and thus to make fit for slipping away, falling out. Hence the meaning “to let slip away,” of eggs (Isaiah 34:15) and of the foetus (in the Hiph. Isaiah 66:7).—πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ means here the life-centre in antithesis to the periphery: the person, the proper I or self. Thus πτωׁ is not unfrequently used to strengthen the pronoun, in order to express the notion “self,” or to emphasize it (comp. e.g., Hosea 9:4; Jeremiah 26:19; Jeremiah 37:9).
Isaiah 46:3. δςξριν and δπωׂ ?ΰιν are in apposition with αιϊιςχα and ωׁ ?ΰψιϊαΧιΧ AND 1. The reverse of the foregoing picture is now presented. There we have the victor; now we see the fate of the vanquished. But first it is the central point and refuge of the vanquished whose disgraceful end is set before us. The idols of Babylon, of which Bel and Nebo are named as the chief representatives, must come down from the places of honor where they were enthroned. Their images are loaded on beasts of burden to go into captivity (Isaiah 46:1-2). From the contrast Israel may learn the lofty nature of its God. No one bears Him forth. On the contrary He has borne Israel with maternal love from the time of its birth, and will continue to carry it when no longer a child, but an old man (Isaiah 46:3-4).
2. Bel boweth——into captivity.Isaiah 46:1-2. There have been found in the library of king Asurbanipal two tablets of terra cotta, which contain two lists, one of the Assyrian, the other of the Babylonian superior gods (see Schrader,Assyrisch-Biblisches in Stud. u. Kr., 1874, p. 324 sqq.). From these it appears that the Assyrians and Babylonians had a system of gods ranged in four grades. At the summit was the highest, transcendent god, by the Assyrians called Asur, by the Babylonians Ilu, El (with the female deity Istar, Astarte).
Following these, in the second grade, are three gods, also belonging it would seem to the unseen world: Anu, Bel or Bil and I—o (Ao). In Babylonian and Assyrian these three bear the same names. Then in a third grade, follow three gods of heaven belonging to the visible world, which again are named alike in both languages: Sin, the moon-god, Samas, the sun-god and Bin, the air-god. Finally, in the fourth degree appear the planet-gods, of which the Assyrian list names five (Marduk, Merodach, i.e., Jupiter; Istar, i.e., Astarte, Venus; Adar=Saturn; Nirgal=Mars; Nabu, Nebo=Mercury), the Babylonian however names only two male and two corresponding female divinities: Marduk (Merodach) with Zarpanituv (Zirbanit) and Nabiuv (Nebo) with Tasmituv (Tasmit). From this it appears that Bel has the second place in the second degree, and Nebo the last place in the lowest degree. Bel (comp. further on it Schrader,Die Keilinschrift. etc., p. 80 sq.), belongs to the divinities of the transcendent, invisible world, whereas Nebo as a planet-god corresponds to Mercury.
He is the πָ ?αִ ?ιΰ, the “revealing” god, and was, in the period of the later Chaldean kingdom along with Merodach, the chief god of the Babylonians, so that most of the kings named themselves after him (Nabopolassar, Nebuchadnezzar, Nabonned). Comp. Schrader, l. c. p. 272.
The highly honored images of the gods, else only served by human hands, are now distributed among the beasts and the cattle, i.e., partly the tamed wild beasts, as elephants and partly the tame domestic beasts, as the camel and the ass. ηַ ?ιָ ?δ as designation of the animalia agrestia and αְּ ?δֵ ?ξָ ?δ as designation of animalia domestica recur often conjoined: Genesis 1:24-25; Genesis 3:14; Genesis 7:14; Genesis 7:21; Genesis 8:1; Leviticus 25:7, etc. The cattle have therefore the chief work to do with them, which consists in toilsome bearing. What a shame for a god to be so heavy! A god ought to be spirit and light, and therefore imponderable! There is frequent mention of carrying forth the gods of a conquered nation, partly as spoil, partly out of religious policy: Isaiah 10:10 sq.; Jeremiah 48:7; Jeremiah 49:3 (comp. 1 Samuel 5:1 sqq.). Comp. also the inscription of Sargon quoted under Isaiah 20:1. πωׂ ?ΰεϊ , “gestata, gestamina, carried images,” comp.
Isaiah 46:7; Isaiah 45:20; Amos 5:26; Jeremiah 10:5. πָ ?ωָׂ ?ΰ means carrying in general. ςָ ?ξַ ?ν only “to carry, load up a heavy burden (freight);” comp. Genesis 44:13; Psalms 68:20; Zechariah 12:3. Thus the Prophet says, “your πωׂ ?ΰεϊ are become ςξρεϊ, and designates thereby a progress in deterius. How this is so he says by the appositional clause a burden to the weary, viz.: beast.
What is said Isaiah 46:1 of Bel and Nebo is generalized in Isaiah 46:2. All the gods together must bow and fall down. They are not able to slip off, let go the load. (See Text, and Gram.). In these words and in the following their soul (person) is gone into captivity (see Text, and Gram.), the Prophet proceeds on the distinction between the idols themselves, the (relatively) transcendent numinibus and the simulacris representing these; a distinction that heathen belief made in thesi at least originally, but gradually in praxi carried out with as little consistency as does the Romish church with its images of the saints (comp. Friedr. Naegelsbach,Nachhomer, Theol. des griech.
Volksglaubens, I. § 3, and V. §11). Thus the meaning of our passage is they are not able to bring it about that the burden of the images shall slip away (viz.: from the hands of the enemy) as some smooth, slippery object. Were the gods of the heathen really gods, the Prophet would say, then they would be able to effect this, massive as they are. In that case the distinction between the god and his image would be justified. But as the gods do not deliver their images, it results that there is no distinction between them, and the gods are not something better and higher. They are in fact ΰμιμιν, nothings.
If the image goes into captivity, then in fact the idol himself is dragged forth, all that belongs to his substance, for out of the image he does not exist. Babylon was especially rich in extraordinarily costly images of the gods. Bead e.g., in Herodotus (I. 183) the description of the colossal, golden images in the temple of Bel, which moreover neither Cyrus nor Darius Hystaspis touched, notwithstanding the Persian religion recognized no worship of images. It was Xerxes that first took away the massive golden image twelve yards high (Herod. l. c.).
3. Hearken unto me——deliver you.Isaiah 46:3-4. These verses form an admirable contrast with Isaiah 46:1-2. The gods are carried to their disgrace; Jehovah carries His people. And He, the strong One, carries them as tenderly and lovingly as a mother her child. Because He would say something earnest and important, He summons the people to give special heed: hearken unto me.
It is little probable, in my opinion, that “house of Jacob” means Judah, while all the remnant of the house of Israel means Israel that in the Assyrian Exile was already for the most part denationalized. First, λֹּ ?μ seems to me to conflict with that, and then the Prophet no where else designates the Israel exiled in Assyria as ωׁ ?ΰψιϊ. This expression (“remnant”) is an honorable title designating the quintessence of the whole nation, without distinction of tribe, that remains after all siftings (comp. Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 10:20 sqq.). This quintessence belongs to the last time, the old age of the nation. I find, therefore, a reference in the expression to Isaiah 46:4 a, and that by λֹּ ?μ the thought is expressed that we find e.g., Jeremiah 3:14, viz.: that no one belonging to the “remnant.” even though he may dwell most concealed and solitary, will be forgotten.
In what follows, the motherly love of God is described. For God is Father and Mother in one person, and His love bears not only a masculine but also a feminine character (comp. Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 49:15; Isaiah 66:9; Isaiah 66:13). All Israel, at once after its birth, “from the belly” or “womb,” thus immediately after its entrance on history as a nation (Jeremiah 2:2), has been born in the arms by the Lord, as a mother carries her little child (comp. Isaiah 63:9). The form: ξִ ?βִּ ?ι (only here in Isaiah comp. ξִ ?πֵּ ?ι30:11) is meant likely to impart an emphasis to the notion involved in the preposition: as if from the mother’s womb.
But Jehovah was not a mother only to the youthful Israel; He continues so when it has become old; and even to old age (Israel’s of course) I am the same, Isaiah 46:4 (comp. Isaiah 41:4). This is something that does not otherwise happen. Only small children are carried, not men and the old. But Jehovah devotes to Israel this maternal care, mutatis mutandis, to the very last. Did He not make Israel, as He repeatedly assures them (Isaiah 43:7, comp.
Isaiah 43:1; Isaiah 43:21; Isaiah 44:2; Isaiah 44:21; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 45:11)? The Lord, says the Prophet, will not forsake His own work. As a mother at one moment lifts her child over an obstacle, at another even carries it a stretch in her arms, until every difficulty and danger is overcome, so the Lord will do to His people even to their old age, i.e., till they have reached the end of their course. Therefore what a difference between Jehovah and idols! The latter let themselves be borne by their worshippers, and then they are borne on beasts of burden to go into captivity. But Jehovah carries His people with maternal tenderness from the beginning to the end.
Now who is God? Whom shall one fear and love? Whom trust?
2. ISRAEL SHALL LEARN TO KNOW ITS GOD BY THE BETWEEN HIM AND THE IMAGES THAT HIM, WHICH ALSO MUST BE CARRIED
Isaiah 46:5-75 To whom will ye liken me, and make me equal,
And compare me, that we may be like?
6 They lavish gold out of the bag,
And weigh silver in the balance,
And hire a goldsmith; and he maketh it a god:
They fall down, yea, they worship.
7 They bear him upon the shoulder, they carry him,
And set him in his place, and he standeth;
From his place shall he not remove:
Yea, one shall cry unto him, yet can he not answer,
Nor save him out of his trouble.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 46:5. ξָ ?ωַׁ ?μ Isaiah 46:6. ζָ ?μִ ?ν.
Isaiah 46:5. The suffix of ϊγξιεπι is to be supplied for ϊωׁ ?εε; also μξι relates to επξδ .εϊωׁ ?μπι has for common subject the Lord and the image that represents Him.
Isaiah 46:6. The entire first half of the verse is subject, only that with ιωׁ ?χμε there is a return from the participle to the finite verb ζָ ?μִ ?ιν is derived from ζεּ ?μ, “to pour out, pour away, throw away,” from which there comes only a Hiphil form (Lamentations 1:8), and the substantive ζεּ ?μָ ?δ “remotio” (hence ζεּ ?μַ ?ϊ praeter).
Isaiah 46:7. ϊηϊιε (comp. Isaiah 25:10) is conceived of substantively=inferiora ejus, the place lying under it. The accusative is the acc. loci, denoting whither.—ιִ ?φְ ?ςַ ?χ has an ideal, indefinite subject (“one” or “they”) to which the suffixes in φψϊε and ιεωׁ ?ιςπε relate.
AND Now the Prophet shows up the folly of that idolatry, which would make images of Jehovah Himself. The prohibition of this was impliedly contained in the general prohibition of images (Exodus 20:4; comp. Deuteronomy 4:12; Deuteronomy 4:15; Deuteronomy 5:8). Even Aaron trangressed this by setting up the golden calf, which pretended to be a symbol of Jehovah Himself (Exodus 32:5). The image of Gideon (Judges 8:27) and of Micah (Judges 17:4; Judges 17:13) and the two golden calves of Jeroboam at Bethel and Dan (1 Kings 12:26 sqq.) were trangressions of the same sort. Comp.
Michaelis, Laws of Moses, V., § 245. Hengstenberg, Introduc. to O. Test. II. All these symbolical figures of beasts were of gold or silver. It was only exceptional where, according to Isaiah 40:20, poorer people contented themselves with wooden images.
But all were in conflict with the eternal truth that it is impossible to make a likeness of the incomparable, invisible God.
It is worthy of note that the Prophet began in Isaiah 40:17 sqq. his polemic against idolatry by an attack on this finer form of it, and here concludes with just such an attack. For in the Ennead 40–48, after our passage, there does not occur again any actual polemic against idolatry. The words of Isa 46:5 recall Isaiah 40:18; Isaiah 40:25. The words hire a goldsmith and he maketh,etc., Isaiah 46:6, recall Judges 17:4.
In Isaiah 46:7 the idea of carrying is emphasized, not without reason: that image, too, made in the likeness of Jehovah is nothing but heavy, vulgar matter, that needs as much to be carried as those Babylonian images of imaginary gods. Manifestly the Prophet would here obviate the objection that images of Jehovah were not to be regarded like other idol images. He answers: Since they must be borne, they are no better than the others.
__________________________
3. ISRAEL SHALL LEARN TO KNOW THE TRUE GOD FROM HIS AND
Isaiah 46:8-118 Remember this, and show yourselves men:
Bring it again to mind, O ye transgressors.
9 Remember the former things of old:
For I am God, and there is none else
I am God, and there is none like me,
10 Declaring the end from the beginning,
And from ancient times the things that are not yet done,
Saying, My counsel shall stand,
And I will do all my pleasure:
11 Calling a ravenous bird from the east,
The man that executeth my counsel from a far country:
Yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass;
I have purposed it, I will also do it.
AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 46:8. τωׁ ?ςν–ζָ ?λַ ?ψ. Isaiah 46:10. ψֵ ?ΰωִׁ ?ιϊ—and comp. ξֵ ?ψֹ ?ΰωׁ. Isaiah 46:11ςַ ?ιִ ?θ.
Isaiah 46:8. δϊΰωׁ ?ωׁ ?ε is any way ἅπ. λεγ. It is certain that it does not come from ΰֵ ?ωׁ, as Jos. Kimchi maintains, and after him Vitringa, Rosenmueller (ed. II.), etc. For what can “inflammamini, incendimini” mean? The meanings “confundamini” “be ashamed” (Jerome), or “be full of zeal” (Vitringa) are certainly much forced.
The derivation from ΰִ ?ιωׁ (ἀνδρίζεσθε, comp. 1 Corinthians 16:13) is, grammatically and as to sense, not impossible. For if δϊΰωׁ ?ωׁ be taken as a denominativum, it does not matter that no trace remains in it of the original π (ΰִ ?πְ ?ωְׁ ?=ΰִ ?ιωׁ, comp. ΰִ ?ωָׁ ?δ). In the case of weak roots Hithpalel (δִ ?ϊְ ?χַ ?εְּ ?ξֵ ?ν, becomes δִ ?ϊְ ?χεֹ ?ξֵ ?ν) is the usual formation. And the Prophet might fittingly say, that Israel ought at last to be a man, to press on to ἡλικία, and no longer waver between Jehovah and idols (1 Kings 18:21). But δִ ?ϊְֹ ?ΰωֵׁ ?ωׁ cannot be made out of ΰִ ?ιωׁ just as well δִ ?ϊְ ?αּ ?εֹ ?πֵ ?ο may be made from αִּ ?ιο, because in the latter there was actually at first a ε, whereas there was not in ΰִ ?ιωׁ. I agree, therefore, with those (D.
Kimchi, Hitzig, Knobel, Delitzsch, comp. Olsh., § 272, a, and 274) who derive δϊΰωׁ ?ωׁ from ΰָ ?ωַׁ ?ωׁ (Arabic assa) “fundavit, stabilivit.” Of this ΰָ ?ωַׁ ?ω Isaiah uses also the substantive ΰֲ ?ωִׁ ?ιωִׁ ?ιν16:7—fundamenta, i.e., the foundations lying bare as ruins.
Isaiah 46:9. λִּ ?ξֹ ?πִ ?ι stands after ΰֵ ?τֶ ?ν only here. Comp. Isaiah 45:6.
AND We have had what I may call two negative arguments for the divinity of Jehovah from the case of the Babylonian idols (Isaiah 46:1-4), and from the symbolic images of Jehovah, that are no better (Isaiah 46:5-7). Here that positive argument is pressed very emphatically, which, by its being five times repeated, prepared for the mention of the name of Cyrus, and is now finally mentioned as the chief result gained by that naming. This argument is based on the assumption that only God can prophesy and fulfil (Isaiah 46:8-10), and He will certainly bring into existence that bird of prey that He has called out of the East to be the executor of His counsel. Because the Prophet passes to another kind of argument, he makes here a (relative) conclusion by exhorting the people to impress well on their memory what they have just heard (Isaiah 43:18; Isaiah 44:21), and to lay it to heart. This they were to do in order to be fixed. (See Text. and Gram.). For Israel in the Exile it was assuredly the chief task, to whose accomplishment our chaps. 40–66 were greatly to contribute, to be at last firmly grounded in the knowledge of Jehovah and in His exclusive worship.
On bring it again to mind see on Isaiah 44:19. By a second Remember, Isaiah 46:9, the Prophet requires one to recall the old prophecies in the sense of the argumentation often used by him (comp. Isaiah 41:21 sqq.; Isaiah 42:9; Isaiah 43:8-13; Isaiah 43:19-21; Isaiah 44:6-10; Isaiah 44:24-28), by which as here, he infers the divinity of Jehovah from His ability to foretell the future, and that idols are nothing because of their inability in this respect. By ψΰωׁ ?πεϊ and ξςεμν, therefore, I understand things that occurred in the period of the ψΰωׁ ?ιϊ (comp. Isaiah 46:10) which look over hither from an immeasurably distant past (ξςεμν). But by these old things the Prophet understands ancient prophecies (comp. on Isaiah 41:22), as clearly appears from Isaiah 46:10.
The clause with λִּ ?ι contains what will be verified by looking back to those old prophecies, viz., that Jehovah alone is God. λִּ ?ι is thus no causal particle, but=that. The participial clauses Isaiah 46:10-11, declaring from the beginning the issue,etc., contain the proofs: remember what is old, viz., that I am God, as He that announces from the beginning and fulfils in its time. If then the clause with λִּ ?ι Isaiah 46:9 b is explanatory of “remember,” etc., and if this explanation consists in this, that the divinity of Jehovah should be known from His prophesying and fulfilling, then it is manifest that one must actually tear the words “remember the former things of old” from the context if he would have them mean an exhortation to “earnestly search out history” in general, εΰιοςεψ see Isaiah 45:5-6; Isaiah 45:14; Isaiah 45:18; Isaiah 45:21. ΰֵ ?μ and ΰμδιν correspond here in parallelism as they do often not in parallelism (Exodus 20:5; Numbers 16:22; Joshua 22:22; Psalms 1:1, etc.). Apart from the meaning of the word in itself, the plural has more an abstract meaning=divinity, highest being (comp. ΰֲ ?γֹ ?πִ ?ινχָ ?ωֶׁ ?δ19:4). Isaiah 46:10. The participles χγΰ ,ΰξγ ,ξβιψ depend on the chief notion to be proved, thus on ΰμ and ΰμδιν, not on the secondary notion λָּ ?ξεֹ ?πִ ?ι.
For Jehovah is God as He who from the beginning (before it germinated Isaiah 42:9; Isaiah 43:19) announced the issue.
The second part of Isa 46:10 enhances what precedes by declaring the firm purpose of carrying out what has been announced. Finally Isaiah 46:11 presents to view this execution. He that is called from the East (Isaiah 41:2; Isaiah 41:25) is Cyrus. He is compared to a bird of prey that swoops on its quarry. Doubtless the noblest of the kind, the eagle is meant. It is possible that ςַ ?ιִ ?θ is radically kindred to ἀετὸς, but it is not proved.
The eagle was a sacred bird to the Persians. According to Xenophon (Cyrop.VII. 1, 4) the standard of Cyrus and also of his successors was an “ἀετὸςχρουσοῦςἐπὶδόρατοςμακροῦανατεταμένος” Still in the time of the younger Cyrus the royal standard of the Persians was an ἀετὸςχρουσοῦςἐπὶπέλτης (ἐπὶξύλου) ἀνατεταμένος (Xenoph. Anab. I. 10, 12). Aeschylus also (Pers. 205–210), into a portentous sign that Atossa sees, introduces the Persians under the image of an eagle, the Greeks under the image of a falcon. Comp.
DunckerGesch. d. Alterth. II. p. 368 sq. ΰιωׁ ςφϊε is not here as in Isaiah 40:13 the fellow-counsellor, but the one called by God Himself to execute His counsel. In conclusion, by a double disjunctive clause, the assurance is emphatically given, that what the Lord has said and projected (ιφψ37:26; Isaiah 22:11) in spirit He will surely bring to pass. Here again, also, the Lord pledges His honor that His prophecy, long before announced, shall be fulfilled by Cyrus, and that thereby His, Jehovah’s divinity will be proved.
4. GOD’S AND MUST COME SPITE OF ISRAEL’S OF HEART
Isaiah 46:12-1312 Hearken unto me, ye stout hearted,
That are far from righteousness:
13 I bring near my righteousness; it shall not be far off,
And my salvation shall not tarry:
And I will place salvation in Zion
For Israel my glory.
AND These two verses respond briefly but plainly to an objection or doubt that might be raised against the representations of Isa 46:1-11. Will Israel suffer itself, to be led to the right knowledge of God by the positive and negative proofs just presented (Isaiah 46:1-7), or even by the positive demonstration, when the prophecy about Cyrus is fulfilled (Isaiah 46:8-11)? The Lord knows that Israel is stout-hearted. This is meant in a bad sense, like that described Isaiah 48:4, ‘ ‘because I knew that thou art obstinate, and thy neck is an iron sinew, and thy brow brass;” comp. Isaiah 56:11. The obstinate, haughty, self-righteous heart is naturally far from the righteousness of God, for it has, for the purpose of being right, not the objective, divine norm, but only a subjective, self-made norm.
There were many such hard, proud hearts in Israel. Proud self-righteousness characterizes the nation (Romans 10:3). Still the Lord, whose gifts and calling are without repentance (Romans 11:29), will fulfil His promises. Note that Isaiah 46:12 begins with hearken unto me, as does Isaiah 46:3. Thus it appears that the two verses are co-ordinated. With Isaiah 46:3 begins the proof of the threefold gain that shall come to Israel by the destruction of Babylon.
Isaiah 46:12 mentions the doubt that may be raised against it. This close relation to Isaiah 46:3 is indicated by their beginning in the same way. Isaiah 46:13 resolves the doubt briefly and effectively. The almighty, gracious will of God toward Israel as a whole is not to be frustrated by the unworthiness of individuals. Spite of the evil condition referred to, Isaiah 46:12, He will bring in his righteousness. As the Prophet here expressly distinguishes between righteousness and salvation, we must take ‘ ‘righteousness” here in the sense of the “quality of righteous,” conformity to the divine will. [“One denotes the cause and the other the effect, one relates to God, and the other to man.
The sense in which salvation can be referred to the righteousness of God is clear from Isaiah 1:27. (See Vol. I., p. 93.) The exhibition of God’s righteousness consists in the salvation of His people and the simultaneous destruction of His enemies. To these two classes it was therefore at the same time an object of desire and dread.—J. A. Alex.] The Lord will yet, spite of the natural unrighteousness of Israel, raise up in Israel the righteousness that avails with Him. But this is the precedent condition of salvation.—Both will come at the right time; if perhaps late, still not too late.
Then the city of Zion will be full of salvation, and the people full of the glory of Jehovah. Thus God’s gracious will toward Israel will be fulfilled under all circumstances. Even Israel’s sins will not be able to prevent its salvation.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 46:3-4. “It is something that God will be with us, will strengthen us, help and preserve us by the right hand of His righteousness (Isaiah 41:10); it is something that He calls us by our name, and is with us in water and fire (Isaiah 43:1); it is something that He holds us as a seal and signet ring (Haggai 2:23); it is something that He holds us as the apple of His eye (Psalms 17:8), that He carries us on His wings (Deuteronomy 32:11), yea, that He gathers us under His wings (Matthew 23:37),—but this exceeds all, that God is willing to be so nearly related to us, that He will carry us under His heart, like a mother does the fruit of her body, and that not only like a mother, who carries the fruit no longer than nine months, but to the greatest and grayest age. Thus the love, fidelity, and services of God far exceed all motherly love, fidelity and services, great as these may be (Isaiah 49:15).”—Cramer.
2. On Isaiah 46:5-8. It is remarkable how deep-seated in the natural man is the desire to comprehend the divinity visibly, in a corporeal form. But God forbids it. First, because it is impossible to represent divinity under any adequate and worthy image; second, because the danger is so great that the image will be taken for the divinity itself. God would be worshipped as a spirit in spirit (John 4:24).
The Son of God appeared in the flesh, and if there ever was a corporeal form that was worthy and able to be to divinity the medium of its visible manifestation, then it was the corporality of Christ. But this was only visible to His contemporaries. Were it necessary to the church ever to have before its eyes the bodily figure of the Lord, the Lord would surely have provided for that, as He has indeed provided that His Spirit and word shall continue preserved to us. But men would certainly have made an idol of the image of the Lord. The Roman Catholic Church has succeeded in heathenizing what is most Christian of all, by making the host in the Lord’s Supper to be a transmutation into the visible body of the Lord. There that deep-seated heathen tendency finds then its gratification.
There we have a visible image, that would however represent the Lord as an object of worship. There God Himself is made an idol!
3. On Isaiah 46:12 sq. Were it necessary for us men to deserve the coming of the Redeemer He would never come. Can the physician only come when the sick man has disposed himself to recovery (Luke 5:31)? No, it is just sinners that attract the Lord. They need Him. He calls them to repentance, with them His righteousness finds a place. But a distinction is to be made here between the heard-hearted sinners that will not hear of the righteousness of God, and those sinners that would willingly be quit of it. Were we men only of the former sort, the door would be closed here on earth against all God’s purposes of salvation.
HINTS1. On Isaiah 46:3-4. “Every Christian ought to believe that God will do this for Him. For His mercies, promised to us in Christ, are neither small nor few. Far as the heaven is from the earth, and the east from the west, such is the mercy of God, if we only abide therein and do not tear ourselves away from it by wanton sinning. For we were not baptized that we might have a gracious God for ten or twenty years. He would be our God in eternity, and forever and ever, most of all when we are in distress and need a God and Helper, as in the straits of death and other danger. Therefore we should be afraid of nothing, but have the certain hope: the greater the distress we encounter, the more will God be near us with His help.” Veit Dietrich.
2. On Isaiah 46:3-4. The maternal love of God. 1) It provides for all (great and small). 2) It ever provides (even to old age).
3. On Isaiah 46:5. “What we are and what we are not we ever best learn when we men contrast ourselves with God. Who can measure how small our time is compared with His eternity. He can and will challenge us in everything and say: ‘to whom will ye compare me, that we may be like?’ Yet the Psalm attempts it: ‘A thousand years in Thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past,’ and what to Him is the succession of generations of men?” Tholuck.
4. [On Isaiah 46:10. My counsel shall stand. This proves, (1) That God has a purpose or plan in regard to human affairs. If He had not, He could not predict future events; (2). That God’s plan will not be frustrated. He has power enough to secure the execution of His designs, and He will exert that power in order that all His plans may be accomplished.
We may observe, also, that it is a matter of unspeakable joy that God has a plan, and that it will be executed. For (1) if there were no plan in relation to human thing, the mind could find no rest. If there was no evidence that One Mind presided over human affairs; that an infinitely wise plan had been formed, and that all things had been adjusted so as best to secure the ultimate accomplishment of that plan, everything would have the appearance of chaos, and the mind must be filled with doubts and distractions. But our anxieties vanish in regard to the apparent irregularities and disorders of the universe, when we feel that all things are under the direction of an Infinite Mind. (2) If His plans were not occomplished there would be occasion of equal doubt and dismay. If there was any power that could defeat the purposes of God; if there was any stubbornness of matter, or any inflexible perverseness in the nature of mind; if there were any unexpected and unforeseen extraneous causes that could interpose to thwart His plans, then the mind must be full of agitation and distress. But the moment it can fasten on the conviction that God has formed a plan that embraces all things, and that all things which occur will be in some way made tributary to that plan, that moment the mind can be calm in resignation to His holy will.” Barnes].
5. On Isaiah 46:12-13. The righteousness that avails with God. 1) Who brings it about (Isaiah 46:13 a); 2) who lays hold on it (not the proud and self-righteous Isaiah 46:12, but the believing); 3) what are its effects (Isaiah 46:13 b, salvation and glory).
Footnotes:are to the beast and to the cattle.Your carried images are loaded up.Heb. their soul.be firm.
apostates.
That.
Heb. The man of my counsel.
give.
To.
HINTS1. On Isaiah 48:1-2. “We, for our part, are also quite fallen into Jewish security. For we take great comfort from this, that we know, that we have God’s word simple and pure, and the same is indeed highly to be praised and valued. But it is not enough for one to have the word. One ought and must live according to it, then will God make account of us. But where one lives without the fear of God and in sin, and hears the word without amendment, there God will punish all the harder, as Christ shows in the parable of the servant that knew his Lord’s will and did it not.
Therefore one should let go such fleshly confidence, and labor to live in the fear of God, and hold faithfully to His word. Then if we fall into distress and pray for deliverance, it will surely be granted to us. But those who brag about God as do the Jews, and yet fear Him not, nor will live according to His word, will boast in vain. God will single them out and punish them as He did the Jews. For these two things must go together: trusting God, and fearing God. Neither can be right without the other.
If thou fearest not God, thou becomest proud and presumptuous as the Jews. But if thou believest not, and only fearest, thou wilt become anxious and fall into despair. Therefore the Psalm says: “The Lord taketh pleasure in them that fear Him, in those that hope in His mercy,” Psalms 147:10. Veit Dietrich.
2. [On Isaiah 48:3-8. The doctrine of providence supported by prophecy. 1) The method stated Isaiah 48:3; Isaiah 48:6; Isaiah 7:2) The reasons for God’s taking this method with them. a. He knew how obstinate they would be (Isaiah 48:4). b. How deceitful they would be. c. That they would be giving His glory to idols (Isaiah 48:5). After M. Henry.].
3. On Isaiah 47:9-11. The divine discipline of children. 1) Its course of procedure: a. God is patient (Isaiah 47:9); b. God punishes severely (Isaiah 47:10). 2) Its aims: a. God is patient a. for the sake of His honor (in order to reveal Himself as the “good”); â. for our sakes (Isaiah 47:9 b that we may not be exterminated); b. God is severe a. for the sake of His honor (that He may not be blasphemed, Isaiah 47:11); â. for our sakes (that we may be purified and confirmed in the furnace of affliction).
4. On Isaiah 48:17-19. “That is our most blessed knowledge that we know God through His self-witness, and who, as one veiled, speaks from the prophets as the One Eternal Prophet; as the reflected splendor of the invisible Divinity that became flesh and blood in Jesus, and is now as our Brother constantly with us. Yea, blessed and forever safe is he that pays heed to God’s testimony of the very gracious condescension of God to us! God makes such heedful ones forever at peace in Himself, whose peace becomes overflowing and overwhelming as a river, because God in it imparts to us pardon and justification. Our righteousness in God is as waves of the sea, that continually swell up in great abundance, for God’s grace that works in us and accomplishes our righteousness is, in fact, infinite. Dost thou lack peace and righteousness, then believe assuredly that the only reason is that thou hast despised the word of thy God.
Yea, whoever stablishes himself in God by believing acceptance of His word, he is forever established, and also has eternal bloom. He belongs to the innumerable family of God, that moves on through all times. How can he ever want for posterity?” J. Diedrich.
5. On Isaiah 48:20. “So God is wont to do: when the enemies of the churches pull hardest on the rope, it must break. We should mark this well, and comfort ourselves by it. For else we will become faint-hearted and despond, when matters go so ill.” Veit Dietrich.
6. On Isaiah 48:20-22. Israel’s Egyptian and Babylonian captivity is a type of the church in the world, and of individual believing souls in the body of this death. But we are to a certain degree ourselves to blame for the pressure of this captivity. There is even very much that holds us back to the flesh-pots of Egypt. We are often wanting in proper love for the one thing needful, in proper faith, in courage, in fidelity, in diligence in good works.
Yet the Lord has deprived the devil of his power. The enemy is even really conquered already; “ein Woertlein kann ihn faellen.” Hence the Christian must be exhorted to depart from Babylon courageously and intrepidly. This the Prophet does in our text. We see in it a warning call to depart out of Babylon. 1) The possibility of going out is a. objectively presented by redemption “that is by Jesus Christ; but b. depends subjectively on our love to God and our faith. 2) The return home is difficult, indeed, as it was with Israel. It is through deserts of distress and danger. But God will not forsake His own.
The spiritual rock (1 Corinthians 10:4) follows along with them. 3) At home, with the Lord, in communion with Him, they find peace, whereas the wicked nowhere and never shall find peace, not even in all the power, splendor and glory of this world.
7. [On Isaiah 48:22. “The wicked, as a matter of sober truth and verity, have no permanent and substantial peace and joy. (1) In the act of wickedness; (2) in the business or the pleasures of life; (3) no peace of conscience; (4) on a death-bed; (5) there is often not only no peace, but the actual reverse, apprehension; despair: (6) beyond the grave, a sinner Can have no peace at the judgment bar of God; he Can have no peace in hell.” Abbreviated from Barnes.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 48:2. Innitebantur Israelitae urbi Hierosolymae et templo, cui Deus se sua cum praesentia gratiosa addixerat (Psalms 132:13-14). Huic autem fiduciae propheta opponit ejus vanitatem. Nos inde petimus ἒλεγχον adversus pontificios, qui papas suos continua successione ex apostolo Petro tanquam fonte perenni profluxisse, Romaeque in cathedra Petri sedisse et adhuc sedere gloriosissime jactitant. Sed hanc jactationem hoc loco confutat propheta.
Nos addimus hasce patrum sententias. Nazianzenus in orat. de laudibus Athan.: “Qui in pietate succedit, in cathedra vera succedit; qui autem contrariam tenet sententiam, in contraria sedet cathedra.” Hieronymus referente Gratiano in jure pontifico part. 1 decr. dist. 40 Song of Solomon 2 : “Non est facile stare loco Pauli et tenere gratiam Petri cum Christo in coelis regnantium. Hinc dicitur. sancti non sunt qui tenent loca sanctorum, sed qui faciunt opera sanctorum.” Foerster.
2. On Isaiah 48:7. “Create means here to reveal something; what hitherto, so to speak, was still a nothing, or something unconjectured and unknown to all men, but was on the other hand shut up and concealed in God’s knowledge. Starke. “Tunc res dicitur fieri, quando incipit manifestius patefieri.” Augustinus, referente Lombardo, I. 3, dist. 18. Foerster.3. On Isaiah 48:8. “Fiunt, non nascuntur Christiani said that same Tertullian, that designates the soul of a man as a naturalitur christiana. There is no contradiction.
For one would neither become a Christian, did he not bear in himself the possibility of it, nor would the possibility alone suffice for the becoming. From the grain of corn alone without the fruit-bearing ground, rain and sunshine, there will come no ears; and just as little from the ground, rain and sunshine alone without the grain of corn.
4. On Isaiah 48:17-18. “Est insignis locus, qui nobis verbum commendat et minatur impiis verbi contemtoribus omnia mala.” Luther.
5. On Isaiah 48:20. “Babylon has a double meaning: 1) the world; 2) the anti-Christian kingdom. We should go out of the world by not having our walk according to it (1 John 2:15; 1 Peter 4:3; James 4:4). So, too, we ought to flee the anti-Christian Babylon according to the voice from heaven, Revelation 18:5.” Cramer.
2. THE FORMER THINGS AS OF THE NEW
Isaiah 48:3-113 I have declared the former things from the beginning;
And they went forth out of my mouth, and I shewed them;
I did them suddenly, and they came to pass.
4 Because I knew that thou art obstinate,
And thy neck is an iron sinew,
And thy brow brass;
5 I have even from the beginning declared it to thee;
Before it came to pass I shewed it thee:
Lest thou shouldest say, Mine idol hath done them,
And my graven image, and my molten image, hath commanded them.
6 Thou hast heard, see all this;
And will not ye declare it?
I have cshewed thee new things from this time,
Even hidden things, and thou didst not know them.
7 They are created now, and not afrom the beginning;
Even before the day when thou heardest them not;
Lest thou shouldest say, Behold, I knew them.
8 Yea, thou heardest not; yea, thou knewest not;
Yea, afrom that time that thine ear was not opened:
For I knew that thou wouldest deal very treacherously,
And wast called a transgressor from the womb.
9 For my name’s sake will I defer mine anger,
And for my praise will I refrain for thee,
That I cut thee not off.
10 Behold, I have refined thee, but not with silver;
I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction.
11 For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it:
For how should my name be polluted?
And I will not give my glory unto another.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 48:3. ψΰωׁ ?πεϊ—ξֵ ?ΰָ ?ζ. Isaiah 48:5. τֶ ?ρֶ ?μ. Isaiah 48:9. ηָ ?θַ ?ν. Isaiah 48:10.φָ ?ψַ ?σ.
Isaiah 48:1. ξֵ ?ΰָ ?ζ is properly=“from that time hitherto.” But ξִ ?ο stands here, according to Hebrew usage, as designation of the term, a quo. We may therefore boldly translate ξΰζ by “then, at that time,” as a reference to time long past.
Isaiah 48:7. μִ ?ξְ ?πֵ ?ιιεֹ ?ν is = ante hunc diem, comp. Isaiah 43:13. εְ before μֹ ?ΰ is demonstrative.
Isaiah 48:8. τִ ?ϊְּ ?ηָ ?δ is causative Piel=“to make an opening,” i.e., to open one’s-self to the report, to hear the report, comp. for the causative use Isaiah 60:11; Psalms 116:6.—The expression χψΰμκ as in Isaiah 58:12; Isaiah 61:3; Isaiah 62:2.
Isaiah 48:9. δΰψικΰσ only Proverbs 19:11; comp. Job 6:11 and the expression in the Pentateuch ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?κְ ΰַ ?τַ ?ιִ ?ν Exodus 34:6; Numbers 14:18, etc.—μξςο Is to be supplied before ϊδμϊι, Isaiah 44:28; Isaiah 46:5.—ηָ ?θַ ?ν, Arab, chatama, Aram. ηֲ ?θַ ?ν, coercere, ηָ ?θָ ?ν frenum, nose-ring.—μָ ?κְ dat. Commodi; Isaiah 40:10.
Isaiah 48:10. It is plain that the αְּ can neither be α pretii, nor that of accompaniment. It is (Hitzig, Delitzsch) the α essentiae = in qualitate argenti, in the quality of silver, i.e., as silver. The only peculiarity here is the placing of the αְּ with the object (comp. Ezekiel 20:41; Psalms 78:55, Del.).—αָּ ?ηַ ?ψ properly means “to choose.” But as to choose presupposes a testing and confirmation, so in the Aram. αְּ ?ηַ ?ψ stands directly for αָּ ?ηַ ?ο (Syr. bochuro = αָּ ?ηεֹ ?ο explorator). In Latin, too, probare means not only to hold something to be good, but also to investigate whether it is good. So also here αηψ is used in the sense of αָּ ?δַ ?ο (comp. Job 34:4).
AND 1. I have declared——commanded them. Isaiah 48:3-5. These three verses express the thought, that from ancient times on, and before He gave this new prophecy that culminates in the name of Cyrus, the Lord had by prophecy and fulfilment proved Himself to be the true God. This is the seventh time the Prophet presents this argument. By ψΰωׁ ?πεϊ, therefore, I understand priora, ante facta.
The Prophet, as it were, divides history into two parts: the old and the new. The new begins with the first prophetic announcements of events relative to Cyrus. The matter is important to the Lord hence he divides δπγϊι, “I have announced,” into two natural component parts: 1) the prophecy went out of His mouth, 2) it entered into Israel’s ear. Thus the fact of the prophecy is proved. And also the fulfilment. For suddenly (τϊΰν is wont to stand for the initiation of the fulfilment, because the inward connection is hid from the eyes of men, comp.
Isaiah 29:5; Isaiah 47:11) the Lord performed what was announced and the thing prophesied came about (comp. Isaiah 44:7; Isaiah 47:9). This course was necessary from the very first. It had always an eminently practical object. Because I know, says the Lord, that thou art hard, i.e., stiff-necked, hard to convince and that thy neck is an iron sinew (πִ ?ιγ, nervus, tendo, spring, resort), therefore hard to bend, and thy brow brass, thus impenetrable, obstinate,—for this reason I announced to the at that time, long ago, so that thou mightest not say my idol (ςֹ ?φֶ ?α, general word, deus ficticius in general, Psalms 139:24) did it, my graven image and my molten image (πρκ, Isaiah 41:29) commanded it here (made it come, Isaiah 45:11). Therefore the Lord here declares that in the past even, thus in what has been indicated as the first period of history, by reason of Israel’s hardness of heart, and its being unimpressible by purely inward, spiritual proofs, and because of its desire for arguments that may be seized outwardly, He had found Himself obliged to establish His claim to be the only true God, by prophesying the future, and bringing to pass what was prophesied.
In this the Prophet says nothing new. He only repeats what he has before set forth in various places (Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 41:21 sqq., Isaiah 41:26; Isaiah 43:9 sqq.; Isaiah 44:7 sqq.; Isaiah 46:9 sq.).
2. Thou hast heard——from the womb. Isaiah 48:6-8. With these words, too, the Prophet repeats essentially only something said before, viz., what he had announced in reference to the new period of salvation to be inaugurated by Cyrus. The words ωׁ ?ξςϊ to ϊπιγε, Isaiah 48:6, form the transition. ωׁ ?ξςϊ manifestly refers to ΰωׁ ?ξιςν, Isaiah 48:3, and δωׁ ?ξςϊικ, Isaiah 48:5. It must be established that not only did the Lord bring those old prophecies to a hearing, but that they were actually heard.
And λֻּ ?μָּ ?δּ would express that all relating to that, therefore the fulfilment also, has been heard. The emphatic ηֲ ?ζֵ ?δ (comp. Isaiah 33:20; Isaiah 30:10) would warn Israel not to treat the matter lightly. Only let it look narrowly, and it must confess that all in the previous period of history relative to prophecy and fulfilment was fully known. Will they not on their part feel impelled to declare and proclaim aloud what they have undoubtedly heard? In the entire section, Isaiah 48:3-11, the Prophet steadily addresses Israel in the second pers. masc. sing.
Suddenly in the single clause, εΰϊνδμΰϊπιγε, he passes to the second pers. masc. plur. The reason for this seems to me to be, that he has in mind here, no longer the ideal total Israel, but the concrete persons of his contemporaries and immediate hearers or first readers.
This appears to me to be one of the passages where the Prophet, who else lives wholly in the Exile, cannot help casting a glance at the actual present. If we might assume that chapters 40–66 were to remain a sealed-up prophecy until the time of the Exile, then we would be warranted in saying that the words and will ye not declare it applied only to the exiles. But the numerous citations from chapters 40–66, that occur in prophets after Isaiah but before the Exile, show that our prophecy even before the Exile must have been publici juris. Hence I can only see in these words an exhortation that Isaiah gives to his actual contemporaries, viz., to confess openly that the history of Israel hitherto is a proof that Jehovah can prophesy and fulfil. [“And ye (idolaters or idols), will not ye declare, the same word used above for the prediction of events, and therefore no doubt meaning here, will not ye predict something? This is Hitzig’s explanation of the words. In favor of this view is its taking δִ ?πִּ ?ιγ in the sense which it has in the preceding verse, and also the analogy of Isa 41:22-23, where the very same challenge is given in nearly the same form; to which may be added the sudden change to the plural form, and the emphatic introduction of the pronoun, implying a new object of address, and not a mere enallage, because he immediately resumes the address to the people in the singular” J.
A. Alex.]. As Israel itself must confess that it has learned to know its God as a prophesier and fulfiller, the Lord bases on that the further demand that they believe also the present new prophecy, and infer from it the proper consequences. Manifestly the ηֲ ?γָ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?ϊ, new things, are the prophecy relating to Cyrus and the period of salvation initiated by him. The Prophet refers to Isaiah 42:9 sqq.; Isaiah 43:19 sqq.; Isaiah 44:24 sqq.; Isaiah 45:1 sqq., Isaiah 45:11 sqq., Isaiah 45:19 sqq.; Isaiah 46:11. He particularly emphasizes that this prophecy as such is also quite a new thing.
Had Israel obtained report of those future events in any other way, natural or supernatural, then, of course, their proclamation by the Prophet would have been met by the reply: “Nothing new, we know it already.” That would have been ruinous for the reputation of Jehovah and His prophet. But there is no mention of that. The prophecy relates to hidden things (Isaiah 1:8; Isaiah 49:6; Isaiah 65:4), to things that have just been created. The expression, are created (comp. Isaiah 41:20; Isaiah 43:7; Isaiah 45:8) is to be judged of by the measure of what is divinely real. The word of prophecy has changed the divine decree from being a λόγοςἐνδιάθετος to being a λόγοςπροφορικός.
The divine idea is thereby, as it were, born into the world. Even though it only exists as a mere word, still a word so uttered is a creative word. If God has spoken it, it also comes to pass. So far what God has spoken, announced, prophesied, is as good as created. It is real even if for the time being it is only a divine decree (comp. under Doctr. and Eth. on Isaiah 48:7). But its reality rests only on this act of the divine will, and the knowledge of it only on the revelation of it by means of the prophet of Jehovah.
No one in the world would have thought of it, and no one in the world would have received intelligence of the divine thought without the revelation through the Prophet. God thinks it, God says it, God does it. It is only and altogether a fruit of God, and hence a proof that God is, and what He is. God revealed it to Israel, and He did it with the intention of curing Israel of its deep-rooted tendency to faithlessness (comp. Jeremiah 3:7; Jeremiah 3:10), from its native tendency to apostacy.
3. For my name’s sake——unto another, Isaiah 48:9-11. These verses are related to what precedes as giving a reason. The new things (Isaiah 48:6), previously concealed, but now entered on existence as to principle by the word of prophecy, involve salvation and deliverance for Israel on the assumption that Israel will let itself be cured of its deep-rooted tendency to apostacy. For this continued rebelliousness it had properly merited extinction. But the Lord desires not the death of the sinner, but that he should repent and live.
For the sake of His own honor, also, He desires not the death of the sinner. For the rejection of Israel after its election would even compromise the Lord Himself. It would make Him appear as one who would, but could not. Hence the Lord will make His anger long, i.e. He will postpone the destructive blow that His anger properly demands (see Text. and Gram.). In fact He postponed it until the rejection of His Son (Matthew 21:39 sqq.).
Therefore, for His name’s sake He will defer His anger, and for the sake of His honor He will restrain it, for Israel’s advantage (see Text. and Gram.), so that it will not be destroyed. He will only purify, refine Israel, yet not as silver; but He will confirm it in the furnace of affliction. The Prophet makes a difference between the refining furnace and the furnace of affliction. The difference cannot relate to the effect, since that is the same in both. For I do not think that the Prophet assumes an unfavorable result in the smelting process, viz. that dross will come of it. According to the context the honor of God demands that Israel be purified and saved.
But the smelting furnace is for the silver no misfortune, no disgrace; it is the natural and necessary means for restoring the silver. Properly Israel ought not to need this smelting process. So far the furnace of affliction is for Israel a punishment and disgrace, which the smelting furnace is not for silver.—Finally the Prophet repeats the thought with emphasis, that the preservation of Israel was in the proper interest of Jehovah. Did He forsake Israel, He would then surrender them to the idols, and thereby permit the honor belonging to Him alone to be given to them. The words: and I will not give my honor to another, Isaiah 48:11 b, in which manifestly the thought of Isa 48:9-11 culminates, is a literal repetition of Isa 42:8. By this, the Prophet intimates that in these words, too (Isaiah 48:9-11), he only repeats what he had said before.
Delitzsch very fittingly at Isaiah 48:11 refers to Ezekiel 36:19-23.
Footnotes:from then.
caused them to be heard.
Heb. hard.
caused them to hear.
and.
omit that.
Or, for silver.
3.THE OF THE NEW THINGS IS
Isaiah 48:12-1512 Hearken unto me, O Jacob
And Israel, my called;
I am he; I am the first, I also am the last.
13 Mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth,
And my right hand hath spanned the heavens:
When I call unto them, they stand up together.
14 All ye, assemble yourselves, and hear;
Which among them hath declared these things?
The Lord hath loved him: he will do his pleasure on Babylon,
And his arm shall be on the Chaldeans.
15 I, even I, have spoken; yea, I have called him:
I have brought him, and he shall make his way prosperous.
TEXTUAL AND On Isaiah 48:14. Expositors have made difficulty about construing ζְ ?ψֹ ?ςεֹ as accusative, because “to perform Jehovah’s or His own arm “is an incomprehensible mode of speech even taken as zeugmatic (Delitzsch), Klostermann, too, (l. c., pp. 7,19) is of the opinion that to translate “He will accomplish his will on Babylon and his punitive work on the Chaldeans” needs a dispensation from Hebrew usus loquendi. ζְ ?ψεֹ ?ςַ does, indeed, not mean “punitive work,” and this is not an instance of mere zeugma, but zeugma and metonymy. It is surely one of the most usual metonymical forms of expression in the Old Testament to put the arm for what is manifested by the arm, i.e., for the power or the might. Comp. Isaiah 33:2; Jeremiah 17:5; Ezekiel 31:17; Psalms 83:9, etc Moreover Isaiah 44:12 proves that the Prophet conceives of the arm, as also in Isaiah 45:9 of the hand, as the seat of power. Might not our passage read: ιַ ?ςֲֽ ?ωֶׂ ?δαְּ ?αָ ?αֶ ?μεּ ?πְ ?αεּ ?ψָ ?ϊεֹ λַּ ?ωְׂ ?γִּ ?ιν (or λֹּ ?ηεֹ ,ηֵ ?ιμεֹ) ηֶ ?τְ ?φεֹ ??
For one may very well say ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δπְ ?λεּ ?ψָ ?δ for “to display strength, power” (1 Kings 16:27). Accordingly, if taken strictly, one need not even assume a zeugma, if the slight difference be not urged that exists between ςωׂ ?δ in ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δηֵ ?τֵ ?υ and ςωׂ ?δ in ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δπְ ?αεּ ?ψָ ?δ.—There can be no doubt that the prefix αּ should be repeated before λַּ ?ωְׂ ?γִּ ?ιν.
AND 1. Hearken unto me——up together, Isaiah 48:12-13. The verses of this section are almost wholly a compilation of the chief elements of chapts. 40–47. The words ωׁ ?ξς as far as ξχψΰι are only a solemn introductory formula, containing an emphatic summons to give attention, in order to intimate the importance of the subject. Comp. Isaiah 48:1; Isaiah 44:1; Isaiah 46:3.—ξְ ?χֹ ?ψָ ?ΰ, “the called,” as regards the word, occurs only here; but as regards the sense it is essentially one with what we read Isaiah 41:9; Isaiah 43:1.
A double calling is spoken of here: Of the ancient and original one which Israel received in the person of its ancestor (Isaiah 41:9), and of the future one when the Lord calls back His people from the Exile (Isaiah 43:1; comp. Isaiah 48:5 sqq.; Isaiah 44:22). Thus Israel is named ξְ ?χֹ ?ψָ ?ΰ as the doubly called people. In what follows the Prophet calls to mind first those fundamental facts that are a guaranty that Jehovah can foretell and fulfil the deliverance by Cyrus. They are 1) His absoluteness and uniqueness. As such He is δεּ ?ΰ, the He par excellence, the absolute subject.
As such the Prophet has already named Him, Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 43:13; Isaiah 43:25; Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 46:4. 2) His eternity, by virtue of which He is the first and the last. He has already been so called Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 44:6; comp. Isaiah 43:13. 3) The creation of heaven and earth, which also has been spoken of in what precedes, in the same sense, viz. that He who created the world can also foretell and fulfil Israel’s deliverance: Isaiah 40:12 sqq., Isaiah 40:22; Isaiah 40:26; Isaiah 40:28; Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 45:12; Isaiah 45:18.
2. All ye, assemble——his way prosperous, Isaiah 48:14-15. The words δχαφε as far as ΰֵ ?μֶּ ?δ(“All ye assemble——these things”) represent here all those passages in which the Prophet has variously uttered the thought, that Jehovah, the Creator of heaven and earth, has challenged all idols to a contest in prophesying in order, by exposing their impotency, to prove their nothingness and His divinity. The passages are Isaiah 41:1 sqq., Isaiah 41:21 sqq., Isaiah 41:26 sqq.; Isaiah 43:9; Isaiah 44:7 sqq., Isaiah 44:24 sqq.; Isaiah 45:20 sqq.; Isaiah 46:9 sqq. Especially our passage recalls Isaiah 43:9 and Isaiah 45:20. In Isaiah 43:9 the interrogatory clause occurs almost verbatim, except the Niph. of χαυ.
For there it reads ξִ ?ιαָ ?δֶ ?νιַ ?βִּ ?ιγζֹ ?ΰϊ. In Isaiah 45:20, as here, the first word is δχαφε. It is self-evident that αָּ ?δֶ ?ν in our passage, as in Isaiah 43:9, is to be referred to the idols, as that ΰֵ ?μֶּ ?δ refers to the things concerning Cyrus. This appears from what immediately follows. For there again we have a collective citation, if I may so express myself. For there all that has been previously said of Cyrus is recalled by the brief words, Isaiah 48:14 b, 15, that emphasize the chief particulars.
Jehovah hath loved him is said first. It is true this statement has not occurred literally before; but it has as to sense. For that the Lord loves Cyrus underlies all those passages that speak of him; Isaiah 41:2 sq., 25; Isaiah 44:28; Isaiah 45:1-7; Isaiah 45:13 sq.; Isaiah 46:11. Moreover the words: He will do His pleasure on Babylon, and His arm on the Chaldeans, though not literally, occur as to sense in what precedes (comp. Isaiah 41:25; Isaiah 43:14; Isaiah 44:28, where, moreover, the words λֹּ ?μηֶ ?τְ ?φִ ?ιιַ ?ωְׁ ?μִ ?ιν occur; Isaiah 45:1 sqq.; Isaiah 46:1 sq., Isaiah 46:10; Isaiah 47 entire).—In Isaiah 48:15 the Lord Himself speaks, confirming the word of His Prophet. He, the Lord, has foretold that which concerns Cyrus (Isaiah 45:21); He called him (Isaiah 45:4), He brings him on, taking him by the hand (Isaiah 45:1), and sees to it that he completes his way (Isaiah 41:3).
Footnotes:Or, the palm of my right hand hath spread, out.
4. TWO
Isaiah 48:16-19 Isaiah 48:20-21 connect naturally with Isaiah 48:14-15. For Isaiah 48:14 foretells the victory of Cyrus over Babylon; Isaiah 48:20 summons Israel to flee out of vanquished Babylon as a prison opened by Cyrus. Isaiah 48:16, however, contains a personal remark of the Prophet; and though Isaiah 48:17-19 are a revealed word of God (com. λֹּ ?δΰָ ?ξַ ?ψιΧ Isaiah 48:17), they are yet of so general a nature, that they would be perfectly in place, indeed, after Isaiah 48:21, as expressive of a regret that Israel did not follow the direct way to salvation, but had made necessary the detour through the Exile; but coming between Isaiah 48:15; Isaiah 48:20, they can only be regarded as a break of the connection. How Isaiah 48:16-19 came where they are will hardly be made out by any one. Their proper place would be between Isaiah 48:21-22. Perhaps they first stood in the margin (occasioned by the personal nature of Isa 48:16 and the retrospective nature of Isa 48:17-19 in the midst of the current of prospective prophecy), and then they were, through misunderstanding, inserted before instead of after Isaiah 48:21. [The Author’s difficulty as to the order of the verses will not be felt by many, any more than they are, e.g., by Lowth, Maurer, Barnes, J.
A. Alex., who comment right on without being aware of anything to stumble at. Yet J. A. A. pauses to say, that the objection as presented by others is entirely unfounded; vide. his comm. on Isaiah 48:18. Those that fail to see the difficulty with the Author, will equally discard the caption he adopts, by which he stamps these verses 16–19 as interpolations.—Tr.).
a) FIRST Isaiah 48:16A personal remark of the Prophet16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this;
I have not spoken in secret from the beginning;
From the time that it was, there am I:
And now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me.
AND These words are enigmatical, and I despair of explaining them in a convincing way. I do not believe that “come ye near unto me, hear ye this” are in parallelism with “all ye assemble yourselves and hear” Isaiah 48:14, and that therefore they are to be construed also as words of Jehovah. [“As certainly now as δִ ?χָ ?αְ ?φεּ Isaiah 48:14 is the word of Jehovah, so certain is it that χִ ?ψְ ?αεּ ΰֵ ?μַ ?ι is the same. He summons to Himself the members of His nation, that they may hear still further His own testimony concerning Himself.” Delitzsch]. For, as has been shown, the initial words of Isa 48:14 are references to something said before. But Isaiah 48:16 begins a thought of another sort. It makes on me the impression of a separate remark, which the Prophet had directed to a narrower circle of immediate hearers, such as, say, the narrower circle of his disciples may have been (comp. on Isaiah 8:16 sqq.).
Some might be surprised regarding the prophecies beginning with chap. 40, that the Prophet foretells so positively a Babylonian Exile, and the deliverance by a prince by the name of Cyrus. The Prophet explains this Isaiah 48:16. By “come ye near unto me” he intimates that he would make a particularly confidential communication. It consists in the statement that he must not be supposed to have known of these things already, say from the beginning of (ξֵ ?ψֹ ?ΰωׁ) his prophetic activity, and to have announced or may-be made a written record of them, as esoteric secrets, only in the narrowest circle. Rather he did not himself know of these things from the beginning. Only ξςϊδιεϊδ, “from the time that it was,” was he there.
That is, only since these things “were created” (πִ ?αְ ?ψְ ?ΰεּ Isaiah 48:7) in the sense that we have explained Isaiah 48:7, did he become familiar with them and they stand visible before his prophetic eye. διεϊδ seems to me to remind one of ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψεַ ?ιְ ?δִ ?ι and of δַ ?γָּ ?αָ ?ψδָ ?ιָ ?δ. The Prophet regards as created, as come to pass, what has been announced to him. Hence he says here, he for his person was present, as an inward, spiritual witness and spectator, when these things, in a prophetic sense, came to pass. But now the LORD Jehovah (see List) has sent him, i.e., has sent him with the commission of announcing, and His Spirit. Therefore he distinguishes between the moment of prophetic seeing and that of prophetic announcement. I cannot construe ψεּ ?ηεֹ as accusative.
For then he would make himself like the Spirit, or put himself on a level with the Spirit. He can only make the Spirit equal with the Lord. But he distinguishes the Lord and His Spirit, by recognizing the first as the one from whom the Spirit proceeds (1 Kings 22:22) or is sent.
This is an attempt at exposition, which however I by no means set forth as an assured assertion. As I cannot hold it to be satisfying, I cannot pretend to have solved the enigma by it. For a Prophet to interrupt his official prophecy by a private remark is, of course, against the rule. Still it is not unexampled. I regard Jeremiah 31:26 as such, where see my comment. In Jeremiah, the occasion of that personal remark was the circumstance, that that moment of awaking out of sleep was for him the brightest point in all his trying prophetic career.
For Isaiah the occasion was, that he regarded it as necessary to give his immediate hearers an explanation why he now announced things the like of which no one had ever before heard from him. It might seem as if hitherto he had preserved silence about what he had long known. But he says: The new thing that ye have heard, I myself did not know earlier. It has only now come to pass (in a prophetic sense), and only after it came to pass did I receive commission to reveal it. Of course, this exposition is only possible if the Prophet that speaks is Isaiah himself, and if Isaiah here for once speaks out of the historical moment in which he prophesied. But does not the whole weight of his discoures rest on this, that he is even prophesying, i.e., announcing future things, not present or past?
If so, then he must be conscious of the interval between prophecy and fulfilment. He must know that what is prophesied lies far, far before him, too far for any human eye to recognize what lies beyond that interval. Hence I cannot agree with Delitsch in considering that the Prophet lives only in the Exile with his spirit. This were only possible did he forget that he prophesied.
[The comment of Delitzsch directly following his words quoted above is: “From the beginning He has not spoken in secret (see Isaiah 45:19); but from the time that all which now lies before their eyes—namely, the victorious career of Cyrus—has unfolded itself, He has been there, or has been by (ωָׁ ?ν, ‘there,’ as in Proverbs 8:27), to regulate, what was coming to pass, and to cause it to result in the redemption of Israel. ‘I was there’ affirms, that, at the time when the revolution caused by Cyrus was preparing in the distance, He caused it to be publicly foretold, and thereby proclaimed Himself the present Author and Lord of what was then occurring. Up to this point Jehovah is speaking; but who is it that now proceeds to say, ‘And now’—namely, now that the redemption of Israel is about to appear (εςֲ ?ϊָּ ?δ being here, as in many other instances, e.g., Isaiah 33:10, the turning-point of salvation)—‘now hath the Lord Jehovah seat me and His Spirit.’ The majority of the commentators assume that the Prophet comes forward here in his own person, behind Him whom he has introduced, and interrupts Him. But since the Prophet has not spoken in his own person before, whereas, on the other hand, these words are followed in Isaiah 49:1 sqq. by an address concerning himself from that Servant of Jehovah who announces Himself as the restorer of Israel and light of the Gentiles, and who cannot therefore be Israel as a nation or the Author of these prophecies, nothing is more natural than to suppose that the words, ‘And now hath the Lord,’ etc., form a prelude to the words of the One unequalled Servant of Jehovah concerning Himself which occur in 49. The surprisingly mysterious way in which the words of Jehovah suddenly pass into those of His messenger, which is only comparable to Zechariah 2:12 sqq.; Zechariah 4:9 (where the speaker is also not the prophet, but a divine messenger exalted above him), can only be explained in this manner. And in no other way can we explain the εςϊδ, which means, that after Jehovah has prepared the way for the redemption of Israel by the raising up of Cyrus, in accordance with prophecy, and by his success in arms, He has sent him, the speaker in this case, to carry out, in a mediatorial capacity, the redemption thus proposed, and that not by force of arms, but in the power of the Spirit of God (Isaiah 42:1; comp. Zechariah 4:6).
Consequently the Spirit is not spoken of here as joining in the sending (as Umbreit and Stier suppose, after Jerome and the Targum; the LXX is indefinite, καὶτὸπνεῦμααὐτοῦ); nor do we ever find the Spirit mentioned in such co-ordination as this (see, on the other hand, Zechariah 7:12, per spiritum suum). The meaning is, that it is also sent, i.e., sent in and with the Servant of Jehovah, who is speaking here.” Del. on Isa., vol. II. p. 252 sq. Clark’sFor. Theol. Lib.
We may anticipate here the comment on Isaiah 48:17-19 for the purpose of saying, in support of the above exposition of Delitzsch, that our Isaiah 48:16-19 seem to be the scripture (ἡγραφή) referred to in John 7:37-39. In our text, the messenger and the Spirit sent with or after him (Isaiah 48:16) are presented as the source of the blessings conditionally guaranteed in Isaiah 48:17-19. The emphatic way in which the mention of the Spirit is introduced (Isaiah 48:16), and the mention of “teaching,” “hearkening to commandments,” “peace” and “righteousness” (Isaiah 48:17-18), make it plain that the agent of the blessings described (Isaiah 48:18-19) must be the Spirit; not, however, excluding the priority of the Redeemer who is the speaker. The blessing described is the blessing of Abraham, as our Author shows below; and (against Del. who translates “grains of sand”) we may, with our Author, translate ξֵ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ = “viscera, bowels” (Barnes and J. A. Alex. do the same).
Of course we must understand the blessing of numerous offspring in a spiritual sense, such as the Spirit will generate, i.e., a spiritual Israel. Our Author has shown this in cognate passages, e.g., see under Isaiah 44:3-5. Moreover the very parallelisms of Isa 48:18, “peace as the river,” “righteousness as the waves,” show this. In John 7:38 the Lord Jesus says: “He that believes on Me, as the Scripture said: rivers of living water shall flow from his bowels (ἐκτῆςκοιλίαςαὐτοῦ).” This is an allusion and interpretation, rather than a quotation. It combines the spiritual figures of Isa 48:18 with the figure of offspring in Isaiah 48:19, where the LXX. has: καὶτὰἔκγονατῆςκοιλίαςσου. By saying this, our Lord claims that He is the source of the Abrahamic blessing, and reproduces in Himself the speaker of our text.
To relieve the obscurity of the allusion the Evangelist adds his comment (John 7:39): “But this He spake of the Spirit, which they that believe on Him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.” By this John completes the allusion to our text, referring to the Spirit which our Isaiah 48:16 represents as sent with the messenger—but after; “and His Spirit (εְ ?ψεּ ?ηεֹ),” curiously subjoined grammatically, seeming to express an after-thought, but really expressing an after-act. The day of Pentecost witnessed this sending, and the promised effect of it in the multiplication of off-spring to those that believed on Christ, in the vast increase of the spiritual Israel, rivers of living waters, righteousness like waves, and seed like the offspring of the sea.
The view here given of the correlation of our text and John 7:37-39, if correct, is invaluable as aid in understanding the former, confirming the exposition of Delitzsch. At the same time it identifies the reference of ἡγραφή in John 7:38, which, so far as we know, has never been satisfactorily done by any commentator, and at the same time must imperatively control the interpretation put upon “rivers of living water.” Tr.]
Footnotes:hath sent me and his Spirit.
b) SECOND Lament that Israel would not hear at the right time Isaiah 48:17-1917 Thus saith the Lord,
Thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel;
I am the Lord thy God which teacheth thee to profit,
Which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go.
18 O that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments!
Then had thy peace been as a river,
And thy righteousness as the waves of the sea:
19 Thy seed also had been as the sand,
And the offspring of thy bowels like the gravel thereof;
His name should not have been cut off nor destroyed from before me.
AND These words interrupt the connection just as does Isaiah 48:16, and make the impression of belonging to the time when the Prophet was prophesying. For chap. 43 is a recapitulation of the thoughts of chaps. 40–47. This recapitulation continues in Isaiah 48:20-21, as we shall show afterwards. But in these Isaiah 48:17-19 there is not a trace of recapitulation. [It is hard to resist the conviction, that were our Author less dominated by this notion of recapitulation, he would see more clearly. See in the Introduction, p. 17, the remarks quoted from J. A.
Alex.—Tr.] They bear a retrospective character. After announcing the deliverance by Cyrus, the Prophet is constrained to make the mournful remark, that Israel might have come to the same goal of salvation by the normal and direct way. This thought was perhaps in place after the recapitulation, but not during it, as a break in the context.
Jehovah, the Redeemer, the Holy One, the God of Israel, is naturally, as such, the teacher and leader also of the nation, and has the right to demand that the nation let itself be taught and led by Him. ξμξγκμδεςιμ (see List); δεֹ ?ςִ ?ιμ is frugi esse, and is used of being able, ability in regard to useful things generally (comp. Isaiah 30:5-6; Jeremiah 2:8, etc.). Here it stands particularly for doing that which is morally profitable. μεΰδχωׁ ?αϊεπεΧ (Isaiah 48:18) can only mean: if thou hadst regarded, then thy salvation had been, etc. Comp. Ewald, § 329, b; 358, a. Isaiah 63:19 reads exactly and literally: if thou hadst rent the heavens, and were come down.
Of course in that passage it is not essentially important if one translate (inexactly) O that thou mightest rend the heavens and mightest come down. For the only difference is that the more exact construction expresses the impatient wish that the rending and coming down had already taken place. But in our passage one cannot say, that the Lord, if the words must relate to the future, wishes Israel might already have completed giving its attention. Every one would expect the wish to be that Israel would give attention now and in all the future. But to express that requires the imperfect or the imperative, and in the apodosis εִ ?ιδִ ?ι or εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ. To be grammatically exact, therefore, one can only construe the words as retrospective.
Had Israel regarded the commandments of the Lord, then its salvation had been as the river (the Euphrates, comp. Isaiah 59:19; Isaiah 66:12, where λְּ ?πָ ?δָ ?ψ is used), and its righteousness as waves of the sea. Corporeal and spiritual salvation would have extended over Israel in measureless abundance (comp. Isaiah 10:22, and on the relation of ωׁ ?μεν to φγχϊ, Isaiah 32:16; Isaiah 46:13). All promises of salvation contain the benedictio vere theocratica of numerous posterity; for power and developed civilization presuppose a numerous people. A people few in numbers can neither be powerful nor enjoy in spiritual respects an all-sided development.
Our passage is founded on Genesis 22:17; Genesis 32:13; comp. Genesis 12:2; Genesis 13:16; Genesis 15:5, etc. φΰφΰιν occurs only in Job (Job 5:25; Job 21:8; Job 27:14; Job 31:8), and in Isa., see List. ξֵ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ is of uncertain meaning. It occurs only here. The ancient versions convey the notion of “gravel, lapilli.” Gesenius, on the other hand, translates: “propagines viscerum tuorum ut (propagines) viscerum ejus,” and by, propagines viscerum maris are to be understood the fish (sea-animals). [The invariable usage of the Bible is to refer to “the sand of the sea” as the figure for multitude; we think there is not an instance of the animal life of the sea being so used. As a combined figure of multitude and off-spring the sand is more appropriate than the fish. It is beside the standing comparison for the Abrahamic blessing, Tr.] Hitzig, Maurer, Knobel [Barnes, J.
A. Alex.] follow the exposition of Gesenius [J. A. A. ascribes it to J. D. Michaelis, Tr.].
Both interpretations have a weak foundation. Yet the latter has in its favor, that ξֵ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ, viscera = ξςιν, after the analogy of πδψεϊ along with πδψιν, etc., is more probable than the ingeniously deduced lapilli.
Therefore the Prophet here expresses the thought, that, had Israel followed the commandments of Jehovah, then the promises given the fathers would have been fulfilled without the mournful intervening stadium of the Exile. [It seems better, with most commentators, to regard Isaiah 48:16-19 as spoken from the stand-point of the foregoing and subsequent context, i.e., of the Exile. This is involved in interpreting “the river” to mean the Euphrates. “Nothing could well be more appropriate at the close of this division of the prophecies, than such an affecting statement of the truth, so frequently propounded in didactic form already, that Israel, although the chosen people of Jehovah, and as such secure from total ruin, was and was to be a sufferer, not from any want of faithfulness or care on God’s part, but as the necessary fruit of its own imperfections and corruptions.” J. A. Alex. on Isaiah 48:18. “His name shall not be cut off nor destroyed before me.” “We may suppose that the writer, after wishing that the people had escaped the strokes provoked by their iniquities, declares that even now they shall not be entirely destroyed. This is precisely the sense given to the clause in the LXX. (οὐδὲνῦνἁπολεῖται), and is recommended by two considerations: first, the absence of the Vav conversive, which in the other clause may indicate an indirect construction; and secondly, its perfect agreement with the whole drift of the passage, and the analogy of others like it, when the explanation of the sufferings of the people as the fruit of their own sin is combined with a promise of exemption from complete destruction,” ibid.on Isaiah 48:19. Delitzsch similarly—Tr.]
Footnotes:like that of its (the sea’s) bowels.
shall not be
5. SUMMONS TO ISRAEL TO FLEE OUT OF BABYLON
Isaiah 48:20-2120 Go ye forth of Babylon.
Flee ye from the Chaldeans, with voice of singing
Declare ye, tell this,
Utter it even to the end of the earth;
Say ye, The Lord hath redeemed his servant Jacob.
21 And they thirsted not when he led them through the deserts:
He caused waters to flow out of the rock for them:
He clave the rock also, and the waters gushed out.
AND Both these verses bear entirely the character of the representation in Isaiah 48:1-15; that is to say, the chief particulars of chaps. 40–47 are recapitulated. They especially correspond to chaps. 46, 47, which are principally occupied with Babylon. That Babylon must be destroyed, and that redeemed Israel must go free from the destroyed prison, has been variously declared in preceding chapters. It is to be especially noted that wherever the deliverance of Israel and Jehovah as their Redeemer are spoken of, it is always primarily the deliverance from Babylon that is meant (Isaiah 41:14; Isaiah 43:1; Isaiah 43:14; Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 44:22; Isaiah 44:24 sqq.; Isaiah 45:13; Isaiah 45:17; Isaiah 47:4). We read in Isaiah 42:22 that Israel is held captive as in a prison. Babylon’s fall is specially announced Isaiah 43:14; Isaiah 46:1-2; Isaiah 47:1 sqq.
It is said in Isaiah 42:10-12; Isaiah 44:23; Isaiah 45:6; Isaiah 45:22-24 that the praise of Jehovah’s acts of deliverance must be sounded to the end of the earth, and be to all nations a guaranty of their own salvation. That on the way the Israelites shall have water in great abundance is promised Isaiah 41:17-19; Isaiah 43:19 sq.; Isaiah 44:3 sq. That the return from Babylon shall not be inferior to the return out of Egypt in miraculous displays of the saving hand of God is stated Isaiah 42:16; Isaiah 43:16; Isaiah 44:27. Thus verses 20, 21 also bear the character of recapitulation. And hence I believe that Isaiah 48:16 and the verses 17–19 were originally supplements, but through misunderstanding were inserted out of place. As regards particulars, it must be noticed that what is to be proclaimed to the end of the earth begins with The Lord hath redeemed and ends with waters gushed out.
The redemption of Israel and its joyful return home must be proclaimed to all nations as a pledge of their own salvation (comp. especially Isaiah 45:22 sqq.) And particularly this point must be emphasized, to them, that the Lord had now a second time given such a miraculous deliverance to the people Israel. For in that lies even a confirmation of His methodical willing and ability to do. And the waters gushed out occurs again Psalms 78:20; Psalms 105:41. Moreover see List. [“Unless we are prepared to assume an irrational confusion of language, setting all interpretation at defiance, our only alternative is to conclude, on the one hand, that Isaiah meant to foretell a miraculous supply of water during the journey from Babylon to Jerusalem, or that the whole description is a figurative one, meaning simply that the wonders of the Exodus should be renewed. Against the former is the silence of history; against the latter nothing but the foregone conclusion that this and other like passages must relate exclusively to Babylon and the return from exile.”—J. A.
Alexander.]
6. THE
Isaiah 48:2222 There is no peace, saith the Lord, unto the wicked.
AND These words do not fit on to Isaiah 48:20-21. They could better connect with Isaiah 48:19 as the negative proof of the thought, that Israel, had it hearkened to the commandments of the Lord, would have found abundant salvation (comp. especially “thy peace had been as a river,” Isaiah 48:18). But if Isaiah 48:22 were only to belong to Isaiah 48:17-19, then the words would not occur in another place and connection. But such is the case at the close of 57. This circumstance proves that the words are meant to form a similar and hence the like-sounding conclusion of the first two Enneads. Indeed even chap. 66 concludes, not with the same words, yet with the same thought, and that in an enhanced and drastic form.
It is certainly not accidental that chaps. 40–66. are in general a book of consolation, that the three chief parts begin with words of consolation, and yet all of them conclude with the words so threatening. Doubtless the Prophet would thereby impress on his readers that the consolation is not unconditional for all, but that only the pious shall partake of it. This threatening earnestness of the respective conclusions, so harshly emphasized and directly in contrast with the predominating consolatory character of the book, should lead the wicked to a thorough introspection.
B.—THE SERVANT OF JEHOVAH
Isaiah 49-57The second Ennead of Isaiah 40-66 has for its all-controlling, central point the personal Servant of Jehovah, in whom all the typical forms already encountered under this name in chapts. 40–48 combine as in their higher unity. Hence in 49–57 the Servant of Jehovah is no longer the people of Israel, nor the Prophet, nor the prophetic institution, but only the Messiah in His servant-form. But these chapters do not speak only of the suffering and enduring Servant, but also of Israel’s sin and of the redemption that the Servant effects by His suffering. Thus it happens that the elements of announcing the suffering, of punishment and consolation cross one another artistically as the various colored threads of a woven web. Yet this crossing occurs only in the first half. For as in the first Ennead Cyrus appears from 41 on successively growing, until in the middle (Isaiah 44:28; Isaiah 45:1) he appears as the ripe fruit, so from 49 on we see the Servant of Jehovah developing in ever greater distinctness, until in the middle (Isaiah 52:13 to Isaiah 53:12) he meets us in the complete Ecce-homo form.
But with the laying in the grave He disappears. From 54 on the Servant of Jehovah is spoken of no more. What then follows is a description of the salvation effected by the Servant in its objective and subjective aspects. This description extends to Isaiah 56:9, where it breaks off with a distant view of the final and highest fruits of salvation, the glorification of nature. With Isaiah 56:10 begins a section in strongest contrast with what precedes. For the Prophet, having finished his description of the glorious future, turns his eye to the present.
In this he sees mournful things in the leaders of the people and in the nation itself. Still he cannot conclude without giving the comforting assurance, that even the present deep degradation will not hinder the fulfilment of the promises of salvation. For the Lord will heal those that let themselves be healed. Only for the wicked, that persistently oppose themselves, there will be no salvation. Thus the second Ennead concludes with the same words as the first.
As to particulars, the following plan, in my opinion, underlies these nine chapters. The first discourse comprises chapt. 49. In this the Prophet draws a parallel between the Servant of God and Zion. Both are alike in this, that they begin small and end great. The chapter divides accordingly into two halves, the first of which gives a total survey of the person and work of the Servant of God (Isaiah 49:1-13), while the second shows how Zion arises out of deepest forsakenness, rebuilds itself anew by the heathen, and finally soars aloft to the highest elevation and glory (Isaiah 49:14-26).—In the second discourse also (chapt. 50) the Prophet opposes Zion and the Servant of God, indicating the connection between the guilt of Israel and the suffering of the Servant, and the deliverance from the former by faith in the latter. He shows in the first part (Isaiah 50:1-3), namely, that just the not-receiving of the Lord when He came to His possession, had as its consequence the temporary rejection of Israel. To this guiltiness of Israel corresponds (in the second part Isaiah 50:4-9) the suffering which the Servant declares Himself willing to undertake with the consciousness that He still cannot come to disgrace.
Then in the third part (Isaiah 50:10-11), by a brief alternative, is shown to the people the possibility of their being accepted again. In the third discourse (chap. 51), we encounter a dialogue, in which the Servant, Israel, Jehovah and the Prophet appear one after another as actors, and that has for subject the final redemption of Israel. In the first part (Isaiah 51:1-8) the Servant, appearing incognito as if veiled, and just by that intimating the highness of His being, holds out to the people of Israel the conditions of its redemption. In the second part (Isaiah 51:9-11) Israel exhorts the Lord to give new proofs of His ancient power. In the third Jehovah replies to Israel’s exhortation with exhortation, and at the same time holds up to His Servant the origin, means and end of His efficiency (Isaiah 51:12-16). In the fourth part the Prophet speaks.
He promises Jerusalem, drunk with the cup of wrath, that the cup of wrath shall pass from its hand to the hand of its enemies (Isaiah 51:17-23). The fourth discourse (chap. 52), treats of the restoration of Jerusalem to glory. In the first part of it (Isaiah 52:1-6) it is stated that Jehovah must restore Jerusalem for the sake of the honor of His name. In the second part (Isaiah 52:7-12) the accomplishment of the restoration is described. The fifth discourse (Isaiah 52:13 to Isaiah 53:12), which represents the culminating point of the second Ennead, can hardly have a better superscription given it than that which Delitzsch has given: Golgotha and Scheblimini [the second term is from the Hebrew of Psa 110:1, meaning “sit at my right hand.”—Tr.]. Here the Servant’s lowliness, luminous with divine majesty, appears in its highest degree.
The discourse has three parts. The first (Isaiah 52:13-15) contains the theme of the prophecy. The second (Isaiah 53:1-7) portrays the lowliness of the Servant as the Lamb that bears the sin of the people. Finally the third (Isaiah 53:8-12) treats of the exaltation of the Servant to glory. The sixth discourse (chap. 54), describes the new salvation as the glorious fruit of all that the Servant of God has done and suffered. In the first part of it (Isaiah 54:1-10) is described the wonderfully rich blessing of posterity, i.e., the incorporation of the Gentile world in Zion as the first fruit of the grace of Jehovah.
In the second (Isaiah 54:11-17) the Prophet describes the new estate of salvation as an universal one. The seventh discourse (chap. 55) treats of this: that for the new salvation there must supervene an entirely new way of appropriating salvation. First (Isaiah 55:1-5) it is shown positively, wherein consists the essence of this new appropriation of salvation; then (Isaiah 55:6-13) negatively, what obstacles and scruples are to be overcome in order that this new mode of appropriating salvation may be established. The short section (Isaiah 56:1-9), the eighth discourse, describes the moral, social and physical fruits of the new way of salvation. Finally, in the ninth discourse (Isaiah 56:10 to Isaiah 57:21) we see a word of conclusion. After the Prophet’s glance had penetrated into the remotest future, he returns to the present.
But it is to be noticed that by the present he understands the whole time previous to the beginning of redemption, therefore the time previous to the end of the Exile. The mournful state of this present makes him reflect whether the atrocities of the present must not make impossible the fulfilment of the glorious promises of the future. For this reason he describes first the mournful situation prevailing at present among the shepherds (Isaiah 56:10 to Isaiah 57:2) and among the people (Isaiah 57:3-14), but comes to the conclusion, that God’s love will really heal those that let themselves be healed, and that only for the wicked, who persistently oppose the divine love, there can be no peace (Isaiah 57:15-21).
I.—THE FIRST Parallel between the Servant of God and ZionIsaiah 49In a sketchy way the Prophet draws a picture of the similar course of development in the case of the Servant of God and that of Israel, which, in consequence of its rejecting the Servant, is repudiated unto the extremest misery, yet shall arise again to the full glory of the church of God. The Servant of God begins His course as a little child in the body of his mother, but Israel, as a repudiated wife, must begin an entirely new course of life. Both come also to the most glorious goal. The chapter has accordingly two parts; the first comprising Isaiah 49:1-13, the second Isaiah 49:14-26.
_______________1. TOTAL SURVEY OF THE PERSON AND WORK OF THE SERVANT OF GOD
Isaiah 49:1-131 Listen, O isles, unto me;
And hearken, ye people, from far;
The Lord hath called me from the womb;
From the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.
2 And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword;
In the shadow of his hand hath he hid me,
And made me a polished shaft;
In his quiver hath he hid me;
3 And said unto me, Thou art my servant,
O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.
4 Then I said, I have laboured in vain,
I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain:
Yet surely my judgment is with the Lord,
And my work with my God.
5 And now, saith the Lord
That formed me from the womb to be his servant,
To bring Jacob again to him,
Though Israel be not gathered,
Yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord,
And my God shall be my strength.
6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant
To raise up the tribes of Jacob,
And to restore the preserved of Israel:
I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles,
That thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.
7 Thus saith the Lord,
The Redeemer of Israel and his Holy One;
To him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth,
To a servant of rulers,
Kings shall see and arise,
Princes also shall worship,
Because of the Lord that is faithful,
And the Holy One of Israel, and he shall choose thee.
8 Thus saith the Lord,
In an acceptable time have I heard thee,
And in a day of salvation have I helped thee:
And I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people,
To establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;
9 That thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth;
To them that are in darkness, Show yourselves.
They shall feed in the ways,
And their pastures shall be in all high places.
10 They shall not hunger nor thirst;
Neither shall the heat nor sun smite them:
For he that hath mercy on them shall lead them,
Even by the springs of water shall he guide them.
11 And I will make all my mountains a way,
And my highways shall be exalted.
12 Behold these shall come from far:
And, lo, these from the north and from the west;
And these from the land of Sinim.
13 Sing, O heavens; and be joyful, O earth;
And break forth into singing, O mountains:
For the Lord hath comforted his people,
And will have mercy upon his afflicted.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 49:1. ξִ ?αֶּ ?θֶ ?ο. Isaiah 49:4. δֶ ?αֶ ?μ ,μηδεεδαμ comp. Isaiah 30:7; Job 9:29.—τςμδ. Isaiah 49:5. ςε–ωׁ ?εּ ?α, Isaiah 12:2; Psalms 28:7. Isaiah 49:7. χְ ?γεֹ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μβֹ ?ΰֵ ?μ—αְּ ?ζδ.
Isaiah 49:1. ξֵ ?ψָ ?ηεֹ ?χ can be dependent on δχωׁ ?ιαε, but just as well on μΰξιν (comp. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 22:3; Isaiah 23:7; Isaiah 57:9) according to familiar usage.
Isaiah 49:5. Instead of ύύύύμΰ before ιΰρσ, the K’ri reads μεֹ. The same is the case in ten other passages: Exodus 21:8; Leviticus 11:21; Leviticus 25:30; 2 Samuel 16:8; 2 Samuel 19:7; Isaiah 9:2; Isaiah 63:9; Job 6:21; Job 13:15; Job 41:4. In only one passage. K’ri reads μֹ ?ΰ, while K’thibh has μεֹ: 1 Samuel 20:2. In two passages K’thibh reads μֹ ?ΰ, but K’ri εְ ?μֹ ?ΰ: Lamentations 2:2; Lamentations 5:5.
As regards our text, the LXX. translates, and after it the Vetus Latinus, “congregabor et glorificabor coram Domino,” from which one sees that they read ΰֵ ?ΰָ ?ρֵ ?σεְ ?ΰֶ ?αָּ ?αֵ ?γ; thus, probably, they drew the first letter of the word μΰ to the foregoing ιωׂ ?εΰμ, and the second to the following ιΰρσ, or substituted it for the ι. Jerome is very much discontented with this translation, which Symmachus and Theodotion also have, because it surrenders a fortissimum contra judaeorum perfidiam testimonium. Aquila translates: “et Israel ei congregabitur.” Therefore he read μεֹ. It seems therefore that party stand-point had an influence on the reading. Among moderns Hitzig translates “in that he leads Jacob back to himself, and Israel will not be carried off.” Hofmann: “Israel that will not be carried away.” B. Fr.
Oehler: “And that Israel be not carried away.” All these take ΰρσ in the sense of “to carry away.” Though I will not deny that it may be taken so, yet this negative thought partly disturbs the sense, partly it is flat and superfluous. It suits the parallelism much better to construe the clause as a positive statement. Then the finite verb stands instead of the infinitive with μְ according to the grammatical usage that demands the speedy return from the subordinate forms to the chief forms. μְ for ΰֶ ?μ or ςַ ?μ is not suspicious, as Hitzig supposes. For beside μειΰρσ being quite as admissible as αָּ ?ΰεּ μָ ?κְ Isaiah 49:18, it is quite common for a preposition to be superseded by a kindred one in the second clause (comp. Jeremiah 3:17; Psalms 33:18).—The clause εΰλαγ as far as ςζι is a parenthesis. The latter part of it is in the perfect εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ, because, according to Hebrew grammar, two future things are not as such made to follow one another in like verbal form, but only the first stands in the future, while the second is expressed by the perfect as being directly present viewed from the standpoint of the future.
Therefore here: I will be honored and then is (as immediate consequence) my God my strength.
Isaiah 49:6. ξִ ?ο before διεϊκ is properly superfluous, or rather it ought to stand before the member that utters the intenser notion: considered from this, that I will make thee a light to the heathen, it is a small thing that thou art my servant to raise up the tribes of Israel. But ξִ ?ο stands here to intimate generally a comparative relation, and, as Delitzsch also observes, one may not press the matter of its position. In Ezekiel 8:17 also, the only other place where πָ ?χֵ ?μ occurs impersonally with ξִ ?ο (comp. 2 Samuel 6:22), this preposition does not stand in the logically correct place. Probably there hovered before the Prophet the thought πָ ?χֵ ?μξִ ?ξְּ ?κָ δֱ ?ιεֹ ?ϊְ ?κָ μִ ?ιεβεΧ i.e., it is from thee, from thy standpoint or in comparison with thy claims, a small thing that thou art my servant to raise up Israel, I will make thee a light to the heathen. That ξִ ?ξְּ ?κָ δֱ ?ιεֹ ?ϊְ ?κָ would accordingly be contracted into ξִ ?δְ ?ιεֹ ?ϊְ ?κָ.—In placing the infin. μְ ?δָ ?ωִׁ ?ια after, there is a certain poetic effect: the two infinitive clauses form a whole with corresponding beginning and end. Comp. Isaiah 44:10; Psalms 6:10.
Isaiah 49:7. In αְּ ?ζδΞπֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ the αζδ is simple infinitive, which is however to be construed here as abstractum pro concrete. πτωׁ is not to be conceived of as in the accusative (of nearer definition), but as standing in the genitive. For it is not the soul of the Servant that is meant, but the soul of the despiser. For not merely outwardly, with words, but truly, inwardly, with their whole soul. He is to them an object of contempt (comp. ωְׂ ?ηֹ ?χ Job 12:4; ξְ ?ωֹׁ ?μ Job 17:6.—In regard to the order ιψΰεεχξε comp. the remarks on the parenthesis in Isaiah 49:5. It is to be noted that it does not read εְ ?δִ ?ωְׁ ?ϊַּ ?ηֲ ?εεּ ωָׂ ?ψִ ?ιν.
For the ε after ωׂ ?ψιν does not stand parallel with the εְ before χָ ?ξεּ, and moreover ιψΰε is not to be supplied before it, but the εְ after ωׂ ?ψιν has demonstrative force=princes, they shall worship him (comp. Ewald, § 344, b; Genesis 22:4; Genesis 22:24; Exodus 16:6-7, etc.).—The εְ before ιαηψκ is to be taken in the same way. It stands demonstratively, corresponding to the ΰωׁ ?ψ before πΰξο, and rhetorically substituted for it for the sake of variety. We could say not more correctly, yet more intelligibly and by a really more common construction: for Jehovah’s sake who is faithful, for the sake of the Holy One of Israel, who has chosen thee.
Isaiah 49:9. To take μֵ ?ΰξֹ ?ψ gerundively (Delitzsch) is not impossible, but it is also not necessary. For what follows is the specification of what precedes, as now there is said after, what all must previously happen to make possible that δχινΰψυ and δπηιμ. Yet μΰξψ is here more than a mere sign of quotation. It denotes an actual, audible speaking, without which the captives would not be able to hear the summons.—ιַ ?λֵּ ?ν zeugma, comp. Psalms 121:6.
AND 1. The one who forms the chief person of the second Ennead, the personal Servant of Jehovah, is also the first that enters here as speaker. What He says and hears affords us a panoramic image of His life and labor from their first mysterious beginning to the remotest glorious end. As the Servant of God begins by summoning all lands of the earth to give heed, He lets it be understood that what is now to be heard concerns all (Isaiah 49:1 a). Then He designates Himself as one called from His mother’s womb (Isaiah 49:1 b), and as an instrument equipped for a successful contest (Isaiah 49:2), to whom Jehovah has given the honorable name “Servant of God” and “Israel,” and by whom He has determined to glorify Himself (Isaiah 49:3). The present out of which the Servant of God speaks does not correspond to these gracious declarations.
For He is constrained to say: I have labored and suffered in vain (Isaiah 49:4 a). But He instantly consoles Himself again with the thought that His right and His reward are in the hands of God, thus in good hands (Isaiah 49:4 b). And then Jehovah Himself confirms this ground of comfort by a threefold declaration: 1) that the work of His chosen Servant, so far from being unsuccessful, will attain a much higher end than what was originally determined. That is, He shall not only bring back the people of Israel to its God, but also bring light and salvation to all nations (Isaiah 49:5-6). 2) The Servant of God, become an object of contempt and aversion, shall become an object of the highest veneration even for kings (Isaiah 49:7). 3) The Servant of God, to a certain time seemingly repudiated, shall yet, when the time for it arrives, be raised aloft and made the mediator of a new Covenant, in consequence of which the Holy Land shall be restored and newly divided, the people redeemed and brought home under divine protection and support from all nations and regions of the world (Isaiah 49:8-12). On account of this glorious redemption, heaven and earth are summoned to praise God (Isaiah 49:13).
2. Listen, O isles——with my God.Isaiah 49:1-4. Islands and nations are here in parallelism, as in Isaiah 41:1. As what follows concerns all, we have here a discourse of universal importance (comp. Isaiah 1:2; Isaiah 34:1). This introduction quite corresponds to the statement of Isa 49:6, that the Servant of God shall be the light of the heathen and salvation of God to the end of the earth.
But who is here the Servant of God? At first sight the Prophet himself seems to speak in Isaiah 49:1-2, declaring his call from his mother’s womb (comp. Jeremiah 1:5), his equipment for the prophetic calling and the protection experienced in its exercise. But instantly Isaiah 49:3 contradicts this. For it is incomprehensible how the Prophet alone can be called Israel. Added to this the Prophet certainly cannot say that the Lord has made him a light to the Gentiles, etc. (Isaiah 49:6).
As little can it be said of him that kings shall worship him (Isaiah 49:7), or that he is set for a covenant of the people (Isaiah 49:8).—The designation of the one addressed as “Israel” in Isaiah 49:3 suggests the thought that Israel is meant, either as a nation or as the nucleus of the nation (the spiritual Israel). But Isaiah 49:5-6, Conflict with this, where both Israel in general and also the nucleus of Israel are expressly distinguished from the Servant of God (see below). But how can one say with Oehler (D. Knecht Jehovah’s, p. 87): “the nation as an ideal Israel leads back the people in their empirical manifestion?” Where is it ever said in any sense whatever that the nation led itself back? And was then the ideal Israel, that would yet be the one to lead back, only among the returned? And did not those that remained in the Exile also belong to empirical Israel?—By the Servant of Jehovah in our text I can only understand the personal Servant.
He constitutes in the whole second Ennead the principal person. What was said of Him in the first Ennead by way of prelude now comes to its full development. The Servant of Jehovah is also a man who lay in the womb of his mother. The Prophet portrays his life ab ovo. It is perhaps not superfluous to remark that while the Prophet says of the people of Israel, God chose, formed, brought on, kept, bore them from the womb on (ξִ ?αֶּ ?θֶ ?ο, Isaiah 44:2; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 46:3; Isaiah 41:8-10), of the personal Servant, he formed and called him from the womb (Isaiah 49:1; Isaiah 49:5), he says of Cyrus, only, he called him by his name and brought him on (Isaiah 45:1; Isaiah 45:3-4). From this it is seen that the Servant of Jehovah in both senses stands nearer Jehovah than does Cyrus.
For in the two first named the Lord claims a certain paternity. But Israel gives him most care. It must also be kept, borne and supported. The personal Servant does not need this help. He is merely formed, then called. Cyrus, however, appears as originating from a region that lies more remote from the Lord.
From that he is called up by his name (and in fact by ωֵׁ ?ν and λֻּ ?πְ ?ιָ ?δ, Isaiah 45:4).
It is even self-evident that ξαθοχψΰπι does not mean: he has called me out of my mother’s womb (Hahn). For thus understood the expression suggests absurd ideas. But it were quite in place to say, that the personal Servant of Jehovah was also an instrument formed ad hoc, and led as it were by the voice of God from birth on. The parallel expression δִ ?ζְ ?λִּ ?ιψωְׁ ?ξִ ?ι means “to make memory, remembrance of the name.” It is used of places of worship intended for calling on the divine name (Exodus 20:21); of a monument intended to perpetuate a name (2 Samuel 18:18); of a tribute of praise meant to keep the memory of a name for all times (Ps. 45:18; Isaiah 26:13). On δַ ?ζְ ?λִּ ?ιψαְּ ?ωֵׁ ?ν, comp. Isaiah 48:1. Here, where the expression is parallel with χָ ?ψָ ?ΰ, which, however, can happen only by means of the name, it seems to designate a more enduring keeping of the name in mind: the Lord has not only called me once, He has also afterwards continually thought of my name; He has never lost sight of me from the bowels of my mother (comp. ξֵ ?ψָֽ ?ηַ ?ν, Isaiah 46:3).
Next the life of the Servant of Jehovah is sketched with only two, yet two double strokes. On the one hand it is said that the Lordhas made His mouth like a sharp sword, and that He has made Him (the Servant) like a polished shaft. The prominent mention of the mouth of the Servant shows that His task consisted eminently in speaking. It is clear that here only a speaking of divine things according to his calling is meant. Thus the Servant of God is characterized as a prophet. God called and equipped him that he might give sharp, incisive testimony to the divine truth.
The expression: “he made my mouth a sharp sword,” is really a metonymy. For what produces the effect of a sharp sword is not the mouth in itself, but the word that proceeds from it (comp. Isaiah 11:4; Revelation 1:16; Hebrews 4:12). In the words: “he made me a polished (αָּ ?ψεּ ?ψ, “smooth, polished to gleaming,” hence easily penetrating, comp. Job 33:3; Zephaniah 3:9) shaft,” the metonymy is pushed still further, as, not only the mouth, but (for the sake of brevity and manifoldness) the whole person stands for the word that proceeds from it. Thus is ascribed to the Servant a penetrating effectiveness that seizes and arouses men to their inmost souls.
The experience of such inward operation is not agreeable to such as are not born from that Spirit whose sword and shaft by the Servant penetrate their hearts. These, according to the spirit that rules them, react against it with murderous wrath. For, incapable of meeting the thrusts of the Servant of God with like spiritual weapons, they seek with fleshly ones to silence the mouth that molests them. And they would soon succeed were not that mouth under a higher protection. Hence the Prophet here represents the sword and shaft as at once sharp-cutting and well protected. It is not otherwise usual to describe the cutting sword as one well concealed, and the pointed shaft as one safely hid in the quiver.
For sword and shaft are in nowise there in order to be hid under the hand or in the quiver. But the Prophet does not carry out his figure consistently. Having Isaiah 49:2; Isaiah 49:1 a, compared the mouth to a sharp sword, the sword designates in 1b the whole person. For when he says: in the shadow of His hand hath He hid me, he, of course, means primarily the sword, which, as the shaft in the quiver, is hid in the sheath under the hand held over it. But here the concealed sword is no longer image of the word, but of the person from which the sword-like, effective word proceeds. But in Isaiah 49:2; Isaiah 49:2 a, it is not said, as according to 1a, one might expect, “He made my mouth a shaft.” That is said under the influence of 1b, and, as remarked, presses the metonymy further.
Still, by the polished shaft the word is meant, whereas δρϊιψπι in 2b again refers to the person. Evidently the Prophet would say, that the one whose word will work on men as sword and shaft, shall at the same time be protected against the hostile opposition of those that are struck, as a sword over whose hands its mighty Lord holds His sheltering hand (comp. Isaiah 51:16), as a shaft that is hid in the quiver (comp. Psalms 127:5). I cannot believe that the “hiding” refers to the “time preceding the period of appearing, or eternity.” Why then would the clauses αφμιγεδηαιΰπι and αΰωׁ ?τϊεδρϊιψπι stand after? And did the thought require prominence, that the Servant before His appearance was protected?
Certainly not. But it did need to be made prominent that the Servant, whilst He roused the world to bitter wrath, was at the same time hid safely.
In Isaiah 49:3 the motive of this protection is given. The Lord cannot leave unprotected the Servant by whom He will glorify Himself. Thus ειΰξψ is to be construed as explanatory. The Lord not only actually affords His protection: He says to him also why. He protects him because he is His servant, His instrument, and in fact one that in strife and victory shall reveal and glorify the power of God. Israel is, of course, not in apposition with the subject, but a second predicate, parallel with my servant.
But here one may by no means take “Israel” as a designation of the nation. For the expression is to be explained as an allusion to Genesis 32:28 : “Thy name shall be called no more of Jacob, but Israel: for thou hast striven with God and men and hast prevailed.” As there is a second Adam, a second David, and Solomon, so there is a second Israel. Jacob, at the time he received the name Israel, had sustained not only many perilous conflicts with men, but also the conflict with the mysterious appearance of the angel. We may not doubt that this his contending with God was also typical. Also He, whose type he was, must pass through conflict to victory, through pains and labor to rest, through shame to glory. Isaiah 49:2 designates the conflicts that the Servant of God had to sustain with men.
That He had also to contend with God, who was at the same time His protector, we see from Matthew 26:36 sqq. Conflict and strife is the task of His earthly existence, but in the contender with God and by Him Jehovah glorifies Himself. For His decree of salvation realizes itself in the whole fullness of its love, wisdom and glory only in and through the second Israel. Of course not at once. For the Servant of God, during the period of His conflict, has dark hours, in which it appears as if He had labored in vain (Isaiah 49:4; comp. Isaiah 30:7; Isaiah 65:23; Job 39:16), consumed His strength for emptiness and a breath (see Text, and Gramm.).
When, spite of all mighty operations of the Spirit, only inferior success, or even decided miscarriage, evidenced by the hatred of the majority of the people, is His reward, such despondency might well come over Him. But He consoles himself that His right is still with (ΰֵ ?ϊ=penes, kept preserved by) Jehovah, and His reward (comp. Isaiah 40:10) with His God. With this the course of life of the Servant of Jehovah is briefly sketched, and the outwardly observable fruit of it designated. In both respects the result is, indeed, unfavorable, but the faith and hope of the Servant of God is not shaken.
3. And now saith—end of the earth.
Isaiah 49:5-6. In Isaiah 49:4 the Servant of Jehovah expresses the assured hope that, spite of past miscarriage, His cause will yet have a good issue. That this hope is well founded is declared by all that follows to Isaiah 49:13. For in these verses the Lord gives His Servant, in threefold gradation, the consoling promise that from lowliness He shall be raised to great glory. Therefore εςϊδ here is not contrastive, but is to be construed as confirmatory: “and now also really” (comp. Isaiah 5:3; Isaiah 5:5).
With joyful emotion the Servant repeats Isaiah 49:5 first of all the facts that had served as the basis of His hope, and now after a momentary shaking prove to be actually steadfast. First He refers to the Lord’s having prepared Him for His Servant even from His mother’s womb (comp. on Isaiah 49:1 b). And, indeed, He was prepared as a Servant for the sake of a work, whose accomplishment the Lord must very pressingly desire in His own interest. For how often has not the Lord given assurance that for His own sake He will accomplish the redemption of Israel (comp., e.g., Isaiah 48:9; Isaiah 48:11)! This work is the restoration of Israel to its God. We encounter here therefore the so important notion of ωׁ ?εּ ?α, concerning which see above Text. and Gram.
Yet shall I—my strength. These words form a parenthesis. What the Servant of God hoped for, according to Isaiah 49:4 a, which in Isaiah 49:5 a the Lord holds out to Him indirectly, He here describes as a second possession: He shall be honored, if not in the eyes of men, yet in God’s eyes (αςιπι different from μςιπι, comp. Isaiah 5:21). Who does not recall here John 5:41-44; John 8:50)? His calling the Lord His strength forms the antithesis to the previously expressed (Isaiah 49:4 a) sense of His own weakness (comp.
Isaiah 12:2; Psalms 28:7).
“And he said,” (Isaiah 49:6), resumes the discourse interrupted by the parenthesis, in order to add something stronger to what is said, Isaiah 49:5. For the Servant having stated (Isaiah 49:5) that His task was the restoration of Israel to Jehovah, He now announces that, in the moment of His despondency, Jehovah has promised that that original task shall be small compared with (see Text. and Gram.) what henceforth is to be the aim of His activity: the Servant shall become the light of the Gentiles, and bear the salvation to the end of the earth. The expression, “raise upthe tribes of Jacob, says more than one at first sight supposes. For it implies that the nation shall be restored according to its original distribution into twelve tribes. But after the deportation of the Ten tribes into the Assyrian captivity this never happened. For the great mass of the Ten tribes disappeared in the exile.
The two tribes of Judah and Benjamin did indeed in greater number return; but after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus all knowledge of tribal belongings ceased. First in Revelation 7:4 sqq. do we encounter again the sharp distinction of the Twelve tribes, and in Matthew 19:29 it is said that the Twelve Apostles shall sit on twelve thrones to judge the Twelve tribes of Israel. Therefore the restoration of the Twelve tribes can be ascribed neither to the people of Israel as a whole, nor to the ideal Israel, nor to the Prophet, nor to the prophetic institution. Only He shall also restore again the Twelve tribes who restores Israel generally, therefore the one who performs the work of δָ ?ωִׁ ?ια (comp. on ωׁ ?εֹ ?αֵ ?α, Isaiah 49:5) in relation to the πְ ?φεּ ?ψֵ ?ιιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ, i.e., to the ωְׁ ?ΰָ ?ψ, the ωְׁ ?ΰֵ ?ψִ ?ιϊ or αְּ ?μֵ ?ιθָ ?δ (comp. Isaiah 4:2-3; Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 10:20 sqq.) in its full comprehensiveness. For a light to the Gentiles, therefore for all nations, shall the Servant of God be made, as is also said Isaiah 42:6.
Comp. Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47. He that is the light of the nations shall also be their salvation (by metonymy for Saviour, bringer of salvation). In fact, by being their light, He becomes their salvation. The Prophet likely has in mind passages like Exodus 15:2; 2 Samuel 10:11.
4. Thus saith——chose thee.
Isaiah 49:7. The Prophet confirms the hope expressed with growing certainty by the Servant of Jehovah (Isaiah 49:4 b–6), by introducing (Isaiah 49:7-8) the Lord Himself as speaker, to repeat to the Servant the promise of his deliverance and exaltation. The Lord designates Himself as the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, because the things spoken of in the words that follow shall reveal, not only the redemption of the Servant, but also of Israel, and not only God’s gracious will, but also His holiness. But the Lord names His Servant by three predicates descriptive of His humiliation. This particular finds a stronger expression here than before or after. We hear sounds that, evidently serve as a prelude to what we hear in chap. 53, especially Isaiah 49:3.
The πֶ ?αֶּ ?ωׁ is here conceived of as the seat of pleasure and displeasure, longing and contempt (comp. Delitzsch, Psychology, IV. § 6, p. 160; Proverbs 23:2; Psalms 27:12; Psalms 35:25; Numbers 21:5; Job 6:7, etc.) αְּ ?ζֹ ?δ (see Text. and Gram.) is only used as here this once. The fact that the word occurs again only in Isaiah 53:3 (bis) is perhaps a not unimportant sign of the relation of our text to that. ξϊςαΞβει is qualitatively the same as αζδΞπτωׁ, only quantitatively different. For the expression means: “he who makes the nation feel disgust, aversion.” It is easily seen how here, too, the allusion is to the “sensation” of the soul. But while αζδΞπτωׁ designates an aversion felt in the inmost soul, βει (meaning here neither the Israelite nor a heathen nation) expresses that the aversion is general, felt in the entire nation, in the entire natural community. For βει is a people as a natural, worldly tribal communion (confluxus hominum).
Hence the word designates the heathen nations, but also Israel, where it is spoken of in the sense just referred to (comp. Isaiah 1:4; Isaiah 9:2). A servant of rulers the Servant of Jehovah is called because by men in power generally, and thus not kings only, He is regarded as a slave, as an individual with no rights. Every one of any command or consideration, deals with Him arbitrarily. But this relation shall undergo a mighty change. The Servant shall be raised to such a height and consideration, that even those possessed of the greatest power, the kings, shall rise up at the sight of Him (Isaiah 14:9) and worship Him.
Because of the Lord, etc., assigns a reason, and does not express the aim. The words recognize the connection between Jehovah and His Servant. Therefore for Jehovah’s sake, i.e., inwardly determined by Him who stands true to His word, and hence helps His Servant, for the sake of the Holy One in Israel, who does not suffer him who is once chosen to fall, they do that expressed in the words “kings shall see—worship:
5. Thus saith——upon His afflicted.
Isaiah 49:8-13. In this section, too, the Lord confirms with His own words the hope of His Servant. The particular of the humiliation, made so prominent in Isaiah 49:7, is here only alluded to. For I have heard thee and I have helped thee imply that the Servant was in a situation, out of which He must implore help. On the other hand the particular of mediation and effecting salvation is unfolded most gloriously. Everything must have its time.
Also the Lord’s display of grace. It belongs only to the wisdom of God to know the right time for everything. Thus He did not let the Saviour of the world come before the time was fulfilled (Galatians 4:4). So Paul understood our text (2 Corinthians 6:2). And Christ Himself (Luke 4:4), by taking Isaiah 61:1 sq., for a text, in general explains the time of His appearing as “the acceptable year,” which must be identical with the “acceptable time” of our text. The prophetic gaze, however, in the “year of salvation” sees comprehensively all those points of time that belong, by way of preparation and development, to this central point of the redemption of Israel.
It begins with the deliverance from the Babylonish captivity and only ends in the completion of salvation in the world beyond. But it must be noted in our text, that the Prophet by no means has in mind the period of the redeeming appearance of the Servant of Jehovah in relation to the precedent suffering of Israel. But the time when He may appear to save is for the Servant Himself a time of salvation, in contrast with a precedent time of suffering, wherein He could not save because He Himself needed salvation in the highest degree. This appears from the antithesis of our ver. to Isaiah 49:7; Isaiah 49:4 a, and from the suffix [“thee”] in ςπιϊιο and ςζψϊιο, which can refer to no one but the Servant of Jehovah. Therefore this Servant must also, in the deep sufferings He must undergo, await the time that the wisdom of God has determined for His own deliverance. Beside an “acceptable time” and I an “acceptable year” the Prophet also mentions an “acceptable day” Isaiah 58:5, where see.
The acceptable day will be for the Servant, naturally a day of salvation, of deliverance. On Χωׁ ?εςδ see immediately below. ςζψϊικ comp. Isaiah 41:14. With εΰφψγ “I will preserve thee” the discourse receives a direction toward the future. The rescued shall at once become a rescuer. To this end He must Himself, first of all, be preserved from all further assaults.
Then the Lordwill make Him a covenant of the people. The words: And I will preserve thee—people are repeated verbatim from Isaiah 42:6, where also see the explanation of the expression “covenant of the people.” This identity of language makes it evident that He who is made the covenant of the people is in both passages the same. Were the people of Israel meant by the mediator of the new covenant, then it would need to read βεֹ ?ιִ ?ν instead of ςָ ?ν. For Israel cannot be at the same time the one covenanted and the mediator, of the covenant. Nor can Israel be the one to distribute the land, for the land is to be distributed among the Israelites. Nor does Israel raise up the land.
For this raising up happens only by the raising up of the people, i.e, Israel itself. Nor can one say that this restorer and divider is the ideal Israel. For precisely this latter is the one which, as possessor of the new covenant is put in possession of the renovated inheritance, and which thereby raised up, will be made a glorious and mighty nation. To this there is something additional. Who does not, with “raise up the land,” and “cause to inherit the inheritances” recall Joshua, who raised up the land of Canaan to the honor of being the dwelling-place of the holy people and distributed it among the tribes of Israel (comp. Joshua 1:6, ϊπηιμΰϊΞδςνΰϊΞδΰψυ)?
This makes it natural for us to regard the one that is helped in a day of salvation and who is to be a second restorer and divider of the land as a second Joshua, as in Isaiah 49:3, we learned to know him as a second Israel. The first Joshua had to divide the land as one already inhabited and cultivated. The second will distribute it to the returning exiles as one hitherto lying waste. From this it appears that the Prophet has in mind primarily those returning from the Babylonish exile. These, too, came back under the conduct of a ιֵ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?ςַ to Palestine (Ezra 2:2; Ezra 3:2; Ezra 3:8-9, etc.). But this was not the right fulfilment of this promise (comp. the remarks on δχινΰϊΞωׁ ?αθιιΧ Isaiah 49:6).
Here, again, the Prophet contemplates together beginning and end, and correctly describes what must happen as a preliminary meager fulfilment before the historical appearance of the personal Servant of Jehovah, as also His work.
In Isaiah 49:9 a (comp. Isaiah 42:7) the captives are addressed as persons; but in what follows they appear as a flock. The Prophet describes here, as often repeatedly in what has preceded, the all-important way home (Isaiah 40:11; Isaiah 41:17 sqq.; Isaiah 43:2; Isaiah 43:15 sqq.; Isaiah 44:27; Isaiah 48:20 sq.). As in Isaiah 40:11, he represents Israel as a flock that finds pasture, both in the way, and on the high places (46:18) that are more arid than the valleys, so that they shall neither hunger nor thirst, nor suffer from the treacherous Fata Morgana (see on Isaiah 35:7). For Israel shall be under the best of leadership: “he that hath mercy on them shall lead them,” (that is of course, indirectly, by the Servant according to Isaiah 49:8 b), even by springs of water shall He guide them.
Isaiah 49:11 is to be explained according to Isaiah 40:4. Jehovah will lead His people the next and directest way. To this end the mountains, exempt from human power, but subject to the Lord as His mountains, i.e., as His creatures, must submit to be a way, i.e., doubtless where necessary lower themselves, while the valleys must fill up, and become elevated causeways (ξρμεϊ). To the particular that the return shall be happily accomplished by God’s help, the Prophet adds, as in Isaiah 43:5 sq., that the return shall take place from every quarter. Having begun with the general ξψηεχ, and added afterwards the more exact designations of the quarters of the heavens, he prompts the conjecture that only after the word of general contents was written, did the thought of the plagae coeli come to him. Hence we will not press ξψηεχ, nor venture to give it the meaning “south” in antithesis to φτεο.
For it never has it elsewhere. The passage Psalms 107:3, may not be cited as proof that ιָ ?ν in antithesis to φτεο means the south. For the latter passage appears just to rest on ours, and only proves that the author of that Psalm thought he must make ξιν in our text denote “from the south.” Therefore I believe that ξιν here as everywhere else means “from the west.” To this is put in antithesis the land of Sinim, as the remotest eastern land. This name must any way represent an entire quarter of the heavens and probably the east. Neither the people ρִ ?ιπִ ?ι mentioned Genesis 10:17, who belonged to the Phoenicians and dwelt in the north of Lebanon (comp. Knobel on Genesis 10:17), nor Sin-Pelusium (Saad.
Bochart, Ewald), and still less the Kurd clan Sin (Egli, Zeitschr. fόr wissensch. Theol. vi. p. 400 sqq.), meets these demands. Hence the majority of opinion inclines to understand the Chinese to be meant by the Sinim. [See a very copious note of J. A. Alex., in loc., who holds the same view.—Tr.]. It has been abundantly shown that already in very remote times wares from India and China were received by the Phoenicians in the emporiums of the Euphrates and Arabia, and brought by them to the west (comp. beside Gesenius in his Thes., and Comm., and Lassen, Ind.
Alterthumsk. especially MoversPhoen. II. 3, p. 240 sq.). But if one ask how the Prophet came to call the Chinese by the name ρִ ?ιπִ ?ιν, it is much questioned whether already in Isaiah’s time they could be named Sinim as inhabitants of a land Thsin or Tsin (comp. Wuttke, Die Entstehung der Schrift., p. 241). Victor 5. Strauss (in an excursus in Delitzsch, p. 712) consequently takes the view that the name ριο is to be derived from the Chinese sjin, i.e., man.
The extraordinarily frequent use that the Chinese made of this word, not only to designate all possible qualities, conditions, sorts of business, but also the relations of descent, moved foreigners to call the nation itself by this name. A decision on this point must be waited for. In conclusion the Prophet summons heaven and earth to rejoice at the important fact, so interesting also to them, that the Lord has again had mercy on His chosen people (comp. Isaiah 44:23; Isaiah 52:9; Isaiah 55:12). The Prophet closes here in an artistic way as with a. forte allegro, while the following strophe begins with a piano maestoso.
Footnotes:1 Or, my reward.
2 Or, That Israel may be gathered to him, and I may, etc.
3 Or, Art thou lighter than that thou shouldest, etc.
4 Or, desolations.
a I have made thee.
5 Or, To him that is despised in soul.
b hath chosen.
6 Or, raise up.
c the mirage.
2. ISRAEL BUILT AFRESH FROM THE
Isaiah 49:14-2614 But Zion said, The Lord hath forsaken me,
And my Lord hath forgotten me.
15 Can a woman forget her sucking child,
That she should not have compassion on the son of her womb?
Yea, they may forget,
Yet will I not forget thee.
16 Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands;
Thy walls are continually before me.
17 Thy children shall make haste;
Thy destroyers and they that made thee waste shall go forth of thee.
18 Lift up thine eyes round about, and behold:
All these gather themselves together, and come to thee.
As I live, saith the Lord,
Thou shalt surely clothe thee with them all, as with an ornament,
And bind them on thee, as a bride doeth.
19 For thy waste and thy desolate places, and the land of thy destruction,
Shall even now be too narrow by reason of the inhabitants,
And they that swallowed thee up shall be far away.
20 The children which thou shalt have, after thou hast lost the other,
Shall say again in thine ears, The place is too straight for me:
Give place to me that I may dwell.
21 Then shalt thou say in thine heart,
Who hath begotten me these,
Seeing I have lost my children, and am desolate,
A captive, and removing to and fro? and who hath brought up these?
Behold, I was left alone; these, where had they been?
22 Thus saith the Lord God,
Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles,
And set up my standard to the people:
And they shall bring thy sons in their arms,
And thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders.
23 And kings shall be thy nursing fathers,
And their queens thy nursing mothers:
They shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth,
And lick up the dust of thy feet;
And thou shalt know that I am the Lord:
For they shall not be ashamed that wait for me.
24 Shall the prey be taken from the mighty,
Or the lawful captive delivered?
25 But thus saith the Lord,
Even the captives of the mighty shall be taken away,
And the prey of the terrible shall be delivered:
For I will contend with him that contendeth with thee,
And I will save thy children.
26 And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh;
And they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine:
And all flesh shall know
That I the Lord am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer,
The mighty One of Jacob.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 49:15. ςεּ ?μ. Isaiah 49:16. ηָ ?χַ ?χ. Isaiah 49:17. ξָ ?δַ ?ψ. Isaiah 49:20. ωִׁ ?λֻּ ?μִ ?ιν. Isaiah 49:21. βֹּ ?μδָ part fem. from ξεּ ?ρָ ?ψָ ?δ = ρεּ ?ψָ ?δ–βָּ ?μָ ?δ again only Jeremiah 17:13. Isaiah 49:22. ηֹ ?φֶ ?ο. Isaiah 49:23, generally.
Isaiah 49:15. ξִ ?ο before ψַ ?ηֵ ?ν has the sense of a negative conjunction=so that not.—In the clause βνΰμδεβεΧ, as is often the case, the conditional particle is omitted.
Isaiah 49:19. I construe the first λִּ ?ι as causal, but the second as the pleonastic λִּ ?ι that is wont to stand after a verbum dicendi (here to be supplied, comp. Isaiah 7:9).—ϊφψιξιεωׁ ?α is: thou wilt be strait from the viewpoint of the dweller, i.e., thou wilt be too strait for dwelling. ϊֵּ ?φְ ?ψִ ?ι from φָ ?ψַ ?ψ; comp. Olsh., § 243, b. [Fuerst, Lex. derives it from ιָ ?φַ ?ψ.—Tr.].
Isaiah 49:20. The imperat. βְּ ?ωָׁ ?δ relates necessarily to the same person as the suffixes in ΰָ ?ζְ ?πַ ?ιִ ?κְ and ωׁ ?λִּ ?μַ ?ιִ ?κְ.—μִ ?ι is not dat. loci, but dat. commodi.Isaiah 49:22. The expression πωׂ ?ΰιψ occurs in Isaiah only here. It plainly means “with uplifted hand to give a sign.” For similar expressions comp. Isaiah 10:32; Isaiah 11:15; Isaiah 13:2; Isaiah 19:16. On the other hand ηψινπν occurs again Isaiah 62:10; yet more frequently πωִׂ ?ΰπν. (Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 11:12; Isaiah 13:2; Isaiah 18:3).
Isaiah 49:24. Great difficulty is presented by ωׁ ?αιφψιχ, which seems to correspond to ωׁ ?αιβαεψ of Isaiah 49:25. Is ωׁ ?αιφψιχ the captivitas, i.e., captive of the righteous, or is it the troop of captives taken from the righteous, i.e., the righteous nation, Israel (comp. βְּ ?ζֵ ?μַ ?ϊδֶ ?ςָ ?πִ ?ι the plunder taken from the poor, Isaiah 3:14), or is it the captive righteous, or, finally, is ωׁ ?αιςψιυ to be read instead of ωׁ ?αιφψιχ, which the Syr. rendering “captivitas herois.” the Vulg. “captum a robusto,” the LXX., ἐὰναἰχμαλωτεύσῃτιςἀδίκως seem to justify? First, in regard to the change of reading, I do not think we can rely here on the ancient versions, for they were evidently uncertain about the sense, and guessed at it. The Syr. without more ado, felt justified in making the corresponding members of the parallel conform, since it translates. num auferetur praeda gigantis aut captivitas herois eripietur? Immo sic ait Dominus: praeda gigantis auferetur et captivitas herois eripietur.” We would, therefore, be only continuing the arbitrariness of the ancients did we read ςָ ?ψִ ?ιυ for φַ ?ψִּ ?ιχ.—If we translate “the captives of the righteous one,” then it must either be admitted that he is called a righteous one who still holds captive the people of God (at the very time when, according to Isaiah 49:23 sq., other heathen powers have begun to bring them back with great honor), and is fearfully punished for it (Isaiah 49:25 sq.), or all sorts of far-fetched meanings must be given to φψιχ (as e.g., J.
D. Mich. makes it mean “victor,” or Paulus, after Schultens, = one who is right, what he ought to be, viz., a brave soldier).—But if we take ωׁ ?αιφψιχ as genitive of the object according to Isaiah 3:14, then we must either take it in the sense of “plunder” (Gesenius), which however is poorly supported by appeal to 2 Chronicles 21:17, or else it is forgotten that when I say “to pillage the poor,” what is pillaged is not the poor man himself but his goods. But if I say “to lead the righteous man captive,” then the object of capture is the righteous man himself. Hence ωׁ ?αιφψιχ were then nothing else than a troop of captives consisting of righteous persons. But then one would expect ωׁ ?αιφַ ?ψִּ ?ιχִ ?ιν, since, indeed, the notion ωְׁ ?αִ ?ι, quite differently from βִּ ?ζֵ ?μָ ?δ, refers to a plurality. But since it reads simply ωׁ ?αιφψιχ, I think it is to be translated simply “captivitas justa” (compare βּ ?εֹ ?ιφψιχ Isaiah 26:2) i.e., “righteous prisoner.” The qualification φψιχ is prompted by Israel being the predominant thought in mind.
Isaiah 49:25. ΰֵ ?ϊ before ιψιακ can be a preposition as in Isaiah 1:8; Jeremiah 2:9; comp. Hosea 4:1; Hosea 12:3; but also sign of the accusative, as in Isaiah 27:8; Deuteronomy 33:8; Job 10:2. The accusative expresses more, and better suits the context.
Isaiah 49:26. ξεֹ ?πֶ ?δ part. Hiph. from ιָ ?πָ ?δ (oppressit, comp. Leviticus 19:33; Leviticus 25:14; Deuteronomy 23:17) occurs only here.—ΰָ ?αִ ?ιψ=ΰַ ?αִּ ?ιψ, occurs only in the connection ιςχαΰֲ ?αִ ?ιψ Genesis 49:24; Isaiah 60:16; Psalms 132:2; Psalms 132:5, and ΰαιψιωׂ ?ψΰμ Isaiah 1:24.
AND 1. In the second half of the chapter, in antithesis to the Servant of Jehovah, the Restorer, appears Zion, that, according to Isaiah 49:8 sqq., was to be restored by Him, and is restored. Accordingly, from Isaiah 49:14 on nothing more is said of the Servant of the Lord, but the discourse is only of Zion as the married wife that is apparently forsaken, yet is still tenderly beloved by the Lord, of her new upbuilding by countless children that are born to her, she knows not where or how, and (in contrast with this), of the judgments of God that shall come on the nations hostile to Israel.
2. But Zion said——continually before me.Isaiah 49:14-16. Zion can only say “the Lord hath forsaken me, and my Lord hath forgotten me,” when the Theocracy seems broken and irrevocably destroyed. The time after the destruction by Nebuchadnezzar was such. But with as much justice the time after the destruction by Titus may be regarded as such. The Prophet sees both together, as previously (Isaiah 49:8 sqq.) he had seen together the return out of the Babylonian and the Roman exile.
Therefore these words of Zion also fall, and that very particularly, in the time when the Servant of Jehovah must lament that He has labored in vain (Isaiah 49:3). Is it an accident that the lament of Zion, Isaiah 49:14, follows immediately after the lament of the Servant of Jehovah? Did the Servant not need to lament that He labored in vain, then Zion would not have had to lament that it was forsaken. Both stand in the closest causal connection. To Zion’s complaint Jehovah returns a wonderfully consoling reply. Here, too, as in Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 46:3 sq.: Isaiah 66:13, there is ascribed to Jehovah a feminine sensibility, a more than maternal love.
How could the Lord forget Zion, seeing that her image was not merely in His heart, but also inscribed upon His hands, as a continual souvenir always before His eyes! In general these words call to mind Deuteronomy 6:8 sq.; Deuteronomy 11:18, comp. Proverbs 3:3; Proverbs 7:3. Others refer to the custom of branding or tattooing on the forehead, arm, or wrist of a slave the name of his master, of a soldier the name of his general, of an idolater the name of his divinity (comp. Gesen. on Isaiah 44:5). Also Revelation 13:16 alludes to this custom.
From “thy walls are continually before me,” it is seen that the Lord would say He has the image of the city, not its name, always before His eyes. For the walls represent the outlines of the figure.
3. Thy children——where had they been. Isaiah 49:17-21. Zion, forsaken and repudiated by her husband, and thus supposing herself debarred from bearing children, is in a wonderful way suddenly surrounded by the most numerous fresh growth, the richest blessing of children and ornament of children. Thy children hasten hither, says Isaiah 49:17. Manifestly there is in αָּ ?πַ ?ιִ ?κְ an allusion to αֹּ ?πַ ?ιִ ?κְ, as also the LXX., Vulg.Targ.
Ar. actually seem to have read. Luther, too, translates “thy builders will hasten”. Though this reading is neither justifiable nor a necessity, still the contrast with the second half of the verse demands that we press the radical notion in απικ, viz.αָּ ?πָ ?δ, and recognize in it an allusion to the fact that it is the children which, so to speak, as the living stones build the house, the family, the generation (comp. Genesis 16:2; Exodus 1:21; Deuteronomy 25:9; 1 Samuel 2:35; 1 Samuel 25:28; 2 Samuel 7:27; Rth 4:11). Therefore, those who join stone to stone, that the house of Israel may grow endlessly, shall come on in haste, but those that destroy and desolate it shall make off. Israel, however, the mother, shall look around.
She sees a great crowd. It has one goal: Zion. Thither all hasten. At first Zion cannot credit it, that all these press on to her as their maternal centre. But the Lord assures her of the important fact with an oath (ηιΰπι, first, Numbers 14:21; Numbers 14:28; Deuteronomy 32:40; only here in Isa.; Jeremiah 22:24; Jeremiah 46:18; most frequent in Ezekiel 5:11; Ezekiel 14:16; Ezekiel 16:48, etc. Comp.
Isaiah 45:23). Zion may regard all this as her own; she may put on the glorious crown of children as an ornament; she may gird herself with them as with the splendid girdle of the bride (χִ ?ωֻׁ ?ψִ ?ιν, Isaiah 3:20). But Zion makes objection. She points to the ruins of her cities, her wasted land. And, in fact, is there no contradiction in this double act of God? On the one hand He destroys the land and decimates the people, and then He brings on a countless multitude as children.
And then what is a great multitude to do in a desert? In reply, the Lord persists in His assertion that Zion is to regard this crowd as her blessing of children. For, He says: as regards thy ruins and desolations and thy devastated land, I say to thee, that now thou shalt be too contracted to dwell in (see Text. and Gram.). Therefore, far from being frightened off by ruins and desolations, the new people even press on. Here is a straitened distress of a new sort! Formerly it was the Philistines, Ammonites, Syrians, Assyrians, etc., that took away the bread from the Israelites in their own land (comp. 33:30).
Now it is her own children! On the other hand, the ancient ξְ ?αַ ?μְּ ?ςִ ?ιν, the ancient devourers have disappeared! That ϊφψιξιεωׁ ?α is more exactly explained Isaiah 49:20. The απιωׁ ?λμιν appear as speakers, and beg the mother to make room for them. It is especially to be noted that the mother is addressed as the representative of the family (see Text. and Gram.). The individual crowded inhabitants, one might think, ought to apply to their individual neighbors.
But such a moving act can only be possible as the act of the totality. Hence the Prophet lets the demand be addressed to the ideal representative of the totality. So that it is to be remarked respecting πωׁ ?δ, that the word evidently means, not a moving to the speaker, but to the one dwelling in the opposite direction, thus not a moving to but away (comp. Genesis 19:9).
Zion, destroyed by Assyrians, Babylonians, Romans (for the Prophet contemplates all these together), stands at last solitary, robbed of all her children. The ideal Zion has become essentially an abstraction, devoid of being. For when all single individuals have disappeared, as was the case after the final destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, then, indeed, the representative of the totality has nothing more to represent, she no more has anything real on which to lean. If now a numerous Israel comes on, then the question of Isa 49:21 is quite natural: who hath borne me these?ιָ ?μַ ?ψ may not be rendered “begotten.” For then Zion would know who had borne these children, but not who had begotten them. She rather says: I have not borne them; who then has borne them for me?—εΰπιεβεΧ is a causal clause: for I was childless (ωׁ ?λεμδ only here in Isa.), unfruitful (βμξεψδ, sterilis, again only Job 3:7; Job 15:34; Job 30:3), banished, driven away. Since the children stand before her, not as new born, but as grown up, she asks further: Who hath brought them up for me?4.
Thus saith——that wait for me. Isaiah 49:22-23. Now the Lord solves the riddle. The countless children are those converted to Jehovah from the Gentiles, and thus primarily become members of the spiritual Israel. But the spiritual Israel is the inward, everlasting core of the fleshly Israel. As the ἔσωἄνθρωπος is the everlasting, abiding core of men in general; as therefore after the new birth, after death and the resurrection, the core of the personality remains ever the same, spite of all the changes of the outward manifestation, so is the “spiritual Israel” ever the same ideal personality that had already formed the centre of the “fleshly Israel.” Hence, with our Prophet, it is the same subject that complains of the ruin of the outward Theocracy and the loss of motherhood ascribed to that, and then still is required to regard the converts from the Gentile world as its children.
Hence I do not believe that by the children coming out of the Gentiles we are to understand the returning Israelites. For Israel could not ask, with reference to these: Who hath borne me these? Though for a time they might have been lost to the sight of the ideal mother, still must she have known them again and recognized them as children of her own body. Whence so many children, whom I have yet not borne myself? is Israel’s inquiry. The Lord replies: at my sign the Gentiles bring thy children hither. Two things are new here: first, that the streaming hither of the children of Zion happens at the command (see Text. and Gram.) of Jehovah; second, that the Gentiles bring them hither with the greatest care and reverence.
The first, already, shows that Jehovah and Zion have a common interest in the matter. They are in fact children of Jehovah and of Zion, viz. spiritual children that have received the spiritual Zion from its Lord, and are now come on to build again Zion corporally, in a certain sense (Isaiah 49:17). This construction is confirmed by what follows: And they shall bring thy sons in their bosom, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders. Therefore these children born in the heathen nations are called Zion’s, the children of the spiritual Israel. Or, as Paul says, Galatians 4:26 : “But Jerusalem which is from above is free, which is the mother of us all.” Whether he himself understood that correctly or not, still the Prophet sees in the spirit that the outward, corporeal Zion (“the Jerusalem that now is”) must be repudiated, (Galatians 4:30; Genesis 21:10; Genesis 21:12), destroyed; but that in place of it shall come out of the spirit of Zion (now truly made free and far extended) a countless posterity, that shall build itself up a new, greater and more glorious Zion even in the corporeal sense (comp. Isaiah 54:1 sqq.). δֹ ?φֶ ?ο is the sinus formed by the wide upper garment, in which one may even carry small children.
For this expression, as also the one following: they shall be carried on the shoulder, denotes such children as demand careful watch and culture. Such care the new Zion shall receive even on the part of princes, i.e., states (comp. Isaiah 60:16; Isaiah 66:12). We need not here explain how this prophecy has been realized in a good as well as an evil sense. But fact it is, that the Zion here meant by the Prophet has received from the rich of this world not only nurture, but also reverence, that partly went the length even of idolatry (ΰτινΰψυ; comp. Genesis 19:1; Genesis 42:6; 1 Samuel 24:9, etc.).
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
II.—THE SECOND The Connection between the Guilt of Israel and the Suffering of the Servant, and the Deliverance from Guilt by Faith in the LatterIsaiah 50With reference to Isaiah 49:14 the Prophet inquires: Where is Zion’s writing of divorcement? Zion is not repudiated, but only punished, because when its Lord came it did not receive Him. But that is the connection between the guilt of Israel and the sufferings of the Servant, who willingly takes them on Himself because He is strong in God and assured of His final victory. Also Israel can become free from its guilt and the punishment of it by turning again to the Lord in the exercise of faith. Of course those that persevere in their sin must be destroyed in it as in a self-kindled flame.
The discourse accordingly subdivides into three parts: 1) Isaiah 50:1-3; Isaiah 2) Isaiah 50:4-9; Isaiah 3) Isaiah 50:10-11.
____________________
1. TO WHAT EXTENT AND WHY ZION IS A WIFE
Isaiah 50:1-31 Thus saith the Lord,Where is the bill of your mother’s divorcement,
Whom I have put away?
Or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you?
Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves,
And for your transgressions is your mother put away.
2 Wherefore when I came, was there no man?
When I called was there none to answer?
Is my hand shortened at all, that it cannot redeem?
Or have I no power to deliver?
Behold, at my rebuke I dry up the sea,
I make the rivers a wilderness:
Their fish stinketh, because there is no water,
And dieth for thirst.
3 dI clothe the heavens with blackness,
And dI make sackcloth their covering.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 50:2. ξγες—τγεϊ—βςψδ often used of dividing waters, Psalms 18:16; Psalms 104:7. Isaiah 50:3. χγψεϊ, comp. Joel 2:10; 4:15.——ωׂ ?χ. Note the comparatively numerous relative or absolute ἅπ. λεγ. ending εּ ?ϊ, occurring in verses 1–3. There are four: χγψεϊ ,τγεϊ ,λψιϊεϊ and λρεϊ.
Isaiah 50:1. ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ after ρτψλψιϊεϊΰξλν is the acc. instrumenti = “wherewith.”
Isaiah 50:2. ξִ ?τְ ?γεּ ?ϊ (comp. Exodus 8:19; Psalms 111:9; Psalms 130:7). The construction with ξִ ?ο is as in Isaiah 49:19; Isaiah 7:13; Isaiah 33:19.—εְ ?ϊָ ?ξֹ ?ϊ is the jussive form without jussive meaning. The like often occurs: Isaiah 27:6; 1 Samuel 2:10; Psalms 9:10; Psalms 11:6; Psalms 104:20.
AND 1. The Prophet here introduces the Lord as the speaker, letting Him explain Himself His relation to Zion, which all through these chapters He has in mind, viz. to the Zion that has rejected the Servant of God, and thus is self rejected, still not on that account repudiated forever. This Zion has exclaimed, Isaiah 49:14 : “The Lord hath forsaken me, the Lord hath forgotten me.” The Lord has already replied to this Isaiah 49:15 by emphasizing His paternal or rather His maternal position, but not His position as husband. Here He replies to that complaint as Zion’s husband. He does not deny that in a certain sense Zion is a divorced wife, her children sold into captivity. But He denies that Zion is definitively divorced by a writing of divorcement, and that the children are sold to a creditor as equivalent for a debt.
Rather both the divorce and the sale are come on them only as a means of chastisement, as punishment for their sins (Isaiah 50:1). This punishment, of course, needed to be because the Lord, in coming to His own possession, found no one to receive Him, because when He called, no one answered, although His redeeming power was in no way exhausted. For He is and continues under all circumstances the Lord of heaven and earth, who can dry up sea and river (Isaiah 50:2), and can clothe the heavens with darkness (Isaiah 50:3).
2. Thus saith——put away, Isaiah 50:1. Of course this verse refers to Isaiah 44:14. But one must not on that account separate Isaiah 50:1-3 from what follows and join them to chap. 49, as many do. For apart from chap. 49, being well rounded and complete in itself in its homogeneous parts, Isaiah 50:1-3, after a joyous beginning, have a very serious meaning that points to what follows. Zion has, indeed, received no writing of divorcement; but still it needed to be punished for its sins (see under § 1 above). The manner of the coming is described Isaiah 50:4-9, and the unavoidable punishment, Isaiah 50:10-11.
Some have found in Isaiah 50:1 an “apparent contradiction,” and would explain it away by saying: Jehovah had, indeed, given Israel a writing of divorcement, but not a usual one, in which the cause of separation needed not to be assigned (Deuteronomy 24:1), but one in which the sin of Israel was named as the cause. But the Rabbins, Jerome, Rosenm., Hahn, Del., and others justly remark, that the question of the Lord,ζδεβψΧΰι, evidently involves the meaning, Israel has in fact no writing of divorcement to show. It was sent away without a bill of divorcement, which according to Deuteronomy 24:1, was necessary to give the divorcement legal force,—therefore it was not definitively sent away, but only provisionally, with the prospect of being received back again. [“The simplest and most obvious interpretation of the first clause is the one suggested by the second, which evidently stands related to it as an answer to the question which occasions it. In the present case, the answer is wholly unambiguous, viz.; that they were sold for their sins, and that she was put away for their transgressions. The question naturally corresponding to this answer is the question, why the mother was divorced, and why the sons were sold? Supposing this to be the substance of the first clause, its form is very easily accounted for.
Where is your mother’s bill of divorcement? produce it that we may see the cause of her repudiation. Where is the creditor to whom I sold you? let him appear, and tell us what was the occasion of your being sold.”—J. A. Alex.]. In the same manner the Prophet would say, that the Lord has not sold the children of Zion, His children, to a creditor as the equivalent for a debt, in which case He would have lost all right to them. Thus both divorce and sale were temporary, and with the right of repurchase.
It is of course to be remarked here, that according to Jeremiah 3:8, the Lord did, indeed, give Israel of the Ten Tribes a bill of divorce. Yet the same Prophet makes in Isaiah 50:1 the extraordinary statement that the Lord will receive again His divorced wife spite of the legal enactment Deuteronomy 24:4. [This reference to Jeremiah seems fatal to the Author’s interpretation, and completely to confirm that of J. A. A., given above.—Tr.].
The distinction that the Prophet makes between mother and children in the two clauses of this comparison is intended only to emphasize the notion of totality; not merely the abstract communion shall be preserved, but it shall retain its natural members. For it were conceivable that the Lord would restore an Israel community with the institutions of the old, but with a non-Israelitish population, with foreign born, branches only grafted into the olive tree Israel (Romans 11:17 sqq.). This, says the Prophet, shall not be; but to the olive tree shall be given also the natural branches, to the national communion the natural children shall be given back. Not all! For only the ωְׁ ?ΰָ ?ψ , the ἐκλογὴ is worthy and capable of being the heir to this promise. This distinction is further marked by representing the mother as divorced, the children as sold.
In Matthew 18:25, Jesus speaks of selling wife and children to pay debts. The Old Testament indeed speaks of a man selling himself with wife and children (Exodus 21:1-6; Leviticus 25:39 sqq.; Deuteronomy 15:12 sqq.). But it is controverted that a man might legally sell his wife or his children in order to pay his debts (comp. Saalschuetz,Mos. Recht. p. 860, and (�hler Herz. R.-Encycl.
XIV. p. 465 sq., against Michaelis,Mos. Recht. III. p. 36 sqq.). But whether legal or not, it seems as a matter of fact to have been a practice to sell children or to take them by force from their father in discharge of a debt, and I think that in this sense Michaelis not unjustly appeals to 2 Kings 4:1; Job 24:9; Nehemiah 5:1. Naturally the selling of children would occur oftener than the selling of a wife. How deep rooted a law of custom may become, even when contrary to statute law, is seen in the analogous case related in Jeremiah 34:8 sqq. πֹ ?ωֶׁ ?δ (comp.
Isaiah 24:2) is the creditor that loans money and demands repayment. The Babylonian Exile was such a temporary sending away of the wife and sale of children. But also the Roman Exile is such; for both are of a sort, and the Prophet contemplates both together. Israel is never to be entirely and definitively repudiated.
3. Wherefore when I came——their covering.Isaiah 50:2-3. The sin for which Israel must be punished consisted in this, that “the Lord came to His own and His own received Him not” (John 1:11). It was as if a stranger, unknown and without rights had come. The servants went each his way; He called, no one answered Him (Isaiah 65:12; Isaiah 66:4). Most recent commentators understand this to refer to the Lord’s coming by the Prophets.
Without saying that this is impossible, I must still maintain that it is unusual, on which account it is not by the commentators supported by examples. That the Lord unceasingly sent His prophets to call Israel to repentance, that Israel would not hear, and that therefore the Babylonian Exile must come on them, became, especially in Jeremiah, almost a standing expression. But the word ωָׁ ?μַ ?η is always used with emphasis: Jeremiah 7:25; Jeremiah 25:4; Jeremiah 26:5; Jeremiah 29:19; Jeremiah 35:15; Jeremiah 44:4. That Isaiah writes αΰϊι and not ωָׁ ?μַ ?ηְ ?ϊִּ ?ι has doubtless its reason. And it is precisely this, that he really meant a personal coming of the Lord, and conceives of it as mediated by the Servant of the Lord, whose appearance forms the chief contents of this second Ennead.
Israel’s not receiving the Lord, might be explained were the Lord grown powerless. But such is not the case. Therefore it has no reasonable ground. It is base contempt, deserving punishment. As the long hand is a figure for wide reaching power (num nescis longas regibus esse manus? comp. Gesen.in loc.), so the short hand is of a power confined to a narrow sphere.
The expression is founded on Numbers 11:23, and occurs again only Isaiah 37:27; Isaiah 59:1. In proof that Israel had no reason for rejecting Him as weak and powerless because He came in the form of a servant, the Lord urges that He is still able to do what He could do at that time when He appeared in majesty before the eyes of Israel, when the people did not dare to refuse Him. For “at my rebuke I dry up the sea,etc., recalls the passage through the dead sea and the Jordan, and I clothe the heavens with blackness,etc., recalls the black cloud on Sinai that veiled the sight of God from the people. One ought to see the δόξα under the present ταπεινότης. The Prophet had repeatedly, in what precedes, used the deliverance out of the Egyptian captivity as a type and pledge of future deliverance (Isaiah 43:2; Isaiah 43:16-17; Isaiah 44:27). He does the same here.
As regards the passage of the Red Sea, Psalms 106:9 has a manifest connection with our passage, the latter clause of which corresponds with the words “I make the rivers a wilderness.” These same words occur verbatim Psalms 107:33, as proof of the divine omnipotence in general that can both make waters a desert and the desert waters. The latter is expressed by a word drawn from Isaiah 41:18. The stinking and dying of the fish are cited as proof of the entire drying up of the waters. This trait, which is no where mentioned in reference to the passage of the Red Sea and Jordan, seems to me to be drawn from the events attending the turning the Nile water into blood (Exodus 7:18; Exodus 7:21). In this case there would be, in some sense, a confusio duarum figurarum, the poetic transference of an Egyptian event to a fact of later date connected with it. Also the words of Isa 50:3 remind one of the exodous from Egypt; comp.
Exodus 19:9; Exodus 19:16; Exodus 20:18; Exodus 24:15 sqq.
Footnotes:With which I put her away.been sold.by.I will.shall stink.shall die.2. THE OFFENSE OF ISRAEL TO THE OF THE SERVANT, WHO SUFFERS, YET IS STRONG IN GOD
Isaiah 50:4-94 The Lord God hath given me the tongue of the learned,
That I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary:
He wakeneth morning by morning,
He wakeneth mine ear
To hear as athe learned.
5 eThe Lord God hath opened mine ear,
And I was not rebellious,
Neither turned away back.
6 I gave my back to the smiters,
And my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair:
I hid not my face from shame and spitting.
7 eFor the Lord God will help me;
Therefore eshall I not be confounded:
Therefore have I set my face like a flint,
And I know that I shall not be ashamed.
8 He is near that justifieth me;
Who will contend with me? let us stand together:
Who is mine adversary? let him come near to me.
9 Behold, ethe Lord God will help me;
Who is he that shall condemn me?
Lo, they all shall wax old as a garment;
The moth shall eat them up.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 50:4-5; Isaiah 50:7; Isaiah 50:9. ΰγπιιδεδ. Isaiah 50:4. ςεּ ?ϊ. Isaiah 50:5. ξָ ?ψָ ?δ. Isaiah 50:6. ξψθιν. Isaiah 50:7. λָּ ?μַ ?ξ—ημξιωׁ, comp. Ezekiel 3:8-9. Isaiah 50:8. ξφγιχ.
Isaiah 50:4. For ςεּ ?ϊ an analogous Arabic root gives sufficient reason for adopting the meaning “succurrere, sustentare.” The combination with μָ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ – μָ ?ςεּ ?ϊ) ςֵ ?ϊ from ςָ ?ϊַ ?ϊ, denomin. from ςֵ ?ϊ, Abulwalid, Kimchi, Luther, et al.) is on the contrary quite uncertain. The derivation from μָ ?ςָ ?δ (μָ ?ςεּ ?ϊ substantive, as λְּ ?γεּ ?ϊ, etc.), is impossible because μָ ?ςָ ?δ is used only in a bad sense = “to babble, βαττολογεῖν.”—γָּ ?αָ ?ψ is—with the word. It is the same accusative that we had in ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψωׁ ?μηϊιδ verse 1.
AND 1. The form of the Servant of God develops with increasing distinctness. The Prophet characterizes Him here in a double aspect. First he describes Him as docile in respect to learning what He was called to perform actively: viz., raising up the weary by means of the word. By this the schoolmaster (pedagogical) activity of the Servant of God is intimated (Isaiah 50:4). But the Servant of God is docile in another sense.
He is obedient and willing to suffer according to God’s will. He does not elude the abuse to which men subject Him, and which answers to just that unsusceptibility of Israel intimated in Isaiah 50:2 (Isaiah 50:5-6). But He knows, too, that the Lord will sustain Him, and He shall not come to shame, and this enables Him to harden His face like a flint (Isaiah 50:7). He knows that the Lord will conduct His cause and justify Him, and can, therefore, boldly summon His adversaries before the bar of judgment. They shall pass away as a moth-eaten garment (Isaiah 50:8. 9).
2. The Lord God——as the learned.Isaiah 50:4. The divine name ΰγπιιδεδ (The Lord Jehovah) occurs in this chapt. relatively oftener than in any other Isaianic passage, viz., four times, vera. 4, 5, 7, 9. The tongue of a disciple is a docile tongue, willing and capable of learning. The Prophet, therefore, sees in the Servant of God one who must learn, and who likes to learn. The picture of the Servant of God that appears before the spiritual eye of the Prophet has not entirely clear and complete outlines. It is one that is prophetically obscure, not wholly comprehensible to the Seer himself. One learns from it only this much, that the Prophet sees the Servant of God active in the service of the “weary and heavy laden.” For those described, Matthew 11:28, best answer to the ιָ ?ςֵ ?σ.
According to the accents, ααψχααχψ should be joined together as in Isaiah 28:19. But it seems to me more fitting to arrange them palindromically after the example of Isa 27:5 (ωָׁ ?μεֹ ?νιַ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δμִ ?ιιַ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δωָׁ ?μεֹ ?νμִ ?ι). Delitzsch well remarks that the Servant is here plainly distinguished from the prophets. For the latter receive their revelations mostly by night. But the Servant of God says that His ear is every morning awakened in order to hear after the manner of a disciple. He is thought of, therefore, not as under the influence of a momentary inspiration repeated at intervals, coming upon Him in the condition of sleep, but as under the constant influence of the Spirit that gives testimony of itself to Him every day from the moment He awakes to consciousness in the morning and on.
Evidently the latter is a higher form of spiritual communication; it implies a more intimate relation between God and him who receives it. But this communication concerning the way in which the Servant of God receives the revelation of the Spirit stands between the descriptions of His active (Isaiah 50:4 a) and passive obedience (Isaiah 50:5 sqq.), if I may use the expression. Is it, then, to be referred to both kinds of obedience? At least it is not to be conceived why “opening my ear” should accomplish itself in another way.
3. The Lord God—eat them up.Isaiah 50:5-9. The revelation and instruction that the Servant of God receives relate more to the will than to knowledge. The ear that is opened is that inward ear where the voice of God is audible and welcome to the soul, and where, therefore, hearing and obeying are one. For what is spoken of here is how the Servant of God has learned obedience, how He ἔμαθενἀφ’ ὦνἔπαθετὴνὐπακοὴν, as is said, Hebrews 5:8, with evident reference to our text, and a modification of its thought. I was not disobedient and I turned not back, show that demands were made on His patientia, His willingness to suffer, and capacity for suffering.
This is instantly confirmed by Isaiah 50:6. For there the Servant of God enumerates what was expected of Him. He gave his back to the blows (properly to the smiters, Matthew 27:26), his cheeks to the plucking, he hid not his face from shame and spit (doubtless a hendiadys; comp. Matthew 26:27; Matthew 27:30). And these sufferings must, by the connection of this discourse, answer just to that offence of Israel for the sake of which it was sold and put away (Isaiah 50:1). By inflicting them it displayed that insusceptibility in consequence of which it would not receive its Lord nor follow His call (Isaiah 50:2).
But not merely obedience gives the Servant of God the power to submit to the severe sufferings. He is also mightily strengthened in this self surrender by the firm belief that God supports Him. To understand the two halves of Isa 50:7 in their right relation, the first must be referred to the past, the second to the future. The first ιςζψ is to be taken in the sense of continuance: But the Lord helps me, hence I have not (hitherto) come to shame.—Just because by this support hitherto experienced I have been strengthened and encouraged, I am become all the more firm, and insensible to persecutions. I have made my face like flint, because (ε in εΰγς is causal) I knew that I would not be put to shame.—The Servant of the Lord knows that He is hated of the world, in many ways censured and persecuted. But He knows, too, that the Lord, His legal assistant, will bring His innocence to light, and will destroy the adversaries.
Confident in His support who will prove Him to be a righteous one, He boldly challenges His adversaries. “Who will contend with me?” He says (comp. on Isaiah 49:25). Let us stand together (comp. Isaiah 43:26)! Who is my adversary? (αςμξωׁ ?τθ only here, comp. Isaiah 41:11 and Exodus 24:14, which passages perhaps hovered in the Prophet’s mind). In Isaiah 50:9, ιςζψμι is decidedly to be taken in the future. δִ ?ψְ ?ωִׁ ?ιςַ, in the sense of “to make bad, guilty, i.e., to condemn,” is found in Isa. again only Isaiah 54:17.
Comp., moreover, Job 34:29; Romans 8:34. [“Romans 8:33-34 is an obvious imitation of this passage as to form. But even Vitringa, and the warmest advocates for letting the New Testament explain the Old, are forced to acknowledge that in this case Paul merely borrows his expressions from the Prophet, and applies them to a different object.”—J. A. Alex.]. The words λμνλαβγιαμε are quoted from our text in Psalms 102:27. Comp., moreover, Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 51:8; Job 13:28, and the List.
Footnotes:The Lord Jehovah.disciples.helps.For I knew.3. THE ON WHICH ISRAEL MAY BE TO GRACE
Isaiah 50:10-1110 Who is among you that feareth the Lord,That obeyeth the voice of his servant,
That walketh in darkness, and hath no light?
Let him trust in the name of the Lord,And stay upon his God.
11 Behold, all ye that kindle a fire,
That compass yourselves about with sparks:
Walk in the light of your fire,
And in the dsparks that ye have kindled.
This shall ye have of mine hand; ye shall lie down in sorrow.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 50:11. χָ ?γַ ?η, comp. Deuteronomy 32:22; Jeremiah 15:14; Jeremiah 17:4.—ζιִ ?χεֹ ?ϊ comp. ζִ ?χִּ ?ιν Isaiah 45:14.
Isaiah 50:10. The passage at first sight seems to admit of a double construction. Either one may understand the question ξιαλνεβεΧ as one that requires the answer “no one;” then the second half of the verse must be referred to the Servant of Jehovah. Or one takes ξִ ?ι in the sense of “quisquis,” and ιαθηεβεΧ as a comforting call to those who incline to put their trust in the Servant of God spite of his humble condition. I regard the latter construction as the correct one, for the following reasons: First, according to the former construction, the whole characteristic of the Servant (ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ as far as αֵּ ?ΰμδָ ?ιε) is superfluous, for it contains nothing but a needless repetition of what is said immediately before in Isaiah 50:5-9. For it is said in Isaiah 50:6-7, that the Servant of the Lord walks in rayless darkness; and he himself testifies in Isaiah 50:7-9 that he trusts in the Lord.
Why this repetition?——Second, in that case Isaiah 50:10 b must read εְ ?δεּ ?ΰιִ ?αְ ?θַ ?ηεβεΧ. For there is no justification of what Hahn says: viz., that, by the use of the perfect, the clause is subordinated to that beginning with ιαθη, so that we are to translate: “who trusts, although he walks.” If the notion “athough” needed to be expressed, it could not be done by means of the perfect ηָ ?μַ ?κְ, but it must then read: εְ ?δεּ ?ΰιִ ?αְ ?θַ ?ηεβεΧ. Hence I share the view of Gesenius, Maurer, Knobel, Delitzsch, that the question ξιαλνεβεΧ singles out of the totality of Israel all the individuals to whom apply the predicates ιψΰιΧ and ωׁ ?ξςαִ ?χεμςαγε. The words ξִ ?ι as far as μεֹ are subject of the whole clause, as Knobel correctly says. It is quite natural that ιψΰιΧ should stand first; for only he that fears God hears also the voice of His Servant (John 8:47). The relative sentence ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ as far as πβδμε is regarded by many as a continuation of the particip. construction ωֹׁ ?ξֵ ?ςַ ?–ιִ ?ψֵ ?ΰ, so that it describes the situation of the God-fearing, that makes them appear as those that need help.
But, first one looks in that case for εִ ?δָ ?μַ ?κְ, and, second, the negative εΰιοπβδμε would be too weak a description of the mournful condition implied in their case. Hence I think the relative clause is to be referred to the Servant. Then ΰֲ ?ωֶ ?ψ involves a significant contrast: he who fears Jehovah and hearkens to the voice of His Servant, which (i.e., although the same) walks in darkness and dispenses with all splendor,—let him trust, etc.—δָ ?μַ ?κְ ηֲ ?ωֵׁ ?λִ ?ιν, comp. Isaiah 9:1; the accusative is the acc. localis according to analogy of δָ ?μָ ?κְ ψεּ ?ηַ ,φְ ?γָ ?χεֹ ?ϊ.
Isaiah 50:11. Instead of ξְ ?ΰַ ?ζְּ ?ψֵ ?ι some would read ξְ ?ΰִ ?ιψֵ ?ι according to the Syriac; or even arbitrarily change the reading (Hitz.) to ξְ ?ΰַ ?εְּ ?ψֵ ?ι (a non-Hebrew word formed from the Arabic). Both are unnecessary. ΰִ ?ζַּ ?ψ is the direct causative Piel=“to make compass about.”—μξςφαδεβεΧ is not=ye shall lie in torment; μְ denotes the terminus in quem of the laying (Job 7:21; Lamentations 2:21, comp. 2 Samuel 8:2; 2 Samuel 12:16; 2 Samuel 13:31).
AND 1. As the discourse of the Servant, which forms the pith of this chapter, was introduced by a word of Jehovah’s, so now it is concluded in the same way. For that Isaiah 50:10-11, are the words of Jehovah appears from this ye shall have from my hand. He turns to the two classes into which Israel separates in relation to the Servant of God. Even after Israel, for the most part, has rejected the Servant of Jehovah, those that fear God and hearken to the voice of the Servant spite His lowliness and obscurity, and lean on Him, may still be blessed (Isaiah 50:10). But those who with flaming torches and burning arrows raged against the Servant of God and His cause are told that the fire kindled by them shall devour themselves. That will be the painful punishment prepared for them by the Lord (Isaiah 50:11).
2. Who is among—in sorrow, Isaiah 50:10-11. As Isaiah 50:6 in a measure formed a prelude to the positive statements concerning the suffering of the Servant contained in 53, so hath no light (splendor) are a prelude to the negative ones (Isaiah 53:2 b). Walketh in darkness along with hath no light, which is the reverse side, is the Biblical expression for the deepest misery, unalleviated by a ray. Therefore whoever, spite of this miserable exterior (see Text. and Gram.), still heeds the voice of the Servant, may trust in the name of Jehovah (Psalms 33:21) and lean on his God (Isaiah 10:20; comp. Isaiah 30:12; Isaiah 31:1); therefore he may comfort himself by the promises of grace given Isaiah 50:1-3.—The enemies of the Servant are called fire-kindlers.
Doubtless a fire is meant that burns in them and by which they then set the outward world on fire. For wickedness is a fire, and the wicked, poisonous tongue (which we are specially to understand by ζִ ?ιχεֹ ?ϊ) is, in James 3:5-6, expressly called a little fire that yet sets a world on fire, and a world of iniquity. Making one’s girding of fiery darts may be said in the same sense as one speaks of girding with strength (Psalms 18:33; Psalms 18:40), or with joy (Psalms 30:12), i.e. figuratively. Fiery darts are their favorite weapons. Gesenius seems to think of a fire inadvertently kindled, because in Isaiah 50:11 a he finds only the continuation of the figure of the darkness and the thought of arbitrary self-help. Others refer the kindling of a fire to the persecutions of the prophets, or to the insurrections of the Jews against the Romans.
Of course events of this sort may contribute to the accomplishment of what the Prophet would say. But it is perverse to think exclusively of special events. All that wicked Israel did, directly and indirectly, against the Servant of God, with fiery darts kindled with hell fire, only kindled a fire that consumed themselves. Thus their own fire turned into a fire of divine wrath, and into that they were constrained to enter. Jerusalem with the Temple perished in it. Of that day when this fire must burn, the Lord says in advance to them: from my hand is this come upon you; in torment ye shall lay yourselves down.
The day when Israel shall experience that fiery judgment from the Lord is the day when, after having played their part, they shall lie down; but they then lie down not in repose, but in torment.
Footnotes:Who.splendor about him.gird.fiery darts.torment. AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 50:1. The church of the Lord may be sorely punished, it may be overrun with enemies, partly destroyed, reduced, as in the days of Elijah, to 7,000 that are invisible, but it can never receive a bill of divorce. For what God has joined together men shall not put asunder. If this be true of the original and Christian marriage, why not still more of the original type of marriage? Ephesians 5:23 sqq.
2. On Isaiah 50:2. “Quia veni et non erat vir. Veni in carnem, inquit, sum mortuus pro vobis, resurrexi, implevi et exhibui praesens omnes promissiones. Verum vos me non recepistis. Sicut est Joh. i.: ‘venit in propria et sui eum non receperunt.’—Numquid abbreviata et parvula, etc. Jactat potentiam suam contra Judaeos et objurgat eos. Quasi dicat: vos me ideo negligitis, quod sine aliqua pompa veniam. Spectatis corporale regnum et hanc infirmitatem contemnitis. Verum ego sic soleo; numquam liberavi vos per virtutem, sed semper per infirmitatem, in qua summa virtus et potentia est, et tum soleo esse potentissimus, cum prorsus nihil posse existimor.” Luther.
3. On Isaiah 50:2. At My rebuke. “God can destroy the wicked by a rebuke (Psalms 9:6). When He rebuked the Red sea it became dry (Psalms 106:9). And when Christ threatened the wind it became still (Luke 8:24). If God can then do so much by chiding, what will happen when He joins the deed to the word, and takes the iron sceptre or the goad in hand (Psalms 2:9; Acts 9:5)?” Cramer.
4. On Isaiah 50:4 sqq. Luther, who renders μωׁ ?εομξεγιν by “learned tongue” still gives in his commentary the explanation that thereby is not to be understood a “lingua magistri,” but a “lingua discipuli” or a “lingua discipulata, quae nihil loquitur, nisi quod a Deo didicit.” And with this agrees admirably what the Lord, especially in the Gospel by John, so often affirms, that He says nothing but what He has heard from His Father, that He does nothing but what He has received from the same, wills nothing but what He wills (John 3:11; John 3:32; John 4:34; John 5:19; John 5:30; John 6:38; John 7:16; John 8:16; John 8:38; John 10:18; John 10:37-38; John 12:49-50; John 14:10; John 14:31; John 15:15; John 16:32). But that the Lord was not docile only with reference to speaking and doing, but also with reference to suffering, He says Himself in the words: “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as Thou wilt,” Matthew 26:39. And hence, Paul testifies that Christ was obedient unto death, even the death on the cross (Philippians 2:8).
5. On Isaiah 50:6. The Lord said, Luke 18:31-33 : “Behold we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished. For He shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on: and they shall scourge Him, and put Him to death: and the third day He shall rise again.” Regarding this it must be noted, that there is no other Old Testament passage that declares that the Servant of God would be spit upon. Moreover no other passage speaks at least so plainly of scourging and smiting. It is further very probable that “ὑβρισθήσεται” especially answers to μηιιμξψθιν; for if anything can be an ὕβρις, it is this ill-treatment of the face.
It is accordingly in the highest degree probable that in Luke 18:31 sqq. the Lord had especially in mind our passage. It then appears also what good reason we have for referring our passage to the Servant of Jehovah.
On Isaiah 50:7-9. “Spes confisa Deo nunquam confusa recedit.”—“He who holds out through Passion-week with Christ alone, must and shall also keep Easter there with Him.” Foerster.
7. On Isaiah 50:11. Regarding the meaning and the fulfilment of this passage, both may be best learned from what Josephus (bell. jud. VI. 4, 5 sqq.) relates concerning the taking of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple. Titus had commanded to preserve the Temple. But “τοῦδὲ (viz., τοῦναοῦ) κατεψήφιστοτὸπῦρὁθεὸςπάλαι.” A Roman soldier, “δαιμονίωὁρμῇτινιχρώμενος” casts a fire-brand through the golden window into the Temple.
Titus hastens up and commands to extinguish the conflagration. He is not heard, or men will not hear. A soldier secretly applies fire to the door-posts of the Temple building proper. The Temple was consumed “ἄκοντοςκαίσαρος.” Josephus repeatedly testifies that it was the Lord that gave the Temple to the flames, and thereafter the whole city of Jerusalem. One might fancy, while reading his account, that he had in mind the words of our text: “This shall ye have of Mine hand.” And who does not think also of: “ye shall lie down in sorrow” (torment) when reading of the surviving Jews, how some were sent off to the mines, some kept to contend as gladiators and with wild beasts in the theatres, the rest sold as slaves (Josephus, l. c. VI. 9, 2).
HINTS7. On Isaiah 50:1-3. Sermon of consolation in times of the Church’s distress. What are we to think of the present conflicts of the Church? 1) We must regard them as a divine chastisement for the sins of the church, and suffer ourselves to be led by them to repentance (behold for your iniquities are ye sold—and no one answered Isaiah 50:1-2)—2) We ought not to despair in these conflicts, but comfort ourselves in the expectation of a gracious deliverance. For God a. is willing for it, because He has neither given the church a bill of divorce, nor can give it (Isaiah 50:1, where is the bill, etc.); b. He has also the power to do it (is my hand shortened, etc., Isaiah 50:1, I clothe the heavens, etc., Isaiah 50:3).
2. On Isaiah 50:4. The Lord says Matthew 11:28 : “Come unto me all ye that are weary,” etc. That is a right well-intended summons and worthy of all confidence. For no one can in fact so refresh the weary as He. Has not God just for this given Him an instructed tongue? “This too may serve to comfort (the weary) when they pour out their hearts toward the servants and children of the Lord, who, mighty in His word, tried and preserved under many a cross, have learned by experience, after their Redeemer’s example, to speak a word in season to the weary (weak, wretched, comfortless, that bear away at their cross nearly tired out, and nearly unable to get on).” Schriver, Seelenschatz, Theil.
IV. 9 Pred. § 6. If, by the waters of such distress and tribulation, there remain still a little spark of faith, apply yourself diligently to consider the word of God, that it may not be utterly quenched, although the devil will be marvellously glad to hinder it. How Christ comforts one by His dear word! As also it is said: “The Lord hath given me a learned tongue,” etc. Tholuck, “Hours of Devotion,” p. 252.
3. On Isaiah 50:4-9. Passion Sermon. The sufferings of the Lord. 1) The ground of them (obedience, Isaiah 50:4-5); 2) The nature of them (ill-use of every sort on the part of those that hated the Lord, Isaiah 50:6-7); 3) The use of them (that we may boldly say: who will contend with me? who is He that condemneth? [Romans 8:33-34] Isaiah 50:8-9).
4. On Isaiah 50:6. “O Lamb of God, how hast Thou tasted to their full extent the impositions of human sinfulness! The blindness and wickedness of the human heart could only become manifest by contrast with Thy holiness, as night is only known in its entire darkness by contrast with the spotless light; and thus it has now even happened. And thou wast silent, and Thou hast endured all contradiction of sinners, silent when they struck Thee with their fists, when they spit in Thy face—the unjust thus treating the Just one, the servants their Lord, the creature the Only Begotten of the Father! “I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks … shame and spitting:” thus it is written of Thee. Innocent Lamb of God, how hast Thou borne the sins of the world, and been obedient unto the depths of humiliation! Tholuck, l. c. 493.
5. On Isaiah 50:10-11. Penitential Sermon. God is love, and at the same time holiness and justice. He bears the rod Gentle and the rod Woe. He announces to us the law and the gospel. To-day also He turns to the pious and the wicked, and offers to each His own. The Lord to-day presents to us life and death. 1) He offers life to those that fear Him (Isaiah 50:10). 2) But He presents death to those who have kindled their heart, word and work at the flames of hell, and thereby set ablaze a fire in which they shall themselves perish (Isaiah 50:11).
III.—THE THIRD The Final Redemption of Israel. A Dialogue between the Servant of Jehovah who appears as one veiled, Israel, Jehovah Himself and the ProphetIsaiah 51This chapter speaks of high and mighty things. We hear four persons speak one after the other. Each of the speakers from his view-point announces what he has to produce in reference to the chief subject. The Servant of God, appearing significantly veiled, presents to Israel the condition of its redemption (Isaiah 51:1-8). Israel then turns with believing supplication to its Lord, praying for a display of power as of old (Isaiah 51:9-11).
The Lord answers Israel with comfort and exhortation, but then turns to the Servant, who is called to execute the work of redemption, in order to set before Him the origin, means and goal of His work (Isaiah 51:12-16). Finally the Prophet himself takes up the word in order to exhort Israel that it would take to heart the consolation given by Jehovah (Isaiah 51:17-23).
____________________
1. THE (VEILED) SERVANT OF JEHOVAH TO ISRAEL THE OF THE
Isaiah 51:1-81 Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness,
Ye that seek the Lord:
Look unto the rock whence ye are hewn,
And to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged.
2 Look unto Abraham your father,
And unto Sarah that bare you:
For I called him alone,
And blessed him, and increased him.
3 For the Lord shall comfort Zion:
He will comfort all her waste places;
And he will make her wilderness like Eden,
And her desert like the garden of the Lord;
Joy and gladness shall be found therein,
Thanksgiving, and the voice of melody.
4 Hearken unto me, my people;
And give ear unto me, O my nation:
For a law shall proceed from me,
And I will make my judgment to rest for a light of the people.
5 My righteousness is near; my salvation is gone forth,
And mine arms shall judge the people;
The isles shall wait upon me,
And on mine arm shall they trust.
6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens,
And look upon the earth beneath:
For the heavens shall vanish away like smoke,
And the earth shall wax old like a garment,
And they that dwell therein shall die in like manner:
But my salvation shall be forever,
And my righteousness shall not be abolished.
7 Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness,
The people in whose heart is my law;
Fear ye not the reproach of men,
Neither be ye afraid of their revilings.
8 For the moth shall eat them up like a garment,
And the worm shall eat them like wool:
But my righteousness shall be forever,
And my salvation from generation to generation.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 51:3. ωָׂ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?οεְ ?ωִׂ ?ξְ ?ηָ ?δ which, beside Psalms 51:10, occurs only in Isaiah; Jeremiah 15:16; Jeremiah 31:13, uses μְ ?ωָׂ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?οεּ ?μְ ?ωִׂ ?ξְ ?ηַ ?ϊμְ ?αָ ?αִ ?ι, and Isaiah 7:24; Isaiah 16:9 χεμωׂ ?ωׂ ?εοεχεμωׂ ?Χ. Comp. Zechariah 8:19. Isaiah 51:5. ζְ ?ψֹ ?ςַ ?–ΰִ ?ιִּ ?ιν. Isaiah 51:6. ξָ ?μַ ?η. Isaiah 51:8. μְ ?γεֹ ?ψγּ ?εֹ ?ψִ ?ιν–ρָ ?ν–φֶ ?ξֶ ?ψ, comp. Psalms 72:5; Psalms 102:25.
Isaiah 51:1. ηֻ ?φַּ ?αְ ?ϊֶּ ?ν abbreviated relative clause for ΰַ ?ωֶׁ ?ψηφαϊνξִ ?ξֶּ ?πּ ?εּ.
Isaiah 51:2. The imperf. ϊηεμμλν, before which ΰωׁ ?ψ is likewise to be supplied, occasions surprise. Why is the perf. not employed? Had the Prophet had in mind the one act of physical birth he must have put the perf. As the word cannot be treated as a substantive (comp. ϊְ ?χεֹ ?ξְ ?ξֶ ?ικָ Psalms 139:21), the choice of the word and the verbal form must be explained by understanding the Prophet to be thinking, not merely of the torqueri that accompanies the act of birth, but also of that torqueri spe (comp. Genesis 8:10; Job 35:14 : Psalms 37:7) that Sarah had to endure through so many years.—The punctuation of the verbs ΰαψλδε and ΰψαδε with the mere Vav, copulative indicates that we are to construe the Vav as denoting intention (Ewald, § 347, a).
Isaiah 51:3. πִ ?ηַ ?ν and εַ ?ιָּ ?ωֱׂ ?ν are praeterita prophetica.—The expression βַּ ?οιִ ?δεָֹ ?δ occurs only here. βַּ ?οΰμδιν occurs several times in Ezekiel 28:13; Ezekiel 31:8-9,—χεֹ ?μζִ ?ξְ ?ψָ ?δ occurs beside here in Psalms 98:5. Isaiah uses ζξψδ again Isaiah 12:2; Isaiah 24:16.
Isaiah 51:4. It is needless and conflicting with the context to read ςַ ?ξִּ ?ιν and μְ ?ΰֻ ?ξִּ ?ιν (Codd., Syr.), instead of ςַ ?ξִּ ?ι and μְ ?ΰֻ ?ξִּ ?ι, or even to take ςַ ?ξִּ ?ι and μְ ?ΰֻ ?ξִּ ?ι as plural endings (Gesen.) and to refer both to the Gentiles. For these verses contain an exhortation to Israel not to renounce its privilege. μְ ?ΰֹ ?ν is indeed nowhere else used for Israel. Yet the use of βּ ?εֹ ?ι Zephaniah 2:9 is analogous. In this case as there, the want of a second word fitted to correspond in parallelism with ςַ ?ν occasions the abnormal use.—The diversities of meanings encountered in the root ψָ ?βַ ?ς, (e.g., the meanings of emotion, trembling, resting seem to combine in the same root), is probably to be explained thus: we must distinguish between a ψָ ?βַ ?ς with original ς, and another with an ς that is derived from a hissing consonant. Probably ψָ ?βַ ?ς, denoting tremefecit, terruit, and from which is derived ψֵ ?βַ ?ς momentum (movimentum, moment of the trembling emotion), is softened from ψָ ?πַ ?ωׂ ,ψָ ?βַ ?ζ (as e.g., the Hebrew φ becomes ς in Aramaic, comp. ςָ ?πָ ?ΰ ,ΰַ ?ψְ ?ςָ ?ΰ,=φֹ ?ΰο, etc.).
But ψָ ?βַ ?ς that involves the meaning “to rest” has an original ς. The Hiph. δִ ?ψְ ?βִּ ?ιςַ in our text means “to make rest,” and that in a similar sense to δֵ ?πִ ?ιηַ and δִ ?πִּ ?ιδַ, which forms, as is well known, in like manner acquire the meaning “deposuit, demisit, posuit, collocavit” (comp. Isaiah 30:32; Isaiah 14:1; Isaiah 46:7, etc.). Thus ΰַ ?ψְ ?βִּ ?ιςַ would involve the meaning of “settling permanently.” For this right is that which from now on remains permanently, everlastingly.
Isaiah 51:6. It is uncertain whether ξָ ?μַ ?η is radically related to ξָ ?ψַ ?η “conterere,” hence ξֶ ?μַ ?η contritum, what is broken small, both salt and rags (Jeremiah 38:11-12); or whether ξָ ?μַ ?η has the fundamental meaning “to flood, to flow,” hence ξֶ ?μַ ?η=flow, salt-flux, salt and=that which has flowed, passed away.—λְּ ?ξεֹ ?Ξλֵ ?ο is taken by the ancient translators and expositors in the sense of “just as,” which grammatically is quite correct, but is thought to be flat as to sense. Hence, after the example of Lowth and Vitringa, most recent expositors take λֵּ ?ο to mean “gnat.” But λֵּ ?ο does not occur in this sense in the singular; and the plural λִּ ?πִּ ?ιν Exodus 8:12 sqq.; Psalms 105:31 is without doubt to be referred to λִּ ?πָּ ?δ (comp. λִּ ?πָּ ?ν Exodus 8:13-14) and not to λֵּ ?ο. Hence Delitzsch is of the opinion that λְּ ?ξεֹ ?Ξλֵּ ?ο is to be taken in the sense of a “so” to which an accompanying gesture imparts a contemptuous meaning. But for this he can only appeal to classic analogies; for 2 Samuel 23:5; Numbers 13:33; Job 9:33 are not fitting comparisons. I am of the opinion that if λְּ ?ξεֹ ?Ξλֵ ?ο is not taken in the sense of “just as,” the application of the comparison is wanting.
For whether λֵּ ?ο be taken=“gnat,” or=contemptuous “so,” in either case the clause ειωׁ ?αιδ to ιξεϊεο still belongs to the comparison and the application is wanting. Thus the discourse becomes obscure; whereas it is quite clear if the clause ειωׁ ?αιδεβεΧ contains the application. For then it is said that all, that is nothing more than citizen of the earth, will pass away just as heaven and earth.
Isaiah 51:7. ηψτϊΰπεωׁ comp. Psalms 22:7; and concerning ΰπεωׁ the remarks on Isaiah 8:1.—βּ ?γֻּ ?τεֹ ?ϊ with fem. ending only here; yet comp. βּ ?γεּ ?τεֹ ?ϊ Ezekiel 5:15; with masc. ending Isaiah 43:28; Zephaniah 2:8.
AND 1. Connecting with the exhortation, Isaiah 50:10, to hearken to the voice of the Servant of God, the Prophet first lets a speaker enter of whom one does not exactly know whether he is Jehovah or one closely connected, indeed, with Jehovah, yet a distinct person from Him. If he is the latter, he can be no other than the Servant of Jehovah, who, veiling here His servant-form, already suffers His unity with Jehovah to appear. The following are reasons for thinking that it is the Servant of Jehovah that speaks in Isaiah 51:1 to Isaiah 8:1) the reference of ωִׁ ?ξְ ?ςεּ ΰֵ ?μַ ?ι, Isaiah 51:1, to ωֹׁ ?ξֵ ?ςַ αְּ ?χεֹ ?μςַ ?αְ ?γּ ?εֹ, Isaiah 50:10; Isaiah 2) Isaiah 51:1; Isaiah 51:3, speak of Jehovah in the third person; 3) Isaiah 42:4, the Zionitic law is called the law of the Servant of Jehovah, and the speaker in these verses describes the same law as proceeding from him (Isaiah 51:4) and as his law; 4) in Isaiah 51:16 the Servant is evidently addressed, and thus is assumed to be a participator in the dialogue, as πρόσωποντοῦδιαλόγου. This discourse divides into three sections, each of which begins with an emphatic summons to give heed: ωׁ ?ξςε (Isaiah 51:1), δχωׁ ?ιαε ,δΰζιπε (Isaiah 51:4), ωׁ ?ξςε (Isaiah 51:7).
2. Hearken to me—voice of melody, Isaiah 51:1-3. The exhortation “hearken to me” refers back to “who hearkeneth to the voice of my Servant,” Isaiah 50:10. Although Isaiah 51:2 is proof that Jehovah is the speaker, still on the other hand Jehovah in Isaiah 51:1 a once and in Isaiah 51:3 twice is spoken of in the third person. Should not the Servant of Jehovah Himself be regarded as the speaker? His unity with Jehovah and His glory begin to shine through here; but because the servant-form and glory still stand uncombined side by side, He does not here appear plainly as the bearer of the latter.
Those whom He summons to hear Him are the same that, Isaiah 50:10, are described as those that “fear the Lord.” The last expression is a general one. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Proverbs 1:7). “To fear God” includes earnest endeavor after righteousness in the widest sense, involving being right and having salvation (proof-text for ψγσφγχ, Deuteronomy 16:20; comp. Proverbs 21:21). But the possession of salvation is assured to those that seek and find the Lord Himself, the highest good (αִּ ?χֵּ ?ωׁ ιΧ said with reference to Exodus 33:7; Deuteronomy 4:20, especially in Hosea 3:5; Hosea 5:6; Hosea 7:10). These upright souls that strive after true righteousness and communion with God, and who are, hence, inclined and fitted “to trust in the name of the Lord and stay upon their God” (Isaiah 50:10), the Servant of the Lord would strengthen and confirm by referring them to Abraham and Sarah. He compares Abraham to a rock from which building-stones are hewn, and Sarah to a well-hole (ξַ ?χֶּ ?αֶ ?ϊαּ ?εֹ ?ψ, the latter reminding one of πְ ?χֵ ?αָ ?δ, comp. Isaiah 48:1), from which earth, clay, etc., are taken.
There lies in the figure the notion of the primitive paternal and maternal ancestry. Ancestors are authority. Their posterity ought to resemble them, not only physically, but spiritually. Israel, then, ought to look back to its ancestors in order to imitate their example. It is to be noticed that Sarah is named here, as in Hebrews 11:11, along with Abraham, as the companion of his faith (see Text. and Gram.). Sarah’s pains in bearing the son of promise were two-fold: first, the inward struggles of faith, the sorrows of a hope again and again deceived, and yet not given up, joyfully ended at last by the physical sorrows of the birth.
Thus ϊηεμμλν leads over to the fact in which Abraham approved himself as an example of faith: the Lord called him as standing alone, as it were a solitary tree, but of course in order to bless and multiply him (see Text. and Gram.). The verbs “to bless and multiply” play a chief part in the promise given to Abraham. Therefore the Prophet points to these here (comp. Genesis 22:17; Genesis 12:2-3; Genesis 13:15-16; Genesis 18:18, etc.). Through long decennials and up to years when posterity was no longer naturally to be expected, Abraham had stood alone like a tree in a wide field, about which, even after long years, there appeared no sign of young growth from seeds falling from it. But he was not on that account weak in faith.
And thus he is a comforting example to his posterity. For that Zion that the Prophet has in mind, which will be contemporary with the Servant of God, and wasted and forsaken (comp. Isaiah 49:14 sqq.), shall also grow up again and have a numerous seed and become a glorious garden of the Lord. By pointing to believing Abraham, the Prophet lets it be understood that just and only on the condition of a faith like Abraham’s can wasted Zion become again a paradise (ςֵ ?γֶ ?ο, Genesis 2:15; Joe 2:3). Unbelieving Israel, however, remains a waste!
3. Hearken unto me—not be abolished.
Isaiah 51:4-6. This section begins with a summons to hearken, still more emphatic than the preceding. It reminds one of Isa 49:1. The Lord will let a new law go forth, He will promulgate a new right to the nations. According to Isaiah 42:1-4; Isaiah 49:6, it is the Servant of God that is the medium of this new revelation of Jehovah’s. The Thorah here spoken of is, therefore, the Zionitic law, or the Gospel, and the right that will be set for a light to the nations is the new ordinance which, resting on the fact of the offering made on Golgotha, makes faith, and no longer works, the central point of subjective performance. I repeat here expressly, that I do not ascribe to the Prophet this knowledge, but that I only explain here what is objectively implied in the Prophet’s words, but not clearly known by him.
If this new Thorah is promulgated, then, on the one hand, “righteousness is come near” that avails with God (Isaiah 46:12-13), and with it salvation is gone forth (i.e., given out, offered to all); but, on the other hand, the time also of universal judgment has arrived. For when the Saviour of the world has appeared, then the time of judgment has come. But the judgment begins at the house of God. The destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans is the first act of the world’s judgment (Matthew 24). We men living at present are, therefore, already in the world’s judgment. In this time, then, of the publishing of the Zionitic law on the one hand, and of the world’s judgment on the other, the isles shall hope in the Lord, and wait on his arm (ζְ ?ψֹ ?ςַ symbolically=protection, support, hence singular; whereas before in ζψςιιωׁ ?τθε the word is taken in the physical sense, therefore the plural).
Here it is intimated, therefore, that just the isles, i.e., the remote, heathen nations, especially of the West, in that last time, that is to be both a time of salvation and of judgment, will accept salvation. It is to be noted that the Prophet says nothing of Israel’s believing on the Servant of the Lord and on His law. Here, therefore, is a hint of that conflict in which Israel stood after the appearance of the Servant and still stands: either to cleave to the gospel with the Gentiles and thereby to disappear as a nation, or to reject the gospel and thereby to be themselves rejected, yet to be preserved as a nation for the time when, without jealousy or competition, the kingdom of God shall appear as the kingdom of David, and will be still one flock under one Shepherd. On ιιημεο comp. on Isaiah 42:4.
Of course Israel acts thus from no praiseworthy motives, but from obstinacy and pride. And hence fleshly Israel shall be destroyed in the judgment. In Isaiah 51:6 the Prophet commands to consider heaven and earth. The heavens, seemingly so firm (firmamentum, στερέωμα) shall vanish away like smoke, the earth that bears all, will become worm-eaten and rotten and pass away as an old garment, and the inhabitants of the earth shall perish just so. But the salvation of Jehovah shall be forever and his righteousness shall not perish. Therefore whoever possesses this salvation and this righteousness shall be preserved.
It is not said that whoever is dug out of the fountain of Abraham shall be blessed. But he that will follow the call of the Lord as Abraham, he that takes His law and believes Him, he shall be blessed, though he were a heathen. Whoever does not believe, though of the seed of Abraham after the flesh, shall perish away just as (see Text. and Gram.) the heaven and earth. Thus the difference between Israel and Gentiles disappears. He that has not the “salvation” and “righteousness” of the Lord is a mere earth inhabitant, whether of the race of Israel or not, and as such he shall perish with the earth.
4. Hearken unto me—generation.
Isaiah 51:7-8. For the third time we hear the summons to hearken. This time it is not addressed to Israel, but to all those that know the true righteousness, and have the law of the Servant of Jehovah in their hearts. “Those that know righteousness” differ from “those that follow after righteousness” only so far as that one must first know righteousness before he can follow after it. It is implied that, not a mere outward acquaintance is meant, but one truly inward and experimental. With this agrees the additional clause the people in whose heart is my law. From this is seen: 1) That not the outward Israel is meant, that received the Mosaic law outwardly.
The words manifestly contain an express antithesis (comp. Jeremiah 31:33, which seems to rest on our text). 2) That here, too, the Servant of Jehovah is thought of. For this new, higher law is in Isaiah 42:4, expressly called His law, and the Thorah of which Isaiah 51:4 speaks, can be no other than that of which the Servant of Jehovah is called to be the mediator. Just on this account, however, the nation, in whose heart is the law of the Servant of Jehovah cannot be regarded here as itself appertaining to the “Servant of Jehovah,” as Del. [also J. A. A.] supposes.
The people that has the righteousness and the law of the Servant of Jehovah in their hearts is not the people of Israel. It is a great people, a more numerous congregation. It is believing mankind, the congregation of those born again, the spiritual Israel, in distinction from unbelieving mankind, the world. This believing congregation has ever and everywhere to contend with the world. It is hated and persecuted by the world (Matthew 10:34 sqq.; 2 Timothy 3:12). But it can rest assured of the protection of its Lord.
Hence the exhortation: fear ye not the reproach of men, neither be ye afraid of their revilings. For the moth shall eat them up as a garment, and the worm shall eat them like wool. There is a play of sound in the original ιΰλμνςωׁ and ιΰλμνρν that cannot be well reproduced in another language. This is the third time that the figure of the garment recurs (Isaiah 50:9; Isaiah 51:6), and the second time for that of the moth (Isaiah 50:9). Both are here combined and strengthened by the rhetorical variation, “the worm shall eat them like wool.” ρָ ?ν, probably from the fundamental meaning of “to spring”, allied to ρּ ?εּ ?ν, is the Greek σήσ (Matthew 6:19, comp. Bochart, Hieroz., Lib.
IV, cap. 25). The concluding clause, but my righteousness, etc., Isaiah 51:8 b, corresponds in part verbatim to the close of Isa 51:6; only that here, too, for the sake of variety there occurs a transposition of the notions.
Footnotes:well.
For he was alone when I called him.
perish.
2. ISRAEL EXHORTS THE LORD TO A NEW DISPLAY OF HIS ANCIENT POWER, AND HOPES FOR THE BEST FROM IT
Isaiah 51:9-119 Awake! Awake! put on strength, O arm of the Lord;
Awake! as in the ancient days, in the generation of old.
Art thou not it that hath cut Rahab,
And wounded the dragon?
10 Art thou not it which hath dried the sea,
The waters of the great deep;
That hath made the depths of the sea a way for the ransomed to pass over?
11 Therefore the redeemed of the Lord shall return,
And come with singing unto Zion;
And everlasting joy shall be upon their head:
They shall obtain gladness and joy;
And sorrow and mourning shall flee away.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 51:9. ηָ ?μַ ?μ–ϊַּ ?πִּ ?ιο–ςεμξιν Poel.—δָ ?φַ ?α Hiph.
Isaiah 51:9. γεψεϊςεμξιν depends on the λְּ before ιְ ?ξֵ ?ι, and not, as Hitzig and Hahn suppose, on ιְ ?ξֵ ?ι; for the expression ιξֵ ?ιγεֹ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ never occurs, and the absence of the preposition before γεψεϊ is according to common usage (comp. Isaiah 48:9; Isaiah 48:14; Isaiah 46:5; Isaiah 44:28, etc.). On the other hand the ιξιχֶ ?γֶ ?ν is a frequent expression (Isaiah 23:7; Isaiah 37:26; Micah 7:20; Jeremiah 46:26; Psalms 44:2; 2 Kings 19:25; Lamentations 1:7; Lamentations 2:17). The expression γεψεϊςεμξιν does not occur again. The plural, ςεμξιν, expressing the relative notion of an immeasurable duration of time past or to come (comp. Isaiah 63:11), belongs to the words that occur only in Part Second.
Isaiah 51:10. δַ ?ωָּׂ ?ξָ ?δ, according to the Masoretic pointing with double-Pashta (comp. Olsh., § 41, k, 47, c. Anm.), should be read as Milel [accented on the penult.—Tr.], consequently regarded as third pers. fem. perf. Then the expression must be taken in a relative sense (Gesen., § 100, Rem.). But this punctuation seems to me a needless refinement. For there is no grammatical or logical ground for departing from the simple and natural construction of the verse, according to which the word is a parallel participle to the foregoing δַ ?ξַּֽ ?ηֲ ?ψֶ ?αֶ ?ϊ.
Isaiah 51:11. The verse is repeated almost verbatim from Isaiah 35:10. The only difference is the small one of ιωׂ ?ιβεοπρε in our text instead of the ιωׂ ?ιβεεπρε of Isaiah 35:10, which may be referred to an error of transcription. In 35 Isaiah 51:9 concludes with the words εְ ?δָ ?μְ ?λεּ βְ ?ΰεּ ?μִ ?ιν. Our Isaiah 51:10 also concludes with βΰειν. It is possible, indeed, that thus ending Isaiah 51:10, the Prophet was reminded of Isa 35:9, and that occasioned his repeating here the words that there follow, viz., Isaiah 35:10. But it is not correct, when Hitzig remarks, that Isaiah 51:11 does not suit the context because here those delivered from Egypt are meant. For the deliverance out of Egypt is only a type of that of final history.
AND Awake—flee away.
Isaiah 51:9-11. In accordance with the almost dramatic arrangement that the Prophet observes, Zion now takes up the discourse. It is so bold as to return exhortation for exhortation. For if Israel was reminded in Isaiah 51:1-6 of what it needed to do for its salvation, it in turn summons the Lord to do His part now, i.e., in the time of the Servant of Jehovah, in the last time, as He did in the beginning time, in Egypt. There is in ςεּ ?ψִ ?ι “awake” a slight intimation that the arm of the Lord has slept, i.e., that there has been a pause in the display of its power. How else could the destruction and desolation (Isaiah 51:3) of Zion, and its consequent second and greatest exile have come about?
Thrice is the cry “awake” called out to the arm of the Lord, as to one lying in deepest slumber, and that can only be wakened by repeated calling. Comp. Isaiah 52:1; Judges 5:12. Put on strength, equip one’s self with strength, is a figure drawn from the arming of a warrior with pieces of armor. The naked arm is thought of as weaker, that covered with brazen bands as stronger, firmer, better able to resist (comp. Isaiah 52:1; Psalms 93:1).
Hitzig cites Homer, Il. 19, 36, δύσεοδ̓ἀλκήν; Delitzsch, Revelation 11:17, λαμβάνεινδύναμιν. And now the Lord’s former doings are, as it were, held up to Him as an example. Art thou not He that cut Rahab asunder, etc. Rahab, properly ferocia, then designation of a monstrum marinum, in which sense it corresponds to ϊַּ ?πִּ ?ιο, and thence, like the latter, which=“the crocodile,” a symbolical name for Egypt (comp. on Isaiah 30:7). On ϊַּ ?πִּ ?ιο comp. List and Ezekiel 29:3; Psalms 74:13-14.
In Isaiah 51:10, reference is further made to the drying up of the Red sea and the passage of the Israelites through it. Therefore here again we find the deliverance out of Egyptian bondage as a type of the last and final redemption. In Isaiah 51:11 (see Text. and Gram.) the Prophet, in entire agreement with the context, expresses the confidence that the arm of the Lord will, indeed, in the last time give proof again of its power displayed in ancient time, and that therefore the redeemed of the Lord shall return home to Zion with rejoicings and to everlasting joy.
3. JEHOVAH SPEAKS: HE REPLIES TO ISRAEL’S WITH , AND HOLDS UP TO HIS SERVANT THE ORIGIN, MEANS AND GOAL OF HIS LABOR
Isaiah 51:12-1612 I, even I, am he that comforteth you:
Who art thou, that thou shouldest be afraid of a man that shall die?
And of the son of man which shall be made as grass;
13 And forgettest the Lord thy Maker,
That hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth;
And hast feared continually every day
Because of the fury of the oppressor,
As if he were ready to destroy?
And where is the fury of the oppressor?
14 The captive exile hasteneth that he may be loosed,
And that he should not die in the pit,
Nor that his bread should fail.
15 But I am the Lord thy God,
That divided the sea, whose waves roared:
The Lord of hosts is his name.
16 And I have put my words in thy mouth,
And I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand,
That I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth,
And say unto Zion, Thou art my people.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 51:14, φָ ?ςָ ?δ, comp. Jeremiah 2:20; Jeremiah 48:12; Isaiah 51:15 ιδεδφΧωְׁ ?ξεֹ; the expression occurs in the same form in Jeremiah 10:16; Jeremiah 31:35 : Jeremiah 32:18; Jeremiah 46:18; Jeremiah 48:15; Jeremiah 50:34; Jeremiah 51:19; Jeremiah 51:57. It seems original with Amos, where it appears now in a simpler form (Amos 5:8; Amos 9:6), now in a more extended form (Amos 4:13; Amos 5:27).
Isaiah 51:12. In ξִ ?ιΞΰַ ?ϊְּ the ξִ ?ι is self-evidently qualis. The expression also corresponds in sound to ΰϊΞδιΰ Isaiah 51:9. The Prophet uses freedom in respect to gender and number. After ξπηξλν he puts the sing ξιΞΰϊ, and after the feminine ξιΞΰϊεϊιψΰι the masculines εϊωׁ ?λη and εϊτηγ, according as the notion Zion or Israel is uppermost. The Vav consec. after ξιΞΰϊ expresses the effect, and hence is=ut; qualis eras, ut timeres. Thus ξιΞΰϊ by no means signifies “how little art thou?” (Knobel). For the same interrogative form may mean: “how great art thou?” comp. Judges 9:28. And any way ξι may, regardless of size great or small, inquire for the occasioning quality generally. Comp. Isaiah 51:19 and ξιΞΰϊ Rth 3:16 with the same phrase, Rth 3:9; Isaiah 57:4; Isaiah 57:11.
Isaiah 51:13. One may supply ηִ ?φָּ ?ιε “his arrows” after λּ ?εֹ ?πֵ ?ο (Psalms 11:2; comp. Isaiah 7:13); still, without an expressed object, the word also means “to aim” (Psalms 21:13).
Isaiah 51:14. ξδψμητϊη is construed as e.g., ξִ ?δַ ?ψְ ?ϊָּ μִ ?ξְ ?φֹ ?ΰ Genesis 27:20. φָ ?ςָ ?δ is “to bow” transitive and intransitive. Here it means the one bowed down by chains or the ξַ ?δְ ?τֶּ ?λֶ ?ϊ (Jeremiah 20:2; Jeremiah 29:26; 2 Chronicles 16:10). δτϊη is a metonymy as in Isaiah 14:17, etc. AND 1. I, even I—should fail.
Isaiah 51:12-14. Jehovah enters here as the third and most exalted person of the dialogue. The “I, even I” corresponds to the “awake, awake” of Isaiah 51:9 and replies to it. It seems to me that “He that comforteth you” refers back to the double πִ ?ηַ ?ν “comforted” Isaiah 51:3. It is as if the Lord would say: Have ye not heard that I, I Jehovah am He that comforts Zion? Are ye not competently assured of this?
Who art thou, now, that thou fearest a man that will die? (See Text. and Gram.). Man that dies, the son of man who is given away as grass, such is the enemy that Israel ought not to fear. There could be no mention of this fear, were it not that Israel forgot Jehovah, who, as Maker of His people (Isaiah 43:1) stretcher forth of the heavens and founder of the earth (Isaiah 40:22; Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 45:12) surely offered a sufficient guaranty for trusting in Him. Forgetting Jehovah is really the cause both of fearing men (Isaiah 51:12) and of the continual trembling (Isaiah 51:13). The mention of one effect before and of the other after the cause, thus proceeding in the one case from effect to cause, and in the other from cause to effect, though not quite exact, is still a common way of speaking (comp. Amos 5:10-12; Jeremiah 2:9 sq.; Isaiah 49:19 sq.; 2 Samuel 12:9).
Evidently and hast trembled every day, etc., Isaiah 51:13, makes stronger the expression of Isa 51:12, both qualitatively and quantitatively. To understand by “the oppressor” the Babylonian oppressor (Knobel) is only possible to one that has no conception of the wide reach of the prophetic gaze. Though Babylon may be included, it cannot be all that is meant, for the Prophet sees together all that Israel feels as an oppressor until the end. Moreover the expression is founded on Deuteronomy 28:53; Deuteronomy 28:55; Deuteronomy 28:57, and is used by Isaiah here and Isaiah 29:2; Isaiah 29:7 in this sense, and besides only by Jeremiah 19:9. λΰωׁ ?ψ=“according as,” and thus expresses that the trembling is in proportion to the aiming of the oppressor.
“But where is the fury of the oppressor?” asks the Lord, anticipating, as it were, the future. The question intimates that a time will come when that fury shall suddenly vanish. With this wondrously quick disappearance of the oppressor connects the instant, and unhindered release of the captives. Prison scenes appear here before the Prophet’s mind: he sees captives bent under the weight of chains, or, worse still, by racking instruments, who are now quickly let go, and thus escape a dreadful fate of slow dying to the pit (a pregnant construction) for want of necessary food.
2. But I am—My people.
Isaiah 51:15-16. I regard both these verses as the address of Jehovah to His Servant. Such an address is not out of place, but the contrary, if we were right in regarding the Servant of Jehovah as taking part in the dialogue and the Isaiah 51:1-8 as His words. εΰπλι “and I” answers to the double ΰπλι Isaiah 51:12 as a similar beginning. The Servant of Jehovah has also great conflicts to endure. The world storms against Him like a raging sea (Psalms 2:1; Isaiah 57:20). Hence Jehovah, to strengthen Him, calls Himself in relation to Him His God, that has power over the sea, to raise it up and, naturally, to quiet it again (Isaiah 17:12-13; Isaiah 23:11; Isaiah 50:2; Isaiah 51:10).
Jehovah Sabaoth is this God called, as Lord of the heavenly hosts. Shall He that has dominion over the powers of heaven not have dominion also over the powers of the earth?
The expression ψָ ?βַ ?ςδַ ?ιָ ?ν “to arouse the sea” occurs first Job 26:12. Afterwards comes our text, and our text is literally reproduced by Jeremiah 31:35. [The Author has an argument that follows here to prove that the language is original with Isaiah, and borrowed by Jeremiah. This is reproduced in brief in the Introduction, pp. 23, 24. The present amplification adds nothing to the clearness of it, and is omitted to save space. As an argument it is not forcible. His explanation is that Jeremiah uses the language in question to denote “a regularly recurring motion of the sea,” and that the ebb and flow of the tide must be meant, because that is the only firmly established ordinance for the sea’s motion that can be classified with the sun, moon and stars, and made a type of the stability of God’s covenant with His people.
But the context of Jer 31:35 does not require us to think that Jeremiah gives this application to the language. Moreover ψָ ?βַ ?ς in any of its accepted meanings is unsuitable to express such motion as the tide. Besides, to Hebrews, remote as they were from the ocean, the tide was an unfamiliar phenomenon, and thus does not appear in their literature. And it may be said that, in relation to our Isaiah 51:13 a. the notion of phenomenal stability is as much demanded for Isaiah 51:15 as in Jeremiah 31:35.
The best treatment of the attempt to prove that our text is borrowed from Jeremiah, and therefore not genuine Isaianic, is to ignore it as frivolous. Still, perhaps, the scrutiny which the debate occasions may lead to a more exact understanding of the language in question. The LXX render Job 26:12, γָ ?βַ ?ςδַ ?ιָ ?ν, κατέπαυσετὴνθάλασσαν. The Author’s discussion of ψָ ?βַ ?ς under Isaiah 51:4 shows how ambiguous the word is in itself, and that we must rely on our tact and the context to determine its meaning. The general scriptural appeal to the sea as proof of God’s power, is to the evidence it gives of His controlling it. It is the sea that rages, He settles it and holds it in bounds.
Comp. Job 38:8-11, and Christ stilling the tempest Mark 4:35 sqq. It seems preferable therefore to accept Lowth’s rendering. “He who stilleth the sea, though the waves thereof roar,” which also Barnes adopts. Tr.]
The words Isaiah 51:16 can only be spoken to the Servant of God. “I have put My words in Thy mouth” designates both the task and the equipment the Servant of God receives. The words recall Isaiah 49:2, where it is said: “And He hath made My mouth like a sharp sword.” The Servant of God must proclaim the will of God. To be able to do this, He must be able to find the proper, powerful, incisive words (Hebrews 4:12). This comes about by God’s word being put into His mouth. If the wrath of men that are enemies to the truth be thereby aroused, the Lord protects Him: “I have covered Thee in the shadow of My hand.” The same is said Isaiah 49:2, in almost the same words of the Servant of the Lord, viz., αְּ ?φַ ?μιָ ?γεֹ δֶ ?ηְ ?αִּ ?ιΰָֽ ?πִ ?ι. By this means the Servant of God will be preserved and enabled to carry out His work.
The aim of this work is that He may plant the heavens and lay the foundations of the earth. Who must this Servant of God be to whom is assigned such a task? What heaven shall He plant? what earth shall He found? Certainly not the old heaven and the old earth that have already been planted and founded, but which, too, are destined, according to Isaiah 51:6 “to vanish away like smoke, and wax old like a garment,” in that assize that the Servant of God will hold. But the Servant of God will plant a new heaven and found a new earth (Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; Revelation 21:1). Concerning the way in which He has done this see under Doctrinal and Ethical, p. 559, § 6.
But the new heaven and the new earth are also a dwelling for the people of God, the Ἰσραὴλπνευματικός, which of course has not proceeded merely from the Twelve Tribes. Nevertheless the historical Israel constitutes the frame into which the new humanity will be joined on as members. Hence, as is said Isaiah 66:22 : “For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before Me,—so shall your seed and your name remain,” so here the people that is to populate the new heaven and new earth is called Zion. Jerusalem, which is from above is the mother of us all, says Paul (Galatians 4:26).
Those that do not recognize the Servant of God as the speaker in Isaiah 51:1-8, must, in order to get tolerable sense out of our passage, assume that Jehovah is the subject of “to plant,” “to found” and “to say.” Let this even be justified respecting “to plant” and “to found,” yet it remains inexplicable how Jehovah should put His word in Zion’s mouth, in order that He, Jehovah, may say: thou art My people.—Others, as Hitzig, take the three infinitives in a gerundive sense: in planting a heaven, and founding an earth, and saying to Zion, etc. Apart from the planting and founding of heaven and earth being made to mean only a new order of things on this earth, or even a new founding of Israel as a state, one can never prove that the Lordthereby put His word into the mouth of His Servant, and thereby protected Him, in that He renewed heaven and earth. For it is inconceivable that the Servant of the Lord will still stand in need of inspiration after heaven and earth are become new.—Less justifiable still, grammatically, is the exposition of Hahn, who would take μπθςεβει simply as a paraphrase of the future: I will plant. He appeals to the usage that permits the use of δָ ?ιָ ?δ with following μְ and the infin. constr. to paraphrase the verb. fin. But there can be no mention of this here, not, indeed, because διδ is wanting, which would make no difference, but because the subject is wanting. For according to HahnμβθςεβεΧ should represent an independent sentence.
But for that at least a subject were requisite. It must at least read ΰָ ?πֹ ?λִ ?ιμִ ?πְ ?θֹ ?ςַ. But as a subject is every way wanting, it follows, necessarily, that μπθςεβει can only be construed as a dependent infinitive clause.
Footnotes:given.
As he took aim.
Or, made himself ready.
The one bowed down hastens.
he will not die away to the pit, and will not want his bread.
And.
[stilleth, Lowth.—TR.]
To plant—to lay, etc.
4. THE PROPHET SPEAKS. HE EXHORTS ISRAEL TO TAKE TO HEART THE COMFORT THAT JEHOVAH
Isaiah 51:17-2317 Awake! Awake! stand up, O Jerusalem,
Which hast drunk at the hand of the Lord the cup of his fury;
Thou hast drunken the dregs of the cup of trembling,
And wrung them out.
18 There is none to guide her
Among all the sons whom she hath brought forth;
Neither is there any that taketh her by the hand
Of all the sons that she hath brought up.
19 These two things 1are come unto thee;
Who shall be sorry for thee?
Desolation, and destruction, and the famine, and the sword:
By whom shall I comfort thee?
20 Thy sons have fainted.
They lie at the head of all the streets, as a wild bull in a net:
They are full of the fury of the Lord,
The rebuke of thy God.
21 Therefore hear now this, thou afflicted,
And drunken, but not with wine:
22 Thus saith thy Lord the Lord,
And thy God that pleadeth the cause of his people,
Behold, I have taken out of thine hand the cup of htrembling,
Even the dregs of the cup of my fury;
Thou shalt no more drink it again:
23 But I will put it into the hand of them that afflict thee:
Which have said to thy soul, Bow down, that we may go over:
And thou hast laid thy body as the ground,
And as the street, to them that went over.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 51:17. ξָ ?φָ ?δ. Isaiah 51:19. ηψα–ψςα–δַ ?ωֹּׁ ?γεְ ?δַ ?ωֶּׁ ?αֶ ?ψ. Isaiah 51:20. ξִ ?λְ ?ξָ ?ψ–ςָ ?μַ ?σ. Isaiah 51:21.ωְׁ ?αֻ ?ψָ ?δ. Isaiah 51:22. ΰֲ ?γֹ ?πִ ?ιν. Isaiah 51:23. ξεֹ ?βִ ?ιν.
Isaiah 51:18. Note the many liquidae, and the likeness in sound of the conclusion of both halves of the verse. Both impart to the words a character of tenderness, sadness.
Isaiah 51:19. Here, too, both halves of the verse have a similar conclusion. For the two interjection-like parentheses ξιιπεγμκ and ΰπηξκ, each beginning with ξִ ?ι, are two rhymes in sentiment. The form of expression ωׁ ?ϊινδπδ recalls Job 13:20; Proverbs 30:7; comp. Jeremiah 2:13; Jeremiah 15:3. χֹ ?ψְ ?ΰֹ ?ϊ (from χָ ?ψָ ?ΰ = χָ ?ψָ ?δ Isaiah 60:18), and also ωֹׁ ?γ ,ξιιπεγμκ and ξιΰπηξκ are undeniable points of contact between our text and Nahum 3:7. For our χֹ ?ψְ ?ΰֹ ?ϊַ ?ιִ ?κְ answers to the ψֹ ?ΰַ ?ιִ ?κְ there; our ωֹׁ ?γ to ωָ ?γּ ?γָ ?δ there; our ξιΰπηξκ to the ξֵ ?ΰַ ?ιִ ?οΰֲ ?αַ ?χֵּ ?ωׁ ξֲ ?πζηֲ ?ξִ ?ινμָ ?κְ there.—ξι in the concluding question ξιΰπηξκ can only mean quails. It is properly an abbreviation of ξִ ?ιΰָ ?πλִ ?ιεַ ?ΰֲ ?πַ ?ηֲ ?ξֵ ?κְ, answering to the ξִ ?ιΞΰַ ?ϊְּ εַ ?ϊִּ ?ιψְ ?ΰִ ?ι, Isaiah 51:12.
Isaiah 51:20. ξִ ?λְ ?ξָ ?ψ means the same as ξִ ?λְּ ?ξֶ ?ψֶ ?ϊ (Isaiah 19:8; Habakkuk 1:15-16) and ξִ ?λְ ?ξψֹ Psalms 141:10).—ωְׁ ?λֻ ?ψָ ?δ part. pass, only here, comp. Isaiah 29:9; the st. constr. is explained by all that follows being conceived of as one notion, a very common construction in Isaiah 5:11; Isaiah 8:6; Isaiah 9:2; Isaiah 28:9; Isaiah 16:6,19; Isaiah 56:9-10, etc.
Isaiah 51:22. ΰֲ ?γֹ ?πִ ?ιν of Jehovah only here.—ψִ ?ια with that for which God contends in the accusative as in Isaiah 1:17; comp. on Isaiah 49:25.
Isaiah 51:23. ξεֹ ?βִ ?ιν “tormentors,” occurs only here in Isaiah, but occurs oftenest in Lamentations, where, however, it is used only of God who visits men with tribulation (Lamentations 1:5; Lamentations 1:12; Lamentations 3:32-33). Only in Job 19:2, is it used, as here, of men who torment the souls of their fellow-men. Perhaps the latter passage was in the mind of the Prophet. It favors this that he continues: “Which have said to thy soul.”—Our text is the only one in all the Old Testament where the Kal. ωָׁ ?ηָ ?δ occurs. With this exception the verb is only used in Hithp.—μַ ?ςֹ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ιν may depend on ϊָּ ?ωִׂ ?ιξִ ?ι, hut also on λַּ ?ηεּ ?υ. The latter is more likely: first, because of the position; second, because just in the connection with ηευ there is a strengthening of the thought. For the earth is not chiefly destined to serve the use of the ςֹ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ιν; but such is the special destination of a street.
AND 1. The reverse side of the redemption of Israel is here presented, viz., the judgment on the enemies of the Theocracy (comp. Isaiah 11:14; Isaiah 14:2; Isaiah 25:10 sqq.; Isaiah 34:1 sqq., etc.), as if to strengthen the effect of light by contrast with its corresponding shadow. But now it is the Prophet that speaks, as if he, too, on his part would induce Israel to take cheerful courage from God’s word. Perhaps this section is meant to form a transition to chap. 52. For instance, in this Isaiah 51:17-23 the population of Jerusalem is addressed, whereas chap. 52. speaks of the holy nation reunited to the holy places.
2. Awake——rebuke of thy God.
Isaiah 51:17-20. The double δϊςεψψι corresponds to the double ςεψι (Isaiah 51:9) and ΰπλι (Isaiah 51:12). In relation to ςεψι, the Hithp. involves the idea of self as an object,=“rouse thyself.” Jerusalem must not persist in a state devoid of comfort and courage; it must wake itself up, cheer up, rouse itself (comp. Isaiah 64:6). It has received from the hand of its Lord the cup of His fury, which by its intoxicating contents, is also a cup of reeling, and has drunk it to the dregs, even sipped it empty. The figure of the cup of wrath is found also Psalms 75:9; Jeremiah 25:15; Jeremiah 25:17; Jeremiah 25:28; Jeremiah 49:12; Jeremiah 51:7; Habakkuk 2:16; Ezekiel 23:31 sqq.: Lamentations 4:21.
The figure of drinking divine fury occurs already Job 21:20, and beside that Obadiah 1:16; Jeremiah 48:26. χֻ ?αַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ (comp. αּ ?εֹ ?αַ ?ς ,χεֹ ?αַ ?ς “a helmet,” κύβη, cupa, Passow, s. v.), the helm-like, rounded [convex] top of the cup, occurs only here and Isaiah 51:22. ϊַּ ?ψְ ?ςֵ ?μָ ?δ (comp. ψְ ?ςָ ?μεֹ ?ϊ3:19) that denotes the effect of the drink, beside here and Isaiah 51:17, occurs only Psalms 60:5. The intensifying of the figure by εּ ?ξָ ?φִ ?ιϊ occurs for substance Obadiah 1:16, by the same word Psalms 75:9 (8), and (which is probably an imitation of our text) Ezekiel 23:34. In Isaiah 51:18 the figure of the drunken woman is continued by saying, that none of the sons of Zion have been in condition to lead their drunken mother. What the Prophet means by this figure appears from Isaiah 51:20. “What is said figuratively in Isaiah 51:17-18, is said without figure in Isaiah 51:19-20. Answering to the full cup, Jerusalem’s misfortune is Isaiah 51:19, represented as a double one, each half, of which is again divided into two parts, so that there results a sort of arithmetical progression. See Text. and Gram.
Whether our text or the similar one in Nahum 3:7 is the original, in my opinion, cannot be doubtful. Manifestly the passage in Isaiah is bolder, of more original construction, it even sounds harsh compared with the smooth form in which it appears in Nahum. The two interjectional clauses have disappeared. The bold, and difficult ξιΰπηξκ is resolved into the sober: “whence shall I seek comforters for thee?” And it may be further remarked, that ξִ ?ι appears to be referred to a human subject and not to the person of Jehovah. Thus it may be said, that the modern expositors, who following the LXX. and Vulg. take ΰπηξκ without further ado for ι ? ?ξγ (Boettcher, N. ex. krit. Ζhrenlese, Nr. 765), or construe ξִ ?ι> as acc. Instrument. (Hitzig.), have their predecessor already in Nahum. πεּ ?γ is “commiserari, to compassionate, sympathize with,” and occurs with following μֽ and πַ ?ηֵ ?ν also Job 2:11; Job 42:11; comp.
Jeremiah 15:5; Jeremiah 16:6; Jeremiah 22:10; Jeremiah 48:17.
Each of the two evils that come on Jerusalem is, according to the parenthesis, represented as a whole consisting of two parts. The first whole is called δַ ?ωֹׁ ?γεְ ?δַ ?ωֶׁ ?αֶ ?ψ “the blow and the downfall” [E. V., “desolation and destruction”]. The two words occur together as here Isaiah 59:7; Isaiah 60:18; Jeremiah 48:3, which last text seems to lean on Isaiah 60:18, because in both ωׁ ?γεωׁ ?αψ is spoken of as something audible. While “the blow” and “the downfall” primarily concern the city as a complex of buildings, ψςα and ηψα “hunger and sword” relate to the persons. The conjunction of these words occurs in Isaiah only here.
It occurs more frequently in Jer., and Ezek. (Jeremiah 14:15-16; Jeremiah 21:7, etc.; Ezekiel 14:21; Ezekiel 6:11; Ezekiel 12:16). Isaiah 51:20 corresponds to Isaiah 51:18, explaining what has rendered the sons of Jerusalem incapable of helping their mother. They were themselves overtaken by the destroying woe. ςָ ?μַ ?σ, which occurs only in Pual and Hithp., means “to be enveloped, especially by a night of tribulation” (comp. Amos 8:13). The Prophet graphically describes the scenes that took place in the city just taken. Thy sons are not small children as in Lamentations 2:11-12; Lamentations 4:4, but children in general, and especially the sons that ought to be able to help their mother.
At the corner of all the streets these unfortunate children lie. This expression, also, appears in Nahum 3:10, as if borrowed from our passage (comp. Lamentations 2:19; Lamentations 4:1), and Nahum seems to have taken our passage in the sense of Isa 13:16, in as much as he writes βַּ ?νςֹ ?μָ ?μֶ ?ιδָ ιְ ?ψֻ ?θְּ ?ωׁ ?εּ αְּ ?ϊεֹ ?ΰλָּ ?μΞηεּ ?φεֹ ?ϊ. The vigorous, and genuinely Isaianic expression λְּ ?ϊεֹ ?ΰξִ ?λְ ?ξָ ?ψ proves the originality of our passage. The children of Jerusalem are compared to an antelope entangled in a net, and making desperate, but vain efforts to free itself. ϊεΰ occurs again only Deuteronomy 14:5, and is there pointed ϊְּ ?ΰεֹ. It signifies a large kind of antelope, classified among the clean beasts, fit for food.
Comp. Bochart, Hieroz. Tom. II. p. 367, ed. Lips., and especially the remarks of Rosenmueller, pp. 369,281. δξμΰιν is in apposition with αָּ ?πַ ?ιִ ?κְ. The words form, so to speak, the bridge between the figure of the cup of fury, Isaiah 51:17 and the literal description in Isaiah 51:20 a. so that Isaiah 51:20 a. is a description of the effect of the cup of fury.
3. Therefore hear——went over.
Isaiah 51:21-23. Having, from Isaiah 51:17 on, described the effect of the cup of fury, the Prophet now gives his reason for calling to Jerusalem “rouse thyself.” Jerusalem, that hitherto was wretched (Isaiah 10:30; Isaiah 54:11), that was drunken but not with wine, but with misery, shall hear (Isaiah 47:8) that its Lord, Jehovah, its God, who represents His people in the judicial contest (ψִ ?ια see Text. and Gram.), takes the cup of fury out of their hand, and gives it into the hand of their enemies. The thought is the same as Obadiah 1:16; Jeremiah 49:12; Jeremiah 48:26. By the departure of the cup of fury from the hand of Jerusalem into the hand of its enemy is revealed the rule of the divine nemesis. The enemies had provoked this by the arrogance with which they had illtreated and abused Jerusalem. The expression: which said to thy soul, bow down, beside being an echo of Job 19:2, is a sort of metonymy.
For what the humiliation feels is named as that which the outward act suffers. The figure indicates how wicked and excessive had been the ill usage inflicted on Israel (comp. Isaiah 10:5 sqq.; Jeremiah 51:20 sqq). [See Barnesin loc., for rich illustration of the final clause from oriental usages.—Tr.].
Footnotes:Heb. happened.
reeling.
sipped it.
The blow and the downfall.
Heb. breaking.
How.
are benighted.
antelope.
They that.
avengeth.
[convex] top of.
as a street for passengers. AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 51:1-3. Here one clearly recognizes the evangelist of the Old Testament. Is it not as if we heard Paul, who wrote Romans 4:11 sqq.; Galatians 3:6 sqq.? Abraham, says Isaiah, is not merely the rock from which ye are hewn, i.e. he is not merely your fleshly ancestor.
Look also on his faith. Become also his spiritual children! “And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah’s womb; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God, and being fully persuaded that what He had promised He was able to perform “(Romans 4:19-21). So ye should have a firm faith that God can make also the ruins of Zion into an Eden, and her waste places into a garden of God. And this hope we ought ever to have respecting the Church of the Lord. If it has even become a “solitarius Abraham et sicut desertum et ruina,” still it may hope to become a paradise and garden of God. And just so may the individual “episcopus et pastor” cheer himself in such a away, “ut credat, ministeriam, suum non esse inefficax, etiamsi in specie nullus fructus videatur sequi” (Luther).
2. On Isaiah 51:4-6. The time when the gospel, the tidings of justification by faith, went forth into the world was at once a time of salvation and of judgment. For these tidings were despised by the Jews and received with joy by the Gentiles. Hence Jerusalem was destroyed. That was the beginning of the judgment of the world, which needed to happen to the house of God.
Had Israel received the gospel, it would have disappeared among the Gentiles. We see this daily in the case of single Israelitish families that are converted to Christianity. They mix with the Gentiles and disappear in their preponderant numbers. Such would have been the case with all Israel had the nation en masse believed on Christ. Just by its unbelief it was preserved as a nation. At last, when the fulness of the Gentiles shall have entered in, all Israel, too, will become believing.
That is, the ἐκλογή, the remnant, will become so. All the rest of Israel, all the ’Ἰσραὴλσαρκικός, will be overtaken by the judgment, and, with the earthly heaven and the earthly earth and all earthly minded men on it, they shall pass away like smoke in the wind, or like a garment consumed by fire. But everything that will have laid hold on the salvation of the Servant of God and His righteousness shall be called Zion, and will belong to the Bride of the Lord, whose wedding-day will then have come. The people of Israel will, indeed, even then retain their individuality, as generally every creature that becomes new in the kingdom of God will retain its specific peculiarity. Indeed, Israel will ever remain what it was: the son of the house, the first-born. But then it will assume this position without prejudice or disregard of the Gentile world, and without danger for itself.
For no one will then any more be able to make of any avail personal reputation or personal merit, but all will recognize that they are what they are by God’s grace.
3. On Isaiah 51:7-8. Jerome says of the ψֹ ?γλֵּ ?ιφֶ ?γֶ ?χ and the ςַ ?νϊּ ?εֹ ?ψָ ?ϊִ ?ιαְ ?μִ ?αָּ ?ν, that they are those “qui habeant legem, quam per Jeremiam Dominus pollicitur, dicens, ‘statuam testamentum novum, non juxta testamentum, quod deposui patribus eorum; sed statuam testamentum, dans leges meas in mentibus eorum (Jeremiah 31:31 sqq.),’ ut nequaquam vivant juxta literam, sed juxta spiritum instaurantes naturalem legem in cordibus suis (Romans 2:14; Psalms 37:30-31).” But those who have the law of the Servant of God in their hearts, stand in the directest opposition to the world, and have only to expect the hatred of the world in the highest degree; yet even alone they are strong against the world, and need not fear its rage (Matthew 5:11-12; Matthew 10:28).
4. On Isaiah 51:9-11. “Dicit ‘consurge,’ perinde atque si Deus altum somnum dormiat.” Luther. Comp. the sleeping of Jesus in the boat (Matthew 8:24 sqq.—“Arise! So the pious pray, not because they believe God is lying idle in heaven, but because they confess their slothfulness and their ignorance, inasmuch as they are unable to think of God as long as they do not feel His help. But although the flesh supposes He sleeps, and that He does not concern Himself about our suffering, yet faith raises itself higher up and lays hold on God’s everlasting power.” Heim u. Hoffmann.—”Sentit ecclesia suam Aegyptum et premitur variis tentationibus mundi, Satanae et conscientiae.
Christus tamen promittit: tristitia vestra vertetur in gaudiam. … Sed hoc molestum est, quod Christus et Petrus dicunt, modicum expectandum esse. Videtur enim hoc modicum turn, cum in tentatione sumus, aeternitas quaedam esse, quare opus habemus his consolationibus verbi.” Luther.—“As the Prophets appeal to previous examples, and, as has happened a little before, the Prophet Isaiah quotes Abraham’s history, and here recalls that of Pharaoh, thus the ancient books of Moses are canonized and confirmed, so that one may not doubt their certainty.” Cramer.—“As the people of Israel in the Babylonian captivity sighed for deliverance and said: If the Lord will redeem the captives of Zion, then we will be like those that dream; then our mouth shall be full of laughter, and our tongue full of singing (Psalms 126:1-2); and as the most ardent longings of the believers in the ancient world were for the coming of Christ in the flesh, as old Jacob says: ‘I have waited for thy salvation, O Lord’ (Genesis 49:18), so we are to long for nothing more than for the coming of Christ to judgment, in which also John precedes us with the words: ‘Even so come, Lord Jesus!’ after it was said: ‘I come quickly. Amen’ (Revelation 22:20). When, therefore, we hear of the signs of the coming of Christ, we should raise up our heads because our salvation draws near (Luke 21:18). There will be no more suffering, cry, pain (Revelation 21:4), but fulness of joy and lovely existence at the right hand of God forevermore (Psalms 16:11).” Renner.
5. On Isaiah 51:12-14. “I, I comfort thee. Not gold, not silver, not honor, not the world, but my word, my Spirit, shall keep and protect thee. Thou fearest men that terrify thee. Why then dost thou not let thyself be raised up when I comfort? For I am God that fill heaven and earth.
They are water-bubbles, moths, stalks of straw, drops in the bucket, dust in the balance, burning thorns. I am a comforter, not alarmer, although the flesh in time of tribulation so judges. I am thy Creator, not thine executioner or tormentor, and my power is so great that I have spread out the heavens and founded the earth. Hence thou hast no cause to fear that I have not strength enough to redeem thee.” Heim and Hoffmann.—“God often withdraws from us consolationes rerum, so that the consolatio verbi may have room and operation with us.” Foerster.—“What is man? What is he good for? What can he profit, or what harm can he do (Sir 18:7; Psalms 56:12; Psalms 118:6)?
And if God be for us, who can be against us (Romans 8:31)? As is to be seen in the examples of Pharaoh, Sennacherib and countless others.” Cramer.
6. On Isaiah 51:15-16. In the second Psalm it is said: “Why do the heathen rage and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth … cast away their cords from us.” And in Psalms 16 : “God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble. Therefore will not we fear though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea; though the waters thereof roar,” etc. The Lord who has power over the sea, and over those powers that rage like the sea, protects His servant against this raging.
The Servant of the Lord does not speak of himself, but what He speaks He speaks as the Father has said to Him (John 12:49-50). And even if what He has spoken and done according to the Father’s will bring Him on the cross, still this bitter day of death is followed by a glorious day of resurrection. And this day of the resurrection is a second creative day. It is the beginning of a new and better world. The glorified life, which in Christ entered into this world out of the cavern of the grave, was not confined to His person. Rather it has penetrated from Him forth, by word and sacrament, to all men.
As through the first Adam death seized also the creation, so through the second Adam the glorified life communicates itself to the whole creation. Not only a new humanity will be formed from Him, but a new heaven and a new earth. Thus it can be said of the Servant of God, that He plants the heaven and lays the foundation of the earth.
7. On Isaiah 51:15-16. “Comfort for the sacred office of the ministry. 1) On account of the founder, who is God Himself. As the great lords, when they issue commands, use their titles in advance, and subscribe themselves by their lands and peoples, so God does also, who is the Lord of hosts. He is strong and reputable enough. 2) This founder and beginner Himself makes those in the gospel ministry capable persons to discharge the office of the Spirit. For our ability is of God (2 Corinthians 3:5). 3) The word that they preach is not their own, but God’s word, which He Himself puts into their mouths (Matthew 10:20). 4) God takes the preachers under His guidance, protection and shelter, and covers them under the shadow of His hand, hides them secretly with Himself against every man’s arrogance (Psalms 31:21). 6) Their office is dear and precious before God, because through them not only are the foundations of the earth laid, but also heaven is set with glorious plants of honor that shall grow and bloom in all eternity to the glory of God.”—Cramer.
HINTS1. On Isaiah 51:4-6. Missionary Sermon. The Lord says: “This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” Matthew 24:14. According to this, there is a close connection between missions and the judgment of the world. The former belongs to the preliminary conditions of the latter.
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
IV.—THE FOURTH The Restoration of the City JerusalemIsaiah 52This chapter closely connects with 51. We see this even outwardly by “Awake, Awake,” Isaiah 52:1, which plainly refers back to the same words, Isaiah 51:9. The Isaiah 51:17-23 we have already recognized as a transition to chap. 52 from the fact that in them the discourse of Jehovah exchanges with that of the Prophet, and that Jerusalem is addressed. But by Jerusalem, then, we must understand the population of Jerusalem, whereas chap. 52 deals entirely with the city as such, i, e., with the holy places (ςִ ?ιψδַ ?χֹּ ?γֶ ?ωַׁ). At the same time in chap. 52 the Prophet alone speaks, or at least only as the publisher of the words of Jehovah. The chapter divides into two parts.
In the first (Isaiah 52:1-6) the Prophet shows why the city of the sanctuary must be restored. The name, i.e., the honor of Jehovah demands it. In the second part (Isaiah 52:7-12) the holy place looks forward immediately to the entrance of its holy inhabitants, who come, under Jehovah’s guidance, from the unholy land. We observe the accomplishment of the restoration.
1. THE NAME OF JEHOVAH DEMANDS THE OF
Isaiah 52:1-61 Awake! awake! put on thy strength, O Zion;
Put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city:
For henceforth there shall no more come into thee
The uncircumcised and the unclean.
2 Shake thyself from the dust;
Arise, and sit down, O Jerusalem:
Loose thyself from the bands of thy neck,
O captive daughter of Zion.
3 For thus saith the Lord,
Ye have sold yourselves for nought;
And ye shall be redeemed without money.
4 For thus saith the Lord God [Jehovah],
My people went down aforetime into Egypt to sojourn there;
And the Assyrian oppressed them without cause.
5 Now therefore, what have I here, saith the Lord,
That my people is taken away for nought?
They that rule over them make them to howl, saith the Lord;
And my name continually every day is blasphemed.
6 Therefore my people shall know my name:
Therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak:
Behold it is I.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 52:2,—πָ ?ςַ ?ψָ τָּ ?ϊַ ?η Hithp—ωְׁ ?αִ ?ιָ ?δ, of like meaning with ωִׁ ?αְ ?ιָ ?δ ,ωְׁ ?λִ ?ιϊ ,ωְׁ ?λִ ?εּ ?ϊ ,ωְׁ ?αִ ?ι; Isaiah 52:3; Isaiah 52:5, δִּ ?πָּ ?ν.
Isaiah 52:2. ωְׁ ?αִ ?ι cannot be construed with χεξι, so as to read: “sit upright” (Gesen.). For the Prophet certainly does not mean that Jerusalem shall sit up; it must stand up, i.e., raise itself up wholly. Nor can ωׁ ?αι (with Koppe, Hitzig), be rendered “captive people;” for then there must be ωִׁ ?αְ ?ιָ ?δ between χεξι and ιψεּ ?ωָׁ ?μַ ?ιִ ?ν. Rather ωׁ ?αι is imperative from ιָ ?ωַׁ ?α.—From this it appears that I do not take ιψεωׁ ?μιν in Isaiah 52:2, a, as subject, but as in apposition with the subject. The subject is ωׁ ?αιδαϊφιεο. One might also regard ιψεωׁ ?μִ ?ιν as the object of ωׁ ?αι.
But it seems to me better to suit the context and also Isaiah’s style of thought generally, to take Jerusalem as meaning the unity of city and inhabitants. Then, too, it results that the clause δϊλּ ?ϊηεξερψιφεΰψκ is to be construed as a parenthesis, and that K’ri is the correct, original reading.
Isaiah 52:5. ξִ ?πָֹּ ?ΰָ ?υ is part. Hithpoel or Hithpoal, with assimilated ϊ.
Isaiah 52:6. In the second clause μָּ ?λֵ ?ο is repeated (comp. the repetition of λְּ ?ςַ ?μ Isaiah 59:18) but not ιֵ ?γַ ?ς, which must be supplied.
AND 1. The first two verses contain the theme. In Isaiah 52:1 the holy city is summoned to awake to consciousness of new strength and new glory, for from henceforth it will be preserved from all desecration. In Isaiah 52:2 the captive people of Jerusalem is summoned to shake itself from the dust of the captivity, to cast away the chains and now again to dwell, as Jerusalem. On the promise follows an historical proof (Isaiah 52:3-4). Jerusalem is like a worthless possession, given away to the enemy without gain or compensation; so it shall without gain for the enemy be redeemed (Isaiah 52:3).
For what gain had the Lord when His people languished in Egyptian bondage, and when Assyria oppressed it (Isaiah 52:4)? And now, too, i.e., after the deportation of the nation by the Babylolonians, the Lord has in Jerusalem nothing but an empty place. The people are dragged away into exile; its oppressors howl in cruelty and haughtiness, while the name of the Lord is continually blasphemed as that of a powerless, conquered God (Isaiah 52:5). But as it is impossible for the name of the Lord to remain covered with this infamy, the Lord will again reveal His name to His people. They shall at the right time know who is their God, and what it means when He says: “here am I” (Isaiah 52:6).
2. Awake——daughter of Zion.
Isaiah 52:1-2. This address to Zion begins with the same words that Isaiah 51:9 begin the address to the arm of Jehovah. It is like an echo which that call has found in the heart of Jehovah. It seems to me incorrect to take ςֹ ?ζ (with Dathe, Gesen., Hitzig, etc.), in the sense of ornament, splendor, according to Psalms 96:6; Psalms 132:8. Why should Jerusalem become merely glorious again? Why not strong and glorious, after having been weak and covered with infamy?
The figurative expression αβγιϊλּ ?ΰψϊ occurs only here (comp. Isaiah 61:10). That by Zion is to be understood the city, as also Hitzig, Knobel, Delitzsch have recognized, appears plainly from ςιψδχγωׁ. This expression (comp. on Isaiah 48:2) intimates wherein the strength and glory of Jerusalem consists. As the earthly dwelling-place of Jehovah, Jerusalem stands high in power and honor above all other dwelling-places of men on earth. But hitherto the holy city was only too often exposed to desecration by the uncircumcised and the unclean (the heathen) coming into the city, not with the intent of paying humble homage, but with a hostile intent.
As often as this happened, it was a proof that Jerusalem had so far lost its “strength” as not to be able to protect its ϊλּ ?ΰψϊ, “magnificence.” In the future that shall not happen again. The strength of Jerusalem shall ever be so great that it will be able to preserve its “magnificence”. The words λιμΰιερισςεγ are repeated, Nahum 2:1, in which verse the initial words of both clauses are taken from our text and Isaiah 52:7 (comp. on Isaiah 51:19-20). Into Jerusalem, now clothed with new power and honor, the banished people shall enter again. They had languished in slavery. They had lain in the dust (Isaiah 47:1).
Jerusalem must rise up from the dust (Isaiah 33:9; Isaiah 33:15), shaking it off, and stand up, and dwell again as Jerusalem (see Text. and Gram.). Neither the city without people, nor the people without city is the true Jerusalem. The chief thing is that Jerusalem will cease to be a desert, and become inhabited again by its people as it ought to be.
3. For thus saith——it is I.
Isaiah 52:3-6. The foregoing promise of a restored Jerusalem is now accounted for by explaining that the honor of Jehovah Himself demanded the restoration. For, says the Lord, ye were sold for nothing. ηπν here can only mean that in surrendering the holy people, the holy land, and the holy city, the Lord received no corresponding indemnification. [Comp. Psalms 44:12. For there was given to Him no other holy people, land, or city for them. Therefore He had, as it were, in respect to earthly possession, got only injury, yea, as Isaiah 52:5 even says, mockery and scorn to boot (comp.
Isaiah 48:9 sqq.). That cannot go on so. The infamy, that has in this way come on the name of the Lord, must be washed out by His making those nations, (who might mock after the fashion intimated Numbers 4:15 sq.; Deuteronomy 9:28; Ezekiel 20:14), feel His power in such a way as simply to compel them to surrender the people of Israel. This is the meaning of and ye shall be redeemed without money. Isaiah 52:4-5 give the historical proof that Israel was sold for nothing. The first time was in Egypt, while Israel dwelt there as a stranger.
The Prophet merely intimates this. Regarding the Egyptian bondage one sees this from the fact that he designates the entire Egyptian episode by the words ιψγςξιμβεֹ ?ψωׁ ?ν. By ωׁ ?νμβεψ (according to Genesis 12:10, where it is said of Abraham) he seems to allude merely to the original object of the going down to Egypt. But we see from ςַ ?ξִּ ?ι that he means all that Israel experienced in Egypt. For those that went down were as yet no nation. But it was just the nation that must suffer all that, on account of which their stay in Egypt is called the first example of being sold.
Also the expression and the Assyrian oppressed them is merely an intimation. Every sort of injury that Assyria did both to the kingdom of Israel, and to the kingdom of Judah is included in it. What did the Lord get by that first Egyptian exile? Nothing, but that, for the time being, the already chosen and consecrated land stood empty. The plan of the Lord to provide for Himself a place of revelation and worship, which He had already begun to realize through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, suffered by that a postponement of several hundred years. Assyria, too, ill-treated Israel αְּ ?ΰֶ ?λֶּ ?ν, i.e., “for nothing” (ΰֶ ?λֶּ ?ν “defectus, not being,” comp. on Isaiah 41:29, with the αְּ ?pretii only here, yet comp.
Job 7:6). For what equivalent in goods of like sort was given to the Lord in place of what He lost by Assyria? Third, the Lord looks on the condition He sees created by the Babylonian Exile. ξδΞμιΞλּ ?δ, in my opinion, can be referred neither to heaven (Hitzig), nor to the lands of the Babylonian exile (Rosenmueller, Stier, Ewald, Umbreit, Delitzsch and, in another sense, Knobel). Was then Jehovah transported to Babylon along with the people? The context every way demands that we refer λּ ?δ to Jerusalem. For 1) the holy city (ςιψδχψωׁ Isaiah 52:1), is the fundamental thought of the chapter.
It treats of the reinhabiting of it, as its standing empty was opposed to Jehovah’s interests. To this standing empty there is plain enough allusion in “My people went down into Egypt” Isaiah 52:4; less plainly in “the Assyrian oppressed them.” But Assyria had only wished to empty the holy city, and only partly emptied the holy land. 2) It “is quite plain that in for my people is taken away the Lord has before His eyes the desolation of the holy land and city. If the people are taken away, then the land and city are empty. In that case what does the Lord find there? Shall the beasts and the land do Him honor? Is it not His will to reveal Himself to men, and to be known and honored by them?
No; more extendedly than He does in regard to Egypt and Assyria, the Lord shows that Babylon has emptied His land and city ηִ ?πָּ ?ν, i.e., without a corresponding equivalent of like sort. And, indeed, they do this with wicked haughtiness. They are rough, savage drivers, that with wild howls use their power over Israel. With most commentators, I refer those that rule over them to the Chaldeans (Isaiah 14:5; Isaiah 49:7). The Israelitish princes would hardly be called ξωׁ ?μιν, seeing they had nothing more to command. They were at most ωָׂ ?ψִ ?ιν.
The meaning “singers” is not adequately supported by Numbers 21:27, and moreover does not suit the context. δֵ ?ιμִ ?ιμ, rendered by the LXX. sometimes ἀλαλἁζειν, sometimes ὀλολύζειν, occurs only thirty times in the Old Testament (nine of these in Isaiah see List), and means chiefly the howl of woe. But I can’t see why it may not signify other sorts of howling, as howl of rage, howl of vengeance, howl of victory, just as well as our German heulen and the Latin ululare, with which, moreover, it is radically related. It is certainly no flattering expression. The overweening conquerors, that do not spare the people, spare their God as little. They praise their idols as being more powerful (Isaiah 10:10 sq.). Hence the Lord must complain that His name is blasphemed the whole day (comp.
Isaiah 51:13; Isaiah 28:24; Isaiah 62:6; Isaiah 65:2; Isaiah 65:5).
The conclusion is drawn in Isaiah 52:6 : because Jerusalem’s desolation is of no profit to the Lord, but rather an injury to His honor, the Lord will reveal His name, i.e., His being (Isaiah 30:27). Israel shall know what his name is, i.e., what it means, or what sort of a name it is. Whether one think of ΰμ or ΰμδιν or ιδιν, in each of these names, and still more in all together, there lies the meaning of the absolute, eternal, powerful being. In that day points to the time in which the Lord has concluded the restoration of Jerusalem. When this time is fulfilled, one will appear and say: here am I. Then Israel shall know that this is its God, Jehovah.
For He will speak His here am I so powerfully, so precluding all opposition, that all will recognize the Lord and Master of the world. Thus the Prophet has proved that the restoration of Jerusalem must necessarily follow.
__________________
2. THE
Isaiah 52:7-127 How beautiful upon the mountains
Are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace;
That bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation;
That saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth!
8 Thy watchmen shall lift up the voice;
With the voice together shall they sing:
For they shall see eye to eye,
When the Lord shall bring again Zion.
9 Break forth into joy, sing together,
Ye waste places of Jerusalem:
For the Lord hath comforted his people,
He hath redeemed Jerusalem.
10 The Lord hath made bare his holy arm
In the eyes of all the nations;
And all the ends of the earth
Shall see the salvation of our God.
11 Depart ye ! Depart ye! go ye out from thence,
Touch no unclean thing;
Go ye out of the midst of her;
Be ye clean, that bear the vessels of the Lord.
12 For ye shall not go out with haste,
Nor go by flight:
For the Lord will go before you;
And the God of Israel will be your rereward.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 52:7, πָ ?ΰָ ?δ—αִּ ?ωַׂ ?ψ. particip.; Isaiah 52:11, αָּ ?ψַ ?ψ, imper. Niph.; Isaiah 52:12, ξְ ?πεּ ?ρָ ?δ.
Isaiah 52:7, πָ ?ΰεָ ?η is Pilel from πָ ?ΰָ ?δ, for according to the law underlying the formation of these verbs, πָ ?ΰָ ?δ stands for πָ ?ΰַ ?ε. and πָ ?ΰεָ ?δ for πַ ?ΰְֽ ?εַ ?εַ; [see Green § 174, 1]
Isaiah 52:11. δαψε is imper. Niph. from αψψ.
AND 1. In an exalted poetic personification the Prophet describes the actual accomplishment of the restoration of Jerusalem. He sees Jerusalem in ruins and uninhabited, yet the ruins are watched by spirit-spies that wait for the resurrection of the city. And look! A messenger comes with the glad news: Jehovah is King (Isaiah 52:7). And then the spies rejoicing see eye in eye the Lord returning to Zion (Isaiah 52:8).
Then the ruins of Jerusalem are summoned to rejoice that the Lord has redeemed His people and His city (Isaiah 52:9), and has shown the strength of His arm and His salvation to all nations (Isaiah 52:10). Now also there issues at length to the people of Jerusalem the summons to return home from the lands of exile. But, since Jerusalem is now cleansed and sanctified anew, they must touch nothing unclean, and must be cleansed themselves and bear the vessels of Jehovah (Isaiah 52:11). For this cleansing they will have time. For they will not go out in haste as in the flight from Egypt, since Jehovah Himself will both lead their expedition and protect their rear against attack (Isaiah 52:12). It is seen that here, too, the Prophet distinguishes between the city and the inhabitants, and sees in the reunion of both the salvation of the future.
2. How beautiful——of our God.
Isaiah 52:7-10. The words: “upon the mountains … publisheth peace” occur again Nahum 2:1 (Isaiah 1:15), where also, in the second half of the verse, are found the words “for—shall no more pass through thee,” which are a modification of the language of Isa 52:1. If we were correct in pronouncing the passage Isaiah 51:19 to be the original in comparison with Nahum 3:7, it follows that there is a like relationship in the present instance. But apart from that, Nahum in the present instance appears as a dilution of our text. How flat is his δִ ?πֵּ ?δ instead of the very poetical ? ?ξַ ?δΞπָּ ?ΰεεּ ?! Lowth remarks that, “the imitation does not equal the beauty of the original.” And does not this δπδ have the appearance of an attempt to avoid the difficulty of the proper signification of ξδΞπΰεε?
Moreover μΰιερισμςαψ is manifestly a smoother mode of expression, more accordant with common usage, than the harsher and less frequent μֹ ?ΰιֹ ?ερִ ?ισιָ ?αֹ ?ΰ (Isaiah 52:1). And it may be further noted, that ςֲ ?αֹ ?ψ, which Nahum uses for αֹ ?ΰ, occurs shortly before in Isaiah (Isaiah 51:23), so that Nahum 2:1 b (Isaiah 1:15 b) appears to be combined from the elements of Isa 51:23; Isaiah 52:1.
How beautiful (lovely) are the feet. The expression refers neither to the sound nor to the sight of the feet (“that bound like gazelles over the mountains” Delitzsch); but is a poetical metonymy. The feet stand for what they do. The feet walk, come. The coming, the advent of the messenger of good tidings is lovely (so Lowth). The coming over the mountains is also poetic embellishment (comp. on Isaiah 13:4).
It is not probable that ξְ ?αַ ?ωֵׂ ?ψ is to be taken collectively, Why not use the plural directly? And why suppose a plurality of messengers”? It would be neither more poetical, nor historically more likely. , The contents of the glad tidings is presented in a sacred triad. One might say that “peace” is most general (comp. Isaiah 9:5-6 and the greeting ωָׁ ?μεֹ ?νμָ ?λֶ ?ξ), “good” refers more to corporeal goods (comp. 1 Kings 10:7; Job 22:18; Psalms 104:28), salvation more to spiritual salvation (σωτηρία, hence the name of the Redeemer Ἰησοῦς). But all are comprehended in the words thy God reigneth.
The antithesis to this is the dominion of the world-power. “The kingdom of God” denotes the sole dominion of Jehovah on earth, that implies the discontinuance of the dominion of all that is world-power. The return from the Exile represents only the feeble beginning of the restoration of God’s reign. When John the Baptist and Jesus Himself proclaimed that “the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 3:2; Matthew 4:17), the latter was about to lay the immediate foundation of it. But the whole period of the Church is as a pause, during which, along with many outward retrogressions, there is only a quiet, inward extension and deepening, and a weak, partial outward progress (comp. Romans 10:15 [where Paul quotes our Text. Tr.]).
The completion will only take place when the Lord will come again visibly to realize His inward and outward sole dominion on earth (Revelation 12:10; Revelation 19:6). All these periods of time are comprehended in the gaze of the Prophet.
The cry of the messenger of good news comes from without. It is heard in Jerusalem by the φֹ ?λִּ ?ιν [“watchers”]. As Jerusalem still lies waste, these must be invisible, spirit-watchers, as it were the genii of the place. I do not comprehend how any one can think that the prophets are meant here. Were there then prophets in Jerusalem while it lay waste? And yet the message came to Jerusalem and not to the exiles. [The Author’s own conception must be regarded as inferior to any other that has been entertained.
It is objectionable even as introducing heathenish imagery which is wholly foreign to Bible poetry. If these watchers are “genii of the locality as it were,” then, as in effect is said below, the messenger of good news is a similar genius? But the persons of the scene are all personifications, and Jerusalem itself is treated dramatically. It is represented as looking for the good things to come. Watchers are on the look-out, and the expected messenger appears. The language paints the emotions of such a crisis.
The Jerusalem of this picture is not a solitude, as the Author says, but is expressly peopled. It is Jerusalem ideally conceived to suit the spiritual realities of this prophecy. To identify the messengers or watchers as prophets or the like is “an unnecessary restriction and objectionable, as it mars the unity and beauty of the scene presented, which is simply that of a messenger of good news drawing near to a walled town, whose watchmen take up and repeat his tidings to the people within” (J. A. Alex.).—Tr.] χεμφτικis an exclamation as Isaiah 13:4; Isaiah 40:3; Isaiah 40:6; Isaiah 56:6. Like a joyful echo the rejoicing of the spies responds to the shout of the messenger.
But they rejoice not merely at the message, but more that they may behold the instant fulfilment of it. For “eye in eye” (ςιοαςιοNumbers 14:14) they see Jehovah’s return to Jerusalem. That ωׁ ?εּ ?α may not be translated here “to lead back” [Eng. V. “bring again” ] appears from the fact that the bringing back of the people is not yet spoken of, but only the return of Jehovah to Jerusalem, which He had forsaken as a desolate and desecrated place (comp. ξδΞμιλּ ?δ Isaiah 52:5). The spies see the Lord., take possession again of the place of His sanctuary. No man sees that.
As the ξαωׁ ?ψ and the φλּ ?ιν are spirits, therefore, that return is one invisible to human eyes, but quite within the cognizance of the eyes of spirits (hence ςικαςιο) It is accomplished in transcendent, spirit-corporeal reality. The desolate ruins of Jerusalem, however, are summoned to burst forth into joy because Jehovah has compassionated His people (Isaiah 51:3), has redeemed Jerusalem. The Prophet sees in that transcendental occupation of Jerusalem the guaranty and principle of the redemption. The perfects πην and are perfecta prophetica. And parallel with these perfects stands also ηωׂ ?σ Isaiah 52:10. For by the redemption of Jerusalem the spiritual eye sees unveiled also to the nations what hitherto was manifest only to the former.
The Lord hath made bare His holy arm means, that that redemption shall be made manifest to the nations as Jehovah’s act. I do not think, therefore, that the expression here is to be compared to that baring of the arm that the warrior does in order to fight with more freedom. But the sense is as in Isaiah 53:1; Exodus 8:15 (19); Luke 11:20. Jehovah reveals Himself to the nations as the originator of the events by which the redemption of Israel is accomplished, that all the ends of the earth (Isaiah 45:22) may see with eyes the salvation that the Lord has prepared for His people.
3. Depart ye——your rereward.
Isaiah 52:11-12. Now that the Lord has again seized possession of His anciently chosen holy place, the people of Israel also is summoned to return thither from the lands of exile. They must get away (ρεψε comp. Isaiah 30:11; Lamentations 4:15) and go out. But as they are to come to “the holy city,” into which nothing unholy must come (comp. Isaiah 52:1), they must not make themselves unclean by contact with what is unclean.
Yea, as the holy vessels, (which the Prophet implies have been taken away as spoil,) are to be brought back along with them (comp. Ezra 1:7 sqq.), they must undergo the legal requirements of purification. The Prophet has certainly in mind here the Levites and the purification prescribed for them (Numbers 8:6 sqq.) since, during the journey through the desert, the service of bearing devolved especially on them (Numbers 4:47, comp. Isaiah 52:24 sqq., Isaiah 52:49). Our passage recalls Isaiah 35:8, where the way on which the redeemed return is called a holy way, that nothing unclean shall go on, Abundance of time and opportunity will be given to prepare for the holy expedition by suitable purification. For this departure shall differ from the departure out of Egypt in not being in haste and like a flight.
The latter was like a flight, because those long detained by Pharaoh were obliged to avail themselves of the moment he was willing to let them go. For he might suddenly change his mind, even though at that time men were urging their departure (Exodus 12:33; Exodus 12:39). But from the second exile Israel should go forth as lord and conqueror (comp. Isaiah 46:1-2; Isaiah 47:1 sqq.). ητָּ ?ζεֹ ?ο “haste,” which Isaiah uses nowhere else, is manifestly an allusion to Exodus 12:11, where it is said of eating the Passover: “and ye shall eat it αְ ?ηλָּ ?ζεֹ ?ο,” and Deuteronomy 16:3, where in reference to the unleavened bread it is said: “for in haste (αητζεο) thou earnest forth from the land of Egypt.” As ητζεο only occurs in our text and the two passages in Deut., so, too, ξְ ?πεּ ?ρָ ?δ occurs again only Leviticus 26:36, where of wicked and exiled Israel it is said, that, in the land of its enemies, it shall become cowardly and inclined to groundless ξְ ?πֻ ?ρַ ?ϊΞηֶ ?ψֶ ?α. Thus in the choice of the word ξִ ?ϊּ ?εֹ ?λָ ?δּ, there appears to be an allusion intended. Israel went out from Egypt also under the protection and guidance of its God.
But it was in haste and as if fleeing. If then it is promised here that the departure from Babylon (the suffix ξִ ?ϊּ ?εֹ ?λָ ?δּ refers to Babylon) shall not be so, (and that because the Lord will go before the expedition and close it up (ξְ ?ΰַָ ?ρֵּ ?σagmen claudens, alluding to Joshua 6:9; Joshua 6:13; Numbers 10:25), we must suppose that the Prophet implies an activity of God in guiding and protecting in reference to their enemies, such as is described in the passages cited above: Isaiah 46:1-2; Isaiah 47:1 sqq.; comp. Isaiah 45:1-2; Isaiah 48:14; Isaiah 48:20.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 52:1-6. “This comforting assurance applies especially also to the spiritual Zion, the Church of Christ. It should ever arouse itself to be courageous and joyous in the midst of outward distress and weakness. The true Church is the holy city of God in which are found nothing but righteous and holy ones, gloriously adorned with the robe of Christ’s righteousness and with garments of salvation (Isaiah 61:10), strong in the Lord., and in the power of His might, (Ephesians 6:10), able to do all things through Christ who strengtheneth them, (Philippians 4:13), whose strength is mighty even in the weak (2 Corinthians 12:9), whereby they are strengthened with all might according to His glorious power unto all patience and long-suffering with joyfulness (Colossians 1:11), free from the bands of their neck—from sins as the snares of the devil by whom they were taken captive at his will (2 Timothy 2:26). (For because they were sold for nothing under sin, i.e. to the pure loss of their Creator and Lord—they shall also be redeemed for nothing, i.e., without their robber and oppressor receiving any indemnity). So the church becomes a congregation that has neither spot nor wrinkle nor any such thing, but is holy and unblameable (Ephesians 5:27). In the visible church (of the called) there are indeed many unclean, unholy hypocrites, like chaff amid the corn (Matthew 3:12), like bad fish in a net (Matthew 13:48), these will in due time be separated from the believers and elect and be cast into everlasting fire.
Whereas the others shall be led into everlasting life, into the kingdom of everlasting glory (Matthew 25:46). Let us therefore gratefully acknowledge and lay hold on the precious grace of Christ that we may be found among the number of the elect.”—Renner.
2. On Isaiah 52:1-6. “If God has promised us redemption from the wicked world, as He has doubtless done, so ought we to flee out of it every day with all our thinking and imagining and doing. Israel had the command never to settle firmly forever in Babylon, but to await in faith their departure and to be ready for it. To this end Zion should put on her divine strength, her spiritual adornment, i.e. the faith unto righteousness, that she may become as a new, purified congregation free for herself. That came to pass first in the New Testament when God’s people were founded not any more on things earthly, but only upon the gracious word of God which each one can receive in faith. Faith is the greatest power on earth, for it partakes of the omnipotence of God, Therefore God’s people, when they strengthen themselves in faith, will break their bondage, and the world (which has indeed never paid God for the dominion with which it has long plagued us, but was only used for a season against us as a rod of anger) must, against its will, let the church go free.
Israel was indeed a guest in Egypt, and later Assyria ill-used it. But now it is still worse; the world is ever more enraged against us. God will not always let it go on so; but because the heathen, in their conceit, boast and triumph over Israel, as if by their own might they had them and even their God in their power, God will reveal Himself to His people with glorious help.” Diedrich.
3. On Isaiah 52:7. “Est cottatio legis et evangelii et commendatio Christi loquentis per apostolos suos. Qui docent legem, sunt tristes bubones et terrent ululatu suo sed nuntii evangelii habent amabiles pedes, afferunt enim laetissimum verbum pro conscientiis turbatis.” Luther.
4. On Isaiah 52:7. Such poor wretched people, who know nothing of God, are not aware of their own misery and everlasting need, who are over head and ears in sin, and know not how to help the least of them,—I say, what better, greater, more joyful, can happen to such people than such a messenger, who, in the first place, announces peace, i.e. who brings the certain tidings that God would be at peace with us, and neither condemn nor be angry with us on account of our sins. On the other hand, who preaches good tidings of good, i.e. he gives the comfort that God will not only not punish according to out desert, but will give and vouchsafe to us His Spirit, His righteousness and all grace. In the third place, who proclaims salvation, i.e. who promise? and comforts us with the assurance that we shall be helped against the devil and death forever. And to comprehend all in one morsel, who can say in truth to Zion, i.e., to believers, thy God is king, i.e. God Himself will receive thee, He will Himself be thy Lord and King; He Himself will teach and instruct thee with His mouth, He Himself will protect thee, and neither office will He any longer devolve on men, but will execute Himself.” Veit Deitrich.
5. On Isaiah 52:8. “Preachers ought to be watchers (Ezekiel 3:17). Therefore they ought neither to be silent about sins and a scandalous life, nor about spreading doctrine that is false. If they are so, they are dumb dogs (Isaiah 56:9).” Cramer.
6. On Isaiah 52:9-10. “When the conversion of the Jews takes place, it will not happen in a corner, but be so glorious and conspicuous that every one must confess: the Lord has done that.” Starke.
7. On Isaiah 52:11-12. “Dost thou like to keep company with the wicked, and wouldst yet be a Christian? That cannot be; for what communion has light with darkness (2 Corinthians 6:14)? Christians are holy people. How would it ever do to make one’s self unclean with sinners? Therefore sigh in all earnestness: ‘Create in me a clean heart, O God,’ etc. (Psalms 51:12).—The Church of Christ and every true believer has in Christ a faithful guide and leader, a mighty protector in distress. If they journey at His command and in their calling, He goes before them.” Starke.
8. On Isaiah 52:11. This passage is cited by the Roman Catholics as authority for the celibacy of the priests. The Apology of the Conf. August. remonstrates against this application of the passage in Art. 11. De conjugio sacerdotum, p. 248, ed Hase; comp. pp. 241, 27; 244, 41.
On Isaiah 52:12. “Est insignis exhortatio, ut simplici fide in solum Christum, ducem nostrum, respiciamus, qui nos colliget, ut maneamus in verbo et simus tuti ab omnibus peccatis. Sic legimus de quadam Sancta Moniali. Ea cum tentaretur ob admissa peccata, nihil aliud respondit, quam se Christianam esse. Sensit enim, se nec suis malis operibus damnari, quod haberet Christum, nee bonis operibus salvari posse, sed Christum pro se traditam victimam satisfecisse pro peccatis suis.” Luther.
HINTS1. On Isaiah 52:1-6. Comfort and admonition to the church in time of distress. 1) Wherein the present distress consists (Isaiah 52:4-5 : how the world-power has ever been hostile to the kingdom of God); 2) What the church in this distress must correct in itself (Isaiah 52:2 : it must make itself inwardly free from worldliness); 3) What the church has to hope in this distress: a. that the Lord will defend His own honor (Isaiah 52:6); b. that He will not suffer His enemies to have the advantage (Isaiah 52:3 : He can for a while let them appear to have it by seeming to surrender His church to their enemies; but He will, at the right moment, take it away from them again); c. that in consequence of this the church will again become strong and glorious (Isaiah 52:1).
2. On Isaiah 52:7-10. “The lovely harmony brought about in the church by the glad tidings of Christ; 1) In the messengers who start it; 2) In the doctrines that continue its sound; 3) In the hearts that re-echo it.” Lauxmann, in “Zeugnissen ev. Glaubens von V. F. Oehler, Stuttgart, 1869.”
3. On Isaiah 52:11-12. The church of the Lord may come to a situation that will compel it to go out of its previous relations. In that case it is important to observe three things: 1) Not to defile itself by participating in the nature and practices of the world; 2) Not to act with imprudent haste or cowardly fear; 3) To confide in the guidance and protection of the Lord.
Footnotes:dwell as Jerusalem.
been sold for.
for.
Their rulers howl.
all day.
Here am I.
Hark, thy watchmen t They raise the voice! Together they rejoice.
For eye m eye they see, as Jehovah returns to Zion.
Cleanse yourselves.
Heb. gather you up.
[The Author uses the word Spδher. Its common meaning is “spies” or “scouts.” It is therefore so rendered in the text, and also because he interprets the scene as a solitude, and the φλιν as look-outs watching for the resurrection of the city (see ab. p. 565). They are therefore no watchmen in any ordinary sense: not even guardian genii, but only “as it were” ghostly videttes. One must wonder why the service would require many, i.e., enough to get up a scene of popular rejoicing such as the passage depicts. The entire conception is so extraordinary that the temptation has been strong to translate Spδher “watchers,” and thus gloss over what seems to be the Author’s peculiar idea. He amplifies It below.—TR.]
V.—THE FIFTH Golgotha and Sheblimini [sit at my right hand.—Tr.]
Isaiah 52:13 to Isaiah 53:12 The transition from Isaiah 52:12 to Isaiah 52:13 is abrupt only in outward appearance. The attentive reader will see that inwardly there has been due preparation for it. For it was said already, Isaiah 49:3-4, that the Servant of the Lord, by whom the Lord will glorify Himself, will be surprised by this success as the unexpected reward of His afflictions. It is said, moreover, Isaiah 49:5-6; Isaiah 49:8 sqq., that the restoration of Jerusalem will be accomplished by the Servant of the Lord. Also, Isaiah 50:1, it is said, that Israel’s sin was the ground of its repudiation. In the same chapter, ver.4 sqq., is described the readiness of the Servant of the Lord to endure the sufferings laid on Him.
Our present section (Isaiah 52:13 to Isaiah 53:12; the erroneous division of chapters arose from supposing that Isaiah 52:13-15 continues, as the foregoing context, to speak of the people of Israel) shows us how these two particulars are inwardly connected: the sufferings that the Servant of Jehovah must bear, and which make Him appear as a refuse of mankind (Isaiah 49:7) are nothing else than the atoning sufferings that He representatively takes on Himself, but from which He will issue as the high, glorious and mighty Ruler (comp. Isaiah 49:7 with Isaiah 52:13; Isaiah 52:15; Isaiah 53:12).
Chapters 49–57 are like a wreath of glorious flowers intertwined with black ribbon, or like a song of triumph, through whose muffled tone there courses the melody of a dirge, yet so that gradually the mournful chords merge into the melody of the song of triumph. And at the same time the discourse of the Prophet is arranged with so much art that the mourning ribbon ties into a great bow exactly in the middle. For chap. 53 forms the middle of the entire prophetic cycle of chaps. 40–66. It has four chapters of the second Ennead, and thirteen chapters of the second and first Enneads before it, and four chapters of the second Ennead and thirteen chapters of the second and third Enneads after it.
Who is the Servant of God, that forms the chief object of our prophecy? That we are not to think of Uzziah, Hezekiah, Josiah, Jeremiah (Saadia, Grotius, Bunsen, K. A. Menzel, Stoats u. Relig. Gesch. der K�nigr.
Israel u. Juda., Breslau, 1853, p. 298 sq.), or even of Isaiah himself, hardly requires proof at the present day (comp. Gesenius Komm. p. 170 sqq.). Or need we pause to refute the view, that the whole Jewish people is the Servant of God, that therefore the speakers Isaiah 53:2 sqq. are the heathen who recognize that Israel has borne their (the heathen) sins? This is the view that the Rabbins put forward since they have begun to carry on polemics with Christians. But even Christian expositors have joined them, among whom Hitzig is to be named foremost.
But it has often been shown, that Israel did not suffer as an innocent for the guilty heathen, but that it suffered for its own guilt; and that it has not borne its sufferings meekly, but with sullen anger, and, as far as possible, with obstinate resistance. Comp. especially McCaul, The doctrine and exposition of the 53 of Isaiah.—V. Fr. Oehler, Der knecht Jehovah’s im Deuterojesaja II., p. 66 sqq.—Wuensche, Die Leiden, des Messias, Leipzig, 1870, p. 35 sqq. Many Rabbins, indeed, as David Kimchi and Isaak Troki, have modified this view, saying, that not Israel thinks thus of itself, but the heathen will so say, “when they see that the faith of Israel is the truth, and on the contrary their faith is error” (Wuensche, l. c., p. 36). On the other hand, McCaul has called attention to the fact that Isaiah 53:11-12, Jehovah Himself describes the suffering of His Servant as expiatory.—Others understand that by the Servant of Jehovah is meant the ideal Israel, i.e., the higher unity of the nation.
This higher unity suffered, not because it consisted of nothing but guilty ones, but, on the contrary, in spite of its consisting only partially of such. It suffered therefore, because not all had sinned and yet all must suffer, in a certain sense innocently, and is so far a prophecy (not prediction) relating to Christ. So Vatke (Religion des Alten Test., 1835). But to this it is to be objected, that this view amounts to a distinction between the better and worse part of the nation to which the text makes no reference whatever. For it manifestly does not contrast one part of the nation with another part, but the entire nation with the one Servant of God. The Prophet does not distinguish guilty and innocent in the nation.
He sees in the nation only guilty ones. This he utters plainly, ver.Isaiah 6 : “all we like lost sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.”—Others understand “the true worshippers of Jehovah” to be meant by the Servant of God. This is the view that Knobel represents. According to this the Prophet in Isaiah 53:2-6 speaks in the first person plural, “because he puts himself among the people, and would be a voice out of the midst of the totality.” His view of the sufferings of the Servant was only partially that of the nation, for the rest (viz., in respect to the cause of their sufferings) this ought to have been their view. That is, the sufferings of the Exile, which were regarded as punishments for the sins of the nation, concerned (according to Knobel) especially the true worshippers of Jehovah, who obstinately clung to their nationality, and were very zealous for Jehovah and opposed to idols. They were especially the ςֲ ?πִ ?ιִּ ?ιν.
The mass of the people, on the other hand, that did not cling strictly to the ancestral religion, stood in good terms with the heathen, and, on the whole, found themselves in tolerable relations. This explanation is so unnatural and inwardly conflicting that it refutes itself. It would have the suffering Servant of Jehovah represent the true worshippers of Jehovah, and those, that in Isaiah 52:2-6 speak of the Servant in the first person plural, to be the apostate Israelites, constituting the great mass of the nation. Then the worshippers of Jehovah and those apostates are opponents. Yet verily the apostates can not speak of the worshippers of Jehovah with great reverence and deep sympathy. In their mouth the name “Servant of Jehovah” could only be used in mockery.
They could only be supposed to say: It is well that such fools are among us: then the hatred of the heathen will discharge itself on them without hurting us. But that serves them right. Why do they not do as we? Why do they not howl along with the wolves? They might fare as well as we, were they only prudent. In some such way must the apostates speak of the worshippers of Jehovah, if their real sentiments were to appear.
But the words sound quite otherwise, that, according to Knobel, come out of the midst of the nation. They are words of the highest reverence. Knobel feels this himself, and hence he makes the Prophet speak these words, expressing thereby, not what the mass of the people actually thought, but what they ought to have thought! How unnatural! The Prophet of Jehovah, who can only be thought of as a worshipper of Jehovah, speaks as the representative, not of such worshippers, but of the great apostate mass of the nation. He expresses, however, not, indeed, the sentiments that these actually harbored, but such as they ought to harbor!
What comedy is this? Verily, if such a distinction between apostates and worshippers of Jehovah be allowed, the Prophet could only meet the former with rebuke. He could only hold up to them their apostacy and admonish them to bear the infamy of Jehovah with the true Israelites, rather than to roll it off, in craven treachery, on their fellow-countrymen.——According to another view the Servant of Jehovah represents the prophetic class or the prophetic institution. Thus in various modifications especially Gesenius and Umbreit; whereas Hofmann understands that by the Servant of God is meant Christ indeed, but only as a prophet. What is said of the sufferings of the Servant does, indeed, in a general way, apply well enough to the prophetic calling; for the prophets were often enough obliged to suffer distress, judgment, contempt, death for the sake of that calling. Yet one thing remains, that under no circumstances can be said of a prophet, viz., that God the Lord cast on Him the guilt of the people, that He bore the sin of the people, that by His wounds the people were healed and made well.
If, indeed, one is determined to find in our passage only the idea of suffering in a calling and not suffering as a representative, I must say that this is only possible by means of an artful exegesis, and refer to the following exposition for the proof of this opinion. Comp. moreover the Doctrinal and Ethical thoughts.
I hold the Messianic interpretation to be the only one that is natural and founded on the sound of the words. When Knobel affirms that the Old Testament knows nothing of a suffering Messiah, and that Deutero-Isaiah knows nothing of a Messiah at all, it just depends on the way one expounds the passages in question. If one does this in the way exhibited in the above sample of Knobel’s style of exegesis, then one can interpret away from every passage whatever he dislikes, and interpret whatever he likes into it. Whoever sees that Christ is the Lamb of God that bears away the sin of the world according to the eternal counsel of God already revealed in the Old covenant, must recognize the connection between this fact and Old Testament prophecy; he must especially recognize in Isaiah 53 the outline of that plan of salvation.
As, speaking generally, all types of the old covenant combine in the one image of the ξָ ?ωִׁ ?ιηַ, so also, in a narrower sphere, the various typical forms of the Servant of Jehovah, given partly in the nation of Israel generally (Isaiah 41:8 sqq.), partly in the pious core of the nation (Isaiah 14:1-5), partly in the prophets (Isaiah 44:26), finally unite in the one figure of the personal Servant of Jehovah. As the species of primitive rock form both the deepest foundation and the highest summit of the earth’s body, so is Christ at once the original and fulfilment of all prophecy. He is in particular both the inmost core and the crowning summit of all typical forms of the Servant of Jehovah. It is to be observed, however, that the Servant of Jehovah is not a type-form co-ordinate with the types of the prophet, priest, and king. But He represents alone the character of the lowly, unsightly, pitiable “Servant-form” or the “sorrowful form” as far as that is common to all those type-forms. For that the Old Testament knows also a king “of the sorrowful form” is evident from Zechariah 9:9.
Hence it is, of course, not correct to say, that in Isaiah 53 is drawn the form of the messianic Priest, King, or Prophet. For Isaiah 53 treats only of the Servant of Jehovah, and only of the Priest, King, or Prophet, so far as even in these also the poor, lowly Servant appears. Hence, too, one may not say that all the persons of the old covenant “that have ever been designated (as servants and instruments of God) by the name Servant of Jehovah, are servants of God in the Isaianic sense. This specific Servant of Jehovah, that we find in Isaiah 40-53 as type of the poverty and lowliness of the Messiah, does not appear at all in the older writing. When Moses (Exodus 14:31; Joshua 1:1-2; Joshua 1:13; Psalms 105:26; 2 Kings 18:12, etc.), Jacob (Genesis 32:10), the Patriarchs (Exodus 32:13; Deuteronomy 9:27) are designated by this name, it is as the servants of Jehovah, without giving prominence to the form of the servant. What servant-form would one find in the angels, who are also called the servants of God in Job 4:18?
It is, indeed, possible that the idea of a servant-form veiling the inward glory gradually developed from observing the contrasts in the life of a David (comp. Psalms 18:1; Psalms 89:4; Psalms 89:21; Psalms 132:10; Psalms 144:10; 2 Samuel 7:5; 2 Samuel 7:8; 2 Samuel 7:18; 2 Samuel 7:20 sq., etc.), of a Job (Isaiah 1:8; Isaiah 2:3; Isaiah 42:7-8) of the prophets (2 Kings 9:7; 2 Kings 9:36; 2 Kings 10:10; 2 Kings 14:25; 2 Kings 17:23, etc.), yea, of the pious in general (Psalms 19:12; Psalms 19:14; Psalms 31:17; Psalms 35:27, etc.). But we first find this idea crystallized into a fixed form in the second part of Isaiah. Later writers may have taken the expression from Isaiah, and applied it in his sense, especially to the people of Israel (comp. Jeremiah 30:10; Jeremiah 46:27-28; Psalms 136:22). But one must be on his guard about taking every use of the word by later writers in the Isaianic sense.
Thus Nebuchadnezzar (Jeremiah 25:9) is called servant of Jehovah, but certainly not in Isaiah’s sense. Before and in Isaiah, ςֶ ?αֶ ?γ is never found conjoined with any other name of God than ιδεδ. It is remarkable, that Moses, in later writings, beside being called ςαγιδεδ (2 Chronicles 1:3; 2 Chronicles 24:9), is also called ςαγδΰμδιν (1 Chronicles 6:34; 2 Chronicles 24:9; Nehemiah 10:30; Daniel 9:11).
Our prophecy subdivides into three parts. The first (Isaiah 52:13-15) contains the theme of the prophecy; the second (Isaiah 53:1-7 treats of the lowliness of the Servant; the third (Isaiah 53:8-12) treats of his exaltation.
____________________
1. THE THEME OF THE
Isaiah 52:13-1513 Behold, my servant shall deal prudently,
He shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high.
14 As many were astonied at thee;
His visage was so marred more than any man,
And his form more than the sons of men:
15 So shall he sprinkle many nations;
The kings shall shut their mouths at him:
For that which had not been told them shall they see;
And that which they had not heard shall they consider.
TEXTUAL AND Ver.13. πָ ?αָ ?δ–ωָׂ ?λַ ?μ see List. The three-degree climax ιψενεπωׂ ?ΰεπγδ must neither be pressed, nor regarded as without significance. It is a rhetorical expedient for expressing the superlative (comp. ὑπερύψωσε Philippians 2:9; Acts 2:33; Acts 5:31; Ephesians 1:20 sqq.).——That ψεּ ?ν may mean “to raise one’s-self” maybe seen Isaiah 30:18.——The conjunction of ψενεπωׂ ?ΰ and in that order is Isaianic: Isaiah 2:12-14; Isaiah 10:33.
Ver.14. λַּ ? ?ֽ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ–λֵּ ?ο is used here as in Exodus 1:12 (Gesen.). Therefore, with most expositors, I hold the clause λֵּ ?οΞξִ ?ωְׁ ?ηַ ?ϊ–ΰָ ?γָ ?ν to be a parenthesis, that explains why many are astonished at the Servant. In regard to the change of person, there is notoriously great freedom in Hebrew, and also in Isaiah 1:29; Isaiah 2:6; Isaiah 14:30; Isaiah 33:2; Isaiah 33:6; Isaiah 41:1; Isaiah 42:20; Isaiah 14:8; Isaiah 14:21). Haevernick, (Theol. d. A. T., p. 248), Hahn and V.
F. Oehler regard the two clauses with λֵּ ?ο as the two degrees of the apodosis. Haevernick urges that λο does not mean adeo, and in that he is of course correct. It is only the comparative ita, not the intensive tam or adeo. But he is wrong in urging the rarity of the parenthesis in Hebrew, and asserting that λο can only introduce the apodosis. Hahn, who pronounces the change of persons carelessness, which one has not the least right to assume (he does not reflect, however, on the frequency of this usage!) is of the opinion, that as Isaiah 52:11-12 speak of Israel, and Isaiah 52:13 of the Servant, so, too, Isaiah 52:14 speaks first of Israel, and then of the Servant.
But that is quite a superficial construction. For there is a chasm between Isaiah 52:12-13. With ver.13 there begins a new, specifically different section, and it is on the contrary quite unnatural and against the context to refer ςμικ again to the nation. V. Fr. Oehler apparently avoids this unnaturalness by referring also ver.13 to the nation, and letting the transition to the servant begin with λοξωׁ ?ηϊ.
But this construction also does violence to the text.——ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ηַ ?ϊ from ωָׁ ?ηַ ?ϊ, Kal unused, Piel “corrupit, pessum dedit,” is any way ἅπ. λεγ. Analogous formations ξָ ?ωְׁ ?ηָ ?ϊ “corruptio, corruptum,” Leviticus 22:25 and ξַ ?ωְׁ ?ηֵ ?ϊ “pernicies,” Ezekiel 9:1. It is uncertain and indifferent as to sense which is the chief form, ξִ ?ωׁ ?ηָ ?ϊ or ξִ ?ωׁ ?ηַ ?ϊ (syncopated from ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ηֶ ?ϊֶ ?ϊ (Haevernick, et al.) or ξִ ?ωׁ ?ηַ ?ϊ as e.g., ξִ ?γְ ?ξַ ?ν, ξֵ ?ψְ ?λַּ ?α. The expression ξωּ ?ηϊξΰιωׁ is explained from the capability of the preposition ξִ ?ο to express a negation. Deformity away from the man is deformity or disfigurement to an appearance no longer human. ξִ ?ο has an analogous meaning in the clause εϊΰψεξαπιΰγν. For here also the literal meaning is: his form is away from men, i.e., no longer human.
AND 1. These verses, which by their contents necessarily belong to chap. 53 according to the common manner of the Prophet, stand in front as giving the theme. Ver.13 sets forth the final goal: the glory and sublimity of the Servant of Jehovah. But in roughest contrast with this stands the way that He must go in order to reach that goal: deepest suffering, by which He almost loses His human appearance (ver.14). But as the humiliation is deep, so is the exaltation high: the Gentile world and its kings will worship Him that is exalted out of suffering, for they, for whom the salvation appeared not to be destined, will also have a share in it (ver.15).
2. Behold my Servant——they consider.Vers.13–15. The expression ιωׂ ?αιμ points to the reciprocal relation of means and end. He that uses the means that lead to the end is wise. The Servant of God will use no false means, therefore He is wise. δωׂ ?αιμ never of itself has the meaning of ηִ ?φְ ?μִ ?ιηַ; but in the sapienter rem gerere there is impliedly the bene rem gerere (comp. Jeremiah 10:21; Proverbs 17:8).
Hengstenberg sees in ιωׂ ?λιμ a “retrospect” to 1 Samuel 18:14-15 where this word is used of David (comp. 1 Kings 2:3; Psalms 101:2; 2 Kings 18:7). But he seems to me to go too far when, according to the parallel passage cited, he understands ιωׂ ?λιμ to mean the wise administration of government, and Stier has properly protested against this construction. Yet we may suppose there is an allusion involving only comparison and not equalization. For the Servant of God appears here, not indeed as king, but as one that, like David, from a small, mean beginning worked himself aloft to high honor.
But the splendid description of ver.13 anticipates merely the end. This end crowns a course of development of the contrary character. It passes through night to light, per ardua ad astra. The vers.14, 15 say this. For many the Servant of God became an object of horror (ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ν comp. Leviticus 26:32; Ezekiel 27:35; Ezekiel 28:19).
But in the same proportion that He first provokes horror by the deformity of His appearance, He will later provoke wondering reverence. His visage was so marred,etc. [“His look however was in that degree disfigured to the inhuman, and His form not like a son of man’s.” Dr. Naegelsbach’s translation.—Tr.]. These words are a parenthesis (see Text. and Gram.). There occurs accordingly a change of person, which, as Hengstenberg remarks, is explained by the parenthesis containing a remark of the Prophet, in which, naturally, the Servant is spoken of in the third person. But by this the continuation of Jehovah’s discourse in ver.15 is also diverted from the second to the third person (see Text. and Gram.).
Since Isaiah 50:10 the expression ςֶ ?αֶ ?γ “servant” has not been used. Chapters 51, 52 spoke of the people of Israel without applying to them the designation “Servant of God.” According to �hler’s exposition, in Isaiah 52:14 to Isaiah 53:12 also the personal Servant of God is not spoken of; and now Isaiah 52:13 must not be introduction to what follows, but recapitulation of what precedes! After previously speaking of Israel’s elevation, and bringing this contemplation to a close in every respect, is it now again to be discoursed on? A section treating of the personal Servant of God ought to begin with a statement having the Servant of God for subject, and yet this Servant of God must not be the one of whom the new section treats, but the one of which the foregoing section treated, yet without designating it as the Servant of God! In this way ver.13, from being a most suitable and artistic beginning of the new section, becomes an unsuitable conclusion of the foregoing one. Of course one will not venture to take αֵּ ?ο in the sense of “adeo,” which it does not have.
But it is equivalent to “corresponding to, in that degree that,” and involves the meaning that the horror of the people answers to the looks of the Servant, so that the former is prompted by the latter. There will be a certain equality between fortunate and unfortunate consequences, in the same degree that one was horrified at Him, He will also provoke joyful wonder and reverence (Isaiah 52:15). πָ ?ζָ ?δ is “to spring,” and with the exception of our text is used in the Old Testament (in twenty places) only of the springing or spurting of fluids. It occurs in this sense also Isaiah 63:3. This use is especially frequent in the Pentateuch, where the various acts of purification and consecration are spoken of, which were performed by sprinkling with blood or water. Hence very many expositors, following the Vulg., and Syr., as Luther, Vatabl., Forer., Grotius(who yet also approved the θαυμάσονται of the LXX. since he says, “minari est veluti aspergi fulgore alicujus,” for which Vitringa reproves him sharply), Lowth (whom however this exposition does not satisfy), Rambach, Hengstenberg, Haevernick, Hahn,etc. [Barnes, J. A.
Alex., Birks,etc.], have taken πָ ?ζָ ?δ in the sense of asperget, [“to asperse, besprinkle”] and have considered the reference to be to the atoning power of the blood of Christ (“Christus virtutem sanguinis a se fusi instar Magni Pontificis domus Dei applicabit ad purificationem conscientiarum gentium multarum.” Vitringa). This explanation was the one generally received by the church. But it is correctly objected to it, that δִ ?ζָּ ?δ never means “to be-sprinkle” but always “to spout,” “to make burst,” and is always followed by the accusative of the spurted fluid, with ςַ ?μ or ΰֶ ?μ of the remoter object that is spurted on. Perhaps on this account the Targ. Jonat., then Saadia and Abenezra gave the rendering disperget. But apart from this meaning not being grammatically established, it does not at all suit the context.
There has been an effort to change the reading. Thus the Englishmen Durell and Jubb, whom Lowth quotes, would read ιηַ ?ζּ ?εּ, which they then take in the sense of the θαυμάσονται of the LXX.: so shall many nations wonder at him.” But Piel of ηָ ?ζָ ?δ never occurs, and the meaning “θαυμάζεσθαι” would be dragged in. J. Dav. Michaelis would point ιַ ?ζַּ ?δּ after the Arabic naziha (amoenus fuit, oblectavit), accordingly the sense would be: “so shall He be the delight of many Gentiles.” This conjecture, also, must be called too far-fetched. The most satisfactory explanation is the one now approved by most expositors (since Ch.
Dav. Martini,Comment. philol. crit. in Jes. cap. 53 Rost. 1791): “He will make spring up,” which springing up is taken either as the expression of joy or of astonishment, surprise, or of reverence, and is construed in antithesis to ωׁ ?ξξεςμικ Isaiah 52:14. Also Stier, Delitzsch, V. Fr. �hler share this view. I side with them because I know of nothing better. The thought in itself, indeed, seems to me suitable.
For one can, of course, suppose that the Prophet means to oppose to that horror with which the suffering Servant was regarded, a surprised springing up proceeding from respectful astonishment. One might quote as a parallel χָ ?ξεּ ωָׂ ?ψִ ?ινεְ ?ιִ ?ωְׁ ?ϊַּ ? ?ֽ ?ηֲ ?εּ ?Isaiah 49:7. And one might also fittingly refer to Jeremiah 33:9 (εְ ?ψָ ? ?ֽ ?πְ ?ζεּ πεֹ ?ιντָ ? ?ֽ ?ηֲ ?γεּ) and Habakkuk 3:6 (εַ ?ιַּ ?ϊֵּ ?ψπּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν). But nevertheless it remains an unfortunate affair, that πָ ?ζָ ?δ is used in the Old Testament only of the springing or spurting of fluids, and never of persons, and that for the latter use one can only appeal to Arabic analogies (naza, see Gesen.Thes. p. 868 a). In my opinion, it is possible that the reading ιַ ?ζֶּ ?δ is not correct. Perhaps we ought to read ιַ ?ϊֵּ ?ψβּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν as in Habakkuk 3:6.
That would give the same sense by means of a genuine Hebrew word, though one, indeed, not frequently used. For πָ ?ϊַ ?ψ “tremuit, subsilivit” occurs beside only Leviticus 11:12; Job 37:1. If ιַ ?ϊֵּ ?ψ was the original reading in our text, it were alowable to think that the contents of chap. 53 occasioned the substitution of the priestly word ιζδ for the one that may have fallen out in some way, or have become indistinct. [The foregoing review of the state of the question concerning ιַ ?ζֶ ?δ, and the Author’s own despairing attempt, dispose one to say “the old is better” and to adhere to the English accepted version. J. A. Alex., says of the other views and especially of that stated above to be the most generally adopted by modern expositors: “The explanation is in direct opposition to a perfectly uniform Hebrew usage, and without any real ground even in Arabic analogy.
The ostensible reasons for this gross violation of the clearest principles of lexicography are: first the chimera of a perfect parallelism, which is never urged except in cases of great necessity; and secondly, the fact that in every other case the verb is followed by the substance sprinkled, and connected with the object upon which it is sprinkled by a preposition. But since both constructions of the verb “to sprinkle” are employed in other languages (as we may either speak of sprinkling a person or of sprinkling water on him), the transition must be natural, and no one can pretend to say, that two or more examples of it in a book of this size are required to demonstrate its existence. The real motive of the strange unanimity with which the true sense has been set aside, is the desire to obliterate this clear description, at the very outset, of the Servant of Jehovah as an expiatory purifier, one who must be innocent Himself in order to cleanse others.—Another objection to the modern explanation of the word is, that it then anticipates the declaration of the next clause, instead of forming a connecting link between it and the first.”—Some that hold the modern view, as our Author and Delitzsch, may not be charged with what J. A. Alex, pronounces the real motive of it. See above the introduction to this section.
But surely it is easier to conjecture that ιַ ?ζֶּ ?δ has the force and construction involved in the old view (if that rendering can be charged with being no better than conjecture) than to resort to such a conjecture as that of the Author.—Tr.].—The added πּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν by no means represents, in relation to ver.14a, merely a (quantitative) intensification (see immediately below on ver.14 b). Shall shut their mouths is a sign of reverence (comp. Matthew 7:16, and in general Isaiah 49:7). ςָ ?μָ ?ιε is causal: on account of His surprisingly imposing appearance they are dumb. To understand the causal clause ?ώώّ ?λιΰωׁ ?ψμΰρτψεπεΧ as Delitzsch does (“what was never told they see, what was never heard they hear”) the text must read λִּ ?ιΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψμֹ ?ΰρֻ ?τַּ ?ψψָ ?ΰεּ. But the additional μָ ?δֶ ?ν, of which that explanation makes no account, intimates rather that the Prophet lays the emphasis on the antithesis between the Jews and the Gentiles. Hence he adds before ψַ ?αִּ ?ιν the word πּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν.
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
2. THE OF THE SERVANT AS THE LAMB THAT BEARS THE PEOPLE’S SIN
Isaiah 53:1-71 Who hath believed our report?
And to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?
2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant,
And as a root out of a dry ground:
He hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him,
There is no beauty that we should desire him.
3 He is despised and rejected of men;
A man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief:
And we hid as it were our faces from him;
He was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4 Surely he hath borne our griefs,
And carried our sorrows:
Yet we did esteem him stricken,
Smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities:
The chastisement of our peace was upon him;
And with his stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned every one to his own way;
And the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,
Yet he opened not his mouth:
He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before her shearers is dumb,
So he openeth not his mouth.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 53:3. πִ ?αְ ?ζֶ ?δ (comp. Psalms 15:4; Jeremiah 22:28; Malachi 1:7; Malachi 1:12; Daniel 11:21). Isaiah 53:4. ΰָ ?λֵ ?ο. Isaiah 53:5. ηֲ ?αֻ ?ψָ ?δ–ξְ ?ηֹ ?μָ ?μ everywhere else ηַ ?αֻּ ?ψָ ?δ comp. Genesis 4:23; Exodus 21:25. ξְ ?γֻ ?λָּ ?ΰ Isaiah 53:6 τָ ?πַ ?ς.
Isaiah 53:2. ϊֹּ ?ΰַ ?ψ like the Latin forma with the special meaning of the beautiful form, comp. Jeremiah 11:16; 1 Samuel 16:18.——δָ ?γָ ?ψ in parallelism with ϊΰψ spoken of the nature of the environment.——εְ ?πִ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?δεּ is neither the same as εַ ?πִּ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?δεּ nor to be rendered: “that we may see him,” for the latter words express such an absence of ϊΰψ and δγψ that the Servant would be altogether invisible. But επψΰδε is protasis of a hypothetical clause: and did we look at him, there was no such form that we would have had pleasure in him. Isaiah 53:3 gives the meaning of the figure used in Isaiah 53:2 a, and a nearer definition of the homely appearance of the Servant described in Isaiah 53:2 b. We may therefore regard Isaiah 53:3 as in apposition with the logical chief-subject of Isa 53:2, which is also at the same time the grammatical subject in the first clause of Isa 53:2 a.
Isaiah 53:3. πִ ?αְ ?ζֶ ?δ, which is repeated by way of recapitulation in the last clause of the verse, forms the chief conception. Comp. αְּ ?ζֹ ?δΞπֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ Isaiah 49:7,αְּ ?ζεּ ?ιςָ ?ν Psalms 22:6; Obadiah 1:2; Jeremiah 49:15.——In ηֲ ?γַ ?μΰִ ?ιωׁ ?ιν Delitzsch would take ΰιωׁ ?ιν in the sense of viri spectabiles. This plural occurs again only Psalms 141:4 and Proverbs 8:4. In the Psalm it is used of the wicked. In the Proverbs it is, indeed, used in parallelism with αְּ ?πֵ ?ιΰָ ?γָ ?ν. But in our text the Prophet can hardly intend to say, that the Servant is forsaken only by men of respectability, but not by inferior people.
He would represent him rather as forsaken of all, as appears from what follows and Isaiah 49:7. But it is very much a question whether ηָ ?γֵ ?μ may be taken in the sense of “desertus.” For Job 19:14 it is said ηָ ? ?ֽ ?γְ ?μεּ χְ ?εֹ ?αַ ?ι, i.e., my neighbors have forsaken me. Therefore ηָ ?κֵ ?μ is not desertus but deserens. It has an active intransitive sense also in Psalms 39:5 (let me know what a transitory thing I am) and in Ezekiel 3:27 (he that hears let him hear; and he that forbeareth let him forbear). I therefore agree with Hengstenberg, who regards the expression “as corresponding exactly to the ‘from a man’ and ‘from the sons of men,’ Isaiah 52:14.” Then the plural would be chosen in order to intimate by the sound of the word the relation to the ξֵ ?ΰִ ?ιωׁ Isaiah 52:14 ηָ ?γֵ ?μ is desinens, ηγμΰιωׁ ?ιν therefore desinens hominum, i.e., he of men that ceases scil. to be a man. Thus the LXX. render it as regards the sense: εἶδοςἐκλεῖπονπαρὰπάνταςἀνθρώπους; Symm.: ἐλάχιστοςἀνδρῶν; Vulg. novissimus virorum.
The explanation of Hahn: avoidance of men (inf. const. as in αְּ ?ζֹ ?δΞπֶ ?λֶּ ?ωׁ Isaiah 49:7), if not exactly ungrammatical, is still very far-fetched.——ξַ ?λְ ?ΰεֹ ?α occurs in Isaiah only in Isaiah 53:3-4 of this chapter; in Isaiah 53:3 it has the feminine ending that never occurs elsewhere; in Isaiah 53:4 it has the common masc. plural ending (Genesis 3:7; Psalms 32:10).——ιγεςημι can, of course, mean “the confidant of sickness,” if ιָ ?γεּ ?ςַ be taken in the sense of ξְ ?ιֻ ?γָּ ?ς Psalms 31:12; Psalms 55:14, etc., ξεּ ?γָ ?ς Isaiah 12:5, ξֹ ?γָ ?ς Rth 2:1; Proverbs 7:4 or ξֹ ?γַ ?ςַ ?ϊ Rth 3:2. But in the only passage where ιָ ?γεּ ?ςַ occurs beside the present (Deuteronomy 1:13; Deuteronomy 1:15) it means “the acquaintance,” not in the sense of familiarity, but the man known and respected by all, the vir illustris or insignis. The genitive construction resolves itself into the construction of the verb with the accusative of nearer definition. for = ιְ ?γεּ ?ςַ ηֹ ?μִ ?ι ,ιָ ?γεּ ?ςַ ηֳ ?μִ ?ι, i.e., who is known in respect to sickness, as one may say πְ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?ΰτָ ?πִ ?ιν sublatus faciem 2 Kings 5:1. ΰֹ ?αַ ?γςֵ ?φεֹ ?ϊἔθνοςἀπολωλεκὸςβουλήν (LXX.) Deuteronomy 32:28. ϊֹּ ?ςֵ ?ιμֵ ?αָ ?απλανώμενοιτὴνκαρδίαν Psalms 95:10, etc.—The explanation “scitus morbi (better edoctus morbum), i.e., as one put in the condition of knowing about sickness” (Delitzsch) seems to me too uncertain and farfetched.——If we were warranted in reading λְּ ?ξַ ?ρְ ?ϊּ ?ιψ, as indeed 4 Codd. do, or in taking ξַ ?ρְ ?ϊֵּ ?ψ in the sense of ξַ ?ρְ ?ϊִּ ?ιψ, we must translate and explain as Hengstenberg does, according to Leviticus 14:45 : “as one that hides the countenance from us.” But this usage of ξַ ?ρְ ?ϊֵּ ?ψ is not sufficiently attested. It must therefore be taken as substantive (ad form. ξַ ?ψְ ?τֵ ?ΰ sanatio, ξַ ?ωְׁ ?ηֵ ?ϊ vastatio (Olsh. §199 a) in the abstract sense of “veiling.” But the further question arises, whether the abstract meaning applies directly or indirectly, and whether the words ελξρϊψτπινξξπε are to be construed as an independent sentence, or are to be joined with παζδ. If ξρϊψ be taken directly as abstract, i.e., if it be left in its abstract meaning, then one must connect the whole clause with παζδ. For, “according to the veiling of the countenance from him,” would be a sentence without a predicate, to gain which the words must lean on παζδ.
But then their position before παζδ is surprising. One would expect εְ ?πִ ?αְ ?ζֶ ?δλְּ ?ξַ ?ρְ ?ϊֵּ ?ψεπΧ, so that the second half of the verse would begin with παζδ as does the first. But παζδ comes after, and, as remarked above, it corresponds to the παζδ beginning the verse, as a sort of relative, recapitulating conclusion, therefore we must take the words εαξρϊψτπινξξπε as an independent clause, which is also demanded by the accents. Then we must take ξρϊψ as the abstract for the concrete. Veiling the countenance from him would be=the object before which one veils the countenance. Thus αξρϊψεπεΧ would be the same as λַּ ? ?ֽ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψξַ ?ρְ ?ϊִּ ?ιψτָ ?πִ ?ινξִ ?ξֶּ ?πּ ?εּ.
Isaiah 53:5. εδεΰ is opposed to εΰπηπε Isaiah 53:4 b, and this in turn to the δεּ ?ΰ before πωׂ ?ΰ Isaiah 53:4 a; so that here we have such a chain of adversative clauses as in Isaiah 51:12-13, where see.——ξְ ?ηֹ ?μָ ?μ is part. Poal, passive to ξְ ?ηεֹ ?μֶ ?μֶ ?ϊ Isaiah 51:9.——The expression ξερψωׁ ?μεξπε is to be judged as ξεּ ?ρַ ?ψδַ ?ωְׂ ?μ Proverbs 1:3, i.e., “chastisement, education to reason, to a reasonable being” (Hitzig, Zoeckler); ξεּ ?ρַ ?ψηָ ?λְ ?ξָ ?δ Proverbs 15:23, “chastisement to wisdom.” ϊּ ?εֹ ?λַ ?ηַ ?ϊηַ ?ιִּ ?ιν Proverbs 15:31 “reproof to life.” The construction is analogous to that of the participle in the construct state instead of the connection by a preposition.——ηֲ ?αֻ ?ψָ ?δ. One properly looks for a plural, which also occurs elsewhere (Psalms 38:9; Proverbs 20:30). For one cannot suppose that the Prophet would speak only of one mark of a blow. We must then take the word collectively. Its meaning is “vibex, wale,” the marks left by a blow.——πִ ?ψְ ?τָ ?ΰμָ ?πεּ “healing is to us,” is explained as passive of the causative Kal ψָ ?τָ ?ΰ= “to do healing.” On this meaning is founded the construction of ψτΰ with the dative of the person (e.g.
Numbers 12:13; 2 Kings 20:5; 2 Kings 20:8) and (more rarely) of the thing (Psalms 103:3), which occurs along with the construction with the accusative (Isaiah 19:22; Isaiah 30:26; Isaiah 57:18-19, etc.). The word is found used impersonally (i.e., with indefinite subject) in Isaiah 6:10, where we translate: one brought him healing. Then πִ ?ψְ ?τָ ?ΰ is passive.
Isaiah 53:7. πֶֽ ?ΰֱ ?μָ ? ?ֽ ?ξָ ?δ is, according to the accents, to be treated as a perfect and not as a participle. The perfect is used because it expresses here not a transaction accomplished successively, like the being led, but an accomplished, continuing state, the being dumb, standing dumb.
AND 1. Having stated the theme in Isaiah 52:13-15, the Prophet introduces the people as speaking. They testify what was said by implication Isaiah 52:15 b, viz. that they have not believed the announcement of the prophets concerning the Servant that they have heard, and have not understood the revelation of the divine power imparted to them (Isaiah 53:1). Thus it came about that they treated as of no account the Servant of Jehovah who sprang up like a root-sprout out of dry ground (Isaiah 53:2-3). This mean-looking form of the Servant of God is explained by the punishment of our sins being laid on Him, that through His suffering we might find peace and healing (Isaiah 53:4-5). While we wearied ourselves in vain to find the way to salvation, Jehovah cast our guilt on Him (Isaiah 53:6); yet He bore it patiently like a sheep, that mutely suffers itself to be led to the slaughter or to shearing (Isaiah 53:7).
2. Who hath believed——revealed, Isaiah 53:1. At first sight that explanation (commended also by John 12:38; Romans 10:16), seems to deserve the preference, that construes Isaiah 53:1 as the language of the Prophet, by which he expresses the consciousness of having said something incredible to the world. Yet on closer examination we admit that those are right who construe Isaiah 53:1 as the utterance of Israel. For 1) the perfect would be very surprising in the mouth of the Prophet. One looks for ιַ ?ΰֲ ?ξִ ?ιο from him, whereas in the mouth of the people, who, according to Isaiah 53:2 sqq., have the historical appearance of the Servant before them, the perfect is quite in place.
By this Israel gives confirmation that it has, indeed, not believed the prophetic pre- announcement, and assigns thereby, at the same time, the reason why, in His lowliness, it regarded the manifested Servant as of no account. 2) The word ωׁ ?ξּ ?ςϊπε likewise is much more appropriate in the mouth of Israel than of the Prophet. The choice of the word is explained by ωׁ ?ξςε, Isaiah 52:15. With reference to this they designate the prophetic announcement imparted to them as ωְׁ ?ξֻ ?ςָ ?δ, as a thing heard. This is the fundamental meaning properly corresponding to the form of the word. The same underlies directly the meaning “knowledge report” (Isaiah 37:7). But as the something heard must at the same time be a something said, the word can, like the Greek ἀκοή, receive the meaning “announcement, preaching,” in which sense we have already had it, Isaiah 28:9; Isaiah 28:19.
Yet in our text we do not need to have recourse to this meaning, as the original sense suffices perfectly. [The view presented here, taken in close connection with the explanation of Isa 52:15 given above, leads consistently to the following logical connection, viz. It is declared Isaiah 52:15 b: for they to whom it had not been told shall see, and those who had not heard shall consider. Thereupon the Jews are introduced saying: Who has believed our report (i.e., what was reported us, what we had heard)? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed (i.e., to whom has it been made plain that the Lord sent this Servant and had a hand in all that He was and did)? So connected the language of Isa 53:1 appears as an exclamation, which, with what follows, marks the contrast between those that heard and believed a revelation made to others (Isaiah 52:15), and those that did not believe that revelation, though it was their own (ωׁ ?ξςϊπֹ ?ε53:1, a thing heard by us). The language following (Isaiah 53:2 sqq.) proceeds, as the author says, to give the reason why the speakers did not believe, or rather it describes how they who were told did not believe what others did believe who were not the direct recipients of the prophetic announcement of what was to be. And the description is in terms that show how aggravated and perverse the unbelief was.
Thus ver.1 is not simply an indirect statement that none believed, but a double intimation of how some believed, and others, the very ones of whom the contrary was to be expected, did not. This explanation is quite consistent with the facts of salvation, and these facts are so set forth by Isaiah himself and reiterated in the New Testament (comp. Isaiah 45:1-3; Romans 10:19-21; Romans 11:11-12). And this consideration gives great countenance to the view.—Tr.]
The arm of the Lord is a metonymy for that of which the arm is the organ, viz. the almighty power of God (Isaiah 52:10). The arm of Jehovah is not only revealed to him who has seen its mighty efficiency a posteriori, but also to him who has recognized a priori what that arm can do. There is, therefore, an outward and an inward revelation of the divine power. The expression has the latter meaning here.
3. For He shall grow——esteemed Him not. Isaiah 53:2-3.—Israel was ill-prepared to receive the Servant of God when He came. The Rabbins, who in polemics with Christians refer our chapter to the Jewish nation or to individual persons, must, indeed, admit that the ancient Synagogue, whose exegesis was as yet unaffected by these polemics, knew very well of a suffering Messiah (comp. the proofs of this in the writing of Constantin L’Empereur,D. Isaaci Abrabanelis et R. Mosis Alschechi,Comment. in Jesajae prophetiam 30, etc.
Lugd., Batav., 1631, in Wuensche,l. c., and in McCaul,l. c., p. 14 sqq.). Yet all quotations from the writings of the ancient Synagogue given by the authors named prove at the same time that even the most ancient authorities acknowledged the suffering Messiah only very reluctantly and with all possible artful turns and distortions. As an example we may cite how Jonatan Ben Usiel, the Targumist, translates Isaiah 53:2-4; Isaiah 53:7. Isaiah 53:2. Et magnificabitur justus coram eo sicut surculi, qui florent, et sicut arbor, quae mittit radices suas juxta torrentes aquarum; sic multiplicabitur gens sancta in terra, quae indigebat eo. Non erit aspectus ejus sicut aspectus communis, nec timor ejus sicut idiotae, sed erit decor ejus decor sanctitatis, ut omnis, qui viderit eum, contempletur eum.
Isaiah 53:3. Erit quidem contemtus, verum auferet gloriam omnium regum: erunt infirmi et dolentes quasi vir doloribus et infirmitatibus expositus. Et cum subtrahebat vultum majestatis a nobis, eramus despecti et in nihilum reputati. Isaiah 53:4. Propterea ipse deprecabitur pro peccatis nostris et delicta nostra propter eum dimittenter; et nos reputati sumus vulnerati, percussi a facie Domini et afflicti. Isaiah 53:7.
Deprecatus est, ipse exauditus est, et antiquam aperiret os suum, acceptus est. Robustos populorum quasi agnum ad victimam tradet, et sicut ovem, quae tacet coram tondente se, et non erit, qui aperiat os suum in conspectu ejus et loquatur verbum.” One sees that this paraphrase pretty much makes the text say the very opposite of what it intends. The insignificant sprig becomes the splendid, flourishing, holy nation; the homely look of the Servant becomes an aspectus non communis; Isaiah 53:3, it is indeed confessed that He will be despised, but at the same time He will deprive kings of their fame, and by withdrawing His countenance draw contempt to the nation. Isaiah 53:4. The substitutionary suffering is transformed into intercession, and those smitten by God are the Israelites. Isaiah 53:7.
Finally, the Servant prays, and, before He opens His mouth, He is heard; the strong, however, among the nations He sacrifices like sheep, and no one dares to open His mouth before Him. Here the suffering Messiah is directly transformed into a victorious and triumphant Messiah. And it is not in a way that makes one say the translator must have had a different reading or have misunderstood. For that neither was the case appears partly from the fact that the other ancient versions agree exactly with the Masoretic text (see Lowthin loc.), and partly from the Paraphrast translating quite correctly when it suits him. But he simply substitutes a Messiah, such as He must be according to his fancy, for the one described in the text, by which he involuntarily testifies, that in his day men indeed found the information of the suffering Messiah in the prophetic writing, but would not understand it. With this agrees admirably the manner in which the disciples of Jesus received the announcement of His impending passion (Luke 9:45; Luke 18:34).
Just on this account we say, that the people of Israel were badly prepared when the Servant of Jehovah appeared in the midst of them.
Thus the Servant came up like a sprout before him.μτπιε is to be referred to Jehovah, Isaiah 53:1, and not to the subject of the interrogative clause in Isaiah 53:1. For the latter mode of expression, even if not exactly incorrect logically, would be very artificial. One would expect μְ ?τָ ?πֵ ?ιπεּ. The meaning of μτπιε, however, is that the Servant of God so grew up before God according to His counsel and will. ιֹ ?επֵ ?χ is properly “the suckling” (Isaiah 11:8), but is here used of the tender offshoot of a plant [“precisely like the cognate English word sucker, by which Lowth translates it.”—J. A. Alex.]. ιεֹ ?πֶ ?χֶ ?ϊ is every where else used in the latter sense (Job 8:16; Job 14:7; Psalms 80:12, etc.).
The choice of the expression here is perhaps influenced by the Prophet having in mind the prophecy of Isa 11:1 sqq. There he spoke of the revirescence of the Davidic house reduced to an insignificant root-stock, and how this renewing would be by means of “a rod of the stem of Jesse” and “a Branch from his roots.” Although he does not use there the expression ιεπχ, and only by the way mentions the suckling that plays on the hole of the adder (Isaiah 11:8), still one sees that in general the Prophet transposes himself back into the sphere of thought of that prophecy. Hence, more plainly than ιεπχ, does λωׁ ?ψωׁ recall that prophecy (comp.Isaiah 11:1-10). As a root can be said to mount up only in the sense of sending forth a sprout or shoot from itself, so ειςμλωׁ ?ψωׁ is to be understood of the springing up of such a root-sprout (comp. πֶ ?φֶ ?ψωָׁ ?ψָ ?ωִׁ ?ιν, Daniel 11:7). A root in dry ground has little hope of flourishing. This was exactly the situation of the Davidic royal house at the time Christ was born.
When the carpenter Joseph was necessitated by the command of Cζsar Augustus (Luke 2:1) to betake himself from Nazareth to Bethlehem, the house of David and his kingdom were like a root out of dry ground; it had no form nor splendor, and as men looked on him there was no such form that they could have pleasure in him (see Text. and Gram.).
Isaiah 53:3 (see Text. and Gram.). By what means the Servant was brought to the state that He ceased to be a man, is said by the words: “a man of suffering and noted for pain.”—And as one, before whom one veils the face, a despised one, whom we did not regard. According to Hahn, it is the countenance of Jehovah that is hid. It is true, so far as I know, that, often as there is mention of hiding the countenance as a sign of mourning (2 Samuel 19:4; Ezekiel 12:6), or of anger (Isaiah 54:8; Isaiah 59:2, etc.), or of reverence (Exodus 3:6) or in order not to be seen (Exod. 13:45), still our text gives the only instance of doing so in order not to see an object of disgust. Yet this is merely an accident. For the gesture is so natural, and so universal and necessary, for men that there is no need of seeking any confirmation of it in national custom.
But the context is decidedly against the view of Hahn. For our passage only speaks of how the Servant of God appeared to men. The outward appearance of a man from whom God hides His face is by no means necessarily that of an ecce homo.4. Surely he hath borne——his mouth.Isaiah 53:4-7. The Prophet leads us from the outward appearance to what is inward. He shows that this pitiable form of the Servant is not an outside corresponding to His interior.
It was not He that drew that woful fate on Himself by His own guilt, but, according to God’s will and for our salvation, He bears our guilt, and He bears it with the patience of a lamb.—ΰָ ?αֵ ?ο, “surely,” is best construed here in its simple and natural adversative meaning as in Isaiah 49:4. As there the Servant’s hope in God’s righteousness is put in contrast with His apparent ill-success, so here to the outward appearance of sinfulness is opposed the inward truth of His innocence and love that suffers for others.—This is done first by declaring the true ground of these sufferings. They are those that we ought properly to have borne. Therefore He took our pains on Himself (πωׂ ?ΰ comp. Matthew 8:17ἔλαβεν; Leviticus 17:16; Leviticus 20:17; Leviticus 20:20, etc.), and bore our sufferings (Matthew 8:17ἐβάστασεν). When Matth. l. c., refers these words to the trouble that the Lord underwent in healing crowds of sick-folk of every sort, it is not thereby affirmed that only in that sense did He bear our sufferings and pains.
For the evangelist certainly saw in the passion of the Lord the chiefest fulfilment of our prophecy, as well as did Christ Himself (Luke 22:37) and Philip (Acts 8:28 sqq.) and Peter (1 Peter 2:22 sqq.). But we learn from that citation in Matth., that we are not to refer our passage exclusively to the passion of the Lord. In the second half of Isa 53:4, the Prophet by no means repeats merely the thoughts to which the first half was set in antithesis. He adds an essentially new ingredient. For while Isaiah 53:3 only says: “we esteemed Him as nothing,” it is said in Isaiah 53:4 : but we esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted. In πָ ?πεּ ?ςַ has been justly detected an allusion to the plague of leprosy, which in Hebrew is especially called πֶ ?πַ ?ς (Leviticus 13:3; Leviticus 13:9; Leviticus 13:20 sqq.; 2 Kings 15:5).
At the same time one involuntarily recalls Job, of whom his friends entertained the same opinion that the people of Israel express about the Servant of Jehovah (comp. Job 2:9; Job 4:7; Job 8:3, etc.). The position of “God” between “smitten” and “afflicted” intimates that both are referred to God’s doing. The Rabbins reproach Christians with proving from ξλδΰμδιν that the Messiah is both a smitten one and God. To this L’Empereur (p. 7 of the work named above at Isaiah 53:2-3) replies to Abrabanel and Alschech in defence of Christians, that they know very well how to distinguish between convenientia and regimen (i.e. st. absol. and st. constr.).——Wuensche calls attention to the fact, that the thought that the Servant of God took on Himself our guilt occurs no less than twelve times in one chapt.: viz., 1) “He bore our sickness,” Isaiah 53:4 a; 2) “He carried our griefs,” Isaiah 53:4 a; 3) “He was wounded for our transgressions,” Isaiah 53:5 a; 4) “He was pierced for our iniquities,” Isaiah 53:5 a; 5) “The chastisement of our peace was upon Him,” Isaiah 53:5 b; 6) “By His stripes we were healed,” Isaiah 53:5 b; 7) “Jehovah laid on Him the iniquity of us all,” Isaiah 53:6 b; 8) “For the transgression of my people He was stricken,” Isaiah 53:8 b; 9) “When thou shalt make His soul an offering for sin,” Isaiah 53:10 a; 10) “And He will bear their iniquity” Isaiah 53:11 b; 11) “And was numbered with the transgressors,” Isaiah 53:12 a; 12) “He bore the sins of many,” Isaiah 53:12 b. From this appears what eminent importance the Prophet attaches to this thought, and how he cannot leave off extolling this wonderful display of the self-denying love of the Servant of God to men.
Isaiah 53:5. The description of the Servant as pierced and crushed, plainly intimates that the Prophet thinks of Him as mortally hurt, which is, moreover, confirmed by “He was cut off,” etc. (Isaiah 53:8), and by the mention of His burial (Isaiah 53:9), and awakening to life (Isaiah 53:10), and finally by the unmistakable “He hath poured out His soul unto death” (Isaiah 53:12).—ξִ ?τְ ?ωָׁ ?ςֵ ?ιπεּ ξֵ ?ςֲ ?εֹ ?ϊֵ ?ιπεּ; as ξο does not=ὑπό, but is=ἀπό, our sins and iniquities are not the direct origin of His being pierced and crushed, but only the indirect cause of it (Del.).—As ιָ ?ρַ ?ψ or ιִ ?ρַּ ?ψ, is very often used in the sense of “to punish,” and is used in particular of the punishments that God decrees against sin (comp. e.g., Leviticus 26:28; Psalms 39:12; Jeremiah 10:24; Jeremiah 30:11), we must refer ξερψ to the first half of the verse, and must regard this being pierced and crushed for the sake of sin as the punishment that rests on the Servant to the salvation of His people. For ωָׁ ?μεֹ ?ν stands here evidently on the one hand in antithesis to the wounds and stripes, on the other parallel with πִ ?ψְ ?τָ ?ΰ, so that the sense is salvum esse, salus, healing, salvation, corresponding to the fundamental meaning of the word. The second half of the verse, like the first, consists of two members that are parallel in meaning.
Isaiah 53:6 explains how it comes, that the Servant of God, though innocent Himself, has yet to bear the guilt of men. “All we,” says Israel, “like lost sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way.” No distinction is observable here between true and apostate Israelites. There is rather an expression of universal sinfulness. Or did the Servant of God appear only for the apostate? Did, perhaps, “the true worshippers of Jehovah” need no expiation for their sins? That would be a contradiction of the universal Biblical view, that Paul so emphatically utters with special appeal to Old Testament passages (Romans 3:9 sqq., comp. Psalms 14:3; Psalms 53:4; Isaiah 59:2 sqq.).
No, Israel so speaks in the name of all its members. And it seems to me, that Israel has not merely its Babylonian forsakenness in mind, but the total character of its moral status in all times. For it seems to me that the words, Isaiah 53:6 a, according to the whole context, are to be referred, not to the outward, but to the inward condition, the state of the heart. In fact it is of the sins of the people that the context speaks, which the Servant is to bear. Wherein these sins consist is stated Isaiah 53:6 a, viz., that the Israelites were all of them wandering sheep, that had forsaken their shepherd (comp. Numbers 27:17; 1 Kings 22:17; 2 Chronicles 18:16), and were going their own self-chosen way, that gratified the flesh, λμπε and the corresponding ΰιωׁ μγγαε the Prophet utters with the greatest emphasis.
Sinners they all are, even the prophets and the pious. Does not Isaiah 6:5 exclaim: “woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips”? Thus all of them may, in a certain sense, be more or less compared to sheep, that strayed away behind their shepherd (comp. Numbers 14:43, etc.), an went their own way (Isaiah 65:2; comp. Isaiah 42:24 and Isaiah 56:11, where the same words are used). Of course they were divided into misleaders and misled (comp.
Jeremiah 1:6-7; Ezekiel 34:2 sqq.). In fact under some conditions the δִ ?ϊְ ?ςָ ?δ is ascribed to the Lord Himself (Isaiah 63:17).
Israel, therefore, has sinned, and the Servant of God is punished. How does that hang together? Did the Servant, perhaps, accidentally come into the domain of the evil that should come on Israel for the punishment of its sins? By no means. God intentionally laid on the Servant the guilt of Israel. τָ ?πַ ?ς means undoubtedly, “to strike, to hit against one, impingere, obvenire,” in a hostile as in a friendly sense. That is, of course, wonderful, that the sufferings that strike the Servant of God are such as properly ought to strike us, the wandering sheep, but which the hand of God diverts and suffers to fall on His head.
If now the object of this procedure was not to make the just punishment strike the Servant for imputed guilt with the same inward necessity with which it would have struck the actually guilty, and, in fact, that these guilty ones under certain conditions might be free from punishment, then I see not how the Prophet could say: “Jehovah laid on Him the iniquity of us all.”—By that it is surely not said that the Servant “let Himself experience the violent death [occasioned] through [men’s] enmity against God,” but that God laid on Him the guilt of us all. What an injustice! Who without the least fault will let himself be loaded with the burden of another’s faults to his own ruin? Who does not at least protest against it with all his might by word and deed? The Servant of God does not protest. He is dumb.
If the ideas πִ ?πַ ?ωׂ and πַ ? ?ֽ ?ςֲ ?πֶ ?δ were meant to be regarded as of equal value and more rhetorical repetition, it must read πִ ?βּ ?ωׂ δεּ ?ΰεְ ?πַ ?ςֲ ?πֶ ?δ. The placing of εְ before δεּ ?ΰ and the participle gives the clause the character of a conditional clause and simultaneously makes prominent the subject. πָ ?βַ ?ωׂ is “urgere,” “premere.” It is commonly used in respect to violent oppressors (comp. Isaiah 3:5; Isaiah 3:12; Isaiah 9:3 and the πֹ ?βְ ?ωִׂ ?ιν of the Israelites in Egypt, Exodus 5:6 sqq.). In respect to this “oppression” the Servant maintains a passive attitude. Yet there is also a certain activity on His part, i.e., so far as He willingly submits Himself. This is expressed by εδεּ ?ΰπςβδ.
We can therefore translate: He was oppressed (the doing of another), while He (the doing of the Servant) willingly submitted Himself. Hence the Niph. πִ ?βַּ ?ωׂ is a pure passive Niph., while πַ ?ςֲ ?πֶ ?δ is reflexive. This willing submission is emphatically portrayed by a double figure. But because the silent suffering of the Servant (comp. 1 Peter 2:23) would be made prominent, that is twice said of Him which is an index of the patience of the sheep both in the slaughter and the shearing, viz., He did not open His mouth.—And indeed this phrase is put before as if it were a thesis, to be illustrated by examples, and then it follows at the close as designation of the general truth drawn from the special facts. ωֶׂ ?δ, properly nomen unitatis as φֹ ?ΰο, designates here a single, and that a male sheep, such as was prescribed for sacrifice (Exodus 12:5, etc.).ψָ ?ηֵ ?μ is the grown mother-sheep, as lambs were not shorn. The figure of the dumb sheep occurs again Jeremiah 11:19 also Psalms 38:14-15 (Psalms 38:13-14); Psalms 39:10 (Psalms 39:9)). In the New Testament several passages refer to the present one: Matthew 26:63; Matthew 27:14; Mark 14:61; Mark 15:5; John 1:29; Acts 8:32.
Footnotes:Or, doctrine.Heb. hearing.he came up.we saw.Despised and ceasing to be man.noted for pain.Or, he hid as it were his face from vs.Heb. as an hiding of faces from him, or from us.Or, tormented.Heb. bruise.Heb. hath made the iniquities of us all to meet on him.wittingly bowed himself.And.As a lamb is brought to the slaughter.opened.[There is no need of making it appear as if one must choose between the interpretation of John and Paul on the one hand and that of the Author and other commentators on the other. For as Delitzsch, in loc., says: “The references to this passage in John and Romans do not compel us to assign ver.1 to the Prophet and his comrades in office.”—TR.]
3. THE OF THE SERVANT TO GLORY
Isaiah 53:8-128 He was taken from prison and from judgment:
And who shall declare his generation?
For he was cut off out of the land of the living:
For the transgression of my people was he stricken.
9 And he made his grave with the wicked,
And with the rich in his death;
Because he had done no violence,
Neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him;
He hath put him to grief:
When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin,
He shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days,
And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied:
By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many;
For he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great,
And he shall divide the spoil with the strong;
Because he hath poured out his soul unto death:
And he was numbered with the transgressors;
And he bare the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_53:8. ιְ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ηֵ ?ηֵ Pil. only recurs again Psalms 143:5. Usually construed with αְּ, the word is found as here joined with the accusative of the thing Psalms 145:5; with the accusative of the person addressed, as it seems, Proverbs 6:22.—ξִ ?τֶ ?ωַׁ ?ς, the ξִ ?ο here is causal, as in Isaiah 53:5.—Since μָ ?ξεֹ, according to Isaiah 44:15 (comp. Ewald, § 247 d), can certainly be used as singular, all the explanations are superfluous that would refer it to the people of Israel and take πֶ ?βַ ?ς in various senses as in apposition with the whole preceding clause, or with some single word of it. Hence we may follow the Masorets who separate ξτωׁ ?ςςξι from what precedes, and connect it with πβςμξε. Thus ξτωׁ ?ςςξι is to be explained according to Isaiah 53:5, and πβς according to πָ ?βεּ ?ςַ Isaiah 53:4.
Isaiah 53:9. There is not the least grammatical difficulty about translating εַ ?ιִּ ?ϊֵּ ?ο with the indefinite subject “they” (comp. Isaiah 6:10; Isaiah 7:24; Isaiah 8:4; Isaiah 10:4; Isaiah 14:32; Isaiah 18:5; Isaiah 21:9; Isaiah 33:20; Isaiah 34:11; Isaiah 45:24). All the explanations that would make the subject to be the people or God or the Servant Himself are forced and unnecessary. The greatest difficulty is in αְּ ?ξֹ ?ϊָ ?ιε. All the ancient versions express the idea “death.” LXX: καὶδώσω … . τοὺςπλουσίουςἀντὶτοῦθανάτουαὐτοῦ.
Vulg.: et dabit impios pro sepultura et divitem pro morte sua, which Jerome and Theodoret, understand of giving over the Jews to the power of the Romans. Abenezra, first with a ιֵ ?ωׁ ΰֹ ?ξְ ?ψִ ?ιν mentions the view, that αξϊιε here as αָּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊֵ ?ιξεֹ Deuteronomy 33:29 is to be taken in the sense of aedificium super sepulcro erectum synonymous with χαψ. Among moderns, Beck, Ewald and Boettcher (De inferis § 79 sqq.), have approved this view. It is doubtless the most satisfactory according to the context, and it seems almost demanded by the parallelism. But there are grammatical objections, for 1) the word must be pointed αָּ ?ξϊָ ?ιε if it were derived from αָּ ?ξָ ?δ “the height;” 2) αξδ has nowhere the meaning “grave mound,” although the Greek βωμός, which means altar and grave mound, offers an interesting parallel. As long as the Masoretic pointing cannot be proved false we must derive αξϊιε from ξεּ ?ϊ, though it may not give a satisfactory sense.
The predicate εַ ?ιִּ ?ϊֵּ ?ο and the object χαψε we must regard as applying also to the second member of the clause: and they gave with the wicked his grave, and with a rich man. On the other hand the qualification of time also extends backwards to the first member of the clause. For it does not suit to take εΰϊςωׁ ?ιψαΧּ as an independent clause: “and He was with a rich man in His death,” for then δָ ?ιָ ?δ or δεּ ?ΰ must follow ςωׁ ?ιψ, nor does it suit to refer αξϊιε only to ΰϊςωׁ ?ιψ, because a corresponding designation of time is wanting in the first member of the clause. αξϊιε would then answer to the αְּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊεֹ 2 Chron. 22:38 which denotes “when He was dead,” or to the αְּ ?ξֹ ?ϊָ ?ν, Leviticus 11:31-32; Numbers 6:7. The plural ξֹ ?ϊִ ?ιν, however, has an analogy in Ezekiel 28:10, where it is said: ξεֹ ?ϊֵ ?ιςֲ ?ψֵ ?μִ ?ινϊָּ ?ξεּ ?ϊ (comp. the like-meaning ηָ ?μָ ?μξְ ?ξεֹ ?ϊֵ ?ι ibid. Isaiah 53:8, and ξְ ?ξεֹ ?ϊֵ ?ιϊַֽ ?ηֲ ?μֻ ?ΰִ ?ιν Jeremiah 16:4). ξεֹ ?ϊִ ?ιν is the state of death consisting of a number of particulars or degrees. Thus, as is well-known, the Hebrew is wont to designates relations of time and space.
The plural ξεϊιν is therefore the same as in ηַ ?ιִּ ?ιν “life,” πְ ?ςεּ ?ψִ ?ιν “the time of youth,” αַּ ?ηֻ ?ψִ ?ιν “age of young men,” ζְ ?χֻ ?πִ ?ιν “old age,” ρַ ?πְ ?εֵ ?ψִ ?ιν “state of blindness.”—ςַ ?μμֹ ?ΰδξν, the rendering “spite of” is not grammatically supported. For all the passages that are cited in proof (Isaiah 38:15; Job 10:7; Job 16:17; 1 Kings 16:7 comp. Ewald § 217 i; 222 b), on closer examination demand the meaning “because, on account of.”
Isaiah 53:10. The construction ηָ ?τֵ ?υδֶֽ ?ηֱ ?μִ ?ι, not taking δημι as equivalent to or miswritten for δֶֽ ?ηְָ ?μִ ?ι, could not in itself seem strange. For it is no uncommon thing in Hebrew for a verb depending on another verb as object, instead of being subordinated in the infinitive, to be co-ordinated in the same verbal form. Comp. δεֹ ?ΰִ ?ιμαֵּ ?ΰֵ ?ψ coepit inscripsit instead of coepit inscribere (Deuteronomy 1:5), ΰεֹ ?ρִ ?σΰֲ ?αַ ?χְ ?ωֶׁ ?πּ ?εּ pergam quaeram instead of pergam quaerere (Proverbs 23:35); comp. Lamentations 3:3; Hosea 5:11; Isaiah 52:1; Jeremiah 49:19; Zephaniah 3:7; Lamentations 4:14.—But there occurs here the modification that between the dependent and the governing verb there is inserted an infinitive, that on the one hand seems to make that co-ordinate verb superfluous, on the other contains what the other wants, viz.: the designation of the object, i.e., the suffix. We will accordingly have to take γλΰεδημι together, so that both words complete one another.
The Hiph. δημι as causative conjugation has γλΰε for its object, by which the latter is defined in respect to manner. From ηָ ?μִָ ?δ may be assumed a secondary form ηָ ?μָ ?ΰ after ϊֲּֽ ?ηֲ ?μֻ ?ΰִ ?ιν Jeremiah 16:4; from this would be the Hiph. δֶ ?ηֱ ?μִ ?ιΰ, and by rejecting the ΰ, δֶ ?ηֱ ?μִ ?ι like the form δֶֽ ?ηֱ ?θִ ?ι 2 Kings 13:6 (Green, § 164, 1). The meaning of ηָ ?μָ ?δ is doluit, dolorem sensit. The Hiph. will accordingly mean “to give a painful sensation, make painful.” Thus we read Micah 6:13; δֶֽ ?ηֱ ?μֵ ?ιϊִ ?ιδַ ?λּ ?εֹ ?ϊֶ ?κָ “I make painful the beating thee;” Hosea 7:5; δֶֽ ?ηֱ ?μִ ?ιωָׂ ?μִ ?ινηֲ ?ξַ ?ϊξִ ?ιַּ ?ιִ ?ο “the princes make painful heating from wine,” i.e., they bring about painful heating from indulgence in wine. So we may here render δημιγλΰε; He made painful the crushing Him, i.e., He crushed, beat Him in a painful way.—ΰִ ?ρΞϊָּ ?ωִׂ ?ιν is quando posueris. There can be no doubt about the imperf. having the meaning of the fut. exacti (Amos 6:9; Job 8:18; Job 22:13).
As regards the meaning of ΰָ ?ωָׁ ?ν, it is certain that it means “guilt offering” (comp. Umbreit, Die Suende, Beitrag zur Theol. d. A. T., 1853, p. 54 sq.). But one must not urge a sharp distinction between it and ηַ ?θָּ ?ΰϊ. We read immediately after ηθΰΞψαινπωׂ ?ΰ, etc., certainly the Prophet does not speak here according to the rules of the theory of sacrifices.
I think that the effort to accumulate the s sound, and to gain a likeness of sound with ϊωׂ ?ιν was not without its influence in the choice of the words in the little clause ΰρΞϊωׂ ?ινΰωׁ ?νπτωε. ωִׂ ?ιν is used in connection with offering a sacrifice Ezekiel 20:28. Comp. the New Testament phrase τιθέναιτὴνψυχήν John 10:12; John 10:15; John 10:17-18; John 13:37-38; John 15:13; 1 John 3:16.
Isaiah 53:11. ξςξμ (see List), the ξִ ?ο I would not construe as causal with Delitzsch, for not the labor He endured, but the inmost being of the Servant is the ground of His exaltation (comp. Acts 2:24). One will have to take ξִ ?ο either temporally (=statim post comp. Isaiah 24:22; Psalms 73:20 and ξִ ?χֵּ ?υ, e.g., Genesis 41:1), or locally—to take out of the tribulation. ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰֶ ?δ specially favors the latter construction.—ιψΰδιωׂ ?ας is an instance of the same construction as that of ητυδημι explained at Isaiah 53:10 above. It is analogous to ψָ ?ΰִ ?ιϊִ ?ιΰεּ ?ψ Isaiah 44:16.
Isaiah 53:12. For the expression ΰημχμεαψαιν there is only one parallel In the Old Testament, viz.: Job 39:17, where it is said of the ostrich: μֹ ?ΰηָ ?μַ ?χμָ ?δּ αַּ ?αִּ ?ιπָ ?δ “God gave it not a share in understanding.” In this, αιπδ is conceived of as a territory to be distributed in which God assigned not the ostrich a ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ, a portion. Accordingly here, too, ψαιν must be regarded as a region that God divides out: I will assign Him a ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ on or in the region that consists in ψαιν. But then the Servant would only be a partaker along with many equals. His whole reward would consist in His not being excluded from the partition. We must notice that in Job the Kal is used, while we have here the Piel.
The later can have a causative meaning=make ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ “make, give a share,” and the prefix αְּ can refer to this substantive idea ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ and introduce just that wherein the ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ consists. As is well-known αְּ is often used in making specifications (Genesis 7:21; Genesis 9:2; Genesis 9:10, etc., comp. 7:4; 20:22).—Against the explanation of ΰϊΞςφεξιν (see Exeg. and Crit.), the grammatical objection may be raised perhaps, that the nota acc, as a rule stands only before the definite noun. But, on the other hand it is to be remembered that the definite article is often wanting, where the word as a general designation is already rendered definite by the sense (comp. Isaiah 1:4; Exodus 21:28; Proverbs 13:21; Job 13:25).—δςψδ is Hiph., from ςָ ?ψָ ?δ (see List). The meaning of the Hiph., as of the Piel is “evacuare, effundere, to empty, to pour out, flow out.” The word is used again of the soul Psalms 141:8.—πִ ?ξְ ?πָ ?δ is taken by many here as Niph. tolerativum=He let Himself be numbered, although elsewhere this Niph. is used as simple Passive, Genesis 13:16; 2 Chronicles 5:6; Ecclesiastes 1:15.—εδεΰ is, as to form, a departure from the dependence on ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ, though as to substance the clauses εδεΰπωׂ ?ΰ and ιτβις are just as much causal as both those that precede them. The Hebrew shuns long chains of subordinated clauses; it prefers parataxis to syntaxis (comp.
Ewald, § 339 a).
AND 1. With Isaiah 53:8 comes a transition. The Prophet perceives that the Servant of God will be released from the distress, and that from then onward His continuance will be endless. These words stand first like a theme. But the Servant will not go on living on the earth among men that live there, for, on account of the sin of the people He is taken away out of the land of the living (Isaiah 53:8). They have buried Him, too, but honorably, because He never used violence nor deceit (Isaiah 53:9), and His destruction was only in consequence of the divine decree.
When, now, the Lord will have made a sin-offering of the soul of His Servant, the latter will prove to be the head of a new generation, He will continue to live forever, and Jehovah’s counsel will be accomplished by Him (Isaiah 53:10). After tribulation and necessity He will find His satisfaction; by His insight He will help many to righteousness and He will carry their guilt (Isaiah 53:11). Therefore Jehovah will assign to Him the great multitude, and He will divide the strong as spoil—all this as reward for having given His life to death, having been reckoned among transgressors, having borne the sins of many, and continually praying for transgressors.
2. He was taken——prosper in his hand. Isaiah 53:8-10. Having set forth, in what precedes, what and how the Servant will suffer, we are now told what kind of a turning of the scale shall happen after the suffering is accomplished. ςֹ ?φֶ ?ψ, found again only Psalms 107:39; Proverbs 30:16, is undoubtedly “coarctatio, restraint, oppression”. Having a general meaning, the word can also mean imprisonment, but it does not mean exclusively confinement. ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τָּ ?θ conjoined with ςφψ, can only mean judicial procedure. We may even take the two words as a sort of hendiadys.
For “oppression and judgment” is just an oppressive, violent, unjust judicial procedure, “unrighteous administration of justice”, as Delitzsch says. I cannot see why μֻ ?χַּ ?η should not mean “He is taken away”. It means the same as in Isaiah 49:24 (25). As there it is asked: can the prey be taken away from the strong? so here it is said that the Servant shall be taken away from the power of unrighteous oppression. This is one, the negative side of the transition. The positive side is stated in the words: and his generation who will think and declare?
Every thing here depends on recognizing the theme-like character of the first part of Isa 53:8. Then the mention of his living on will not appear to be a “premature” thought. γּ ?εֹ ?ψ is manifestly, as to sense, an allusion to the theocratic promise, Exodus 20:5-6; Deuteronomy 5:9-10, and in respect to the sound an allusion to Deuteronomy 7:9 (“which keepeth covenant and mercy——to a thousand generations”). Whatever may be the fundamental meaning of γּ ?εֹ ?γ, it any way means the γενεά, the generation, and that in various senses. From a temporal point of view, the members of the great chain to which one may compare the human race, or nation, are called γεψ with reference to the generations that succeed one another. Hence both past (comp. Isaiah 58:12; Isaiah 61:4) and future (comp.
Exodus 3:17; Exodus 23:14, 31:41, etc.) generations are called γεψεϊ. Thus there is mention of coming and going generations (Ecclesiastes 1:4), of “another generation” (Psalms 119:13), of a first, second, third, etc., generation (Deuteronomy 23:3-4; Deuteronomy 23:9). Hence γεֹ ?ψ can mean also the present generation, contemporaries (Numbers 34:13, etc.). But because every such generation has a character common to it good or bad, the word acquires also an ethical meaning, and designates a generation as a whole of this or that kind. Hence the meaning, “kind, race” (Jeremiah 2:31, etc.). But because a generation is always the product of another, or also of a head of a race, it involves necessarily the idea of descent, posterity.
Hence to the people of Israel may be said “your generations”, i.e., your coming posterity (Leviticus 23:23), or: “to you and your posterity” (μλνΰεμγψϊιλν, Numbers 9:10). But the total of the generations of posterity can be comprehended as a whole, and this whole be called γּ ?εֹ ?ψ. Comp. Psalms 22:31, where γεψ in this sense stands between ζֶ ?ψַ ?ς and ςַ ?νπεֹ ?μָ ?γ; Psalms 71:18. And such is the meaning of the word here (LXX. γενεὰαὐτοῦ, Vulg. generatio ejus). “His generation” are those descended from him conceived as a unit. This is the meaning of γּ ?εֹ ?ψ in Isaiah 53:10.
Therefore the words: “he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days” is not empty repetition, but explication of the particular intimated in the theme of the discourse. According to the most ancient Old Testament representations, as found in the Pentateuch, there is no continued living in the world beyond. Hence, excepting long life on earth, posterity is for each person the highest wish and happiness. Without posterity, to die is the same as to be condemned. Numerous, measureless posterity means the same as everlasting life. Hence the lawgiver threatens those that transgress Jehovah’s commandments with visitation on children in the third and fourth degree, thus extinction in the third or fourth generation.
On the contrary he promises those that keep the commandments, that the Lord will be gracious to them to a thousand generations (Exodus 20:5-6). The Prophet’s thought here connects with this representation, and hence he uses γּ ?εֹ ?ψ, and not ζֶ ?ψַ ?ς. To him whom men thought to exterminate, the Lord promises γεψ, posterity, a race that shall descend from him, but of a peculiar kind, as appears from what follows (“for he is taken away,” etc.). Who is able to think out and declare the manner of this race?—For the ideas “to think and to declare” both lie in ωִׂ ?ιηַ. It is a poetic word, belonging to higher and choice style, that is used partly of meditative contemplation (Psalms 55:18; Psalms 77:4; Psalms 77:7; Psalms 77:13; Psalms 119:15; Psalms 119:23; Psalms 119:27; Psalms 119:48, etc.), partly of uttering the thoughts (Psalms 69:13, comp. Proverbs 6:22).
When a man is dead he is past begetting posterity. But it is otherwise with this wonderful Servant of God. Hence the nature of His posterity is so inexplicable, because He will have it after He is cut off from the land of the living. βָּ ?ζַ ?ψ (see List) is “to cut,” “to hew,” both “to cut through” (1 Kings 3:25 sq.; 2 Kings 6:2), and “to cut off,” “to sunder” (2 Chronicles 26:21), always, however, with the secondary idea of cutting off sharp or smooth. “Land of the living” is the earth, the dwelling-place of men in the flesh (Deuteronomy 12:1; Deuteronomy 31:13; 1 Kings 8:40), and stands in antithesis to Sheol, the dwelling of the departed, the shades (comp. Job 28:13; Psalms 27:13; Jeremiah 11:19; Ezekiel 26:20; Ezekiel 32:23 sqq.). Why He was so clean cut off from the land of the living the Prophet states in words that recall Isaiah 53:4-5. We have already remarked that the Prophet surprisingly often and certainly on purpose repeats the thought that the Servant must die for the sin of His people.
On account of the sin of my people is a plague to Him. It must be remembered that πֶ ?βַ ?ς (used especially Leviticus 13, 14 of the “plague of leprosy”) beside the meaning of divine punitive judgment, includes that of leprosy.—The Prophet also gives intimation concerning the burial of the Servant. But it is obscure. One gets the impression as if the persons that attended the last stage of the Servant’s earthly history were confused in the Prophet’s view. We cannot be surprised if the Prophet sees forms and scenes whose nature and meaning he does not himself understand. But still his delineation always appears correct to those who are able to test it by the fulfilment.
Here we might say that he saw the wicked, in whose company the Servant of God died, so near together with the rich man in whose grave he was laid, that he construes the relation of all these persons as fellowship with reference to the burial. Yet we do not know where the two malefactors were buried with whom the Lord was crucified. For that they were buried we may definitely conclude from John 19:31, and from what Josephus says of the care of the Jews for the burial even of those who were capitally punished (“so as also … to take down and bury those crucified before the setting of the sun,” Bell. jud. iv. 5, 2). But if they were buried near the place of execution, then their grave was near to that of the Lord, and thus in general the Prophet’s representation appears correct. ΰֵ ?ϊ undoubtedly means “with” also in a local sense (comp. Genesis 19:33; Leviticus 19:13; Job 2:13; Judges 4:11; 1 Kings 9:26). He is buried with a rich man that lies in the rich man’s grave, as much as He is buried with the wicked, who has His grave near theirs.
F. Philippi, whom Delitzsch quotes, has justly remarked that the honorable burial with a rich man makes “the beginning of the glorifying (of the Servant) that begins with His death.” He receives such a burial after severe suffering and a shameful death, because (see Text. and Gram.) He used no violence nor was guile in His mouth. Similar language is found Job 16:17. ηξν and ξψξδ are found conjoined as here, Zephaniah 1:9. “But Jehovah was pleased to smite Him painfully” does not begin a new thought, but connects closely with what precedes, and forms a conclusion. “When thou shalt have made His soul,” begins a new chain of thought: the Servant is buried with a rich man because He had done no wrong, but only Jehovah had decreed to crush Him. The honor put upon the Servant therefore had its ground 1) in that He had done nothing bad, 2) in that His suffering was only in consequence of a divine decree. Guilt and punishment were in themselves something quite foreign to the sinless One; independent of that a divine decree would impose on Him the crushing load of sickness, of pain.
What is subject in the words ΰνϊωׂ ?ινΰωׁ ?νπτωׁ ?ε? As the suffix in πτωׁ ?ε can only relate to the Servant, He cannot be the subject, but only either “soul” or Jehovah. To take the people as subject (Hofmann) is forced and without ground in the context, though I cannot urge against the view that the people are here the speakers. For they cease to speak, Isaiah 53:6. From Isaiah 53:7-10 the Prophet speaks. If “soul” be taken for subject (as by most expositors: Maurer, Umbreit, Stier, Hengstenberg, V.
F. Oehler, Ebrard, Delitzsch,etc.), several objections appear. First of all it is an unusual mode of expression to say the soul has brought a sin-offering. If that points to an antithesis in Himself, one cannot understand why just the soul should be elevated into antithesis to spirit or body. But if “His soul” is as much as to say, “He Himself as contrasted with others,” still it must be said what He offered in sacrifice. For if He brought any sort of offering that another also could bring, then that is nothing that deserves to be made prominent.
But if it would be intimated that He sacrificed what others could not, viz., Himself, then that needs to be expressly said. Many, indeed, (Stier, Hahn,etc.), suppose that this idea is contained in the words themselves; for if the Servant, in so far as He is a living soul, makes a sacrifice, then He gives just Himself as a living soul away unto death. But that is by no means a necessary consequence. For then ϊωׂ ?ινΰωׁ ?νπτωׁ ?ε would only be another way of writing ιָ ?ωִׂ ?ινΰָ ?ωָׁ ?ν. But would these words imply that He offered Himself? V.
F. Oehler urges this very tellingly against Hengstenberg, Stier, Hahn, but overlooks the fact that he condemns his own view. For he gets the “soul” as subject from the context, while the others would take it from the words themselves. But that just the chief thing remains unsaid, is against his view as it is against theirs. Or is ωִׁ ?ιν the same as “to set one’s self,” as Knobel would have, appealing to Ezekiel 23:24; 1 Samuel 15:2; 1 Kings 20:12? But in the places cited ωׁ ?ιν is used causatively=“to make a station, take a station.” And this causative use requires that an object beside that which is inherent be not named.
How would one combine ΰωׁ ?ν with that inherent object? In short, if πτωׁ ?ε is subject, then it is not said what the Servant brings as a sin-offering, and one cannot understand why the Prophet did not write simply ιָ ?ωׂ ?ιν.—I believe (with Hofmann and Delitzsch in their earlier editions, and with Hitzig, but in another sense than his) that Jehovah is subject. The abrupt change of person need give no surprise. We have already had many examples of how common this is to the language in general, and to Isaiah in particular. Comp. Isaiah 2:6; Isaiah 14:30; Isaiah 33:2; Isaiah 33:6; Isaiah 41:1; Isaiah 42:20; Isaiah 45:8; Isaiah 45:21; Isaiah 52:14.
Already in Isaiah 53:6, “Jehovah laid on Him the iniquity of us all,” says that Jehovah gave up His Servant that He might take on Himself the guilt and punishment of the sinful people. Essentially the same is said in the words “He was pleased to smite Him painfully.” For that this means here a smiting to death and not mere sickness as some would have it, is as certain as that the cause of this death was the sin of the people (Isaiah 53:8τωׁ ?ςςξι). But, it is replied, the expiation is offered to God, he does not perform it himself. That is true. But for this reason it is still possible that God may provide the beast of sacrifice, as in the case of Abraham, Genesis 22:8; Genesis 22:13. The Prophet, indeed, did not know how that could happen.
But we, who see the prophecy in the light of its fulfilment, do know (John 3:16; 2 Corinthians 5:21). According to this exposition we can understand why the Prophet did not avoid the abrupt change of person. Had he written ιָ ?ωִׂ ?ιν instead of ϊָּ ?ωִׂ ?ιν, undoubtedly the Servant would have been taken for subject of the clause. Just that He would avoid, and therefore speaks of Jehovah in the second person in spite of His being before and afterwards spoken of in the third person.——But death shall not swallow up the Servant of God. He shall be taken from “oppression and judgment” (Isaiah 53:8), and become the progenitor of a new race. For here the Prophet connects back with the thought of Isa 53:8, that was put first as the theme.
Here, too, we learn what we are to understand by ϊּ ?εֹ ?ψ of Isaiah 53:8. Seed, posterity shall the Servant see.—There underlies the expression, and also the following: He shall prolong His days, primarily the Old Testament representation of life, viz., that the life-necessity of the pious is satisfied by a long life on earth (comp. “that thy days may be long” Exodus 20:12; Deuteronomy 4:40; Deuteronomy 22:7, etc.) and numerous posterity. But he that has these lives to see children’s children (Genesis 50:23; Job 42:16; Psalms 128:6). Yet, though the Prophet’s thought has this connection, it is in the nature of the Servant of God that the Old Testament letter must in Him be fulfilled in a higher sense. His posterity comes not by fleshly generation, but by a life-communication of another sort. How this will be the Prophet does not say.
But we can perceive from ξιιωׂ ?εηη “who will think and declare,” Isaiah 53:8, that he treats here of a life, and answering to it also, of a communication of life of a high and wonderful kind. But the Servant of God will do more than merely live and communicate life. He will also work and create. What was pleasing to God (ηֵ ?λֶּ ?υ comp. Isaiah 44:28; Isaiah 46:10), His counsel and will, shall find its realization by the hand of the Servant (comp. Isaiah 54:17; Isaiah 48:15; Isaiah 55:11).
3. He shall see——transgressors, Isaiah 53:11-12. In Isaiah 52:13-15 God was the speaker; Isaiah 53:1-6, the people of Israel speak; 7–10 the Prophet speaks. The concluding word is put again into the mouth of God Himself. Also in their contents Isaiah 53:11-12, have a great resemblance to Isaiah 52:3-15 as we shall see. Only in Isaiah 52:13 and in Isaiah 53:11 is He that is the subject of the whole prophecy named by His honorable title, and both times the form is my Servant. This my expresses high honor. Not men, but God Himself, with His own mouth, applies to the Servant this honorable title here at the culmination of this prophecy relating to Him.
Isaiah 53:11 connects with what precedes, and continues the description of the ascent from lowliness to highness. The tribulation was night, in which one saw nothing (comp. Isaiah 50:10). The seeing shows that it grows light (see Text. and Gram. on ξφξμ). It is possible that the Prophet combines both constructions [the temporal and the local meaning of ξִ ?ο, viz. “after and away from out of the tribulation of His soul He shall see”], which we are not able to reproduce in our language. Is αγςϊεcognitio sui or cognitio sua?
I believe with most expositors that the former is meant. For the latter only Malachi 2:7 can be quoted; and there it is doubtful whether we ought to render conservant or custodiunt cognitionem. As the lips are not the seat of knowledge, the latter is more probable, and then the sense would be: the mouth of the priest must reprove those that depart from right knowledge. But then γςϊ is not doctrine, but knowledge. And so also in our text the assured meaning “cognitio,” therefore in the passive sense “cognitio sui” is to be preferred. Without knowledge, indeed, there is also no faith (Romans 10:14).—φַ ?γִּ ?ιχ is “as a righteous man.” δφγιχ is causative Hiph.: “to prepare righteousness;” hence the construction with μְ.
As the one that has the righteousness, He can be the means of others obtaining it. Here, also, the Prophet can hardly have understood the deep import of his words. For we cannot assume that he had a clear knowledge that the “righteousness that avails with God” would be alone in the possession of Him who acquired it by His blood (Romans 3:21-26).—μָ ?ψַ ?αִּ ?ιν, “to many,” answers to the New Testament τοῖςπολλοῖς (e.g.Matthew 20:28; comp. 1 Timothy 2:4; Romans 5:18, where for οἱπολλοὶ is simply πάντες). It expresses the majority, the great mass, compared with which single exceptions vanish, and in so far it is almost the same as “totality.” ςεπϊνινπμ, He will bear their iniquities, cannot relate to that “bearing” that consists in sufferings in the place of others (Isaiah 53:4). For we are here in the condition of glory. Hence “to bear” here can only relate to that priestly bearing that the Mediator accomplishes by the ever-continued presentation of His merit before God (Hebrews 7:25).
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
VI.—THE SIXTH The New SalvationIsaiah 54The fifty-third chapter retained its ground color, black, to the end. For the Prophet purposely once again accumulated the dark images of suffering in the twelfth verse, although from Isaiah 54:8 on he had let the light of the Easter morning dawn. It is as if he designed to paint the edge of his mourning ribbon dark black, so that it might appear in sharp relief. Spite of this, chap. 54 has a close inward connection with what precedes. For was it not said already Isaiah 53:10, that the Servant will have seed, and in Isaiah 54:12 that a great crowd shall be given Him as spoil? Have we not read Isaiah 52:10, that the arm of the Lord shall be revealed before all nations, and that all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of God?
Is it not represented in Isaiah 49:12 sqq., that Zion, though a forsaken wife, shall have countless children? And is it not intimated Isaiah 49:6 that this unaccountable increase of the children of Zion will be because the Servant of God is made the light of the Gentiles? This thought now forms the chief contents of chap. 54 viz.: that Zion, apparently forsaken and repudiated, shall be made happy by a wonderful blessing of children, and that by reason of the righteousness of the Servant being imparted to men far beyond the limits of the natural Israel.
The chapter has two parts: 1) The rich blessing of children a fruit of the eternal grace of Jehovah (Isaiah 54:1-10); 2) Israel’s state of salvation is one extending on all sides (Isaiah 54:11-17).
_______________
1. ZION’S RICH OF A FRUIT OF THE ETERNAL GRACE OF JEHOVAH
Isaiah 54:1-101 Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear;
Break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child:
For more are the children of the desolate
Than the children of the married wife, saith the Lord.2 Enlarge the place of thy tent,
And let them stretch forth the curtains of thine habitations:
Spare not, lengthen thy cords,
And strengthen thy stakes;
3 For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left;
And thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles,
And make the desolate cities to be inhabited.
4 Fear not: for thou shalt not be ashamed:
Neither be thou confounded; for thou shalt not be put to shame:
For thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth,
And shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood any more.
5 For thy Maker is thine husband;
The Lord of hosts is his name;
And thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel;
The God of the whole earth shall he be called.
6 For the Lord hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit,
And a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God,
7 For a small moment have I forsaken thee;
But with great mercies will I gather thee.
8 In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment;
But with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee,
Saith the Lord thy Redeemer.
9 For this is as the waters of Noah unto me;
For as I have sworn
That the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth;
So have I sworn
That I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.
10 For the mountains shall depart,
And the hills be removed;
But my kindness shall not depart from thee,
Neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed,
Saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 54:1. ωֹׁ ?ξֵ ?ξָ ?δ under ωָׁ ?ξֵ ?ν. Isaiah 54:4. ΰμΞϊιψΰι—λָ ?μַ ?ν in Niph. Isaiah 54:5. ςֹ ?ωֶׂ ?δ. Isaiah 54:8. πּ ?ΰֲ ?μֵ ?κְ ,ωֶׁ ?φֶ ?σ—χֶ ?φֶ ?σ. Isaiah 54:10. ξְ ?ψַ ? ?ֽ ?ηֲ ?ξֵ ?κְ.
Isaiah 54:3. δεֹ ?ωִׁ ?ια causative from the neuter ιָ ?ωַׁ ?α “to be inhabited,” Isaiah 13:20; Jeremiah 17:6; Jeremiah 17:25; Jeremiah 30:18.
Isaiah 54:5. ςωׂ ?ικ (see Exeget. and Crit.) is subject, ιδεδ is in apposition with it, and αςμικ is predicate. The plural αֹּ ?ςֲ ?μַ ?ικְ is to be explained by αֹּ ?ςֵ ?μ being used here for αַּ ?ςַ ?μ, and being inflected and construed accordingly (see Green, § 202, 2). But why not simply αְּ ?ςָ ?μַ ?ιִ ?κְ ?? I think for this reason: because after the overthrow of the Old Testament Theocracy a re-marriage, as it were, was necessary, a re-founding of the former relations. The plural, as remarked, draws the plural ςωַֹׁ ?ιִ ?κְ after it.
Isaiah 54:6. χְ ?ψָ ?ΰָ ?κְ is a rare form for χְ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?κְ (comp. Isaiah 60:9).—ΰωϊπςεψιν is still dependent on αְּ before ΰωׁ ?δςζελδ.—The imperf. ϊִ ?ξָּ ?ΰֵ ?ν is used because, not a definite, solitary fact, but something that often happens is to be thought of.
Isaiah 54:8. ωֶׁ ?φֶ ?σχֶ ?φֻ ?σ is a genuine Isaianic play on words (comp. Isaiah 1:4; Isaiah 1:23; Isaiah 5:7; Isaiah 7:9; Isaiah 8:10; Isaiah 22:5; Isaiah 24:3-4; Isaiah 24:16 sqq.; Isaiah 25:6; Isaiah 27:7; Isaiah 28:7; Isaiah 28:10 sqq.; Isaiah 29:2; Isaiah 32:7; Isaiah 32:19, etc..).
Isaiah 54:9. The LXX translates ἀπὸτοῦὕδατοςτοῦἐπὶΝῶε. It seems therefore to have read ξִ ?ξֵּ ?ι. But the whole translation of the verse is so confused that one sees the translator knew not what to do with the text. Symm., Theod., Vulg., Targ., Jon., Syr., Saad. read λִּ ?ιξֵ ?ι. Also Matthew 24:37 (comp.
Luke 17:26) seems to favor the reading λιξι with its ὥσπεραἱἡμέραιτοῦΝῶε, though the passage is not properly a quotation of our text. Yet most CODD by far read λιΞξι, In Stier and Theile’s Polyglott, the reading λιξι is not quoted at all. Moreover the following ξιΞπη, as also the relation to the foregoing ωׁ ?φσχφσ favors the reading λιΞξι.—ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ cannot be construed pronominally, for the contorted construction that ensues, and the following λֵּ ?ο forbid it. We therefore take it as an adverb = λַּ ? ?ֽ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ (Jeremiah 33:22; Ewald, § 360, a).—πωαςϊιξ ?ֵֽ ?ςֲ ?αֹ ?ψ is construed as ΰֲ ?φַ ?εֶּ ?δξֵ ?δַ ?ξְ ?θִ ?ιψ Isaiah 54:6.
AND 1. Sing, O barren——be inhabited.
Isaiah 54:1-3. Of course the Prophet addresses Jerusalem or Zion, yet not as a local congregation, but as representative of the whole nation. And it is true also, that He has in mind the Israel of the Exile, yet not of the Exile in its temporal limitation, but in the prophetic sense, that is so far as this comprehends in one view the Israel of the Exile with the subsequent time to the downfall of the outward Theocracy. For the Israel to which he speaks here is the ωֹׁ ?ξֵ ?ξָ ?δ “desolate,” that is no more αְּ ?ςεּ ?μָ ?η “married,” but is forsaken and repudiated by her husband (comp. Isaiah 54:6; Isaiah 49:21). The old, outward Theocracy sets, is broken as one shivers an earthen vessel.
In so far Israel is despised, repudiated, forsaken by its husband. But from the broken shell issues the kernel that from the beginning was hid, in the shell till the period of ripeness. And this kernel now enters on a new existence, in which it develops to a greatness and glory, in comparison with which the greatness and glory of its former stage of existence almost vanish. For the narrow house becomes a mighty edifice under which all nations of the earth (Isaiah 54:3), find room. The Apostle Paul uuderstands by this new, grand edifice the “Jerusalem from above that is the mother of us all” (Galatians 4:26-27). And this “Jerusalem from above” is nothing else than the New Testament Zion, which itself, in turn, in the visible militant Christian Church, has only the first and initial stage of its existence.
It is therefore a right meager construction when rationalistic expositors find nothing more said in our passage, than that Jerusalem after the Exile will be more populous than before, and that the people in the land will not have room, and consequently will spread out, and that to the south and to the north, i.e., toward Edom, Syria and Phoenicia (thus Knobel, Seinecke, etc.). What is to be understood by βειν Isaiah 54:3 we shall see below at that verse.
Rejoice O barren, recalls the words of Hannah’s Song of Solomon 1 Samuel 2:5 : “so that the barren hath borne seven,” where the additional thought occurs that the one having many children proves to be an ΰֻ ?ξְ ?μָ ?μָ ?δ, an exhausta viribus. μΰιμγδ is one that had never hitherto borne children (Judges 13:2). If Zion be meant here, which we are to regard as the antitype of Sarah (Isaiah 2:1-3), and we may add also of Hannah, still barren cannot refer to the fact that Jerusalem during the Exile was robbed of her children and during that time bore no more (Delitzsch). According to that we would need to understand the blessing of children to mean the children that should be born in Jerusalem when it would be rebuilt. The ςχψδ is rather the hidden kernel of the “spiritual Israel,” within the “fleshly Israel,” that is not yet released from the shell, that has not attained an independent existence. Although the children of the fleshly Israel have felt more or less the influence of the spiritual Israel, yet so far as such is the case, they are only children of an invisible mother, whose existence is latent, and who on this account must be reckoned as not bearing.—The same mother that is called barren is afterwards called desolate. Here the word itself (ωׁ ?εξξδ) shows Jerusalem when rebuilt cannot be meant.
For the rebuilt Jerusalem is no longer “desolate” and is not less a married wife than she had been before. But the New Testament Zion implies the destruction of the outward Theocracy, and thus the apparent dissolution of the former relation between the latter and God. Just then, the Prophet would say, when Zion in respect to its outward situation will be desolate, a lonely woman forsaken of her husband, just then the new Zion will develop out of it and have a much richer blessing of children than Zion had before in its Old Testament form. ωׁ ?εξξδ is the destroyed, wasted, solitary one (comp. Lamentations 1:13; Lamentations 3:11). αςεμδ (comp. Isaiah 62:4-5), according to the representation of the relation between Jehovah and Zion as a married one, designates Jerusalem as the Theocracy in whose stability appears also the stability of that married relation.
Isaiah 54:2. As a measure of the greatness of the promised blessing of children, the Prophet calls on Zion to widen the place of her tent, i.e., she must prepare an extended surface for the erection of her tent for dwelling. For it is not probable that ξχεν designates the interior of the tent. What follows of itself shows that the extent of that interior will be great. πָ ?θָ ?δ here does not mean “to stretch or strain” (Isaiah 44:13), but “to expand” (Isaiah 40:22; Isaiah 45:12). The third person plural is used in the sense of the indefinite subject=let them expand. The Prophet implies that Zion may become concerned lest her dwelling be too much extended, and that she would check the expansion.—He therefore calls on her not to do so: ΰμΞϊηωׂ ?λι, “do not oppose, hinder it” (Isaiah 58:1).
For all the nations of the earth are to find their spiritual dwelling under this tent. Corresponding to the greatness of the tent, the ropes must be lengthened and the pins be set firmly. But it has been justly remarked that strengthening the stakes refers not only to the greater resistance required for a tent of greater dimensions, but also to the fact that this is to be no more a momadic tent, but is to be a tabernacle continuing forever (Isaiah 33:20).
Isaiah 54:3. For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left. There appears in these words to be an allusion to Genesis 28:14, “and thy seed shall be as dust of the earth, and thou shalt break forth (εּ ?τָ ?ψַ ?φְ ?ϊָּ) to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south.” One sees from this passage also, that the Prophet does not merely name the right and left side (north and south) because breaking forth on the west would be hindered by the seas and on the east by the desert. But, spite of the comparison of the fastened stakes, the Prophet entertains the thought of an issuing forth in an appointed way. In such a connection the two lateral directions are ever named (comp. Genesis 24:49; Numbers 20:17; Numbers 22:26; Deuteronomy 2:27; Deuteronomy 5:32; Isaiah 9:19, etc.).—When it is further stated: and thy seed shall possess (ιָ ?ψַ ?ωׁ as frequently, Deuteronomy 2:12; Deuteronomy 2:21-22; Deuteronomy 9:1, etc.), the nations, we must remember what has been already said by the Prophet, Isaiah 49:6; Isaiah 49:12; Isaiah 49:18, sqq.
We learn from these passages that the seed of Israel shall not merely take possession of some nations, but of all nations, and not of lands by expelling the inhabitants, but actually of the inhabitants themselves. For these themselves shall become the seed of Israel. But Zion shall wonder to see herself surrounded by a countless posterity, and how she came by these many children (Isaiah 49:21 sqq.)—The seed of Israel will also make desolate cities to be inhabited. That the Prophet does not mean the desolate cities of Palestine that are to be repeopled, appears from the whole context which has a much loftier aim. Men are not wont to choose desolated places for residences. Colonists prefer to lay out a new city, rather than settle in the ruins of an ancient one.
But the seed of Zion penetrates to all nations and seeks out even ruined nations, destroyed and desolated regions. It has in fact the mission of bearing new life everywhere that men are found.
2. Fear not—the Lord thy Redeemer.
Isaiah 54:4-8. In the name ωׁ ?εξξδ “desolate,” that is given to Zion, Isaiah 54:1, there is an intimation of a dreadful catastrophe. There will then come a time when Zion will no more be the “married wife” as heretofore, but “desolate.” That will, any way, be a severe and alarming crisis. In reference to just this critical time, Zion is called on not to fear, for, spite of the blow that seems to threaten annihilation, she will not come to shame (comp. Isaiah 45:16-17). She is further exhorted not to become depressed by the sense of shame, for she will actually have no occasion to blush with shame (comp.
Isaiah 33:9). Yea, she will even forget the shame of her youth, and remember the reproach of her widowhood no more. The Prophet, therefore, distinguishes two periods of that time that precedes the issuing of the new Zion out of its Old Testament shell, viz., the youth and the widowhood, and both are designated as periods of reproach. The youth is the commencement period until David. It is the period when the Theocracy had a miserable existence, distressfully asserted itself in the midst of heathen nations, sometimes, as in the days of Samson and Elijah seeming to be lost in the struggle with its enemies, especially the Philistines. The widowhood denotes the period of exile, not merely the Babylonian, but also the Assyrian and the Roman exiles.
For just with the beginning of the last named was coincident the issuing of the New Testament Zion from its Old Testament shell. In what follows is given the reason why Zion need not fear being brought to shame (Isaiah 54:5-8).
Isaiah 54:5. Although apparently no longer “married,” Zion still has an “husband,” and He is identical with her Maker. Can then the Maker suffer His work to be destroyed? Were that not a reproach to Him? And is it conceivable that Jehovah, who is the Maker here, will let Himself be loaded with this disgrace? Therefore He that is Jehovah, and indeed Jehovah of hosts, the Lord and Commander of all heavenly powers, He is the Maker of Israel and also its husband.
What security in these titles? And the same is true of the predicates given to God in what follows. What kind of a βְ ?ΰֻ ?μָּ ?δ “redemption “must that be, that proceeds from the Holy One of Israel (comp. Isaiah 41:14; Isaiah 43:14; Isaiah 48:17)! Can He be faithless to His word, unmerciful, cruel? And beside all this, this “Holy One of Israel” is the God of the whole earth (comp.
Genesis 24:3). He will therefore not have merely the will, but also the power to redeem Israel.—But if Jehovah was hitherto Israel’s Maker, Husband and Redeemer, why is He so no more? When we look exactly, He has not ceased to be.
Isaiah 54:6. He, in fact, calls Israel back to Him as a woman forsaken (Isaiah 60:15; Isaiah 52:4), heart sore (properly, mortified in spirit, comp. Isaiah 63:10; Genesis 6:6); as a man calls back the beloved wife of his youth, after having once scorned her.
Isaiah 54:7. Only a small moment did the Lord forsake His people. But this moment of giving pain He will make good again by so much greater mercy. The centrifugal ςֲ ?ζα shall have a corresponding centripetal χַ ?αֵּ ?υ (comp. the remark at Isaiah 43:5.
Isaiah 54:8, states the occasion of this momentary infliction of pain. It was the welling up of wrath, which, however, only prompted a momentary hiding of the face (comp. Isaiah 8:17; Isaiah 59:2; Isaiah 64:6).—ωֶׁ ?φֶ ?σ has plainly the same meaning as ωֶׁ ?θֶ ?σ “super-abundance,” that is often used of a great flood of water and welling up of anger (Proverbs 27:4; Psalms 32:6; Job 38:25; comp. Isaiah 8:8; Isaiah 30:28; Isaiah 66:12). But here, as the antithesis of “everlasting kindness, it does not mean a lasting overflow, but only a momentary boiling over, like, say, the boiling over of a kettle. Therefore I allow myself to translate “in Gluth der Wuth” [an effort to copy the paronomasia of the original. See other attempts quoted in J. A. Alex., in loc.—Tr.].
3. For this——hath mercy on thee.
Isaiah 54:9-10. The Prophet supports the foregoing promise of “everlasting kindness “by giving it equal rank with the promise made to Noah (Genesis 8:21 sq.; Isaiah 9:8 sqq.). Jehovah Himself calls this promise an everlasting covenant (Genesis 9:16). And on this covenant, as on an immovable basis, rests the present stability of the earth. Here then the promise that the Lord will no more be wroth with Zion is put on a par with this covenant. If by Zion is to be understood the Israel of the exile, thus the fleshly Israel, then, indeed, as Hendewerk remarks, the Lord did not keep His word.
But we have seen above under Isaiah 54:1, that the spiritual Israel is meant. Thus ζΰֹ ?ϊ Isaiah 54:9 relates to the turn in Israel’s affairs described in Isaiah 54:1-8. And as the general abstract ζΰϊ refers to that whole stage of the Theocracy’s development, so also ξּ ?ιπηwaters of Noah as pars pro toto, represent by metonymy the whole Noachian period. But from what follows, it appears that the Lord makes prominent a central point in the two periods. That is He makes the promise just given to Zion parallel with that given to Noah. He calls both an oath, although the word “to swear” occurs neither in what precedes, nor in the places in Genesis that have been cited.
But when the Lord gives His word, it is always an oath in substance, though it may not be as to form. For whether He expressly says it or not, when the Lord gives His word, He stakes His honor, and so His very divinity, as a man does the highest good he has, his salvation. χָ ?φַ ?σ and βָּ ?ςַ ?ψ are related to one another as the inward sensation and outward manifestation. But βςψ here, as often, designates the real divine acts of judgment as a rebuking (comp. Isaiah 17:13; Psalms 9:6; Psalms 68:31; Psalms 80:17).—Finally in Isaiah 54:10, the Lord gives another image of the immovable fixedness of the covenant He makes with Zion. It shall stand more firmly than mountains and hills. For though these are elsewhere taken as the image of what is firm and immovable (Psalms 36:7; Psalms 65:7; Psalms 104:5; Psalms 104:8), still here and in other passages (Isaiah 24:18-20; Habakkuk 3:6; Job 9:5; Job 14:18; Psalms 46:3-4; Psalms 114:4; Psalms 114:6), the possibility is also recognized of mountains shaking, leaping, and even falling down.
But such a possibility is positively denied in respect to the grace of God and His covenant of peace (covenant whose aim and consequence is peace, Numbers 25:12; Ezekiel 34:25; Ezekiel 37:26). In regard to the formula of assurance in Isaiah 54:10, it is to be remarked that this sort of thing occurs four times in this section. The first two times it sounds quite simply, “saith the Lord,” Isaiah 54:1; saith thy God, Isaiah 54:6. But toward the end, where the pathos of the Prophet rises, the formula grows to “saith the Lord thy Redeemer,” Isaiah 54:8, and “saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee,” Isaiah 54:10.
Footnotes:Hinder it not.possess.depressed.she was scorned.2. ISRAEL’S OF EXTENDS ON ALL SIDES
Isaiah 54:11-1711 O thou afflicted, tossed with tempest, and not comforted,
Behold, I will lay thy stones with fair colours,
And lay thy foundations with sapphires.
12 And I will make thy windows of agates,
And thy gates of carbuncles,
And all thy borders of pleasant stones.
13 And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord;
And great shall be the peace of thy children.
14 In righteousness shalt thou be established:
Thou shalt be far from oppression; for thou shalt not fear:
And from terror; for it shall not come near thee.
15 Behold, they shall surely gather together, but not by me:
Whosoever shall gather together against thee shall fall for thy sake.
16 Behold, I have created the smith
That bloweth the coals in the fire,
And that bringeth forth an instrument for his work;
And I have created the waster to destroy.
17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper;
And every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn.
This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord,
And their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_54:11. ςָ ?πι see List.—ρֹ ?ςֲ ?ψָ ?δ is part. Kal from ρָ ?ςַ ?ψ “tumultuari, to storm, be moved by tempests, to be hunted” (comp. Jonah 1:11; Jonah 1:13; Hosea 13:3).—πֻ ?ηָ ?ξָ ?δ is perf., for as part. it would need to read ξְ ?πֻ ?ηָ ?ξָ ?δ (comp. on Isaiah 53:7).—αְּ ?before ρλּ ?ιψιν cannot be taken strictly as instrumental, For the stone is not the instrument with which one lays a foundation, but only one of the means. One may therefore only regard αְּ as instrumental in the wider sense, unless it may be treated as a species of αְּ essentiae. It were, indeed, not Impossible to translate with Gesenius, “super saphiros.” But there occurs no instance of designating the basis on which something is founded by αְּ In this sense everywhere ςַ ?μ is used (Psalms 24:2; 155:5; Amos 9:6; Son 5:15).
Isaiah 54:12. We may make particular note here of the grammatical construction. According to Hebrew usage, what is made of any stuff is not described as the product of the stuff, but the material is put in apposition with the object to be made, or the object made is put in apposition with the material. Thus 1 Kings 18:32, “he built the stones an altar.” Here the object made is in apposition with the material. But the reverse occurs Exodus 38:8, “All his vessels he made brass,” i.e., brazen. The Hebrew conceives of the thing fabricated as a particular form of appearance of the material of which the artist makes it.
This form of expression may be owing t its poverty in respect to adjective forms. In our text, therefore, the construction μΰλπιΰχψη and μΰαπιηλυ is to be understood like the immediately preceding εωׂ ?ξϊιλγλγωׁ ?ξωׁ ?ϊιο, only that in the two cases first named the Hebrew way of conception appears more pregnantly. For it is in general possible in Heb after. the verbs ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δ ,πָ ?ϊַ ?ο ,ωָׂ ?ν, to designate that into which something is made not merely by μְ, but also by the simple accusative.
Isaiah 54:13. This verse may be treated as dependent ωַׂ ?ξְ ?ϊִּ ?ι on or as an independent normal clause.—, ψַ ?α as third pers. perf. masc. Kal from ψָ ?αַ ?α does not occur elsewhere. It must therefore be construed as adjective.
Isaiah 54:14. ϊλεππι is Hithpalel with assimilated ϊ. The meaning is “to make ready, fast.” What follows suits very well this construction of φγχδ in a subjective sense. First the imperative ψηχι seems strange, if a promise is given and not an exhortation. Then ςωֶׁ ?χ means “the oppresio, violence,” in an active sense. The meaning “terror” is badly supported by Isaiah 38:14.
Isaiah 54:15. δֵ ?ο with almost a hypothetical significance, see Ewald, § 103, g.—ξֵ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊִ ?ι stands here instead of ξֵ ?ΰִ ?ϊִּ ?ι, as in Isaiah 59:11 ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν for ΰִ ?ϊָּ ?ν. These are solitary instances of this use that became frequent only later. One may not cite Genesis 34:2; Leviticus 15:18; Leviticus 15:26 as analogous examples. For in these passages ΰεϊָ ?δּ is really nota accusativi, because ωָׁ ?λַ ?α that precedes the word in all the passages named, involves there the transitive meaning of “lying with, sleeping with.” But Joshua 14:12 can be quoted as an example of this isolated use.—ξִ ?ι before βָּ ?ψ stands here in the sense it has when at the point of transition from an Interrogative to a relative meaning. Comp. Isaiah 44:10; Isaiah 50:10.
Isaiah 54:16. μξςωׂ ?δε is not=“for his use;” for the smith forges swords not for his own use. But μְ is here = secundum. Therefore he produces an implement, a weapon according to his workmanship, i.e., such as answers to his manufacture in general and to his individual craft in particular.
AND 1. O thou afflicted——pleasant stones.
Isaiah 54:11-12. The foregoing strophe promised Zion a wonderful blessing of children, the “benedictio vere theocratica,” as the fundamental condition of national well-being in the largest measure. Now the blessing is extended to all. Zion was wretched, hunted, comfortless in her youth and widowhood. Lo-nuhama [not comforted] recalls Lo-ruhama [not having obtained mercy] Hosea 1:6. But now Zion shall mount so high in splendor and glory that her walls shall consist of sapphires bedded in stibium, her doors of carbuncles, yea, her border-walls of precious stones.
What a contrast between this past and the future which the Prophet has in mind, and which of course has also its stages ! For it is not realized at once, but only by degrees, until it is accomplished in the image of the future that the Apostle John portrays in Revelation 21:18 sqq. λּ ?εּ ?οְ is a paint made of sulphuret of antimony or grey stibium, Arabic Kohl, hence alchohol; to which is related the Hebrew λָּ ?ηַ ?μ “to paint,” Ezekiel 23:40, see Herz. R. Enc. XIII p. 446; IX. p. 607. The stones shall be bedded in stibium.
It was a custom to paint around the eyes with a shining black paint, which 2 Kings 9:30 is called ωׂ ?εּ ?νςֵ ?ιπַ ?ιִ ?ναַּ ?λּ ?εּ ?οְ. So also the stones of the walls shall be set in costly stibium instead of mortar. Their edges therefore shall have its color, and the stones themselves the effect that stibium imparts to the eyes. This explanation may be harmonized with the mention of ΰַ ?αְ ?πֵ ?ιλּ ?εּ ?οְ in the list of materials collected by David for the building of the Temple, 1 Chronicles 29:2, by supposing that there λּ ?εּ ?οְ means stones prepared in a peculiar manner unknown to us. But the stones of the foundation shall be blue sapphires (Job 28:6; Job 28:16). The pinnacles of the walls (ωׁ ?ξωׁ ?εϊ, plural form occurring only here, properly the sun-beams, hence the projecting points, pinnacles of the wall, ἐπάλξεις) shall consist of λּ ? ?ַֽ ?γְ ?λֹּ ?γ (comp.
Ewald § 48, c). This word, which only occurs again Ezekiel 27:16, is likely connected with λִּ ?ιγεֹ ?γ § scintilla (Job 41:11), and designates a shining, sparkling stone. The LXX translates ἴασπις; modern writers understand it to mean the ruby or carbuncle, a stone of red hue. The gates shall consist of ΰαπιΰχγη (ἄπ. λεγ. from χָ ?γַ ?η “acccendit, exarsit,” comp. χַ ?γַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ “febris ardens,” a precious stone of fiery appearance, thus probably carbunculus, small glowing coal). πְּ ?αεּ ?μ cannot mean here the boundary line, for the wall itself is such for the city, and it has already been spoken of. And there is no Biblical authority for a boundary wall that enclosed also the territory of the city extra muros, i.e., a sort of Chinese wall. We will therefore need to take βαεμ in the sense of that which is bounded, i.e., of the city territory that is bounded by the wall, a not unfrequent meaning (comp.
Genesis 10:19; Exodus 10:14; Exodus 10:19; 1 Samuel 11:3; 1 Samuel 11:7 and the Latin finis). This city territory shall be paved with choice stones (ητυΰαπι a general expression found only here). Such is the understanding of our text that the author of the book of Tobit had, for he writes: “And the streets (πλατεῖαι) of Jerusalem shall be paved (ψηφολογηθήσονται, laid in mosaic) with beryl and carbuncle and stones of Ophir,” Tob 8:17. He had therefore the idea of a tesselated pavement.
2. And all thy children——saith the Lord.
Isaiah 54:13-17. After these intimations of an outward glory equally grand and symbolical, the Prophet turns to the inward blessings that relate to the sphere of intelligence, of the life of the soul, of right-living. “All thy children,” he says, “shall be Jehovah learned,” i.e., taught by Jehovah. Thus he promises knowledge, and in fact the highest and most infallible, since Jehovah Himself is its source. Kindred expressions occur Isaiah 44:3; Joe 3:1 sq.; Jeremiah 31:34, while their fulfilment is declared in the New Testament in such passages as John 6:45 (διδακτοὶθεοῦ); 1 Thessalonians 4:9 (θεοδίδακτοι); Acts 2:16 sqq.; Hebrews 8:10 sqq.; 1 John 2:20. Where the Lord is Himself and alone the teacher, there the result can only be the deepest and most universal satisfaction for spirit and soul. For what the Lord teaches is the true wisdom.
But that is not mere theory, but also practice as well, and satisfies the whole man.—Israel so taught cannot practice unrighteousness. It must be holy as its Lord is holy. By the exercise of righteousness it shall itself be established; for righteousness exalts a nation (Proverbs 14:34). Israel must not, as the world does, regard as good everything that furthers its own interest. It must not in impending danger, itself practice unrighteousness and violence. For in fact it has nothing to fear.
It must be on its guard both against unrighteousness and alarm. It must be neither insolent nor despondent. ξְ ?ηִ ?ϊָּ ?δ is “fractio, consternatio,” in a subjective or passive sense (comp. Proverbs 8:3; Proverbs 14:28). For it (viz., the subject of ξηϊη) shall not come near (fem. in a neuter sense) thee.
Isaiah 54:15. In connection with the statement of Isa 54:14, that Israel need not fear, the Prophet now sets forth the reason. First he does not deny that there may be hostile conspiracies against Israel. Behold, they shall surely gather [“they band together in bands,” Dr. N—’s. rendering.—Tr.]. βּ ?εּ ?ψ has this meaning of banding together in a hostile sense also in Psalms 56:7; Psalms 59:4; Psalms 140:3. But though that may happen it is not from Me, says the Lord. Whoever, then, without Jehovah’s approval, bands together at Zion (the neighborhood of conspirators is ever hostile), He will, as it were attracted like birds are said to be by the rattlesnake, fall on thee and so dash to pieces (comp. Luke 20:18).
Isaiah 54:16. And because God the Lord “causes iron to grow” and has taught men to make swords of it, and that for the ξωׁ ?ηιϊ “the waster” to use for destroying, so also He has the power to compel the creature of His hand not to use his destructive efficiency on Israel.—I cannot treat the clause εΰ֞ α֞ ξωׁ ?ηιϊμηαμ as the apodosis. The sentence rather affirms that the Lord made the weapons not for play, but of course for destruction. But opposed to Israel, the weapons shall fail in their mission, although they have that mission from God. From iron weapons the transition to the fleshly weapon is easy, viz., to the tongue, which is often compared to weapons of iron and is called worse (Psalms 55:22; Psalms 57:5; Psalms 64:4; Jeremiah 9:3; Jeremiah 9:8; Jeremiah 18:18). Every such tongue that shall raise itself in legal strife with Israel shall be proved by the latter to be a ψָ ?ωָׁ ?ς, criminal and guilty (Isaiah 50:9).
A brief word in conclusion finishes the discourse. This (ζΰϊ) refers back to the rich promise of blessing of the chapter. This is given to the servants of Jehovah. Isaiah intentionally speaks here for the first and only time of servants of Jehovah. Manifestly there is intended an antithesis to the Servant of Jehovah that plays so prominent a part in chap. 53. After that chapter the Prophet has nothing more to say concerning the Servant of Jehovah.
But he has still to indicate how the salvation from the Saviour will be conveyed to those that need and are worthy of salvation. The expression ςַ ?αְ ?γֵ ?ιι “servants of Jehovah” occurs again 2 Kings 9:7; 2 Kings 10:23; Psalms 118:1; Psalms 134:1; Psalms 135:1. Now to these servants of Jehovah the promise of this chapter is given, pointing out, as it were, their inheritance and the righteousness acquired for them. Beck (Die Cyrojes. Weiss., p. 161) even recognized that φγχϊν forms an antithesis to ϊψωׁ ?ιςι. The enemies of Israel shall dash to pieces (Isaiah 54:15), and if they contend before a judgment bar, shall be condemned.
But the servants of the Lord shall, as the seed of the Servant of Jehovah (Isaiah 53:10; Isaiah 53:8), inherit the glory that is promised to Him, and obtain the righteousness which He the Righteous One, according to Isaiah 53:11, shall impart to the many.
Footnotes:I lay.in stibium.will found thee.pinnacles.rubies.Be for from oppression.on thee, i.e., dash to pieces on thee.after his craft.righteousness from me. AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 54:2. “God dwelt in the Old Testament with His divine service in the Tabernacle, which was fifty ells broad and a hundred ells long. But it is not accomplished with this in the New Testament. For the stakes must be set out much further, because Christ will reign from one sea to the other (Psalms 72:8).” Cramer.
2. On Isaiah 54:4-5. “We do God no honor when we are so very much afraid of our spiritual enemies. O, how joyful and assured we can be when we have God for a friend! Luke 12:32; Romans 8:31.—A believing follower of Jesus cannot perish. He is as a living member united to Christ his Head. Will the head let one of its members be reviled, and not rescue its honor? Luke 18:7-8.—The timid and shy ought not to be made more timid and shy, but one ought to comfort and cheer them up. 1 Thessalonians 5:14.”—Starke.
3. On Isaiah 54:5. “Habebis maritum non Mosen, non Petrum, non Paulum, non papam, etc., sed Dominum qui fecit te.” Luther. In the plurals αςμιοςωιο, the old theologians found an adumbratio mysterii S. S. Trinitatis: “sponsi vel sponsoris tui factores tui Jehova.” Foerster.
4. On Isaiah 54:6-8. What is all time in comparison with eternity? Therefore what are especially the exile-periods of Israel, even the longest, the Roman exile, in comparison with the everlasting communion of the nation with its Lord? Therefore what are the tribulations of Christendom compared with the everlasting rest that is promised to the people of God? Hebrews 4:9.
We ought, therefore, in the greatest distress, while sighing: O, Lord, how long! never to forget that with the Lord a thousand years are as one day. We ought to remember that every earthly period of time is for the Lord but a moment. For the prize of everlasting bliss, an earthly moment of tribulation may well be endured.—“Ratio non potest credere, momentum et punctum esse tentationem, sed putat aeternam et infinitum esse, quia tantum in praesenti sensu haeret, nihil sentit, vidit, audit, cogitat, intelligit quam praesentem dolorem et praesens malum. Quare spiritualis haec est practica, omnia apparentia spectra relinquire et assuefacere cor ad non apparentia, hoc est fide in verbo haerere.”—Luther.
5. On 54. 9. “Nonnunquam pluit, ut sit species aliqua futuri diluvii, non tamen redit diluvium. Quoties homines cernunt unam nubeculam ascendentem, turn putant rediturum diluvium. Hoc est, levis tentatio frangit animum, sed oportet, ut sic ex fide in fidem proficiamus. Nisi nonunquam desperatio incideret, non disceremus vere credere.” Luther.
6. [On Isaiah 54:11-12. “In the foregoing chapter we had the humiliation and exaltation of Christ; here we have the humiliation and exaltation of the Church; for if we suffer with Him, we shall reign with Him.” Isaiah 54:12. “That which the children of the world lay up among their treasures, and too often in their hearts, the children of God make pavements of, and put under their feet, the fittest place of it.” M. Henry.]
7. On Isaiah 54:11-12. “The color display of precious stones in which the New Jerusalem shines is more than childish painting. Whence then have the precious stones their charm? The ultimate ground of this charm is this, that in all nature everything stretches up to the light, and that in the mineral world the precious stones represent the highest stage of this ascending process of inward absorption. It is the process of self-unfolding of the divine glory itself, that is reflected typologically in the ascending scale of the play of color and in the transparency of the precious stones. Therefore the high-priest bears a breast-plate with twelve precious stones, and on them the names of the twelve tribes of Israel, and therefore Revelation 21. takes the picture of the New Jerusalem, that the Old Testament Prophet here sketches (without distinguishing the last time and the world to come), and paints it in detail, adding to the precious stones, which he names individually, also crystal and pearls. How could that be explained if the stone-world did not absorb in itself a reflection of the eternal lights, from which God is called πατὴρτῶνφώτων, and were it not implied that the blessed will some time be able to translate these stony types into the words of God out of which they have their being?” Delitzsch.
8. [On Isaiah 54:13. “The church’s children, being born of God, shall be taught of God; being His children by adoption, He will take care of their education. It was promised (Isaiah 54:1) that the church’s children should be many; but lest we should think that being many, as sometimes it happens in numerous families, they will be neglected, and not have instruction given them so carefully as if they were but few, God here takes that work into His own hand: They shall all be taught of God, that is, they shall be taught by those whom God shall appoint, and whose labors shall be under His direction and blessing. He will ordain the methods of instruction, and by His word and ordinances will diffuse a much greater light than the Old Testament church had. Care should be taken for the teaching of the church’s children, that knowledge may be transmitted from generation to generation, and that all may be enriched with it, from the least even to the greatest.” M. Henry.]
9. On Isaiah 54:16 sq. “Verily He is also with our enemies. But not to give them success against us, but to restrain them from us, and precisely not to let them succeed. God says, He is also there when weapons are forged against us; He is also there when they sally forth for our destruction. Thus He will hold them, so that with all their equipping they will do nothing. If our almighty Friend Himself is with our enemies, we may well have no fear of any enemy. God causes the weapons of all the world to be forged so soft that they can do nothing to His children armed with a panoply by His word. So shall it be also with tongues that blaspheme against us. We will convict them, and in that they shall have their judgment.” Diedrich.
10. [On Isaiah 54:17. “The idea is, that truth and victory, in every strife of words, would be on the side of the church. To those who have watched the progress of discussions thus far on the subject of true religion, it is needless to say that this has been triumphantly fulfilled. Argument, sophism, ridicule, have all been tried to overthrow the truth of the Christian religion. Appeals have been made to astronomy, geology, antiquities, history, and indeed to almost every department of human science, and with the same want of success. Poetry has lent the charm of its numbers; the grave historian has interwoven with the thread of his narrative covert attacks and sly insinuations against the Bible; the earth has been explored to prove that ‘He who made the earth and revealed its age to Moses was mistaken in its age,’ and the records of Oriental nations, tracing their history up cycles of ages beyond the Scripture account of the creation of the world, have been appealed to; but thus far, in all these contests, the ultimate victory has declared in favor of the Bible.—Those who are desirous of examining the effects of the controversy of Christianity with science, and the results, can find them detailed with great learning and talent in ‘Twelve Lectures on the Connection between Science and Revealed Religion,’ by Dr. Nicholas Wiseman, Andover, 1837.” Barnes.]
HINTS1. On Isaiah 54:1-3. Thoughts equally applicable in preaching on missions to the Jews and to the heathen. As long as the Old Testament, fleshly Israel had the husband, the spiritual Israel was unfruitful. But when that fleshly Israel had become desolate, then the spiritual Israel became free and began to stir itself, to develop its soarings and activity. And with what results!
As soon as it was no longer important where one must worship, but the chief concern was how one must worship, and that one must worship “in spirit and in truth,” immediately to the true Israel was opened the way to the heathen, and to the heathen the way to Israel. And from that moment Zion became the mother of countless heathen children. And these, who hitherto had been without God and without hope in the world, now suddenly gained a Father, a home and a child’s rights that are eternal. In the spiritual Israel, which is one with the Christian church, there is for this reason the uniting centre between Jew and Gentile. The Jews should recognize in the church of the gospel the kernel of their Theocracy long since broken up, and the fulfilment of all the promises and hopes of the Old Covenant. And the Gentiles should see that by means of the Christian church they may become children of Abraham, and thus be grafted into the old holy olive tree (Romans 11:17 sqq.).
2. On Isaiah 54:2-8. “An urgent call to gospel mission work. 1) God wills it. 2) Fear not. 3) God is with thee.” Dr. Thiele.
3. On Isaiah 54:7-14. “The great mercy of the Lord. 1) How deep it goes, a. from God’s heart (great mercy, Isaiah 54:7); b. from an eternal purpose of grace (with everlasting grace, Isaiah 54:8). 2) How firm it stands, a. on God’s oath (Isaiah 54:9); b. when everything gives way and falls (Isaiah 54:10). 3) How it raises up (Isaiah 54:11-14).” Scheerer, Manch. Gaben u. Ein G., 1868, p. 284.
4. On Isaiah 54:10. “It is true, histories give us examples of mountains being displaced and sinking away; but that the Lord Jesus ever forsook or cast out a believing soul, of that no man will find an example. Ah! how should He forsake that which, when it forsakes Him, He seeks, with such great, divine patience and long-suffering, to restore again, and calls to it: Return again, thou backslider, and I will not change my countenance against thee, for I am merciful; I will not keep anger forever (Jeremiah 3:12).”—Scriver.
5. On Isaiah 54:11-13. “There are names for you! Whoever will judge by them must say that God is ungracious towards the church, and is angry with it and punishes it. For to be wretched, suffer all weathers, be comfortless, as God Himself here confesses of Christians, that is very hard and does not go off without vexation. What becomes then of the assurance: I will not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee? The comfort is given above, it shall in the first place be the anger of a father, accordingly it shall not endure long, it is but for a moment.
With this agrees the Prophet here, and says how God would adorn and embellish the church with sapphire pavements, crystal windows, and gates of rubies. One must not think of this as happening in a physical sense. The Holy Ghost means the spiritual adornments, that all her children, i.e., all true Christians are taught of the Lord. That is, they have the Holy Ghost, and by faith in Christ much peace. For the hearts know God, that He is gracious; they look to Him for all good, call on Him in every distress, experience His gracious deliverance and help. Therefore, let it storm as it may, the heart is still joyful in God.
These are the sapphire, crystal, rubies that are found in the church, and with which she is embellished. But note particularly what it means, to be taught of God. For it does not mean what the Anabaptists and other deluded spirits dream, that God converts the people by some particular revelation. But God teaches by the office of the ministry, which He has ordained for men here on earth, that in the name of His Son Christ Jesus they should preach repentance and forgiveness of sins, and baptize. With such preaching and baptism is the Holy Ghost, and He kindles in hearts reliance on the grace of God and impels to obedience. That then is what is meant by being taught of God, and goes on without special revelation.”—Veit Dietrich.
6. On Isaiah 54:14-17. The church should in all times remember that it is the house of the holy and righteous God, and should draw from that both warning and comfort. The church of the Lord stands on righteousness. 1) It is itself righteous, a. in that it appropriates the righteousness that the Lord has acquired for it; b. in that it does no wrong itself, but in every thing and toward every one exercises righteousness. 2) It obtains justice from the Lord against those that would do it wrong. For a. those that complot against the church do so without the righteous God; hence they have b. the righteous God against them, and they and their purposes must come to confusion,
VII.—THE SEVENTH The New Way of appropriating Salvation Isaiah 55:1-5 When we contemplate the contents of our chapters, one could almost outdo the modern criticism and exclaim: This was never written in the Exile ! It must have been written after Christ, by a disciple of Paul who read the epistles to the Romans and Galatians! But on closer inspection one observes that our Prophet describes, not what he lived to see and learned to know by experience, but future things that were still enigmatical to himself. A Frenchman would say: il ne voit pas, il entrevoit seulment les chose futures. I can only understand the contents of our chapter in its relation to what precedes, as representing in what a new and hitherto unknown way Israel is to obtain a countless posterity and a salvation extending in every direction. That is, in connection with Isaiah 54, our Isaiah 55. shows, that the mode of subjective appropriation of salvation will be a new one.
No longer by doing works, but by believing acceptance shall one put himself in possession of that salvation, which a new David, as a new mediator of a covenant, shall offer to the world, not by force of arms, but by His direct and indirect testimony. But this testimony must meet with a timely acceptance, and sincere repentance must prepare an entrance for the mercy of God. Also no one should regard the new way of salvation as unreasonable and impracticable, for not only Israel, but the entire creation, shall quite certainly partake of this salvation.
The chapter has two parts. The first is positive in its contents. It designates believing acceptance of the word as the essence of the new way of salvation. The second part is negative. It points with warning to the obstacles and scruples that must be set aside in order not to frustrate the new way of salvation.
____________________
1. THE NATURE OF THE NEW WAY OF THE OF GOD
Isaiah 55:1-51 Ho, every one that thirsteth,
Come ye to the waters,
And he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat;
Yea, come, buy wine and milk
Without money and without price.
2 Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread?
And your labor for that which satisfieth not?
Hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good,
And let your soul delight itself in fatness.
3 Incline your ear, and come unto me:
Hear, and your soul shall live;
And I will make an everlasting covenant with you,
Even the sure mercies of David.
4 Behold, I have given him for a witness to the people,
A leader and commander to the people.
5 Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not,
And nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee
Because of the Lord thy God,
And for the Holy One of Israel; for he hath glorified thee.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_55:1-2. ωָׁ ?αַ ?ψ is here denom. from ωֵׁ ?αֶ ?ψ annona [from ωֶׁ ?αֶ ?ψ see Fuerst. Lex.—Tr.], (comp. Isaiah 42:7; Isaiah 42:10; Isaiah 47:14, etc..). In Isaiah the word is found in this sense only here.—μεΰΞμην is Oxymoron as μΰΞςָ ?ν ,μֹ ?ΰΞΰֵ ?μ, (Deuteronomy 32:21), μֹ ?ΰΞςֵ ?υ (Isaiah 10:15), μΰֹ ?Ξΰָ ?γָ ?ν ,μֹ ?ΰΞΰִ ?ιωׁ, (Isaiah 31:8).
Isaiah 55:3. The expression λָּ ?ψַ ?ϊαְּ ?ψִ ?ιϊμְ is almost as common in the Old Testament as ςִ ?νor λָּ ?ψַ ?ϊαְּ ?ψִ ?ιϊΰֵ ?ϊ It occurs Exodus 23:32; Exodus 34:12; Exodus 34:15; Deuteronomy 7:2; Joshua 9:6-7; Joshua 9:11; Joshua 9:15-16; Joshua 24:25; Judges 2:2; 1 Samuel 9:1-2; 2 Samuel 5:3; 1 Kings 20:34; 2 Kings 11:4; Hosea 2:20; Isaiah 61:8; Jeremiah 32:40; Ezekiel 34:25; Ezekiel 37:26; Job 31:1; Psalms 89:4; 1 Chronicles 11:13; 2 Chronicles 7:18 (without αψιϊ); Isaiah 21:1; Isaiah 29:10. It is true that the expression is chiefly used in the case of a covenant that a superior concludes with an inferior as a benefaction or imposing a duty for the latter (see e.g. Job 31:1). Once (2 Chronicles 29:10) it is used in the case of a covenant that the man concludes with God. The expression is evidently in its origin a pregnant construction, as the preposition μְ depends on the verb, not according to its verbal meaning, but according to some, latent meaning in the verb This meaning may be that of laying on, assuring, or offering, according to the context—The expression in ηַ ?ρְ ?γֵ ?ιγָ ?εִ ?γ is found again 2 Chronicles 6:42 in Solomon’s prayer of consecration.
It does not occur its the corresponding passage, 1 Kings 8, as indeed none of 2 Chronicles 6:40-42 does (comp. Zoeckler in loc.). It seems to me that the author of 2 Chron. borrowed the words ηργιγεγ from our text, and thereby bears testimony to its having relation to 2 Samuel 7. As regards the construction, it is zeugmatic. For the accusative ηργιγ depends on the latent idea of giving in, ΰλψϊδαγιϊ, and in fact Paul so renders the words Acts 13:34 : on ὃτιδώσωὑμῖντὰὅσιαΔαυῖδ.
Isaiah 55:4. The grammatical construction of πָ ?βִ ?ιγεּ ?ξְ ?φַ ?εֵּ ?δμΰξιν is not normal. It ought at least to read πְ ?βιγεβε (comp. Ezekiel 31:16 ξִ ?αְ ?ηַ ?ψεְ ?θεֹ ?αμְ ?αָ ?πεֹ ?ο Daniel 1:4). The expressions πִ ?αְ ?ζֶ ?δεַ ?ηֲ ?γַ ?μΰִ ?ιωִׁ ?ιν Isaiah 53:3, and πָ ?βεּ ?ςַ ξֻ ?λֵּ ?δΰֱ ?μδִ ?ιν Isaiah 53:4, are not at all to be compared as Ewald supposes (Gram., § 339,6; see above the comm. in loc.). This construction is therefore an unicum, if indeed the pointing be correct Moreover ξְ ?φַ ?εֶּ ?δ in a substantive sense occurs only here.
It seems me that the choice of expression was occasioned by the Prophet having in. mind 2 Samuel 6:21, where David says to Michal: the Lord chose me before thy father μְ ?φַ ?εֹּ ?ϊΰֹ ?ϊּ ?ιπָ ?βִ ?ιγςַ ?μΞςַ ?νι AND 1. In chap. 55 the Lord promised Israel a blessing that would extend on every hand. As if in a well supplied market, all these blessed possessions shall be spread out before Israel. Now the people are summoned to come up and buy, but—without money (Isaiah 55:1)! It is no longer as it once was when one must do a hard work in order to get food, which—still did not satisfy. One sees at once that the Prophet does not mean corporeal nourishment, for he calls on men to hear.
By that one shall receive dainty nourishment (Isaiah 55:2). And that the importance of this hearing may be felt, he repeats his summons to hear twice. By virtue of this hearing the soul shall live and be capable of entering into the everlasting covenant with the Lord, that shall procure the sure mercies of David (Isaiah 55:3). The David that is to be the mediator of this grace will be first of all a witness, and hearing will be the condition of partaking of His grace. By His testimony to the truth He will however become also prince and commander of nations (Isaiah 55:4). But the great chief witness will avail himself of Israel in order to bring his testimony to the nations.
Israel shall call nations that it did not know, and these nations will hasten to Israel that heretofore remained unknown to them. But they will hasten up in order to come to Jehovah and to the Holy One of Israel, who also glorifies His people in this way (Isaiah 55:5). Thus the chief emphasis in this section rests upon the inward, believing inclination to the word of the Lord, something high as heaven above outward merit of works. This believing inclination Israel should bring to the word of the Lord that announces to it the glory of David’s kingdom. Then it will itself dare to preach this word, and, by means of the faith that it will find, it will gather the nations to it, which, according to Isaiah 54:1 sqq., will be its seed, and also the basis of the new, eternal Davidic kingdom.
2. Ho, every one——mercies of David.
Isaiah 55:1-3. Before the gaze of the Prophet stands Israel, made inwardly and outwardly free from the chains of the world-power by the Servant of God. According to chap. 54. a rich blessing from the Lord is promised to it. But it cannot partake of it without more ado. Like the old Israel it must fulfill a condition. To the old Israel it was said (Deuteronomy 28:1 sq.): “And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe and to do all His commandments which I command thee this day, that the Lord thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth: and all these blessings shall come upon thee, and overtake thee.” Here, therefore, the fulfilment of the law was set up as a condition of obtaining the blessing.
It is otherwise in the new kingdom that the Prophet sees from afar with the eye of the spirit. There nothing is demanded but hunger and thirst, and yet, of course, such as is contented with the gratification that the Lord offers. Stier justly calls attention to the fact that our Lord must have had in mind our text when He said: “blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness for they shall be filled” (Matthew 5:6). Comp. also Matthew 11:28; John 7:37. δεֹ ?ι does not depart here from its fundamental meaning. It must not be taken here as a cry merely summoning together, any more than in Isaiah 17:1; Isaiah 18:1, or like Zechariah 2:10-11, where Koehler appropriately translates “Hui” [“Ho,” “quick”]. In our passage, the cry of woe has reference only to the suffering condition of those addressed.
It is an expression of compassion for their lamentable fate, that offers only an illusory satisfaction for their wants. It is as if we were to say: Alas, ye poor needy ones! Thus Maurer, with whom Stier needed not to find fault.—What sort of hunger and thirst the Prophet means first appears from his offering to satisfy it without compensation. The rationalistic expositors will have it that only earthly blessings are meant. Thus they would understand that the exiles are indirectly summoned to return home by painting up the possessions that would follow on that, which were to be had as water for the thirsty and without sacrifice (Gesenius, Hitzig). Others think only of eating and drinking.
Canaan would be incomparably more than in former days a land flowing with milk and honey (Seinecke, Knobel). But construed in this way the words contain a disgraceful deception. No emigration agent ever sought to seduce ignorant peasants to emigrate to Brazil or Texas with such lies as this would-be Prophet Isaiah would have used, if these expositors were correct. For did he represent to them “the restoration of the state under the image of refreshing food and drink,” or did he promise them literally “food and drink, and that for nothing,” then both were unblushing lies, as in general the passages that speak of an easy, safe return over a convenient road well supplied with every thing needful (Isaiah 35:6 sqq.; Isaiah 41:17 sqq.; Isaiah 43:18 sqq.; Isaiah 49:8 sqq.; Isaiah 51:11; Isaiah 52:8 sqq.), would contain nothing but fraud, if they are referred in the ordinary sense to the return from the Babylonian captivity. For what ever justified such an agitator in promising to the Israelites splendid political relations, support without cost? The outward relations of the returning exiles were by no means splendid.
They continued to be under the Persian rule. In that prayer at their feast recorded in Nehemiah 9 we find them complaining (Nehemiah 9:36): “Behold, we are servants this day, and for the land that thou gavest unto our fathers to eat the fruit thereof and the good thereof, behold, we are servants in it.” And we see that they were obliged to pay taxes as much as in the land of exile; for Nehemiah 9:37 says: “And it (the land) yieldeth much increase unto the kings whom thou hast set over us because of our sins; also they have dominion over our bodies, and over our cattle, at their pleasure, and we are in great distress.” And the same appears still more clearly from Ezra 4:13, where in the accusing letter of Rehum and Shimshai we read: “Be it known now unto the king, that, if this city be builded, and the walls set up again, then will they (the Israelites) not pay toll, tribute and custom, and so thou shalt endamage the revenue of the kings.” According to Ezra 7:24, King Artasasta [Artaxeres] released only the priests and the other servants of the Temple from all taxes.—From Nehemiah 5:1-5 we see that the returning Israelites, at least the poorer among them, had hunger and distress enough to suffer in the promised land, for the poor among those engaged in building the walls beg for a distribution of grain, because otherwise, in order to keep their numerous families, they must pawn their lands, or even, where that had already been done, surrender their children to servitude. Thus it is seen that the returned exiles experienced neither a restoration of the commonwealth, nor was their daily bread given either in abundance or without cost. And yet we do not find in the historical books of this period a trace of their considering themselves cheated. They themselves certainly did not take the words of our Prophet in the sense in which the rationalistic expounders would understand them. For why then did so many, in fact the majority of the exiles remain in exile?
If the taxes in the Exile were so oppressive, as some suppose, and the condition of wages so unfavorable, why did not all return to Palestine? Was then the return more advantageous in every respect? According to Ezra 1:5 only those resolved to return “whose spirit God raised” (aroused). The resolve to return was thus a victory of the spirit over the flesh. Therefore they knew well that they would not find the flesh pots of Egypt in desolate Palestine. Thus they were far from regarding the words of our Prophet as promising these flesh pots.
We see, accordingly, that if the Prophet was no enthusiast or cheat, but would say the truth, it was impossible that he could mean to promise to the returning exiles fortunate outward circumstances. Now since, as is well known, the expressions “to thirst, hunger, eat, drink, bread, wine,” are very often used in a spiritual sense (comp. Isaiah 25:6; Isaiah 44:3; Isaiah 65:13; Amos 8:11; Psalms 42:3; Psalms 63:2; Matthew 5:6; John 6:35, etc.), so it is manifest that the Prophet means them in this sense. In addition to this the Prophet afterwards in Isaiah 55:2-3 expressly designates the satisfaction as the fruit of hearing: on which more hereafter, μְ ?λεּ is used three times in Isaiah 55:1 not meaning “go,” but “come hither,” because the speaker himself has in possession the things he invites others to receive. The word, therefore, stands here, as often elsewhere (comp. Isaiah 2:3-5) in the sense of a particula excitandi, as age, δεῦρο, δεῦτε “come on, here!”
The second member of the verse contains a completion of the first. It adds, that satisfaction will be given not only to those thirsty ones that have money, but also to those that have none. εΰωׁ ?ψΰιοΞμελρσ is thus a second subject of μλε and nearer definition of λμΞφξΰ. Vav before ΰωׁ ?ψ, therefore, involves the idea of “and indeed.” In the third member come bay and eat a third particular is introduced, namely that of hunger and its correlative bread. The fourth member repeats and intensifies: not only is “for not money” strengthened by the further “for not wages” (ξְ ?ηִ ?ιψ comp. Isaiah 45:13), but wine and milk are named in addition as things to be bought. They are costlier and nobler means of nourishment than water.
Milk is the wine of infancy, wine the milk of maturity. Thus not merely bare necessities, but the daintiest, noblest gratification, is offered to those craving it (comp. on Isaiah 55:2 b).
Isaiah 55:2. The question: why are you weighing out money? intimates that the man in this case, has a certain inclination to weigh out his money, and that effort is needed to prevent him. And such is actually the fact. The hardest law is easier for a man than the gospel. He would rather put himself to the rack like a fakir or a Trappist, than receive the gift of God for nothing. He will not have any thing for nothing.
He does not want grace, but wages, for his merit. And yet what he gets in this way is not bread, not satiety.—For one’s own works are not able to give the true righteousness, and so, too, cannot give true peace. Recall Luther’s monastic life, and then what he found when he had learned to believe. It may at first sight appear objectionable that the Prophet even in Isaiah 55:1, makes use of the oxymoron (see Text, and Gram.), by saying “buy for not-gold, for not wages,” whereas one expects “buy not for money, not for wages,” as, indeed, before he invited every one ΰωׁ ?ψΰιομελρσ to come on. Thus one expects ּ ?μΰαλρσ ּ ?εμΰαξηιψ. But the Prophet would evidently say, that of course they should buy. ωׁ ?αְ ?ψεּ does not stand before εΰλμε to no purpose.
There shall indeed be a purchase price paid, but it shall consist of μΰΞλρσ and μΰΞξηιψ. That is, of course, something odd. For μΰΞμην explained by μεΰμωׂ ?αςδ evidently denotes a nourishment that does not deserve the name of bread, that is worse than bread. Therefore μΰΞμην is a contemptuous expression. Accordingly μΰΞλρσ and μΰΞξηιψ must designate a price that is worse than money or wages, that does not deserve this name. The sense of ωׁ ?αψεαμεΰΞλρσεβεΧ could not be then: “buy, but not with gold, but with a higher, better price.” These words must rather mean: “buy for a price that has not even the value of money or of any other sort material compensation.” Can the Prophet mean to say that?
Shall the purchase price that he demands be worse than money, not even money? That cannot possibly be his meaning. Thus we see that we cannot take μΰΞλρσ and μΰΞμην in quite the same sense. Now such a negative expression formed by the use of μΰ may have a various antithesis according to the context; a superius or inferius may be its antithesis. Thus in Isaiah 10:15 we were obliged to take μֹ ?ΰΞςֵ ?υ = “not wood but something much higher; and just so in Isaiah 31:8, μΰΞΰιωׁ and μΰΞΰγν = “not a man, but something higher,” whereas μΰΞΰָֹ ?γָ ?ν ,μΰֹ ?Ξΰֵ ?μ designate something that is less than God, less than a nation. The evangelist of the Old Testament gives here (Isaiah 55:2) a genuine evangelical counsel, whose meaning and long range was certainly concealed from himself.
Israel shall no more bring money, and labor (one could construe ιְ ?βִ ?ιςַ ?� also in the sense of “res labore parta, gains of labor” Isaiah 45:14). For legal works are as money that one has paid for food that deserves not the name of bread, because it does not satisfy. For legal works a man receives his own deserts! But that is just μΰΞμην! It does not satisfy, it gives no peace. It does not procure for us the wedding garment, but only our own clothes, with which one will be cast out (Matthew 22:12-13).
In contrast with weighing out money, the Prophet now says what Israel should do in order to get satiety. He names therefore now the true purchasing price, the μΰΞλρσ and μΰΞξηιψ. It consists in hearkening to the Lord. There can be no doubt about the sort of hearing that is meant. It must any way be a very significant hearing, for the Prophet exhorts to it three times by saying ωξςεωׁ ?ξες, then δθεΰζπλν and finally ωׁ ?ξςε (Isaiah 55:3). He cannot mean the hearing with the outward ear, for the Lord would not be satisfied with that.
Hearing with the inward ear, the receptivety of the heart, faith must be meant. Amos 8:11, to which Kimchi text refers us, is nearly related to ours. It is not impossible that it hovered in the mind of the Prophet. There it is said: “Behold the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord.” Receiving the word, the message of salvation, the gospel, such is the price that is better than money and wages (αρσ and ιβις). Thus in eat good and your soul shall delight itself in fatness, “eat” and “enjoy itself” are meant in a spiritual sense. θεֹ ?λ. meaning “good” in general has a physical or spiritual sense according to the context (comp. Jeremiah 31:12; Jeremiah 31:14; Proverbs 19:8; Proverbs 24:25, etc.).
On the expression ϊϊςεβαγωׁ ?οπΧ comp. Isaiah 58:14; Isaiah 66:11; Psalms 37:4; Job 22:26; Job 27:10, and with respect to γωׁ ?ο Psalms 36:4 to Psalms 63:6), and ϊηιπτωׁ ?λν, comp. Ezekiel 18:27; Psalms 119:175.
Isaiah 55:3. The Lord then demands faith in His word. But this word is extraordinary: for it announces the salvation that the Servant of Jehovah acquired by His suffering and death (53). Those to whom the gospel of Jesus Christ is no foolishness, no offence, receive the mercies of David. In the Crucified One David is latent. The inscription above the cross unconsciously spoke the truth.
The thief is a type to us of the faith that is demanded here. He saw in the Crucified the king. Therefore he is also promised a participation in the kingly glory. On λָּ ?ψַ ?ϊαְּ ?ψִ ?ιϊμְ “to make a covenant,” see Text, and Gram.). Covenant making is an ancient thing in the relation between Jehovah and the people Israel. The Lord foretold to the people salvation and the Saviour in a gradual way, always increasing in definiteness and clearness, until at last He informs the chosen king David that He will found for him an everlasting, all-comprehending kingdom on the basis of the sonship of God (2 Samuel 7:12 sqq.).
This promise is the highest and most glorious of all the promises ever yet made to Abraham and his seed, in this respect, that it comprehends all preceding promises, frees them from their generality, lays them on a definite head, and defines them as a promise of a dominion that shall far excel all others in extent, duration, title and power. This promise is also the foundation of all later promises. For all of them add nothing essentially new. Although they add the nearer definition that Israel itself, and the promised Son of David shall become servants of God, i.e., must pass through suffering to glory, and although they at later periods refine and paint up both these particulars more in detail and in a variety of ways, still that word of the Prophet Nathan continues to be the principal stock around which all later Messianic prophecies are grouped. The mercies of David therefore are those promises of mercy that were given to David in respect to an other, higher David. These mercies of David are also a covenant, as the promises given to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob are called a “covenant” (comp.
Genesis 15:18; Genesis 17:2 sqq.; Exodus 2:24; Leviticus 26:42; 2 Kings 13:23, etc.). For in them God not only makes a gift, but requires a corresponding performance. It is true that this covenant has the peculiarity, that it is not broken by single acts of unfaithfulness on the part of men. For it is an everlasting covenant. Such acts of backsliding cause the Lord to use severity, but not to break the covenant Such also is doubtless the meaning of the word πΰξπιν [“sure”]. At least it should be noted that Psalms 89. after saying in Psalms 89:29-30 (Psalms 89:28-29): “My mercy will I keep for him forevermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with him (πֶֽ ?ΰֱ ?ξֶ ?πֶ ?ϊμεֹ).
His seed also will I make to endure forever, and his throne as the days of heaven,” it proceeds to say Psalms 89:31 sqq. (Psalms 89:30); “if his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments; if they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments; then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless my loving-kindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail [lie. Marg.],” etc It is in the highest degree probable that Psalms 89. hovered in the mind of the Prophet as he wrote these words. Koester says in regard to this: “Psalms 89. fere commentarii instar est ad nostrum locum. Similitudo tanta est, ut prophetam nostrum psalmi hujus auetorem esse conjicere liceat” (comp. Stier p. 548, Anm.), Although the latter idea is inadmissible, still the expression ηργιιδιδ with which Psalms 89. begins, (and which occurs beside only Psalms 107:43; Isaiah 63:7; Lamentations 3:22), reminds one of our text, as do also Psalms 89:4; Psalms 89:29; Psalms 89:38; Psalms 89:50 (Psalms 89:3; Psalms 89:27; Psalms 89:37; Psalms 89:49); and in general the object of the whole Psalm is to hold up to God the promises given to David, and on the ground of them to implore protection in pressing need.
Comp. remarks below on Isaiah 55:4, and Text, and Gram, on Isaiah 55:3, ηργιγεγ.
Isaiah 55:4. If in Isaiah 55:1-3, the Prophet has in mind the time when no longer personal works, but the believing acceptance of God’s word is decisive in respect to receiving salvation, then he stands with his thought in the midst of the Messianic period. And, indeed, the further particularpressed upon him, that not Israel alone will receive that salvation, but also the Gentile world. He sees the barriers broken down that separate Israel from the Gentiles. The David that was promised to the first David is made by the Lorda witness of the nations,i.e., one that shall testify salvation to the nations. That the suffix in πְ ?ϊַ ?ϊִּ ?ιε (“I have given him”) refers to David Isaiah 55:3, is certain.
But the one made a witness cannot possibly be the first David. How would a statement come into this context concerning the task to be fulfilled by the successor of Saul in his time? According to Isaiah 55:1-3, the Prophet’s thoughts are in the future when the marvellous change will take place, that God will no longer require giving from men but only receiving. Therefore I take the expression “mercies of David” as having a double meaning, viz.: not only the promises given to David, but also pointing to David. This of course assumes that the name David may be applied to the Messiah also. But this assumption is fully justified, since not only later, but also earlier prophets expressly designate the Messiah by the name of David (Hosea 3:5; Jeremiah 30:9; Ezekiel 34:23-24; Ezekiel 37:24-25).
The expression ςִ ?γִ (“witness”) likewise appears to me to be borrowed from Psalms 89. For in Psalms 89:38 of this Psalm the author concludes the representation of the promise given to David with the words: εְ ?ςֵ ?γαַּ ?ωַּׁ ?ηַ ?χπֶֽ ?ΰֱ ?ξָ ?ο. I share the view of Maurer, Hitzig, Delitzsch, Moll,etc., that by ςγαωׁ ?ηχ we are to understand God Himself (comp. Job 16:19, and regarding the expression ωׁ ?ηχPsalms 89:7). In our text, then, David, who fulfills “the mercies of David,” is called a witness of the nations, because He testifies also to the Gentile world what God had testified to the people Israel, because He carries out to the Gentiles that same gospel to whose believing acceptance Israel was summoned in Isaiah 55:2-3. In this peaceful way, not by force of arms, shall the other David also become a prince and commander of the nations.
To take ςֵ ?γ in the sense of “lawgiver,” with Hitzig, is altogether arbitrary. On the construction of Isa 55:4 b see Text, and Gram. Any way it would express, that the second David shall be the same in respect to the nations that the first was in respect to the people Israel.
Isaiah 55:5. But the manner in which the second David will be a witness of God to the nations will be, not that He will personally and directly exercise the office of witness, but He will let it be exercised by His people Israel to whom He immediately belongs. Although I regard the “witness” of Isaiah 55:4 as being the second and not the first David, still I believe that the Prophet here has in mind those words of the first David in Psalms 18:43 sqq. where, speaking primarily of His activity as an earthly conqueror, he also certainly as a “prophet” (Acts 2:30), speaks of the call of His kingdom to make spiritual conquests. Especially our words “a nation whom thou knewest not,” recall the words Psalms 18:44 (43): “a people whom I have not known shall serve me.” The disciples and Apostles of the Lord, who received the command to preach the gospel to all nations, were, in fact, Israelites. Through them Israel called nations that it previously did not know, and nations, that before knew nothing of Israel hastened to it (Isaiah 2:2-3). Israel and the Gentile world have even found in the second David a common centre that draws one to the other.
This thought is so expressed in Isaiah 55:5 b, that there Jehovah is designated as the object and goal of this running hither. They came, not for Israel’s sake, but for the sake of Jehovah its God, and not to Israel, but to the Holy One of Israel. But it is nevertheless an honor of a high and unique sort, that Israel is favored with being the instrument of calling the nations to Jehovah. And the honor that the Lord has purposed for Israel, has its root just therein; for this reason it is ςֶ ?μְ ?ιεֹ ?οςַ ?μλָּ ?μΞδַ ?βּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν (“high above all nations” (Deuteronomy 4:6 sqq.; Deuteronomy 26:19; Deuteronomy 28:1; 2 Samuel 7:23 sq.) and “servant of Jehovah,” so far as this expression also designates the call of Israel to be the medium of salvation (“salvation is of the Jews,” John 4:22, comp. Isaiah 43:19). And it belongs also to this, that Israel is repeatedly called directly the “witness of Jehovah” (Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 44:8).
Besides, this clause of the verse is repeated verbatim Isaiah 60:9. As Israel is everywhere thought of as masculine (ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δֶ ?ικָ ,ΰֵ ?μֶ ?ικָ ,ιְ ?γָ ?ςεּ ?κָ) the suffix of τֵּ ?ΰֲ ?ψָ ?κְ cannot be a fem. suffix, but is a masculine pausal form, as in ςָ ?πָ ?κְ Isaiah 30:19.
Footnotes:Heb. weigh.acquisition.Hearken, hearken.And your soul shall.a nation.For the sake of.to.2. WHAT AND ARE TO BE REMOVED, THAT THE NEW WAY OF MAY OBTAIN
Isaiah 55:6-136 Seek ye the Lord while he may be found,
Call ye upon him while he is near:
7 Let the wicked forsake his way,
And the unrighteous man his thoughts:
And let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him;
And to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
Neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways,
And my thoughts than your thoughts.
10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven,
And returneth not thither,
But watereth the earth,
And maketh it bring forth and bud,
That it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:
11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth:
It shall not return unto me void,
But it shall accomplish that which I please,
And it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
12 For ye shall go out with joy,
And be led forth with peace:
The mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing,
And all the trees of the field shall clap their hands.
13 Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree,
And instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree:
And it shall be to the Lord for a name,
For an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_55:9. Before βαδε the particle of comparison is omitted; comp. Jeremiah 3:20.
Isaiah 55:10. πϊο, subject βωׁ ?ν and ωׁ ?μβ.——The imperf. ιֵ ?ψֵ ?γ designates what happens continuously; ιָ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?α that which is supposed, not actual; δεμιγδ ,δψεδπϊο ,δφξιηδ, on the other hand designate simple objective facts.
Isaiah 55:11. The accusative ΰֲ ?ωׁ ?ψ before ωָׁ ?μַ ?ηְ ?ϊִּ ?ι is quite normal. Verbs of teaching, commanding, commissioning, as is well known, stand with a double accusative; comp. Exodus 4:28; 1 Samuel 21:3, etc.Isaiah 55:13. διδ is to be construed neutrally.——One might take ωֵׁ ?ν here as meaning “monumentum,” as in 2 Samuel 8:13, and as Isaiah uses it Isaiah 56:5. But one does better to take it in the sense of “renown” (comp. Deuteronomy 26:19; Zephaniah 3:19); but ΰεϊ, on account of the addition ΰωׁ ?ψμΰιλψϊ, had better be taken in the sense of “signum, monumentum” that which, as it were, bears and preserves the renown (comp. Isaiah 19:20; Deuteronomy 28:46; Numbers 17:3, etc.).
AND 1. Seek the Lord——abundantly pardon.Isaiah 55:6-7. The entire section Isaiah 55:6-11 deals with the difficulties that actually, or in human opinion, oppose that “hearing” that the Lord has demanded in Isaiah 55:2-3. The first difficulty is, that so many men are unable to make up their minds to lay hold, i.e., to respond to the Lord’s call, and on their side to desire and seek what offers itself to them. For, of course, the soul must on its part incline to the Lord, who inclines Himself to it. This is the “seeking” and “calling” of which verse 6 speaks.
Believing is a hard matter. Hence many hesitate until it is too late. And hence the Prophet’s warning, to turn to the Lord in season, to seek and call on Him. For the Lord is not near and able to be found without limitation. Hast thou suffered thy heart to harden or become callous, or hast thou suffered the time to lapse wherein believing is any way possible, i.e., the period of earthly life, that ends with death and with the world beyond which begins the seeing,—then thou findest the Lord no more, He withdraws. Thou canst then no more believe, even though wishing painfully to do so, as Esau who found no room for repentance though he sought it with tears (Hebrews 12:17), or as those who have slipped past the fateful “to-day” (comp.
Hebrews 3:7 sqq.; Hebrews 4:7 and the parables of the invited guests Luke 14:17 sqq., and the laborers in the vineyard Matthew 2:1 sqq.). The second and chiefest hinderance to believing is this, that men cleave too much to evil. They love it too much; all their imagining and doing is directed to it. They cannot get rid of sin, they are under the ban and constraint of it. Hence the Prophet warns, that the wicked first of all must forsake his wicked way and the man of iniquity (Proverbs 6:12; Proverbs 6:18, which likely was in the Prophet’s mind) his thoughts. This is the negative side of the exhortation.
With this is joined the positive; the wicked should turn to Jehovah a. to the end that He may have mercy on him, b. for the reason that Jehovah is (not a strange but) Israel’s (“our”) God, and is inclined and accustomed to pardon abundantly.
2. For My thoughts——whereto I sent it.Isaiah 55:8-11. These verses reply to those objections that the natural man opposes to the new way of salvation proposed by God in Isaiah 55:1-3. The first objection runs: it is inconceivable that man can obtain salvation simply by believing and not by his own works. The Prophet declares that this objection is groundless. For, he says, My thoughts are not your thoughts,etc.
What is foolishness with men is wisdom with God, 1 Corinthians 1:18 sqq. God is great in littleness, strong in weakness, glorious in lowliness, wise in foolishness. Just for that reason He is approachable. The poor and lowly do not take offence at this form of His appearance. No, just thus He is comprehensible to them. But the wise and prudent are sifted by it as through a sieve.
Whoever holds his head so high that he cannot go through the narrow gate, must remain without. He is not fit to be in the kingdom of God. But whoever is not offended at the gospel of the manger and of the cross, will be sensible that there is in it a power and wisdom that is as high as heaven above all the wisdom of both scribes and philosophers. The second objection runs: the sermon that, according to Isaiah 55:1-3, demands only hearing and accepting must remain without effect. This objection also is groundless. For it is with the word that announces God’s lofty thoughts, as it is with the products of the physical atmosphere that descend to the earth, in order to render the latter capable of unfolding its life forces.
Rain and snow do not return without accomplishing their ends, but they fructify (δεμιγ cause to give birth, comp. Isaiah 66:9; 1 Chronicles 2:18) the earth, and cause it to bring forthφֶ ?ξַ ?η (sprouts comp. on Isaiah 4:2) and give seed to the sower and bread to the eater. The efficiency of the word should be designated as (see Text and G.) an actual certainty. I translate λιΰν simply by “but.” The word of God (and one may think here of all that is called λόγοςθεοῦ), does not return empty. Thus it is expressly said of it that it does return. And in fact every thing that goes out from God, also that word spoken or written by men by the power of His Spirit, must, as an eternal, real, divine existence, unite itself again with its original source; or more correctly: what comes out of God remains also eternally in God.
3. For ye shall——not be cut off.Isaiah 55:12-13. λִּ ?ι, “for”, beginning Isaiah 55:12, introduces the proof of the statement of Isa 55:11. The word of God shall return, not unsuccessful, but wholly successful. For Israel shall go forth and be led with joy. Such is just the efficiency of that word of God that is meant, Isaiah 55:1-3. It is clear that. the Prophet cannot mean the future departure out of the Babylonian exile.
But he does mean an exodus of which that physical exodus is only the type. For the historical redemption out of the Exile is both a type and a pledge of the redemption out of the exile of sin, out of the bondage of the devil. The same God that would and could redeem “the fleshly Israel” out of the corporeal exile, will by force of the same love and power redeem the spiritual Israel out of the spiritual exile. And in that exodus Israel will rejoice, and be led in peace. And the non-personal creation will share in Israel’s joy: the mountains, and the hills will break forth into singing, and all trees clap their hands. That this could not be on the occasion of the corporeal exodus from Babylon, is clear.
It is manifest, then, that the Prophet intends a much higher, a spiritual exodus. But this latter also has its gradations. When once nature itself is penetrated with spirit and glorified (Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; Romans 8:21), then, what in the word of the Prophet is not merely poetic imagery, but real contents of life, will at last receive its entire accomplishment. In the time the Prophet thinks of, noxious growths will give place to noble growths that bring a blessing with them. Instead of πςφευ (again only Isaiah 7:19, therefore a genuine Isaianic word) shall grow up the cypress (comp. on Isaiah 41:19), instead of the flea-bane (ρִ ?ψְ ?τָּ ?γ, ἅπ. λεγ., its meaning is debated, comp. Gesen.,Thes., and Herz.,R.-Enc.
XIV., p. 666. I translate, with Delitzsch, after the LXX., Aqu. Theod.,κόνυζα, flea-wort, flea-bane), the myrtle (see on Isaiah 41:19). We had similar expressions, Isaiah 35:1 sqq.; Isaiah 41:18 sq.; Isaiah 44:23; Isaiah 49:13; Isaiah 52:9. This glorious act of salvation shall redound to the Lord’s everlasting renown, and be an everlasting monument of His love, power, and wisdom.
Footnotes:Heb. the man of iniquity.Heb. he will multiply to pardon.cypress.flea-wort. AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 55:1-3. “Hoc periphrasi allegorica (sitiendi et carendi pecunia) notantur ii, quibus arida est conscientia ex aestu irae divinae propter peccata, quique anxie sitiunt gratiam Dei ac remissionem peccatorum, quam se propriis operibus consequi posse plane desperant.”—Foerster.2. On Isaiah 55:1. “It is no legal commanding and ordering, that gives nothing of which it speaks, but an evangelical offer and invitation, that also gives what it demands. He who gives the command to come, also gives the strength to enable one to come, i. e., faith (Matthew 11:23; John 6:27; John 6:44).”—Starke.3. On Isaiah 55:1.
Robustis, qui tentationibus peccati et mortis exercentur, datur vinum ad consolationem; rudibus autem et infirmis datur lac ad alimentum, quo instituuntur et docentur.”—Luther. “In Proconsular Africa the ancient church had a custom of offering to those baptized milk and honey for the new childhood and childishness. But Jerome informs us that they took also wine and milk.”—Stier: Offering milk and honey was an oriental custom.
4. On Isaiah 55:1-2. “The salvation of Christ cannot be bought for money, as Peter let Simon know when he offered money for it: ‘Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money’ (Acts 8:20). It is not to be obtained by any sort of personal merit or work, trouble, or labor (whoever would have it thus fatigues himself in vain, and can never be satisfied, nor find any comfort for his soul), but by the pure, undeserved divine grace (Romans 3:23 sq.; Ephesians 2:8).”—Renner.5. On Isaiah 55:2. “Est confutatio et abrogatio omnium aliarum, religionum, doctrinarum et operum. Quod omnes religiones, omnes doctrinae et studia omnia extra hanc gratiae doctrinam sint frustranea et tamen laboriosa, quae non tranquillum faciant animum sed affligant. Diligenter autem notabis hoc praedicatum, quod tribuit omnibus justitiis, quae sunt extra gratiam, quod scilicet sint laboriosae et tamen frustraneae, sicut sub papa experti sumus”—Luther.“The Papists make God a sun shop-keeper, who would sell his heaven.”—Foerster.6.
On Isaiah 55:3. The peculiarity of “the sure mercies of David” consists in this, that under no circumstances can they be withdrawn from the throne and kingdom of David. Individuals, yea, even whole races and generations, that belonged to those entitled to them, may be excluded on account of their sin. But taking all together, David’s throne and kingdom shall stand and develop, grow and increase to the elevation and extent that God has determined for it. It is to regard the matter from another side when one says: “No man should doubt the grace of God or despair of it. And when we are assaulted by the doubt whether God will even preserve us in the knowledge of Himself, we should oppose to it the sure mercies of David.
For mountains and hills may fall away, but His grace shall not remove from us (Isaiah 54:10).”—Cramer.7. On Isaiah 55:3-4. “But what is the contents of the sure mercies promised to David? It is this High, Wonderful One, whom God has set for a Witness to men, in whom they should see the divinity, yea, whom He has made Head of the nations! Therefore a Person? Yes, indeed; the Messiah, the God-man, of whom Isaiah has so long spoken mysteriously, as of the Servant of Jehovah. He is a Person!
For I (myself even a person) am surely not to go down beneath myself and find my soul’s contents and life in a thing! That were utterly heathenish. No. A Person is the sure mercy of David, and, indeed, the greatest of all: He in whom God bears witness of Himself to mankind, and in whom God comprehends all mankind as in their Head, Son of God, Son of man, the eternally youthful Lord of mankind, and also her, the Virgin Mary’s, Son. Of such a Lord the virgin mother, and mankind will not have to complain. Since this one must arise in Israel, the true Israel, the Apostle choir, shall draw the remotest heathen to itself, and the latter shall run up with joy because they recognize the almighty, eternal God in His church, as He glorifies it.”—Diedrich.8.
On Isaiah 55:6. “Quaerite eum, dum estis in corpore, dum datur locus poenitentiae, et quaerite non loco sed fide… … Appropinquat autem appropinquantibus sibi (Jac. 4:8), et filio longo post tempore revertenti laetus occurrit.” Jerome.9. On Isaiah 55:7. “That is the only way of salvation. First, for a man to turn away from his own will of evil thoughts, and then conversion to God who is rich in pardon, and His pity will not tarry.” Umbreit.10. On Isaiah 55:8. “One of the most sublime passages of Scripture, where more than commonly the πΰνιδεδ should evince itself as a truth to every conscience… … Whoever in such discourses is unable to hear the speaking Person of God, lacks something in his own personality; he has not yet become a thou that the greatest I may address.” Stier.11. On Isaiah 55:8-9. The human heart comprehends with difficulty the doctrine that “God hath concluded all in unbelief, that He might have mercy upon all.” But such as do comprehend it exclaim with Paul: “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out!” (Romans 11:32 sq.).—“Quanto sum sublimior, tanto et clementior.” Grotius in Stier.—“Not merely the thoughts of an adulterer, fornicator, thief, are deep beneath the divine thoughts, but also those that to reason are good, holy human thoughts of reformation, of the way of salvation and righteousness, are not good for anything, until they attain the elevation of compassion and pardon.
Especially in respect to justification, God declares all γְּ ?ψָ ?λִ ?ιν [“ways”], i. e. even religions, doctrines and wise ones among men, basely false, because in the best case they ever obstinately wish to bring price and money for His grace! They ever wish to help themselves, though it is before their eyes that even in nature nothing grows on earth without rain from above.” Stier.12. On Isaiah 55:10-11. “The prophetic preaching since Deuteronomy 32:1 is frequently compared to rain, and the word is also conceived of as a messenger, envoy of God, Isaiah 9:7 (8); Psalms 107:20; Psalms 147:15 sqq. The personification assumes that the word is no mere sound or letter. Emitted from the mouth of God, it acquires form, and in this form it conceals divine life by reason of its divine origin, and so it runs, alive of God, endued with divine power, charged with divine commissions, as a swift messenger through nature and the world of men, there for instance to melt the ice, here to protect and save, nor does it come back from its round of errands until it has made the will of its Sender operative. This return of the word of God also presupposes a divine essence in that word.
The will of God that is concrete and audible in the word is the expression of His essence, and resolves itself into this again as soon as it is fulfilled. The images chosen are rich with allusions. As snow and rain are the mediate cause of growth, and thus also of the enjoyment of what is harvested, so also by the word of God the ground and soil of the human heart is softened, refreshed and made fertile and vegetative, and this word gives the Prophet, who is like the sower, the seed which he scatters, and it brings with it bread that nourishes the soul; for every word that proceeds from the mouth of God is also bread (Deuteronomy 8:3). The particular point of comparison, however, is the energy with which the word converts itself into reality.”—Delitzsch.13. On Isaiah 55:12-13. “Away with the base, stale thoughts, as if God the Lord were here only letting lofty words sound through His Prophet, about all the conveniences of the journey for the small number of Jews of that time! This exodus, this return home of the redeemed, is something quite different, extends indeed in the long perspective through much and various till the goal is reached.
The first exodus from the world and sin is meant, thus indeed from Israel that has become unholy, into the reproach of Christ—furthermore the whole way of the church since that time, with all its recurring goings forth, presenting themselves in such variety of ways, finally, and indeed in the most perfect sense, the last redemption to the glory of the children. For again Israel’s return out of obduracy will furnish the last prelude that will be the reconciliation of type and reality.” Stier. HINTS1. On Isaiah 55:1-5. The LORD a merchant. 1) He invites the whole world to buy. 2) The price He demands is not money nor performance, but that men will let Him present His wares to them. 3) His wares; He offers the mercy of David, that gives peace to all the world.
2. On Isaiah 55:1-5. Missionary Sermon. “God’s invitation to the sure mercies in Christ. 1) We hear in it the call of a love that wills that help be extended to all men. 2) We see in it the law of a wisdom that has resolved to save all nations by a Mediator. 3) We find in it the reminder of a promise that continues still to-day to be fulfilled among the nations”—“Missions the best glorifying of the kingdom of Christ. For 1) They help the constitution of the kingdom to attain its rights. 2) They set the Lord of the kingdom in the full light. 3) They bring the distant members of the kingdom into full course.” Dr. Zapff.3. On Isaiah 55:1. “What God does not work in us Himself He does not recognize as His own.
Therefore no compelling law is needed here, no command nor prohibition. For faith does all that is to be done in a free spirit. That is, it surrenders itself to God, who works everything in us out of grace. And that, also, is what Isaiah preaches, that we should come to the Lord in order to hear Him and to buy wine and milk for nothing.” Arndt, Wahres Christenthum, III. 2, 4.
4. [On Isaiah 55:1. “Our buying without money intimates, (1) That the gifts offered us are invaluable and such as no price can be set upon. Wisdom is that which cannot be gotten for gold. (2) That He who offers them has no need of us, nor of any returns we can make Him. He makes us these proposals, not because He has occasion to sell, but because He has a disposition to give. (3) That the things offered are already bought and paid for. Christ purchased them at the full value, with price, not with money, but with His own blood, 1 Peter 1:19. (4) That we shall be welcome to the benefits of the promise, though we are utterly unworthy of them, and cannot make a tender of anything that looks like a valuable consideration.” M. Henry].
5. On Isaiah 55:6. “God has neither time nor place, is ever ready to help and to give, stands every moment before our door (Revelation 3:20). His time is all time, but our time is not all time” (Psalms 95:8; Hebrews 3:7; Hebrews 3:13; Hebrews 3:15; Hebrews 4:7). Arndt, ibid. II., 34, 12.
6. [On Isaiah 55:7. A call to repent. I. What it is to repent. (1) It is to turn from sin; it is to forsake it, and with loathing, “forsake his way.” There must be not only a change of way, but a change of mind, “forsake his thoughts.” Repentance, if it be true, strikes at the root and washes the heart from wickedness. (2)It is to return to the Lord: as to our sovereign Lord against whom we have rebelled; as to the fountain of life-giving waters.—II. The encouragement to repent. (1) God will have mercy. Misery is the object of mercy.
Now the consequences of sin, by which we have become truly miserable (Ezekiel 16:5-6), and the nature of repentance, by which we are made sensible of our misery and are brought to bemoan ourselves (Jeremiah 31:18) make us objects of pity, and with God these are tender mercies. (2) He will abundantly pardon. Though our sins have been very great and very many, and oft repeated, and we are still prone to offend. After M. Henry].
7. On Isaiah 55:8-9. “The consolations afforded by these words. 1) We learn from them self-renunciation. 2) We learn faith from them. 3) We gain from them the right hope.” Ed. Engelhardt, in Manch. Gaben, etc., III. Jahrg., p. 602.
8. On Isaiah 55:8-11. “The comparison of the divine thoughts and ways with ours. 1) They are different from ours. 2) They are more efficient than ours.” Nesselmann, Ibid., 1870, p. 477.
9. On Isaiah 55:8-9. “One must take care that an exhortation to repentance with the promise of the gracious forgiveness of sins precede. . . . Thus the meaning is: do not wonder that I say, with God is much forgiveness, and He will have compassion even on the wicked and malicious, if they turn to Him. For ye men are so minded that ye do not willingly forgive and forget, when one has treated you roughly and often offended you. Therefore ye judge me according to your sentiment and thoughts, as if I too were so hard and unwilling to forgive. But my thoughts and my sentiment are in this respect as far from yours as heaven from earth.” Scriver, Seelenschatz, II., Th. 8 Pred. § 13.
10. On Isaiah 55:10-11. Comparison of the word with rain and snow. 1) Both come down from heaven. 2) Both operate fruitfully upon the earth. 3) Both return to heaven, but not without having successfully done their work on earth.
11. On Isaiah 55:12-13. The departure of the people of God out of the exile of sin, and evil. 1) That such a thing is to be looked for. 2) When it is to be looked for. 3) How it will be accomplished (in joy which shall be felt not only by redeemed mankind, but also by the impersonal creation).
VIII.—THE EIGHTH Isaiah 56:1-9 The new salvation mediated by the Servant of God was described chap. 54 in its general, objective aspect; in chap. 55 in respect to the subjective appropriation of salvation. Chap. 56, in a few but plain strokes, shows us the same as the source of an entirely new ethical, social and physical regulation of life. For Isaiah 56:1-2 hold out the prospect of a holy walk, Isaiah 56:3-7 of a new legal regulation respecting strangers and eunuchs, finally Isaiah 56:8-9, that the salvation shall be extended also to the impersonal creature.
The Isaiah 56:10-12 belong as to substance to the following chapter.
The moral, social and physical fruits of the new way of salvationIsa_56:1-91 Thus saith the Lord,Keep ye judgment, and do justice:
For my salvation is near to come,
And my righteousness to be revealed.
2 Blessed is the man that doeth this,
And the son of man that layeth hold on it;
That keepeth the sabbath from polluting it,
And keepeth his hand from doing any evil.
3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak
Saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me from his people:
Neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
4 For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs
That keep my sabbaths,
And choose the things that please me,
And take hold of my covenant;
5 Even unto them will I give in mine house
And within my walls a place and a name
Better than of sons and of daughters:
I will give them an everlasting name,
That shall not be cut off.
6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the Lord,To serve him, and to love the name of the Lord,To be his servants,
Every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it,
And taketh hold of my covenant:
7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain,
And make them joyful in my house of prayer:
Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar:
For mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.
8 The Lord God [Jehovah] which gathereth the outcasts of Israel, saith,
Yet will I gather others to him,
Beside those that are gathered unto him.
9 All ye beasts of the field, come to devour,
Yea, all ye beasts in the forest.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_56:1. φγχδ and ξωׁ ?τθ in parallelism as in Isaiah 28:17; Isaiah 32:16 Isaiah 33:5; Isaiah 59:9; Isaiah 59:14.
Isaiah 56:2. ζֹ ?ΰϊ and αָּ ?δּ can of course be grammatically referred to what follows. But grammar just as much admits of their being referred to what precedes. And I prefer the latter, because then there is no need of taking ωֹׁ ?ξֵ ?ψ for ωָׁ ?ξεֹ ?ψ or μִ ?ωְׁ ?ξֹ ?ψ, but it can be understood simply as in apposition with ΰֱ ?πεֹ ?ωׁ and αοΞΰγν in a specifying sense.——ωׁ ?ξψωׁ ?Χξημμε is not to be understood as if ξο simply intimated from what the Sabbath should be kept, in which sense ωׁ ?ξψ and ξο are frequently conjoined (e.g.,ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ψψַ ?βְ ?μֶ ?κָ ξִ ?μָּ ?λֶ ?γ “he keeps thy foot from the snare” Proverbs 3:26, etc.). ξο has here, as often, the negative meaning (comp. Isaiah 44:18; Isaiah 49:15; Isaiah 58:13, etc.). We must therefore translate: “who keeps the Sabbath (comp. Exodus 31:14) so that he does not profane it.” For the suffix in ημμε were quite superfluous if it were intended to be said only in general from what the Sabbath must be kept.
In the latter case one would rather look for an infinitive passive or an abstract noun: he who keeps the Sabbath from being profaned, or from profanation. Moreover this involves the meaning that one must not only keep the Sabbath himself, but also guard it from every profanation by others. But the suffix is pertinent if the meaning is: he who keeps the Sabbath so that he does not profane it (the Sabbath, not anything in general). This explanation is commended by the fact that the same construction recurs Isaiah 58:13. Of course, then, the following clause ωׁ ?ξψιγεεβεΧ must be similarly explained.
Isaiah 56:3. πִ ?μְ ?εָ ?δ is, from its ending, not the participle, but the perfect. If the pointing be correct, then the mode of expression belongs to the instances where the article involves a pronominal meaning; Joshua 10:24; Genesis 21:3; Ezra 8:25; 1 Chronicles 29:17; 1 Chronicles 26:28.——In ξςμςξε the ςμ has a cumulative sense, as in Isaiah 32:10; Genesis 28:9; Genesis 31:50, etc.Isaiah 56:4. As regards the construction, one sees from εαηψε, that the Prophet arranges the clauses by that rule according to which, from the view-point of the first stage of the future attained, what remains is presented in the perfect as the simple unfolding of that stage. For the sake of variety, and doubtless also for the purpose of denoting the persistency of the holding fast, the Prophet expresses the third condition by the participle. For this reason we are not to construe ξηζιχιν as in apposition, say, with ρψιριν, but it stands parallel with εαηψε. The pronomen separatum δֵ ?ν is wanting, as very often happens, Isaiah 2:6; Isaiah 24:2; Isaiah 34:21; Isaiah 37:26; Isaiah 41:7, etc.——The words of Jehovah, announced by λδΰξψδΧ, begin with ΰωׁ ?ψιωׁ ?ξψε as appears by the suffixes and afformatives of the first person.
Isaiah 56:5. ιָ ?ψεָ ?ωֵׁ ?ν, belong together as a double idea, and θεαξαΧεξαΧ refers to it. Hence ιָ ?γ cannot simply mean “side, place, share” (as e.g., Numbers 2:17; Deuteronomy 23:13; Genesis 46:24, etc.), nor ωֵׁ ?ν mean simply “name.” But both together must designate a monument that preserves the memory of the name. In this sense ιָ ?γ stands alone (2 Samuel 18:18; 1 Samuel 15:12), and also ωֵׁ ?ν (comp. on Isaiah 55:13). The combination has the force of a hendiadys: mark and memory=memorial mark.
Isaiah 56:6-7. ΰַ ?δֲ ?αָ ?δ is the infin. with the fem. ending δ_.——On ιִ ?χָּ ?ψֵ ?ΰ comp. Isaiah 54:5; Isaiah 35:8; Isaiah 62:4; Isaiah 62:12.
Isaiah 56:8. Only here and Zechariah 12:1 is πΰν so placed at the beginning. On the double name ΰγπιιδεδ see List.Isaiah 56:9. I construe λμηιϊεωׂ ?γι (instead of which Isaiah 43:20 ηַ ?ιַּ ?ϊδַ ?ωָּׂ ?γֶ ?δ) as the object of ΰֲ ?χַ ?αֵּ ?υ Isaiah 56:8, and Isaiah 56:9 b as parallel clause. The form ηַ ?ιְ ?ϊεֹ (excepting in Zephaniah 2:14, where ηַ ?ιְ ?ϊεֹ βεֹ ?ι are spoken of, and thus the word is evidently used in a figurative sense), occurs only in connection with the substantives ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ (Genesis 1:24; Psalms 79:2), ωָׂ ?γַ ?ι (Psalms 104:11) and ιַ ?ςַ ?ψ(Psalms 50:10; Psalms 104:20). ηιϊεΰψυ designates the totality of all beasts. The two halves of them are the ηַ ?ιְ ?ϊεֹ ωָׂ ?γַ ?ι and ηַ ?ιְ ?ϊεֹ ιַ ?ςַ ?ψ or αַּ ?ιַּ ?ςַ ?ψ.
AND 1. Thus saith the LORD——any evil.Isaiah 56:1-2. It might appear from Isaiah 55:1-3, as if, for receiving the promised salvation, nothing more were necessary than receptivity, and as if all activity were excluded. That such is not the case is intimated already Isaiah 55:7, by the exhortation to penitent turning from evil and turning to the Lord. But the Prophet designedly declares in the present passage, that one should not suppose moral uncleanness is compatible with participation in the promised salvation. It is indeed God’s free grace that accords to men the satisfaction spoken of in Isaiah 55:2-3.
But this grace is not only to make men blessed, but also to sanctify them. It is in fact impossible for one to enjoy the goodness of God, and at the same time to insult Him by transgressing His commandments. Such an exhortation is of course needless for those that have entered body and scul into the kingdom of God, i. e., for those that no longer live in the mortal body that is subject to sin. To all those that still stand in the conflict of this earthly life, the kingdom of God has only come near. To them the righteousness of God is not completely revealed (comp. Romans 8:24).
When we note that the Lord, at the end of the first clause of Isa 56:1 requires of men that they “use righteousness,” then the corresponding revelation of His righteousness, that He promises at the close of the verse, consist in this, that He for His part, as the one covenanting party (Isaiah 55:3), will keep what He has promised. Thus, too, it is said to Christians that have in faith laid hold of God’s grace: “know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9 sq.)? and: “this ye know, that no whore, monger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ, and of God” (Ephesians 5:5); and: “follow after holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord” (Hebrews 12:14, comp. 1 Timothy 6:11; 1 Thessalonians 5:23, etc.). Moreover the author of Psa 106:3, seems to have had our passage before him.
Isaiah 56:2. He that does what was required in Isaiah 56:1 (see Text. and Gram.), is to be esteemed blessed. For he has proved that he has true faith. Two commandments, or two categories of commandments, are named instead of all. First the Sabbath commandment. The Sabbath was the day consecrated to Jehovah.
By its weekly recurrence, it was a standing admonition to the duty that Israel owed to Jehovah, and thus a touchstone of whether Israel would faithfully pay this duty. Hence it is called, Exodus 31:13 : “a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you.” Thus the Sabbath belonged to foundations of the Theocracy, its profanation was punished with death (Exodus 35:2), which was to be inflicted by the whole congregation, and by means of stoning (Numbers 15:35). And keepeth his hand from doing any evil; one can say that in this clause the Prophet includes the sphere of the second table of the Decalogue. Luther says: Comprehendit nomine sabbati omnia ea, quae nos Deo debemus, hoc est primam tabulam. Rursus cum dicit “custodiens manus suas etc.,” omnia caritatis opera complectitur, hoc est secundam tabulam. The Prophet means about the same that is demanded of the Israelites, Isaiah 1:16-17 (where see my comment).
One may also say that he has in mind the image of the Old Testament φַ ?γִּ ?ιχ, the antithesis to which is the ςָ ?ψִ ?ιυ. It is moreover to be noted, that the Prophet, in contemplating the future Messianic salvation with reference to its moral behaviour, does so in the form of as exhortation. Although on the whole he gives a promise, still, agreeably to the nature of the subject, he appeals here with special emphasis also to the personal performance of men. His ΰַ ?ωְׁ ?ψֵ ?ι Isaiah 56:2 is conditioned on the admonition ωׁ ?ξψεξωׁ ?τθεςωׂ ?εφγχδ Isaiah 56:1.
2. Neither let the son——for all people. Isaiah 56:3-7. In these verses the Prophet shows that the new way of salvation will have in its train an entirely new order of law and life. The natural basis of the old covenant was the descent from Abraham, through the lineage consecrated by means of circumcision. This explains why the reception of strangers into this holy national communion could take place only under certain onerous conditions.
For it was possible (Deuteronomy 23:4 sqq., comp. Saalschuetz,Mos. Recht. chap. 100). Now evidently the Prophet would say, that the foreigners (αְּ ?πֵ ?ιπֵ ?λָ ?ψ a broader conception than βֵּ ?ψִ ?ιν; for βֵּ ?ψ is only the foreigner sojourning in the land, whereas πָ ?λְ ?ψִ ?ι or αֶּ ?οΞπֵ ?λָ ?ψ designates the foreigner generally, comp. Isaiah 14:1, επְִ ?μְ ?εָ ?δδַ ?βֵּ ?ψςֲ ?μֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν; Saalschuetz,l. c. p. 684 sq.) in the new covenant, will suppose that there will be greater stringency in the legal requirements respecting the reception of foreigners into the Israelitish communion in consequence of the enhanced glory. Thus the Prophet assumes, that Israel will be so glorious in the new covenant, that the inferiority of the heathen will, in contrast, only appear in so much the stronger light, that consequently nothing more will be said of receiving the latter into Israel, yea, that the question will even be raised of excluding those already received.
A πִ ?μְ ?εָ ?δΰμΞιδεδ is one that has joined himself to the χְ ?δַ ?μιδεδ “assembly of Jehovah,” and has been received into it (comp. Nehemiah 10:29). The expression occurs in this sense Isaiah 14:1; Jeremiah 1:5; Zech. 2:15; Esther 9:27. From Isaiah 56:6, we will learn that an allusion to offering one’s self for the priestly ministry is not foreign to the word. It seems to me to be a needless inquiry, whether the Prophet means by πμεδ proselytes of the gate or proselytes of righteousness. For he would evidently say, that all those who are unable to trace back the origin of their race to the root of Israel, will question, whether, because not predestined by birth to the glory of this people, thus because not noble enough, they must not be expelled again from the national communion of Israel, spite of their reception into it, and spite of their having thereby become λְּ ?ιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μμְ ?λָ ?μΞγָּ ?αָ ?ψ (comp.
Leyrer in Herz. R.-Encycl XII. p. 244). The Prophet negatives this inquiry, because the new covenant will rest on a totally different basis from the old. Not fleshly descent, not works of the law will be the chief thing, but the receptivity for God’s word, and the disposition to receive His gift as a gift of grace (Isaiah 55:1-3). This negation is followed by another relating to the quite similar apprehension ascribed to the eunuchs. He, that on account of sexual impotency was unable to propogate his race, was, according to the Old Testament view, a man living in a certain measure under a curse.
For since the Old Testament knows no continuance of life beyond the present, but only a continuance of life in the present in children, therefore the want of children appears to it ignominious punishment (comp. Isaiah 4:1; Genesis 30:23; 1 Samuel 1:5 sqq.; Isaiah 2:1 sqq. Luke 1:25). A eunuch in the proper sense was, according to Deuteronomy 23:2, excluded forever from admission into the congregation. He could not continue to live, he was excluded from the possibility of co-operating in preserving the natural basis on which the whole Israelitish communion rested. Such a one must, of course, in the old covenant regard himself as a dry, unfruitful tree.
There would be no reason for this in the new covenant, which makes the everlasting life depend on spiritual and not on fleshly conditions.
Isaiah 56:4. The Prophet now names three such spiritual conditions of life. In their enumeration there is a progression from the special to the general. As the first he names the observance of a definite single commandment, that regarding the Sabbath. As already remarked, it belonged to the foundations of the Theocracy. At first sight the mention of this commandment gives the impression of Old Testament narrowness.
And indeed we have observed often already, how the prophets continue to be rooted in their own times, and hence paint the future with the colors of the present. But it is also to be considered, that the Prophet certainly knew how to distinguish between a merely outward and truly spiritual fulfilment of the Sabbath-commandment. He must, according to the whole character of his prophecy, have the latter in his mind. He thinks of the Sabbaths as the halting places of religious life, where the pilgrim provides himself with bread and water of life for the next stretch of life’s way, until at last he arrives where all life is a great, holy Sabbath, i. e., an eternal resting in God. “The rest of God on the seventh creative day, that has no evening, hovers over the whole course of the world, in order at last to receive it into itself.” �hler. The second condition is expressed more generally, whereby it is to be noted that the expression αηψε designates as the right obedience that which is voluntary, and rests on an inward harmony with the divine will. The third and most general condition, is holding fast to the covenant of God in general, for to this belongs not only the right activity, but also the right receptivity (Isaiah 55:3).
In this connection it seems to me inadmissible to think specially of the covenant of circumcision, when just in Isaiah 56:3, the irrelevancy of fleshly birth and generation has been emphasized.
Isaiah 56:5. I will give them in My house and in My walls a mark and memory better than sons and daughters. On ιγεωׁ ?ν [“a place and a name” English Version] see Text. and Gram. [“As the meaning place (for ιγ) is admissible in 2 Samuel 18:18, as in many other cases, it appears to be entitled to the preference.” J. A. Alex.]. The Lord will set up this mark in His house and in His walls.
The Temple walls are not elsewhere made prominent, whereas the city walls are. For not only does the wall, in common usage, (comp. intra, extra muros: Psalms 122:7) represent the circuit of the city, but it is personified as the representative of the city community (Lamentations 2:8; Lamentations 2:18). So I believe here, the Prophet would denote the ecclesiastical and political communion, the ecclesiastical and political citizenship. The Lord will give the eunuchs a memorial-mark that will better preserve their name than sons and daughters, whose succession any way must at last become extinct, that is, an everlasting name that shall never be cut off. Note the repetition from Isaiah 55:13. [“A beautiful coincidence and partial fulfilment of the promise is pointed out by J. D.
Michaelis, in the case of the Ethiopian eunuch, whose conversion is recorded Acts 8, and whose memory is far more honored in the church than it could have been by a long line of illustrious descendants.” J. A. Alex.]. What shall this everlasting name be? Living on in the memory of after-times? Yet just how will this be secured?
Sons and daughters, in fact, only take the place in the Old Testament of personal immortality in the New Testament sense. The everlasting name is nothing else than everlasting personal continuance as it is promised in 1 Corinthians 15:29 sqq. on the ground of the resurrection of the Lord. If the bearer of the name himself lives everlastingly, then there is at length the true, new, everlasting name (Isaiah 65:15; Revelation 2:17; Revelation 3:12). Of what avail is the everlasting name to him who himself is swallowed up of death?
Isaiah 56:6. It is a sort of ὕστερονπρότερον when the Prophet discourses last of the απιπλψ “the foreigners,” after having put that first in the theme-like Isaiah 56:3. His designating them as those joining themselves to Jehovah to serve Him, reminds us very much of Num 18:2, where it is said in reference to the Levites: “and they shall join themselves to thee and shall minister unto thee” (comp. ibid. Isaiah 56:4). If this passage hovered in the Prophet’s mind, then his choice of expression would intimate that he promised to “the foreigner” a certain participation in the priestly character of the people Israel, that he conceives of their holding a relation to the latter, something like that of the Levites to the priests. The Piel ωֵׁ ?ψֵ ?ϊ is chiefly used of the priestly ministrations (Exodus 28:43; Exodus 29:30; Exodus 39:1; Numbers 3:31; Numbers 4:12; Numbers 4:14, etc.).
The Prophet would evidently intimate by the word ΰδαδ (see Text. and Gram.) “to love,” that the foreigner’s joining himself to Jehovah to serve Him will be voluntary, proceeding from the inmost necessity of the heart. The additional statement: to be his servants, seems to me to confirm the conjecture that the Prophet conceives of the relation of the foreigners to the Israelites as like that of the Levites to the priests. For the expression μςαγιν seems to me a reminder that ςֲ ?αֹ ?γָ ?δ is the specific word used for the Levitical ministry (comp. Numbers 8:23 sqq.), which in Numbers 4:47 is distinguished into ςַ ?αֹ ?γַ ?ϊςֲ ?αֹ ?γָ ?δ and ςֲ ?αֹ ?γַ ?ϊξַ ?ωָׂ ?ΰ.
Isaiah 56:7. Only to the foreigner is it promised, that the Lord, when they have fulfilled the conditions proposed already to the eunuch (Isaiah 56:4), will bring them up on His holy mountain (Isaiah 2:2 sq,; Isaiah 25:6 sqq.), and make them joyful in His house of prayer. The Lord therefore distinguishes His house from His mountain, and calls the former His prayer-house, i. e., the house where one prays to Him and to Him alone. That there will be a place and time of the greatest joy, we know already from Isaiah 2:4 where the return of an aetas aurea is promised, and from Isaiah 25:6 sqq. where the prospect is presented to the nation of a glorious meal and great joy (Isaiah 56:9) on the holy mount. To the colors of the present, with which the Prophet paints the future, belongs also his conception of the worship on the holy mountain, as being quite in the old style. He sees there still the altar on which burnt-offerings and sacrifices are offered!
Still, it is not to be overlooked, that he calls the Temple a “house of prayer,” before he speaks of the sacrifices, and that he afterwards emphatically repeats the designation “house of prayer” as a denominatio a potiori, so to speak. Although the old Temple was a place destined also for prayer (comp. 1 Kings 8:28 sqq.), yet in the Old Testament it is never called a house of prayer. There is, therefore, in this name an intimation that the sacrifices to be offered in the temple of the future will be spiritual sacrifices (1 Peter 2:5), the fruit of the lips that confess His name (Hebrews 13:15). The clause: for My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations does not assign a reason for what immediately precedes, but for the fundamental thought that the Lord will bring also the foreigners to His holy mountain. The Prophet would make prominent the universality of the salvation, and one easily detects also in λμΞδςξιν a reference to Isaiah 3:2 sqq. and to Isaiah 25:6 sqq. On the other hand Jesus Christ in Matthew 21:13 (Mark 11:17; Luke 19:43) lays the emphasis on the idea “house of prayer,”
3. The Lord God——in the forest.
Isaiah 56:8-9. The initial words saith the Lord God, intimate something new and grand to be said. Now it is nothing new, nor is it anything exceeding grand beyond what we have had already, that Jehovah, in addition to the scattered of Israel, will gather the heathen, so that there may be one flock and one shepherd. For has not the Prophet hitherto often enough (comp. 54), and even from Isaiah 56:3 on of our chapter, given expression to this? Has he not said plainly enough, Isaiah 56:7, that the Lord will bring the foreigners to His holy mountain and make them joyful in His house? Why then this repetition? and why still more this solemn preface?
The Prophet states, in Isaiah 56:9, whom the Lord will add to those already gathered. All meanings of this Isaiah 56:9 that would disjoin it from Isaiah 56:8, and connect it with what follows are unnatural. Some take λμΞηιϊεαιςψ as accusative, and understand by it the flocks of Israel badly kept or grown wild; others, as the modern expositors, would take ηιϊεαιςψ as a second vocative, which leaves the object the same, viz., the badly guarded Israel (Isaiah 56:10); others again, as Stier, etc., understand by the beasts of the field and forest especially the savage nations (in antithesis, therefore, it would seem to “the foreigners” as the civilized) that are also to be invited. But in all these explanations I find neither anything new, nor anything grand, nor any thought that is a fitting conclusion for the chain of thoughts preceding.
Did not the Prophet begin, from chap. 54 on, to describe how all will be new and wonderful in the new covenant? Israel, although judged and repudiated, shall suddenly see itself surrounded by a countless troop of children. One is no longer to be blessed by means of works of the law, but by believing acceptance (55)! But of course obedience to God’s command is not to cease (Isaiah 56:1-2). By these new conditions of life, however, entrance is permitted also to the heathen, and even the eunuchs may be fully qualified members of the community, which rests on a spiritual basis of life, and no longer on a merely natural basis. Therefore a higher, out and out spiritual order of nature, is held in prospect!
Already in Isaiah 55:12-13, the Prophet afforded us a presentiment, that also the lower half of creation, the organic but not personal creation, viz., the vegetable world, will feel itself penetrated by this new spirit of life, the spirit of glorification. What wonder if he says the same here of the beasts! And is that a new thought with our Prophet? Has he not already, Isaiah 11:6 sqq., declared, that the kingdom of the Messiah will fill the world with new, higher life-forces? Has he not in the same place especially declared, that even the nature of the beasts will change, that from enemies of man they will become their friends and play-mates (Isaiah 11:8 comp. with Hosea 2:18, and Isaiah 65:25)? I find in Isaiah 56:8, therefore a climax.
To the chain of promise, that all foreigners, yea, even the eunuchs can have part in the new covenant, is added as the final link that also the brute world shall find admittance.
It should be noted that the Lord is described here as the great gatherer. Under the old covenant sin reigned, and consequently discontent and discord, through the whole world of nature and men. In the new covenant reign love and peace. The centrifugal tendency is replaced by a centripetal. Everything gathers to the common centre. But the Lord, who is this centre and effects this gathering, begins it with Israel.
Then He gathers to Israel the heathen. Then He brings up the vegetable and brute world, that they, the groaning creation, may become regenerated and free from the bondage of destruction unto the glorious liberty of the children of God (Romans 8:21). It is certainly not an accident, and is a strong support to our explanation, that the words ξְ ?χַ ?αֵּ ?υ and πִ ?γηֵ ?ιιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ are taken from Isaiah 11:12, therefore out of the same chapter in which we first found the expression of the view that is the basis of our explanation here. For there it says: “And He will raise up a standard toward the nations and assemble the outcasts of Israel (πγηιιωׂ ?ψΰμ) and gather (χִ ?αֵּ ?υ) the scattered of Judah from the four corners of the earth.” Only in Isaiah 11:12 and Isaiah 56:8 does the expression πγηιιωׂ ?ψΰμ occur in Isaiah. It is found once beside in Psalms 147:2, which belongs to a later period. The word χִ ?αֵּ ?υ is used three times in our passage; first as a predicate of Lord, as the gatherer of the outcasts of Israel.
Beside that principal passage, we learn from many passages of 40–66. the significance of this ingredient of the future (Isaiah 40:11; Isaiah 43:5; Isaiah 49:18; Isaiah 54:7; Isaiah 60:4; Isaiah 62:10). The ξְ ?χַ ?αֵּ ?υ, then, who understands gathering and does it willingly, will gather still others to Israel, viz., to those gathered to Israel. One would suppose that what is further to be gathered must even be added to “outcasts of Israel.” But the Prophet evidently distinguishes “the outcasts,” and “those that are gathered.” By the latter he means such as could by no means be designated as outcasts of Israel, because they never belonged to (the fleshly) Israel. He means by them the heathen of whom he has spoken, Isaiah 56:3; Isaiah 56:6 sq. Of this it was indeed said Isaiah 56:7, that the Lord will bring them to His holy mountain. Therefore we detect two things in the words ςμιεμπχαυιε; first, that the πִ ?χְ ?αָּ ?φִ ?ιν are no πִ ?γָּ ?ηִ ?ιν; that they nevertheless belong to Israel.
For they belong to the spiritual Israel. After that, what is left that could be added to Israel, when, beside “the outcasts,” the heathen, after qualifying as in Isaiah 56:6, have already become πχαφιν, “the gathered?” Then nothing is left but the impersonal creatures. And as already Isaiah 55:12-13, the vegetable world was mentioned as interpenetrated by the new life-forces, nothing remains to us but the brute world, to be declared a partaker of the new life. Because the beasts of the earth are destined to partake of the new life, the bringing on of one half is described by beasts of the field, and of the other by beasts of the forest (see Text. and Gram.). Only in respect to the form of the expression does a change occur. Isaiah 56:9 b states in what way the gathering will take place, viz., by extending an invitation to them.
It is not necessary to supply an object to μΰλμ. The brutes are just invited to eat, to a meal. It is, mutatis mutandis, the same meal to which, Isaiah 25:6, all nations are invited.
[The Author’s interpretation of Isa 56:9, connecting it with the preceding context, has in its favor the marked division of the Masoretic text, in addition to its own ingenuity. But spite of His assertion to the contrary, that is much the more natural division that connects Isaiah 56:9 with what follows, as is proved by its having been so generally adopted, notwithstanding the Masoretic division. The Author supports his view chiefly by appeal to “saith the Lord God,” as a preface that intimates that something new and grand, or grandly new, is to be said. But this inference may itself be questioned. Yet if it were justified, he himself undoes the force of his appeal by showing; that, after all, what is said is not grandly new, seeing it has been said in effect before. The naturalness and propriety of the connection of Isa 56:9 with what follows may be illustrated by a reference to John 10:10; John 10:12.
The relation of Isa 56:1-12, as coherent parts of one distinct chapter, may be illustrated by a reference to Matthew 24:42-51. The Author’s own exposition of the text of itself calls to mind this latter passage, as one that in its spirit is related to the revelation in our prophecy. But the Author actually brings the passages into relation: see below Hom. Hints, § 1. The propriety of throwing Isaiah 56:10-12 into one connected section with Isaiah 57:1-2, may therefore be questioned.—TR.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 56:1-2. “Just because Christ has appeared, we ought not to suppose that now we may live as we please, but rather we ought to be the more diligent about righteousness and godly conversation. For therefore the saving grace of God has appeared and chastens us, that we should live chastened, righteous and godly (Titus 2:11).” Cramer.
2. On Isaiah 56:2. Apart from the temporal coloring of this declaration, it may be remarked here, that the weekly day of rest is necessary, also, for us Christians as long as we are under the curse, Genesis 3:17 sqq. It is one of the greatest and most important benefactions of God, that at the creation of time He at once gave us also the proper division of time. Less than six working days would interrupt too often the progress of human labors and encourage laziness; more than six working days in succession would use up human forces too soon. Six days’ labor, then a day of rest, is just the right and in every respect healthful medium.
That we Christians observe the first instead of the seventh day, has come about of itself, without any special higher ordinance. It is the victory that the second creation, as the beginning of the holy, blessed, everlasting life, must naturally have over the first creation as the beginning of a life made subject to sin, evil and death. For Sunday is the weekly Easter feast. The day of Christ’s resurrection was also a creative day, and indeed a higher one than that of which the Sabbath reminds us. Therefore we ought to celebrate Sunday in a higher style. We, as mush as the men of the old covenant, need rest for the body and rest for the soul.
The soul should on this day wash off the dust and dirt, that have gathered through the week’s work, by a cleansing, refreshing, strengthening bath in its heavenly life-element, that is offered in God’s word. But it should do this in a truly spiritual, not in an outwardly legal way. Let it beware of getting out of the Scylla of Publicanism into the Charybdis of Pharisaism. Even the Old Testament Sabbath was a day of joy. So much the less is it becoming to make of the Christian Sabbath a day of gloomy, depressing asceticism. The Christian Sunday should be illumined with the joy and glory of Easter morning.
But by this joy it should also at the same time be raised high away out, not only above all earthly plagues, but also above all bad, merely earthly joy. It should stand in the brightness of the transfiguration, and thus not merely imitate the light of Easter day, but also typify the light of the everlasting Sabbath.
[If Sunday is anywhere kept holy in the manner described in the last two of the foregoing sentences, there one might abstain from controversy concerning the grounds of its being so. But it is a fact now historical, that the day is nowhere greatly kept sacred, where its importance is urged on no better grounds than those given above. It is a strange proceeding to find a reason for the institution or need of the Sabbath in Genesis 3:17 sqq., when God Himself gives as the reason His own resting on the seventh day, and that not from a work on which rested the blight of a curse. We assent to the statement that “six days’ labor, then a day of rest, is just the right and healthful medium.” But it is still true, that this rule could never be urged as of binding force on any other ground than that of revelation. Experience confirms it; but it could never do so in a way to make it an article of religion, any more than it could make the habit of early rising an article of religion. The reason for the institution of the Sabbath was God’s resting.
Making a day for man to rest like God rested, is itself a revelation of God’s willingness to have men share his rest. To “enter his rest” is the chief, final goal of religion, both under the old and under the new covenant. The Sabbath, therefore, as typical of that rest, and (when we observe it) of our hope of sharing that rest, is the great distinctive and significant institution of the only true religion, i.e., the only religion that offers a true hope of immortality. As long as God’s people have not yet entered into His rest, there is reason, and all the reason there ever was, for observing that day that is a type of His rest. When the rest itself is given, there will no longer remain a typical day to be kept. Just as there no longer remained any sacrifices for sin after the great Sacrifice was come, that all sacrifices for sin typified (Hebrews 10:26).
In Hebrews 4:1-11 the truth just stated is clearly revealed. And in Isaiah 56:8-10 it is put with a pointedness that expressly affirms the Sabbath to be an existing institution for the people of God under the new covenant, though this meaning is generally overlooked. But if the order of thought in Hebrews 4:1-11 is closely scrutinized, it will appear that, in Isaiah 56:8-10, Paul reminds his readers, that Joshua did not give the promised rest, which he appeals to as the only event of the past that might seem to be a realization of God’s promise of rest. The proof that the rest was not then given is, that God afterwards spake of another day for giving it. As the consequence of the rest being yet future, Paul says, Isaiah 56:9 : “Therefore there remaineth σαββατισμός (i.e., the observance of the Sabbath), to the people of God.” And so it must “remain” as long as the watchword of Christians is: “Let us labor to enter into that rest” (Hebrews 4:10).—It is remarkable that the author, in his comment on Isaiah 56:7, seems to find less “temporal coloring” in the expressions “burnt-offerings and sacrifices,” and “mine altar,” than in the mention of “keeping the Sabbath.” To him the former give no impression of Jewish narrowness in Isaiah, while the latter seems so fitted to give this impression that the best he can offer is an indifferent apology. As he is but a representative of multitudes of Christians, including multitudes of eminent ones, it is a mournful evidence of how far the Christian church is from properly valuing the divine and priceless institution of the Holy Sabbath, and therefore how far we Gentiles and “foreigners “are from meeting the conditions of the blessings of the new covenant set forth in the prophecy before us.—Tr.]
3. On Isaiah 56:3-7. In the old covenant, only he was fully qualified as to principle [to be one of the covenant people] who was descended from Abraham through Isaac and Jacob. The natural basis of descent was at the same time the legal basis. Those who only from without grew into this natural and legal basis, must ever, in a certain degree, have regarded themselves as only guests received out of grace, that must properly yield and give place to the fully qualified, were the principles of the Theocracy carried out consistently. And might it not be expected that the triumph of the Theocracy would be attended with the most severely consistent carrying out of its principle?
The right that descent from Abraham through Isaac and Jacob gave, involved, as does every right, a duty, viz., that of co-operating in preserving the natural basis. The extinction of the Twelve Tribes would have been the end of the Old Testament Theocracy. Hence the high significance of marriage, of generation, of posterity. To be childless or, still worse, to be incapable of begetting children, was a ban and curse that rested on a man, like a divine judgment that excluded him from living on and working on, and gave him absolutely to death. What a consoling look, then, the Prophet takes here into the nature of the new covenant ! There is no longer Greek nor Jew; their continued life and activity no longer depends on fleshly posterity.
But in the new covenant Christ is all. Whoever is rooted and lives in him is a child of God, and hence, too, an heir of God and joint heir with Christ (Romans 8:17). He has his citizenship and everlasting life in Christ. His name lives on everlastingly, because he himself is everlasting.
4. On Isaiah 56:5. These words were used by the Papists to commend celibacy. Luther remarks on this: “Propheta hic non versatur in laude virginitatis, sed consolatur steriles eunuchos, ne desperent de sua vocatione, et diserte dicit de eunuchis servantibus Sabbatum et tenentibus foedus divinum. Non ligitur agit de laude eunuchatus aut virginitatis, sed laude servantium mandata.”
5. On Isaiah 56:8-9. There will one time be a new heaven and a new earth (Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; 2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1). Paul speaks of “the anxious expectation of the creature,” and that it “will be delivered from the service of the perishable nature to the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Romans 8:19; Romans 8:21). “Behold, I make all things new,” says He that sitteth on the throne (Revelation 21:5). We must not, therefore, think it wonderful if the Prophet here speaks of the brute world and their relation to man becoming new. Are not, after all, the Cherubim types of what will become of the brute world (Ezekiel 1:10)?
HINTS1. On Isaiah 56:1-2. This text may most appropriately be used for an Advent Sunday (comp. the Epistle of the I. Adv., Romans 13:11-14, the Gospel of the second Luke 21:25-34, the Epistle of the third 1 Corinthians 4:1-5 and of the fourth Philippians 4:4-7), or for one of the last Sundays after Trinity, when the look of the congregation is turned to the coming of the Lord to judgment. On such a day, in the sense of the parables of “the faithful and wise servant” (Matthew 24:45 sqq.) or of the ten virgins (Matthew 25:1 sqq.), one might preach on The revelation of the Lord that we are to look for at the last day. I.
When and how will this revelation take place? (Isaiah 56:1 b) 1.) As regards the time, we are to think of it as near; 2) As regards how, it will bring to light, a. the Salvation intended for us, b. the Righteousness of God. II. Under what conditions may we cheerfully anticipate this revelation? When we are found as servants that do the Lord’s will. 1) What is the doing of such a servant (Isaiah 56:1 a, Isaiah 56:2, comp. Matthew 24:46)? 2) How does one become such a servant? (by sincere repentance and living faith).
2. On Isaiah 56:3-7. Missionary Sermon. The Church of the Lord a house of prayer for all nations. I. A house of prayer, therefore 2) not a place for offering outward divine service, but 1) a place for worshipping in spirit and in truth (John 4:24). II. For all nations. For 1) neither fleshly descent nor fleshly defect excludes; 2) only that is demanded which all men may perform: that one hold fast the covenant of the Lord, and choose what pleases Him (Isaiah 56:4).
3. On Isaiah 56:3-7. We have here an example of what Peter says, Acts 10:34-35, that with God there is no respect of persons, but in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with Him. God proved that, even in the Old Covenant, since He commanded to receive also foreigners into His nation, if they sought Him. But especially in the New Testament has He called and gathered all heathen to His believing people Israel, and to the fellowship of Christ and of His salvation. Let a man be ever so bad, ever so poor and despised of men, still, if he become a believing Christian, he is of as much importance to God as the most superior person.
And what this one has in God, Christ and His kingdom, with that same every believing Christian may comfort himself. Hence John writes of believers, they have their fellowship with them. the holy Apostles; and their fellowship is with the Father, and with Jesus Christ his Son (1 John 1:3).”
4. [On Isaiah 56:6. “The conditions on which admission is had to the privileges of the people of God. (1) They were to “join themselves to the Lord;” embrace the true faith and become a worshipper of the true God. (2) This should be with a purpose to serve Him. (3) They were to “love the name of the Lord,” that is, to love Jehovah Himself. (4) They were to keep His Sabbaths. (5) They were to take hold of His covenant.”—Barnes].
5. On Isaiah 56:8-9. Sin rends mankind, yea all nature asunder, puts them at enmity and scatters them. For by sin we all become egoists, and so lose both the tendency to the common centre, God, and also to those who revolve with us around the centre. God’s love gathers, again what has been scattered. Let us consider God’s activity in gathering. 1) He gathers the outcast of Israel. 2) He gathers to these the heathen. 3) He brings also, in addition to these, the impersonal creatures, the plants (Isaiah 55:12-13) and the brutes (Isaiah 11:6-8; Isaiah 55:25; Romans 8:19-23).
Footnotes:Or, equity.the foreigners.will utterly separate.mark.the foreigners.Heb. To his gathered.to eat.[The remarks of the Author on this mention of the Sabbath, and all “the impression of Old Testament narrowness” of which he would divest it, belong to a condition of “rootedness” in a state of religious life that has lost much of the blessing of the Sabbath. Those who believe in the perpetual obligation of the Fourth Commandment, and have lived in church communions that have observed the command, and have religious traditions through generations of Sabbath-keeping people, will see no “Old Testament narrowness” in the language of the Prophet. On the contrary, we must see in this language the express revelation, that the new covenant is not to involve an abrogation of the Sabbath of the Fourth Commandment; that Sabbath is, in fact, to be more honored than ever, and the keeping of it is to be the first privilege of those that hold fast to that covenant. Though part of the foundations of the Theocracy, it did not pass away with the latter. Some of those foundations last still, e, g., the Abrahamic covenant—, Tr.].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 56:11. (Every one looks to his own way). “Potest intelligi de externis criminibus, sed magis placet, ut accipiatur de speciosis viis, in quibus ambulant hypocritae. Sic Franciscanus Francisci regulam sequitur, decalogum et evangelii doctrinam negligit tanquam rem vulgarem, quae ad vulgus pertirneant.”—Luther.
2. On Isaiah 56:12. In the Alexandrian and Vatican texts of the LXX., the words from ξχφδε Isaiah 56:11 to the end of Isa 56:12 are wanting, which even Jerome remarks on. He adds: “denique hos versiculos nullus ecclesiasticorum interpretum disseruit, sed quasi patentem in medio foveam transiliunt atque transmittunt.”—That the Fathers, unacquainted as they were with Hebrew, pass the words by, is simply explained by the LXX. omitting them. Jerome, because he knew Hebrew, as he himself says, “added them ex hebraico.” But why the Greek translator left them out is doubtful: Theodotion (see Hexapla Orig. ed. Montfaucon II., p. 179) has them.—“Ab hoc vitio (ebrietatis) abstinere debent pii ecclesiae ministri memores interdicti apostolici 1 Timothy 3:2-3, considerantes secum, nullam horulam ipsis esse adeo liberam ac vacuam, qua non ad officia functionis suis possint avocari.”—Foerster.—“Let one point the rough figure for himself for the more delicate spiritual form also, quite as Matthew 24:49; Ephesians 5:18, and the like are meant.
For there is a drunkenness and voluptuousness in all kinds of wine and intoxication, which only the eye of the Spirit beholds in many an honorable Bishop, General-superintendent or Superior-court-preacher. Stier. “Vita concionatoris optimus syllogismus.” Chrysostom.
3. On Isaiah 57:1. “Against the heedlessness of the world, that regards the life and death of men alike. For because Pharaoh and Moses, Saul and Jonathan, Judas and Peter, must temporally die, the one as the other, they suppose it is as much to one as to the other. But on the contrary, one should lay it to heart when useful and pious men fall, because, first, one must miss them afterwards, especially their prayers by which they stand in the breach and run to the walls (Ezekiel 22:30); second, because the destruction of such people is wont to be an evil omen of a great impending misfortune and change, [“It is a sign that God intends war when He calls home His ambassadors.”—M. Henry]. Examples: When Noah turns his back on the world and shuts himself in the ark, the deluge comes (Genesis 7:17).
When Lot goes out of Sodom and Gomorrah, fire from heaven falls on them (Genesis 19:24). When Joseph dies in Egypt, the bondage of the children of Israel begins, together with the murder of their infant boys (Exodus 1:8). When Hezekiah died, then followed the tyranny of Manasseh (2 Kings 20, 21) When Christ and His disciples were made way with, then began the destruction of Jerusalem.”—Cramer.—“Sicut ad Josiam dicit: tolleris, ne videant occuli tui hoc malum, etc. (2 Kings 22:18-20). Sic excidio Hierosolymitano erepti sunt apostoli et reliqui Sancti. Idem nobis accidet. Vivunt adhuc passim quidam pii homines, propter iliis Deus differt poenam.
Sublatis autem iis sequetur Germaniae ruina.”—Luther.—“Blessed are the dead, which die in the Lord, for they rest from their labor (Revelation 14:13). And hellish enemies, as little as human, can do them any harm.”—“It is a misfortune for the whole country when distinguished and deserving people are taken out of the midst by temporal death. For them, indeed, it is well; but God have mercy on those that are left. For as in a great storm, when the heavens are overcast with clouds, the shepherd leads in the sheep, the husbandman hastily gathers his sheaves, the parents call in the children from the streets, so our dear God calls His dearest children together, that the calamity may not touch them.”—Cramer.—“The men of grace or mercy are receivers and distributers, thus also the mediators of the grace of God for their people; the men of grace, that atoningly represent the land by intercessions and conduct, postpone its judgment (Genesis 18:24; Ezekiel 22:30).” Stier.—“The mere presence of an honest man is still a, restraint on the unbridledness of blasphemers.” G. Mueller in Stier.
4. On Isaiah 57:2. “Against the idle fancy of the fire of purgatory. For here it is said of those who have walked uprightly, not that they get into trouble, unrest, pain and torment, by which they must be purged; but that, with respect to their souls, they come to peace. But as to their bodies, they rest in their sleeping chamber. They are not on this account driven about; they seek also no mass or soul baths, as the Papists pretend.”—Cramer.
“Nam stultum est mortem matrem timuisse quietis,
Quam fugiunt morbi, moestaque pauperies.”
(Attributed to Cornelius Gallus, the friend of Virgil).
5. On Isaiah 52:4. It should be a wreath of honor to all faithful teachers and preachers, that they are regarded as monsters and are lampooned by the wise of this world. For if the great Prophet Isaiah in this passage, item, Jeremiah (Jeremiah 20:8), Elijah (2 Kings 2:24), Ezekiel (Ezekiel 33:31), Job (Job 17:6), yea, even Christ Himself had to suffer this, what wonder is it if the scoffing birds sharpen their beaks on us and chatter like the storks?” Cramer.
6. [On Isaiah 52:8. “When a people forget God, the memorials of their apostacy will be found in every part of their habitations. The shrines of idol gods may not be there; the beautiful images of the Greek and Roman mythology, or the clumsy devices of less refined heathens may not be there; but the furniture, the style of living will reveal from ‘behind every door and the posts” of the house that God is forgotten, and that they are influenced by other principles than a regard for His name. The sofa, the carpet, the chandelier, the centre-table, the instruments of music, the splendid mirror, may be of such workmanship as to show, as clearly as the image of a heathen god, that Jehovah is not honored in the dwelling, and that His law does not control the domestic arrangements.” Barnes].
7. [On Isaiah 57:10. “Thou art wearied——no hope. This is a striking illustration of the conduct of men in seeking happiness away from God. They wander from object to object; they become weary in the pursuit, yet they do not abandon it; they still cling to hope though often repulsed—and though the world gives them no permanent comfort—though wealth, ambition, gayety, and vice all fail in imparting the happiness which they sought, yet they do not give it up in despair. They still feel that it is to be found in some other way, than by the disagreeable necessity of returning to God, and they wander from object to object, and from land to land, and become exhausted in the pursuit, and still are not ready to say there is no hope, we give it up in despair, and we will now seek happiness in God.” Barnes.
“Note.—Despair of happiness in the creature, and of satisfaction in the service of sin, is the first step toward a well-grounded hope of happiness in God, and a well-fixed resolution to keep to His service; and those are inexcusable who have had sensible convictions of the vanity of the creature, and yet will not be brought to say, ‘There is no hope to be happy short of the Creator.’—Note.—Prosperity in sin (Thou hast found the life of thy hand) is a great bar to conversion from sin.” M. Henry].
8. On Isaiah 57:11. “God keeps silence only for a while, but yet not for ever and continually, with respect to men’s sins; but the longer He has kept silence, the harder He punishes afterwards.”—Starke.
9. On Isaiah 57:12. “Tuam justitiam. Est emphasis in pronomine tuam. Quasi dicat: mea justitia firma et perpetua est, tua non item.… In calamitate nihil desperatius est justitiariis, cum secundis rebus nihil quoque iis sit confidentius.—Luther.”
10. On Isaiah 57:15 sq. “God has three sorts of dwellings: first in the highest, second in the sanctuary, third in humble hearts. The first dwelling is the universalis praesentia, the universal presence, by which He fills all (Jeremiah 23:24); but there He is too high and incomprehensible for us. The other is gratiosa, the gracious presence, by which He lets Himself be found in the word and sacraments, and also comes finally to us and makes His dwelling in our hearts (John 14:23).” Cramer, comp. Renner, p. 199.—“Humilis anima est Dei sessio et delectabile cubile.” “Excelsus es Domine, sed humiles corde sunt domus tua” (Psalms 113:6; Psalms 138:6). Augustin.—“Fluenta gratiae deorsum non sursum fluunt.” Bernhard.—“Here is a principal passage beaming with evidence, that “holy” means not merely the tremenda majestas, but essentially comprehends the self-communicating condescension of love.” Stier.—Comp. His Reden Jesu V., p. 499, and the essays of Schoeberlein and Achelis in Stud. and Krit. 1847, I., IV.
11. On Isaiah 57:18. Here again we have one of those words in which Isaiah shows Himself to be the Evangelist of the Old Testament. For in the old covenant God does not yet heal men, else the new were superfluous. The law only effects knowledge of sin, but it does not give the power to overcome sin. One fancies here again that he hears the Apostle that wrote Romans 8.
12. On Isaiah 57:19-21. “The gospel in a sermon of peace to the heathen that were far off, and to the Jews that were near. For by it we both have access in one Spirit to the Father (Ephesians 2:18). But the wicked quakes all his life and what he hears terrifies him (Job 15:20; Isaiah 48:22). And especially in conflicts, and notably in the last hour, and when they see God’s judgment near, one sees this in them, that they not only therefore often spit out blasphemies, but that for great anguish they have laid hands on themselves. Examples: Saul, Ahithophel, Judas, Franciscus Spiera.
For because such peace is not to be brought about with works, they must ever stick in anger, resentment, discontent and disfavor with and before God. And it is only pure folly to wish to give the terrified hearts rest by their own expiation, merit and self-elected holiness. Much less will there be rest if one teaches such people to doubt the forgiveness of sins.” Cramer.
HINTS1. On Isaiah 56:10 to Isaiah 57:2. These words may be used as the text of a sermon for a fast-day, or also for a synodical sermon. One might then regard the Prophet’s words as a mirror, or as a measure whereby to measure the condition of the church (of the country, of the times). From this would then come 1) earnest warning to those that belong to the wicked here described, or who do not oppose their doings; 2) comfort for those that have “walked straight before them,” for, though hated and persecuted by men, they shall still come to peace.
2. On Isaiah 57:1-2. These words (also “a Jewish formula solennis for the pious dead,” Stier) have very often been used as texts for funeral discourses for celebrated men.
3. On Isaiah 57:2. Those that have walked in their uprightness, i. e., who during their lives have served the Lord in a living faith, need not fear death. It is to them a bringer of joy. For it brings 1) eternal peace to their soul, 2) rest to their body in the chamber of the grave, till the day of the blessed resurrection.
4. On Isaiah 57:3-10. A description of the coarse idolatry, to which in our day correspond only too many appearances of the modern and subtile heathenism. Only too many have sucked in with their mother’s milk superstition and unbelief, which as a rule go together. As Ishmael, who was begotten after the flesh, mocked and persecuted Isaac that was born according to the promise (Galatians 4:28 sqq.), so also now. The false seed, i. e., those that are not born of the Spirit of the church, although by their fleshly birth they belong to it, mock and persecute the genuine children of the church.
With insatiable greed people run daily, but especially on the Lord’s day, under all green trees, i. e., to the places of worldly pleasure-seeking, where the idols of the belly and of mammon are served! And how many children are from their earliest youth led away to the service of these idols! Are not thereby their immortal souls spiritually slain? And is not that, in the end, a worse sacrifice of children than that ancient sort? All that puts men in mind of the service of God, men get out of their sight (pious customs, Sunday, feast days, church acts, as baptism, marriage, burial), in order to be able to surrender themselves undisturbed and wholly to the modern idols. Men no longer seek their strength in the covenant with the Lord, but among men in associations of every kind.
And, because that does not instantly reveal its ruinous effects, but often seems to have a good effect, men never weary of this conduct, but confirm themselves in it more and more.
5. On Isaiah 57:12. Many men will not by any means believe that their good works are wholly insufficient to obtain the righteousness that is of avail with God. Now God will, indeed, not suffer to go unrewarded the cup of water that we give to the thirsty in the proper spirit (Matthew 10:42; Mark 9:41). But could we point to ever so many such cups, still they do not suffice to pay our ten thousand talents (Matthew 18:24 sqq.). One must therefore remind his charge of the great reckoning that the Lord will one day have with us. In this 1) will be had a complete and perfectly correct investigation into our indebtedness and assets. 2) Then it will appear that our assets will be too defective to be of any use whatever against our indebtedness.
6. On Isaiah 57:13-14. It depends very much on the sort of spirit with which one turns to God for help. If one does it in order to make a trial also with the dear God, then one will certainly be denied. But if one does it because one knows no other helper, and wishes to know no other, then one may confidently count on being heard. How differently the answers sound that God gives to the cries for help that reach Him. 1) To the one it is said: let thy gatherings help thee. 2) But to the others is called out: a. make a road, clear the way, take up the stumbling-block out of the way of my people; b. inherit the land, possess my holy mountain.
7. On Isaiah 57:15-16. “I know that these sayings speak especially of penitent sinners and aroused consciences; but I do not see why they may not with good right be applied also to other alarmed and anxious people. One has here to look also at the examples of the dear children of God who are presented to us in the Holy Scriptures full of fear and alarm. Think of Job (Job 9:34; Job 13:21), David (Psalms 25:17; Psalms 55:5 sqq.), Daniel (Daniel 8:17 sq.), Paul (1 Corinthians 2:3; 2 Corinthians 7:5), yea, of Jesus Christ Himself (Matthew 26:37; Mark 14:33; Luke 22:44). From this thou seest clearly, thou lover of God, but timid and frightened soul, that thou art not the first among the children of God, that suffer His terrors and must go about with an anxious heart. It is also therewith sufficiently shown that such an event is not a reminder of anger, but rather of the grace of the kind and gracious God.”—Scriver.
8. On Isaiah 57:15-16. “A holy shudder goes through my soul when, in receiving Thy body and blood, I think of who they are to whom Thou so communicatest Thyself! That is Thy way, Thou wonderful Lord, that Thou utterly humblest and castest down to the ground before Thou raisest up. Thou sayest: ‘I who dwell in the high and holy place am with those that are of a contrite and humble spirit.’ Has the greatness of my sin already melted my heart, it melts still more at the greatness of Thy grace.”—Tholuck.
9 On Isaiah 57:15-16. Sermon for Whitsun week: “Wherein do we behold the greatest glory of the God of grace? 1) Therein, that He does not despise a poor sinner’s heart for a dwelling. 2) Therein, that He manifests Himself in it not as a judge, but as a comforter.” Taube, in Gottes Bruenl. hat Wassers die Fuelle. Hamburg, 1872.
10. On Isaiah 57:17-18. One is reminded here of 1 Kings 19:11 sq. God is not in the tempest, nor in the earthquake, but He is in the still, gentle breeze. The gospel goes more to the hearts of men, and lays deeper hold on them than the law. The conversion of men. 1) It is prepared by being angry and smiting (Isaiah 57:17). 2. It is accomplished by God’s inwardly healing the heart.
11. On Isaiah 57:19. Missionary Sermon. The work of missions: 1) By whom is it accomplished? 2) On whom is it accomplished? 3) What end does it serve?
12. On Isaiah 57:20. “The whole Scripture testifies that what it says of the grace of God, of the forgiveness of sins and of the assurance of bliss belongs to the penitent. For those that are ever stirred up and driven on by their malignant desires (like the sea by the winds), and commit one sin after another (like the sea casts out all sorts of dirt), are wicked men, and have no peace to expect.”—Scriver.
IX.—THE NINTH Concluding Word: The Mournful Present, which will not be Prevented by the Approach of the Glorious Future. Isaiah 56:10 to Isaiah 57:21.Isaiah is wont to set the present in the light of the future, in order to make an impression on it by the contrast. I appeal to chapters 2–5, and to my interpretation of Isa 2:5. Jeremiah also imitates Isaiah in this (Jeremiah 3:11 to Jeremiah 4:4). The sudden spring from the remotest, the glorious future into the mournful, immediate present that the Prophet makes between Isaiah 56:9-10, need not therefore seem strange to us. It is to be admitted that the description of the bad shepherds, Isaiah 56:10-12, can suit also the period of the Exile.
That it at least fits Isaiah’s contemporaries very well is undeniably plain from Isaiah 28. That in the exile, prophets of Jehovah were murdered (Isaiah 57:1) simply for being such, is possible, but not probable, and not proved. That remnants of idolatry continued through the whole exile, is not only possible but also probable. However the time before and after the destruction of Jerusalem must be distinguished. But that all kinds of idolatry even Moloch worship, with its sacrifices of children (Isaiah 57:5), still occurred in the Exile, is not probable and not proved. It is utterly inconceivable, or, as Hengstenberg says (Christol.
II. p. 201, 2 edit.), “it has no meaning,” that Israel even in exile sent to foreign kings for help (Isaiah 57:9). The threat: because thou hast not laid to heart my silence ξֵ ?ςεֹ ?μν, thy works shall be made manifest and thy idols be swept away (Isaiah 57:11-13), certainly suits better the time before than the time after the Exile. For this reason even the opponents of the genuineness have been obliged to admit that the authorship of our section dates before the Exile (comp. Kleinert, Echth. D. jes. Weiss. p. 305 sqq.; Stier in his Comm.; Hengstenberg, l.c.).
They do so partly by forced interpretations; partly by assuming that the whole passage Isaiah 56:10 to Isaiah 57:21 (Eichhorn), or at least Isaiah 56:9 to Isaiah 57:11 (Ewald) is repeated “from older prophets.” I am for this reason of the opinion (with Kleinert, Stier, Hengstenberg) that the grounds already given are opposed to the idea that in writing our passage, too, Isaiah’s view-point was that of the Exile (Del.).
The section divides into three parts. In the First the Prophet contrasts the conduct and the fate of the bad and of the good shepherds of the present (Isaiah 56:10; Isaiah 57:2). In the Second he describes the mournful signs of the present, the idolatrous doings of the nation (Isaiah 57:3-14). In the Third he returns to promising salvation, and announces that God’s love will still bring salvation and healing to those that let themselves be healed (Isaiah 57:15-21).
_______________
1.—THE PRESENT MARKED BY THE OF THE BAD AND GOOD
Isaiah 56:10 to Isaiah 57:210 His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant,
They are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark;
Sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber.
11 Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough,
And they are shepherds that cannot understand:
They all look to their own way,
Every one for his gain, from his quarter.
12 Come ye, say they, I will fetch wine,
And we will fill ourselves with strong drink;
And to-morrow shall be as this day,
And much more abundant.
57 1 The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart:
And merciful men are taken away, none considering
That the righteous is taken away from the evil to come.
2 He shall enter into peace:
They shall rest in their beds,
Each one walking in his uprightness.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 56:10. δζδ. Verse 12. ιϊψξΰγ; Isaiah 57:1. ΰπωׁ ?ιΞηργ– ωׂ ?νςμμα; Isaiah 57:2. ξִ ?ωְׁ ?λָּ ?α.
Isaiah 56:10. The suffix in φֹ ?λּ ?εֹ undoubtedly refers to Israel.
Isaiah 56:11. The suffix in ξχφδε is related to the ideal totality to which the ΰִ ?ιωׁ belongs.
Isaiah 57:1. I cannot approve the view that λιξτπιεβεΧ is an objective clause depending on ξֵ ?αִ ?ιο. For how could then the wicked know that the pious by their death only escape the impending evil? And must it not then read, as Vitringa has said, μִ ?τְ ?βֵ ?ι or at least ξִ ?μִּ ?λְּ ?πֵ ?ι? I believe that we must construe ξִ ?τְ ?πֵ ?ι as causal, as in countless instances beside.
Isaiah 57:2. This verse is very difficult on grammatical and lexical grounds. For if one take δֹ ?μֵ ?κְ as the subject of ιָ ?αεֹ ?ΰ, then this insertion of a clause whose subject is identical with that of the principal clause, but expressed in the plural, is very violent, and, so far as I see, unexampled, notwithstanding the great freedom usual in Hebrew in respect to the change of person and number. It is also very questionable whether ξִ ?ωְׁ ?λָּ ?α can mean “burying place,” and whether πεֹ ?ηַ with ςַ ?μ can mean “rest in the grave.” For ξωׁ ?λα is only twice beside this used of a bed prepared for a dead person. In 2 Chronicles 16:14 it designates the bed of state on which king Asa was laid before his burial (ξωׁ ?λα and χְ ?αָ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ are expressly distinguished). Also in Ezekiel 32:25 there is prepared for Elam a ξωׁ ?λα in the under-world, around about which are the ςְ ?αָ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ of his adherents.
Thus it appears that ξωׁ ?λα can indeed designate the place of repose of a dead person, but that is not then the grave in which he lies, but a distinguished elevated couch, on which he lies. But here nothing else is meant to be said of the righteous than that he, as one who has walked uprightly, finds rest in his grave. For this reason I am unable also to agree with the explanation, grammatically admissible, that treats ιαεΰωׁ ?μεν as a clause by itself, and δμκ as the subject of ιπεδε. Then the participle is regarded as collective: the upright walking, i. e., the total of those walking uprightly. But here ςμξωׁ ?λαεϊν remains an oddity. For this reason I am of the opinion, that ιπεηεςμξΧ is to be treated as clause thrown in, expressive of the situation (comp.
Jeremiah 13:21): “comes to peace—while they rest on their beds—who walks uprightly”. In this way is made prominent the contrast between the fleshly rest on soft pillows (comp. Isaiah 66:10. ωׁ ?λαινΰδαιμπεν) that the bad shepherds enjoy, and the rest of everlasting peace of God enjoyed by the righteous whom the world persecutes (comp. Luke 16:22). It is true one looks for εְ ?ηֵ ?ξָּ ?δ before ιָ ?πεּ ?ηεּ. Still Vav. in such clauses is not unfrequently omitted (comp. e. g., Psalms 57:4; ηֵ ?ψֵ ?σωׁ ?ΰֲ ?τִ ?ι; Ewald, § 311, a), and the omission of δֵ ?ξָּ ?δ finds compensation in the striking prominence of the plural.—The plural ξωׁ ?λαεϊ is found beside here in Hosea 7:14; Micah 2:1; Psalms 149:5.
It is also perhaps not unimportant to remark that this plural only occurs with ςַ ?μ, and that both the singular and the plural with ςַ ?μ never mean anything else than the bed on which the living repose. The passages with ξωׁ ?λα in the singular with ςμ: 2 Samuel 4:11; 2 Samuel 11:2; 2 Samuel 13:6; 1 Kings 1:47; Psalms 4:5; Psalms 36:5; Job 33:19; Son 3:1. For the use of both sing. and plur. in Isaiah, see List.—πָ ?λֹ ?ηַ is τὸἐναντίον, ex adverso positum, that which lies directly opposite, directly before a man. Hence δμκπληε is he that goes the way lying directly before him. δμκ with the accusative as in Isaiah 33:15; Isaiah 50:10.
AND 1. The Prophet stands at the conclusion of the task he proposed for the second Ennead. He has pursued the word of the Servant of God through all its alternations to its glorious goal. From the light of the final glorification he turns his eye back and observes with pain the contrast between the glorious future and the mournful present. As we notice in Isaiah 48:6 that the Prophet by no means becomes unconscious of the present in his contemplation of the future, so we see here, too, that he cannot avoid instituting a comparison between that hereafter and the now. The difference is so great, that one does not comprehend how from the now the hereafter can ever come to be.
But nothing is impossible with God. Spite of the heinousness of the present, the word of the Lord stands fast, that the people of God (those of course excepted that persistently resist the drawings of the Spirit) shall come to the peace and refreshment on the mount of God. The Prophet describes first the heinousness of the present. His eye falls chiefly on those that ought to be leaders and exemplars to the nation in the good way. But these are blind watchmen, and dumb, lazy dogs (Isaiah 56:10) and insatiably greedy. They are shepherds without knowledge, only keen for their own interest (Isaiah 56:11), and carousers that each day carry on worse than the day before (Isaiah 56:12).
Where such men rule, of course the lot of the righteous is outwardly mournful; unregarded by the crowd they are borne away by the evil (Isaiah 57:1). But happily for them! For while others on their luxurious pillows surrender themselves to a fatal repose, the righteous go in to everlasting peace (Isaiah 57:2).
2. His watchmen——more abundant.—Isaiah 56:10-12. Although in general the transition here is sharp from the future to the immediate present, still the figure used in Isaiah 56:9 prepares the transition in a very artistic way. For, although I do not think that there the Prophet summons the wild beasts to devour Israel, because they may easily do this on account of the bad watch that is kept, still I think it likely, that the Prophet, by the mention of the future of the beasts, is led to think of the beasts of the present, and of the way in which Israel is given over to them. φֹ ?τִ ?ιν (Isaiah 21:5-6; Isaiah 52:7), which means primarily “spies, sentinels on guard,” we are to understand here as meaning those whose duty it is, on account of their office, to warn the community of evil, and with it to contend against wickedness. Such, first of all, are the prophets. But also the priests (Malachi 2:7) and worldly superiors, in short all that are entrusted with the shepherd office (εְ ?δֵ ?ξָּ ?δψςִ ?ιν56:11) are included.
But what sort of watchmen are those that cannot see? In the ordinary sense there are none such. But in a spiritual sense there are. For there are, alas, those spiritually blind, whose spiritual eye is plastered up, and who consequently “do not know,” i. e., have no knowledge, no understanding of what they ought to know, ιָ ?γς in this absolute sense we had already Isaiah 44:9; Isaiah 44:18; Isaiah 45:20. Changing his figure, the Prophet further compares those bad shepherds to dogs that should watch the flock, and which though not blind, indeed, are yet dumb. But a protector that sees the enemy and gives no notice, is just as bad as one that does not see him at all (indeed worse subjectively).
Thus the second figure intensifies the charge; for it adds a bad will to incapacity. Why they do not bark is said in the following words (added in the form of apposition): snarling in sleep, lying down, loving to slumber.δָ ?ζָ ?δ, ἅπ. λεγ. seems to designate the sounds a dog utters in sleep, and therefore the meanings “to sleep, dream, snore, to be delirious” are ascribed to the word; comp. Bochart, Hieroz. ed. Lips. I. p. 781 sqq. With the Arabs the dog passes for a sleepy beast (comp.
Hitzigin loc.), while, on the contrary, in the Occident it is the type of watchfulness (see Bochart, l. c.). The Prophet would say of the bad shepherds under all circumstances, that they cannot bark because they love their comfort and advantage beyond everything. Hence they get off nothing more than a snarl or a growl, such as a dog utters in slumber. Bochartl.c. adduces several passages from the ancients that show that they regarded these sounds in sleep as a characteristic peculiarity of dogs. They are lazy, yet insatiably greedy dogs (ςַ ?ζֵּ ?ιΞπֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ strong in greed, Isaiah 5:14; Isaiah 29:8; Isaiah 55:2); they do not know what it is to be satisfied. And they are shepherds! adds the Prophet indignantly, with reference to “his watchmen,” etc., Isaiah 57:10 init.
Then, as is his manner, Isaiah proceeds, in what follows, to explain the figure: answering to the ignorance of what is enough, is a worse ignorance with respect to δָ ?αִ ?ιο, “to distinguish “(comp. the reverse of this Isaiah 32:4). They are strangers to true wisdom. They let selfishness essentially determine the direction of their efforts (comp. Isaiah 58:6), and especially greediness for gain. αֶּ ?φַ ?ς is “that cut off, the cutting, gain” (Isaiah 33:15; Isaiah 57:17), χָ ?φֶ ?δ is the end in the sense of the periphery (comp. Genesis 19:4; Jeremiah 50:26). Thus the idea is: from the utmost periphery in to the very centre every one of this fine fellowship turns only to gain.
Accordingly they all do so without exception.
And what good does their money do them? Isaiah 57:12 shows this by examples. Such a blind, dumb watchman, who can open eye and mouth well enough when it concerns his belly, calls out to the passer-by, or a visitor: Come ye, I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with intoxicating drink (ωֵׁ ?λָ ?ψ comp. on Isaiah 5:11). This friendly host, however, does not invite to merely a short banquet, but, (answering to “they know not satiety” Isaiah 57:10), also to one that the following day will be continued in grander style. The words βγεμ are both a nearer definition and also intensify the meaning. The next day is to be like the first only as a drunken day in general, but distinguished as to species by being of a much higher quality.
Who does not think here of what the Prophet says Isaiah 28:7 sqq. of the vice of drunkenness that invaded both Judah and Israel? At all events, this moral aberration agrees very well with the religious degeneracy spoken of in Isaiah 57:3 sqq.
3. The righteous perish——uprightness, Isaiah 57:1-2. If Isaiah 56:10-12 describes the doings of the bad shepherds, especially of false prophets, then by the righteous man here must be understood also a prophet. And ΰαγ and πΰρσ cannot mean a natural death, for that would be much more an encouragement than a warning to the bad. Rather the context seems to me to demand that the mournful fate of the true and righteous servants of Jehovah be contrasted with the lazy, jovial doings of the dumb dogs. Therefore (with Umbreit and others) I understand ΰαγ and πΰρτ to denote a violent death.
I cannot avoid the impression that the Prophet here alludes to circumstances that he sees quite near, and as perhaps personally threatening to himself. Of course, precise proof of this cannot be offered; and I will only offer the view as a conjecture. The flood of unbelief had only swelled to greater magnitude under the idolatrous Manasseh. The apostacy was universal. It was much as in the days of Elijah (1 Kings 19:10). It is also expressly said of Manasseh, that he shed very much innocent blood, and filled Jerusalem with it from one end to the other (2 Kings 21:16); and tradition (handed down by Josephus,Antiq.
X. 3, 1) refers that bloodshed especially to execution of numerous prophets. Even though Isaiah himself may not so have perished, and though the tradition to that effect be unfounded (see Introduction, pp. 3, 4), still Isaiah, while writing this, may have had this atrocious period in mind, and even have regarded it as threatening himself with destruction. That no man laid it to heart, if again a Jehovah-prophet was slain, is perfectly explained by the frequency of such events and by the apostacy being so universal and intense. The expression ΰπωׁ ?ιΞηργ might in parallelism have a general meaning. Yet history justifies our construing it in a particular sense. ηֶ ?ρֶ ?γ is “pietas, piety.” αΰιοξαιο is said as αְּ ?δִ ?ξָ ? ?ֽ ?φְ ?ΰεֹ, Isaiah 55:6. On λιξτπιεβεΧ, see Text. and Gram.
It was said before only, that the pious are taken away without any one regarding it. Now the reason of this is given. It is the ψָ ?ςָ ?δ, the universally prevalent wickedness. That explains that the righteous are not only taken away, but that it is done without opposition, yea, even without causing any disturbance.
Isaiah 57:2. But that is only a seeming misfortune for the righteous. In fact in this way he enters into peace, while they, the wicked, are fatally reposing on their beds of luxury (see Text. and Gram.).
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 56:11. (Every one looks to his own way). “Potest intelligi de externis criminibus, sed magis placet, ut accipiatur de speciosis viis, in quibus ambulant hypocritae. Sic Franciscanus Francisci regulam sequitur, decalogum et evangelii doctrinam negligit tanquam rem vulgarem, quae ad vulgus pertirneant.”—Luther.
2. On Isaiah 56:12. In the Alexandrian and Vatican texts of the LXX., the words from ξχφδε Isaiah 56:11 to the end of Isa 56:12 are wanting, which even Jerome remarks on. He adds: “denique hos versiculos nullus ecclesiasticorum interpretum disseruit, sed quasi patentem in medio foveam transiliunt atque transmittunt.”—That the Fathers, unacquainted as they were with Hebrew, pass the words by, is simply explained by the LXX. omitting them. Jerome, because he knew Hebrew, as he himself says, “added them ex hebraico.” But why the Greek translator left them out is doubtful: Theodotion (see Hexapla Orig. ed. Montfaucon II., p. 179) has them.—“Ab hoc vitio (ebrietatis) abstinere debent pii ecclesiae ministri memores interdicti apostolici 1 Timothy 3:2-3, considerantes secum, nullam horulam ipsis esse adeo liberam ac vacuam, qua non ad officia functionis suis possint avocari.”—Foerster.—“Let one point the rough figure for himself for the more delicate spiritual form also, quite as Matthew 24:49; Ephesians 5:18, and the like are meant.
For there is a drunkenness and voluptuousness in all kinds of wine and intoxication, which only the eye of the Spirit beholds in many an honorable Bishop, General-superintendent or Superior-court-preacher. Stier. “Vita concionatoris optimus syllogismus.” Chrysostom.
3. On Isaiah 57:1. “Against the heedlessness of the world, that regards the life and death of men alike. For because Pharaoh and Moses, Saul and Jonathan, Judas and Peter, must temporally die, the one as the other, they suppose it is as much to one as to the other. But on the contrary, one should lay it to heart when useful and pious men fall, because, first, one must miss them afterwards, especially their prayers by which they stand in the breach and run to the walls (Ezekiel 22:30); second, because the destruction of such people is wont to be an evil omen of a great impending misfortune and change, [“It is a sign that God intends war when He calls home His ambassadors.”—M. Henry]. Examples: When Noah turns his back on the world and shuts himself in the ark, the deluge comes (Genesis 7:17).
When Lot goes out of Sodom and Gomorrah, fire from heaven falls on them (Genesis 19:24). When Joseph dies in Egypt, the bondage of the children of Israel begins, together with the murder of their infant boys (Exodus 1:8). When Hezekiah died, then followed the tyranny of Manasseh (2 Kings 20, 21) When Christ and His disciples were made way with, then began the destruction of Jerusalem.”—Cramer.—“Sicut ad Josiam dicit: tolleris, ne videant occuli tui hoc malum, etc. (2 Kings 22:18-20). Sic excidio Hierosolymitano erepti sunt apostoli et reliqui Sancti. Idem nobis accidet. Vivunt adhuc passim quidam pii homines, propter iliis Deus differt poenam.
Sublatis autem iis sequetur Germaniae ruina.”—Luther.—“Blessed are the dead, which die in the Lord, for they rest from their labor (Revelation 14:13). And hellish enemies, as little as human, can do them any harm.”—“It is a misfortune for the whole country when distinguished and deserving people are taken out of the midst by temporal death. For them, indeed, it is well; but God have mercy on those that are left. For as in a great storm, when the heavens are overcast with clouds, the shepherd leads in the sheep, the husbandman hastily gathers his sheaves, the parents call in the children from the streets, so our dear God calls His dearest children together, that the calamity may not touch them.”—Cramer.—“The men of grace or mercy are receivers and distributers, thus also the mediators of the grace of God for their people; the men of grace, that atoningly represent the land by intercessions and conduct, postpone its judgment (Genesis 18:24; Ezekiel 22:30).” Stier.—“The mere presence of an honest man is still a, restraint on the unbridledness of blasphemers.” G. Mueller in Stier.
4. On Isaiah 57:2. “Against the idle fancy of the fire of purgatory. For here it is said of those who have walked uprightly, not that they get into trouble, unrest, pain and torment, by which they must be purged; but that, with respect to their souls, they come to peace. But as to their bodies, they rest in their sleeping chamber. They are not on this account driven about; they seek also no mass or soul baths, as the Papists pretend.”—Cramer.
“Nam stultum est mortem matrem timuisse quietis,
Quam fugiunt morbi, moestaque pauperies.”
(Attributed to Cornelius Gallus, the friend of Virgil).
5. On Isaiah 52:4. It should be a wreath of honor to all faithful teachers and preachers, that they are regarded as monsters and are lampooned by the wise of this world. For if the great Prophet Isaiah in this passage, item, Jeremiah (Jeremiah 20:8), Elijah (2 Kings 2:24), Ezekiel (Ezekiel 33:31), Job (Job 17:6), yea, even Christ Himself had to suffer this, what wonder is it if the scoffing birds sharpen their beaks on us and chatter like the storks?” Cramer.
6. [On Isaiah 52:8. “When a people forget God, the memorials of their apostacy will be found in every part of their habitations. The shrines of idol gods may not be there; the beautiful images of the Greek and Roman mythology, or the clumsy devices of less refined heathens may not be there; but the furniture, the style of living will reveal from ‘behind every door and the posts” of the house that God is forgotten, and that they are influenced by other principles than a regard for His name. The sofa, the carpet, the chandelier, the centre-table, the instruments of music, the splendid mirror, may be of such workmanship as to show, as clearly as the image of a heathen god, that Jehovah is not honored in the dwelling, and that His law does not control the domestic arrangements.” Barnes].
7. [On Isaiah 57:10. “Thou art wearied——no hope. This is a striking illustration of the conduct of men in seeking happiness away from God. They wander from object to object; they become weary in the pursuit, yet they do not abandon it; they still cling to hope though often repulsed—and though the world gives them no permanent comfort—though wealth, ambition, gayety, and vice all fail in imparting the happiness which they sought, yet they do not give it up in despair. They still feel that it is to be found in some other way, than by the disagreeable necessity of returning to God, and they wander from object to object, and from land to land, and become exhausted in the pursuit, and still are not ready to say there is no hope, we give it up in despair, and we will now seek happiness in God.” Barnes.
“Note.—Despair of happiness in the creature, and of satisfaction in the service of sin, is the first step toward a well-grounded hope of happiness in God, and a well-fixed resolution to keep to His service; and those are inexcusable who have had sensible convictions of the vanity of the creature, and yet will not be brought to say, ‘There is no hope to be happy short of the Creator.’—Note.—Prosperity in sin (Thou hast found the life of thy hand) is a great bar to conversion from sin.” M. Henry].
8. On Isaiah 57:11. “God keeps silence only for a while, but yet not for ever and continually, with respect to men’s sins; but the longer He has kept silence, the harder He punishes afterwards.”—Starke.
9. On Isaiah 57:12. “Tuam justitiam. Est emphasis in pronomine tuam. Quasi dicat: mea justitia firma et perpetua est, tua non item.… In calamitate nihil desperatius est justitiariis, cum secundis rebus nihil quoque iis sit confidentius.—Luther.”
10. On Isaiah 57:15 sq. “God has three sorts of dwellings: first in the highest, second in the sanctuary, third in humble hearts. The first dwelling is the universalis praesentia, the universal presence, by which He fills all (Jeremiah 23:24); but there He is too high and incomprehensible for us. The other is gratiosa, the gracious presence, by which He lets Himself be found in the word and sacraments, and also comes finally to us and makes His dwelling in our hearts (John 14:23).” Cramer, comp. Renner, p. 199.—“Humilis anima est Dei sessio et delectabile cubile.” “Excelsus es Domine, sed humiles corde sunt domus tua” (Psalms 113:6; Psalms 138:6). Augustin.—“Fluenta gratiae deorsum non sursum fluunt.” Bernhard.—“Here is a principal passage beaming with evidence, that “holy” means not merely the tremenda majestas, but essentially comprehends the self-communicating condescension of love.” Stier.—Comp. His Reden Jesu V., p. 499, and the essays of Schoeberlein and Achelis in Stud. and Krit. 1847, I., IV.
11. On Isaiah 57:18. Here again we have one of those words in which Isaiah shows Himself to be the Evangelist of the Old Testament. For in the old covenant God does not yet heal men, else the new were superfluous. The law only effects knowledge of sin, but it does not give the power to overcome sin. One fancies here again that he hears the Apostle that wrote Romans 8.
12. On Isaiah 57:19-21. “The gospel in a sermon of peace to the heathen that were far off, and to the Jews that were near. For by it we both have access in one Spirit to the Father (Ephesians 2:18). But the wicked quakes all his life and what he hears terrifies him (Job 15:20; Isaiah 48:22). And especially in conflicts, and notably in the last hour, and when they see God’s judgment near, one sees this in them, that they not only therefore often spit out blasphemies, but that for great anguish they have laid hands on themselves. Examples: Saul, Ahithophel, Judas, Franciscus Spiera.
For because such peace is not to be brought about with works, they must ever stick in anger, resentment, discontent and disfavor with and before God. And it is only pure folly to wish to give the terrified hearts rest by their own expiation, merit and self-elected holiness. Much less will there be rest if one teaches such people to doubt the forgiveness of sins.” Cramer.
HINTS1. On Isaiah 56:10 to Isaiah 57:2. These words may be used as the text of a sermon for a fast-day, or also for a synodical sermon. One might then regard the Prophet’s words as a mirror, or as a measure whereby to measure the condition of the church (of the country, of the times). From this would then come 1) earnest warning to those that belong to the wicked here described, or who do not oppose their doings; 2) comfort for those that have “walked straight before them,” for, though hated and persecuted by men, they shall still come to peace.
2. On Isaiah 57:1-2. These words (also “a Jewish formula solennis for the pious dead,” Stier) have very often been used as texts for funeral discourses for celebrated men.
3. On Isaiah 57:2. Those that have walked in their uprightness, i. e., who during their lives have served the Lord in a living faith, need not fear death. It is to them a bringer of joy. For it brings 1) eternal peace to their soul, 2) rest to their body in the chamber of the grave, till the day of the blessed resurrection.
4. On Isaiah 57:3-10. A description of the coarse idolatry, to which in our day correspond only too many appearances of the modern and subtile heathenism. Only too many have sucked in with their mother’s milk superstition and unbelief, which as a rule go together. As Ishmael, who was begotten after the flesh, mocked and persecuted Isaac that was born according to the promise (Galatians 4:28 sqq.), so also now. The false seed, i. e., those that are not born of the Spirit of the church, although by their fleshly birth they belong to it, mock and persecute the genuine children of the church.
With insatiable greed people run daily, but especially on the Lord’s day, under all green trees, i. e., to the places of worldly pleasure-seeking, where the idols of the belly and of mammon are served! And how many children are from their earliest youth led away to the service of these idols! Are not thereby their immortal souls spiritually slain? And is not that, in the end, a worse sacrifice of children than that ancient sort? All that puts men in mind of the service of God, men get out of their sight (pious customs, Sunday, feast days, church acts, as baptism, marriage, burial), in order to be able to surrender themselves undisturbed and wholly to the modern idols. Men no longer seek their strength in the covenant with the Lord, but among men in associations of every kind.
And, because that does not instantly reveal its ruinous effects, but often seems to have a good effect, men never weary of this conduct, but confirm themselves in it more and more.
5. On Isaiah 57:12. Many men will not by any means believe that their good works are wholly insufficient to obtain the righteousness that is of avail with God. Now God will, indeed, not suffer to go unrewarded the cup of water that we give to the thirsty in the proper spirit (Matthew 10:42; Mark 9:41). But could we point to ever so many such cups, still they do not suffice to pay our ten thousand talents (Matthew 18:24 sqq.). One must therefore remind his charge of the great reckoning that the Lord will one day have with us. In this 1) will be had a complete and perfectly correct investigation into our indebtedness and assets. 2) Then it will appear that our assets will be too defective to be of any use whatever against our indebtedness.
6. On Isaiah 57:13-14. It depends very much on the sort of spirit with which one turns to God for help. If one does it in order to make a trial also with the dear God, then one will certainly be denied. But if one does it because one knows no other helper, and wishes to know no other, then one may confidently count on being heard. How differently the answers sound that God gives to the cries for help that reach Him. 1) To the one it is said: let thy gatherings help thee. 2) But to the others is called out: a. make a road, clear the way, take up the stumbling-block out of the way of my people; b. inherit the land, possess my holy mountain.
7. On Isaiah 57:15-16. “I know that these sayings speak especially of penitent sinners and aroused consciences; but I do not see why they may not with good right be applied also to other alarmed and anxious people. One has here to look also at the examples of the dear children of God who are presented to us in the Holy Scriptures full of fear and alarm. Think of Job (Job 9:34; Job 13:21), David (Psalms 25:17; Psalms 55:5 sqq.), Daniel (Daniel 8:17 sq.), Paul (1 Corinthians 2:3; 2 Corinthians 7:5), yea, of Jesus Christ Himself (Matthew 26:37; Mark 14:33; Luke 22:44). From this thou seest clearly, thou lover of God, but timid and frightened soul, that thou art not the first among the children of God, that suffer His terrors and must go about with an anxious heart. It is also therewith sufficiently shown that such an event is not a reminder of anger, but rather of the grace of the kind and gracious God.”—Scriver.
8. On Isaiah 57:15-16. “A holy shudder goes through my soul when, in receiving Thy body and blood, I think of who they are to whom Thou so communicatest Thyself! That is Thy way, Thou wonderful Lord, that Thou utterly humblest and castest down to the ground before Thou raisest up. Thou sayest: ‘I who dwell in the high and holy place am with those that are of a contrite and humble spirit.’ Has the greatness of my sin already melted my heart, it melts still more at the greatness of Thy grace.”—Tholuck.
9 On Isaiah 57:15-16. Sermon for Whitsun week: “Wherein do we behold the greatest glory of the God of grace? 1) Therein, that He does not despise a poor sinner’s heart for a dwelling. 2) Therein, that He manifests Himself in it not as a judge, but as a comforter.” Taube, in Gottes Bruenl. hat Wassers die Fuelle. Hamburg, 1872.
10. On Isaiah 57:17-18. One is reminded here of 1 Kings 19:11 sq. God is not in the tempest, nor in the earthquake, but He is in the still, gentle breeze. The gospel goes more to the hearts of men, and lays deeper hold on them than the law. The conversion of men. 1) It is prepared by being angry and smiting (Isaiah 57:17). 2. It is accomplished by God’s inwardly healing the heart.
11. On Isaiah 57:19. Missionary Sermon. The work of missions: 1) By whom is it accomplished? 2) On whom is it accomplished? 3) What end does it serve?
12. On Isaiah 57:20. “The whole Scripture testifies that what it says of the grace of God, of the forgiveness of sins and of the assurance of bliss belongs to the penitent. For those that are ever stirred up and driven on by their malignant desires (like the sea by the winds), and commit one sin after another (like the sea casts out all sorts of dirt), are wicked men, and have no peace to expect.”—Scriver.
Footnotes:Or, Draming, or, talking in their sleep.
Heb. strong of appetite.
Heb. know not to be satisfied.
And they are shepherds! They know not how to distinguish.
without exception.
Heb. men of kindness, or, godliness.
For.
Or, from that which is evil.
He enters into peace (while they rest on their beds) who walks straight before him.
Or, go in peace.
Or, before him.
2. THE PRESENT MARKED BY THE DOINGS OF THE NATION
Isaiah 57:3-143 But draw near hither, ye sons of the sorceress,
The seed of the adulterer and the whore.
4 Against whom do ye sport yourselves?
Against whom make ye a wide mouth,
And draw out the tongue?
Are ye not children of transgression, a seed of falsehood,
5 Enflaming yourselves with idols
Under every green tree,
Slaying the children in the valleys
Under the cliffs of the rocks?
6 Among the smooth stones of the stream is thy portion;
They, they are thy lot:
Even to them hast thou poured a drink offering.
Thou hast offered a meat offering,
Should I receive comfort in these?
7 Upon a lofty and high mountain hast thou set thy bed:
Even thither wentest thou up to offer sacrifice.
8 Behind the doors also and the posts hast thou set up thy remembrance:
For thou hast discovered thyself to another than me,
And art gone up; thou hast enlarged thy bed,
And made thee a covenant with them;
Thou lovedst their bed where thou sawest it.
9 And thou wentest to the king with ointment,
And didst increase thy perfumes,
And didst send thy messengers far off,
And didst debase thyself even unto hell.
10 Thou art wearied in the greatness of thy way;
Yet saidst thou not, There is no hope:
Thou hast found the life of thine hand;
Therefore thou wast not grieved.
11 And of whom hast thou been afraid or feared,
That thou hast lied,
And hast not remembered me, nor laid it to thy heart?
Have not I held my peace even of old,
And thou fearest me not?
12 I will declare thy righteousness,
And thy works; for they shall not profit thee.
13 When thou criest, let thy companies deliver thee;
But the wind shall carry them all away;
Vanity shall take them:
But he that putteth his trust in me
Shall possess the land,
And shall inherit my holy mountain;
14 And shall say, Cast ye up, cast ye up, prepare the way,
Take up the stumbling-block out of the way of my people.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 57:4. δϊςπβ—ιμγιΞτωׁ ?ς. and ζψςωׁ ?χψ. Isaiah 57:5. ρְ ?ςִ ?τֵ ?ιδַ ?ρְּ ?μָ ?ςִ ?ιν. Isaiah 57:9. ωεּ ?ψ—ςγΞξψηεχ.
Isaiah 57:4. The form ιִ ?μְ ?γֵ ?ι is found only in this place before Makkeph. Except this, ιַ ?μְ ?γֵ ?ι three times without Makkeph: Isaiah 2:6; Exodus 2:6; Hosea 1:2.
Isaiah 57:5. The participles πηξιν and ωׁ ?ηθι are in apposition with and explanatory of ιμγιτΧ and πֵ ?ηָ ?ξִ ?ιν .ζψςωׁ ?Χ is part. Niph. from ηξν.—The expression λμΞςυψςπο, which occurs only here in Isaiah, is found beside Deuteronomy 12:2; 2 Kings 16:4; 2 Kings 17:10; 2 Chronicles 28:4; Jeremiah 2:20; Jeremiah 3:6; Jeremiah 3:13; Ezekiel 6:13.
Isaiah 57:6. The clause λְּ ?ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ΧΞπημημχκ is very difficult; and expositors differ very much about it. The LXX. connect the words λημχιΞπημ with what precedes (σφάζοντεςτὰτέκνααὐτῶνἐνταῖςφάραγξινἀνὰμέσοντῶνπετρῶνἐνταῖςμερίσιφάραγγος. Ἐκείνησουἠμερίς, οὖτόςσουὁκλῆρος). [The words ἐνταῖςμερίσιφάραγγος are wanting in Tischendorf’s 4th edition of the LXX. of 1869,—Tr.], but that gives an intolerable tautology. Vulg. in partibus torrentis pars tua; thus it takes ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ι for ηֶ ?μְ ?χֵ ?ι.—Targ. Jonatan: in laevibus locis ripae torrentis est pars tua.—Syrus: sors tua et haereditas tua cum sorte torrentium erit. Thus he takes αְּ ?=cum, and likewise ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ιΞπημ = ηֶ ?μְ ?χֵ ?ιΞπΧ; the double δֵ ?ν he takes as simply=et.
Similarly, only still more freely, does the Arabic version in the London Polyglot translate: Sors illorum (scil. idolorum) erit portio vestra. One sees that these ancient versions were little exact in adhering to the original text. Jerome understands the “in partibus torrents,” to declare how “omnes montes, vales atque torrentes plenierant cultu daemonum,” and the “pars tua, sors tua” denotes for him that the demons were to the Israelites what the Lord should have been, according to Deuteronomy 32:9; Psalms 47:5; Psalms 73:26. Later expositors divide into five classes. Some take ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ι also to be equal to ηֶ ?μְ ?χֵ ?ι, which they understand variously, partly in a physical, partly in a spiritual sense. But all these views we must reject as grammatically unfounded.
Others take ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ι somehow in the sense of “laevitas, laeva, smoothness, smooth places,” but construe ημχκ in the sense of “punishment.” According to this the sense would be: stoning with the smooth stones (Raschi), drowning, casting down over smooth, slippery places into the deep (Vitringa: Vos detrudemini in laevia vallis, i.e., in lubrica et salebrosa loca, quae quem in profunda vallis praecipitem agunt), the stony desert (Coccejus),—that is your well-merited portion. But it is manifest that ημχκ and βεψμκ have here nothing to do with punishment, but continue to describe the sin. The third class of expositors construe ηֶ ?μְ ?χֵ ?κְ in the sense of “the right place, theatre.” Then the meaning would be: in the smooth clefts of the rock, or in the bare places of the valleys, there is the place where thou carriest on thy iniquitous work (J. D. Michaelis, Paulus, Gesen., Comment., Rueckert, Hitzig, Umbreit). But the following emphatic δֵ ?νδֵ ?νεΧ and the second half of the verse show, that the mention here is not merely of the theatre of the idolatrous doings.
A fourth class see in ημχι a designation of the idol images themselves. They derive the word from the Arabic chalaqa, efformavit, effinxit, so that the meaning would be: “in the images of the valley is thy portion,” or “with the idols in the valley thou carriest on thy trade” (Koppe in Lowth’s Isaiah, Knobel). But the root ηָ ?μַ ?χ in Hebrew never has this sense. Finally, the fifth class (Lowth, Rosenm., Gesen. Thes., Ewald, Delitzsch, Seinecke, Rohling, [J. A.
Alex.]) take ημχκ in the spiritual sense in which Jehovah is called the portion of His people (comp. the places cited above, and Psalms 119:57; Joshua 22:25; Psalms 16:5, etc.) But δַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ιΞπημ are smooth stones such as, according to a widespread custom of antiquity, were objects of divine worship. Very properly reference has been made to δֲ ?ξִ ?ωָׁ ?δηַ ?μֻ ?χֵ ?ιΰֲ ?αָ ?πִ ?ινξִ ?οΞδַ ?πַּ ?ηַ ?μ 1 Samuel 17:40. Fuerst, in the Concordance, puts our ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ι with ηַ ?μֻּ ?χֵ ?ι under one rubric, in that without further notice he points it ηַ ?μֻּ ?χֵ ?ι. And indeed the two words differ only by one dot, and hence a copyist’s error were cot impossible. Fuerst in his Lex. derives our ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ι from ηַ ?μָּ ?χ, which would be an abnormal vocalization instead of δַ ?μָּ ?χֵ ?ι (Olsh., § 183, a). Now if one may neither read ηַ ?μֻּ ?χֵ ?ι instead of ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ι, nor yet take ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ι for an abnormal stat. const. pl. from ηַ ?μָּ ?χ, then we can only derive ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ι either from ηָ ?μָ ?χ (Isaiah 30:10) or from ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ.
But the latter were likewise an unusual formation, for the connecting form of the plural must sound ηֶ ?μְ ?χִ ?ι, according the sole suffix forms in use (comp ηֶ ?μְ ?χִ ?ι ,ηֶ ?μְ ?χֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν ,ηֶ ?μְ ?χֵ ?κְ, Hosea 5:7). The Daghesh in μ would any way be Dag. Dirimens. If then we derive our word from the adjective ηָ ?μָ ?χ “laevus, lubricus, smooth,” then ημχιΞπημ would be the smooth things of the valley. But, in view of the intentional paronomasia with ηֶ ?μְ ?χֵ ?κּ, we may further assume that ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ι the Prophet means nothing else than what is described in 1 Samuel 17:4, “smooth stones from the brook,” in fact that ημχιΞπημ is in the end nothing more than an abbreviation of ηַ ?μְ ?χֵ ?ιΰַ ?αִ ?πֵ ?ιδַ ?πַ ?ηַ ?μ, an abbreviation that of course would be understood only by one that had the passage of 1 Sam. in his mind.—αְּ before ηַ ?μְּ ?χֵ ?ι is used as Joshua 22:25 ΰֵ ?ιοΞμָ ?λֶ ?νηֵ ?μֶ ?χαַ ?ιδεָֹ ?δ.
Isaiah 57:8. ξֵ ?ΰִ ?ϊִּ ?ιβִ ?μִ ?ιϊ, as it seems to me, must be judged after the analogy of the expressions βָ ?μָ ?δςַ ?ξִּ ?ι (Isaiah 5:13), βָּֽ ?μְ ?ϊָ ?διְ ?δεּ ?γָ ?δ (Lamentations 1:3), βָּ ?μָ ?δξָ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ωׁ (Isaiah 24:11; comp. 1 Samuel 4:21 sq.; Proverbs 27:25, etc..). For as βָ ?μָ ?δ originally means “to uncover, make bare,” so that form of expression declares that by removal of the people, who as it were cover it, the land Is uncovered, made bare. It is to be noticed, moreover, that ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ itself is by metonymy used for the people (Judges 18:30), and that also other things, e. g., the grass, can be described as uncovering their place by their removal. It is true that only Kal is used in this sense. But had the Prophet written βָּ ?μִ ?ιϊ then, according to the constant and frequent usage, one must have taken this in the sense of: “in exilium abiisti.” But he would not say that. What is here spoken of, is no punitive ridding out of a place, but a very spontaneous, headstrong and willful making bare, empty.
Hence the Prophet uses the Piel. Therefore I cannot approve of the other explanations that supply “the shame” or “the clothes,” or that treat ξִ ?ωְׁ ?λָּ ?αֵ ?κְ as the common object of the three verbs (Delitzsch.—ιϊψϊΞμκξδν (certainly not castrasti quosdam ex iis, Grotius) is properly without analogy; for 2 Chronicles 7:18 the person with whom the covenant is made is designated by μְ, in 1 Samuel 20:16; 1 Samuel 22:8 ςִ ?ν is used. But these passages show that after λψϊ the αְּ ?ψִ ?ιϊ may be omitted. The Prophet might then have written εϊλψϊμָ ?δֶ ?ν. But then the particular would be wanting, that Israel made demands, conditions which were to be fulfilled on the part of the other. One must, to be exact, translate: thou bargainedst, madest conditions for thee from those.—The words ιγηζιϊ are likewise without analogy.
The explanations: thou descriest a place (to lie down),—where thou seest but a beckoning hand,—thou dividest a hand, i.e., thou dost destine a side of the couch for the lover (Knobel)—all of them contain an unsuitable clumsy thought. One looks for something that belongs to the ξωׁ ?λα in the sense indicated, or that follows on it. And thus there is much to favor the view that sees in ιָ ?γ an euphemism for the masculine member. Only analogies from other languages (see Delitzsch) can be adduced, but considering the originality of our author this can be no obstacle. ηָ ?ζָ ?δ then, like ψָ ?ΰָ ?δ, according to well known usage, stands for sentire, experiri (comp. Job 8:17; Job 15:17; Job 24:1; Psalms 58:11). [J. A.
Alexander briefly dismisses the euphemistic view by saying; “the sense gratuitously put upon the phrase by Doederlein, and the praises given him for the discovery, are characteristic of neological aesthetics.” His own comment is: “The most probable interpretation of the last words of the verse is that which gives ιָ ?γ the same sense as in Isaiah 56:5” (viz., “a place”). Spite of the respectable commentators that approve of this euphemistic sense (Ewald, Hitzig cited by Delitzsch who agrees), it should be rejected. Delitzsch refers to Ezekiel 16:26; Ezekiel 23:20. But the coarse, plainness of the language there is ground enough for inferring that, did Isaiah mean to express the like here, he would use language as plain. It were just as reasonable to imagine the same significance for ιָ ?γ in Isaiah 56:5. There is actually no ground for doing so, in either case. “Thou descriest a place (to lie down)” gives a good rendering.
Comp. the clause ηζιϊ—ΰδαϊ with Job 8:18, ςַ ?μΞβַּ ?μωָֽׁ ?ψָ ?ωָׁ ?ιειְ ?ρֻ ?αָּ ?α֑ ?εּ αֵּ ?ϊΰֲ ?αָ ?πινιַֽ ?ηֱ ?ζֶ ?δ.—Tr.].
Isaiah 57:10. πεֹ ?ΰָ ?ωׁ is part. Niph. desperatus (Job 6:26), The neuter only here and Isaiah 2:25; Isaiah 18:12.Isaiah 57:11. γָ ?ΰַ ?β is sollicitum esse and has primarily intransitive meaning (Jeremiah 17:8). In this sense it is conjoined with μְ (1 Samuel 9:5; 1 Samuel 10:2) or with ξִ ?ο (Psalms 38:19; Jeremiah 42:16). In our text it is used transitively, as in Jeremiah 38:19, joined with the accusative.—The ϊִּ ?ιψְ ?ΰִ ?ι with the attached Vav consec., shows that the Prophet conceives of it as the consequence of γΰβ. The latter accordingly denotes the inward, religious dread, of which the outward evidences are only the consequence. λִּ ?ι before ϊλζαι is the causal “that” after questions.
Isaiah 57:14. εְ ?ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψ is used impersonally as in Isaiah 25:9; Isaiah 45:24; Isaiah 65:8.
AND 1. In this section the Prophet describes the idolatrous, and hence adulterous doings that at the time of this prophecy were prevalent in the entire nation. He summons the nation to approach in order to hear his castigating words. He addresses them as posterity of adulterous parents (Isaiah 57:3). They had often scoffed at him. Hence he asks them: Who is he whom ye derided, and who are ye?
Are ye not as bastards who would supplant the genuine offshoots (Isaiah 57:4)? And then he points out to them their untheocratic, bastard way, by enumerating facts. Ye carry on your idolatry under every green tree. Ye slay the children by the brooks and in rocky hollows (Isaiah 57:5). These places have become the holy and promised land to you. And, that every part of the worship of Jehovah may have its idolatrous counterpart, ye do not omit drink and meat offerings for the idols (Isaiah 57:6).
Then by sacrifices ye have made the high mountains the scene of your adulterous worship of idols (Isaiah 57:7). Jehovah’s mottoes, that should be in every house, are thrust into the corner. But ye do as a woman that forsakes the place at the side of her husband, and sets up a couch of lewdness in another place (Isaiah 57:8). And also by seeking aid from foreigners ye carry on an adulterous idolatry. For ye sent messengers with rich gifts to foreign kings, yea, ye have boasted even of alliances with hell (Isaiah 57:9). And ye were indefatigable in these doings; nothing availed to convince you of their vanity.
Rather, as long as ye could stir, ye would never confess to sickness (Isaiah 57:10). How wrong such conduct was appears the more manifest, when one compares whom Israel feared and whom it did not fear. Yea, what sort of beings were those whom thou fearedst, whereas thou fearedst me no more, who so long kept silence spite of thy unfaithfulness? (Isaiah 57:11). But I will speak and make manifest your righteousness and your works. From that will be seen that ye have no claim to be helped (Isaiah 57:12). Then let your numerous idols help you.
But the wind will carry them off. He, on the contrary, that trusts in me, will receive inheritance in the holy land and on the holy mountain (Isaiah 57:13). For these there will be a glorious return into the promised land (Isaiah 57:14).
2. But draw near——falsehood.
Isaiah 57:3-4. εְ ?ΰַ ?ϊֶּ ?ν strongly reminds one of that εΰϊν, Isaiah 48:6, which, according to our construction, is also to be understood as an address of the Prophet to the people living in his own time. Draw near hither is like a citation before the ruler, who proposes to hold up to the subject his guilt, and to announce the punishment (comp. Isaiah 34:1; Isaiah 48:16; Isaiah 41:1; Isaiah 41:5; δֵ ?πָּ ?δ, as in 2 Samuel 20:16, and often). The Israelites are addressed as sons of a sorceress (comp. on Isaiah 2:6). Witchcraft is only possible by reason of idolatrous superstition, because it would produce effects by supernatural powers that are not the powers of the true God. The children of the witch are such as have not only a witch for mother, but have also themselves a witch nature.
Thus the idolatrous inclination of the people is charged as something inherited (comp. on Isaiah 1:4). What is here expressed in one notion is explained in the second half of the verse. For ζψςξπΰσ is seed of the adulterer (comp. ζΧξְ ?ψֶ ?ςִ ?ιν, Isaiah 1:4; Isaiah 14:20; ζΧχֹ ?γֶ ?ωׁ, Isaiah 6:13; ζΧωֶׁ ?χֶ ?ψ, Isaiah 57:4), thus the ancestors of the present generation are designated as adulterers in their relation to Jehovah, i.e., as idolaters. But that the present generation is adulterous, i.e., idolatrous, is expressed by the addition (εַ ?ϊִּ ?ζְ ?πֶ ?δ) [Eng-V. “and the whore”]. The view that this word is only the feminine of ξπΰτ is disproved from the fact that the simple Vav copulative (εְ ?ϊִ ?ζְ ?πֱ ?δ) would be used. Moreover, the mode of expression would be affected, and the addition superfluous.
For from the view-point of polygamy, adultery is only possible with a married woman. Therefore in ζψςξπΰσ is implied the representation, that the married woman had sinned with another man, i.e., with idols, and that therefore the present generation no longer has Jehovah for a father de facto, though de jure He may still pass for such. But εַ ?ϊִּ ?ζְ ?πֶ ?δ expresses that this generation, sprung from adultery, though recognized as legitimate, has itself committed adultery. As is well known, ζָ ?πָ ?δ stands very often for Israel’s apostacy to idols (Exodus 34:15 sq.; Leviticus 17:7; Numbers 15:39; Deuteronomy 31:16; Hosea 2:6 sq.; Isaiah 1:21, etc.).
In Isaiah 57:4 the Prophet charges the people with the audacious scoffing with which they persecuted the followers of Jehovah in general and himself, the worthy Prophet in particular. For the question ςμξι can, of course, in itself have a quantitative sense: are there then men at all, about whom ye make yourselves merry? But why might there not have been men, about whom even such a degenerate people might with a certain justice make themselves merry? For this reason we must take the question ςμξι in a qualitative sense as in Isaiah 37:23. There it is asked: whom hast thou derided, etc.? Answer: the holy One of Israel.
Thus here, also, the sense of qualis must be in the ξι (comp. Isaiah 57:11; Isaiah 51:12). The imperfects ϊϊςππε, etc., denote that these derisions still continue. Here also we have that personal ΰַ ?ϊֶּ ?ν, which makes so entirely the impression of immediate living presence. And if the contemporaries derided Jehovah’s true followers and His prophets especially, who amongst them all was more exposed to the derision and deserved it less, than Isaiah. Hence there seems to me in this ςμΞξι to be expressed the consciousness of personal worth and of outrage perpetrated by wounding it. δϊςππ, “delectari aliquare, to delight one’s self, to take pleasure from something,” is found only here in a bad sense.
Opening wide the mouth along with derisive laughter is mentioned also Psalms 22:8; Psalms 35:21. Sticking out the tongue as a gesture of derision is not mentioned elsewhere in the Scripture. Expositors cite Livy, VII. Isaiah 10 : linguam ab irrisu exserens. The point of the verse consists in the distinction between the one scoffed at and the scoffers. What the former is, is not said.
But we guess it. What the latter are, the Prophet states with the words: are ye not children of sin (i.e., such whose own nature partakes of the sin of those that begot), a spurious seed? That is, I think that ζψςωׁ ?χψ is the antithesis of ζψςΰֱ ?ξֶ ?ϊ (Jeremiah 2:21). Then it is not a seed in which materially the species “lie.” appears out of the sphere of the genus “sin;” but ζψςωׁ ?χψ is a seed which any how formally is not what it pretends to be; i.e., a false, spurious seed. Thus the same is expressed as by ξπΰσζψς Isaiah 57:3.
3. Inflaming——yourselves comfort in these.Isaiah 57:5-6. In what follows the Prophet enumerates all the sorts of idolatry by which the Israelites of his times proved themselves to be “children of sin” and “a spurious seed.” ΰֵ ?μִ ?ιν here means terebinths and not “gods,” as appears from the λμΞςυιΧ (see on Isaiah 1:29) that stands in parallelism. As a beautiful, shady tree, the terebinth played a great part in the idolatrous tree worship of the Hebrews (comp. Ezekiel 6:13; Hosea 4:13). It enticed to idolatry.
Hence it is said, that the idolatrous fervor, that was only too closely joined to fleshly voluptuousness, was kindled by the terebinths. But not only stately, shady terebinths, every green tree kindled the idolatrous desire. But worse still than the tree-worship, was the murderous Baal and Moloch worship, to which especially the poor children fell a sacrifice (comp. my remarks on Jeremiah 17:2). Although this horrible worship exacted the burning of children, still the word ωָׁ ?ηַ ?θ is used in connection with it, beside other expressions referring to it (Jeremiah 7:31; Jeremiah 19:5; Ezekiel 16:20-21. At the same time it seems to me that the Prophet (who in what follows pursues the thought that Israel in a sacrilegious way transferred all parts of Jehovah’s worship to its idolatrous worship), would here, by the choice of this word ωׁ ?ηθ, express the thought that the children were their ςεֹ ?μεֹ ?ϊ. For the slaying of beasts destined for whole-burnt-offerings was expressed by ωׁ ?ηθ, whereas ζָ ?αַ ?η was the specific word for the slaying of the ωׁ ?μξιν (see on Isaiah 5:7-8).
In the valleys, under the clifts of the rocks, thus not only in the vale of Hinnom, but elsewhere also, in forbidding rocky defiles, were those horrid sacrifices offered.
Isaiah 57:6. Among the smooth stones of the stream is thy portion. See Text. and Gram. By these smooth stones are any way to be understood the sacred anointed stones (Bayetilia). The earliest trace of this usage appears in Genesis 28:18; Genesis 35:14. But what was originally a simple act of consecration to serve for sacred remembrance, became gradually the substratum of an idolatrous worship, the stone worship (comp.
Jeremiah 3:9; Ezekiel 20:32). As the name βαίτυλος, βαιτύλια is of Ph�nician origin, the view is not without foundation that this name is to be referred back to αֵּ ?ιϊΞΰֵ ?μ. Comp. [Smith’sDic. of the B. Art. Stones]; Leyrer in Herz. R.-Encycl.
XVI. p. 322; Kurtz, Hist. of theOld Covenant, I. § 75, 3; Grimmel, De lapidum cultu, Marburg, 1853. The baetylia were indeed stones smooth with oil. Arnobius (Adver. Gentes I. 39) relates of the heathen period of his life: “Si quando conspexeram lubricatum lapidem et ex olivi unguine sordidatum, tanquam inesset vis praesens, adulabar, affabar et beneficia poscebam nihil sentiente de trunco.” Lowth cites at our text a passage from Theophrast (to Autolykos I. 15) where it is said of a superstitious man: “Καίτῶνλιπαρῶνλίθωντῶνἐνταῖςτριόδοιςπαριὼνἐκτῆςληκύθουἔλαιονκαταχεῖνκαὶἐπὶγόναταπεσὼνκαὶπροσκυνήσαςἁπαλλάττεσθαι.” Comp. Clement of Alex. Strom.
VII. 843. Our passage indeed does not seem to speak of oily, smooth stones. But it appears that that worship, apart from the smoothing by oil, was only given to stones that by nature or art had a smooth surface. At least we could not suppose that Jacob chose a rough stone for his pillow. And our text favors the idea that one did not choose for adoration any sort of stone remarkable for size or form, but especially smooth stones. The emphatic δֵ ?νδֵ ?νthese, these, refers to the stones as something that Israel in a shameful way made rivals of Jehovah. πּ ?εֹ ?ψָ ?μ, properly lapillus, is, indeed, no where else so used that Jehovah Himself is called “the lot” of His people.
But the word is chosen here because the Prophet intended an allusion to the notion “stone” contained in ημχιΞπδμ. The thought underlying also the second half of verse 6 is, that the idolatrous Israelites gave to their lumpish idols what was due to Jehovah alone. For here, too, the aping is rebuked, by which they transferred the various parts of Jehovah worship to the idol worship. For πֶ ?ρֶ ?κְ ?drink offering, and ξִ ?πְ ?ηָ ?δmeat offering were essential parts of Jehovah’s worship. The latter consisted of flour in various forms, with salt, olive oil and incense in addition (Leviticus 2). The former represented the drinking suited to eating, and consisted only of wine (Exodus 29:40; Numbers 15:5 sqq.). δֶ ? ?ֽ ?ςֱ ?μָ ?δ with the object ξπηη = altari imposuit fertum occurs again Isaiah 66:3.
How deeply the Lord feels the insult, is declared in the words: should I console myself (be quiet) concerning such? Niph. πִ ?ηַ ?ν with ςַ ?μ denotes 1) to pity one’s self, 2) to feel regret, sorrow, 3) to console one’s self, to quiet one’s self (2 Samuel 13:39; Jeremiah 31:15; Ezekiel 32:31). A modification of the last meaning given is “to revenge one’s self,” which we had Isaiah 1:24. The context shows that only the meaning given under 3) suits here.
4. Upon a lofty——sawest it.Isaiah 57:7-8. In these two verses the Prophet shows how in idolatrous worship, Israel even (πνΞωׁ ?νςμιϊ Isaiah 57:7) aped the peace offering, the ζֶ ?αַ ?ηωְׁ ?μָ ?ξִ ?ιν. And he joins with it, in a particularly marked way, the adulterous conduct of which it was thereby guilty. Why the Prophet connects the latter particular just with ωְׁ ?μָ ?ξִ ?ιν may have this reason, that these sacrifices were always united with meals, and just these may have given occasion for abandonment to joviality and especially to fleshly debauchery, particularly when celebrated in the open air on mountain elevations. Hosea 4:13 also mentions the offering of the idolatrous ζֶ ?αַ ?η on mountain tops and connected with licentiousness.
The expression ηψΞπαδεπωֹ ?ΰ is found so exactly only here; but comp. Isaiah 2:2; Isaiah 30:25. ωַׂ ?ξְ ?ϊְּ ξִ ?ωְׁ ?λָּ ?αֵ ?κְ is a figurative expression for the act of idolatrous worship. It cannot be doubted that by μִ ?ζְ ?αֹּ ?ηַ ζֶ ?αַ ?η the Prophet means the Shelamim sacrifice. For the ζαη was most closely joined with that. “For the Shelamim offering [peace offering] the Pentateuch also uses simply the expression ζֶ ?αַ ?η, i.e., killing; indeed this word in the Pentateuch has only this narrower sense, as further the meal of the ωׁ ?μξιν as often designated by the verb ζαη. The reason of this mode of expression was, that, as in the burnt-offering, the peculiar feature was the bringing up of the entire sacrifice on to the altar, so the sacrificial meal belonged essentially to the peace offering. ζָ ?αַ ?η denotes the killing with reference to a meal that was to be held (comp. especially Leviticus 17:3 sqq.; Deuteronomy 12:15); it is thus distinguished from ωָׁ ?ηַ ?θ which has no such reference.” (�hler in Herz., R.-Encycl. X. p. 637).
The initial words of Isa 57:8 have experienced a double explanation. The ancient expositors from Jerome down understand by ζλψεο, remembrance, any sort of idolatrous emblem, especially the household gods, Lares. But first it is to be objected, that the expression is a strange one to denote that, and then to put behind the doors and the posts seems rather to describe contemptuous than honorable treatment. Hence modern expositors have justly understood ζλψεο to mean what in Deuteronomy 6:8; Deuteronomy 11:20, was prescribed to be written on the ξְ ?ζִ ?εּ ?ζεֹ ?ϊ and on the ωְׁ ?ςָ ?ψִ ?ιν, especially since in Exodus 13:9 a similar memorial is expressly called ζִ ?λָּ ?ψεֹ ?ο. Therefore we may justly regard our text as a reference to the passages of the Pentateuch just cited. The Prophet charges the Israelites with putting those memorials containing the principles of the Theocracy behind the posts and doors, instead of on them, of course to get those hated reminders as far out of sight as possible.
This done, they shamelessly left vacant (see Text. and Gram.) the place at the side of their husband, like an adulterous wife, in order to betake themselves to the couch of a lover.—ξΰϊιπμιϊ states how the adulterous wife made empty the place at her husband’s side; εϊςμε, how she ascended to the elevation (Isaiah 57:7); δψηαϊξωׁ ?αּ ?ακ, how she made the lewd bed, i.e. broad, to give room for the lover. ιλψϊΞμκξδν (see Text. and Gram.), describes the coarseness of this relation. The shameless harlot demands her price. What it was is not said. Any way it was agreed to. For the text continues: thou lovedest their embrace (ξωׁ ?λα frequent in this sense: Numbers 31:17-18; Numbers 31:35; Judges 21:11-12, etc.).
5. And thou wentest—wast not grieved.Isaiah 57:9-10. The Prophet has hitherto described what we may call the immediate worship of idols. Now he turns to what may be called the political or indirect idolatry of the Israelites. For when they turned to heathen nations for help, instead of relying on the Lord, that also was idolatry. And it was such not merely in the subtile sense of trusting in an arm of flesh (comp.
Jeremiah 17:5-6; Isaiah 30:1 sq.; Isaiah 31:1-3; 2 Kings 16:7), but also in the grosser sense, inasmuch as trusting in a heathen nation involved trusting in its gods (Isaiah 10:10-11; Jeremiah 2:33; Jeremiah 2:36; Ezekiel 23:7; Ezekiel 23:30; Hosea 12:1). If this is the correct understanding of the fundamental thought of our passage, it is clear that we are not to understand ξֶ ?μֶ ?κְ as meaning an idol, as many expositors do. It is therefore neither Moloch (comp. Isaiah 8:21; Amos 5:26; Jeremiah 49:1; Jeremiah 49:3; Zephaniah 1:5), nor Anamelech, the Chronos of the Sepharvaim (2 Kings 17:31), as Hitzig thinks, nor the Ph�nician Baal (ξֶ ?μֶ ?καַּ ?ςַ ?μ) as Knobel says. It seems to me also incorrect to suppose it refers directly to the king of Assyria. For there is nowhere any trace of his having been directly “the king” for the Israelites.
And one cannot appeal to Isaiah 30:30 to show that he was, for there, according to the context (comp. Isaiah 57:31, ΰַ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?ψ), only the Assyrian king can be thought of. Hence it seems to me that the Prophet would say: Israel has ever turned to him who, according to existing relations, was for the time the king, κατ’ ἐξοχήν. Nearly like, but not identical, is the construction of Saadia, who understands ξμκ as collective. Also the choice of the word ωׁ ?εּ ?ψ seems to favor our constructions, for it means “circuire, to go about” (comp. ωָׁ ?ψָ ?δ, the wandering about, for caravans, Ezekiel 27:25). αַּ ?ωֶׁ ?ξֶ ?ο is “with oil.” But it remains doubtful whether that means “as one anointed with oil” (in order to charm the senses, Ezekiel 23:40) or “with presents of oil and ointments.” Grammatically either is allowable. Comp. for the former use, Genesis 32:11.
But I prefer the latter, because it cannot be said that Israel itself came to the king, but sent ambassadors to remote places. Rather, according to Isaiah’s style, the latter is the explanation of the figure. The great rulers, now Assyria, now Egypt, lived far away. Did Israel perhaps send ambassadors further than that? Any way one may not press the significance of “oil and ointments.” The simple meaning is, that Israel sent the noblest and costliest gifts of its land as presents. The olive tree grew nowhere so well as in Palestine; comp.
Leyrer, Herzog’sReal-Enc. X. p. 547. One of the ingredients of the ψִ ?χֻּ ?δִ ?ιν (ἅπ. λεγ., otherwise ψֹ ?χַ ?δ), “ointments,” perfumes, were αְּ ?ωָׂ ?ξִ ?ιν, and Palestine was regarded as the exclusive home of the balsam shrub, ibid. I. 673. Isaiah 39:2 shows that costly oil and noble ointment belonged to the royal treasures. ςִ ?ιψ=“messenger,” as in Isaiah 18:2. But Israel’s attempts to find helpers not only went far, but also deep.
It is common to understand ςψΞωׁ ?ΰεμ to mean the humble gestures and words of those seeking help. But that were a bad and senseless hyperbole. I believe the Prophet by didst send thy messengers far off refers chiefly to chaps. 28–33, and by thou wentest down to hell has especially in mind Isaiah 28:15, where the rulers of Jerusalem are made to say: “We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement.” The Hiph. δωׁ ?τιμ, therefore, has not an ethical, but a local sense (comp. Isaiah 25:12; Isaiah 26:5; Psalms 113:6).
Isaiah 57:10. Thus Israel had wearied itself with much running (γֶּ ?ψֶ ?γ is abstractum here: the going, running, as often, comp. 1 Kings 18:27 and Isaiah 47:12; 1 Kings 19:7); but did not learn to see the uselessness of its efforts. Rather, because the weak hand from time to time felt some life, Israel never came to feel sick, i.e. to know and feel its powerlessness in its complete reality.
6. And of whom hast thou——way of my people.Isaiah 57:11-14. Having thus described the idolatrous practices of the nation, the Prophet next asks for the reasons of it. These may be positive and negative: the idols may have advantages that Jehovah has not, and Jehovah may have defects that the idols are free from. I do not believe that ΰϊΞξι refers to the heathen nations or their rulers, to whom Israel had looked for protection. For the whole context treats essentially of Israel’s religious conduct, and here especially of the reasons Israel might have for preferring idols to Jehovah.
And, indeed, according to our remark on Isaiah 57:9, the dreadfulness of a nation depended on the power of its gods. ξִ ?ι therefore refers to the idols. It is to be taken in the same sense as in Isaiah 57:4. Indeed one may say that this ΰϊΞξι stands in a certain antithetical relation to that ςμΞξι. For if ςμΞξι, Isaiah 57:4, relates primarily to the Prophet, still it refers indirectly also to Jehovah, because the Prophet is such a one only through Jehovah. Of whom wast thou apprehensive, and so wast afraid. See Text. and Gram.
It might be thought that what could move Israel to unfaithfulness to its Lord must be very considerable, grand in power and glory, far superior to Jehovah. But is such the case? No. One might expect the Prophet to dwell here on the contemptible quality of idols, that is intimated only by ξִ ?ι. But what were the use? Has he not abundantly done so in the first Ennead?
See Isaiah 40:18 sqq.; Isaiah 41:6 sq.; 21 sqq.; Isaiah 42:17; Isaiah 43:9 sqq.; Isaiah 44:9 sqq.; Isaiah 45:20; Isaiah 46:1 sqq.; Isaiah 47:12; Isaiah 48:3 sqq.—That thou liedst. The meaning of λִּ ?ζֵּ ?α here appears from what follows. It denotes the unfaithfulness, covenant-breaking nature of Israel. For by its deeds it proved its words to be lying words (comp. Psalms 78:36 sq.). Apart from single covenants (Exodus 19:8; Exodus 24:3; Exodus 24:7; Deuteronomy 5:27 sqq.; Joshua 24:16; Joshua 24:24) the confession of Jehovah was the standing law in Israel.
The sense is: What is the quality of those things that thou fearest, that (αִּ ?ι, see Text. and Gram.) thou couldest be seduced by them to break faith with thy God? But, from the antithesis to ςμΞξι, Isaiah 57:4, and from what the Prophet has already said of the idols, it is seen that Israel found no sufficient motive for apostacy in the nature of its idols. There is another motive, viz. the silence of Jehovah. This must have been of such a nature as to explain the absence of fear of Him who was with Israel. This appears from the apodosis; therefore thou fearest Me not.—Therefore we are not to understand a not-speaking, but a not-doing. The Lord had kept His peace, and indeed from very ancient time (εְ before ςεμξ=“and indeed,” comp.
Isaiah 13:10; Isaiah 32:7; Isaiah 44:28), He had looked on, spared, used forbearance. Of course this must be understood relatively, for single chastisements were not wanting. But in comparison with the language the Lord used in leading Israel into exile, all that had been before was silence. Thus the Lord speaks of such a silence with reference to Israel as He had before spoken of with reference to the Gentiles, Isaiah 42:14. If one supposes the Prophet to speak from the stand-point of the Exile, it is verily not evident what so terrible happened to the wicked Israelites after the Exile, as to make all that happened before seem silence in comparison.
Isaiah 57:12. I will declare.—In contrast with His former silence, the Lord says He will speak. He will declare the righteousness of Israel and its fruits, the works. The whole verse is ironically meant. First of all there is irony in ΰπιγ. At first sight it seems as if the Lord presented the prospect of an imposing proclamation of the great, hitherto-ignored deserts of Israel.
Second, one supposes on this account that by “righteousness” and “works” are to be understood the manifestations of an actually existing righteousness of Israel’s. But in fact the Lord means that the unrighteousness, the malignity, of Israel shall, by a suitable judicial act, be pilloried before the whole world. Third, the expression: but they will not profit thee is an ironical meiosis. For what Israel has to show in fruits of righteousness is so much the opposite of true righteousness that no other fruit than destruction can come of it. It is seen that I do not follow the punctuation of the Masorets. I cannot therefore approve of the rendering: “and as regards thy handiwork (the idols), they will not profit thee (Delitzsch, Seinecke, Rohling, Weber).
For 1) the brief words, Isaiah 57:12 b a, would be no suitable expression for the important thought that the Lord will bring Israel’s sin to light by great judgments; 2) it were strange to say, Isaiah 57:12 b, of the idols: “they will not help thee,” and then to continue, Isaiah 57:13 : “when thou criest let them help thee.”—Thus I believe that not till in Isaiah 57:13 is declared the incapacity of the heaps of idols (χαּ ?εּ ?φִ ?ιν., ἅπ. λεγ., properly “gatherings” in the sense of “pantheon”).—[“Aben Ezra appears to understand the word generically, as denoting all that they could scrape together for their own security, including idols, armies and all other objects of reliance.” J. A. Alex. This comprehensive meaning would suit the reference of Isa 57:9-10, which, spite of the Author’s interpretation, that makes the main reference in the end to be to idols, certainly does not exclude reliance on foreign kings and their armies.—Tr.]—The wind, yea, a breath will carry away the whole pantheon (Hengstenbebg, Delitzsch, comp. Isaiah 41:16; Isaiah 41:29). On the other hand, those that put their trust in the Lord, even if the general calamity shall have carried them off into the Exile, will take possession of the holy hand and of the holy mountain as their inheritance.
Hence return out of the Exile is the concluding thought, which is expressed in Isaiah 57:14 with great emphasis.
Footnotes:and who thyself playest harlot.
spurious seed.
Or, among the oaks.
by means of the terebinths.
Should I after this have pity.
For the place by me thou modest empty.
And modest terms for thee from them.
Or, hewed it for thyself larger than theirs.
Or, thou providest room.
Or, thou respeetedst the king.
thou didst descend to hell.
Or, living.
sick.
so that thou fearedst.
collections of gods=pantheon.
breath.
And one shall say.
3. GOD’S LOVE SMITES AND HEALS THOSE THAT LET BE HEALED
Isaiah 57:15-2115 For thus saith the high and lofty One
That inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy;
I dwell in the high and holy place,
With him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit,
To revive the spirit of the humble,
And to revive the heart of the contrite ones.
16 For I will not contend for ever,
Neither will I be always wroth:
For the spirit should fail before me,
And the souls which I have made.
17 For the iniquity of his covetousness was I wroth,
And smote him: I hid me, and was wroth,
And he went on fowardly in the way of his heart.
18 I have seen his ways, and will heal him:
I will lead him also, and restore comforts
Unto him and to his mourners.
19 I create the fruit of the lips;
Peace, peace to him that is far off, and to him that is near,
Saith the Lord; and I will heal him.
20 But the wicked are like the troubled sea,
When it cannot rest,
Whose waters cast up mire and dirt.
21 There is no peace, saith my God to the wicked.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 57:15. γַּ ?λָּ ?ΰ as an adjective, comp. Psalms 34:19. Isaiah 57:16. ςָ ?θַ ?σ frequent in the Psalms 61:3; Psalms 73:6; Psalms 77:4; Psalms 107:5; Psalms 142:4; Psalms 143:4. Isaiah 57:17. αֶּ ?φַ ?ς, comp. Jeremiah 6:13. Isaiah 57:20. γֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ.
Isaiah 57:17. δַ ?ρְ ?ϊֵּ ?ψ is the inf. absol. placed after, expressing the notion of what is constant, continuous; one might say here, expressive of the constant practice. Instead of εΰχφσ it would properly read εְ ?χָ ?φεֹ ?σ. But, as is well known, there occur many modifications in this sort of construction. Especially it happens not seldom that the inf. absol. changes in the last member into the finite verb or participle (comp. 2 Samuel 16:13; Genesis 26:13; Jeremiah 41:6; 2 Samuel 15:20; 2 Samuel 16:5, etc.). Therefore we translate: “and I smite him, in that I being angry hide myself.” δρϊψ direct causative Hiph.=to make concealment, hiding.—The clause ειμλωׁ ?εααεπεΧ states the further consequence of the divine smiting. But for this is used the Vav consec. imperf., denoting, not a single, historical fact, but a manifestation constantly repeated, according to the usage that expresses aoristically what is yet something continuous.
Comp. εַ ?ϊִּ ?ζְ ?πֶ ?δ Isaiah 57:3; εַ ?ιִּ ?πְ ?ψְ ?ωׁ ?εּ Isaiah 57:20.—ωׁ ?εֹ ?αָ ?α comp. Jeremiah 3:14; Jeremiah 3:22; concerning its distinction from ωׁ ?εֹ ?αֵ ?α see on Jeremiah 31:22.
Isaiah 57:18. One may (according to the view in the comment below) understand ΰψτΰδε de conatu, as the word is evidently used in Jeremiah 6:14; Jeremiah 8:11, which passages, also, on account of αֶּ ?φַ ?ς in the foregoing verse, and on account of the double ωָׁ ?μεֹ ?ν, accord in sound with our text. The construction of Isa 57:18 is as in Isaiah 57:17 a. As there χφτϊι is followed by εΰλδε, so here ψΰιϊι is followed by εΰψτΰδεεπ ?Χ.
Isaiah 57:19. Instead of πεּ ?α the K’ri reads πִ ?ια, because the only passage beside where the substantive occurs, Malachi 1:12, has πִ ?ιαεֹ, The singular suffix in ψτΰϊιε is to be referred to the collective singulars ψδεχ and χψεα.
Isaiah 57:20. As it does not read δַ ?πִּ ?ψְ ?πָּ ?ωׁ, we are not to regard this verbal form as a participle, but as the third pers. perf., and to supply ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ before it.—The words δωִׁ ?χθμΰιελμ are quoted Jeremiah 49:23. That in Jeremiah they are not original, appears from his using them as outward adornment, as embellishment of his discourse, whereas in our text they are organically grounded in the context.—ψֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ, comp. ψָ ?τַ ?ν pedibus calcavit, turbavit. Concerning the Aorist εַ ?ιִּ ?πְ ?ψְ ?ωׁ ?εּ, comp. on εַ ?ιִּ ?μֶ ?κְ Isaiah 57:17.
AND The Prophet here gives a worthy conclusion to the Ennead whose centre is the humble Servant of God. He points us to the fact, that the ground of all salvation is the unity of highness and lowness in God that love mediates. For God is enthroned as the highest and absolutely holy Being in the highest majesty and glory, and yet at the same time He dwells with the wretched and contrite in order to give them new life (Isaiah 57:15). For He is angry for a while, but the foundation of His being is still love. Hence He cannot let the spirit, the soul of men, His own creatures, be destroyed (Isaiah 57:16). On account of sin, indeed, He smites a man.
But when the man, not reformed by the outward chastisement, perseveres in his own chosen way (Isaiah 57:17), still He does not for this reason give him up. He now applies the opposite mode of treatment: He heals him, by working inwardly on his heart by gentle means, as far, of course, as there is the necessary receptivity for this healing treatment, that is, the capacity of being sorry for the ways of the past (Isaiah 57:18). In conclusion, the Prophet designates the announcement of this divine saving treatment as the flower of the word of prophecy (Isaiah 57:19), but which of course will not profit all. For the wicked, that are like the sea, which lashed by storms throws up dirty foam (Isaiah 57:20)—the wicked find no peace (Isaiah 57:21). We wonder to hear these profound, evangelical words from the mouth of the Old Testament Prophet. Were they perhaps written by a scholar of the beloved disciple and smuggled in here?
And how artistically the Prophet recapitulates the fundamental thought of this section, and returns to the refrain with which he would conclude this as all three sections.
2. For thus saith——I have made.Isaiah 57:15-16. That Isaiah 57:15, and not Isaiah 57:14, begins the concluding word appears from the formula “For thus saith” which as a rule begins sections (Isaiah 56:4; Isaiah 52:4; Isaiah 45:18; Isaiah 31:4; Isaiah 21:6; Isaiah 21:16; Isaiah 18:4, etc.), partly, too, from the divine title, which is wont to be employed at the head of sections (Isaiah 1:24; Isaiah 10:24; Isaiah 22:15; Isaiah 30:15, Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 43:1; Isaiah 43:14; Isaiah 43:16; Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 45:11; Isaiah 45:18; Isaiah 48:17; Isaiah 49:7, etc.). A third reason is, that the Isaiah 57:15-21 relate to a wider sphere than those that precede. For from Isaiah 56:10 on, the Prophet had Israel in mind, while in this concluding word his gaze comprehends humanity entire.—First he describes the Lord in respect to His infinite exaltation. He calls Him first ψνεπωׂ ?ΰ, an expression that occurs only Isaiah 6:1, and which describes that exaltation of God primarily according to its outward appearance.
Thus he calls Him ωׂ ?λֵ ?οςַ ?γ (i. e., not: He who inhabits eternity,—a representation incapable of accomplishment, but: who eternally sits enthroned, i. e., maintains His house, His place, thus also His dignity and honor eternally, can never like a man be driven out of it, Isaiah 9:5; Isaiah 30:8; Isaiah 26:4; Isaiah 45:17; Isaiah 64:8; Isaiah 65:18). Third he designates Him as the One whose name is “The Holy One,” sanctus. Thus one would think He was too holy to resort to fellowship with sinful men. But no! He declares of Himself: although I dwell on high (heaven is meant, the high place of God that overlooks all, comp Isaiah 33:5, and the modified expression ibid. Isaiah 57:16) and in the holy place (χָ ?γεֹ ?ωׁ in the sense of χγֶֹ ?ωׁ as in Psalms 46:5; Psalms 65:5; it is the upper sanctuary that is meant, Exodus 25:9; Exodus 25:40; Exodus 26:30; Acts 7:44; Hebrews 8:5), still I dwell also with him that is of a contrite and lowly spirit (Proverbs 16:19; Proverbs 29:23).
What contrasts, therefore, God is capable of! He dwells at the same time in the highest and in the lowliest. But that is no contradiction. For the “lowly spirit” is also just a choice and worthy dwelling, yea the choicest of all, since it is a living, personal habitation. But it is so choice for the reason that the humble man surrenders himself wholly, adds nothing from his own, will only accept God and let himself be illuminated by Him. Thus God supplies what is wanting in him.
For He makes His dwelling in him precisely for the purpose of filling spirit and heart (i. e., mind and soul, thinking and willing), of the humble and contrite with a new, fresh divine life (comp. Galatians 2:20). It appears from “to revive the spirit” and “to revive the heart,” that the Prophet means such humble souls as are also bowed down deep with sorrow. Hence, Isaiah 57:16, he can proceed with for I will not to eternity contend, nor be perpetually angry (comp. Psalms 103:9). God cannot do this for the reason, also, that else the whole being of men would be destroyed.
For as a creature, man cannot in the long run endure the wrath of God. By continued smiting the spirit of man that “stands before God,” i. e., as kindred with God, is capable (Matthew 18:10) of His presence and fellowship, and the soul that became πִ ?ωְ ?ξַ ?ϊηַ ?ιִּ ?ιν (Genesis 2:7) by the inbreathing of the Spirit, must pine away and perish. In this way God would destroy His own work.
3. For the iniquity——his mourners.Isaiah 57:17-18. The sorrows that God decrees are not blows of destruction (Lamentations 3:31-42). He is angry and chastises only on account of sin. But that sin is here made prominent which is in 1 Timothy 6:10 called the root of all evil things, viz., the πλεονεξία (Colossians 3:5) or φιλαργυρία. It is here named metonymically, the thing striven for (αֶּ ?φַ ?ς, “cutting, gain”) being put for the striving.
What guilt is so great that a man will not burden his conscience with it for the sake of gain? The perf. χφτϊι describes the anger as an actual foundation that the Lord feels in His heart. The consequence and expression of this anger is the smiting. But as it is not said εָ ?ΰַ ?λֵּ ?δεּ but εְ ?ΰַ ?αֵּ ?δεּ, we may not translate: and I smote, but: “and I smite.” From this it appears, that the Lord has not in mind concrete, definite facts, as say His conduct toward the people Israel, but He describes here the conduct He observes everywhere and toward all men. Therefore we must translate: I am angry and I smite, in that being angry (see Text. and Gram.) I hide Myself. The clause but he went off rebelliously in the way of his heart, declares the further consequence of the divine smiting.
The observation continually repeats itself, that the divine chastisement is disregarded by men. It was verified in the case of Israel as in that of the majority of mankind. Therefore the chastisement was of no avail. One would suppose then that the Lord must leave the contumacious man to his well deserved fate. But no! The forbearance, the patience, the compassionate love of God is without bounds.
He sees (surveys) the ways of a man, their beginning, middle and end. He sees whither these ways lead. They lead to everlasting destruction. He cannot suffer this. Therefore He approaches a man not only outwardly by angry smiting (Isaiah 57:17 a), He also makes the attempt inwardly. He heals the man; self-evidently the man who lets himself be healed.
For God lays His grace indeed as near a man as possible. But He never forces it on him. The manner of the healing is explained in the following words: and I will lead him,etc. God brings the man from the way of error on to the right way, and then extends to him what is needful to comfort and strengthen him. ωַׁ ?μֵּ ?νπִ ?ηֻ ?ξιν is properly “to requite, compensate consolations,” i. e., offer consolations as compensation. The εμΰαμιε joined on contains the plainest restriction of the εΰψτΰδε. That is one must, with Stier, Delitzschet al., take εְ in the sense of “and indeed, viz.” (comp.
Isaiah 57:11). The Lord cannot guide all and refresh all with His consolations, but only those that are of a troubled spirit. They are therefore the same that in Isaiah 57:15 are called contrite and humble of spirit.
4. I create the fruit——the wicked.Isaiah 57:19-21. So much is certain, Isaiah 57:19 introduces the conclusion. The thought “peace” joins Isaiah 57:19-21 close to one another. But what of αεψΰπεαωׂ ?τϊιν? Grammatically the words may be joined either with what precedes or with what follows.
And as regards the sense, “sprout, fruit of the lips” does not necessarily mean only thanks and praise, although the words of our text are so understood, Hebrews 13:15. In Proverbs 10:31 wisdom is designated as the outgrowth of the mouth, in Proverbs 12:14; Proverbs 13:2; Proverbs 18:20 satiety with good generally is described as τְּ ?ψִ ?ιτֶ ?δ and ϊְּ ?αεּ ?ΰַ ?ϊωְׂ ?τָ ?ϊַ ?ιִ ?ν. Therefore πεαωׂ ?τϊιν may be the word of prophecy, either that before us or the word of prophecy in general. Now can I one say, that the Lord extends comfort in that He creates thanks and praise? Not very well. At least in our context one looks for: in order to make (μִ ?αְ ?ψֹ ?ΰ) thanksgiving, or “I create fruit of the lips, in that I extend comfort” But if by “fruit of the lips” one understands the prophetic word, then would be said, that the Lord heals, guides, comforts, in that He makes the fruit of the lips, i. e., of the prophetic lips.
But that were a very forced and artificial manner of expression. For the Lord can after all only indirectly heal and comfort by making the Prophet speak divine words. It comes about directly only by means of the Lord’s opening the hearts to give heed to what is spoken by His Spirit (Acts 16:14). Therefore it does not seem to me to be proper to connect αεψΰπΧωׂ ?Χ with what precedes. But if we connect it with what follows, the same reasons already given determine against the meaning “thanks and praise.” Therefore if we refer it to the prophetic word, we must first of all not forget that these words are spoken with a certain emphasis. The expression though kindred, is still not the same in meaning as τְ ?ψִ ?ι or ϊְּ ?αεּ ?ΰַ ?ϊωׂ ?τϊιν.
For πεּ ?α is not the usual word for “budding, sprouting” (the most usual are τָ ?ψַ ?η or φָ ?ξַ ?η). It occurs only in poetry and only in four places, and, as remarked, is always used with a certain emphasis. For Psalms 62:11 it designates a vigorous sprouting, and the same also Psalms 92:15, which speaks of an impelling force effective even in old age. Proverbs 10:31 would say, that the mouth of the righteous is gifted with the power to produce that which is noblest, wisdom. Zechariah 9:17, finally, also speaks of a power of production whose intensity is attested by the excellence of what it produces. So then I believe that here πεαωׂ ?Χ does not mean in general “offspring of the lips,” but “splendid offspring, noble offspring.” That is, the Prophet would say, that he regards the proclamation of peace and healing for those far and near as the highest and noblest flower of his prophecy.
Peace, peace to him that is far off, and to him that is near, and I will heal him, saith the Lord, therewith creating the flower of the (prophetic) lips, i. e., in that He utters the highest and most glorious thing that He commissions His Prophet to proclaim. ΰξψιδεδ stands elsewhere only at the end of the discourse (Isaiah 22:14; Isaiah 39:6; Isaiah 45:13; Isaiah 49:5; Isaiah 54:1; Isaiah 54:6; Isaiah 54:8; Isaiah 54:10; Isaiah 59:21; Isaiah 65:7; Isaiah 65:25; Isaiah 66:9; Isaiah 66:20-21; Isaiah 66:23). Here it stands, as in Isaiah 57:21; Isaiah 48:22 (comp. μִ ?ιΰָ ?ξַ ?ψ45:24; Jeremiah 30:3) as an insertion. The double ωָׁ ?μεֹ ?ν sounds solemn and emphatic (comp. Isaiah 26:3; Jeremiah 6:14; Jeremiah 8:11; 1 Chronicles 12:18). By the “far and near” I cannot understand “the Israelites scattered far and wide.” How should the remote or nearer distance of the place of banishment from Palestine have any importance for the Lord? And if not for Him, then certainly they would have no importance for the believing Israelites.
To give explanation on this Point was not necessary for the “flower of prophecy.” But it was important to declare, that also the heathen, that hitherto had been far off, were to come near and partake of the salvation of Israel (comp. Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6; Isaiah 65:1; Hosea 2:23, etc.). Thus Paul understood the passage (Ephesians 2:17). εψτΰϊιε connects with εΰψτΰδε Isaiah 57:18, and shows that the Lord knows no salvation without healing. There is indeed no salvation for those not healed, the spiritually sick, the wicked (Isaiah 57:20-21). Thus εψτΰϊιε mediates in an artistic way the connection between what precedes and what follows.
Isaiah 57:20. The wicked are like the sea that is stirred up. The Prophet distinguishes two particulars. First the unrest of the sea. This is the effect of storms that do not allow the sea to rest. The other is the foam and mud that the sea throws out of its depths. The likings and cravings, the passions are the storms that stir up the human heart and let it have no rest. The wicked works are the foam and slime that then come to the surface and make manifest the uncleanness, the depravity, therefore the malady within. For it cannot rest: these words are quoted in Jeremiah 49:23, see Text. and Gram. [This verse recalls Judges 13, which may be an allusion to it.—Tr.].
Isaiah 57:21 gives the refrain-like conclusion of the Ennead which we had Isaiah 48:22. It does not come in abruptly as there, but is duly prepared. The only difference between this and Isaiah 48:22 is that here we have ΰμδι while there it reads ιδεδ. In this “my God” is uttered the absolute reliability of what has been said. How could that be incorrect that was said to the Prophet by his God?
Footnotes:The One dwelling eternally.
For the spirit that goes out from me would pine away,
am I angry, and smite him, in that being angry I hide myself.
But.
Heb. turning away.
even.
He that creates the noblest bloom of the lips.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 56:11. (Every one looks to his own way). “Potest intelligi de externis criminibus, sed magis placet, ut accipiatur de speciosis viis, in quibus ambulant hypocritae. Sic Franciscanus Francisci regulam sequitur, decalogum et evangelii doctrinam negligit tanquam rem vulgarem, quae ad vulgus pertirneant.”—Luther.
2. On Isaiah 56:12. In the Alexandrian and Vatican texts of the LXX., the words from ξχφδε Isaiah 56:11 to the end of Isa 56:12 are wanting, which even Jerome remarks on. He adds: “denique hos versiculos nullus ecclesiasticorum interpretum disseruit, sed quasi patentem in medio foveam transiliunt atque transmittunt.”—That the Fathers, unacquainted as they were with Hebrew, pass the words by, is simply explained by the LXX. omitting them. Jerome, because he knew Hebrew, as he himself says, “added them ex hebraico.” But why the Greek translator left them out is doubtful: Theodotion (see Hexapla Orig. ed. Montfaucon II., p. 179) has them.—“Ab hoc vitio (ebrietatis) abstinere debent pii ecclesiae ministri memores interdicti apostolici 1 Timothy 3:2-3, considerantes secum, nullam horulam ipsis esse adeo liberam ac vacuam, qua non ad officia functionis suis possint avocari.”—Foerster.—“Let one point the rough figure for himself for the more delicate spiritual form also, quite as Matthew 24:49; Ephesians 5:18, and the like are meant.
For there is a drunkenness and voluptuousness in all kinds of wine and intoxication, which only the eye of the Spirit beholds in many an honorable Bishop, General-superintendent or Superior-court-preacher. Stier. “Vita concionatoris optimus syllogismus.” Chrysostom.
3. On Isaiah 57:1. “Against the heedlessness of the world, that regards the life and death of men alike. For because Pharaoh and Moses, Saul and Jonathan, Judas and Peter, must temporally die, the one as the other, they suppose it is as much to one as to the other. But on the contrary, one should lay it to heart when useful and pious men fall, because, first, one must miss them afterwards, especially their prayers by which they stand in the breach and run to the walls (Ezekiel 22:30); second, because the destruction of such people is wont to be an evil omen of a great impending misfortune and change, [“It is a sign that God intends war when He calls home His ambassadors.”—M. Henry]. Examples: When Noah turns his back on the world and shuts himself in the ark, the deluge comes (Genesis 7:17).
When Lot goes out of Sodom and Gomorrah, fire from heaven falls on them (Genesis 19:24). When Joseph dies in Egypt, the bondage of the children of Israel begins, together with the murder of their infant boys (Exodus 1:8). When Hezekiah died, then followed the tyranny of Manasseh (2 Kings 20, 21) When Christ and His disciples were made way with, then began the destruction of Jerusalem.”—Cramer.—“Sicut ad Josiam dicit: tolleris, ne videant occuli tui hoc malum, etc. (2 Kings 22:18-20). Sic excidio Hierosolymitano erepti sunt apostoli et reliqui Sancti. Idem nobis accidet. Vivunt adhuc passim quidam pii homines, propter iliis Deus differt poenam.
Sublatis autem iis sequetur Germaniae ruina.”—Luther.—“Blessed are the dead, which die in the Lord, for they rest from their labor (Revelation 14:13). And hellish enemies, as little as human, can do them any harm.”—“It is a misfortune for the whole country when distinguished and deserving people are taken out of the midst by temporal death. For them, indeed, it is well; but God have mercy on those that are left. For as in a great storm, when the heavens are overcast with clouds, the shepherd leads in the sheep, the husbandman hastily gathers his sheaves, the parents call in the children from the streets, so our dear God calls His dearest children together, that the calamity may not touch them.”—Cramer.—“The men of grace or mercy are receivers and distributers, thus also the mediators of the grace of God for their people; the men of grace, that atoningly represent the land by intercessions and conduct, postpone its judgment (Genesis 18:24; Ezekiel 22:30).” Stier.—“The mere presence of an honest man is still a, restraint on the unbridledness of blasphemers.” G. Mueller in Stier.
4. On Isaiah 57:2. “Against the idle fancy of the fire of purgatory. For here it is said of those who have walked uprightly, not that they get into trouble, unrest, pain and torment, by which they must be purged; but that, with respect to their souls, they come to peace. But as to their bodies, they rest in their sleeping chamber. They are not on this account driven about; they seek also no mass or soul baths, as the Papists pretend.”—Cramer.
“Nam stultum est mortem matrem timuisse quietis,
Quam fugiunt morbi, moestaque pauperies.”
(Attributed to Cornelius Gallus, the friend of Virgil).
5. On Isaiah 52:4. It should be a wreath of honor to all faithful teachers and preachers, that they are regarded as monsters and are lampooned by the wise of this world. For if the great Prophet Isaiah in this passage, item, Jeremiah (Jeremiah 20:8), Elijah (2 Kings 2:24), Ezekiel (Ezekiel 33:31), Job (Job 17:6), yea, even Christ Himself had to suffer this, what wonder is it if the scoffing birds sharpen their beaks on us and chatter like the storks?” Cramer.
6. [On Isaiah 52:8. “When a people forget God, the memorials of their apostacy will be found in every part of their habitations. The shrines of idol gods may not be there; the beautiful images of the Greek and Roman mythology, or the clumsy devices of less refined heathens may not be there; but the furniture, the style of living will reveal from ‘behind every door and the posts” of the house that God is forgotten, and that they are influenced by other principles than a regard for His name. The sofa, the carpet, the chandelier, the centre-table, the instruments of music, the splendid mirror, may be of such workmanship as to show, as clearly as the image of a heathen god, that Jehovah is not honored in the dwelling, and that His law does not control the domestic arrangements.” Barnes].
7. [On Isaiah 57:10. “Thou art wearied——no hope. This is a striking illustration of the conduct of men in seeking happiness away from God. They wander from object to object; they become weary in the pursuit, yet they do not abandon it; they still cling to hope though often repulsed—and though the world gives them no permanent comfort—though wealth, ambition, gayety, and vice all fail in imparting the happiness which they sought, yet they do not give it up in despair. They still feel that it is to be found in some other way, than by the disagreeable necessity of returning to God, and they wander from object to object, and from land to land, and become exhausted in the pursuit, and still are not ready to say there is no hope, we give it up in despair, and we will now seek happiness in God.” Barnes.
“Note.—Despair of happiness in the creature, and of satisfaction in the service of sin, is the first step toward a well-grounded hope of happiness in God, and a well-fixed resolution to keep to His service; and those are inexcusable who have had sensible convictions of the vanity of the creature, and yet will not be brought to say, ‘There is no hope to be happy short of the Creator.’—Note.—Prosperity in sin (Thou hast found the life of thy hand) is a great bar to conversion from sin.” M. Henry].
8. On Isaiah 57:11. “God keeps silence only for a while, but yet not for ever and continually, with respect to men’s sins; but the longer He has kept silence, the harder He punishes afterwards.”—Starke.
9. On Isaiah 57:12. “Tuam justitiam. Est emphasis in pronomine tuam. Quasi dicat: mea justitia firma et perpetua est, tua non item.… In calamitate nihil desperatius est justitiariis, cum secundis rebus nihil quoque iis sit confidentius.—Luther.”
10. On Isaiah 57:15 sq. “God has three sorts of dwellings: first in the highest, second in the sanctuary, third in humble hearts. The first dwelling is the universalis praesentia, the universal presence, by which He fills all (Jeremiah 23:24); but there He is too high and incomprehensible for us. The other is gratiosa, the gracious presence, by which He lets Himself be found in the word and sacraments, and also comes finally to us and makes His dwelling in our hearts (John 14:23).” Cramer, comp. Renner, p. 199.—“Humilis anima est Dei sessio et delectabile cubile.” “Excelsus es Domine, sed humiles corde sunt domus tua” (Psalms 113:6; Psalms 138:6). Augustin.—“Fluenta gratiae deorsum non sursum fluunt.” Bernhard.—“Here is a principal passage beaming with evidence, that “holy” means not merely the tremenda majestas, but essentially comprehends the self-communicating condescension of love.” Stier.—Comp. His Reden Jesu V., p. 499, and the essays of Schoeberlein and Achelis in Stud. and Krit. 1847, I., IV.
11. On Isaiah 57:18. Here again we have one of those words in which Isaiah shows Himself to be the Evangelist of the Old Testament. For in the old covenant God does not yet heal men, else the new were superfluous. The law only effects knowledge of sin, but it does not give the power to overcome sin. One fancies here again that he hears the Apostle that wrote Romans 8.
12. On Isaiah 57:19-21. “The gospel in a sermon of peace to the heathen that were far off, and to the Jews that were near. For by it we both have access in one Spirit to the Father (Ephesians 2:18). But the wicked quakes all his life and what he hears terrifies him (Job 15:20; Isaiah 48:22). And especially in conflicts, and notably in the last hour, and when they see God’s judgment near, one sees this in them, that they not only therefore often spit out blasphemies, but that for great anguish they have laid hands on themselves. Examples: Saul, Ahithophel, Judas, Franciscus Spiera.
For because such peace is not to be brought about with works, they must ever stick in anger, resentment, discontent and disfavor with and before God. And it is only pure folly to wish to give the terrified hearts rest by their own expiation, merit and self-elected holiness. Much less will there be rest if one teaches such people to doubt the forgiveness of sins.” Cramer.
HINTS1. On Isaiah 56:10 to Isaiah 57:2. These words may be used as the text of a sermon for a fast-day, or also for a synodical sermon. One might then regard the Prophet’s words as a mirror, or as a measure whereby to measure the condition of the church (of the country, of the times). From this would then come 1) earnest warning to those that belong to the wicked here described, or who do not oppose their doings; 2) comfort for those that have “walked straight before them,” for, though hated and persecuted by men, they shall still come to peace.
2. On Isaiah 57:1-2. These words (also “a Jewish formula solennis for the pious dead,” Stier) have very often been used as texts for funeral discourses for celebrated men.
3. On Isaiah 57:2. Those that have walked in their uprightness, i. e., who during their lives have served the Lord in a living faith, need not fear death. It is to them a bringer of joy. For it brings 1) eternal peace to their soul, 2) rest to their body in the chamber of the grave, till the day of the blessed resurrection.
4. On Isaiah 57:3-10. A description of the coarse idolatry, to which in our day correspond only too many appearances of the modern and subtile heathenism. Only too many have sucked in with their mother’s milk superstition and unbelief, which as a rule go together. As Ishmael, who was begotten after the flesh, mocked and persecuted Isaac that was born according to the promise (Galatians 4:28 sqq.), so also now. The false seed, i. e., those that are not born of the Spirit of the church, although by their fleshly birth they belong to it, mock and persecute the genuine children of the church.
With insatiable greed people run daily, but especially on the Lord’s day, under all green trees, i. e., to the places of worldly pleasure-seeking, where the idols of the belly and of mammon are served! And how many children are from their earliest youth led away to the service of these idols! Are not thereby their immortal souls spiritually slain? And is not that, in the end, a worse sacrifice of children than that ancient sort? All that puts men in mind of the service of God, men get out of their sight (pious customs, Sunday, feast days, church acts, as baptism, marriage, burial), in order to be able to surrender themselves undisturbed and wholly to the modern idols. Men no longer seek their strength in the covenant with the Lord, but among men in associations of every kind.
And, because that does not instantly reveal its ruinous effects, but often seems to have a good effect, men never weary of this conduct, but confirm themselves in it more and more.
5. On Isaiah 57:12. Many men will not by any means believe that their good works are wholly insufficient to obtain the righteousness that is of avail with God. Now God will, indeed, not suffer to go unrewarded the cup of water that we give to the thirsty in the proper spirit (Matthew 10:42; Mark 9:41). But could we point to ever so many such cups, still they do not suffice to pay our ten thousand talents (Matthew 18:24 sqq.). One must therefore remind his charge of the great reckoning that the Lord will one day have with us. In this 1) will be had a complete and perfectly correct investigation into our indebtedness and assets. 2) Then it will appear that our assets will be too defective to be of any use whatever against our indebtedness.
6. On Isaiah 57:13-14. It depends very much on the sort of spirit with which one turns to God for help. If one does it in order to make a trial also with the dear God, then one will certainly be denied. But if one does it because one knows no other helper, and wishes to know no other, then one may confidently count on being heard. How differently the answers sound that God gives to the cries for help that reach Him. 1) To the one it is said: let thy gatherings help thee. 2) But to the others is called out: a. make a road, clear the way, take up the stumbling-block out of the way of my people; b. inherit the land, possess my holy mountain.
7. On Isaiah 57:15-16. “I know that these sayings speak especially of penitent sinners and aroused consciences; but I do not see why they may not with good right be applied also to other alarmed and anxious people. One has here to look also at the examples of the dear children of God who are presented to us in the Holy Scriptures full of fear and alarm. Think of Job (Job 9:34; Job 13:21), David (Psalms 25:17; Psalms 55:5 sqq.), Daniel (Daniel 8:17 sq.), Paul (1 Corinthians 2:3; 2 Corinthians 7:5), yea, of Jesus Christ Himself (Matthew 26:37; Mark 14:33; Luke 22:44). From this thou seest clearly, thou lover of God, but timid and frightened soul, that thou art not the first among the children of God, that suffer His terrors and must go about with an anxious heart. It is also therewith sufficiently shown that such an event is not a reminder of anger, but rather of the grace of the kind and gracious God.”—Scriver.
8. On Isaiah 57:15-16. “A holy shudder goes through my soul when, in receiving Thy body and blood, I think of who they are to whom Thou so communicatest Thyself! That is Thy way, Thou wonderful Lord, that Thou utterly humblest and castest down to the ground before Thou raisest up. Thou sayest: ‘I who dwell in the high and holy place am with those that are of a contrite and humble spirit.’ Has the greatness of my sin already melted my heart, it melts still more at the greatness of Thy grace.”—Tholuck.
9 On Isaiah 57:15-16. Sermon for Whitsun week: “Wherein do we behold the greatest glory of the God of grace? 1) Therein, that He does not despise a poor sinner’s heart for a dwelling. 2) Therein, that He manifests Himself in it not as a judge, but as a comforter.” Taube, in Gottes Bruenl. hat Wassers die Fuelle. Hamburg, 1872.
10. On Isaiah 57:17-18. One is reminded here of 1 Kings 19:11 sq. God is not in the tempest, nor in the earthquake, but He is in the still, gentle breeze. The gospel goes more to the hearts of men, and lays deeper hold on them than the law. The conversion of men. 1) It is prepared by being angry and smiting (Isaiah 57:17). 2. It is accomplished by God’s inwardly healing the heart.
11. On Isaiah 57:19. Missionary Sermon. The work of missions: 1) By whom is it accomplished? 2) On whom is it accomplished? 3) What end does it serve?
12. On Isaiah 57:20. “The whole Scripture testifies that what it says of the grace of God, of the forgiveness of sins and of the assurance of bliss belongs to the penitent. For those that are ever stirred up and driven on by their malignant desires (like the sea by the winds), and commit one sin after another (like the sea casts out all sorts of dirt), are wicked men, and have no peace to expect.”—Scriver.
c.—The new creature
Isaiah 58-66At the close of the second Ennead, the gaze of the Prophet had returned from the heights of prophecy to the practical necessities of his own time. In the third Ennead he renewedly mounts aloft to the heights of prophetic vision. Chapters 58, 59. form, as it were, the ladder on which he ascends. He shows in them how the people must, by a sincere repentance, raise themselves out of the region of the flesh into the region of the spirit. After this introductory section, the Prophet, in the second discourse, chap. 60, lets the day of salvation dawn by the rising of a new sun that will prove to be a new, heavenly principle of life in the sphere both of nature and of personal life. The third discourse, Isaiah 61:1 to Isaiah 63:6, shows us that the new principle of life will be represented by a personal centre.
And in this personality, which, indeed, he beholds only as veiled, the Prophet distinguishes a three-fold official activity. He so speaks of it that we must recognize it as the bearer of a prophetic, priestly and kingly power and dignity. As for the object of this three-fold activity, it will be a double one. In a positive respect, there will be brought by that personal centre to the people Israel all-comprehending salvation, that shall find its concentrated expression in a new name. But negatively, it will be active as judge of the whole Gentile world, here represented by Edom. The fourth discourse, chaps, Isaiah 63:7-19 implies another descent of the Prophet into the present.
But this time it is not the actual, absolute present, but a relative present, viz., that of the Exile into which he translates himself in thought. And as out of this present, he makes the people pray the Lord, in a fervent prayer, that He who once showed Himself as the God of His people, would now also look down, yea, that He would come down with grand display of His power. The fifth discourse, finally, chaps. 65, 66, is like a limited “yes” to the prayer offered in the foregoing discourse. For the prayer was respecting the deliverance of all Israel (Isaiah 64:7-8). To this 65 replies that neither all Israel will be saved, nor all Israel be lost. The righteousness of God will give to each his own (Isaiah 65:1-16).
The pious shall receive new life. For there shall be a new earth and a new heaven. And the new life that shall reign in these will be one that is inexhaustibly rich, spiritually exalted, in the highest degree intensive; it will also bear the character of the tenderest maternal love (Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:14). In conclusion, there follows, Isaiah 66:15-24, a panorama of the last time. Its acts of judgment the Prophet beholds together. The first act of the judgment is pre-supposed when, in Isaiah 66:19, it is said, that those that have escaped bring the salvation to the heathen; that the latter shall, as it were, bring back Israel as an offering to Jehovah, and that then all mankind shall be a new Israel on the highest pinnacle.
So ends the book with an outlook on a new creation of a higher grade, whose reverse side is briefly indicated in the extended refrain, Isaiah 66:24, as a worm that never dies, and a fire that is unquenchable.
It must, in the third Ennead, first of all surprise one, that the number of the chapters in it no longer corresponds to the number of discourses, as is in general the case in both the Enneads that precede. For there are nine chapters, and yet only five discourses. Besides, we observe evident interpolations in various places [see Introd., p. 16 b]. Also, the division of verses is erroneous in several places (comp. the rem. on Isaiah 63:19 b—Isaiah 64:4 a). All this appears to me to indicate that the Prophet had not wrought out the last Ennead as perfectly as the two preceding. In the materials originating from him, there were doubtless nine discourses indicated for the third division. Hence the undeniable Isaianic character of much the greater part of these last nine chapters. [The Author’s further inferences are substantially a repetition of what appears on pp. 16, 17 of the Introduction, where see.—Tr.]
_______________I.—THE FIRST Bridge from the Present to the Future, from Preaching Repentance to Preaching GloryChaps. 58, 59This discourse connects closely with the concluding word of the foregoing Ennead. There the Prophet had descended from the heights of future glory to the level of the present. This present, with its sad moral condition, makes him doubtful whether the glorious images of the future that he beheld could be realized. But he is comforted: God’s loving wisdom is able to heal a man, if only he does not harden his heart. The Prophet, then, in these chapters, proceeds from the level to which in 57 he descended. But he mounts upward again.
He builds a bridge for himself that shall conduct him again to those heights he has momentarily forsaken. This he does first, by repelling the charge of the people that God is unjust and denies to their deserving its suitable reward. God, he says, is not unjust, but your piety is good for nothing, for it is merely outward, and appears associated with deeds that are morally objectionable (Isaiah 58:1-5). Then it is shown how true piety that pleases God must prove itself by actions (Isaiah 58:6-14). Then in chap. 59 which, with chap. 58, forms an organic whole, the Prophet first refutes the charge that God cannot help, and shows that the moral corruption of the people is to blame for their misfortune (Isaiah 59:1-8). This charge the people acknowledge to be founded, and make a sincere confession that promises genuine fruits (Isaiah 59:9-15 a).
Upon this confession the Prophet promises again that Israel shall come to its right, to the possession of the theocratic salvation, and receives in conclusion the comforting assurance that the Spirit imparted to him will rule in Israel forever (Isaiah 59:15 b–21). This artistically constructed conclusion has a double sense. First it intimates that the new covenant which the Goel will conclude with Israel shall inaugurate a life in the Spirit, and indeed the same Spirit which is imparted to the Prophet, and which will instantly, from chap. 60. on, again raise him aloft to the heights of prophetic vision. Here the division of the chapter is not quite correct. The first chief part of the discourse comprises Isaiah 58:1 to Isaiah 59:8; the second Isaiah 59:9-21. The first part opposes charge to charge.
In chap. 53 the charge against Israel on account of false piety is opposed to the charge against God of unrighteousness. In Isaiah 59:1-8 the charge of moral corruption is opposed to the charge of inability. The second part contains first the people’s confession of sin (Isaiah 59:9-15 a), and then the promise that Jehovah will, after their repentance, also help Israel to their rights, by which also the spirit of the Prophet is, as it were, set free, and rendered capable of a new flight.
_______________
1. CHARGE AGAINST CHARGE
Isaiah 58:1 to Isaiah 59:8.a. The complaint of the people against the unrighteousness of Jehovah, opposed by the charge of false piety. Isaiah 58:1-14.1 Cry aloud, spare not,
Lift up thy voice like a trumpet,
And show my people their transgression,
And the house of Jacob their sins.
2 Yet they seek me daily,
And delight to know my ways, As a nation that did righteousness,
And forsook not the ordinance of their God: They ask of me the ordinances of justice;
They take delight in approaching to God.
3 Wherefore have we fasted, say they, and thou seest not?
Wherefore have we afflicted our soul, and thou takest no knowledge?
Behold, in the day of your fast ye find pleasure,
And exact all your labours.
4 Behold, ye fast for strife and debate,
And to smite with the fist of wickedness:
Ye shall not fast as ye do this day,
To make your voice to be heard on high.
5 Is it such a fast that I have chosen?
A day for a man to afflict his soul?
Is it to bow down his head as a bulrush,
And to spread sackcloth and ashes under him? wilt thou call this a fast,
And an acceptable day to the Lord?
6 Is not this the fast that I have chosen?
To loose the bands of wickedness,
To undo the heavy burdens,
And to let the oppressed go free,
And that ye break every yoke?
7 Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry,
And that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy house?
When thou seest the naked, that thou cover him;
And that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh?
8 Then shall thy light break forth as the morning,
And thine health shall spring forth speedily:
And thy righteousness shall go before thee;
The glory of the Lord shall be thy rereward.
9 Then shalt thou call, and the Lord shall answer;
Thou shalt cry, and he shall say, Here I am.
If thou take away from the midst of thee the yoke,
The putting forth of the finger, and speaking vanity;
10 And if thou draw out thy soul to the hungry,
And satisfy the afflicted soul;
Then shall thy light rise in obscurity,
And thy darkness be as the noon day:
11 And the Lord shall guide thee continually,
And satisfy thy soul in drought,
And make fat thy bones:
And thou shalt be like a watered garden, and like a spring of water,
Whose waters fail not.
12 And they that shall be of thee shall build the old waste places:
Thou shalt raise up the foundations of many generations;
And thou shalt be called, The repairer of the breach,
The restorer of paths to dwell in.
13 If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath,
From doing thy pleasure on my holy day;
And call the Sabbath a delight,
The holy of the Lord, honourable;
And shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways,
Nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words:
14 Then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord ;
And I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth,
And feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father:
For the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_58:3. It is doubtful whether ςַ ?φְּ ?αֵ ?ιλֶ ?ν means operas vestras (i.e„ your laborers), or opera vestra. But since ςֶ ?φֶ ?α (on the abnormal doubling of the φ by Dagheshforte derimens or separative see Green, § 24. b; 216, 2 a) never has a personal sense, but always means only labor, hard work, we must translate: and ye exact all your compulsory labor. πָ ?βַ ?ωׂ is construed not only with the accusative of the person, but also with the accusative of the thing, as is shown by 2 Kings 23:35. The double accusative joined with the word here shows that it is conceived of as verbum postulandi.Isaiah 58:5. It is not clear to me why Delitzsch affirms that the μְ in δֲ ?μָ ?λֹ ?σ is not dependent on ϊχψΰ. Only the ablative of the gerund could be so expressed.
But here no ablative gerund is in place. For one could not translate: num flectendo caput arundinis instar? But it is the pure dative of the remoter object, that numberless times stands after χָ ?ψָ ?ΰ in the sense of “calling, to give a name.” μְ very often has a pretonic vowel before the monosyllabic infinitive that itself does not stand in the construct state (comp. Numbers 24:10; Amos 7:4). The construction εωׂ ?χεΰτψιַ ?φֹּ ?ιςַ after the infinitive μָ ?λֹ ?σ is a return from the subordinate to the principal form.
Isaiah 58:6. Also in the last clause of this verse we notice the discourse returns after three infinitives to the principal form, to the imperfect.
Isaiah 58:7. δֲ ?μֹ ?ΰ at the beginning of the verse recapitulates the δμΰ Isaiah 58:6, and also represents the clause introduced by the latter (is not that a fast, that I choose?).——τָּ ?ψַ ?ν “to split, divide,” (only again spoken of bread, Jeremiah 16:7, where μֶ ?ηֶ ?ν is to be supplied; used beside only with τַּ ?ψְ ?ρָ ?δ of beasts that cleave the hoof) occurs only here in Isaiah.——The word ξְ ?ψεּ ?γִ ?ιν is difficult. It is found Lamentations 1:7 meaning “a going astray, erratio.” Lamentations 3:19 has the same word in the singular in the same sense. Both times the word is joined with ςֳ ?πִ ?ι, miseria, as in our text it is with ςָ ?πִ ?ι, miser. That it is so connected with one or other of these words in every instance of its use, is certainly no accident. It seems to indicate a proverbial mode of expression. Also it results that our word is really from the same root as that in Lam.
If then the latter be from ψεּ ?γ, errare, vagari, then our word must be from the same, and not from ξָ ?ψַ ?γ rebellare. Now as there are no words ad. f. ξָ ?χεֹ ?ν (with further obscuration in the plural into u) or ξָ ?φεּ ?χ, that would have both a substantive and adjective signification, we must, with Maurer, Knobel, et al., take ξψεּ ?γ as a substantive, which like e.g. ξַ ?μְ ?ΰָ ?κְ ,ξεֹ ?ψָ ?ΰ, etc., pass over from the abstract meaning to the concrete. Then ξְ ?ψεּ ?γִ ?ιν would be not merely wanderings astray,” but also “wanderers,” as it were personified goings astray.
Isaiah 58:10. δֵ ?τִ ?ιχ (in Isaiah occurs only τּ ?εּ ?χ vacillare Isaiah 28:7) is “to make go out, promere, bring forth,” in various senses, comp. Psalms 140:9; Psalms 144:13, Proverbs 3:13; Proverbs 8:35; Proverbs 12:2; Proverbs 18:22. It is still uncertain whether the root of our ϊτχ is or is not identical with that of τχε Isaiah 28:7 and ιָ ?τִ ?ιχ Jeremiah 10:4. The jussive form εְ ?ϊָ ?τֵ ?χ stands parallel with ΰִ ?ρΞϊָּ ?ρִ ?ιγ in the foregoing conditional clause. We translate, not quite literally: “and sacrifice thy hunger to the hungry one” (comp. Gesen. and Umberit). Properly it should be rendered: “and draw forth (offer out of thy provision) to the hungry one that after which thy soul craves.” The other translation is for the sake of brevity and pregnancy.
Isaiah 58:11. By the imperf. with Vav consec. [copulat?] ιημιυ appears as the consequence of ηָ ?μַ ?υ ּ ?εְ ?δִ ?ωְׂ ?αִּ ?ιςַ is extraxit, subtraxit; ηָ ?μεּ ?υ is extractus, “become loose, free from, expeditus.” The Piel ηִ ?μֵּ ?υ denotes “to draw off” (clothes), “to draw out” (a prisoner; thus to free). Hiph. occurs only here. As Kal has a transitive meaning (excepting in Hosea 5:6), a Hiph. formed from it is hardly in place here. Already Archbishop Secker, with whom Lowth agrees, would on this account read εְ ?ςָ ?φְ ?ξָֽ ?ϊְ ?κָ ιַ ?ηֲ ?μִ ?ισ (comp. Isaiah 40:29; Isaiah 40:31;Isaiah 41:1).
But ηָ ?μεּ ?υ meaning “equipped, fighting men,” is a word of such frequent occurrence, that the formation of a denominativum δֶ ? ?ֽ ?ηֱ ?μִ ?ιυ, meaning “to make fit for war, active,” is quite conceivable. I agree in this with Delitzsch without regarding it necessary to assume a ηָ ?μַ ?υ, “to be strong,” for ηֲ ?μָ ?φִ ?ιν, lumbi.
Isaiah 58:12. Ewald, et al., would read αֻּ ?πּ ?εּ. But, apart from only the Kal and Niph. of αָּ ?πָ ?δ being used, this reading is needless, because nothing is gained by it either in respect to grammar or sense. Still I would not render ξִ ?ξְּ ?κָ by “a te oriundi,” and treat it as implying the subject of αָּ ?πε. But the latter carries its subject in itself; the third person plural of the personal pronoun (δֵ ?ν), for which we use the indefinite subject man, “one, they,” is expressed by the afformative εּ.
Isaiah 58:13. The expression δָ ?ωִׁ ?ιαψֶ ?βֶ ?μξִ ?ο is found only here. Elsewhere we find: ξָ ?πַ ?ςψΧ (Proverbs 1:15), ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ψψΧ (Proverbs 3:26; Eccl. 4:17), δָ ?ρִ ?ιψψΧ (Proverbs 4:27).—Expositors now justly give up supplying ξִ ?ο before ςֲ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ϊ, which affords a forced construction, if not exactly an impossible one. ςωׂ ?εϊ is in apposition with ψβμκ, The doing, dispatching business (ηֵ ?τֶ ?υ see on Isaiah 58:3) is in fact the foot that desecrates the Sabbath. [Though the meaning “business,” maintained for the word ηֵ ?τֶ ?υ, be suitable for its use in later writers, there is no reason for so rendering it here or in ver.3 or in the passages there cited from Isaiah. Delitzsch says at Isaiah 58:3 of ξָ ?φָ ?ΰδֵ ?τֶ ?μִ: “In the face of ver.13 this cannot have any other meaning than to stretch one’s hand after occupation, to carry on business, to occupy one’s-self with it,—ητυ combining the three meanings, application or affairs, striving, and trade or occupation.” Translation of Clark’s F. Theol. Lib.
As at Isaiah 58:13 he adds nothing to corroborate the above appeal to that verse, it would seem that in some way the use of ητυ in connection with the Sabbath must self-evidently refer to business. That is, we may suppose, it is self-evident that it can’t mean “pleasure.” It is hard to resist the persuasion that such is actually the logical process of this interpretation. It is influenced by a state of religious life that has given up the Sabbath and will only recognize a Sunday. To those of different tradition it is not self-evident, that the right observance of the Sabbath does not call for self-renunciation in favor of God, even the renouncement of our own pleasures, that we may seek pleasure in what pleases God. To such, therefore, it seems perfectly obvious, as J. A.
Alex., says on (Isaiah 44:28) that “the word (ητυ) has here its strict, original, and usual sense of inclination, will or pleasure, that which one delights in, chooses or desires; and the substitution of affair or business would be not only arbitrary but ridiculous.” –Tr ].
AND 1. Cry aloud——their sins.
Ver.1. The Prophet still stands in the present; he is not soaring in the heights of prophetic vision. He never loses sight of the practical question: what must Israel do to be saved? Even in this last Ennead, where yet the inmost depths and the highest heights of the future salvation present themselves to his gaze, he does not forget to oppose the illusion, that every Israelite by his birth alone and nothing more has an expectancy of this salvation. On the contrary he says most emphatically, that the judgments of the Lord will fall on the unbelieving Israel just as on the unbelieving Gentile world (comp. especially Isaiah 65:2 sqq.; Isaiah 66:4 sqq., 14 sqq.). The Prophet, therefore, does not idealize his nation.
He sees it in its concrete reality, made up as it is of the God-fearing and the godless combined. But it deeply concerns him that as many as possible of the latter may be converted. He had concluded the second Ennead with such a descent to the sphere of practical necessity, and from that sphere also he addresses himself to the third and final cycle of discourse. One sees how important to the Lord this practical point of view is, from the way He summons the Prophet to give it effect; with the greatest emphasis, without timidity or sparing the Prophet must hold up to the people their sins. For without the knowledge of sin there is no return (ωׁ ?εּ ?α), and without return there is no salvation. This exhortation, to hold up to the people their sins, is of the nature of a theme.
For warning against sin and exhortation to repent is the undertone of all of chapts. 58, 59; and is similarly the serious, dark background in chapts. 64–66.
“Cry with throat,” i. e., with chest-tones, with a full, strong sound (not with suppressed or whispered sound, comp. 1 Samuel 1:13). Farther, the Prophet is not to restrain (Isaiah 54:2), viz., his voice. He is therefore not to spare his voice, and accordingly not his hearers either. For a loud calling that penetrates marrow and bone, strains not only the crier but hearer also. The Prophet’s cry should penetrate to the quick, therefore it is said to him he must lift up his voice like the Shophar. ωׁ ?ετψ interchanges Joshua 6 with τֶ ?ψֶ ?ο (comp. vers.5 and 4, 6, 13). According to Josephus (Antiq.
V., 6, 5, comp. Judges 7:16), the Shophar was a rams-horn [κριοῦκέρας). Jerome, too, remarks on Hosea 5:8 concerning the Shophar: buccina pastoralis est et cornu, recurvo efficitur, unde et graece κερατίνη appellatur.” Comp. Leyrer, in Herz.,R. Enc. X., p. 131.
2. Yet they seek——to the Lord.Vers.2–5. I share the view of Delitzsch, that εְ before ΰεϊι is to be taken in an adversative, and not a causal sense. For the summons to hold up importunately to the people their sin, implies that they do not know their sin, that they hold themselves to be quite sinless. In contrast with this (indirectly expressed) opinion of themselves, stands what the people attempt with respect to God. God’s ways seem incomprehensible to them.
That is, they do not at all understand how the Lord can deal with them as He does. They think they deserve reward and praise, and yet must endure severe tribulation. γָּ ?ψַ ?ωׁ (comp. Isaiah 31:1) is=“to inquire, to find out by asking, to search out.” They would know from the Lord how His treatment is to be understood. For such is the meaning of γςϊγψλιιητφεο, which on its part is moreover explanatory of ΰεϊιιγψωׁ ?εο. But they do not stop with a verbal explanation. They demand a formal reply, i. e., they would have their pretended right assured to them by formal, judicial procedure.
As a people that practice righteousness and has not forsaken the law (ξωׁ ?τθ=legal norm) of its God, they demand of Jehovah judicial processes of righteousness, i. e., an impartial judicial procedure. They appeal, as it were, from Jehovah to a higher, independent court, and demand that Jehovah shall appear before it. In the expression ξωׁ ?τθιφγχ “righteous judgments,” there is thus an indirect charge that Jehovah’s treatment of them had been unjust. An impartial tribunal shall decide, and before this Jehovah Himself should appear. Such is the meaning χψαϊΰΧ (substant. χְ ?ψָ ?αָ ?δ again only Psalms 73:28). χָ ?ψַ ?α is often used for appearing before judgment or before the lord and governor (Isaiah 34:1; Isaiah 41:1; Isaiah 41:5; Isaiah 48:16; Isaiah 57:3; Malachi 3:5).—Notice the full-sounding forms ιֶ ?ηְ ?τָ ?φεּ ?ο ,ιγְ ?ψωׁ ?εּ ?ο (the latter rhyme-like concluding the two halves of the verse). They paint the bold insolence displayed.
In ver.3 the Lord lets the Israelites themselves produce their complaint. We have fasted and chastened ourselves. Such is the merit they urge. They ask why it is not acknowledged.—This passage has been urged as a proof that our book originated in the exile, because from Zechariah 7:3 sqq. (comp. Isaiah 8:19) it appears that in the Exile fasting in the fourth, fifth, seventh and tenth months came in vogue (comp. WienerR.
W., and Herz.R. Enc. s. v. Fasten), whereas the Mosaic law prescribed fasting for only one day in the year, viz., the great day of atonement (Leviticus 23:27-32). In this bragging about their fasting is found an indication of that extension that in the Exile was given to the rite of fasting. Even Delitzsch will not be dissuaded of the idea that here we “have before us a picture out of the life of the exiles.” But was that Isaiah’s task, to give pictures from the life of the exiles?
In that passage of Zech. we are informed of an embassy, probably from Bethel, that made inquiry in Jerusalem, whether fasting in the fifth month was to be retained even after the return out of the Exile. Thereupon Zechariah receives a commission to answer the people that they might use their pleasure in this respect. For fasting as eating was indifferent to the Lord. What other divine service, better and more rational (Romans 12:1), Jehovah requires must be known to them from the words that Jehovah caused to be proclaimed by “the former prophets (πְ ?αִ ?ιΰִ ?ινδָ ?ψִ ?ΰ ? ֹ ?ωׂ ?πִ ?ιν) when Jerusalem was inhabited and in prosperity, and the cities thereof round about her,” And then follows vers.9, 10, what sort of words of former prophets the Lord means: “Execute true judgment, and show mercy and compassions every man to his brother: and oppress not the widow, or the fatherless, the stranger nor the poor; and let none of you imagine evil against his brother in your heart.” If it be asked what words of an older prophet Zechariah means, only our passage can be first thought of. Of course the agreement is not verbal; but neither is there any other passage that does agree verbally with that in Zechariah. And as regards the sense, our passage is the only one that in the same way as Zechariah exposes negatively the valuelessness of outward fasting and sets positively in antithesis to it the true λατρεία that is well-pleasing to God. “Did ye at all fast unto me?” the Lord asks in Zechariah 7:5.
The idea of fasting here involves the idea of solemnizing, honoring, sanctifying in the way of divine service, and on this depends the accusative suffix (“do ye then fast me”). Not my honor and my interest did ye seek in your fasting, is, then what the Lord says, Zechariah 7:5. And He says the same in our text, only more extendedly, in that He charges the Israelites with not having God at all in view or in their hearts when they fasted, since otherwise it were impossible for them at the same time to carry on all sorts of wickedness. And as regards the positive feature, our Prophet in vers.6, 7, when he admonishes to let go the bound, to feed, entertain, clothe the poor, actually says what Zechariah (Isaiah 7:9-10) says with his admonition to practise works of righteousness and love. Also the prophet Joel utters a similar thought (Joe 2:12-13). By the words “and with fasting, and with weeping and with mourning” followed by “and rend your heart and not your garments,” he points out the difference between the true and the false λατρεία.
Zechariah may also have thought of Eze 18:5 sqq. (although it by no means has for subject the contrast between true and false divine service) since that is the only place beside Zechariah where the expression ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τַּ ?θΰֱ ?ξֶ ?ϊ is found. But our passage has the most resemblance to that in Zechariah, partly because it speaks only of fasting and partly because it contrasts false and true fasting. There are some other particulars that favor the idea that Zechariah had our passage, and also others in chapts. 40, 66 in mind. Of inferior significance is the fact that the expression ξωׁ ?τθΰξϊZechariah 7:9, (in which we have recognized a connection with Ezekiel 18:8), perhaps includes also a reminiscence of ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τְ ?θֵ ?ιΞφֶ ?γֶ ?χIsaiah 58:2, which expression, beside here, is found only Psalms 119:7; Psalms 119:62; Psalms 119:106; Psalms 119:160; Psalms 119:164, in the form ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τְ ?θֵ ?ιφִ ?γְֶֽ ?χκָ. It is more important that in Zechariah 7:13 we have a very plain echo of Isa 1:2; Isaiah 65:12; Isaiah 66:4. For after Zechariah (Isaiah 7:9-10) had quoted what “the former prophets” had demanded instead of the merely outward fasting, he proceeds in ver.11, with the information that Israel did not heed the words of those prophets, and that thereby a great wrath came about on the Lord’s part (Isaiah 58:11-12).
Then it is said further: “And it came to pass, that as He cried and they would not hear” (ver.13). Now these words are the reproduction of a thought that in this form is peculiar to chapts. 40, 66. Thus in Isaiah 50:2 we have the words: “Wherefore when I came was there no man, when I called was there none to answer?” Afterwards we read: “I called and ye did not answer, I spake and ye did not hear” (Isaiah 65:12). Finally: “I called and there was none answering, I spake and they did not hear” (Isaiah 66:4). The same form of expression is found with modification only in Jeremiah and Zechariah beside. Thus in Jeremiah we read: “And I spake unto you, rising up early and speaking, but ye heard not; and I called you, but ye answered not” (Jeremiah 7:13); and again: “And thou shalt speak all these words unto them; but they will not hear thee; thou shalt also call unto them; but they will not answer thee” (Jeremiah 7:27).
Finally: “I have spoken unto them, but they have not heard; and I have called unto them, but they have not answered” (Jeremiah 35:17). Such are the Old Testament passages in which the said form of speech occurs applied to the people Israel. For it occurs already Job 19:16, but there only in relation to Job and his servant. We expressly observe that we have to do here only with that form of expression, which to the calling of a superior opposes the not answering of an inferior, and not with the opposite where the superior refuses to answer the call of an inferior. Now it is possible that the expression was borrowed from Job 19:16, and applied to the relation of Jehovah to Israel. Who did this first is the question.
Any way the words in Zechariah 7:13 a, have most resemblance to Isaiah 65:12; Isaiah 66:4. Now as this kind of expression is found in Isaiah only Isaiah 50:2; Isaiah 65:12; Isaiah 66:4, the conclusion is very natural that Zechariah reckoned the author of Isaiah 40-64 to the former prophets that prophesied in the time “when Jerusalem still sat and was quiet and its cities round about and the south, and the plain” (Zechariah 7:7). For evidently vers.13, 14 are explanatory of what precedes. It is said wherein “the great wrath” consisted, of which Isaiah 58:12 spoke. And as the cause of this wrath was said to be that the Israelites would not hear “the law and the words which Jehovah Sabaoth sent by His Spirit by the hand of the former prophets,” so, in ver.13a, the cause of the wrath is more nearly defined by a condensed statement of the contents of those former prophecies. The conclusion here presented is the judgment also of KueperDas Prophetenth, d.
A. B. p. 291. Another proof of the same thing is, that the words: “made heavy their ears that they should not hear” (Zechariah 7:11), is a quotation of Isa 59:1. And it may be noted that the expression λָ ?αְ ?γָ ?δΰִ ?ϊֶ ?ο in general occurs only in Isa. (Isaiah 6:10; Isaiah 59:1). From this whole investigation it results, that we have not to consider the words of Isa 58:3 a, as the language of an exile, but of a contemporary of Isaiah.
Although only one fast day in the year was legally prescribed, still voluntary fast-days were allowed both for individuals, and for the whole community. And there are many texts to prove that such often occurred. Comp. Judges 20:26; 1 Samuel 7:16; 2 Samuel 1:12; 2 Samuel 12:16 sqq.; 1 Kings 21:12; Joe 1:14; Jeremiah 36:6; Jeremiah 36:9; 2 Chronicles 20:3; Ezra 8:21; Psalms 109:24, etc. It was just voluntary fasting that was likely to become the subject of work-righteous, Pharisaical boasting (Luke 18:12). ςִ ?πָּ ?δπֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ is “to restrain, bow, repress the craving” for food. It is the expression by which the law itself designated the inward side of fasting (Leviticus 16:31; Leviticus 23:27; Leviticus 23:29; Leviticus 23:32; Numbers 29:7; Numbers 30:14; Psalms 35:13). “Crucify the flesh,” though not a literal rendering, is true to the sense; for πτωׁ is after all nothing else than the inner flesh, fleshly craving in the extended sense.
Isaiah 58:3 b. To this proud, work-righteous speech of the people, in which they make the Lord, as it were, the defendant, the Lord Himself replies by pointing them away from worship in the letter to worship in spirit, and in truth (John 4). First He exposes the hypocrisy of their way of fasting. Fasting ought to be a divine worship. Thus it implies a direction of the heart toward God. But how can devotion be thought of in those who, while they fast, turn their thoughts only to worldly profit, yea, to wrangling and unrighteousness. ηֵ ?τֶ ?υ is that which a man delights in, not merely in the sense of transitory pleasure, but also in the more serious sense of business interest.
In this sense it even stands parallel with αֶּ ?φַ ?ςJob 22:3, comp. Job 21:21. In Isaiah 44:28; Isaiah 53:10 we see plainly the transition from one to the other meaning. In our chapter ver.13 the word occurs twice again in the sense of πρᾶγμα, negotium. In Ecclesiastes 3:1; Ecclesiastes 3:17; Ecclesiastes 5:7; Ecclesiastes 8:6, it occurs in this sense, and each time the LXX. render it by πρᾶγμα. By the expression ξָ ?φָ ?ΰ before ητυ the Prophet purposes primarily a paronomasia with respect to φֹ ?ξְ ?λֶ ?ν.
But perhaps, too, ξφΰητυ (to touch, take hold of a business, according to the fundamental meaning pertingere ad, assequi, comp. Job 11:7; Psalms 21:9; Isaiah 10:10; Isaiah 10:14) was a popular expression current in business life. The general sense of ϊπβωׂ ?ελμΞςφαιλν is easily made out. The Prophet reproaches the Israelites with combining greedy exaction with their fasting. But ςφαιλν occasions difficulty, on which see Text, and Gram.
Isaiah 58:4. But beside greedy harshness toward those under them, the Israelites combined with their fasting vexatious strife that degenerated into deeds of violence towards those of like condition. Fasting, instead of raising them up inwardly, made them moody to the degree that they give vent to their ill-humor by cudgelings. Thus their fasting exercised even a demoralizing influence. The consequence is that the prayer, which combined with such fasting they send toward heaven, is not heard. λַּ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ν cannot possibly (with Hahn) be taken in the sense of ὡςἐνἡμέρᾳ (Romans 13:12-13), ὡςτέκναφωτός (Ephesians 5:8). Also Stier ascribes too much to the expression when, following Jarchi, he takes it in the sense of “as becomes the day” (i. e., the day of atonement). λַּ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ν simply urges the present, silently implying a contrast with the past and future.
That is, the Prophet will say nothing of the past and future. He only makes prominent: that Israel now, in the present moment, does not fast as it ought to (comp. 1 Samuel 2:16; 1 Samuel 9:27; 1 Kings 22:5). It implies also the possibility of doing better in the future. In μδωׂ ?ξις the μְ denotes the intended effect: ye fast not so that (the intended effect, to bring your voice on high (Isaiah 57:15; Isaiah 33:5) to a hearing) can be attained. Fasting and praying go together, and fasting is intended to serve the prayer as an accompaniment that recommends it, as say, with reference to men, a present is joined to a petition to make it more effective (compare the texts cited above on voluntary fasting).
Ver.5. The Prophet once more comprehends what has been said, in a question that calls for a negative response. Shall that (described vers.3 b–4) be a fast that I choose, a day when a man afflicts his soul? We must not (with the Vulg. Luther and many others refer δλζδεβεΧ to what follows (numquid tale est jejunium quod elegi, per diem affligere hominem animam suam?Vulg.). For the words ιενςπεϊΰγνπτωׁ ?ε are words of the law (Leviticus 16:31; Leviticus 23:27; Leviticus 23:32; Numbers 29:7).
One ought to fast so according to the law. Therefore the words ιενςπεϊε֝ are parallel with φενΰαηψδε. It is indeed God’s will that a man afflict his soul, i. e., his psychical lusts, that he crucify the flesh. That is wholesome and healthy. But would fasting combined with outrage, as described Isaiah 58:3 b–4, be really a wholesome crucifying of the flesh? This question must be answered with no.
Moreover that is also to be called no fasting when one lays all stress on the outward, bodily exercise (the σωματικὴγυμνασία) 1 Timothy 4:8) and at this price leaves the inward flesh wholly unmolested. The expression “sackcloth and ashes” occurs again only Daniel 9:3; Esther 4:1; Esther 4:3. Evidently Isaiah has also here been the source for later usage, for in general the language of Isaiah 40-66 is not that of Daniel and Esther.
3. Is not this the fast——thine own flesh.
Isaiah 58:6-7. It is well to observe that in these two verses, which would describe the fasting that is well-pleasing to God, the Prophet says nothing more of bodily mortification. He only names the works of righteousness toward the oppressed (ver.6), and beneficence toward the poor and needy. But one must not understand that he positively rejects fasting. When he says: is not that a fasting I choose? he assumes that there will be fasting. What follows: to loose, etc., only gays what should be combined with fasting, in contrast with the conduct of the Israelites in this respect.
Nevertheless the Prophet lays the chief stress just on the works mentioned in Isaiah 58:6-7. He assumes that the practice of these works also costs a sacrifice either of bodily substance, or of inward resignation and subduing uncharitable inclinations. He that subdues the flesh to the will in this wise, practises the true “afflicting of the soul.” Notice how the Prophet is here quite on the road that reaches its highest elevation in the declarations of Isa 66:3. Also: that thou hide not thyself from thy flesh, is a trace of the broad, evangelical spirit that reigns in our passage. To the question: who is my neighbor? the answer is given here: every one who is of thy flesh. The answer does not run: every one who is of thy nation, or tribe (Luke 10:29 sqq.).
Thus our Prophet here, too, rises far above theocratic narrowness. [Comp. James 1:27].
4. Then shall thy light——to dwell in.
Isaiah 58:8-12. The Prophet now gives a series of ten promises of glorious reward for those who will fulfil the command of the Lord in the right spirit. He strings them together like a necklace of pearls, yet so that, after the first four promises, he mentions again (Isaiah 58:9 b, and 10a), the conditions, as one breaks the monotony of the string of pearls by an ornament of another form and color. The row of promises consists of four and six members, among which a certain parallelism and also a climax is observable. In Isaiah 58:8-9 a, the Prophet describes in some measure the pious man’s course of life. Rising out of the obscurity of his previous way of life, the light of divine holiness and glory rises like the morning dawn for the pious man—αָּ ?χΞς “to split,” Niph. “by splitting to press forth,” (comp.
Isaiah 35:6; Isaiah 59:5). Heretofore sick, he feels in himself the power of a new life, by which, as it were, new, healthy flesh grows on him, as on the dead bones Ezekiel saw (Ezekiel 37:5 sq.). ΰֲ ?ψֻ ?λָ ?δ is certainly derived most naturally from ΰָ ?ψַ ?κְ ?longum esse, and denotes the new flesh that extends over the wound, by which, supplanting that which is dead, it fills up the gaps and restores the normal form of the member, (comp. FleischerinDel. Comm. p. 592, Anm.). The word is found only here in Isaiah, comp. Jeremiah 8:22; Jeremiah 30:17; Jeremiah 33:6; 2 Chronicles 24:13; Nehemiah 4:1.
He that has come to the light, and that has become strong in health, moves along the course assigned him. This march resembles a triumphal procession. As before him that goes in triumph are borne or led along the signs of his victory, so the glory of the pious goes before him, i. e., his righteous works. But he does not on this account shine in the brightness of his own celebrity, for he that closes up and holds together (comp. Isaiah 52:12) the procession, and thus shows himself to be the power that controls all, is the glory of Jehovah. But where is the pious one, let his course of life be never so glorious, that does not need God?
Therefore the Prophet comprehends all the rest together in the great, glorious right of petition of the pious one, which consists in this, that the pious may ask for everything, and never prays in vain (Matthew 21:22; Mark 11:24; John 14:13 sq.). As has been remarked, the Prophet in ver.9 b–10 a interrupts the chain of promises, in order to repeat the conditions. What he mentions as such is again the demand to forego every sort of lovelessness (Isaiah 58:9 b), and to practise every sort of love (ver.10a). As the first thing to be abstained from, he designates: not to rule tyrannically, but to take away yokes wherever they exist. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty (2 Corinthians 3:17), and love does no evil to its neighbor; it seeks not its own; it rejoices not in iniquity (1 Corinthians 13:4 sqq.). There is here a certain climax: the Prophet evidently regards subjugation, tyranny, violence as the coarsest violation of the law of love.
As a more refined transgression, he regards the pointing (ωְׁ ?μַ ?η, inf.) with the finger. This, among western nations as well as among orientals, is a gesture of contempt, comp. Gesen.in loc. (infamis digitus, the middle finger; Pers. II:33: rideto multum et digitum porrigito medium, Martial, II:28, 2). According to Proverbs 6:13, pointing the finger appears also as a means of malignant denunciation and spiteful betrayal. Still more refined, but not better on that account, is the transgression of the law of love by sacrilegious discourse (comp.
Isaiah 1:13; Isaiah 10:1; Psalms 5:6; Psalms 6:9, etc.).—The demand to cease to do evil is followed by the demand to do good (ver.10). And vice omnium it is demanded that the pious sacrifice his own hunger to the hungry, and satisfy the afflicted soul. For I agree with Delitzsch in the opinion that πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ can mean nothing else here than that after which the soul, i. e., here the hungry man’s prompting for nourishment, craves. Hence it is going too far, when Stieret al., following Jerome, take πτωׁ in the sense of life and heart. For he that is hungry after our life, to him we would not owe it.
Ver.11. In what now follows we have a second row of promises and made stronger. It is composed of six members, but in its fundamental thought it corresponds to the one of four members [that precedes]. For underlying it is the thought of a life-career, that begins with the morning and presses happily through conflicts of every sort. But in this succession of six members the issue is different. That is, it concludes with a perspective of an activity that is richly blessed, and extends its efficiency into the remotest times.
The first promise of this series corresponds exactly to the beginning of the first series: liberation from the chains of darkness, rising of light and increase of it is promised in such measure, that even the obscurest parts of that darkness will have the brightness of midday. (Job 11:17; Psalms 18:29; Psalms 37:6, etc.).—The second promise is indeed the shortest, but it is also the most important of all: the Lord will never withdraw His hand from the pious one; He will abide with him and guide him (Isaiah 57:18) in all his ways. The third promise assumes that cross and conflict will, nevertheless, not be wanting to the pious one. For there will be also for him still ςַ ?ηְ ?φָ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ, i. e., hot places. Jerome translates: “implebit splendoribus animam tuam.” Hahn follows this and translates: ‘ ‘and let thy soul be satisfied with brightness.” It is true, the root φָ ?ηָ ?δ ,φָ ?ηַ ?η, in its fundamental meaning, “burning,” involves the meaning of “gleaming” and of “drought.” Hence on the one hand φַ ?η, nitens on the other hand φְ ?ηִ ?ιηָ ?δ (Psalms 68:7) and φְ ?δִ ?ιηִ ?ιִּ ?ν (Nehemiah 4:7) loca arida. But what is promised already, Isaiah 58:10 b, satisfies the requirements of light, and ver.11b. shows that the Prophet has in mind the refreshing element of water. He promises satiety from it in a two-fold gradation.
First, the pious one shall want none, even in localities that for others are arid deserts. The soul, i. e., the need of -water shall be richly satisfied, so that thereby the bones (thus the body itself) become fresh and powerful. But, and this is the fourth promise, the refreshing element shall be, bestowed on the pious one in a still greater degree. That is to say, he shall himself become a well-watered garden; in fact, a richly flowing spring of water. Thus the pious one shall be an oasis in the desert, a lovely, green, fruitful garden, with a glorious spring that never goes dry. The expression βοψεδ is found again only in Jeremiah 31:12. ξεφΰξιν is the place of issue, the flowing place for water (comp.
Isaiah 41:18; Psalms 107:33; Psalms 107:35; 2 Chronicles 32:30). In general comp. Isaiah 1:30; Isaiah 51:3; Son 4:12.—The fifth promise extends to the pious one the prospect that he will be still beyond the period of his life a source of blessing, and indeed the cause of a glorious restoration: they shall build (see Text, and Gram.) from thee (ξִ ?ξְּ ?κָ designates the ideal originator) ancient waste places,” means nothing else than: thou wilt be the author and spiritual director of such buildings by which ancient buildings that were destroyed shall be restored. The Prophet purposely does not say that it shall be just bodily children. Any way it will be children after the Spirit. Hence, also, in the second clause, just the second person sing. is used.
It were incomprehensible why the children’s building should be mentioned before that of the father. On the other hand, ϊְּ ?χεֹ ?ξֵ ?ν explains to us the meaning of the απεξξκ. One is, indeed, tempted to do as Stier and others do, and refer the second clause to new buildings, since γεψεγεγ, as a rule, points to the future, and since great men are wont not merely to restore, but also to found new institutions. But in Isaiah 61:4, the Prophet repeats this expression with some modifications, and there, according to the context, only restoration can be meant. Added to this, χεν in Pilel designates essentially “rising up again,” and the predicates βֹ ?γֶ ?ψ and ξְ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?αֵ ?λ equally refer to restoration. γεψεγεψ (notice that it does not say μְ ?γֹ ?εψεΧ) is used of the past also in Deuteronomy 32:7; Psalms 90:1.—The sixth promise extends to the pious one the prospect of honorable surnames, the praise of having deserved well of his country. A τֶ ?ψֶ ?υβֹּ ?γֵ ?ψ is one that walls up (comp.
Ezekiel 22:30; 2 Kings 12:13) what is shattered (τֶ ?ψֶ ?υ28:21; Isaiah 30:13), thus a repairer of human dwellings. But, in order to dwell comfortably in a land, men must be able to go to one another, commerce and intercourse must be possible. Hence the additional title restorer of the paths. μָ ?ωָֽׁ ?αֶ ?ϊ “to dwell in,” is probably to be referred to both, since, in order to dwell, i. e., for comfortable and secure dwelling in a land, both are necessary, good dwellings and good roads. πְ ?ϊִ ?ιαָ ?δ is a poetic word with no technical reference, and hence suitable for designating any sort of way (comp. Leyrer’s article “Strassen in Palaestina;” Herz. R. Enc. xv. p. 157 sqq.).—One sees, especially from ver.12, that the Prophet, who here still before the Exile preaches repentance to his nation, has yet always in mind the great future of restoration.
So it is characteristic that, to the pious of his day, as a last and most glorious reward, he presents the prospect, that by him, too, shall be exercised blessed influences on Israel’s reinstallation in its land.
5. If thou turn——hath spoken it.
Isaiah 58:13-14. Isaiah’s contemporaries seem to have provoked the Lord especially by two things. First by an excess that was not demanded; that is by fasting much more than was commanded. They fancied that by this outward exercise they could bribe the Lord and wipe out scores with Him. But then they let themselves be caught in doing too little. They were as lax about keeping the Sabbath as they were strict about fasting.
The Sabbath was Jehovah’s day. Keeping it holy was a sure sign of fidelity to Jehovah, and easily tested. Thus the Prophet demands a right sanctification of the Sabbath as a condition of glorious, theocratic blessing (comp. Isaiah 56:2). The doing or dispatching business (ηֵ ?τֶ ?υ comp. onver.3 and Text, and G., where see Tr.’s note) is just the foot whose tramp desecrates the holy ground of the Sabbath. From the mouths of those that did not heartily serve the Lord, one may often have heard utterances that the celebration of the Sabbath was a burden, that interfered with all business and occupation (Amos 8:5).
Opposed to this the Prophet demanded that men shall call the Sabbath a delight (ςπβ again only Isaiah 13:22). It merits this name as the universal friend of man, that brings rest and refreshment to all that are weary and heavy-laden. But, as being holy to Jehovah, it deserves the name honorable (ξְ ?λֻ ?αָּ ?γ to be highly honored). But the Israelites should practically honor it also by not doing their own ways, and not going about their trade and occupation (ξςωׂ ?εϊ=far from making, without making or doing), by not doing their own business (see on ver.3) and by not carrying on conversation. The expression γִ ?αֵּ ?ψγָּ ?αָ ?ψ is found again Isaiah 8:10. The sense differs with the context.
In many passages it has no pregnant sense (comp. Genesis 41:28; Genesis 44:18; 2 Kings 5:13; Job 2:13; Proverbs 25:11). But there are also passages where it has (Deuteronomy 18:20; Isaiah 8:10; Jeremiah 29:23; Jeremiah 34:5; Ezekiel 12:25; Ezekiel 12:28; Ezekiel 14:9; 2 Samuel 7:7). According to the Mosaic law, the Sabbath should be a day of joy (comp. Oehler in Herz.R. Enc. xiii. p. 199).
Could it be exacted of all Israelites that on this day only weighty words should proceed from their mouth? Certainly not. But business conversation could properly be forbidden. On the Sabbath no business must be transacted, neither by works nor by words. Thus γָּ ?αָ ?ψ is here about the same as πρᾶγμα (comp. 1 Samuel 20:2; Judges 18:7; Judges 18:18, etc.). Let the Israelite practically honor the Sabbath in this way and he will delight himself in Jehovah Himself.
He will serve the Lord with inmost satisfaction, and the Lord on His part will bestow upon Him the highest honor and the highest enjoyment. I will cause thee to ride, I will feed thee are citations from Deuteronomy 32:13, comp. Deuteronomy 33:29. To ride on the high places of the earth denotes exaltation above all other nations. Instead of “eating the heritage of Jacob thy father,” the original text in Deuteronomy reads “eat the increase of the fields; and He (Jehovah) made him to suck honey out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty rock.” These expressions are compressed in our text, and an expression used instead that recalls the promises given to the fathers in reference to the land of Canaan (Exodus 3:8; Exodus 3:17; Exodus 13:5, etc.). On “For the mouth of the Lord,” etc., see on Isaiah 1:20; Isaiah 40:5.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 58:2-3. There are also to-day many men that hold up their good works to God (Luke 18:11 sqq.), and who, out aloud or silently, reproach Him for not adequately rewarding them for them. But one can distinguish here two classes: those that boast of having done works of undoubted moral worth; and such as found their pretensions essentially on works that are morally indifferent, as ceremonies of worship and the like. Of course there is a difference between these, for the former can, under some circumstances, really deserve praise; whereas the latter under all circumstances accomplish something more or less morally worthless, yea, possibly, as miserable hypocrites, directly provoke the wrath of God. But never has the creature the right to accuse God.
It may be debated whether such accusation is more folly or wickedness. It is tinder all circumstances a presumptuous judgment. For, as long as we live, results are not assured, and we lack ability to see all. Only the day will make it clear what is the relation between God’s doing and ours, and that He has not let the just recompense be wanting (Isaiah 1:18; Isaiah 43:26).
2. On Isaiah 58:4 sqq. The Prophet finds fault with the fasting of the Jews in two respects. First, because they combined them with works of unrighteousness. Second, because they held the “bodily exercise” to be the chief thing. Perhaps in the Sermon on the mount our Lord had our text in mind when He said: “When ye fast, be not as the hypocrites of a sad countenance.” Matthew 6:11.
He makes prominent one particular that probably hovered before our Prophet also. For it is possible that he saw in the “hanging the head” an artificial, affected, and so hypocritical expression of a piety that did not exist inwardly; although it is not absolutely necessary that this letting the head hang and making one’s bed in sand and ashes took place with hypocritical intent. But our Lord expressly demands that one do not let appear the harassed, sickly look, that was the perhaps quite natural consequence of fasting. He says (Matthew 6:17): “but thou, when thou fastest, anoint thy head and wash thy face, that thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father, which is in secret.” One sees, therefore, that in the Sermon on the mount the Lord by no means rejects corporeal fasting. He only shows abhorrence of men’s hypocritically abusing fasting for the gratification of pride. But the Prophet also does not reject fasting.
But he would have corporeal fasting be the faithful expression of a simultaneous moral doing of penitent self-denial and compassionating love.
3. On Isaiah 58:6-9. As the apostle James pressingly urges against dead works, that even Abraham’s faith was in itself a grand moral act, so here, too, the Prophet insists on right works as opposed to false works. But neither declares essentially anything concerning the true ground and origin of the works that they mean, because the context of their discourses does not call for it. We are to supply this from passages that professedly speak to this point, which they silently take for granted, according to the measure of intelligence given to them. For even Isaiah knows right well that that which satisfies and strengthens is not to be obtained by one’s own labor and effort (55).
4. On Isaiah 58:7. “Flesh denotes here in this context something more still, which J. von Mueller has remarked: “The remembrance of universal brotherhood, and how we are all exposed to like things”—as ἅνθρωποιὁμοιοπαθεῖς. Verily flesh has need of covering. When therefore thou seest the naked, then see and feel therein the need of thine own flesh, and do not, proudly selfish, conceal or cover only thyself with thy garment that belongs to the other as also being thy flesh.” Stier.5. On Isaiah 58:7. Concerning the expression λָּ ?ψֹ ?νμֶ ?ηֶ ?ν see Doctrinal and Ethical on Jeremiah 16:7.
6. [On Isaiah 58:13-14. “From the closing portion of this chapter we may derive the following important inferences respecting the Sabbath. (1) It is to be of perpetual obligation. The whole chapter occurs in the midst of statements that relate to the times of the Messiah. There is no intimation that the Sabbath was to be abolished, but it is fairly implied that its observance was to be attended with most happy results in those future times.... (2) We may see the manner in which the Sabbath is to be observed. In no place in the Bible is there a more full account of the proper mode of keeping that holy day. We are to refrain from ordinary travelling and employments; we are not to engage in doing our own pleasure; we are to regard it with delight, and to esteem it a day worthy to be honored. And we are to show respect to it by not performing our own ordinary works, or pursuing pleasures, or engaging in the common topics of conversation.
In this description there occurs nothing of peculiar Jewish ceremony, and nothing which indicates that it is not to be observed in this manner at all times. Under the gospel assuredly, it is as proper to celebrate the Sabbath in this way as it was in the times of Isaiah, and God doubtless intended that it should be perpetually observed in this manner. (3) Important benefits result from the right observance of the Sabbath. In the passage before us these are said to be, that they who thus observed it would find pleasure in Jehovah, and would be signally prospered and be safe. But those benefits are by no means confined to the Jewish people. It is as true now as it was then, and they who observe the Sabbath in a proper manner find happiness in the Lord—in His existence, perfections, promises, law, and in communion with Him—which is to be found no where else... And it is as true that the proper observance of the Sabbath contributes to the prosperity and safety of a nation now as it ever did among the Jewish people.
It is not merely from the fact that God promises to bless the people who keep His holy day—though this is of more value to a nation than all its armies and fleets; but it is that there is in the institution itself much that tends to the welfare and prosperity of a country.... Any one may be convinced of this who will be at the pains to compare a neighborhood, a village, or a city where the Sabbath is not observed with one where it is; and the difference will convince him at once that society owes more to the Sabbath than to any single institution beside.” Barnes.]
7. On Isaiah 59:2. “Quia quotidie apud nos crescit culpa, cur non et simul crescat poena?” Augustine. “The public sins are compared to a thick cloud, that sets itself between heaven and earth, and as it were hinders prayers from passing through (Lamentations 3:44).” Starke. “There is great power in sin, for it separates God and us from one another.” Cramer. “There are times when the hand of the Lord lies long and heavy on His children. One feels that God has withdrawn from him and hidden His countenance. But one does not sufficiently investigate the cause. One seeks it in God, and it lies in us, who, by sins unacknowledged and not repented of, make it impossible to God to turn to us in grace.” Weber.8. On Isaiah 59:3-8.
The register of sins that Isaiah here holds up to the Jews is a mirror in which many a Christian, many a nation, many a time may recognize its own image. The Prophet declares here very plainly the poison nature, the serpent origin of sin. Sin is the poison that the old serpent knew how to bring into our nature. He that has stolen a taste of a product of this poison, as Eve did of the tree of knowledge, supposing that he will thereby receive some good, will go to ruin by it. But he that would be no lover of sin, but would stand forth as its opponent, may count upon it that the reptile will press its malignant fang in his heel, as was even held in prospect to the great trampler of the serpent’s head Himself (Genesis 3:15).
9. On Isaiah 59:9-15 a. Here is for once an honest and thorough confession of sins. Nothing is palliated here, nothing excused. It is freely confessed that Israel is itself to blame for all its wretchedness, and this guilt is acknowledged to be the consequence of the apostacy from Jehovah and of the workings of a depraved heart, whose malignant fruits have become manifest in words and works. Comp. Jeremiah 3:21 sqq.—Here therefore is given a model for all who would know wherein true repentance must consist.
10. On Isaiah 59:15 b sqq. “Si tu recordaberis peccatorum tuorum, Dominus non recordabitur.” Augustine. “God wonders that men let sin become so great and His righteousness so small.” Oetinger in Stier.—It is a divine privilege to need no helper. With God there is no difference between willing and being able. With Him the being able follows the willing ad nutum. And there is nothing to which God, when He wills, has not also the right. We men, when we have the will and the power, are often without the right, and this takes the foundation from under our feet.
Isaiah 59:17. This is the original source of the Apostle Paul’s extended description of the spiritual armor, Ephesians 6:14; Ephesians 6:17. Also in 1 Thessalonians 5:8 there underlies the same representation of the equipment required by Christians. On the other hand God is conceived of as an equipped warrior, e.g., Psalms 7:13-14; Psalms 35:2-3. In Exodus 15:4 He is directly called “a man of war.”
11. On Isaiah 59:18-20. Regarding the time of the fulfilment of this prophecy, the honorable and thorough confession of sin in Isaiah 59:9-15 a, assumes the conclusion of the judgments against Israel and the conversion of the Gentiles. So Paul understood our passage, who cites it, Romans 11:26, to prove that only then will the Jews partake of the salvation when the fulness of the Gentiles shall have come in. Therefore the Prophet distinguishes three great periods of time. The first comprehends all the stages of time in which Israel will be impenitent, and hence deprived of its theocratic rights.
This period will conclude with a condition wherein Israel’s scale, as too light, hurries upwards to the highest elevation, while the scale of the Gentiles, by reason of its weight, will sink deep down. Just this situation will bring about the turning of the scale. Israel will repent; but those Gentiles and those Israelites that will not have repented will be overtaken by the judgment (Isaiah 59:18; Isaiah 59:20 ωׁ ?αιλωׁ ?ςαιςχα). For neither the “fulness of the Gentiles,” nor “all Israel” excludes there being still unconverted Gentiles and Jews. The third period is then the period of salvation, when the Goel [“Redeemer”] will come to Zion and raise up the covenant (Isaiah 59:21).
12. On Isaiah 59:21 “Does the Spirit of God remain, then does also His word; does the word remain, then preachers also remain; do preachers remain, then also hearers do; do hearers remain, then there remain also believers, and therefore the Christian church remains also, to which ever some still will be gathered out of the Jews (Romans 11:26).”—“Although in general God has promised that His word and Spirit shall not depart from the church of God, still no one must become so secure about that (comp. Jeremiah 18:18) as if it were impossible that this or that particular church (and even the Romish church is nothing more) could err.” Cramer. HINTS1. On Isaiah 58:1. Penitential Sermon. The text teaches us two things: 1) What one ought to preach on a day of repentance [fast-day]; viz., hold up to the people their sins. 2) How one should preach: a. boldly, b. without sparing, loud as a trumpet.
2. On Isaiah 58:2-9 This text contains the outlines of a popular theodicy. First we hear, Isaiah 58:2-3 a, the popular complaint that the divine Providence that guides the affairs of the world is unjust, and that He is not fair to the claims of reward that each individual fancies he has. Then in Isaiah 58:3 b–9, we hear the divine justification. It consists of two parts. In the first part God shows that the claims of men are unfounded in two respects.
This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/
b) To the complaint of the people concerning Jehovah’s inability is opposed the charge of moral corruption Isaiah 59:1-81 Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save;
Neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear:
2 But your iniquities have separated between you and your God
And your sins have hid His face from you, that He will not hear.
3 For your hands are defiled with blood
And your fingers with iniquity;
Your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered perverseness.
4 None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth:
They trust in vanity, and speak lies;
They conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity.
5 They hatch cockatrice’ eggs
And weave the spider’s web:
He that eateth of their eggs dieth,
And that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper.
6 Their webs shall not become garments,
Neither shall they cover themselves with their works
Their works are works of iniquity,
And the act of violence is in their hands.
7 Their feet run to evil,
And they make haste to shed innocent blood:
Their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity;
Wasting and destruction are in their paths.
8 The way of peace they know not;
And there is no judgment in their goings:
They have made them crooked paths:
Whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.
TEXTUAL AND Ver.8. ξαγιμιν direct causative Hiph. with αֵּ ?ιοΞμְ as e. g., in Genesis 1:6; Ezekiel 22:26; Ezekiel 42:20.——δִ ?ρְ ?ϊִּ ?ιψ also direct causative Hiph.; comp. moreover, as regards the expression, Isaiah 54:8.
Ver.3. The word πְ ?βֹ ?ΰַ ?μ is found only here and Lamentations 4:14, where the words πְ ?βֹ ?ΰֲ ?μεּ αַ ?γָּ ?ν are evidently taken from our text. The form πְּ ?βΰַ ?μ is irregular. The prefix π denotes a Niphal form, whereas βְֹ ?ΰַ ?μ appears as a Pual or passive of Poel. The root βָּ ?ΰַ ?μ (kindred to βָּ ?ςַ ?μ fastidivit) occurs again in the sense of “impurum, profanum esse,” in the Hiph. in Isaiah 63:3, on the other hand often in later writers: Zephaniah 3:1; Malachi 1:7; Malachi 1:12; Ezra 2:62; Nehemiah 7:64; Daniel 1:8.——Thus πְ ?βֹ ?ΰַ ?μ is bad Hebrew both materially and formally. It seems to me that the expression was purposely taken by the Prophet from popular language, in order, by the bad word, to designate the more graphically the bad thing.
The root, which originally belongs more to the Aramaic dialect, only penetrated into the Hebrew Scripture language at a later date, as the passages quoted show.——one may not render ϊδβδ “to murmur,” which would make nonsense where the same word occurs in Psalms 35:28; Psalms 71:24; Job 27:4; Proverbs 8:9. The tongue (or palate) in all these passages is personified, and treated as the inner source of what the lips outwardly express aloud. Gesenius (Thes. p. 364) quotes with approval the words of Gussetius, that “δָ ?πָ ?δ non reperitur cum parte magis extrinseca, nompe ωָׂ ?τָ ?δ, et sic aliquam servat intrinsecitatem.” And that is correct. By δָ ?πָ ?δμָ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?ο the same thing is affirmed of the tongue that is elsewhere ascribed to it when it is said of it, that a high song of praise ψεֹ ?ξָ ?ξ Psalms 66:17), honey and milk (Son 4:11), malignity (Job 20:12), pain and wickedness (Psalms 10:7) are under the tongue, or that pleasant doctrine is on the tongue (Proverbs 31:26), or that wickedness is in the tongue (Job 6:30). All these expressions must be regarded as metaphors, because in all of them the outward, irrational organ is substituted for the inward rational organ.
Ver.5. δַ ?ζּ ?εּ ?ψֶ ?δἅπ.λεγ., comp. ζֹ ?ψεּ Isaiah 1:6,’ from ζεּ ?ψ “to press together;” it is a passive participial form, as e. g. ρεּ ?ψָ ?δ ,ςεּ ?μ with the rare feminine ending Ξֶ ?δ.
Isaiah 59:8.αָּ ?δּ the totality of the ways, comp. e. g., Isaiah 22:11; Isaiah 37:4.
AND 1. Behold——not hear.
Vers.1, 2. Ver.1 implies a double reproach which Israel lets fall beside that in Isaiah 52:2-3. In the latter they had reproached Him with injustice. Here they let it be understood that Jehovah either lacks the necessary strength of hand (χφψδιγΞιΧ comp. on Isaiah 50:2) or else hearing. The expression λαγδΰζο does not signify unwillingness to hear, but inability to hear, deafness, as in Genesis 48:10 “the eyes of Israel were heavy from age” signifies the physical weakness of the eyes, wherefore it is added “he could not see.” The expression λָּ ?λֵ ?γ used of the ear occurs again only Isaiah 6:10;and in Zechariah 7:11 as a quotation from our text (comp. on Isaiah 58:6 sqq.). In ver.2 is given the real reason for Israel’s mournful fate. It is their sins that raise a partition-wall between them and their God, and make Him hide His face from them so that He does not hear.
2. For your hands——not know peace.
Vers.3–8. In this section the Prophet specifies the sins of Israel, showing that it is wholly penetrated by sin, and that the outward manifestation exactly corresponds to the corrupt interior. He first points to the hands spotted with blood. Then he says that guilt, offence clings to their fingers, by which he would only express, that this blood came not on their fingers by accident, but by actual trespass. He distributes the notion ‘ ‘blood-guiltiness” to the palms and fingers according to the law of parallelism. The lips speak lies loud and audibly, while the tongue devises wickedness, which is set in operation by means of the lies.
There prevails here, too, the antithesis between what is outward and what is inward. In ver.4 there underlies the same antithesis. I have no doubt that χψΰαφγχ designates the judicial invocatio (in jus vocare, καλεῖνἐπὶδίκην); so Coccejus, Gesen., Maurer, Knobel. For first, in this way the two clauses of the half of the verse most beautifully correspond. The first treats of the complainant, and the second of the fate his complaint has with the Judge. Moreover Job 13:22 seems to me to prove that the general sense “to call” may, according to the context, acquire the meaning of a forensic act, as that of the call proceeding from the complainant to appear at the bar of judgment and to justification.
If we takeχψΰ in the sense of κηρύσσειν, as Delitzsch does (“no one gives public testimony with righteousness”), it would be giving too much meaning to χψΰ and to κηρύσσειν. If one were to take it with Stier in the sense “no one calls (appeals) to righteousness, raises his voice for it, i.e., in order to it and for it,” that would be to attach too much meaning to the prefix αְּ. I translate: there is no one that appeals with righteousness, and there is no one that is judged with faithfulness (impartially). One could, as most do, translate πωׁ ?τθ also by “who conducts his cause.” But the Niph. primarily means “to be judged” (Psalms 9:20; Psalms 37:33; Psalms 109:7); and this meaning seems to me to suit better here, since ςֹ ?πֶ ?δ (as in Job 13:28) would better answer to χψΰ in the sense denoted before, and πωׁ ?τθ does not mean “to defend one’s self” but “to go to law, litigare,” and thus includes the complainant. According to our meaning the complainant’s aim at wrong is judged, but also the judges treat the cause with no fidelity or love of truth. ΰξεπδ answers here to the idea φֶ ?γֶ ?χ as, e. g., Psalms 96:13; Proverbs 12:17; 1 Samuel 26:23 etc. Now where such things come to light, there must be something lacking within.
There, instead of the living God, emptiness, vanity, nothingness must be the refuge in which trust is placed; there, too, lies must serve as indispensable aids (γλψΞωׁ ?εΰ see Isaiah 58:9). In general the natural law is observed: as the seed, so the fruit. What is conceived within as the germ of the ςָ ?ξָ ?μ (weary trouble with the secondary notion of what is baneful, a curse, especially in Ecclesiastes 1:3; Ecclesiastes 2:10 sqq., etc., comp. Job 5:6-7; Psalms 7:17) comes to light in an aggravated form as ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο (vanum, malum in the double sense of the word). The notion ΰεο is stronger than ςָ ?ξָ ?μ, since it expresses more strongly both the idea of vanity, illusiveness, as well as that of moral wickedness. Moreover both conceptions (ςξμ and ΰεο) are often conjoined, not only in passages that more or less literally coincide with ours (Job 15:35; Psalms 7:15), but elsewhere also (Psalms 10:7; Psalms 90:10; Psalms 55:11).
In vers.5, 6, by a double image, the Prophet expresses the thought that the inward corruption of the people reveals itself outwardly by corresponding works. He compares the Israelites to poisonous serpents that produce poisonous eggs, and to poisonous spiders that draw out of their body a baneful web. In Isaiah 59:5 a the comparisons stand side by side in their general import. But Isaiah 59:5 b there is mentioned first a double destructive use of the basilisk’s egg. Either one eats it, and dies of it; or the broken egg divides itself as an adder, i. e., lets slip out through the crack the poisonous adder, that is dangerous to the foot of him that treads on it (Genesis 3:15). Thus the works of the Israelites are on the one hand positively ruinous, on the other hand they appear as useless, unreliable, consequently also as indirectly ruinous.
That is, so far as the Israelites are thought of as spiders that produce a web, there their products prove useless for protecting garments. Consequently the conduct of the Israelites is altogether the product of an inward corruption, and in every respect, in part useless and thus indirectly pernicious (ξςωιΞΰεο), in part directly and positively ruinous (τςμηξν).
Isaiah 59:7-8 continue the effort to hold up to Israel the manifoldness of its sinful ways. It is as if the Prophet, having in Isaiah 59:6 spoken of the sinful works of the hands, would now describe the participation of the feet in these works. This he does by means of a citation. For the entire first half of Isa 59:7 is taken from Proverbs 1:16 (as on the other hand Paul in Romans 3:15-17 gives a free citation of our Isaiah 59:7-8 a). Also the words their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity are the more to be regarded as a reminiscence of Pro 6:18 since the expression ξηωׁ ?αεϊΰεο occurs only in these two passages, and also the second half of Pro 6:18 is only a variation of the first half of Isa 1:16. In the last number of Isa 59:7 as also in Isaiah 59:8, the Prophet appears to have intended to show how Israel had by its sins polluted everything even that was called a way.
Hence it is said at the close of Isa 59:7 that wasting and destruction (Isaiah 51:19; Isaiah 60:18) is in their paths (ξְ ?ρִ ?μָּ ?δ the beaten road; notice the antithesis to ωׁ ?γεωׁ ?αψ); then Isaiah 59:8γψκ “the way” and ξςβμεϊ “the wagon tracks, orbitae,” are described as devoid of peace and judgment, and the πϊιαεϊ “the footpaths” are made crooked by them (in their interest μָ ?δֶ ?ν). “The way of peace” is an expression that occurs only here, and as a citation from this text in Luke 1:79 and Romans 3:17. Also in writing these clauses the Prophet had undoubtedly in mind passages in Proverbs like Proverbs 2:8-9; Proverbs 2:15. The concluding clause of Isa 59:8 : whosoever goeth therein,etc., corresponds to the beginning of the verse, and is a sort of recapitulation of all that was said concerning the ways of the Israelites. That is, the result is that every one that goes thereon learns not to know peace (viz. practically, Isaiah 47:8; Jer. 20:20).
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 58:2-3. There are also to-day many men that hold up their good works to God (Luke 18:11 sqq.), and who, out aloud or silently, reproach Him for not adequately rewarding them for them. But one can distinguish here two classes: those that boast of having done works of undoubted moral worth; and such as found their pretensions essentially on works that are morally indifferent, as ceremonies of worship and the like. Of course there is a difference between these, for the former can, under some circumstances, really deserve praise; whereas the latter under all circumstances accomplish something more or less morally worthless, yea, possibly, as miserable hypocrites, directly provoke the wrath of God. But never has the creature the right to accuse God.
It may be debated whether such accusation is more folly or wickedness. It is tinder all circumstances a presumptuous judgment. For, as long as we live, results are not assured, and we lack ability to see all. Only the day will make it clear what is the relation between God’s doing and ours, and that He has not let the just recompense be wanting (Isaiah 1:18; Isaiah 43:26).
2. On Isaiah 58:4 sqq. The Prophet finds fault with the fasting of the Jews in two respects. First, because they combined them with works of unrighteousness. Second, because they held the “bodily exercise” to be the chief thing. Perhaps in the Sermon on the mount our Lord had our text in mind when He said: “When ye fast, be not as the hypocrites of a sad countenance.” Matthew 6:11.
He makes prominent one particular that probably hovered before our Prophet also. For it is possible that he saw in the “hanging the head” an artificial, affected, and so hypocritical expression of a piety that did not exist inwardly; although it is not absolutely necessary that this letting the head hang and making one’s bed in sand and ashes took place with hypocritical intent. But our Lord expressly demands that one do not let appear the harassed, sickly look, that was the perhaps quite natural consequence of fasting. He says (Matthew 6:17): “but thou, when thou fastest, anoint thy head and wash thy face, that thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father, which is in secret.” One sees, therefore, that in the Sermon on the mount the Lord by no means rejects corporeal fasting. He only shows abhorrence of men’s hypocritically abusing fasting for the gratification of pride. But the Prophet also does not reject fasting.
But he would have corporeal fasting be the faithful expression of a simultaneous moral doing of penitent self-denial and compassionating love.
3. On Isaiah 58:6-9. As the apostle James pressingly urges against dead works, that even Abraham’s faith was in itself a grand moral act, so here, too, the Prophet insists on right works as opposed to false works. But neither declares essentially anything concerning the true ground and origin of the works that they mean, because the context of their discourses does not call for it. We are to supply this from passages that professedly speak to this point, which they silently take for granted, according to the measure of intelligence given to them. For even Isaiah knows right well that that which satisfies and strengthens is not to be obtained by one’s own labor and effort (55).
4. On Isaiah 58:7. “Flesh denotes here in this context something more still, which J. von Mueller has remarked: “The remembrance of universal brotherhood, and how we are all exposed to like things”—as ἅνθρωποιὁμοιοπαθεῖς. Verily flesh has need of covering. When therefore thou seest the naked, then see and feel therein the need of thine own flesh, and do not, proudly selfish, conceal or cover only thyself with thy garment that belongs to the other as also being thy flesh.” Stier.5. On Isaiah 58:7. Concerning the expression λָּ ?ψֹ ?νμֶ ?ηֶ ?ν see Doctrinal and Ethical on Jeremiah 16:7.
6. [On Isaiah 58:13-14. “From the closing portion of this chapter we may derive the following important inferences respecting the Sabbath. (1) It is to be of perpetual obligation. The whole chapter occurs in the midst of statements that relate to the times of the Messiah. There is no intimation that the Sabbath was to be abolished, but it is fairly implied that its observance was to be attended with most happy results in those future times.... (2) We may see the manner in which the Sabbath is to be observed. In no place in the Bible is there a more full account of the proper mode of keeping that holy day. We are to refrain from ordinary travelling and employments; we are not to engage in doing our own pleasure; we are to regard it with delight, and to esteem it a day worthy to be honored. And we are to show respect to it by not performing our own ordinary works, or pursuing pleasures, or engaging in the common topics of conversation.
In this description there occurs nothing of peculiar Jewish ceremony, and nothing which indicates that it is not to be observed in this manner at all times. Under the gospel assuredly, it is as proper to celebrate the Sabbath in this way as it was in the times of Isaiah, and God doubtless intended that it should be perpetually observed in this manner. (3) Important benefits result from the right observance of the Sabbath. In the passage before us these are said to be, that they who thus observed it would find pleasure in Jehovah, and would be signally prospered and be safe. But those benefits are by no means confined to the Jewish people. It is as true now as it was then, and they who observe the Sabbath in a proper manner find happiness in the Lord—in His existence, perfections, promises, law, and in communion with Him—which is to be found no where else... And it is as true that the proper observance of the Sabbath contributes to the prosperity and safety of a nation now as it ever did among the Jewish people.
It is not merely from the fact that God promises to bless the people who keep His holy day—though this is of more value to a nation than all its armies and fleets; but it is that there is in the institution itself much that tends to the welfare and prosperity of a country.... Any one may be convinced of this who will be at the pains to compare a neighborhood, a village, or a city where the Sabbath is not observed with one where it is; and the difference will convince him at once that society owes more to the Sabbath than to any single institution beside.” Barnes.]
7. On Isaiah 59:2. “Quia quotidie apud nos crescit culpa, cur non et simul crescat poena?” Augustine. “The public sins are compared to a thick cloud, that sets itself between heaven and earth, and as it were hinders prayers from passing through (Lamentations 3:44).” Starke. “There is great power in sin, for it separates God and us from one another.” Cramer. “There are times when the hand of the Lord lies long and heavy on His children. One feels that God has withdrawn from him and hidden His countenance. But one does not sufficiently investigate the cause. One seeks it in God, and it lies in us, who, by sins unacknowledged and not repented of, make it impossible to God to turn to us in grace.” Weber.8. On Isaiah 59:3-8.
The register of sins that Isaiah here holds up to the Jews is a mirror in which many a Christian, many a nation, many a time may recognize its own image. The Prophet declares here very plainly the poison nature, the serpent origin of sin. Sin is the poison that the old serpent knew how to bring into our nature. He that has stolen a taste of a product of this poison, as Eve did of the tree of knowledge, supposing that he will thereby receive some good, will go to ruin by it. But he that would be no lover of sin, but would stand forth as its opponent, may count upon it that the reptile will press its malignant fang in his heel, as was even held in prospect to the great trampler of the serpent’s head Himself (Genesis 3:15).
9. On Isaiah 59:9-15 a. Here is for once an honest and thorough confession of sins. Nothing is palliated here, nothing excused. It is freely confessed that Israel is itself to blame for all its wretchedness, and this guilt is acknowledged to be the consequence of the apostacy from Jehovah and of the workings of a depraved heart, whose malignant fruits have become manifest in words and works. Comp. Jeremiah 3:21 sqq.—Here therefore is given a model for all who would know wherein true repentance must consist.
10. On Isaiah 59:15 b sqq. “Si tu recordaberis peccatorum tuorum, Dominus non recordabitur.” Augustine. “God wonders that men let sin become so great and His righteousness so small.” Oetinger in Stier.—It is a divine privilege to need no helper. With God there is no difference between willing and being able. With Him the being able follows the willing ad nutum. And there is nothing to which God, when He wills, has not also the right. We men, when we have the will and the power, are often without the right, and this takes the foundation from under our feet.
Isaiah 59:17. This is the original source of the Apostle Paul’s extended description of the spiritual armor, Ephesians 6:14; Ephesians 6:17. Also in 1 Thessalonians 5:8 there underlies the same representation of the equipment required by Christians. On the other hand God is conceived of as an equipped warrior, e.g., Psalms 7:13-14; Psalms 35:2-3. In Exodus 15:4 He is directly called “a man of war.”
11. On Isaiah 59:18-20. Regarding the time of the fulfilment of this prophecy, the honorable and thorough confession of sin in Isaiah 59:9-15 a, assumes the conclusion of the judgments against Israel and the conversion of the Gentiles. So Paul understood our passage, who cites it, Romans 11:26, to prove that only then will the Jews partake of the salvation when the fulness of the Gentiles shall have come in. Therefore the Prophet distinguishes three great periods of time. The first comprehends all the stages of time in which Israel will be impenitent, and hence deprived of its theocratic rights.
This period will conclude with a condition wherein Israel’s scale, as too light, hurries upwards to the highest elevation, while the scale of the Gentiles, by reason of its weight, will sink deep down. Just this situation will bring about the turning of the scale. Israel will repent; but those Gentiles and those Israelites that will not have repented will be overtaken by the judgment (Isaiah 59:18; Isaiah 59:20 ωׁ ?αιλωׁ ?ςαιςχα). For neither the “fulness of the Gentiles,” nor “all Israel” excludes there being still unconverted Gentiles and Jews. The third period is then the period of salvation, when the Goel [“Redeemer”] will come to Zion and raise up the covenant (Isaiah 59:21).
12. On Isaiah 59:21 “Does the Spirit of God remain, then does also His word; does the word remain, then preachers also remain; do preachers remain, then also hearers do; do hearers remain, then there remain also believers, and therefore the Christian church remains also, to which ever some still will be gathered out of the Jews (Romans 11:26).”—“Although in general God has promised that His word and Spirit shall not depart from the church of God, still no one must become so secure about that (comp. Jeremiah 18:18) as if it were impossible that this or that particular church (and even the Romish church is nothing more) could err.” Cramer. HINTS1. On Isaiah 58:1. Penitential Sermon. The text teaches us two things: 1) What one ought to preach on a day of repentance [fast-day]; viz., hold up to the people their sins. 2) How one should preach: a. boldly, b. without sparing, loud as a trumpet.
2. On Isaiah 58:2-9 This text contains the outlines of a popular theodicy. First we hear, Isaiah 58:2-3 a, the popular complaint that the divine Providence that guides the affairs of the world is unjust, and that He is not fair to the claims of reward that each individual fancies he has. Then in Isaiah 58:3 b–9, we hear the divine justification. It consists of two parts. In the first part God shows that the claims of men are unfounded in two respects.
First for this reason, because they do not do good purely, but along with the good have still room in their hearts for evil, consequently imagine that they can serve two masters (Isaiah 58:3 a., 4). Second, their claims are unfounded, because founded in the illusion that it is sufficient to fulfil the divine commands in a rude, outward manner. Thus men suppose, e.g., that they can satisfy the divine command to fast by harassing the body by hunger, and lying on sack-cloth and ashes (Isaiah 58:5). In the second part God shows what must be the nature of the performances that would satisfy the demand of His holiness, and give a claim on His righteousness for reward. That is to say, men must first of all, by practical repentance, make restoration for all injustice done by them, and make manifest by works of mercy their love to God and their neighbor (Isaiah 58:7). Then divine salvation and divine blessing will be constantly with them, and in every necessity their prayer for help will find certain hearing (Isaiah 58:8-9 a).
3. [On Isaiah 58:3. “Having gone about to put a cheat on God by their external services, here they go about to pick a quarrel with God for not being pleased with their services, as if He had not done justly or fairly by them.” M. Henry.]
4. [On Isaiah 58:4. “Behold, you fast for strife and debate. When they proclaimed a fast to deprecate God’s judgments, they pretended to search for those sins that provoked God to threaten them with His judgments, and under that pretence, perhaps, particular persons were falsely accused, as Naboth in the day of Jezebel’s fast, 1 Kings 21:12. Or the contending parties among them upon those occasions were bitter and severe in their reflections one upon another, one side crying out, ‘It is owing to you,’ and the other, “It is owing to you, that our deliverance is not wrought.’ Thus, instead of judging themselves, which is the proper work of a fast-day, they condemned one another.” M. Henry.]
5. [On Isaiah 58:5; Isaiah 58:7. “Plain instructions given concerning the true nature of a religious fast. 1. In general a fast is intended: (1) For the honoring and pleasing of God (Isaiah 58:5, a fast that I have chosen, an acceptable day to the Lord). (2) For the humbling and abasing of ourselves, Leviticus 16:29. That must be done on a fast-day which is a real affliction to the soul, as far as it is unregenerate and unsanctified, though a real pleasure and advantage to the soul as far as it is itself. II. What will be acceptable to God and afflict our corrupt nature to its mortification. (1) Negatively, what does neither of these, a. To look demure, put on a melancholy aspect and bow the head like a bulrush, Matthew 6:16.
Though that were well enough so far, Luke 18:13. b. It is not enough to mortify the body a little, while the body of sin is untouched. (2) Positively, a. That we be just to those with whom we have dealt hardly (Isaiah 58:6). b. That we be charitable to those that stand in need of charity (Isaiah 58:7).” After M. Henry.]
6. On Isaiah 58:7. The compassionate love of the Samaritan. 1) What does it give? a. food, b. housing, c. clothing. 2) To whom does it give? To its flesh, i. e., to its neighbor in the sense of Luk 10:29 sqq.
7. On Isaiah 58:9. “What if the Lord were to make us priests, and if He were to give us the light and righteousness that Aaron bore on his heart as often as he went in unto the Lord, and by which the Lord gave him answer when He inquired,—if He were to give all of us that in our hearts, who are priests of the new covenant? And assuredly I believe that He will also do this. What He has already promised by the Prophets, He will much more fulfil in us: Thou shalt call, and the Lord shall answer thee; when thou shalt cry, He will say: here I am.” Tholuck.8. On Isaiah 58:7-9. “O God, our great, sore, horrible blindness, that we so disregard such a glorious promise! To whom are we harsh, when we do not help poor people?
Are they not our flesh and blood? As in heaven and earth there is no creature so nearly related to us, it ought to be our way: what we would that men should do to us in like case, that let us do to others. But there that detestable Satan holds our eyes, so that we withdraw from our own flesh and become tyrants and blood-hounds to our neighbors. But what do we accomplish by that? What do we enjoy? We load ourselves with God’s disfavor, curse and all misfortune, who might otherwise have temporal and eternal blessing.
For he that takes on him the distress of his neighbor, his light shall break forth like the morning dawn, i.e., he shall find consolation and help in time of need. His recovery shall progress rapidly, i.e., God will again bless him, and replace what he has given away. His righteousness shall go before him, i.e., he shall not only have a good name with every one, but God will shelter him from evil, and ward off from him temporal misfortune, as one may see that God wonderfully protects His own when common punishments go about. And the glory of the Lord will take him to itself, i. e., God will interest Himself for him, [as follows Isaiah 58:9]. Lo, of such great mercy as this does greed rob us, when we do not gladly and kindly help the poor!” Veit Dietrich.
9. [On Isaiah 58:12. Thou shalt be called (and it shall be to thy honor) the repairer of the breach, the breach made by the enemy in the wall of a besieged city, which whoso has courage and dexterity to make up, or make good, gains great applause. Happy are those who make up the breach at which virtue is running out, and judgments are breaking in. M. Henry].
10. On Isaiah 59:1-2. It is often in human life as if heaven were shut up. No prayer seems to penetrate through to it. To all our cries, no answer. Then people murmur (Isaiah 8:21 sq.; Lamentations 3:39) and accuse God, as if He were lame or deaf.
But they ought rather to seek the blame in themselves. There still exists a wall of partition between them and God, a guilt unatoned for, the sight of which still continuously provokes the anger of God, and hinders the appearance of His mercy (Isaiah 1:15 sqq.; Isaiah 64:5 sqq.; Daniel 9:5 sqq.: Proverbs 1:24 sqq.). Hence Christians must be pointed to what they must guard against in seasons of long-continued visitation and what they should strive after at such times before all things. As they would avoid great harm to soul and body, they must beware of laying any blame on God, as if He were wanting in willingness or ability. Rather, by sincere repentance, their endeavor should be that heaven may be pure and clear, that their guilt may be forgiven for Christ’s sake, and that, as children of God, with the testimony of the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:16) in their hearts, they may have free access to the heart of their heavenly Father.
11. On Isaiah 59:3-8. The description the Prophet gives here of the depraved moral condition of Israel is also a description of human sinfulness generally. And the Apostle Paul has adopted parts of it in the portrait he gives of the condition of the natural man (comp. Isaiah 59:7 with Romans 3:15). Therefore, where one would draw the picture of the natural man, he may make good use of this text.
12. [On Isaiah 59:13. Conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood. “They were words of falsehood, and yet they were said to be uttered from the heart, because though they differed from the real sentiments of the heart, and therefore were words of falsehood, yet they agreed with the malice and wickedness of the heart, and were the natural language of that; it was a double heart, Psalms 12:2.” M. Henry.]
13. On Isaiah 59:15 b–21. One may preach on this text in times of great distress and conflict for the Church. The Lord the protection of His Church. 1) The distress of the Church does not remain concealed from Him, for He sees: a. that the Church encounters injustice (Isaiah 59:15 b), b. that no one on earth takes its part (Isaiah 59:16) 2) He stirs Himself (Isaiah 59:16 b; Isaiah 59:17 a, Isaiah 59:19 b): a. to judgment against the enemy (Isaiah 59:17 b, Isaiah 59:18), b. to salvation for the Church (Isaiah 59:17 helmet of salvation): a. with reference to its deliverance from outward distress (Isaiah 59:20), β. with reference to inward preservation and quickening of the Church (Isaiah 59:20 b, 21), c. to rescue the honor of His own name (Isaiah 59:19 a), because the Church is even His kingdom, the theatre for the realization of His decrees of salvation. Comp. Homil. Hints on Isaiah 49:1-6.
14. [On Isaiah 59:16 sqq. “How sin abounded we have read, to our great amazement, in the former part of the chapter; how grace does much more abound we read in these verses. And as sin took occasion from the commandment to become more exceedingly sinful, so grace took occasion from the transgression to appear more exceedingly gracious.” M. Henry.]
Footnotes:too short to save, too dull to hear.Or, have made him hide.deviseth wickedness.appeals with justice, there is no one that would judge impartially.Or addersbasilisk.Or, that which is sprinkled is as if there brake out a viper,Heb. breaking.Or right.tracks.
2.THE UPWARD
a) The transition from the Mournful Present to the Blessed Future by means of the Nation’s Penitent ConfessionIsa_59:9-15 a 9Therefore Isaiah 11 judgment far from us,
Neither doth justice overtake us:
We wait for light, but behold obscurity;
For brightness, but we walk in darkness.
10 We grope for the wall like the blind,
And we grope as if we had no eyes:
We stumble at noonday as in the night;
We are in desolate places as dead men.11 We roar all like bears,
And mourn sore like doves:
We look for ajudgment, but there is none;
For salvation, but it is far off from us.
12 For our transgressions are multiplied before thee,
And our sins testify against us:
For our transgressions are with us;
And as for our iniquities, we know them.
13 In transgressing and lying against the Lord,And departing away from our God,
Speaking oppression and revolt,
Conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood.
14 And ajudgment is turned away backward,
And justice standeth afar off:
For truth is fallen in the street,
And equity cannot enter.
15 aYea, truth faileth;
And he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey.
TEXTUAL AND See List for the recurrence of the words: Isaiah 59:9. ΰֲ ?λֵּ ?μָ ?δ–πְ ?βֹ ?δָ ?δ Isaiah 59:10. βָ ?ωַׁ ?ωׁ, comp. ξָ ?ωַׁ ?ωׁ.
Isaiah 59:10. He parag. accented the first time, the second time unaccented, seems to me to be with reference to merely rhetorical effect, corresponding only to the outward difference between ςεψιν and ΰιοςιπιν (Isaiah 40:29).—λַּ ?πֶּ ?ωֶׁ ?σ with the preposition omitted, comp. Isaiah 1:25; Isaiah 5:18; Isaiah 5:29; Isaiah 10:14; Isaiah 28:21.—ΰַ ?ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ο is an adjective form from ωָׁ ?ξֵ ?ο pinguis fuit, like ΰֵ ?ιϊָ ?ο ,ΰַ ?λְ ?ζָ ?α ,ΰַ ?λְ ?ζָ ?ψ. The Prophet could write αַּ ?ωְׁ ?ξֵ ?πִ ?ιν, but he coined a new word in order to intimate that he would have the word taken in more than the common, in an intensified sense. Judges 3:29 ωָׁ ?ξֵ ?ο is used parallel with ΰִ ?ιωׁ ?Ξηַ ?ιִ ?μ: they smote ten thousand Moabites λָּ ?μΞωָ ?ξֵ ?οεְ ?λָ ?μΞΰִ ?ιωׁ ηַ ?ιִ ?μ. Also in Psalms 78:31 ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?πִּ ?ιν is placed in parallelism with αַּ ?ηεּ ?ψִ ?ιν (comp, Isaiah 10:16).
Since the words αΰωׁ ?ξπινλξΧ as far as λָּ ?ωַׁ ?μְ ?πεּ stand in the same grammatical relation as αφδψινλπωׁ ?σ, and correspond to these words in parallelism, they must have an analogous sense. There lies in the former the same antithesis as in the latter. See Exeg. and Crit..Isaiah 59:12. ςπϊδαπε comp. Isaiah 3:9; and as regards the singular predicate with the plural subject comp. Isaiah 1:6; Isaiah 34:13; Isaiah 35:9.
Isaiah 59:13. πָ ?ρεֹ ?β inf. absol. Niph. from ρεּ ?β, comp. Zephaniah 1:6.—δֹ ?βεֹ ,δֹ ?ψεֹ are inff. abss. Poel from δָ ?ψָ ?δ and δָ ?βָ ?δ; they both occur only here. They are evidently meant for a paronomasia.
Isaiah 59:14. The discourse returns to the verb. fin.Isaiah 59:15. ξωׁ ?ϊεμμ, with reflexive-causal meaning; comp. Psalms 76:6.
AND 1. From the present, whose contemplation he begins in chap, 58, the Prophet would prepare a way for himself to behold the remote future. The sins and vices of the present, which he had to oppose to the people’s charge of injustice on God’s part, prevent the coming of the salvation to which the people had a certain right as to something promised. But these sins can be blotted out, a way to Israel’s right to salvation can be made, if Israel repents. That will come about. Hence in the present section the Prophet describes the penitent Israel.
That this repentance may appear spontaneous and real, he lets Israel itself speak. He was the more moved to do this, as he comprehends together relative and absolute present, and accordingly would include himself and his own time. With ςμΞλο, “therefore” (Isaiah 59:9), the Israelites join on to the charge of the Prophet. They admit thereby that their sins are the cause of their sad condition, which they now proceed to describe (Isaiah 59:9-11). To this “therefore” corresponds the causal λι, “for,” Isaiah 59:12 : what they should know as the consequence of the Prophet’s charges, that they now prove by a candid confession of sin (Isaiah 59:12-15 a). In direct contrast, therefore, with that bold statement, Isaiah 58:2-3, that Jehovah was unjust toward His people, Israel here confesses emphatically, in a double turn of discourse intertwined like a chain, and in connection with the mirror of its sins that the Prophet holds before it, Isaiah 59:2-8, that its wretchedness is the consequence of its sin (Isaiah 59:9-11), and its sin is the cause of its wretchedness (Isaiah 59:12-15 a).
2. Therefore—far off from us, Isaiah 59:9-11. With therefore begins a great and important turn in the discourse. Israel no longer boasts of its righteousness and innocence, as in Isaiah 58:2-3, but confesses that the Prophet was entirely right in his accusations, Isaiah 59:2-8; it confesses that on account of these sins its right is far from it. But what strange confession of sin is this when Israel says: On account of my sins I rightly do not receive my right; right is done me that I suffer wrong. Evidently there is implied here a double right.
On the one hand there exists for Israel an absolute right, that is founded on its election to be a peculiar people, and on the promise given to the fathers and often repeated afterwards. This is the right (ξωׁ ?λּ ?θ) and the righteousness (φγχδ) spoken of in Isaiah 59:9; Isaiah 59:11. By virtue of this right a wrong seems to have happened to Israel when it has been conquered, oppressed, carried off captive by the heathen. But such times of distress are only obscurations of right, i.e. transitory veilings of that right that stands immovable as the sun, occasioned by Israel’s sin for the time being, that makes necessary the manifestations of God’s relative right, i.e. transitory moments and periods of punishment. In Isaiah 59:9 now, the people confess that the present obscuration of its (absolute) right is not an absolute, but only a relative injustice, i. e. in relation to its present misbehaviour a well founded right. That Israel itself speaks, and that it is not solely the Prophet that declares of Israel that it has come to a right view, is evidently intended, so that Israel’s confession of repentance may be heard from its own mouth, thus from the most reliable source, and also as a voluntary one.—The expression μΰϊωׂ ?ιβπεφγχδ recalls the αְּ ?ψָ ?λεֹ ?ϊ or χְ ?μָ ?μεֹ ?ϊδִ ?ωִׂ ?ιβֻ ?κָ of Deuteronomy 28:2; Deuteronomy 28:15.
Comp. also Isaiah 35:10; Isaiah 51:11. From Isaiah 59:9 b and on, this condition of Israel devoid of its right is described in figures. The people compare it to the situation of those that in darkness hope for light, and yet never see the hope fulfilled. Next they compare themselves in their helplessness and want of counsel to blind men that grope along by touching the wall. Further they compare themselves to the blind that stumble at midday as in the twilight; then to the dead, i.e. to the shades of the dead that move among the living, strengthless and without support, with tottering gait (comp. the ἀμενηνὰκάρηνα or φῦλαἀνθρώπωνFr. V.
Naegelsbach,Homer. Theol. VII., § 25). The word ΰωׁ ?ξπιν, which occurs only here, can, in my opinion, only mean “the fat,” i.e. those in vigorous life, in contrast with the unsubstantial shades. So also Delitzsch, Seinecke, Rohling, etc. See Text. and Gram.
The light of midday does not help the blind; he stumbles any way. It does not help the shade of a dead man to move about in the environment of men rejoicing in life; he totters and is unsteady just the same. One might say that then it ought to read λξϊιναΰωׁ ?πιν. But the intention of making the last member of the parallelism like the first prevails. The explanations: “as the dead in darkness, or in desolate places, or in fat regions,” partly do not correspond to the parallelism, partly are ungrammatical. But one must now distinguish the substance from the image.
What would the Prophet say by this figure? I am surprised that even Delitzsch here follows in the steps of Knobel, and thinks he must find the Prophet’s point of view in the last decade of the Exile, and that the meaning is: When, after his conquest over Croesus, Cyrus hesitated to march against Babylon, hope and fear unceasingly alternated in the souls of the Exiles. Verily, the Prophet’s standpoint is one much higher, his circuit of vision a much broader one. He would here even pave the way to the distant views of chapters 60. sqq. The thing that hinders the appearance of the deeds of salvation there promised, is Israel’s sin. Let the partition wall of sin be cleared away by knowledge of it and proper fruits of repentance, then can the Lord arise to put Israel in possession of its right.
Wherever and whenever Israel truly recognizes its misery and the cause of it, it must so speak as is here represented. For there it must measure its situation by the measure of God’s promises, and must ask itself: Am I what, as the people of God, I ought to be? Then it must see the imperfection and uncertainty of its situations—now high up, then deep down; at one time unrighteously dominated over, at another unrighteously dominating—and confess that Israel can only find its eternal, inalienable right in and with its God.
Isaiah 59:11. Israel compares itself to bears growling for hunger (illustrative passages from the classics find in Bochart, Hieroz. II., p. 134), and to doves that for like reason plaintively coo and sigh (ibid. II., p. 539 sq.). δָ ?ξָ ?δ and δָ ?βָ ?δ are nearly related in sound and meaning. The first is used of the dove, Ezekiel 7:16; the latter is used also of the lion (Isaiah 27:8; Isaiah 31:4). We had it for the sighing of the dove already, Isaiah 38:14. By comparing themselves to the growling of the bear and to the sighing of the dove, the Israelites let it be understood that both the strong and the weak, each in his way, make audible complaint concerning the prevailing distress.
3. For our transgressions—himself a prey, Isaiah 59:12-15 a. As already remarked, the λִּ ?ι, “for,” that begins Isaiah 59:12, corresponds to the “therefore” that begins Isaiah 59:9. It is the same chain-like succession as that of e. g.Isaiah 51:12-13; Isaiah 53:4-5; Isaiah 53:12. “The people strike up the Widduj (the confession) that is marked by the rhyming inflexions anu and enu” (Delitzsch).—The second λι “for,” in Isaiah 59:12 is not co-ordinate with the first, but subordinate. For Israel would not have been able to say: Our sins stand before thee and testify against us, had it not before owned to having such sins. The consciousness of its sinfulness betrayed in Isaiah 59:12 b was alone able to determine it to the declaration of Isa 59:12 a.
In Isaiah 59:13 follows a specification of the sins of which Israel is conscious. The first and chief is apostacy from Jehovah, idolatry. It is characterized in a three fold way. We may understand τωׁ ?ς to denote the inward revolt against the Lord,ληωׁ the denial of Him practised in words (αַּ ?ιδεδ is to be referred to both, comp. Isaiah 1:2; Isaiah 43:27; then Hosea 9:2; Jeremiah 5:12), πρεβεβεΧ, the outward actual falling away by exchanging the worship of Jehovah for heathen worship. One may say that Isaiah 59:13 a treats of transgressions against the first table of the law, Isaiah 59:13 b of transgressions against the second.
For Isaiah 59:13 b speaks of violations of the duties we owe our neighbors. γαψςωׁ ?χερψδ is to carry on discourse (conversation, agreement) that aims at oppression of others and departure from the law. The expression γַּ ?αֶּ ?ψΞρָ ?ψָ ?δ, wherever else it occurs (Deuteronomy 13:6; Jeremiah 28:16; Jeremiah 29:32), is used only of the false doctrine of the false prophets. Thus here Isaiah would have principally in mind the seductive discourses of false prophets. In antithesis to δָ ?ψָ ?δ, concepit, δָ ?πָ ?δ can here only mean “breathing forth,” the proferre by means of speech.
Isaiah 59:14, At first sight and by comparison with Isaiah 59:9, one is tempted to understand 14a (with Hitzig and others) to refer again to the hindrance in the way of Israel having the right belonging to it in the theocratic sense (see above). But Isaiah 59:14 b conflicts with that; for there the fides publica is evidently spoken of that must underlie the administering of justice and all trade and conduct. Where fidelity wavers, and no one can any more believe and trust another; where all propriety and decorousness, all honestum is formally held aloof, excluded, put under the ban, there can be no mention of right and justice in the market (αψηεα, in foro); of course there fidelity must gradually be wholly missing (Isaiah 34:16; Isaiah 40:26), while if any one only does not join in, would let the wickedness alone, he incurs the danger of being singled out for plunder.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 58:2-3. There are also to-day many men that hold up their good works to God (Luke 18:11 sqq.), and who, out aloud or silently, reproach Him for not adequately rewarding them for them. But one can distinguish here two classes: those that boast of having done works of undoubted moral worth; and such as found their pretensions essentially on works that are morally indifferent, as ceremonies of worship and the like. Of course there is a difference between these, for the former can, under some circumstances, really deserve praise; whereas the latter under all circumstances accomplish something more or less morally worthless, yea, possibly, as miserable hypocrites, directly provoke the wrath of God. But never has the creature the right to accuse God.
It may be debated whether such accusation is more folly or wickedness. It is tinder all circumstances a presumptuous judgment. For, as long as we live, results are not assured, and we lack ability to see all. Only the day will make it clear what is the relation between God’s doing and ours, and that He has not let the just recompense be wanting (Isaiah 1:18; Isaiah 43:26).
2. On Isaiah 58:4 sqq. The Prophet finds fault with the fasting of the Jews in two respects. First, because they combined them with works of unrighteousness. Second, because they held the “bodily exercise” to be the chief thing. Perhaps in the Sermon on the mount our Lord had our text in mind when He said: “When ye fast, be not as the hypocrites of a sad countenance.” Matthew 6:11.
He makes prominent one particular that probably hovered before our Prophet also. For it is possible that he saw in the “hanging the head” an artificial, affected, and so hypocritical expression of a piety that did not exist inwardly; although it is not absolutely necessary that this letting the head hang and making one’s bed in sand and ashes took place with hypocritical intent. But our Lord expressly demands that one do not let appear the harassed, sickly look, that was the perhaps quite natural consequence of fasting. He says (Matthew 6:17): “but thou, when thou fastest, anoint thy head and wash thy face, that thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father, which is in secret.” One sees, therefore, that in the Sermon on the mount the Lord by no means rejects corporeal fasting. He only shows abhorrence of men’s hypocritically abusing fasting for the gratification of pride. But the Prophet also does not reject fasting.
But he would have corporeal fasting be the faithful expression of a simultaneous moral doing of penitent self-denial and compassionating love.
3. On Isaiah 58:6-9. As the apostle James pressingly urges against dead works, that even Abraham’s faith was in itself a grand moral act, so here, too, the Prophet insists on right works as opposed to false works. But neither declares essentially anything concerning the true ground and origin of the works that they mean, because the context of their discourses does not call for it. We are to supply this from passages that professedly speak to this point, which they silently take for granted, according to the measure of intelligence given to them. For even Isaiah knows right well that that which satisfies and strengthens is not to be obtained by one’s own labor and effort (55).
4. On Isaiah 58:7. “Flesh denotes here in this context something more still, which J. von Mueller has remarked: “The remembrance of universal brotherhood, and how we are all exposed to like things”—as ἅνθρωποιὁμοιοπαθεῖς. Verily flesh has need of covering. When therefore thou seest the naked, then see and feel therein the need of thine own flesh, and do not, proudly selfish, conceal or cover only thyself with thy garment that belongs to the other as also being thy flesh.” Stier.5. On Isaiah 58:7. Concerning the expression λָּ ?ψֹ ?νμֶ ?ηֶ ?ν see Doctrinal and Ethical on Jeremiah 16:7.
6. [On Isaiah 58:13-14. “From the closing portion of this chapter we may derive the following important inferences respecting the Sabbath. (1) It is to be of perpetual obligation. The whole chapter occurs in the midst of statements that relate to the times of the Messiah. There is no intimation that the Sabbath was to be abolished, but it is fairly implied that its observance was to be attended with most happy results in those future times.... (2) We may see the manner in which the Sabbath is to be observed. In no place in the Bible is there a more full account of the proper mode of keeping that holy day. We are to refrain from ordinary travelling and employments; we are not to engage in doing our own pleasure; we are to regard it with delight, and to esteem it a day worthy to be honored. And we are to show respect to it by not performing our own ordinary works, or pursuing pleasures, or engaging in the common topics of conversation.
In this description there occurs nothing of peculiar Jewish ceremony, and nothing which indicates that it is not to be observed in this manner at all times. Under the gospel assuredly, it is as proper to celebrate the Sabbath in this way as it was in the times of Isaiah, and God doubtless intended that it should be perpetually observed in this manner. (3) Important benefits result from the right observance of the Sabbath. In the passage before us these are said to be, that they who thus observed it would find pleasure in Jehovah, and would be signally prospered and be safe. But those benefits are by no means confined to the Jewish people. It is as true now as it was then, and they who observe the Sabbath in a proper manner find happiness in the Lord—in His existence, perfections, promises, law, and in communion with Him—which is to be found no where else... And it is as true that the proper observance of the Sabbath contributes to the prosperity and safety of a nation now as it ever did among the Jewish people.
It is not merely from the fact that God promises to bless the people who keep His holy day—though this is of more value to a nation than all its armies and fleets; but it is that there is in the institution itself much that tends to the welfare and prosperity of a country.... Any one may be convinced of this who will be at the pains to compare a neighborhood, a village, or a city where the Sabbath is not observed with one where it is; and the difference will convince him at once that society owes more to the Sabbath than to any single institution beside.” Barnes.]
7. On Isaiah 59:2. “Quia quotidie apud nos crescit culpa, cur non et simul crescat poena?” Augustine. “The public sins are compared to a thick cloud, that sets itself between heaven and earth, and as it were hinders prayers from passing through (Lamentations 3:44).” Starke. “There is great power in sin, for it separates God and us from one another.” Cramer. “There are times when the hand of the Lord lies long and heavy on His children. One feels that God has withdrawn from him and hidden His countenance. But one does not sufficiently investigate the cause. One seeks it in God, and it lies in us, who, by sins unacknowledged and not repented of, make it impossible to God to turn to us in grace.” Weber.8. On Isaiah 59:3-8.
The register of sins that Isaiah here holds up to the Jews is a mirror in which many a Christian, many a nation, many a time may recognize its own image. The Prophet declares here very plainly the poison nature, the serpent origin of sin. Sin is the poison that the old serpent knew how to bring into our nature. He that has stolen a taste of a product of this poison, as Eve did of the tree of knowledge, supposing that he will thereby receive some good, will go to ruin by it. But he that would be no lover of sin, but would stand forth as its opponent, may count upon it that the reptile will press its malignant fang in his heel, as was even held in prospect to the great trampler of the serpent’s head Himself (Genesis 3:15).
9. On Isaiah 59:9-15 a. Here is for once an honest and thorough confession of sins. Nothing is palliated here, nothing excused. It is freely confessed that Israel is itself to blame for all its wretchedness, and this guilt is acknowledged to be the consequence of the apostacy from Jehovah and of the workings of a depraved heart, whose malignant fruits have become manifest in words and works. Comp. Jeremiah 3:21 sqq.—Here therefore is given a model for all who would know wherein true repentance must consist.
10. On Isaiah 59:15 b sqq. “Si tu recordaberis peccatorum tuorum, Dominus non recordabitur.” Augustine. “God wonders that men let sin become so great and His righteousness so small.” Oetinger in Stier.—It is a divine privilege to need no helper. With God there is no difference between willing and being able. With Him the being able follows the willing ad nutum. And there is nothing to which God, when He wills, has not also the right. We men, when we have the will and the power, are often without the right, and this takes the foundation from under our feet.
Isaiah 59:17. This is the original source of the Apostle Paul’s extended description of the spiritual armor, Ephesians 6:14; Ephesians 6:17. Also in 1 Thessalonians 5:8 there underlies the same representation of the equipment required by Christians. On the other hand God is conceived of as an equipped warrior, e.g., Psalms 7:13-14; Psalms 35:2-3. In Exodus 15:4 He is directly called “a man of war.”
11. On Isaiah 59:18-20. Regarding the time of the fulfilment of this prophecy, the honorable and thorough confession of sin in Isaiah 59:9-15 a, assumes the conclusion of the judgments against Israel and the conversion of the Gentiles. So Paul understood our passage, who cites it, Romans 11:26, to prove that only then will the Jews partake of the salvation when the fulness of the Gentiles shall have come in. Therefore the Prophet distinguishes three great periods of time. The first comprehends all the stages of time in which Israel will be impenitent, and hence deprived of its theocratic rights.
This period will conclude with a condition wherein Israel’s scale, as too light, hurries upwards to the highest elevation, while the scale of the Gentiles, by reason of its weight, will sink deep down. Just this situation will bring about the turning of the scale. Israel will repent; but those Gentiles and those Israelites that will not have repented will be overtaken by the judgment (Isaiah 59:18; Isaiah 59:20 ωׁ ?αιλωׁ ?ςαιςχα). For neither the “fulness of the Gentiles,” nor “all Israel” excludes there being still unconverted Gentiles and Jews. The third period is then the period of salvation, when the Goel [“Redeemer”] will come to Zion and raise up the covenant (Isaiah 59:21).
12. On Isaiah 59:21 “Does the Spirit of God remain, then does also His word; does the word remain, then preachers also remain; do preachers remain, then also hearers do; do hearers remain, then there remain also believers, and therefore the Christian church remains also, to which ever some still will be gathered out of the Jews (Romans 11:26).”—“Although in general God has promised that His word and Spirit shall not depart from the church of God, still no one must become so secure about that (comp. Jeremiah 18:18) as if it were impossible that this or that particular church (and even the Romish church is nothing more) could err.” Cramer. HINTS1. On Isaiah 58:1. Penitential Sermon. The text teaches us two things: 1) What one ought to preach on a day of repentance [fast-day]; viz., hold up to the people their sins. 2) How one should preach: a. boldly, b. without sparing, loud as a trumpet.
2. On Isaiah 58:2-9 This text contains the outlines of a popular theodicy. First we hear, Isaiah 58:2-3 a, the popular complaint that the divine Providence that guides the affairs of the world is unjust, and that He is not fair to the claims of reward that each individual fancies he has. Then in Isaiah 58:3 b–9, we hear the divine justification. It consists of two parts. In the first part God shows that the claims of men are unfounded in two respects.
First for this reason, because they do not do good purely, but along with the good have still room in their hearts for evil, consequently imagine that they can serve two masters (Isaiah 58:3 a., 4). Second, their claims are unfounded, because founded in the illusion that it is sufficient to fulfil the divine commands in a rude, outward manner. Thus men suppose, e.g., that they can satisfy the divine command to fast by harassing the body by hunger, and lying on sack-cloth and ashes (Isaiah 58:5). In the second part God shows what must be the nature of the performances that would satisfy the demand of His holiness, and give a claim on His righteousness for reward. That is to say, men must first of all, by practical repentance, make restoration for all injustice done by them, and make manifest by works of mercy their love to God and their neighbor (Isaiah 58:7). Then divine salvation and divine blessing will be constantly with them, and in every necessity their prayer for help will find certain hearing (Isaiah 58:8-9 a).
3. [On Isaiah 58:3. “Having gone about to put a cheat on God by their external services, here they go about to pick a quarrel with God for not being pleased with their services, as if He had not done justly or fairly by them.” M. Henry.]
4. [On Isaiah 58:4. “Behold, you fast for strife and debate. When they proclaimed a fast to deprecate God’s judgments, they pretended to search for those sins that provoked God to threaten them with His judgments, and under that pretence, perhaps, particular persons were falsely accused, as Naboth in the day of Jezebel’s fast, 1 Kings 21:12. Or the contending parties among them upon those occasions were bitter and severe in their reflections one upon another, one side crying out, ‘It is owing to you,’ and the other, “It is owing to you, that our deliverance is not wrought.’ Thus, instead of judging themselves, which is the proper work of a fast-day, they condemned one another.” M. Henry.]
5. [On Isaiah 58:5; Isaiah 58:7. “Plain instructions given concerning the true nature of a religious fast. 1. In general a fast is intended: (1) For the honoring and pleasing of God (Isaiah 58:5, a fast that I have chosen, an acceptable day to the Lord). (2) For the humbling and abasing of ourselves, Leviticus 16:29. That must be done on a fast-day which is a real affliction to the soul, as far as it is unregenerate and unsanctified, though a real pleasure and advantage to the soul as far as it is itself. II. What will be acceptable to God and afflict our corrupt nature to its mortification. (1) Negatively, what does neither of these, a. To look demure, put on a melancholy aspect and bow the head like a bulrush, Matthew 6:16.
Though that were well enough so far, Luke 18:13. b. It is not enough to mortify the body a little, while the body of sin is untouched. (2) Positively, a. That we be just to those with whom we have dealt hardly (Isaiah 58:6). b. That we be charitable to those that stand in need of charity (Isaiah 58:7).” After M. Henry.]
6. On Isaiah 58:7. The compassionate love of the Samaritan. 1) What does it give? a. food, b. housing, c. clothing. 2) To whom does it give? To its flesh, i. e., to its neighbor in the sense of Luk 10:29 sqq.
7. On Isaiah 58:9. “What if the Lord were to make us priests, and if He were to give us the light and righteousness that Aaron bore on his heart as often as he went in unto the Lord, and by which the Lord gave him answer when He inquired,—if He were to give all of us that in our hearts, who are priests of the new covenant? And assuredly I believe that He will also do this. What He has already promised by the Prophets, He will much more fulfil in us: Thou shalt call, and the Lord shall answer thee; when thou shalt cry, He will say: here I am.” Tholuck.8. On Isaiah 58:7-9. “O God, our great, sore, horrible blindness, that we so disregard such a glorious promise! To whom are we harsh, when we do not help poor people?
Are they not our flesh and blood? As in heaven and earth there is no creature so nearly related to us, it ought to be our way: what we would that men should do to us in like case, that let us do to others. But there that detestable Satan holds our eyes, so that we withdraw from our own flesh and become tyrants and blood-hounds to our neighbors. But what do we accomplish by that? What do we enjoy? We load ourselves with God’s disfavor, curse and all misfortune, who might otherwise have temporal and eternal blessing.
For he that takes on him the distress of his neighbor, his light shall break forth like the morning dawn, i.e., he shall find consolation and help in time of need. His recovery shall progress rapidly, i.e., God will again bless him, and replace what he has given away. His righteousness shall go before him, i.e., he shall not only have a good name with every one, but God will shelter him from evil, and ward off from him temporal misfortune, as one may see that God wonderfully protects His own when common punishments go about. And the glory of the Lord will take him to itself, i. e., God will interest Himself for him, [as follows Isaiah 58:9]. Lo, of such great mercy as this does greed rob us, when we do not gladly and kindly help the poor!” Veit Dietrich.
9. [On Isaiah 58:12. Thou shalt be called (and it shall be to thy honor) the repairer of the breach, the breach made by the enemy in the wall of a besieged city, which whoso has courage and dexterity to make up, or make good, gains great applause. Happy are those who make up the breach at which virtue is running out, and judgments are breaking in. M. Henry].
10. On Isaiah 59:1-2. It is often in human life as if heaven were shut up. No prayer seems to penetrate through to it. To all our cries, no answer. Then people murmur (Isaiah 8:21 sq.; Lamentations 3:39) and accuse God, as if He were lame or deaf.
But they ought rather to seek the blame in themselves. There still exists a wall of partition between them and God, a guilt unatoned for, the sight of which still continuously provokes the anger of God, and hinders the appearance of His mercy (Isaiah 1:15 sqq.; Isaiah 64:5 sqq.; Daniel 9:5 sqq.: Proverbs 1:24 sqq.). Hence Christians must be pointed to what they must guard against in seasons of long-continued visitation and what they should strive after at such times before all things. As they would avoid great harm to soul and body, they must beware of laying any blame on God, as if He were wanting in willingness or ability. Rather, by sincere repentance, their endeavor should be that heaven may be pure and clear, that their guilt may be forgiven for Christ’s sake, and that, as children of God, with the testimony of the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:16) in their hearts, they may have free access to the heart of their heavenly Father.
11. On Isaiah 59:3-8. The description the Prophet gives here of the depraved moral condition of Israel is also a description of human sinfulness generally. And the Apostle Paul has adopted parts of it in the portrait he gives of the condition of the natural man (comp. Isaiah 59:7 with Romans 3:15). Therefore, where one would draw the picture of the natural man, he may make good use of this text.
12. [On Isaiah 59:13. Conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood. “They were words of falsehood, and yet they were said to be uttered from the heart, because though they differed from the real sentiments of the heart, and therefore were words of falsehood, yet they agreed with the malice and wickedness of the heart, and were the natural language of that; it was a double heart, Psalms 12:2.” M. Henry.]
13. On Isaiah 59:15 b–21. One may preach on this text in times of great distress and conflict for the Church. The Lord the protection of His Church. 1) The distress of the Church does not remain concealed from Him, for He sees: a. that the Church encounters injustice (Isaiah 59:15 b), b. that no one on earth takes its part (Isaiah 59:16) 2) He stirs Himself (Isaiah 59:16 b; Isaiah 59:17 a, Isaiah 59:19 b): a. to judgment against the enemy (Isaiah 59:17 b, Isaiah 59:18), b. to salvation for the Church (Isaiah 59:17 helmet of salvation): a. with reference to its deliverance from outward distress (Isaiah 59:20), β. with reference to inward preservation and quickening of the Church (Isaiah 59:20 b, 21), c. to rescue the honor of His own name (Isaiah 59:19 a), because the Church is even His kingdom, the theatre for the realization of His decrees of salvation. Comp. Homil. Hints on Isaiah 49:1-6.
14. [On Isaiah 59:16 sqq. “How sin abounded we have read, to our great amazement, in the former part of the chapter; how grace does much more abound we read in these verses. And as sin took occasion from the commandment to become more exceedingly sinful, so grace took occasion from the transgression to appear more exceedingly gracious.” M. Henry.]Footnotes:right.twilight.Among the flourishing (with life) as the dead.Or, is accounted mad.
b) The Prophet promises Jehovah’s intervention and is encouraged to further announcements of salvationIsa_59:15-2115b And the Lord saw it,
And it displeased him that there was no judgment.
16 And he saw that there was no man,
And wondered that there was no intercessor:
Therefore his arm brought salvation unto him;
And his righteousness, it sustained him.
17 For he put on righteousness as a breastplate,
And an helmet of salvation upon his head;
And he put on the garments of vengeance for clothing,
And was clad with zeal as a cloak.
18 According to their deeds, accordingly he will repay,
Fury to his adversaries, recompence to his enemies;
To the islands he will repay recompence.
19 So shall they fear the name of the Lord from the west,
And his glory from the rising of the sun.
When the enemy shall come in like a flood,
The spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him.
20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion,
And unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord.21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord;My spirit that is upon thee,
And my words which I have put in thy mouth,
Shall not depart out of thy mouth,
Nor out of the mouth of thy seed,
Nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the Lord,From henceforth and forever.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_59:18. λְּ ?ςμ...λְּ ?ςַ ?μ (comp. Isaiah 63:7) is a mixture of preposition and adverb, and in the context a confusio duarum constructionum. That is to say, the two modes of expression are mixed up, viz., λִּ ?βְ ?ξֻ ?μεֹ ?ϊλֵּ ?οιְ ?ωַׁ ?μֵּ ?ν (instead of λִּ ?βְ ?ξֻ ?μεֹ ?ϊλְּ ?ωִׁ ?μֻ ?ν, because, may be, the substantives from ωָׁ ?μֵ ?ν that mean retributio, ωִׁ ?μּ ?εּ ?ξָ ?δ ,ωִׁ ?μֻּ ?ν ,ωׁ ?μֵּ ?ν ,ωֶׁ ?ΰֶ ?ν are all of them very rarely used) and ςַ ?μΞβְ ?ξֻ ?μεֹ ?ϊιְ ?ωׁ ?μֵּ ?ν.
Isaiah 59:19. ιִ ? ?ֽ ?ψְ ?ΰεּ and not ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰεּ as Knobel would have. For although the latter = videbunt would also give a good meaning, still the former is the critically approved reading. See Delitzsch.—The words ψεηιΧπερρδπε recall Isaiah 40:7, where it reads ψεηιΧπωׁ ?αδαε. Evidently these words hovered before the Prophet. Bat there vegetation is spoken of, which the breath of the Lord (conceived of as a hot wind) dries up. Here it speaks of a stream which the breath of the Lord does not dry up, but can only drive onwards.
Hence the Prophet must choose another word than πωׁ ?αδ. But he would choose one of like sound, for which περρδ offered. This Pilel from πεּ ?ν does not elsewhere occur, indeed. But neither does the would-be Poel formed from πֵ ?ν occur. There is only a Hithp. δִ ?ϊְ ?πεֹ ?ρֵ ?ν (Zechariah 9:16; Psalms 60:6, passages that themselves present great difficulty). But this Prophet, so mighty in language, could and dared to form a Pilel πεֹ ?ρֵ ?ν and in taking it in a causative sense (=to produce flight, haste), and making αεֹ dependent on it, he proceeds quite in the spirit of the Hebrew language.—It seems to me beyond doubt that φַ ?ψ (in pause φָ ?ψ) is to be taken as=coarctatus.
But it is not to be derived from φεּ ?ψ (“onpressing stream,” Ewald, Knobel, Seinecke, Rohling) but from φָ ?ψַ ?ψ. There are in Hebrew many verbs in which the transitive and intransitive force are still together unseparated. φψψ is one of them. Comp. φַ ?ψμִ ?ι Psalms 31:10. etc.; ξָ ?χεֹ ?νφַ ?ψ Numbers 22:26; Isaiah 49:20 : λֹּ ?ηַ φַ ?ψ Proverbs 24:10, etc.—Against the explanation of λַּ ?πָּ ?δָ ?ψφַ ?ψ that, with Gesenius, Maurer, Umbreit, Delitzsch, I hold to be correct, it may be objected from a grammatical point of view, that the disjunctive Pashta on πָ ?δָ ?ψ calls for a substantive meaning for φַ ?ψ, and that φψ as an attribute of δπδψ must also have the article. But the accent is only the Masoretic construction, and the omission of the article forms no very rare exception, which appears to me to be prompted in cases where the subject is rendered definite already by the comparison (comp., e.g., Isaiah 11:9).
Isaiah 59:21. The use of ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν for ΰִ ?ϊָּ ?ν, which we find in Jeremiah very much developed, is in Isaiah still in its beginnings. For in him both forms occur harshly together: Isaiah 54:15.
AND 1. The Lord can only reply to Israel’s sincere confession of sin by the assurance of His grace. Therefore the Prophet declares that the Lord recognizes the complaint, that its right (Isaiah 59:9) has escaped from it, to be well founded (ver.15b, 16a), and that He has prepared to help them to it. Therefore recompense will be given to the enemies of Israel (Isaiah 59:18). East and west shall be witnesses of the mighty displays of Jehovah’s power, when He will come on like a stream that bursts its dams and is driven by a tempest beside, in order to bring deliverance to penitent Israel (Isaiah 59:19-20). This promise of outward manifestation of salvation is followed by another more inward, and also comforting and encouraging for the Prophet himself, that the covenant of the Lord with Israel will be realized by the spirit that the Lord has laid on the Prophet continuing to operate forever in Israel.(Isaiah 59:21).
2. And the Lord saw it—saith the Lord.Isaiah 59:15 b–20. According to the prospect the Prophet held out, Isaiah 58:9, so it comes to pass. There it says: if Israel will bring proper fruits of repentance, then it will call and the Lord will answer it; it will cry, and the Lord will say: here am I. In Isaiah 59:12-15 a Israel has made so hearty a confession, that the fruits of repentance demanded, Isaiah 58:6 sqq., are to be expected with certainty. Instantly the Lord hears, and now also actually answers.
He investigates the situation and owns with displeasure (ιψςαςΧ, comp. Genesis 21:11, etc., only here in Isa.) that Israel really has not its theocratic right. ξωׁ ?τθ Isaiah 59:15 b is thus to be construed as in Isaiah 59:9. Moreover, the Lord sees with dismay (ιωׁ ?ϊεξν, comp. Isaiah 63:5) that no one is there. To the expression, ΰιοΰιωׁ, corresponds in parallism ΰιοξτπις. The former must therefore have a meaning analogous to and preparatory for the latter.
We must therefore supply after ΰιωׁ the thought: “who is able to mediate such a thing, to bring it to rights”. Comp. Isaiah 41:28; Isaiah 63:5. ξτπις is intercessor, comp. Isaiah 53:12; Isaiah 47:3.
Upon the knowledge of what is wanting follows instantly the actual intervention. It is successful, for the arm of the LORD (symbol of His omnipotence, Isaiah 33:2; Isaiah 40:10; Isaiah 48:14, see List) affords him help, and the sure support of His purpose is the righteousness of his cause and of His will. Isaiah 59:16 b is related to what follows. as a summary statement of the contents. Isaiah 59:17 follows with specification in figurative expressions. Here Jehovah is portrayed arousing the several attributes and activities He needs in order to help His people to their right; and the awaking of the powers resident in Him is represented by the figure of His laying on the several pieces of military equipment. Comp. the application of our passage in Ephesians 6:14; Ephesians 6:17, and the Doct. and Eth., p. 644, § 10.
Thus the righteousness just designated as the guaranty of success is compared to the coat of mail from which all darts of the enemy rebound. ωִׁ ?ψְ ?ιָ ?ο only here in lsa.; comp. 1 Kings 22:34; 2 Chronicles 18:33. The helmet, the defensive armor, that protects the head, the noblest and most prominent part of the body, guarantees therefore very properly the chief concern: deliverance, salvation, victory (ιְ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?ςַ ?δ, comp. Habakkuk 3:8). The garments must denote that He means vengeance, and the ξְ ?ςִ ?ιμ (the long, woolen under garment, comp. Isaiah 61:10) must represent the deep earnestness, the glowing zeal that animates Him. Isaiah 59:18.
Thus equipped, the Lord advances to the conflict. The object of it is righteous recompense to the enemies of Israel. The rage with which they have oppressed Israel, in general all that they have done to it (βְּ ?ξεּ ?μ, vocab. anceps, comp. Isaiah 3:11; Isaiah 66:6) shall be recompensed to them, especially to “the isles”, the representatives of the heathen world. But they will fear the name of the LORD,i.e., His appearance, revelation, in the west and his glory in the east. ξִ ?ο before ξςψα and ξζψη of course designates to the Hebrew way of speaking the terminus a quo, whereas we must, in our manner of representing it, substitute the term. in quo. For the Hebrew would not say that they will fear the Lord from east and west hither, as if the appearance of the Lord were to be regarded as standing in the middle between east and west.
But the Prophet stands in the middle, and he would only say that both those that present themselves to him from the east and those that meet his gaze from the west, from whatever side they come, will fear the Lord. On this well-known Hebrew mode of expression comp. Isaiah 17:13; Isaiah 22:3; Isaiah 40:15, etc. The expression, “fear the name of the Lord,” is found, Deuteronomy 28:58, and on the ground of that passage in Psalms 86:11; Nehemiah 1:11; probably also Micah 6:5, where ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰָ ?δωְׁ ?ξֶ ?κָ is to be read, instead of ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰֶ ?δωׁ ?Χ; then, too, Psalms 102:16, which is evidently a citation of our text, and confirms the reading ιִ ? ?ֽ ?ψְ ?ΰεּ; and Psalms 61:6; Mal. 3:20.—And how should not the heathen fear the name of the Lord, seeing He comes as a compressed river! (On φψ see Text and Gram). What better image could the Prophet use to signify Jehovah’s might, that for a time restrained itself to the point of apparent injustice toward Israel, only to break forth with the greater energy? He compares it to a stream which the dikes for a while crowd together, but which, when it makes a crevasse in the dikes, breaks away with so much the greater power, and irresistibly carries all before it, especially when its own weight is augmented by a driving wind.
In this he expresses the thought that also underlies Isaiah 40:7, that the Spirit of the Lord, that also in the wind has one of its forms of manifestation, will exercise the activity suited to it, at the destruction of the world, as it did at the creation (Genesis 1:2; comp. Isaiah 4:4; Isaiah 28:6).—In Isaiah 59:20 the distinction between “Zion” and “the converted in Jacob” is due to the parallelism, and therefore we must not attach to this merely rhetorical distinction the weight of a logical distinction. On ωׁ ?αιλּ ?ωׁ ?ς comp. Isaiah 1:7; Isaiah 1:27; Isaiah 5:13; Isaiah 28:1.
3. As for me—forever, Isaiah 59:21. When we compare chap, 58. with 60, we find in the former a very prosaic, practical, severe homily, which can only have been made for a (relative or absolute) present occasion. But in chap. 60. we again find the Prophet in a lofty flight, announcing the remote future. Chap. 59. forms the bridge to this in the manner designated above (comp. also in Doct. and Ethic., p. 644, § 11) When now 59. concludes with a declaration that promises to the Prophet the continuance of the charismatic gifts of the Spirit heretofore imparted to him, we will be right in regarding this declaration of our verse as the direct transition to the loftier style of prophecy that again begins in chap. 60. Still, of course, Isaiah 59:21 cannot be referred only to this assurance given to the Prophet; for the sound of the words of the verse shows that the Lord at the game time would crown the promise given to the people Israel from Isaiah 59:15 a and on.
Thus this verse has a double character. This appears from the plural suffix in ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν on the one hand, and on the other from the address to the Prophet. At the same time it is to be remarked, that Isaiah 59:21, in relation to what precedes, has a positive and inward character. Positive, because nothing more is said of the evil to be done to the enemies, but only the good to be to Israel is spoken of; inward, because what is said is not concerning victory and outward salvation, but concerning inward impartation of the Spirit. εΰπι is not=but I. For nothing is said before of what another would have done. Therefore it means “and I,” but the emphasis is on the “I,” and this is made prominent because something is to be promised that only God can do.
At the same time there is in these words a reminder of the words spoken to Abraham, Genesis 17:4 : “As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee.” But the covenant that the Lord here holds up to view is no longer one that promises great increase by means of a numerous posterity, as in that covenant with Abraham. This new covenant refers to the spiritual life, to a new spiritual communion with the Lord, to the worship of God in spirit and in truth.
One would not comprehend in what follows why the Lord does not say directly: I will put my Spirit upon them, etc., but says: My Spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth (Isaiah 51:16), shall not depart out of thy mouth, etc., if there were not just that double object indicated above. But would the Lord have promised to the Prophet so numerous a posterity, would he have declared the prophetic gift to be a matter of inheritance in his family? Certainly not. In contrast with Genesis 17:4 sqq., that also has much to say of “a seed after thee,” but only in the sense of a numerous corporeal posterity, it is here promised to the Prophet that he should have many spiritual descendants; that therefore Israel, to the remotest generations, shall be a people filled with the Spirit, and people of God in the most exalted sense. The spirit-replenished posterity of the Prophet, and of the people Israel, generally merge together in one. From chap. 60. onwards it is evidenced at once that the Prophet has become no mere preacher of repentance, as might seem to be the case from chapts. 52, 53, 59. 1–8, but that the high prophetic gift is still in him that is able to behold with enraptured eye the glory of the remote future, and to proclaim it with eloquent tongue.
[On Isaiah 59:21 Delitzsch says: “The following prophecy is addressed to Israel, the ‘servant of Jehovah,’ which has been hitherto partially faithful and partially unfaithful, but which has now returned to fidelity, viz., the ‘remnant of Israel,’ which has been rescued through the medium of a general judgment upon the nations, and to which the great body of all who fear God, from east to west, attach themselves.” Clark’sFor. Th.L. J. A. Alexander interprets it in the same way. He says: “The only natural antecedent of the pronoun them is the converts of apostacy in Jacob, to whom the promise in Isaiah 59:20 is limited.
These, then, are suddenly addressed, or rather the discourse is turned to Israel himself as the progenitor, or as the ideal representative of his descendants, not considered merely as a nation, but as a church, and therefore including proselytes as well as natives, Gentiles as well as Jews, nay, believing Gentiles to the exclusion of the unbelieving Jews. This idea of the Israel of God, and of the prophecies, is too clearly stated in the Epistle to the Romans to be misapprehended or denied by any who admit the authority of the apostle. This interpretation is moreover not a mere incidental application of Old Testament expressions to another subject, but a protracted and repeated exposition of the mutual relations of the old and new economy, and of the natural and spiritual Israel. To this great body, considered as the Israel of God, the promise now before us is addressed, a promise of continued spiritual influence, exerted through the word and giving it effect. The phrase upon thee, here as elsewhere, implies influence from above, and has respect to the figure of the Spirit’s descending and abiding on the object. The particular mention of the mouth cannot be explained as having reference merely to the reception of the word, in which case the ear would have been more appropriate.
The true explanation seems to be that Israel is here, as in many other parts of this great prophecy, regarded not merely as a receiver, but as a dispenser of the truth.” The Author’s effort to include a personal address to the Prophet as well as to the spiritual Israel seems to have no more valuable effect than to prepare a transition to the lofty prophetic flight that begins with chap. 60. We can better dispense with the transition than accept the ideas brought in by that interpretation.—Tr.]
Footnotes:Heb. it was evil in his eyes.was horrified.coat of mail.Heb. recompences.For he will come asapent up stream, which the breath of Jehovah drives.Or, put him to flight.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 58:2-3. There are also to-day many men that hold up their good works to God (Luke 18:11 sqq.), and who, out aloud or silently, reproach Him for not adequately rewarding them for them. But one can distinguish here two classes: those that boast of having done works of undoubted moral worth; and such as found their pretensions essentially on works that are morally indifferent, as ceremonies of worship and the like. Of course there is a difference between these, for the former can, under some circumstances, really deserve praise; whereas the latter under all circumstances accomplish something more or less morally worthless, yea, possibly, as miserable hypocrites, directly provoke the wrath of God. But never has the creature the right to accuse God.
It may be debated whether such accusation is more folly or wickedness. It is tinder all circumstances a presumptuous judgment. For, as long as we live, results are not assured, and we lack ability to see all. Only the day will make it clear what is the relation between God’s doing and ours, and that He has not let the just recompense be wanting (Isaiah 1:18; Isaiah 43:26).
2. On Isaiah 58:4 sqq. The Prophet finds fault with the fasting of the Jews in two respects. First, because they combined them with works of unrighteousness. Second, because they held the “bodily exercise” to be the chief thing. Perhaps in the Sermon on the mount our Lord had our text in mind when He said: “When ye fast, be not as the hypocrites of a sad countenance.” Matthew 6:11.
He makes prominent one particular that probably hovered before our Prophet also. For it is possible that he saw in the “hanging the head” an artificial, affected, and so hypocritical expression of a piety that did not exist inwardly; although it is not absolutely necessary that this letting the head hang and making one’s bed in sand and ashes took place with hypocritical intent. But our Lord expressly demands that one do not let appear the harassed, sickly look, that was the perhaps quite natural consequence of fasting. He says (Matthew 6:17): “but thou, when thou fastest, anoint thy head and wash thy face, that thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father, which is in secret.” One sees, therefore, that in the Sermon on the mount the Lord by no means rejects corporeal fasting. He only shows abhorrence of men’s hypocritically abusing fasting for the gratification of pride. But the Prophet also does not reject fasting.
But he would have corporeal fasting be the faithful expression of a simultaneous moral doing of penitent self-denial and compassionating love.
3. On Isaiah 58:6-9. As the apostle James pressingly urges against dead works, that even Abraham’s faith was in itself a grand moral act, so here, too, the Prophet insists on right works as opposed to false works. But neither declares essentially anything concerning the true ground and origin of the works that they mean, because the context of their discourses does not call for it. We are to supply this from passages that professedly speak to this point, which they silently take for granted, according to the measure of intelligence given to them. For even Isaiah knows right well that that which satisfies and strengthens is not to be obtained by one’s own labor and effort (55).
4. On Isaiah 58:7. “Flesh denotes here in this context something more still, which J. von Mueller has remarked: “The remembrance of universal brotherhood, and how we are all exposed to like things”—as ἅνθρωποιὁμοιοπαθεῖς. Verily flesh has need of covering. When therefore thou seest the naked, then see and feel therein the need of thine own flesh, and do not, proudly selfish, conceal or cover only thyself with thy garment that belongs to the other as also being thy flesh.” Stier.5. On Isaiah 58:7. Concerning the expression λָּ ?ψֹ ?νμֶ ?ηֶ ?ν see Doctrinal and Ethical on Jeremiah 16:7.
6. [On Isaiah 58:13-14. “From the closing portion of this chapter we may derive the following important inferences respecting the Sabbath. (1) It is to be of perpetual obligation. The whole chapter occurs in the midst of statements that relate to the times of the Messiah. There is no intimation that the Sabbath was to be abolished, but it is fairly implied that its observance was to be attended with most happy results in those future times.... (2) We may see the manner in which the Sabbath is to be observed. In no place in the Bible is there a more full account of the proper mode of keeping that holy day. We are to refrain from ordinary travelling and employments; we are not to engage in doing our own pleasure; we are to regard it with delight, and to esteem it a day worthy to be honored. And we are to show respect to it by not performing our own ordinary works, or pursuing pleasures, or engaging in the common topics of conversation.
In this description there occurs nothing of peculiar Jewish ceremony, and nothing which indicates that it is not to be observed in this manner at all times. Under the gospel assuredly, it is as proper to celebrate the Sabbath in this way as it was in the times of Isaiah, and God doubtless intended that it should be perpetually observed in this manner. (3) Important benefits result from the right observance of the Sabbath. In the passage before us these are said to be, that they who thus observed it would find pleasure in Jehovah, and would be signally prospered and be safe. But those benefits are by no means confined to the Jewish people. It is as true now as it was then, and they who observe the Sabbath in a proper manner find happiness in the Lord—in His existence, perfections, promises, law, and in communion with Him—which is to be found no where else... And it is as true that the proper observance of the Sabbath contributes to the prosperity and safety of a nation now as it ever did among the Jewish people.
It is not merely from the fact that God promises to bless the people who keep His holy day—though this is of more value to a nation than all its armies and fleets; but it is that there is in the institution itself much that tends to the welfare and prosperity of a country.... Any one may be convinced of this who will be at the pains to compare a neighborhood, a village, or a city where the Sabbath is not observed with one where it is; and the difference will convince him at once that society owes more to the Sabbath than to any single institution beside.” Barnes.]
7. On Isaiah 59:2. “Quia quotidie apud nos crescit culpa, cur non et simul crescat poena?” Augustine. “The public sins are compared to a thick cloud, that sets itself between heaven and earth, and as it were hinders prayers from passing through (Lamentations 3:44).” Starke. “There is great power in sin, for it separates God and us from one another.” Cramer. “There are times when the hand of the Lord lies long and heavy on His children. One feels that God has withdrawn from him and hidden His countenance. But one does not sufficiently investigate the cause. One seeks it in God, and it lies in us, who, by sins unacknowledged and not repented of, make it impossible to God to turn to us in grace.” Weber.8. On Isaiah 59:3-8.
The register of sins that Isaiah here holds up to the Jews is a mirror in which many a Christian, many a nation, many a time may recognize its own image. The Prophet declares here very plainly the poison nature, the serpent origin of sin. Sin is the poison that the old serpent knew how to bring into our nature. He that has stolen a taste of a product of this poison, as Eve did of the tree of knowledge, supposing that he will thereby receive some good, will go to ruin by it. But he that would be no lover of sin, but would stand forth as its opponent, may count upon it that the reptile will press its malignant fang in his heel, as was even held in prospect to the great trampler of the serpent’s head Himself (Genesis 3:15).
9. On Isaiah 59:9-15 a. Here is for once an honest and thorough confession of sins. Nothing is palliated here, nothing excused. It is freely confessed that Israel is itself to blame for all its wretchedness, and this guilt is acknowledged to be the consequence of the apostacy from Jehovah and of the workings of a depraved heart, whose malignant fruits have become manifest in words and works. Comp. Jeremiah 3:21 sqq.—Here therefore is given a model for all who would know wherein true repentance must consist.
10. On Isaiah 59:15 b sqq. “Si tu recordaberis peccatorum tuorum, Dominus non recordabitur.” Augustine. “God wonders that men let sin become so great and His righteousness so small.” Oetinger in Stier.—It is a divine privilege to need no helper. With God there is no difference between willing and being able. With Him the being able follows the willing ad nutum. And there is nothing to which God, when He wills, has not also the right. We men, when we have the will and the power, are often without the right, and this takes the foundation from under our feet.
Isaiah 59:17. This is the original source of the Apostle Paul’s extended description of the spiritual armor, Ephesians 6:14; Ephesians 6:17. Also in 1 Thessalonians 5:8 there underlies the same representation of the equipment required by Christians. On the other hand God is conceived of as an equipped warrior, e.g., Psalms 7:13-14; Psalms 35:2-3. In Exodus 15:4 He is directly called “a man of war.”
11. On Isaiah 59:18-20. Regarding the time of the fulfilment of this prophecy, the honorable and thorough confession of sin in Isaiah 59:9-15 a, assumes the conclusion of the judgments against Israel and the conversion of the Gentiles. So Paul understood our passage, who cites it, Romans 11:26, to prove that only then will the Jews partake of the salvation when the fulness of the Gentiles shall have come in. Therefore the Prophet distinguishes three great periods of time. The first comprehends all the stages of time in which Israel will be impenitent, and hence deprived of its theocratic rights.
This period will conclude with a condition wherein Israel’s scale, as too light, hurries upwards to the highest elevation, while the scale of the Gentiles, by reason of its weight, will sink deep down. Just this situation will bring about the turning of the scale. Israel will repent; but those Gentiles and those Israelites that will not have repented will be overtaken by the judgment (Isaiah 59:18; Isaiah 59:20 ωׁ ?αιλωׁ ?ςαιςχα). For neither the “fulness of the Gentiles,” nor “all Israel” excludes there being still unconverted Gentiles and Jews. The third period is then the period of salvation, when the Goel [“Redeemer”] will come to Zion and raise up the covenant (Isaiah 59:21).
12. On Isaiah 59:21 “Does the Spirit of God remain, then does also His word; does the word remain, then preachers also remain; do preachers remain, then also hearers do; do hearers remain, then there remain also believers, and therefore the Christian church remains also, to which ever some still will be gathered out of the Jews (Romans 11:26).”—“Although in general God has promised that His word and Spirit shall not depart from the church of God, still no one must become so secure about that (comp. Jeremiah 18:18) as if it were impossible that this or that particular church (and even the Romish church is nothing more) could err.” Cramer. HINTS1. On Isaiah 58:1. Penitential Sermon. The text teaches us two things: 1) What one ought to preach on a day of repentance [fast-day]; viz., hold up to the people their sins. 2) How one should preach: a. boldly, b. without sparing, loud as a trumpet.
2. On Isaiah 58:2-9 This text contains the outlines of a popular theodicy. First we hear, Isaiah 58:2-3 a, the popular complaint that the divine Providence that guides the affairs of the world is unjust, and that He is not fair to the claims of reward that each individual fancies he has. Then in Isaiah 58:3 b–9, we hear the divine justification. It consists of two parts. In the first part God shows that the claims of men are unfounded in two respects.
First for this reason, because they do not do good purely, but along with the good have still room in their hearts for evil, consequently imagine that they can serve two masters (Isaiah 58:3 a., 4). Second, their claims are unfounded, because founded in the illusion that it is sufficient to fulfil the divine commands in a rude, outward manner. Thus men suppose, e.g., that they can satisfy the divine command to fast by harassing the body by hunger, and lying on sack-cloth and ashes (Isaiah 58:5). In the second part God shows what must be the nature of the performances that would satisfy the demand of His holiness, and give a claim on His righteousness for reward. That is to say, men must first of all, by practical repentance, make restoration for all injustice done by them, and make manifest by works of mercy their love to God and their neighbor (Isaiah 58:7). Then divine salvation and divine blessing will be constantly with them, and in every necessity their prayer for help will find certain hearing (Isaiah 58:8-9 a).
3. [On Isaiah 58:3. “Having gone about to put a cheat on God by their external services, here they go about to pick a quarrel with God for not being pleased with their services, as if He had not done justly or fairly by them.” M. Henry.]
4. [On Isaiah 58:4. “Behold, you fast for strife and debate. When they proclaimed a fast to deprecate God’s judgments, they pretended to search for those sins that provoked God to threaten them with His judgments, and under that pretence, perhaps, particular persons were falsely accused, as Naboth in the day of Jezebel’s fast, 1 Kings 21:12. Or the contending parties among them upon those occasions were bitter and severe in their reflections one upon another, one side crying out, ‘It is owing to you,’ and the other, “It is owing to you, that our deliverance is not wrought.’ Thus, instead of judging themselves, which is the proper work of a fast-day, they condemned one another.” M. Henry.]
5. [On Isaiah 58:5; Isaiah 58:7. “Plain instructions given concerning the true nature of a religious fast. 1. In general a fast is intended: (1) For the honoring and pleasing of God (Isaiah 58:5, a fast that I have chosen, an acceptable day to the Lord). (2) For the humbling and abasing of ourselves, Leviticus 16:29. That must be done on a fast-day which is a real affliction to the soul, as far as it is unregenerate and unsanctified, though a real pleasure and advantage to the soul as far as it is itself. II. What will be acceptable to God and afflict our corrupt nature to its mortification. (1) Negatively, what does neither of these, a. To look demure, put on a melancholy aspect and bow the head like a bulrush, Matthew 6:16.
Though that were well enough so far, Luke 18:13. b. It is not enough to mortify the body a little, while the body of sin is untouched. (2) Positively, a. That we be just to those with whom we have dealt hardly (Isaiah 58:6). b. That we be charitable to those that stand in need of charity (Isaiah 58:7).” After M. Henry.]
6. On Isaiah 58:7. The compassionate love of the Samaritan. 1) What does it give? a. food, b. housing, c. clothing. 2) To whom does it give? To its flesh, i. e., to its neighbor in the sense of Luk 10:29 sqq.
7. On Isaiah 58:9. “What if the Lord were to make us priests, and if He were to give us the light and righteousness that Aaron bore on his heart as often as he went in unto the Lord, and by which the Lord gave him answer when He inquired,—if He were to give all of us that in our hearts, who are priests of the new covenant? And assuredly I believe that He will also do this. What He has already promised by the Prophets, He will much more fulfil in us: Thou shalt call, and the Lord shall answer thee; when thou shalt cry, He will say: here I am.” Tholuck.8. On Isaiah 58:7-9. “O God, our great, sore, horrible blindness, that we so disregard such a glorious promise! To whom are we harsh, when we do not help poor people?
Are they not our flesh and blood? As in heaven and earth there is no creature so nearly related to us, it ought to be our way: what we would that men should do to us in like case, that let us do to others. But there that detestable Satan holds our eyes, so that we withdraw from our own flesh and become tyrants and blood-hounds to our neighbors. But what do we accomplish by that? What do we enjoy? We load ourselves with God’s disfavor, curse and all misfortune, who might otherwise have temporal and eternal blessing.
For he that takes on him the distress of his neighbor, his light shall break forth like the morning dawn, i.e., he shall find consolation and help in time of need. His recovery shall progress rapidly, i.e., God will again bless him, and replace what he has given away. His righteousness shall go before him, i.e., he shall not only have a good name with every one, but God will shelter him from evil, and ward off from him temporal misfortune, as one may see that God wonderfully protects His own when common punishments go about. And the glory of the Lord will take him to itself, i. e., God will interest Himself for him, [as follows Isaiah 58:9]. Lo, of such great mercy as this does greed rob us, when we do not gladly and kindly help the poor!” Veit Dietrich.
9. [On Isaiah 58:12. Thou shalt be called (and it shall be to thy honor) the repairer of the breach, the breach made by the enemy in the wall of a besieged city, which whoso has courage and dexterity to make up, or make good, gains great applause. Happy are those who make up the breach at which virtue is running out, and judgments are breaking in. M. Henry].
10. On Isaiah 59:1-2. It is often in human life as if heaven were shut up. No prayer seems to penetrate through to it. To all our cries, no answer. Then people murmur (Isaiah 8:21 sq.; Lamentations 3:39) and accuse God, as if He were lame or deaf.
But they ought rather to seek the blame in themselves. There still exists a wall of partition between them and God, a guilt unatoned for, the sight of which still continuously provokes the anger of God, and hinders the appearance of His mercy (Isaiah 1:15 sqq.; Isaiah 64:5 sqq.; Daniel 9:5 sqq.: Proverbs 1:24 sqq.). Hence Christians must be pointed to what they must guard against in seasons of long-continued visitation and what they should strive after at such times before all things. As they would avoid great harm to soul and body, they must beware of laying any blame on God, as if He were wanting in willingness or ability. Rather, by sincere repentance, their endeavor should be that heaven may be pure and clear, that their guilt may be forgiven for Christ’s sake, and that, as children of God, with the testimony of the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:16) in their hearts, they may have free access to the heart of their heavenly Father.
11. On Isaiah 59:3-8. The description the Prophet gives here of the depraved moral condition of Israel is also a description of human sinfulness generally. And the Apostle Paul has adopted parts of it in the portrait he gives of the condition of the natural man (comp. Isaiah 59:7 with Romans 3:15). Therefore, where one would draw the picture of the natural man, he may make good use of this text.
12. [On Isaiah 59:13. Conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood. “They were words of falsehood, and yet they were said to be uttered from the heart, because though they differed from the real sentiments of the heart, and therefore were words of falsehood, yet they agreed with the malice and wickedness of the heart, and were the natural language of that; it was a double heart, Psalms 12:2.” M. Henry.]
13. On Isaiah 59:15 b–21. One may preach on this text in times of great distress and conflict for the Church. The Lord the protection of His Church. 1) The distress of the Church does not remain concealed from Him, for He sees: a. that the Church encounters injustice (Isaiah 59:15 b), b. that no one on earth takes its part (Isaiah 59:16) 2) He stirs Himself (Isaiah 59:16 b; Isaiah 59:17 a, Isaiah 59:19 b): a. to judgment against the enemy (Isaiah 59:17 b, Isaiah 59:18), b. to salvation for the Church (Isaiah 59:17 helmet of salvation): a. with reference to its deliverance from outward distress (Isaiah 59:20), β. with reference to inward preservation and quickening of the Church (Isaiah 59:20 b, 21), c. to rescue the honor of His own name (Isaiah 59:19 a), because the Church is even His kingdom, the theatre for the realization of His decrees of salvation. Comp. Homil. Hints on Isaiah 49:1-6.
14. [On Isaiah 59:16 sqq. “How sin abounded we have read, to our great amazement, in the former part of the chapter; how grace does much more abound we read in these verses. And as sin took occasion from the commandment to become more exceedingly sinful, so grace took occasion from the transgression to appear more exceedingly gracious.” M. Henry.]
II.—THE SECOND The Rising of the heavenly Sun of life upon Jerusalem, and the new personal and natural life conditioned therebyIsaiah 60The Prophet has returned from speaking of the present to treat of the last things. He sees a new Sun, the principle of new life, rise upon Jerusalem. Although this future, too, is depicted in colors belonging to the present time, yet we perceive from the matters which he specifies, that his discourse relates to the distant future. And, although the Prophet does not distinguish the times, we see that the fulfilment will take place gradually. We observe in respect to the influence of the Sun, which, according to Isaiah 60:1-2, is to rise upon Jerusalem, and advance from a glory which is more of a natural character to one which is more supernatural and heavenly. The chapter, however, does not divide itself into two, but into three sections, of which the first (Isaiah 60:1-9) has for its subject the gathering of all nations to the sun that rises upon Jerusalem; the second (Isaiah 60:10-17 a), the restoration of Jerusalem to outward glory; the third (Isaiah 60:17 b–22), this new life in its relation to God, and in its moral and spiritual manifestation. [We do not like such a division of this grand prophetic picture.
Its parts cannot well be thus separated.—D. M.].
____________________
1. THE OF THE NATIONS TO THE SUN THAT RISES UPON . . Isaiah 60:1–9 1Arise, shine; for thy light is come;
And the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee.
2 For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth,
And gross darkness the people:
And the Lord shall arise upon thee,
And his glory shall be seen upon thee.
3 And the Gentiles shall come to thy light,
And kings to the brightness of thy rising.
4 Lift up thine eyes round about, and see:
All they gather themselves together, they come to thee:
Thy sons shall come from far,
And thy daughters shall be nursed at thy side.
5 5 Then thou shalt see, and flow together,
And thine heart shall fear, and be enlarged;
Because the abundance of the sea shall be converted unto thee;
The forces of the Gentiles shall come unto thee.
6 The multitude of camels shall cover thee,
The dromedaries of Midian and Ephah;
All they from Sheba shall come:
They shall bring gold and incense;
And they shall shew forth the praises of the Lord.7 All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered together unto thee,
The rams of Nebaioth shall minister unto thee:
They shall come up with acceptance on mine altar,
And I will glorify the house of my glory.
8 Who are these that fly as a cloud,
And as the doves to their windows?
9 Surely the isles shall wait for me,
And the ships of Tarshish first,
To bring thy sons from far,
Their silver and their gold with them,
Unto the name of the Lord thy God,
And to the Holy One of Israel, because he hath glorified thee.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_60:1, Delitzsch justly bids us mark that χεξιΰεψι are Trochees, and λιΞαΰΰεψκ are lambuses. Observe the change of vowels. All the Hebrew vowels are found in these five words in correspondence with the fulness of thoughts which these few words contain. How admirably is the language adapted to the subject! Does not this betoken that master of speech, Isaiah? [“What power of creative might lies in these two Trochees, Kumi, ori, which are, as it were, prolonged till what they say is done; and what a power of consolation lies in the two Lambuses ki-ba orech, which, as it were, stamp upon the action of Zion the seal of the divine action, and fit to the ἅρσις (raising up) its θἐσις (foundation)! Delitzsch.—D. M.].
Isaiah 60:3. ζֶ ?ψַ ?η, ortus, is ἅπ. λεγ. as an appellative. As a proper name it is of frequent occurrence.
Isaiah 60:4. ϊֵּ ?ΰָ ?ξַֽ ?πָ ?δ. Observe that the nun has no dagesh forte. (Comp. Naegelsbach’s Gr. §§ 5, 6).
Isaiah 60:7. [“The verbal form ιְ ?ωָֽׁ ?ψְ ?ϊεּ ?πֶ ?κְ which is repeated in Isaiah 60:10, has an abbreviated suffix without the tone, as Isaiah 47:10.” Delitzsch].
Isaiah 60:9. τֵ ?ΰֲ ?ψָ ?κְ, with a rarer suffix form for τֵ ?ΰֲ ?ψֵ ?κְ. See a like form in Isaiah 54:6.
AND 1. The Prophet sees in the distant future the restoration of Jerusalem, and its exaltation to unparalleled, supermundane and everlasting glory. But he sees bonded together every thing that is in the future to produce this glory, from the first weak beginnings till the consummation in the heavenly Jerusalem. He sees at first night prevailing over the whole earth. But where Jerusalem is, he beholds a growing brightness as at the rising of the sun. He calls to Jerusalem to receive the glory which Jehovah is about to impart to her, and to let that glory unfold itself (Isaiah 60:1-2).
Then he sees how this light emanating from Jerusalem attracts the Gentiles and their kings (Isaiah 60:3). He sees further how together with the heathen (and we may say, even in the heathen), Jerusalem’s own children try to reach the mother city, and are aided in this effort by the heathen (Isaiah 60:4). With joy Jerusalem beholds these multitudes stream to her, and rejoices the more, that they come not with empty hands, but bring with them the choicest products of land and sea (Isaiah 60:5). Troops of camels will carry the gold and incense of the East (Isaiah 60:6); the flocks of the eastern nomadic lands will be acceptable as offerings on the altar of Jehovah (Isaiah 60:7). On the other hand, ships come from the distant West, laden with the precious things of lands beyond the seas, and are with their sails like to bright clouds, or doves on the wing (Isaiah 60:9). It is obvious that here again the Prophet draws the picture of the future with the colors of the present.
2. Arise, shine—come unto’ thee.
Isaiah 60:1-5. The image before the mind of the Prophet is a sunrise scene. Far and wide night still reigns, but grandly above all other heights of the earth towers mount Zion, which here, in accordance with Isaiah 2:2; Micah 4:1, appears as “established in the top of the mountains, and exalted above the hills.” And the Prophet beholds this highest mountain of the earth irradiated by the rising sun. Its summit glitters as if covered with celestial light. From this the Prophet knows that the dawn of the day of salvation for Jerusalem has arrived. He calls therefore to her encouragingly, χεּ ?ξι [“In Ephesians 5:14 this first verse is combined in a paraphrastic form with Isaiah 51:17; Isaiah 52:1, 2,” Kay].
Jerusalem has now to lift up her head, because her redemption is nigh (comp. Luke 21:28); she is to raise herself from the depression and prostration in which her situation has hitherto kept her. Jerusalem shall become light, shall shine (ΰεֹ ?ψִ ?ι, the verb ΰεֹ ?ψ in Isaiah only here, Isaiah 60:19; Isaiah 27:11). But she is not to shine in her own light, but to let herself be enlightened by the higher light which rises on her. But this light is called “thy light,” because Jerusalem and this light are adapted the one to the other. What sort of a light it is which shall rise upon Jerusalem, is told us in Isaiah 60:1 b.
It is the glory of Jehovah. This light shall rise as an everlasting sun upon Jerusalem (comp. Isaiah 60:20; ζָ ?ψַ ?η is vox solennis of the rising of the sun, and occurs in Isaiah besides here only Isaiah 60:2 and 58:20). In Isaiah 60:2 the explanation is given why the sunrise referred to in Isaiah 60:1 b is a matter of such great importance, and why Jerusalem is so pressingly summoned to yield herself to the influence of this rising sun [Rather to shed forth the light which she has received from it. D. M.].
Jerusalem has herein the highest honor conferred on her that the Sun first rises upon her, that she is that point in the East from which the light is to spread over the countries shrouded in darkness. [“The Sun of suns is Jahve (Psalms 84:12), the God who comes, Isaiah 59:20.... When this Sun rises on Zion she becomes altogether light, but not for herself alone, but for all mankind.” Delitzsch. D. M.]. ςֲ ?ψָ ?τֶ ?μ is found only here in Isaiah. We see from Isaiah 60:3 that the nations still in darkness are not inaccessible to the light. They have a longing for the light, [This is not said], and a susceptibility of receiving it.
Nations and princes come to the heavenly light. The brightness of thy rising is the brightness of that which rises upon Jerusalem, according to Isaiah 60:2, the brightness of Jehovah. [But Zion made light in the Lord is represented as herself shining as a light in the world. Her rising can be described as the brightness of the sun when he goeth forth in his might, Judges 5:31; 2 Samuel 23:4. To regard “the brightness of thy rising,” as meaning “the brightness of that which rises upon thee,” is surely forced and unnatural, albeit the best interpreters acquiesce in this explanation. But the church, as irradiated by the divine glory, and reflecting it, has a light and brightness which is called her own, and which she sheds upon the world.—D. M.].
Not only the nations and princes of the heathen world hasten to Jerusalem. Along with them are other visitants, who are no foreigners in Jerusalem, but are children of the house. The scattered members of the Israelitish kingdom, conducted and attended with all honors by the Gentiles, will return to the holy home (comp. Isaiah 11:11 sqq.; Isaiah 25:6 sqq.; Isaiah 26:2 sq.; Isaiah 27:13; Jeremiah 3:18, see commentary on this place). [“Those who confine these prophecies to the Babylonish exile understand this as describing the agency of heathen states and sovereigns in the restoration. But in this, as in the parallel passages [Isaiah 43:5–7; Isaiah 49:18–23], there is, by a strange coincidence, no word or phrase implying restoration or return, but the image evidently is that of enlargement and accession; the children thus brought to Zion being not those whom she had lost, but such as she had never before known, as is evident from Isaiah 49:21. The event predicted is therefore neither the former restoration of the Jews, nor their future restoration.” Alexander.
D. M.]. The words ver, 4a, are repeated from Isaiah 49:18. The gathering together (πχαφε) refers not only to separate individuals but according to places such as Isaiah 11:12; Hosea 2:2, [E. V. Hosea 1:11] it refers especially to the reunion of Judah with Israel.
Of the sons we are simply told that they come from a great distance, but the daughters are carefully carried. ςμΞφγ is not=on the side, i. e., on the one arm or on the one shoulder (Isaiah 49:22), but upon the hip; for it is still the custom in the Orient to carry the children astride on the hip. Such care as is bestowed on children, will be shown to the female members of the people (comp. Isaiah 66:12). ΰָ ?ξַ ?ο is here as Isaiah 49:23 after the place in Numbers 11:12, used to denote the nursing and tending of a child. But Jerusalem shall not only see her children come, she shall have the joy of seeing them come with full hands, furnished with all the magnificence and glory of the world. In Isaiah 60:5 the words εְ ?πָ ?δψְ ?ϊְּ to μְ ?αָ ?αֵ ?κְ are to be taken as a sentence denoting a circumstance, put as a parenthesis, which expresses the emotion with which Jerusalem will see what has been depicted. The sentence setting forth the object αιιδτκεβεΧ is, accordingly, dependent on ϊִּ ?ψְ ?ΰִ ?ι, which, therefore, cannot possibly come from ιָ ?ψֵ ?ΰ [But it is better, with the E.V., to take αι as causal.—D.
M.]. The verb πָ ?δַ ?ψ is not here that πָ ?δַ ?ψ which means “to stream” (Isaiah 2:2; Jeremiah 31:12; Jeremiah 51:44), and which comes from πָ ?δָ ?ψ, a river. But it is a different word, related to πεּ ?ψ, πֵ ?ψ occurring as a verb besides only Psalms 34:6, but forming the stem of the substantives πְ ?δָ ?ψָ ?δ (Job 3:4) and ξִ ?πְ ?δָ ?ψָ ?δ (Judges 6:2). The signification is to “shine,” “to brighten up” (for joy). Joy makes the face shine, but the heart tremble (τָ ?ηַ ?γ in this sense besides only Jeremiah 33:9). [Henderson renders this clause well: Thy heart shall throb and dilate. The idea of enlargement or expansion of the heart through joy is Semitic; but, as Delitzsch points out, we have the opposite idea in angor, angustia.—D.
M.]. The joy is called forth by Jerusalem seeing how the treasures of the sea (δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο as Psalms 37:16; Jeremiah 3:23 in the sense of swarm and abundance of the most manifold products, comp. also Isaiah 60:14), and the wealth of the nations come to her. [The abundance of the sea denotes all precious things which the islands and maritime countries possess.” Delitzsch. D. M.]. ςַ ?μ stands after ιδτκ in the sense of ΰֶ ?μ (comp. on Isaiah 10:3).
3. The multitude of camels—glorified thee.
Isaiah 60:6-9. [A multitude of camels, without the definite article]. In these verses the Prophet describes how the treasures of the East (Isaiah 60:6-7) and of the West (Isaiah 60:8-9) are brought to Jerusalem. The eastern trading nations are indicated by a multitude of camels (ωִׁ ?τְ ?ςָ ?δ, comp. ωֶׁ ?τַ ?ςDeuteronomy 33:19, in Isaiah only here) and young animals [αּ ?λψι not dromedaries, which are not for carrying burdens, but for riding.—D. M.], from Midian and Ephah, which bring from Sheba gold and incense, (comp. on Isaiah 43:23), the most valuable wares. Midian was a son of Abraham by Keturah, and the father of Ephah, Genesis 25:2; Genesis 25:4, comp. Genesis 37:28; Genesis 37:36; Judges 7 :ωְׁ ?αָ ?ΰ is Arabia felix (comp. 1 Kings 10:2; Jeremiah 6:20; Job 6:19; only here in Isaiah).
These merchants at other times sought gain; now they have a nobler aim. They wish to honor Jehovah; they bring Him presents. This they declare in songs of praise (both αִּ ?ωַׂ ?ψ and ϊְּ ?δִ ?μָּ ?δ are used by Isaiah only in chapters 40–66). The eastern pastoral tribes join the eastern trading tribes. Respecting Kedar comp. on Isaiah 21:16 sqq.; Isaiah 42:11. Kedar was the second, Nebaioth the eldest son of Ishmael, Genesis 25:13.
It is disputed whether Nebaioth is the progenitor of the Nabataei, i. e., of the northern or north western Arabs (for Nabataea is the whole country between the Euphrates and the Red Sea). Comp. Delitzsch on this place, and Herzog, R.-Encycl., 1, p. 598, 2d Ed. ωֵׁ ?ψֵ ?ϊ is a word which is often used of the ministry rendered by the priests to Jehovah (Numbers 18:2; Deuteronomy 17:12; 1 Samuel 2:11; 1 Samuel 3:1 et saepe). The flocks of Kedar and the rams of Nebaioth will therefore as ςεֹ ?μεֹ ?ϊ ascend the altar of Jehovah. [ςַ ?μΞψָ ?φεֹ ?ο is translated in E. V., and by Dr. Naegelsbach, with acceptance.
But it signifies rather with pleasure, delight or good will, and is to be distinguished from the expression elsewhere used μְ ?ψָ ?φεֹ ?ο which means to (the divine) acceptance, or with acceptance. So Vitringa, Hitzig, Henderson, Delitzsch. On this representation of the victims offering themselves willingly Lowth remarks: “This gives a very elegant and poetical turn to the image. It was a general notion, that prevailed with sacrificers among the heathen, that the victim’s being brought without reluctance to the altar was a good omen; and the contrary a bad one.”—D. M.]. The great number and excellence of these offerings will conduce to the honor of the temple of the Lord.
In Isaiah 60:8-9 the West appears upon the scene. They that like a cloud, or as doves to their enclosure skim over the sea, are ships with expanded sails. The sails spread out resemble a cloud, the velocity is compared with the swift flight of the dove (comp. Hosea 11:11. Bochart, Hieroz. 2. p. 540 sqq.). The feminine ending in ϊςετιπδ is caused by the feminine ΰְָ ?πִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ϊ. ΰֲ ?ψֻ ?αָּ ?δ is opus reticulatum, net, interwoven work.
The answer to the question, who are these, etc., is left to the reader. Every one perceives that it is ships that come from the west. But why those ships hasten with such speed to the holy land is explained in Isaiah 60:9. They are directed by inhabitants of the ΰִ ?ιִּ ?ιν, which here as often (see the List), represent the islands and maritime countries of the west. These people hope in Jehovah. Among those ships the foremost (αָּ ?ψִ ?ΰωֹׁ ?πָ ?δ comp.
Numbers 10:14; 1 Kings 20:17; 1 Chronicles 11:6) are the ships of Tarshish (comp. Isaiah 2:16; Isaiah 23:1, 14). These, which are the largest, and come from the greatest distance, shall also be the first to bring Jerusalem’s sons with their silver and gold to the place where the Lord makes known His name, i. e., reveals His nature, and is therefore honored as the Holy One of Israel (see the List). Jerusalem’s glorification is also thereby intended. [The picture drawn in this section perplexes those who understand it of the literal restoration of the Jews, and of the future glory of the earthly Jerusalem. Hess, Baumgarten and others argue from Isaiah 60:7 for the restoration of animal sacrifices. But Delitzsch justly rejects this notion as utterly contrary to the Christian system.
Animal sacrifice has been abolished by the Servant of Jehovah offering Himself once for all. The blood of the Crucified One has swept away the partition wall of particularism and of ceremonial shadows. But if the victims and the altar here spoken of are not to be taken literally, why should we look for a material temple or construe literally the other traits in the picture? The whole description represents not the material Jerusalem, but the Church of God under images, which, to be consistently interpreted, cannot be taken in a gross, literal sense. “We, Christians, are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God,” etc., Hebrews 12:22.—D. M.].
Footnotes:Or, be enlightened; for thy light cometh.a carried on the hip.brighten up.Or, noise of the sea shall be turned toward thee.Or, wealth.young camels.lattices.2. The Restoration of Jerusalem to Outward Glory
Isaiah 60:10–17 a10 And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls,
And their kings shall minister unto thee:
For in my wrath I smote thee,
But in my favor have I had mercy on thee.
11 Therefore thy gates shall be open continually;
They shall not be shut day nor night;
That men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles,
And that their kings may be brought.
12 For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish;
Yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.
13 The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee,
The fir tree, the pine tree, and the box together,
To beautify the place of my sanctuary;
And I will make the place of my feet glorious.
14 The sons also of them that afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee;
And all they that despised thee shall bow themselves down at the soles of thy feet;
And they shall call thee, The city of the Lord, the Zion of the Holy One of Israel.
15 Whereas thou hast been forsaken and hated,
So that no man went through thee,
I will make thee an eternal excellency,
A joy of many generations.
16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles,
And shalt suck the breast of kings:
And thou shalt know that I the Lord am thy Saviour,
And thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.
17a For brass I will bring gold,
And for iron I will bring silver,
And for wood brass,
And for stones iron.
AND 1. In what follows the Prophet depicts the rebuilding of Jerusalem, and the commencement of a new glorious life in it. The foreign nations that destroyed the walls of the old Jerusalem, shall build the walls of the new (Isaiah 60:10). And its gates shall stand open day and night, for they are needed no more to keep off the enemy, but only to let in foes, if any there should be, as prisoners with their spoils (Isaiah 60:11). Should there be any nations who are not attracted by the light (Isaiah 60:3), but repelled by it, they will go to destruction (Isaiah 60:12). Jerusalem will then inwardly also be magnificently adorned, as it becomes the sanctuary of Jehovah (Isaiah 60:13).
Then they whose fathers formerly oppressed Jerusalem, or who themselves had despised it, must humbly do it homage, and regard it as the city of God (Isaiah 60:14). Then will Jerusalem be no more forsaken, hated, and shunned; but it will shine in everlasting glory as the joy of all coming generations (Isaiah 60:15). All nations must bring their best and most precious things as tribute, as a sign that the God of Israel alone is the Almighty God who can help (Isaiah 60:16). And as a measure to estimate the future glory of Jerusalem, the Prophet further tells us that gold and silver will come in the place of brass and iron, and brass and iron in the place of wood and stone (Isaiah 60:17 a).
2. And the sons of strangers . . . and for stones iron (Isaiah 60:10-17 a). [The expression rendered in the E. V. Sons of strangers, is literally translated, Sons of strangeness or of a foreign country, i. e., foreigners, aliens.—D. M.]. In this section, too, the Prophet still paints with the colors of the present.
Foreigners shall build Jerusalem’s walls. Perhaps there is here a reminiscence of the time when Israel in Egypt had to erect buildings for Pharaoh (Exodus 1:11). In the second part of Isa 60:10 the Prophet thinks of the terrible days when Jerusalem’s walls were destroyed by foreigners. This was done not only by Nebuchadnezzar, but at least partially by others also (comp. 2 Kings 14:13 sq.; 1 Kings 14:26). Great as was the wrath which destroyed Jerusalem’s walls by the hands of foreigners, so great will be the favor which causes foreigners to rebuild them stronger and more beautiful than ever. A further contrast to the former evil times will be this, that it will be no longer necessary to shut the gates of Jerusalem, for there is no longer an enemy to fear; and there is no more night, which favors the works of darkness (Isaiah 60:19-20, and Revelation 21:25).
On the contrary, the only concern now will be to admit the spoil taken from enemies, and their princes that are led captive. That πδεβιν is here to be taken in this sense is evident from a comparison of such places as 1 Samuel 30:2; 1 Samuel 30:20; Isaiah 20:4. [Delitzsch explains πδεβιν as applied to these kings, that they are “led as captives by the church, irresistibly bound by her, i. e., inwardly subdued (comp. Isaiah 44:14, with Psalms 149:8), and suffer themselves, as prisoners of the church and of her God, to be led into the holy city in solemn procession of honor.”—D. M.] Isaiah 60:12, ηָ ?ψַ ?π, properly to dry up, stands regularly of cities and countries, but is also transferred to nations (Isaiah 37:18; Jeremiah 50:21; Jeremiah 50:27). [They who consider the literal Jerusalem to be the subject of this prophecy, and not the church of God, may ask themselves if utter destruction will really be the punishment of every nation and kingdom that will not serve the Jews. But it is not they that are born after the flesh that are heirs of these promises, but they who are Christ’s, and so the true seed of Abraham, the Israel of God. (Galatians 3:28-29; Galatians 4:26-31) The Gentile Christians are not doomed to bondage. In Christ’s church there is one flock and one Shepherd.—D.
M.] Is the building of the temple spoken of in Isaiah 60:13? The answer to this question will decide the point whether the trees mentioned in Isaiah 60:13 are to serve for the building of the sanctuary, or for ornament to the holy city. But in Isaiah 60:13 there is no mention of the temple, but only of the place of the sanctuary. [But this expression implies a sanctuary.—D. M.] Further, we learn from Isaiah 66:1–3 that the new Jerusalem will have neither temple, nor the service that was performed in the temple (comp. Revelation 21:23). [But vide contra, Isaiah 60:7; Isaiah 2:3.—D. M.] Thirdly, it must appear strange that there is no mention of the cedars of Lebanon, which formed the chief material in the building of the old temple. [But the sherbin tree is a species of cedar growing on Lebanon.—D.
M.] The trees here named are cited from Isaiah 41:19, and, as there, are here mentioned only as representatives of magnificent vegetation. Hitzig’s remark, too, is of weight, that according to Isaiah 60:17, wood will be excluded as building material. I therefore hold with Hitzig, Ewald, Knobel, Delitzsch, that Isaiah 60:13 is to be understood of the glorious ornamental living trees that will grace Jerusalem. The glory of Lebanon, which expression occurs besides only Isaiah 35:2, is probably of the same import as “the choice and best of Lebanon” (Ezekiel 31:16). Luxuriant vegetation, glorious trees will beautify the place where the Lord, though He has no temple of stone there, has still the place of His gracious presence, and where His feet rest (elsewhere called δֲ ?γֹ ?νψַ ?βְ ?μָ ?ιε, as which the earth, 66, or the sanctuary with the ark of the covenant, 1 Chronicles 28:7; Psalms 90:5, et saepe, is designated). [So, not withstanding the Lord’s declaration to the contrary, Jerusalem, artificially embellished, will still be the place where men ought to worship, though it shall have no material temple (John 4:20-24). In the dogmatical and ethical remarks on Isaiah 66:19 sqq., our author truly says that Isaiah teaches that “instead of the local place of worship of the old covenant, the whole earth will be the temple of the Lord.” We might quote Isaiah as teaching that there will be a temple and sacrifices, too, in the glorious Jerusalem of the future.
See the mention of the going up of all nations to the house of the Lord in Isaiah 2:2, 3; see, too, in verse 7 of this chapter the mention of countless sacrifices ascending the altar of God. If, notwithstanding these statements, we are justified in holding, as Dr. Naegelsbach does, that there will in the Holy City of God be no external temple and no animal sacrifices, we may go further, and seek a spiritual sense for the description of the future outward glory of Jerusalem contained in this chapter. How natural it is to put Zion and Jerusalem for the church of God, whose centre Jerusalem was of old, is seen from the use of Rome for the Church of Rome, whose centre is in that city! We are never to forget that the Prophet paints the future with the colors of the present, and we should avoid playing fast and loose with symbolical language.—D. M.] ΰֲ ?λַ ?αֵּ ?γ at the end of Isa 60:13, designedly corresponds to its initial word λְ ?αεֹ ?γ.
As the picture mainly sets forth the contrasts between what once was and what shall be, we are told in verse 14 that the descendants of former oppressors and mockers will come submissively to do homage to Jerusalem. (ωְׁ ?ηεֹ ?ηַ is infin. nominascens, and is to be taken as accus. modalis, or adverbialis (comp. Ewald, § 279, Isaiah 1:2, 6). [“The ςַ ?μ before λַּ ?τεֹ ?ϊ is not simply equivalent to at, but expresses downward motion, and may be translated down to. The act described is the oriental prostration as a sign of the deepest reverence.—Alexander. Comp. Revelation 3:9.—D. M.] When these worshippers at the same time call Jerusalem the City of Jehovah, Zion of the Holy One of Israel, they make thereby a confession of faith.
They declare thereby that they hold the religious faith of Israel as the true one, They acknowledge, first, that the God of Israel justly bears the name ιδεδ; that He is, therefore, the true God; and, secondly, that Jerusalem justly calls herself the City of Jehovah, i. e., the place where God reveals Himself and is worshipped. In “φִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?οχΧιΧ the appellative signification of φιεο (φִ ?ιּ ?εּ ?ο, cippus, monumentum) comes to view. [? ] Jerusalem stands as the great, glorious monument which proclaims to the world the Godhead of Jehovah. A further contrast (Isaiah 60:15) refers to the relation of Jehovah as husband of Jerusalem. [But Jerusalem is not depicted in Isaiah 60:15 as a wife forsaken and hated and avoided by God.—D. M.]. The Prophet in spirit sees Jerusalem so forsaken and desolate that she, as a deserted city, is trodden by no one, but avoided by all. ΰֵ ?ιοςֹ ?αֵ ?ψ. Comp.
Isaiah 33:8; Isaiah 34:10; Jeremiah 9:9; Jeremiah 9:11; Ezekiel 33:28 et saepe. [Whereas thou hast been, etc., is literally “Instead of thy being,” etc.,—D. M.]. As the opposite of this, Jerusalem shall be an eternal glory (βָּ ?ΰεֹ ?ο, in the objective sense, as Isaiah 2:10, 19, 21; Isaiah 4:2; Isaiah 13:19; Isaiah 23:9 et saepe), and joy of all coming generations (comp. Isaiah 24:11; Psalms 48:3). The relation of child and servant is before the mind of the Prophet in Isaiah 60:16. Israel has in the present been obliged to be the illtreated, plundered servant.
Foreign conquerors and tyrants have impoverished it, have sucked it out to the very blood. In opposition to this, the promise is now made that foreign kings must regard Jerusalem as a new born, carefully nursed, beloved child. This child will now suck their breasts. This is the explanation of the apparent incongruity of Jerusalem sucking the breasts of men, and not of women. [The language used forces us to interpret the whole prophecy allegorically.—D. M.] There lies at the same time this in the image, that the kings themselves will not be illtreated slaves, but affectionate caretakers (Isaiah 49:23), He who causes this wonderful change is Jehovah, whom Israel will thereby know as Saviour and Redeemer by reason of His love, and as the mighty One of Jacob by reason of His power. The second part of verse 16 is almost a literal repetition from Isaiah 49:26.
In Isaiah 60:17 a the Prophet has evidently before him what(1 Kings 10:18-29) is related of Solomon. Mark especially verses 21 and 27 of the passage referred to, where it is said that silver was then nothing accounted of, that Solomon made it as stones. For brass, etc., i. e., instead of brass, etc. [“The city will be massive, built entirely of metal, so that neither the elements nor enemies can destroy it. That the Prophet does not mean to be understood literally is apparent from the allegorical progress of the Prophecy.”—Delitzsch.—D. M.]
Footnotes:Strangers.Or, wealthand their kings as captices.cypressplane-treesherbin-tree3. THE NEW LIFE OF OF WHICH BOTH THE PEOPLE AND NATURE PARTAKE
Isaiah 60:17-2217b I will also make thy officers peace,
And thine exactors righteousness.
18 Violence shall no more be heard in thy land,
Wasting nor destruction within thy borders;
But thou shalt call thy walls Salvation,
And thy gates Praise.
19 The sun shall be no more thy light by day;
Neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee:
But the Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light,
And thy God thy glory.
20 Thy sun shall no more go down;
Neither shall thy moon withdraw itself:
For the Lord shall be thine everlasting light,
And the days of thy mourning shall be ended.
21 Thy people also shall be all righteous:
They shall inherit the land for ever,
The branch of my planting, the work of my hands,
That I may be glorified.
22 A little one shall become a thousand,
And a small one a strong nation:
I the Lord will hasten it in his time.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_60:19. Although the Masoretes separate μπβδ by means of zakeph gadol from what follows, and thereby intimate that they wish μπβδ to be taken in the sense: “as regards brightness,” this construction seems to me needlessly difficult.
Isaiah 60:21. The reading of the Keri ξַ ?θָּ ?ςַ ?ι is to be preferred to that of the Kethib ξַ ?θָּ ?ςεֹ or ξַ ?θָּ ?ςָ ?ε, which is probably a mistake of the copyist.
Isaiah 60:22. The feminine suffix is here to be taken in the neuter sense (comp. Isaiah 59:8; Isaiah 22:11; Isaiah 27:4).
AND 1. In this section the Prophet takes a loftier flight. The higher life which he promises is above all without sin, i. e., holy. Righteousness, peace and salvation will, therefore, characterize the life of the community (Isaiah 60:17 b, 18). But even the life of nature will receive a new, higher centre of life. For it will be no more the sun that sheds upon the earth light and heat, and thereby life, but God will Himself be the Sun that shines perpetually and unchangeably (Isaiah 60:19-20).
And because the people, being born again of a divine seed, will sin no more, they will also never lose their country, but possess it to eternity (Isaiah 60:21). They will also partake of the theocratic blessing of a numerous posterity in the highest degree (Isaiah 60:22). In the two last verses [and all throughout the chapter, D. M.] we see again how the Prophet represents spiritual, heavenly things with earthly colors.
2. I will also make—gates Praise.
Isaiah 60:17 b, 18. The Prophet, who had hitherto depicted chiefly the external glory of the future Jerusalem, now describes more its inward state. The might of sin will be broken. Its reign comes to an end. Peace and righteousness have dominion. We have to inquire whether we have to take ωׁ ?μεν and φγχδ as the object or as the predicate.
But more is contained in the declaration that peace and righteousness will bear rule than in the statement that the rulers will be peaceable and just people. For the latter might be substantially true, and yet much dissension and injustice be in the land. But when peace and righteousness are not only in the rulers but are themselves the rulers (Gesenius, Umbreit, Stier, Delitzsch, etc.), then everything that could disturb peace and impede justice, is excluded. We shall have to take the term peace in its most extensive and highest sense, as comprehending the harmony of man with God, with himself, and with his fellow creatures. Under righteousness we shall have to understand that complete righteousness which consists in the conformity of human willing and doing with the divine will. Righteousness and peace are related as cause and effect.
For only when our willing is conformable to the divine, can the right harmony with God prevail in us and around us. We can recall here Psalms 85:11, where for restored Israel the hope is expressed that φγχεωׁ ?μεν will kiss each other in their land. Peace and righteousness are here poetically personified, which is a form of expression not rare in Isaiah (comp. Isaiah 22:18; Isaiah 32:16 sq.; Isaiah 45:8; Isaiah 59:14). [“τְּ ?χֻ ?γָּ ?δ properly means office, magistracy, government, here put for those who exercise it, like nobility, ministry and other terms in English. πβωׁ ?ιν, which has commonly a bad sense, is here used for magistrates or rulers in general, for the purpose of suggesting that instead of tyrants or exactors they should now be under equitable government.” Alexander. D. M.].
Where righteousness and peace rule, nothing more will be heard of violence and wild devastation (ωׁ ?γεωׁ ?αψ as Isaiah 59:7; Isaiah 51:19). On the latter part of Isa 60:18 comp. the remarks on Isaiah 26:1, which place is related to the one before us. [“The walls of the city of God will be impregnable—Salvation itself. Her gates (unlike those, which ‘lamented and mourned’ Isaiah 3:26) shall be filled with jubilant anthems; shall be mere Praise.” Kay in the Bible Commentary. D. M.].
3. The sun shall be—in his time.
Isaiah 60:19-22. Now we see clearly the meaning of that call, “Arise, shine, for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee.” The Lord shall he not only the Sun of the life of the spirit; He shall also be the Sun of the life of nature. The light of His divine δόξα will immediately shine through it. As moon and stars grow pale before the rising sun, so will the earthly sun grow pale (comp. Isaiah 24:23 with Commentary and the places of like purport Isaiah 4:5; Isaiah 30:26) before the original Fountain of all light, with whom is no variableness (James 1:17), when He rises as the sun. We need now the lights of heaven (Genesis 1:14 sqq.), because the eternal Light is still hidden from us.
We live here in faith, not in sight. The Apostle John employs this trait in the picture which he draws of the New Jerusalem, Revelation 21:23; Revelation 21:25; Revelation 22:5. πֹ ?βַ ?δּ, Isaiah 60:19, corresponds to the preceding ΰεψιεξν. In Isaiah 13:10; Joel 2:10; 4:15πβδ is also used Of the brightness by night. Although there will be still a distinction in the times of the day, there will be no more darkness. As sun and moon will be no more the lights, but the Lord, the Prophet can also say to Jerusalem, Thy sun will set no more, thy moon will not wane (ΰָ ?ρַ ?σ of the drawing in, the withdrawal of the rays of light, whereby the waning and temporary disappearance of the moon are caused, comp, Isaiah 16:10; Joel 2:10; 4:15). When this alternation of light and darkness in the life of nature is past, history will consist no more of days of joy and days of mourning, The days of mourning are entirely past (ωָׁ ?μֵ ?ξ as 1 Kings 7:51; ιξιΰαμ comp.
Genesis 27:41; Deuteronomy 34:8). The mourning days of Israel consisted in this, that the people as a punishment for their sins were given into the hands of their enemies, and had their land taken from them. But when the people, through the unrestricted influence on their life of the new sun that has risen upon them, have become entirely holy and righteous, such judgments will never more be spoken of. They will possess their land for ever, like a garden of God, which contains no weeds to be rooted up, but only holy plants. [Some interpreters take ΰψυ in the sense of earth. Isaiah 49:8 favors this wider sense of ΰψυ. Here as in Isaiah 11:1πֵ ?φֶ ?ψ denotes a shoot rather than a branch.
Observe, too, that ξַ ?θַּ ?ςַ ?ι is in the plural (Keri)—my plantings=“my creative acts of grace” (Delitzsch). D. M.]. The work of my hands is an expression occurring Isaiah 19:25, where it is applied to the people of Assyria, when they shall be hereafter converted. Israel will therefore, as Assyria, be a people whose life is wrought by God, and will therefore conduce to the praise of God (Isaiah 61:3). [“The dependence of God’s people on Himself for the origin and sustentation of their spiritual life is forcibly expressed by the figure of a plant which He has planted, and by that of a work which He has wrought. Ephesians 2:10.” Alexander.
D. M.]. Then too will that benedictio vere theocratica of a numerous progeny guaranteeing everlasting continuance be realized in the richest measure. The least one (the adjective with the article in the sense of the superlative), i. e., the one that is physically most insignificant, the weakest shall become a thousand, and the smallest one (the same in sense as χθοa strong people (comp. Micah 4:7). We see in Isaiah 60:21-22, how the Prophet again paints the future with the colors of the present.
In this Old Testament shell we can discern the New Testament kernel of the κληρονομίααἰώνιος (Hebrews 9:15), and of the ζωὴαἰώνιος (John 3:15; John 3:36 et saepe). The Prophet has foretold in this chapter great, wonderful, incredible things. [The Lord, therefore, at the close, solemnly guarantees their fulfilment. The last words form the seal of the prophecy. “His time” is=“its time,” not the time of the Lord. “Its time” is the time which the Lord has appointed, and which is known only to Him. When that time has arrived, He will hastily accomplish what has been foretold (Isaiah 46:11; Isaiah 43:13; Isaiah 9:6).–D. M.].
Footnotes:peace thy magistracy, and righteousness thy rulersThe leastThe leastThe smallestD AND ETHICAL1. [Barnes in his Notes quotes Pope’s Messiah in which “some of the ideas in this chapter, descriptive of the glorious times of the Gospel, have been beautifully versified.” Cowper in the last book of The Task delightfully expatiates on the same “fair theme.” Justly does he exclaim regarding this prophetic picture:
“O scenes surpassing fable, and yet true,
Scenes of accomplished bliss! which who can see,
Though but in distant prospect, and not feel
His soul refresh’d with foretaste of the joy?”—D. M.]
2. On Isaiah 60:1. “Surge! Illuminare! sunt imperativi evangelici, quibus includitur atque promittitur auxilium divinum praesens ad obsequendum.” Seb. Schmid. “He whose dicere is facere speaks these words, He who with the word ταλιθὰκοῦμι and Νεανίσκε, σοὶλέγω, ἐγέρθητι (Mark 5:41; Luke 7:14), raised up the dead girl, the deceased young man.” Leigh.3. “The gracious light of Jehovah, which radiates gloriously in the manifestation of the Redeemer, fills, too, with the light of God the people among whom it shines. What once happened only to Moses upon the mount, when his face shone with heavenly splendor from his converse with the Lord, will now he imparted to the entire sanctified race.” Axenfeld.4. On Isaiah 60:1 sqq.
The fulfilment of this prophecy takes place by successive stages. In the first place, it is manifest that the city of God here spoken of cannot be the earthly Jerusalem, which was doomed to destruction. But the prophecy has for its, object the ἅνω ‘Ιερουσαλὴμ, the Free, which is the mother of us all (Galatians 4:26), which is elsewhere called the heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22), or the New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:2). The Lord and living centre of this heavenly Jerusalem appeared, indeed, in the earthly city, and made it the point whence the light emanated to enlighten the Gentiles. For in Jerusalem the Lord had to die (Luke 13:33) and to rise again; and from Jerusalem the preaching of repentance and forgiveness of pins in His name must begin (Luke 24:47). But after the destruction of the earthly Jerusalem, and during the time of the Gentiles, when the holy place is trodden down (Revelation 11:2), there is no other Jerusalem on earth than the church of the Lord, a poor and only provisional form of His kingdom, which, for the period between the first and second act of the judgment of the world (Matthew 24:29), i. e. between the destruction of Jerusalem, and the second coming of the Lord to effect the first resurrection (Revelation 20:4 sqq.), has for its task in conflict with opposing forces, the calling, gathering and enlightening of the elect from all nations.
But when the Lord shall have come again in visible glory, and shall have accomplished the first resurrection and the second act of the judgment of the world, then will those who are called hereto reign with Him a thousand years. During this time there will, according to Revelation 20:9, be a holy city on earth which is called “the beloved city.” .... But when the third act of the judgment of the world, the second resurrection, and the general judgment shall be completed (Revelation 20:11-15), then will the earth, with the heavenly bodies comprised in the system of which it forms a part, have become new (Revelation 21:1), Then will the holy city, the new Jerusalem (ibid Isaiah 60:2), the prototype, descend upon the earth, and then will our prophecy obtain its complete fulfilment (Revelation 21:10 sqq.).—[If the church of the Lord is now, as our author holds, the only Jerusalem on earth; if it can now truly be said to stand for the Jerusalem of prophecy, it may pari ratione, as a “glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing,” represent Jerusalem in the future more glorious condition in which it is to appear according to prophecy. The church of the Lord as the heavenly Jerusalem will never be superseded by a material city. We Christians are come unto Mount Zion and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22). There is just as much reason to hold that there must now, in order to the fulfilment of prophecy, be a literal Jerusalem, the centre of attraction to God’s chosen people, as that there must be such a city in any future period.
Our author in the foregoing remarks disparages unduly the present dispensation. The church of the Lord is now more than a poor and provisional form of His kingdom. See 2 Corinthians 3; Luke 7:28; Luke 10:23-24.—D. M.]
5. On Isaiah 60:10–16. Poor and unpretending as is the appearance of the church, like that of her Master when He was in the form of a Servant, yet is she constantly herein displaying her majesty that kings and nations must, when it is needful, serve her, whether willingly or reluctantly. The Roman emperors, after having for three centuries endeavored by every means to extirpate the church, must at last submit to her. But when people would not let the church advance, when they would injure her, or deprive her of her necessary freedom and independence, and make her serviceable to worldly aims, then they have inflicted the greatest harm on themselves. This is seen in the example of the Oriental church [and not in her alone] which, after she was made a dead state church, could no longer resist the onset of Islam. This is seen in modern times in many a State, in which unnatural fetters are laid upon the church, whereby her credit, reputation and efficiency are undermined to the great detriment of the people and of the State.
6. On Isaiah 60:12. “The Roman pontiffs abuse this oracle of the Prophet to establish their tyranny over monarchs. In particular, it is recorded of Pius 4, that at the time of his election he caused a coin to be struck, on one side of which was his own image adorned with a triple crown, and on the other, these words of the Prophet were inscribed.” Foerster. [“The idea of Isa 60:12 is, that no nation can flourish and long continue that does not obey the law of God, or where the true religion does not prevail, and the worship of the true God is not maintained. History is full of affecting illustrations of this. The ancient republics and kingdoms fell because they had not the true religion. The kingdoms of Babylon, Assyria, Macedonia and Egypt; the Roman empire, and all the ancient monarchies and republics, soon fell to ruin because they had not the salutary restraints of the true religion, and because they lacked the protection of the true God.
France cast off the government of God in the first Revolution, and was drenched in blood. It is a maxim of universal truth that the nation, which does not admit the influence of the laws and the government of God, must be destroyed. No empire is strong enough to wage successful war with the great Jehovah; and sooner or later, notwithstanding all that human policy can do, corruption, sensuality, luxury, pride and far spreading vice will expose a nation to the displeasure of God, and bring down the heavy arm of His vengeance.” Barnes. D. M.].
7. On the whole chapter. “We have, as the church of believers, the first fruits of this prophecy. But only in the holy people that has its centre in the new Jerusalem of the end [rather that forms the church of the future], shall we behold God’s work, His manifestation and its effect: on the nations in all its fulness. Let us rejoice over the first fruits, and regard them as a pledge of the complete fulfilment of the word of the Prophet.’ Weber.8. On the whole chapter. [“Surely the strain of this evangelic prophecy rises higher than any temporal deliverance. Therefore we must rise to some more spiritual sense of it, not excluding the former.
And that which some call divers senses of the same Scripture, is, indeed, but divers parts of one full sense. This Prophecy is, out of question, a most rich description of the kingdom of Christ under the Gospel. And in this sense, this invitation to arise and shine is mainly addressed to the mystical Jerusalem (comp. Ephesians 5:14), yet not without some privilege to the literal Jerusalem beyond other people. They are first invited to arise and shine, because the sun arose first in their horizon. Christ came of the Jews, and came first to them.
The Redeemer shall come to Zion, says our Prophet in the former chapter. But miserable Jerusalem knew not the day of her visitation, nor the things that concerned her peace, and therefore are they now hid from her eyes. She delighted to deceive herself with fancies of I know not what imaginary grandeur and outward glory, to which the promised Messiah should exalt her, and did, in that kind particularly, abuse this very prophecy; so doting upon a sense grossly literal, she forfeited the enjoyment of those spiritual blessings that are described.” Archbp. Leighton, who has two sermons (4 and 5) on Isaiah 40:1. D. M.].
HINTS1. On Isaiah 60:1–6. “In Christ’s appearing in our world there is a twofold call directed to us: 1) Arise; shine! 2) Lift up thine eyes to the Gentiles.” Fr. E. Bauer. “What a blessing the spread of the revealed word will bring to the heathen in respect to individuals, to families, to nations.” Taube. “Zion, the great mother of nations in the midst of her children. 1) With her abundant maternal joys; 2) with her weighty maternal cares; 3) with her holy maternal duties.” Gerok. “What should move us willingly and joyfully to obey the call addressed to the Christian church, ‘Arise; shine?’ 1) There are millions still in darkness; 2) that so blessed a light has arisen on us; 3) that God has promised that our efforts for those benighted millions shall not be in vain.” Walther of St. Louis. [It is through the church that God operates on a dark and sinful world. The church, in order to fulfil her calling to be a light to the Gentiles, must herself shine in the glory of the Lord. “We will go with you; for we have heard that God is with you” (Zechariah 8:23),—this will hereafter be the language of them that are without to the people of God.
The efficiency of the church depends on her holiness and spiritual prosperity. God blesses us to make us a blessing (Genesis 12:2). See this thought set forth in the 67 Psalm.
“Heaven does with us as we with torches do;
Not light them for themselves.”
–D.M.].
2. On Isaiah 60:1. [“What is the shining of the true church? Doth not a church then shine when church service is raised from a decent and primitive simplicity, and decorated with pompous ceremonies, with rich furniture and gaudy vestments? Is not the church then beautiful? Yes, indeed; but all the question is, whether this be the proper, genuine beauty or not; whether this be not strange fire, as the fire that Aaron’s sons used, which became vain, and was taken as strange fire. Methinks it cannot be better decided than to refer it to St.
John, in his book of the Revelation. We find there the description of two several women, the one riding in state, arrayed in purple, decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearl, chap. 17; the other, chap, 12, in rich attire too, but of another kind, clothed with the sun, and a crown of twelve stars on her head. The other’s decorament was all earthly; this woman’s is all celestial. What need has she to borrow light and beauty from precious stones, who is clothed with the sun, and crowned with stars? She wears no sublunary ornaments, but which is more noble, she treads upon them; the moon is under her feet. Now, if you know (as you do all, without doubt) which of these two is the spouse of Christ, you can easily resolve the question.
The truth is, those things seem to deck religion, but they undo it. Observe where they are most used, and we shall find little or no substance of devotion under them; as we see in that apostate church of Rome. This painting is dishonorable for Christ’s spouse, and, besides, it spoils her natural complexion. The superstitious use of torches and lights in the church by day is a kind of shining, but surely not that which is commanded here. No; it is an affront done both to the sun in the heaven and to the Sun of righteousness in the church.” Abp. Leighton.—D.
M.]
3. On Isaiah 60:10–12. Since the kingdom of David was established on Mount Zion, and the Lord solemnly confirmed this choice (Psalms 2:6), there is always, yea, there will be to eternity a holy Zion, or Jerusalem, as centre of the kingdom of God. But the Lord leads His Zion by strange ways. It passes through sin and death to sanctification and life. Let us consider the term Zion according to its earthly history.
We distinguish a double form. We see the Old Testament Zion fall on account of its sins. The Lord smites it in His wrath. But it rises not in a material, but in a spiritual form, as the Christian church which serves God in spirit and in truth (John 4:20 sqq.), and comprehends all nations. This Zion builds itself from the Gentiles. Strangers build its walls (Isaiah 60:10).
The gates of these walls are not shut for all who are not circumcised in the flesh. But these gates are open day and night for all who are willing to receive the grace of God in Christ and to serve Him (Isaiah 60:11). The nations, who serve God in Christ, will be greatly blessed even in respect to earthly greatness and prosperity. For the spirit of Christianity will permeate with its quickening influence all natural factors. But where Christianity is not received, or where it is suffered to die out, there moral corruption and decay are the necessary result (Isaiah 60:12).
4. On Isaiah 60:10. “God’s love is not extinguished because His wrath burns. Has the fire of His anger produced its effect, then the Sun of His grace rises again; for, says the Lord, ‘I kill, and I make alive; I wound and I heal (Deuteronomy 32:39); in my wrath I smote thee, but in my favor have I had mercy on thee.’ ”—Thol.5. On Isaiah 60:17-18; Isaiah 60:21. “Above the voice, which tells us what we ought to be and are not, there sounds another in every human heart which gives a ray of hope that our iniquities shall not separate us from our God, and that we shall one day be what we ought to be. This foreboding voice of longing expectation, which, although weak and confused, sounds through the generations of men, has found in the Old Covenant its fulfilment. There clear, unmistakable voices speak of the time when a fountain shall be opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness’ (Zechariah 13:1); of a time when it shall be said of the city of God on earth: ‘Thy people shall be all righteous, and shall inherit the earth forever, the branch of my planting, the work of my hands that I may be glorified.’ ”—Tholuck.6.
On Isaiah 60:18–22. It is a great comfort in the present time when darkness covers the earth and thick darkness the people, to know that it will not always remain so. We are now only in an intermediate state. A time of light will come when God alone will be Sun, and that 1) for the intellectual and spiritual life of men (Isaiah 60:18; Isaiah 60:21); 2) for the life of nature.
3—THE THIRD The Personal Centre of the Revelation of SalvationIsaiah 61, 62 and Isaiah 63:1-6 Great works are never accomplished without great men. After reading chapter 60,sone involuntarily asks himself: Who will be the instrument in God’s hand of performing this great work? This question is answered by the Prophet in the three chapters, 61–63, in which he speaks of Him who will bring complete salvation to Israel, but will judge the heathen. Most modern interpreters (with the exception of Stier, Hengstenberg, Delitzsch, Rohling) are of opinion that the Prophet here speaks of himself. I approve in general of the reasons adduced by Delitzsch in favor of the view that the Saviour of Israel is the subject of the prophecy.—[Delitzsch alleges the following grounds in support of his view: 1) Nowhere has the Prophet hitherto spoken of himself as such in detail; rather he has, with the exception of the close of Isa 57:21 (saith my God), purposely kept his own person in the background. 2) On the other hand, where another than Jehovah has spoken of the work to which he was called, and of what he had experienced in the fulfilment of his calling, Isaiah 49:1 sqq.; Isaiah 1:4 sqq., that person was the very Servant of Jehovah, of whom and to whom Jehovah speaks, Isaiah 42:1 sqq.; Isaiah 52:13-15, not the Prophet, but He who is destined to be the Mediator of a new covenant, to be a light to the Gentiles, and the Salvation of Jehovah for the whole world, and who by self humiliation unto death ascends to this full glory of His calling. 3) Everything that the Prophet here says of himself is found in the picture of that Servant of Jehovah, who stands alone and unapproachable, highly exalted above the Prophet; He is endowed with the Spirit of Jehovah, Isaiah 42:1; Jehovah has sent Him and with Him His Spirit, Isaiah 48:16 b; He has the tongue of the learned, to help the weary with words, Isaiah 1:4; He spares and delivers those who are almost despairing and destroyed, the bruised reed and the dimly burning wick, in order, Isaiah 42:7, “to open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house,”—this is what above all He has in word and deed to do to His people, Isaiah 42:7; Isaiah 49:9. 4) After the Prophet has once so dramatically set forth the Servant of Jehovah of whom he prophesies, and has made Him appear as the speaker in Isaiah 49:1 sqq.; Isaiah 1:4 sqq. (and also Isaiah 48:16 b), we cannot suppose that he will now put himself in the foreground, and ascribe to himself such official attributes as he has made to be characteristic features of that unique Personage predicted by him.”—D. M.]—To the reasons mentioned by Delitzsch, I add what Hengstenberg and Rohling have called attention to, that much which the speaker here says of himself is far too great to be ascribed to a mere man.
The Prophet can indeed announce, but he cannot himself effect and bestow what he has announced. And if chapter 63, as cannot be denied, stands in closest connection with chaps, 61 and 62, is He, we ask, who there performs the negative side of the work of salvation, the Prophet? Does not the Prophet most clearly distinguish himself from Him, as the questioner from the person interrogated?
A.—THE SIDE OF THE OF 61–621. A distant view of him who, as Prophet, King and Priest is the founder of Salvations Isaiah 61:1-111 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me;
Because the Lord hath anointed me
To preach good tidings unto the meek;
He hath sent me to bind up the broken-hearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives,
And the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,And the day of vengeance of our God;
To comfort all that mourn;
3 To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion,
To give unto them beauty for ashes,
The oil of joy for mourning,
The garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness;
That they might be called trees of righteousness,
The planting of the Lord, that he might be glorified.
4 And they shall build the old wastes,
They shall raise up the former desolations,
And they shall repair the waste cities,
The desolations of many generations.
5 And strangers shall stand and feed your flocks,
And the sons of the alien shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers.
6 But ye shall be named the Priests of the Lord:Men shall call you the ministers of our God:
Ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles,
And in their glory shall ye boast yourselves.
7 For your shame ye shall have double;
And for confusion they shall rejoice in their portion:
Therefore in their land they shall possess the double:
Everlasting joy shall be unto them.
8 For I the Lord love judgment,
I hate robbery for burnt offering;
And I will direct their work in truth,
And I will make an everlasting covenant with them.
9 And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles,
And their offspring among the people:
All that see them shall acknowledge them,
That they are the seed which the Lord hath blessed.
10 I will greatly rejoice in the Lord,My soul shall be joyful in my God;
For he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation,
He hath covered me with the robe of righteousness,
As a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments,
And as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels.
11 For as the earth bringeth forth her bud,
And as the garden causeth the things that are sown in it to spring forth;
So the Lord God will cause righteousness and praise
To spring forth before all the nations.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_61:1. The expression τְ ?χַ ?ηΞχεֹ ?ηַ is to be written as one word without Maqqeph; for there is in Hebrew no word χεֹ ?δַ (on the form see Ewald, § 157, c). As τָ ?χַ ?η is employed only of the opening of the eyes and ears, the LXX. in rendering τυφλοῖςἀνάβλεψινare in part right, inasmuch as even prisoners who sit in darkness and the shadow of death are brought by deliverance from prison to see again the light. However the Septuagint is wrong in taking the expression to mean healing of the blind.
Isaiah 61:6. The ἅπ. λεγ. ϊִּ ?ϊְ ?ιַ ?ξָּ ? ?ֽ ?ψεּ is either from ιָ ?ξַ ?ψ=ξεּ ?ψ (of which there is besides only the Hiphil δֵ ?ιξִ ?ιψ permutavit Jeremiah 2:11), or from ιָ ?ξַ ?ψ=ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψ (from which is the Hithpael δִ ?ϊְ ?ΰַ ?ξַּ ?ψ Psalms 94:4, extulit se). The former derivation seems to be the more appropriate, because δִ ?ϊְ ?ΰַ ?ξַּ ?ψ Psalms 94:4, is evidently used in a bad sense.
Isaiah 61:10. ιְ ?ςָ ?θַ ?πִ ?ι (on account of the pause ιְ ?ςָ ?θָֽ ?πִ ?ι) is, if correctly pointed, to be derived from ιָ ?ςַ ?θ which occurs only here, but is identical with ςָ ?θָ ?δ. ϊַּ ?ςְ ?γֶּ ?δ is Kal as Hosea 2:15; Jeremiah 4:30; Jeremiah 31:4.
AND 1. The middle triad (chaps, 61, 62 and 63) of the third Ennead (an aggregate consisting of nine) sets Him again before our eyes by whom the great salvation promised in chap. 60 is to be accomplished. Much of what the Prophet sees done by this great Personage whose name is withheld, bears a prophetic character, such as the bringing of glad tidings and comforting (Isaiah 61:1). But the setting free of the prisoners (ibid.), the proclaiming of the time of grace and of vengeance (Isaiah 61:2), and the real communication of ornament and joy for ashes and mourning (Isaiah 61:3), seem to indicate kingly might. Of like significance is the new order of things spoken of in Isaiah 61:4-7. In Isaiah 61:8-9 Jehovah ratifies the work of His Servant by declaring of it, that it is conformable to justice, and that He intends to make an everlasting covenant with Israel, by which the Israelites shall be known by all nations as the people blessed by Him.
Finally, He, who had spoken from Isaiah 61:1-7, speaks again. He rejoices that He is clothed with the garments of salvation, which make Him appear as priestly bridegroom in wonderful union with His bride, to whom His righteousness and glory are by a vital and organic relation communicated (Isaiah 61:10-11). It almost seems as if the Prophet lets us have a glimpse of the three offices which have their common root in the unction of the Spirit.
2. The Spirit of the Lord God——shall be unto them.Isaiah 61:1-7. With the words, The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is upon me, the Subject of the prophecy attributes to Himself what Jehovah Isaiah 42:1 declared of His Servant, and what had been already, Isaiah 11:2, declared of the root of Jesse. [Three times in Isaiah is Messiah described as endued with the Spirit of the Lord. First the Prophet affirms this of Him, Isaiah 11:2, “the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him.” Next, Isaiah 42:1, Jehovah Himself declares of the Messiah: “I have put My Spirit upon Him.” Here, lastly, One, whose appointed work marks Him as the Messiah, declares: “The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is upon Me.” Does not this parallelism speak in favor of the identity of person in all three passages? It serves, too, to mark the unity of the whole book. D.
M.]. The speaker affirms that He has the Spirit of Jehovah, that all He speaks and does may be known to be wrought by God. The Spirit of the Lord is upon Him because (ιַ ?ςַ ?ο comp. Isaiah 30:12; Isaiah 65:12; Isaiah 66:4) Jehovah has anointed Him. [“ξַ ?ωַׁ ?ηΰֹ ?ϊִ ?ι is more emphatic than ξְ ?ωָׁ ?ηַ ?πִ ?ι. In the choice of the word ξωׁ ?η we may find an intimation that the Servant of Jehovah and the Messiah are one person.” Delitzsch. “Anointing, whether it occurs as an outwardly performed symbolical action, or as a mere figure, is always used to designate the gifts of the Holy Ghost, comp. 1 Samuel 10:1; 1 Samuel 16:13-14; Daniel 9:24. As the anointing is identical with the imparting of the Spirit, we cannot isolate the words: because the Lord has anointed me, but must closely connect them with all that follows.
He has endued Me with His Spirit to preach good tidings, etc.Hengstenberg.—D. M.] αִּ ?ωַּׂ ?ψ occurs only in the second part of the book, and is rendered everywhere, with the exception of Isa 41:27, in the Septuagint by εὐαγγελίζω. It is here, as frequently, connected with the accusative of the person. ςָ ?πָ ?ε is found further in Isaiah 11:4; Isaiah 29:19. [“ςָ ?πָ ?ε as ςָ ?πִ ?ι from ςָ ?πָ ?δ to bow down; the latter is one bowed down through adversity, the former one inwardly bowed down, emptied of all self-confidence.” Delitzsch. “ςπι and ςπι are never confounded. In this world of sin the meek are at the same time the suffering; and that especially here the meek are at the same time to be regarded as suffering, is shown by the glad tidings which stand in contrast to their misery. The ςπειν in opposition to the wicked, appear as the people of the Messiah in Isaiah 11:4 also.” Hengstenberg.—D. M.].
The binding up of the broken-hearted can be conceived as wrought by words of consolation. [But comp. Psalms 147:3 where this work is ascribed to Jehovah as His own; and Vitringa truly remarks that the speaker here appears non praeco tantum, sed et dispensator of the rich blessings that are mentioned.—D. M.]. On the year of liberty comp. Leviticus 23:8 sqq. [“The proclaiming of perfect liberty to the bounden, and the year of acceptance with Jehovah, is a manifest allusion to the proclaiming of the year of Jubilee by sound of trumpet. This was a year of general release of debts and obligations, of bond men and women, of lands and possessions, which had been sold from the families and tribes to which they belonged.
Our Saviour, by applying this text to Himself, Luke 4:18-19, a text so manifestly relating to the institution above- mentioned, plainly declares the typical design of that institution.” Lowth. “The Servant of God proclaims nothing which He does not at the same time bestow, as Isaiah 61:3 clearly shows.” Hengstenberg.—D. M.]. The expressions, captives and bound point to, first of all. Israel’s deliverance from the Exile. For the Israelites in exile were indeed prisoners of war and captives. [But they were freed from the Babylonish exile before the mission of the Messiah. How then could He be sent to them?—D.
M.]. The Prophet here comprehends in his view the whole time of salvation beginning with the liberation from exile. In all that the Prophet here says of the healing of the sick, of the freeing of prisoners, of the rejoicing of the sorrowful, or the honoring of the despised (Isaiah 61:7), and of the rebuilding of what was laid waste, he has evidently in his mind the getting rid of the misery of the old time, and the commencement of the new, glorious era. To this commencement he reckons also the time of the establishment of a new covenant (Isaiah 61:8). It is hard to say where he sees the boundary which marks the beginning of this time. It may not have been clearly perceived by him (1 Peter 1:11).
Yet comp. on Isaiah 62:2. The expression ωְׁ ?πַ ?ϊΞψָ ?φεֹ ?ο is not an official term, but a rhetorical variation for γּ ?ψְ ?εֹ ?ψ and is intended to designate a time of glory and blessing such as that of the Messiah will be. It will have in its train a day of vengeance, one day of judgment, for wrath is short (comp. Psalms 30:6; Isaiah 10:25; Isaiah 54:8, etc.), grace long. In Isaiah 34:8; Isaiah 63:4 we have the same kind of representation; for “the year of recompenses or redemption” [my redeemed] is just the long time of grace granted to Israel, Chaps. 61 and 62 correspond to the year of grace, chap. 63 to the day of vengeance. In regard to the expression πָ ?χָ ?ν see remarks on Isaiah 34:8. [It is manifestly with allusion to the year of jubilee that the time of grace here predicted is called an acceptable year of the Lord,i.e., a year of favor or of grace.
This allusion explains the employment here of the definite time year. The time of grace is elsewhere spoken of as a day; “In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee,” comp. 2 Corinthians 6:2. The New Testament speaks, too, of the day of redemption and of days of vengeance, Luke 21:22; Ephesians 4:30. The time of wrath towards the church is a comparatively short time, and is frequently contrasted with God’s everlasting mercy to her. But the day of vengeance here predicted has respect to obdurate enemies of the Lord, and on them God’s wrath abideth,John 3:36.—D. M.].
In Luke 4:16 sqq. it is related that Jesus Christ read the commencement of this chapter in the synagogue of Nazareth, and declared Himself as the person by whom this prophecy is fulfilled. We see from this that He did not apply it merely to the deliverance from the Exile, and that He regarded it as a genuine prophecy given by God, and not as the work of a deceiver. [“Our Lord ended His reading in the synagogue at ‘the acceptable year of the Lord’ (Luke 4:19); but at the close of His ministry (Luke 21:22) He spoke of the ‘days of vengeance.’ ” Kay.—D. M.] They who mourn are Zion’s mourners, Isaiah 61:3, and on them shall be put on, or to them shall be given (the Prophet substitutes the word ϊֵּ ?ϊ for ωׂ ?εּ ?ν because this word is applicable only to clothes) the head-ornament [E. V. beauty] for ashes.τְּ ?ΰֵ ?ψ is the name of the female turban (Isaiah 3:20) and of the priest’s cap, Exodus 39:28; Ezekiel 44:18. Note the paronomasia here. Putting ashes on the head was a sign of mourning, 2 Samuel 13:19.
The expression ωׁ ?ξοωׂ ?ωׂ ?εο is found besides only in Psalms 45:5, in that Psalm which typically represents a King of Israel as a bridegroom, and which has manifold points of contact with our chapter. There shall be the oil of joy given instead of mourning, and a magnificent robe, as symbol of exaltation, instead of a heavy, oppressed spirit. [Dr. Naegelsbach takes ϊְּ ?δִ ?μּ ?δ in the sense of glory, honor, in which view he follows Delitzsch. Alexander considers a garment of praise to be a garment which excites praise or admiration. But Hengstenberg best explains the meaning of these mourners having a garment of praise put on them as denoting that “they shall be clothed with praise, the praise of a divine goodness which has been manifested to them.” Comp. Psalms 109:18, He clothed himself with cursing like as with his garment.—D.
M.] ξַֽ ?ςֲ ?θֶ ?δamictus, is found only here. The same remark applies to ψεּ ?ηַ λֵּ ?δָ ?δ (comp. Isaiah 42:3). The Prophet proceeds now to speak of those who are blessed by Him whose work had been described. They shall be called, what they really are, Terebinths of righteousness. What this name signifies, the Prophet immediately explains in words repeated from Isaiah 60:21. [“The gifts of God, although described by material figures, are spiritual, inwardly efficacious, renewing and sanctifying the inner man, sap and strength and marrow and motive power of a new life.
The church becomes thereby Terebinths of righteousness,i.e., possessors of a righteousness wrought by God, approved by God, in such force, constancy and fulness as Terebinths with their strong stems, their luxuriant verdure, their perennial [?] foliage—a planting of Jehovah to the end that He may get honor thereby.” Delitzsch. D. M.]. We see from Isaiah 61:4 that the Prophet is thinking of exiles who have returned to their own country. But here again he sees everything together which will in the future prove to be a return from exile; for he cannot possibly have before his mind only the return under Zerubbabel and Ezra, as this poor beginning in no way corresponds to the grandeur of the picture here drawn. Having reached their home the exiles will build again the places that have lain waste for an incalculably long time, and restore the ruins of the habitations built by their ancestors.
Comp. Isaiah 58:12 and Isaiah 44:26. They will be assisted in this work by foreigners as their servants. For these will feed their flocks, and be their husbandmen and vinedressers, while they themselves shall be called Priests of Jehovah, ministers of our God. As a privileged, ruling caste they shall live on the wealth of the heathen, and in regard to honor and glory shall come into their place (ϊϊιξψε. Israel appears here as the priestly nobility (comp.
Exodus 19:6), and the Gentiles as the misera contribuens plebs, that has to perform the hard work. When the Prophet, Isaiah 66:21, says of the Gentiles that Priests and Levites shall be taken from them also, he rises above his Old Testament stand-point, and speaks purely and entirely as the Evangelist of the Old Covenant. [The future conversion of Israel, instead of reducing the Gentiles to the condition of menials, will conduce exceedingly to their riches, Romans 11:12. Believing Gentiles can never be considered and treated as ‘aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise’ Ephesians 2:12. On the contrary, they are ‘fellow heirs and of the same body,’ Ephesians 3:6. The Prophet is speaking here not of Israel after the flesh, but of the Israel of God (Galatians 6:16), and does not contradict what he elsewhere states in regard to the equal privileges of converted Gentiles, Isaiah 19:24-25; Isaiah 66:21 sqq. Even in connection with the new heavens and the new earth our Prophet speaks of the people of Jerusalem themselves planting vineyards and eating their fruit, Isaiah 65:17-23,and so not confining themselves to the exercise of priestly functions.
Literally understood, these places are mutually exclusive and contradictory. They must be taken figuratively. Barnes extracts the kernel from the shell in saying: “The whole idea is, that it would be a time of signal prosperity, a time when foreigners would embrace the true religion; and when the accession would be as great and important as if they were to come in among a people, and take the whole labor of attending their flocks and cultivating their fields.” I append Abarbanel’s comment on Isaiah 61:5-6. “He (the Prophet) mentions also that the Lord anointed him to announce to the Israelites that the nations shall be subjected unto them so that foreigners will stand and feed their flock, and aliens will cultivate their fields and vineyards, so that the children of Israel shall not be employed in any coarse work, but shall serve the glorious God with their law and prayer alone. Therefore he says: Ye shall be called Priests of the Lord, as if he would say, ye shall not feed flock, nor till the ground, but shall serve the Most High and be Priests of God and servants of the Most High, and so this will be your name. And that ye may have time for the service of the blessed God, ye shall eat the wealth of the Gentiles.” D. M.].
Isaiah 61:7ξִ ?ωְׁ ?πֶ ?δ is plainly duplum, double. I do not think that we can understand this of twofold in land. This interpretation puts into the text something not contained in it. The direct antithesis of shame is honor. ξωׁ ?πδ can therefore mean nothing else than double compensation in honor for the lost honor, which is explained when Israel enters into the glory of the Gentiles. We have to supply ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ before λְּ ?μִ ?ξָּ ?δ as in many other cases. [We have here an enallage of persons, the second giving place to the third. Dr.
Naegelsbach renders: On their inheritance they shall sing for joy. But he admits that ηֶ ?μְ ?χָ ?ν can be the accusative of the object as in Psalms 51:18, which is evidently the construction adopted by the translators of the E. V. D. M.]. Israel’s land is not become larger, nor is the separate inheritance of individuals.
But there are added to their own honor and to their own possession the wealth and honor of the heathen. Therefore the inheritance of each Israelite has become double, and therefore they shall have everlasting joy. If we consider what has been mentioned from Isaiah 61:3 b as the fruit of the agency of Him who speaks, we must say that the Israelites shall be called Terebinths of righteousness as a fruit of prophetic work. [He who produces trees of righteousness is more than a prophet.] But that they can build again their cities, make the heathen to be their servants, and live in prosperity and honor, has been brought about by their King.
3. For I the Lord——hath blessed.Isaiah 61:8-9. These two verses confirm what the Accomplisher of the divine will set in prospect before the people of Israel from Isaiah 61:1-7. Jehovah Himself now speaks in order to sanction the word of His Anointed. Was such a sanction necessary, or does the person of Him who designated Himself, Isaiah 61:1, as the Anointed of Jehovah, pass over into the person of Jehovah Himself? I do not venture to decide.
The latter would not be impossible. Comp. the remarks on Isaiah 9:5. Injustice and iniquitous robbery (ςεֹ ?μָ ?δ=ςַ ?εְ ?μָ ?δ59:3, here as Job 5:16; Psalms 58:3; Psalms 64:7 with quiescent wav comp. Ps. 92:16), such as was perpetrated on Israel, challenges the justice of God. He makes good, then, for the past the injury which Israel suffered, while he renders to Israel uprightly and fairly (αΰξϊ comp. Isaiah 10:20; Isaiah 16:5; Isaiah 38:3; Isaiah 48:1) the merited τְּ ?ςֻ ?μָּ ?δi.e., labore partum, reward, indemnification, (Comp.
Isaiah 40:10; Isaiah 49:4; Isaiah 62:11; Isaiah 65:7), [Translate not: I will direct their work, E. V., but I will give their reward in truth], and makes for the future an everlasting covenant with them, which shall guarantee to them protection against such evil. I will make an everlasting covenant with them. Comp. Jeremiah 32:40, where also the expressions πְ ?θַ ?ςְ ?ϊִּ ?ιν 61:44 (comp. Isaiah 61:3), and αΰξϊ are reminiscences from our place.
The ninth verse speaks of one glorious result of that everlasting covenant: It unfolds its effects in such fulness and intensity, that a character (character indelebilis) is imprinted upon the Israelites which distinguishes them from all nations. They will bear the opposite of the mark of Cain, the sign of blessing on their forehead; λִּ ?ιδֵ ?νεβεΧ is not causal, but states the object of ιλιψεν (the subject of the dependent sentence is attracted by the governing verb, comp. Isaiah 3:10). “All that see them will know them that they are,” etc., is for “all that see them will know that they are,” etc. This everlasting covenant cannot possibly be any other than the “new covenant,” spoken of in Jeremiah 31:31 sqq. (comp. Hebrews 8:8; Hebrews 8:13). We see, hence, that the Prophet has here in his eye the time following that of the old covenant, the time of the new covenant. [“The true application of this verse is to the Israel of God in its diffusion among all the nations of the earth, who shall be constrained by what they see of their spirit, character, and conduct, to acknowledge that they are the seed which the Lord hath blessed.
The glorious fulfilment of this promise in its original and proper sense, may be seen already in the in- fluence exerted by the eloquent example of the missionary on the most ignorant and corrupted heathen, without waiting for the future restoration of the Jews to the land of their fathers.”—Alexander.—D. M.]
4. I will greatly rejoice——before all the nations. Isaiah 61:10-11. The speaker here is the Servant of Jehovah; for who else could be compared at the same time with the priestly Bridegroom and with the bride? He expresses his holy joy in God, because Jehovah has clothed Him with garments of salvation, and covered Him with the robe of righteousness (comp. Isaiah 59:17).
Garments of salvation are not such as signify salvation received, but such as cause salvation, for the Servant of Jehovah is the bringer of salvation, not the receiver of it, Redeemer, not redeemed. [Yet πεֹ ?ωָׁ ?ς is predicated of Him, Zechariah 9:9.—D. M.] How the garments of the Redeemer cause salvation, is shown by the φְ ?γַ ?χָ ?δ which follows the ιֶ ?ωַׁ ?ς. The Redeemer covers those who are redeemed by Him with His garment. Because His garment is pure and holy and unexceptionable before God, all who present themselves before God in this garment appear righteous, and so are redeemed. Or is it, perhaps, more correct and more accordant with what follows (Isaiah 61:11) to say that the Lord’s garment, as a living power, germinates and multiplies itself [?], and that, therefore, the wedding garment spoken of in Matthew 22:11 sqq., and the white robes of Rev 3:4-5; Revelation 4:4; Revelation 6:11; Revelation 7:9; Revelation 7:13, are, as it were, shoots from the living garment of the Saviour? The ξְ ?ςִ ?ιμ is not the outer garment, the ωִׂ ?ξְ ?μָ ?δ but a tunica superior, “an over undergarment, or under overgarment”(Leyrer in Herzog,R.
Enc. 7, p 725), which was worn only by distinguished persons, such as kings and princes, and by the high-priest (Exodus 28:31 sqq.; Leviticus 8:7). Comp. the nearer description in JosephusAntiqq. 3, 7, 4. In the second part of the verse some interpreters (Hitzig, Hahn), after the LXX. and Vulg., would take λִּ ?δֵ ?ο simply in the sense of λּ ?εֹ ?πֵ ?ο or δֵ ?λִ ?ιο But λִּ ?δֵ ?ο nowhere has this meaning; and the expressions ξְ ?ςִ ?ιμ and τְּ ?ΰֵ ?ψ seem to indicate priestly ornament. τְּ ?ΰֵ ?ψ is not in itself the priestly covering of the head. But in two places it is brought into connection with the priestly head-ornament; Exodus 39:28, and Ezekiel 44:18. λִּ ?δֵ ?ο is not=to act priestly, i.e., gloriously, with pomp, in the tropical sense; but it is “Sacerdotem agere, sacerdotio fungi.” Whatever its radical, etymological signification may be, the word means in the Old Testament never anything but to act priestly, to attend to the priesthood. τְּ ?ΰֵ ?ψ stands in the accusative of modality, or of nearer definition: the bridegroom is priest, not in general, but in relation to his head-ornament. For this characterizes him as priest. The glorified Servant of God here spoken of, is compared with a priestly bridegroom, because He has purchased the bride by His priestly work, i.e., by the sacrifice which He offered for her (53), and because He still executes the office of a priest for her by intercession and blessing.
But why the comparison with the bride with her ornaments on her? Why is not the comparison rather with a bridal pair?—What means this distinction of bride and bridegroom? It seems to me that this question can be answered from only one stand-point, and this one on which the Prophet himself cannot yet have consciously stood. There hovers over this whole chapter a sort of vail which was riot raised till its fulfilment. The words of 1 Peter 1:10-11, are fully applicable to our Prophet in regard to this place. The fulfilment makes known to us that the Lord comprehends the bride with Himself as one.
He is the Head, she is the body (Ephesians 1:23). The life of Christ, His Spirit, His salvation, His righteousness, are in the church. Therefore is He who wears the garments of salvation and the robe of righteousness compared both with the priestly bridegroom and the bride λַ ?λַּ ?μָּ ?δ recalls Isaiah 49:18, as λֶּ ?ηָ ?ϊָ ?ο recalls Psalms 19:6. Under the λֵּ ?μִ ?ιν the whole apparatus of female finery is to be understood (comp. Genesis 24:53; (Deuteronomy 22:5) Isaiah 61:11 is and must remain enigmatical, if it is not taken, as it has been by us, as an explanation of the thought that the garments of righteousness and salvation, which the Servant of God wears, can, as a living principle, propagate themselves, and so become the ornament of the bride. Isaiah 61:11 is therefore connected with Isaiah 61:10 by λִּ ?ι.
I accordingly regard Isaiah 61:11 as explaining why He who compared Himself with the priestly bridegroom, compares Himself also with the bride. This can be done because the righteousness which the bridegroom as priest has acquired, and consequently the glory, too, which He has obtained, must appear in His body, the bride, just as the seed committed to the ground must appear in the field or in gardens. [Alongside of this explanation I place that of Delitzsch: “The word in the mouth of the Servant of Jehovah is the seed, from which a grand thing unfolds itself before all the world. The field and soil (ΰψυ) of this development is the human race, the enclosed garden of the same is the church, and the grand thing itself is φְ ?γָ ?χָ ?δ as the actual inward nature of His church, and ϊְּ ?δִ ?μּ ?δ glory, as its actual outward appearance. He who makes the seed to grow is Jahve, but the bearer of the seed is the Servant of Jahve, and to be permitted to scatter the seed of a future so full of grace and glory is the ground of His nuptial jubilation.” While Christ and His bride the church are one, and while He does for her all our author states, more is evidently drawn from the similes in Isaiah 61:10 than they were intended to teach.—D. M.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 61:1. The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me.—Old writers found in this statement the three persons of the Holy Trinity.
2. On Isaiah 61:1. Because Jehovah has anointed me. It is beyond question that the Saviour had the triple office of Prophet, Priest and King. Nor can it be questioned that in the old covenant priests, kings and prophets were anointed, although we must say of the prophets, that they, in accordance with the peculiar nature of their office, were not anointed by men, but were anointed solely and immediately by God with the Holy Spirit. There is, then, a threefold theocratic office, and what is common to them all is anointing.
As each of the three offices has different duties, so different qualifications are needed for each. A different χρῖσμαand therefore a different χάρισμα also is imparted to the Prophet, a different one to the priest, a different one to the king. This does not prevent a king from being also prophet, or a prophet from being also priest, or a priest from being also prophet in certain special cases. But He who has the anointing in full measure, who has the Spirit not merely ἐκμέτρου (John 3:34, comp. 1 Corinthians 12:27; Ephesians 4:7), but the whole Spirit, He is eo ipso King, Priest and Prophet, He is the ξָ ?ωִׁ ?ιηַ κατ’ εξοχήν.
3. [On He hath sent me.—Christ when fulfilling His ministry delighted to speak of Himself as the sent of God. It is remarkable with what frequency He so describes Himself in the Gospel of John. In that Gospel He makes mention of the Father’s sending Him about forty times. He always acted under a sense of His responsibility as commissioned by the Father. We can reason backwards, and establish the divine mission of Jesus Christ from His corresponding to the Servant of God here described, more perfectly than any person who has ever appeared in the world. Mark how every trait in the picture was fulfilled in Him.—D. M.].
4. [On to proclaim liberty to the captives.—“Whereas by the guilt of sin we are bound over to the justice of God, are His lawful captives, sold for sin till payment be made of that great debt, Christ lets us know that He has made satisfaction to divine justice for that debt, that His satisfaction is accepted, and if we will plead that, and depend upon it, and make ourselves over and all we have to Him, in a grateful sense of the kindness He has done us, we may by faith sue out our pardon, and take the comfort of it; there is, and shall be, no condemnation to us. And whereas by the power of sin in us we are bound under the power of Satan, sold under sin, Christ lets us know that He has conquered Satan, has destroyed him that had the power of death, and his work, and provided for us grace sufficient to enable us to shake off the yoke of sin, and to loose ourselves from those bands of our neck. The Son is ready by His Spirit to make us free.” Henry.—D. M.].
5. On Isaiah 61:2-3. “The year of Jubilee in the prophecy Isaiah 61:1-3, as whose fulfiller Christ presents Himself, Luke 4:21, is regarded as a type of the Messianic time of salvation, in which, after all the conflicts of the kingdom of God are victoriously passed through, the discords of the world will lose themselves in the harmony of the divine life, and with the σαββατισμὸςof the people of God (Hebrews 4:9) the acts of history will be concluded.” �hler.6. On Isaiah 61:2. On this passage Clement of Alexandria (Strom. Isaiah 1:21) and other cotemporary fathers founded the view that Christ’s public ministry lasted only one year, a view which Gerh. Joh. Vossius took up afterwards on other grounds.
7. [On Isaiah 61:2. The day of vengeance of our God.—“It is a great truth manifest everywhere that God’s coming forth at any time to deliver His people is attended with vengeance on His foes. So it was in the destruction of Idumea—regarded as the general representative of the foes of God (34–35); so it was in the deliverance from Egypt—involving the destruction of Pharaoh and his host; so in the destruction of Babylon and the deliverance of the captives there. So in like manner it was in the destruction of Jerusalem; and so it will be at the end of the world, (Matthew 25:31-46; 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10). The coming of the Redeemer to save His people involved heavy vengeance on the inhabitants of guilty Jerusalem, and His coming to judgment in the last day will involve the divine vengeance on all who have opposed and hated God.” Barnes.—D. M.]
8. On Isaiah 61:3. “Christ in coming to preach the Gospel confers many benefits: He binds up, He sets free, He opens, He comforts, He gladdens, He adorns, He anoints, He clothes. In Him we have every thing, so that we can say with Ambrosius: ‘We have every thing in Christ, and Christ is every thing in us. Wilt thou that thy wounds be healed, He is the physician; art thou in a burning fever, He is the cool fountain of water; art thou burdened with sins, He is righteousness; dost thou need aid, He is strength; dost thou fear death, He is the life; dost thou desire heaven, He is the way; dost thou fear darkness, He is the light; dost thou crave nourishment, He is food. Therefore taste and see that the Lord is good. Blessed is the man who trusteth in Him (Psalms 34:9).’ ” Cramer.
9. On Isaiah 61:4. [“The setting up of Christianity in the world repaired the decays of natural religion, and raised up those desolations both of piety and honesty, which had been for many generations the reproach of mankind. An unsanctified soul is like a city that is broken down, and has no walls, like a house in ruins; but by the power of Christ’s gospel and grace it is repaired, it is put in order again, and fitted to be an habitation of God through the Spirit. And they shall do this, they that are released out of captivity; for we are brought out of the house of bondage, that we may serve God, both in building up ourselves to His glory, and in helping to build up His church on earth.” Henry,—D. M.] When hereafter the city will be on earth in which there will be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying, nor pain, in which, too, there will be no temple, for the Lord God Almighty is Himself its temple—then will the earth itself, which is the oldest ruin, be restored to what it originally was, to be the soil and ground which bears the tabernacle of God with men (Revelation 21:3).
10. On Isaiah 61:5-6. Weber is of the opinion that the Israelites will fulfil the priestly office only in so far as it related to teaching, and that they will receive for this as fair compensation “the bodily services” of the Gentiles. But that the office of teachers is not here in question is shown by the words ξωׁ ?ψϊιΰμδιπε Teaching is not the essential function of the priesthood, but sacrificial and sacramental mediation. [We have not far to look to find the animal sacrifices (see Isaiah 60:7), if we find here a prophecy of the literal conversion of Israel after the flesh into a nation of priests. Ezekiel, however, tells us (Isaiah 45:15-16) that not even all the Levites, but only the priests the Levites, the sons of Zadok, should perform the proper functions of priests in the house of the Lord in that city whose name is Jehovah-Shammah. The New Testament and the providence of God have sufficiently shown that this prophecy was not designed to confer on the Jews a patent of nobility among the nations.
In the exposition of Isa 61:5-6 we have pointed out its true interpretation. How the Jews understood this passage may be seen in Eisenmenger’s Entdecktes Judenthum, Vol. 2, p. 758 sqq. It will not be every nation that will be allowed the privilege of serving the Jews. Some will perish utterly. But every Jew will have two thousand eight hundred servants. And this number of servants is determined by Zechariah 8:23 : “In. those days it shall come to pass that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you.” Now there are according to the Jews seventy nations, and ten men from each would make seven hundred, but as the garment of every Jew will have four wings (λπσ not skirts), each of which will be seized by a Gentile, it follows that four times seven hundred persons, i.e., two thousand eight hundred, will be the servants of one Jew.
How so many could take hold of the garment of one man is not explained. But Peter, the Jewish Christian, may be supposed to have understood in what sense we should take the prophecies in Isaiah 60, 61. Yet he would not suffer the Gentile Cornelius to bow down at the soles of his feet, and he thought that no human being should permit a fellow-man to do so. Acts 10:25-26. And those words of his (Acts 10:34-35), “God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with Him,” should have prevented Christian expositors of the Old Testament from adopting the carnal interpretation of the Jews. Dr.
Charles Hodge has truly said that in the didactic portions of the New Testament “there is no intimation that any one class of Christians, or Christians of any one nation or race, are to be exalted over their brethren; neither is there the slightest suggestion that the future kingdom of Christ is to be of earthly splendor. Not only are these expectations without any foundation in the teachings of the Apostles, but they are also inconsistent with the whole spirit of their instructions. … It is as much opposed to the spirit of the Gospel that pre-eminence in Christ’s kingdom should be adjudged to any man or set of men on the ground of natural descent, as on the ground of superior stature, physical strength, or wealth.”—D. M.].
11. On Isaiah 61:9. “Omnis, qui viderit eos, prima fronte cognoscet, quia semen sit, cui benedixerit Dominus. Quis enim ex ordine vitae, mansuetudine, continentia, hospitalitate, cunctisque virtutibus non intelligai populum Dei?” Hieronymus.12. On Isaiah 61:11. [“So that the whole world is become Eden: reclaimed for ever out of the hand of the unrighteous spoiler. In, this year of Jubilee the earth is restored to its proper heirs, the righteous seed. For all those weary ages of wrong, compensation shall be made. The Priestly King will re-consecrate shame-stricken men, and they shall now be ‘kings and priests unto God.’ ” Kay, D. M.].
HITS1. On Isaiah 61:1-3. The announcement of the coming Saviour by Himself—It tells 1) the Person who sends Him; 2) His equipment for His work; 3) the design of His mission. It is a) to promise and bestow all consolation for the godly; b) to announce judgment for the wicked.
2. [The Lord hath anointed me.—“Aaron wag anointed to be high-priest by Moses (Exodus 40:13; Leviticus 8:12). The Lord Himself has anointed Messiah Psalms 45:7, ‘God thy God, hath anointed Thee.’ So we know that when Jesus was baptized (amidst crowds who were confessing their sins, Matthew 3:6, as on a great Day of Atonement), the heavens were ‘rent’ (Mark 1:10), as if the veil which separated God and man were torn asunder, and ‘God anointed Him with the Holy Ghost’ (Acts 10:38), declaring Him to be “His beloved Son, in whom He was well pleased.” Shortly afterwards Jesus publicly applied this prophecy to Himself (Luke 4:17); and then went forth to proclaim the world’s Jubilee (Luke 4:43; Luke 8:1).” Kay, D. M.].
3. On Isaiah 61:6-7. The Spiritual Priesthood of Christians.—1) Their office (ministers of God), a) by spiritual sacrifices (Romans 12:1; 1 Peter 2:5; Hebrews 13:16); 6) by interceding and blessing; 2) Their present shame; 3) Their future glorification.
4. On Isaiah 61:9. How are Christians known among other men? 1) By their confession, which does not agree with that of the world; 2) By their walk, which differs most decidedly from that of the children of the world.
5. On Isaiah 61:10-11. The mutual relation between Christ and His Church.—1) Christ as the priestly bridegroom puts His Church in possession of righteousness and salvation; 2) The church, arrayed in her bridal ornament, brings forth righteousness and praise to the Lord.Footnotes:opening of the eyes.put on.terebinths.aliens.enter, substitute yourselves.robbery by iniquity.give their reward.Heb. decketh as a priest.
2. A DISTANT VIEW OF THE OF Isaiah 62a) How the Redeemer is Himself the Finisher of this Salvation Isaiah 62:1-51 For Zion’s sake will I not hold my peace,
And for Jerusalem’s sake I will not rest,
Until the righteousness thereof go forth as brightness,
And the salvation thereof as lamp that burneth.
2 And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness,
And all kings thy glory:
And thou shalt be called by a new name,
Which the mouth of the Lord shall name.
3 Thou shalt also be a crown of glory in the hand of the Lord,And a royal diadem in the hand of thy God.
4 Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken;
Neither shall thy land any more be termed Desolate:
Aut thou shalt be called Hephzi-bah,
And thy land Beulah:
For the Lord delighteth in thee,
And thy land shall be married.
5 For as a young man marrieth a virgin,
So shall thy sons marry thee:
And as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride,
So shall thy God rejoice over thee.
AND 1. The speaker is the same in this as in the preceding chapter. Great things had been promised in the previous discourse. Will all be fulfilled? The Anointed of God declares most decidedly, appealing to His love to Jerusalem as the surest guarantee, that He will not rest till Jerusalem is exalted to the highest pitch of glory, and as the appropriate expression of this glory, a new name is promised to her (Isaiah 62:1-2). Jerusalem will then be the most beautiful royal ornament of the Lord her King (Isaiah 62:3).
The times are past when country and city could become desolate. There will be a double relation between Jerusalem and Jehovah, which cannot be dissolved, because it rests on the deepest and truest love. Jehovah will have pleasure in Jerusalem as a bridegroom in his bride. Therefore Jerusalem cannot again be separated from Jehovah, or from her children (Isaiah 62:4-5).
2. For Zion’s sake——rejoice over thee. (Isaiah 62:1-5). We might almost have thought that the promise had reached its maximum at the close of chapter 61, and that nothing greater could be added. But this is not the case. To our surprise we read, Isaiah 62:1, that the Messiah speaks of increasing effort which He will put forth to bring Jerusalem to the highest pinnacle of glory. We perceive from this that the accomplishment of salvation will take place gradually.
That in chapter 62 the speaker is not the Prophet, but the Messiah, I maintain, with Stier and Delitzsch. [Here there is a mistake. Delitzsch makes the speaker in this chapter to be Jehovah. I translate from his Commentary: “That Jehovah here speaks (LXX. Targum, Grotius, Vitringa, Luzzatto), is shown by Isaiah 62:6 a, and by the use of the word ηָ ?ωָׁ ?δ which is the expression commonly employed by Jehovah when He lets the existing condition of things continue without interposing (Isaiah 65:6; Isaiah 57:11; Isaiah 64:11; Isaiah 42:14).”—D. M.] The later interpreters for the most part regard the words as an utterance of the Prophet; But how could he hope to see all stages of this salvation accomplished? And how could he appoint the watchers spoken of in Isaiah 62:6?
For to regard these watchmen as pious worshippers of Jehovah whom the Prophet appointed to call to Jehovah even as incessantly as he himself does (Isaiah 62:1), is exegetical caprice. Intercessors, who by their supplications bring about the restoration of the walls of Jerusalem, are not watchers on the walls. For watchmen are set over something which already exists. Observe, too, the μְ ?ξַ ?ςַ ?ο which significantly stands at the be- ginning of the discourse, and is repeated in the i second member. God’s Anointed rests not, out of love to Zion. In His love, therefore, lies the security that Zion will have her right, that the promise given her will be kept.
Is a better guarantee conceivable? He will not rest till her righteousness breaks forth as brightness, namely, the full brightness of the clear day, and her salvation as a blazing torch. The one of these images is taken from the day, the other from the night. By day there is no clearer light than that which comes from the sun; by night no light shines more brightly than a blazing torch. πֹ ?βַ ?δּ is here used as 1.10; Isaiah 60:3; Isaiah 60:19. Righteousness and salvation correspond to one another, as in Isaiah 61:10; Isaiah 59:17; Isaiah 56:1; Isaiah 51:5-6; Isaiah 51:8, etc. When Israel’s righteousness and salvation have attained their culmination, then they will shine so brightly that all nations and kings must see them.
I do not think that there is any essential difference between salvation and glory. Glory is only the side of salvation which strikes the eyes, which is outwardly conspicuous (comp. Isaiah 58:8). But when Israel has become new outwardly and inwardly, a new name is also appropriate for him. This new name represents, therefore, a new time, the time of which it is said: “Behold, I make all things new” (Revelation 21:5). But only God Himself can appoint (πָ ?χַ ?α to pierce, perforare, notare, only here in Isaiah) this new name, which exactly corresponds to the essential nature of Israel.
We perceive from this trait that the Prophet does not think merely of the restoration by Cyrus (comp. Revelation 2:17). How high the renovated Jerusalem will stand is seen from Isaiah 62:3. The crown is the ornament of a prince’s head. When Jerusalem is Jehovah’s glorious crown, it is the first, highest, most precious jewel which He possesses (comp. Isaiah 28:1; Isaiah 28:5; Revelation 21). [“It has been thought by some that there is a want of congruity in representing the crown as in the hand, instead of its being upon the head; but it must be obvious, that with no propriety whatever could the church be spoken of as placed on the head of Jehovah.
The language is designed to teach the high estimation in which Jerusalem shall be held by the Most High, and her perfect security under His protection.” Henderson, who rightly substitutes for hand, in the second member of Isa 62:3, palm, or the open I hand (λַּ ?σ),—D. M.] The love of Jehovah effects that Jerusalem can never more be called Forsaken, nor her land Desolate; that, on the contrary, the city must be called My-delight-in-her, and the land Married. Thou shalt be called, is equivalent to Thou shalt be. [The E. V. translates the two first names, and gives the original forms of the two last. This is a manifest inconsistency. Azubah and Shemamah are the Hebrew words which are respectively rendered Forsaken and Desolate.
Azubah and Hephzibah occur as actual names; the former was that of the mother of Jehoshaphat (1 Kings 22:42), the latter was the name of the mother of Manasseh (2 Kings 21:1). It is reasonable to suppose that the passage before us was written with allusion to the marriage of Hezekiah with Hephzibah, and that the imagery and form of expression here employed were suggested by that event. That marriage was evidently hailed with joy as full of promise. But Manasseh, the son of Hezekiah by Hephzibah, brought ruin on Judah. This passage, then, could hardly have been written after the death of Hezekiah. Professor Plumptre pertinently asks: “At what period towards the close of the captivity would the mind of a later writer have turned to so disastrous a marriage, and so ill-omened a name as that of Hephzibah, as, suggestive of hope and gladness?”—D.
M.] The land shall be called αְּ ?ςεּ ?μָ ?δi.e., Maritata. The holy land shall not be a virgin chosen by no man, nor a repudiated wife, nor a widow, but a wife living in the conjugal relation. And to this figure there shall correspond a double reality (Isaiah 62:5). [Instead of thy sons,Lowth and many others would read thy builders, changing αָּ ?πַ ?ιִ ?κְ into αֹּ ?πָ ?ιִ ?κְ and they consider the plural to be used for the singular, Jehovah being the builder of Jerusalem, who marries her. This alteration has been made to remove the seeming incongruity of sons marrying their mother. “The idea of the marriage of children with their mother is indeed incongruous, but not only is αָּ ?ςַ ?μ a noble word, which in itself expresses only taking possession of, but, moreover, church and home are blended together in the prosopop�ia.”—Delitzsch. The particles of comparison are to be supplied (Gesen.Gr. § 155,2 h). A young man by marrying “wins for himself an inalienable right to have and to hold.”—Kay.—D.
M ]
____________________
b) How the Redeemer accomplishes the Salvation of Jerusalem by means of the watchmen whom he has appointed Isaiah 62:6-96 I have set watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem,
Which shall never hold their peace day nor night: Ye that make mention of the Lord, keep not silence,
7 And give him no rest, till he establish,
And till he make Jerusalem a praise in the earth.
8 The Lord hath sworn by his right hand, and by the arm of his strength,
Surely I will no more give thy corn to be meat for thine enemies;
And the sons of the stranger shall not drink thy wine,
For the which thou hast laboured:
9 But they that have gathered it shall eat it,
And praise the Lord;And they that have brought it together shall drink it
In the courts of my holiness.
AND 1. As the Redeemer had said of Himself (Isaiah 62:1) that He will not rest till Jerusalem has reached even the highest glory, so He declares here that He will also indirectly, and by means of others, contribute to the attainment of this high end, namely by means of watchmen, who shall do as He Himself: not rest nor be quiet till the end is reached. If these watchmen are to help to reach the goal, their labor takes place in the time which precedes the attainment of the end. And it is naturally assumed in regard to this time, that while it lasts there are still enemies who can hurt Jerusalem, and against whom one must be constantly on his guard. On the other hand, these watchmen are also to be remembrancers for Jehovah, appointed to remind Him incessantly that the work is not yet completed, that Jerusalem is not yet that which it is to be (Isaiah 62:6-7). But Jehovah gives with an oath the comforting assurance, that Israel shall never again be the prey of the enemy, but shall rejoice evermore undisturbed in communion with their God, and shall partake to His praise of the fruits of their land (Isaiah 62:8-9).
2. I have set——courts of my holiness.Isaiah 62:6-9. We must here above all hold fast that the subject of δτχγϊι must be the same as that of ΰηωׁ ?δ and ΰωׁ ?χεθ Isaiah 62:1. It is therefore the Anointed of the Lord who here speaks. [The appointment of officers in the church is in the New Testament ascribed to both God and Christ, 1 Corinthians 12:28; Ephesians 4:11.—D. M.]. When He, on the one hand, perceives the necessity of appointing watchmen on the walls of Jerusalem, and, on the other hand, has the power to do this, He must be the Lord of Jerusalem, and also in some sense absent from it.
And when He charges these watchmen to cry to Jehovah continually, and to let Him have no rest till He make Jerusalem a praise in the earth, it is clear that He regards Jehovah as still standing above Himself. [But it is the Prophet who here suddenly breaks in, and addresses the “Lord’s remembrancers.”—D. M.]. The Prophet, then, means to say that the Jerusalem restored according to chapter 61 by the working of the Messiah will be a city well built, and well provided with walls, but will still have enemies to fear, and not yet be the immediate theatre of the might and glory of her Lord. For when her Lord and Bridegroom has appointed watchmen, who cry to God incessantly for her (as e.g., Moses Exodus 17:11 sqq., and Samuel 1 Samuel 7:8 sqq.; 1 Samuel 8:6; 1 Samuel 15:11; 1 Samuel 12:16-23; Psalms 99:6; Jeremiah 15:1), this intimates not only the presence of enemies, but also His own absence. He still needs representatives who in His name and Spirit, and also in His place exercise the office of guardians and watchmen in two ways; while they, on the one hand, warn against enemies; on the other, pray to God without ceasing for protection and help. [These watchmen strikingly contrast with those described Isaiah 56:10.—D. M.].
The Jerusalem that after the Exile was restored, had still, even after the rebuilding of its walls, enemies enough, against whom it needed guardians and watchmen even as much as intercessors. The Zion of the New Testament has also enemies of every kind, but has also guardians and watchmen (Ephesians 4:11 sqq.), who as Jacob (Genesis 32:24 sqq.) have in their office to wrestle with God and men. For the Zion of the New Testament with all her superiority over that of the Old, has yet a still higher ideal which she strives after: the heavenly Jerusalem. [The rendering in the text of the E. V.: Ye that make mention of the Lord can plead in its favor prevailing usage. But the marginal rendering, Ye that are the Lord’s remembrancers is supported by Isaiah 43:26 where Jehovah speaks put me in remembrance and by the context, in which Zion’s watchmen are commanded to importune Jehovah till He fulfil His promise by glorifying Jerusalem. The δַ ?ξַּ ?ζְ ?λִּ ?ιψִ ?ινΰֶ ?ϊι֯ here addressed are thus exhibited as those who put Jehovah in remembrance.
D. M.]. The prayer of these watchmen is answered. [The assurance that follows is intended rather to inspire them with confidence in prayer. D. M.]. Jehovah has sworn (the distinction between his right hand and the arm of his strength is merely rhetorical) that the still threatening enemies shall not hinder the peaceful prosperity of Jerusalem, nor her communion with her God.
Here again the Prophet lays on Old Testament colors. He represents the enemy as a barbarous horde of Amalekites or Midianites, that makes an irruption into Palestine when the harvest is ripe, in order to carry it off (comp. Judges 6:3; Deuteronomy 28:33). This shall not happen any more. The Israelites shall in the future enjoy the fruit of their labor undisturbed, thanking God alone for the same and giving Him the glory (Deuteronomy 14:22-26). [“In the courts of my sanctuary cannot mean that the produce of the harvest will be consumed only there (which is inconceivable), but only signifies, with allusion to the legal ordinance respecting the second tithe which was to be consumed by the landed proprietor and his family, with the addition of the Levites and the poor, in the holy place ‘before the Lord,’ Deuteronomy 14:22-27, that the partaking of the produce of the harvest will be consecrated by religious feasts. Thoughts of all Israel being then a nation of priests, and of all Jerusalem being a sanctuary, are not contained in this promise.
It declares only this, that the enjoyment of the blessing of the harvest will henceforth be unimpaired, and will take place with grateful acknowledgment of the Giver, and so, because sanctified by thanksgiving, it will itself become a religious service. This is what Jehovah has sworn by His right hand, which He lifts up only to attest the truth, and by His mighty arm which irresistibly executes what He has promised.” Delitzsch. D. M.].
_______________________
c) General survey of what is accomplished by the Redeemer Isaiah 62:10-1210 Go through, go through the gates;
Prepare ye the way of the people;
Cast up, cast up the highway;
Gather out the stones;
Lift up a standard for the people.
11 Behold, the Lord hath proclaimed unto the end of the world,
Say ye to the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy salvation cometh;
Behold, his reward is with him,
And his work before him.
12 And they shall call them,
The holy people, The redeemed of the Lord:And thou shalt be called, Sought out, A city not forsaken.
AND 1. The Prophet in these words again briefly states all that belongs to the positive saving work of the Redeemer. He begins, therefore, with the summons to prepare the way for those returning from the Exile, and on all sides to give the signal to set out (Isaiah 62:10-11); for with the deliverance of Israel from the Babylonian exile, the time of salvation extending to the appearance of the New Jerusalem begins. The last and highest glory the Prophet at the close briefly characterizes by ideal names (Isaiah 62:12).
2. Pass through——not forsaken.Isaiah 62:10-12. The liberation of Israel from the Babylonian captivity is the beginning of redemption. Then the cry shall be heard: Go through the gates. These gates are not those of the cities of Palestine which are to be entered, but the gates of the Babylonian cities out of which they are to move; for this summons stands at the head, and after it comes the mention of the way which is to be prepared. The summons is, therefore, to be understood as Isaiah 48:20; Isaiah 52:11. τַּ ?πּ ?εּ and ρֹ ?μּ ?εּ are repeated from Isaiah 57:14.
To whom are these imperatives addressed? To all, both Jews and Gentiles (comp. ςַ ?μδָ ?ςַ ?ξִּ ?ιν at the close of Isa 62:10), who have to assist in making the return home practicable, easy and glorious. But we must not suppose that the summons must be literally carried out. Who built a highway (ξְ ?ρִ ?μָּ ?δ) for the Israelites when they came out of Egypt? Yet it is said in Isaiah 11:16 that for the remnant returning from Assyria there should be a highway like that on which Israel came out of Egypt. The expression is employed for rhetorical effect. ρχμεξΰαο means that where the way should be rough and stony, the stones should be removed.
This is not to be literally understood, but to be taken generally of the removal of all obstacles (comp. Isaiah 57:14 b). On the construction, comp. Isaiah 7:8; Isaiah 17:1; Hosea 9:12. But as the exiles are not all in one country, the chief land of the Exile, but are scattered in all regions of the world, the command is at the same time issued to give them all the signal to return home. [“Lift up a standard above the nations.” This is the most accurate rendering, and is given by Luther, Alexander and Delitzsch.Dr. Naegelsbach takes ςַ ?μ in a loose sense as equivalent to ΰֶ ?μ or μְ, and supposes that the signals are to be set up for the nations that shall accompany Israel.
D. M.]. That what is said in Isaiah 62:11 does not relate merely to a proclamation published in the realm of Cyrus (Ezra 1:1), is evident, because this call is to sound forth to the end of the earth. The dominion of Cyrus did not reach so far, but the Israelites were in exile to the ends of the earth. The message must therefore reach the most distant nations, and no Israelite, even though living alone among the heathen, shall be forgotten (comp. Isaiah 11:11; Jeremiah 3:18; Jeremiah 16:14 sqq.). [“It has been made a question whether the pronoun his (in his reward, etc.), refers to Jehovah or to the nearest antecedent, Salvation; and if to the latter, whether that word is to be translated Saviour, as it is by Lowth and in the ancient versions.
This last is a question of mere form, and the other is of but little exegetical importance, since the Saviour or salvation meant is clearly represented elsewhere as identical with God Himself. The last clause is a repetition of Isa 40:10, and if ever the identity of thought, expression and connection served to indicate identity of subject, it is so in this case.” Alexander. This interpreter maintains that “the plain sense of the words, the context here, and the analogy of Isa 40:10, are all completely satisfied by the hypothesis that the Messiah (or Jehovah) is here described as coming to His people, bringing with Him a vast multitude of strangers, or new converts, the reward of His own labors, and at the same time the occasion of a vast enlargement to His Church.” D. M.]. The names, Isaiah 62:12, are memorials of blessing, for Israel will certainly be that which it is called (comp. on Isaiah 32:5 sqq.). The expression ςַ ?νδַ ?χֹּ ?γֶ ?ωׁ occurs exactly no where else in the Old Testament.
But compare Daniel 12:7; Daniel 7:27. The expression βְּ ?ΰֻ ?μֵ ?ιιδεδ is found in Isaiah only here; further in Psalms 107:2 (comp. τְּ ?γεּ ?ιִ ?ιִ ιΧ35:10; Isaiah 51:11). Jerusalem shall be called Derushah, the Sought out (the city desired and beloved by all), and the antithesis is added in the expression μΰπςζαδ.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 62:1. “How could the eternal Word keep silence? Christ is never silent; let us, therefore, never be weary to hear and to learn His word.” Leigh. [Christ loved His church and gave Himself for it that He might sanctify and cleanse it, and that He might present it to Himself a glorious church. His Zion is very dear to Him, and He gives her the glory which the Father gave to Him (John 17:22). He never forgets her, never ceases to work for her good, and to intercede for her. What precious consolation we find in the declaration contained in this first verse, when it is regarded as coming from the mouth of Christ Himself! “We may sing upon certainty of success before-hand, even in our winter storm, in the expectation of a summer sun at the turn of the year.
No created powers in Hell, or out of Hell, can mar the music of our Lord Jesus, nor spoil our song of joy. Let us then be glad, and rejoice in the salvation of our Lord; for faith had never yet cause to have wet cheeks, and hanging-down brows, or to droop or die....If Christ were buried and rotten among the worms, we might have cause to look like dead folks, but ‘the Lord liveth, and blessed be our Rock., ” Rutherford’s Letters, 182.—D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 62:2 b. The new name is the correlative of the new creation. But only God Himself will appoint the new name. Only God the omniscient, the searcher of hearts, before whose eyes all things are naked and opened, is able to give this new name, for He only knows perfectly the inward nature of the new creature. When we read (Revelation 2:17) that no one will know the new name but he who receives it, this cannot mean that no one will be acquainted with this name, that it will be a hidden, secret name, as, e.g., Macrobius (Saturn.
III. 9) speaks of a secret name of the city of Rome with which even the most learned were unacquainted. For we read (Revelation 19:12) that Christ has such a name written which no man knew, but He Himself. And this name is then mentioned,Revelation 19:13. He is called: the Word of God. The sound of the name is known, but its deep significance no one understands but He who bears it. It follows that what we read in Isaiah 62:4 of this chapter cannot possibly be the new name referred to in Isaiah 62:2.
For Hephzibah and Beulah are like Azubah (For-saken) and Shemamah (Desolate). The former names come in the place of the latter. But Azubah and Shemamah were never actual names. And so Hephzibah and Beulah cannot be actual names. [“That ωֵׁ ?ν is not to be understood of a mere name, but has special reference to state and character, is obvious from the common idiom by which anything is said to be called what it really is. See Isaiah 1:26.” Henderson. Who can understand all that is contained in the name Hephzibah as applied by the Lord to His church?
There is a mystery of grace and condescension in this significant name which we cannot fully comprehend. Only God Himself could give such a name to His church.—D. M.].
3. On Isaiah 62:6 sq. “No one should venture to serve as a spiritual watchman who has not been set by Christ Himself on the walls of Jerusalem.” Leigh. [“God is so far from being displeased With our pressing importunity, as men commonly are, that He invites and encourages it, He bids us cry after Him. He bids us make pressing aplications at the throne of grace, and give Him no rest, Luke 11:5-6. He suffers Himself not only to be reasoned with, but to be wrestled with.” Henry.—D. M.].
4. On Isaiah 62:7. [“The public welfare and prosperity of God’s Jerusalem is that which we should be most importunate for at the throne of grace; we should pray for the good of the church, 1) That it may be safe, that He would establish it, that the interests of the church may be firm, may be settled for the present, and secured to posterity. 2) That it may be great, may be a praise in the earth; that it may be praised, and that God may be praised for it. We must persevere in our prayers for mercy to the church till mercy comes; we must do as the Prophet’s servant did, go yet seven times, till the promising cloud appear, 1 Kings 17:44. It is a good sign that God is coming to a people in ways of mercy, when He pours out a spirit of prayer upon them, and stirs them up to be fervent and constant in their intercessions.” Henry. The Lord’s Remembrancers put God in remembrance of His own promises. As Jacob, Genesis 32.: Thou saidst.
Comp. 2 Samuel 7:25. This is their all-prevailing plea. Therefore they find in their heart to pray. 2 Samuel 7:27.—D. M.]
5. On Isaiah 62:9. [“Nothing is a more certain indication of liberty and prosperity than this—that every man may securely enjoy the avails of his own labor. In nothing is a state of liberty and order more distinguished from tyranny and anarchy than this. Nothing more certainly marks the advance of civilization; and nothing so much tends to encourage industry and to promote prosperity....And as the tendency of true religion is to repress wars, and to establish order, and to diffuse just views of the rights of man, it everywhere promotes prosperity by producing the security that a man shall enjoy the avails of His own productive industry. Wherever the Christian religion prevails in its purity, there is seen the fulfilment of this prophecy; and the extension of that religion everywhere would promote universal industry, order and law.”—Barnes—D. M.]
6. On Isaiah 62:10. “Every Christian teacher should let the imperatives that are found here sound daily in his ears and heart. For Christ has spoken them to him also. As often as a fit of slumber or laziness comes upon thee in the discharge of thy office, bethink thyself that Christ is standing behind thee and calling to thee: Go through, go through! Prepare the way, prepare the way! Lift up a standard!” Leigh.7.
On. Isaiah 62:11. “Adventus Christi vulgo triplex statuitur: humiliationis, sanctificationis, glorificationis.” Foerster. Christ first came from above down to earth visible to all in the form of a servant. Secondly, He comes continually from above invisibly, by His Spirit in the word and sacrament that He may sanctify us. Thirdly, He will come again from above visible to all, not in the form of a servant, but in glory (Matthew 25). This three-fold coming of the Lord must be continually held before the church that the Bride may be ready when the Bridegroom comes.
8. On Isaiah 62:12. [“None are to be called the redeemed of the Lord but those that are the holy people; the people of God’s purchase is a holy nation. And they shall be called sought out; God shall seek them out, and find them wherever they are dispersed, eclipsed or lost in a crowd; men shall seek them out that they may join themselves to them, and not forsake them. It is good to associate with the holy people, that we may learn their ways, and with the redeemed of the Lord, that we may share in the blessings of the redemption.” Henry.—D. M.]
HINTS1. On Isaiah 62:1-5. We have here an appropriate text for a sermon on the future prospects of the church. Mark 1) The foundation of the church’s hope, 2) The object of that hope. The foundation is the love which the Lord bears to His church (Isaiah 62:1 : For Zion’s sake, Isaiah 62:4 b and 5). The object of hope is a. Redemption from long-prevailing evils (Isaiah 62:4 a); b. A new life (Isaiah 62:1 b, Isaiah 62:2 a, Isaiah 62:3); c. A new name (Isaiah 62:2 b).
2. On Isaiah 62:6-7. The duty and aim of Christian ministers. 1) Their duty: a. toward men; not to be silent with exhortations and warnings; b. toward God; not to be silent with intercessions (Isaiah 62:6 b and 7 a). 2) Their aim: that the church of the Lord be built up and perfected (Isaiah 62:7 b).
3. On Isaiah 62:9. [This verse may properly be employed to form the basis of a discourse against the doctrine of the Communists, who would deprive others of the fruit of their industry.—D. M.]
4. On Isaiah 62:10-12. “Three things are here contained: 1) An invitation to all to meet the Messiah who is about to appear; 2) The proclamation of His advent; 3) The fit designation of those who receive the Lord with joy.” Carpzov.Footnotes:aburning torch.That is; My delight is in her.That is, Married.Hob. with the joy of the bridegroom.all the day and all the night.Or, ye that are the Lord’s remembrancers.Heb. silence.Heb. If I give, etc.strangers.new wine.sanctuary.recompense.people of the sanctuary.
B. The negative side of the revelation of Salvation. The judgment on the heathen Isaiah 63:1-61 Who is this that cometh from Edom,
With dyed garments from Bozrah?
This that Isaiah 1 glorious in his apparel,
Travelling in the greatness of his strength?
I that speak in righteousness,
Mighty to save.
2 Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel,
And thy garments like him that treadeth in the wine fat?
3 I have trodden the winepress alone:
And of the people there was none with me:
For I will tread them in mine anger,
And trample them in my fury;
And their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments,
And I will stain all my raiment.
4 For the day of vengeance is in mine heart,
And the year of my redeemed is come.
5 And I looked, and there was none to help;
And I wondered that there was none to uphold:
Therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me;
And my fury, it upheld me.
6 And I will tread down the people in mine anger,
And make them drunk in my fury,
And I will bring down their strength to the earth.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_63:2. [The Masoretic note marks as abnormal the Pattach in βַּ ?ϊ though the word is in Pause. But pattach when pausal is commonly not lengthened in monosyllabic words. See Delitzsch in loc.—D. M.].
Isaiah 63:3. εְ ?ιֵ ?ζ apocopated future Kal from πָ ?ζָ ?δ, to sprinkle. ΰֶ ?βְ ?ΰַ ?μְ ?ϊִּ ?ι is, beside the Niphal πְ ?βֹ ?ΰֲ ?μεּ, the only form of the verb βָּ ?ΰַ ?μ, impurum esse, which occurs in Isaiah. It is a Hiphil form imitating the Aramaic, and has possibly been chosen in order to give to the thing a corresponding expression in bad Hebrew, in a word taken from the common language current in conversation.
AND 1. Chapters 60–63 are most closely connected. In 60–62 there was described the positive work of God’s Anointed which brings blessing and salvation to Israel. Chapter 63 shows how He will accomplish the negative side of His mission by punishing the heathen. With dramatic effect the Prophet pictures a person of commanding appearance approaching from Edom in magnificent but blood-stained raiment. To the question who He is, the person asked replies that He is He to whom it belongs to hold judgment, and to bring salvation (Isaiah 63:1).
And to the further question why His garment is so red, (Isaiah 63:2), He answers that He has trodden the wine-press alone, with no man of the nations with Him, (which He will requite by the execution of the same judgment on them), and thus He has soiled His garment (Isaiah 63:3). The hero comes therefore from executing judgment on Edom, and He sets forth in prospect a second judgment embracing all nations. This second judgment, which was only parenthetically mentioned in Isaiah 63:3, is treated of more fully in Isaiah 63:4-6. First, it is marked in Isaiah 63:4 as a long-purposed day of vengeance, with which at the same time a year of salvation will begin. Then it is again prominently stated, that the hero sees Himself isolated, but trusts notwithstanding in the strength of His own arm, and of His fury (Isaiah 63:5), and is confident that He will tread down the nations, and shed their vital juice (Isaiah 63:6).
2. Who is this that——to the earth.Isaiah 63:1-6. The Fathers (Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen, Ambrose, Augustine,etc.), apply this passage directly to the sufferings and ascension of Christ. Origen, in particular, and after Him Jerome and Theodoret put the question: Who is this that cometh,etc., into the mouth of the angels who guard the gates of heaven. Thereupon the foremost of the procession accompanying the Lord answer in the words of Psalms 24. “Lift up your heads, O ye gates; and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in.” Athanasitius makes the question proceed from the mouth of fallen angels. Under Edom the Fathers understand the (red) earth.
Another group of interpreters, with Luther at their head, understand under Edom the Synagogue of the Jews, under Bozrah “urbem munitam privilegiis divinis, i.e., Jerusalem. The blood is the blood of the Jews. The hero comes from inflicting judgment on Jerusalem. Calvin disputes any reference to Christ. He finds in the passage simply the announcement of a judgment on the Edomites which is still future. This view is more definitely set forth by Grotius and others, as they see here a prophecy of that devastation of Edom which was effected by Judas Maccabaeus (Maccab.
Isaiah 5:3 sqq. 65; 2 Maccab. Isaiah 10:15 sqq. Jos. Antiqq. xii. 11, 12). Eichhorn and Koppe regard Nebuchadnezzar as the accomplisher of this threatening. Cocceius, and many others after him put a spiritual sense on the passage, and understand under “the trampling down” the “crucifixionem veteris hominis et abolitionem omnis impietatis per crucifixionem Christi.” Vitringa, who here follows in general the rabbinical interpretation, understands under Bozrah Rome, and under Edom the countries subdued by the Romans.
The “conculcare” he refers here as in chapter 34 to the liberation of the Christians from the power of Rome. But he does not, as many others, think of the elevation of Christianity to be the religion of the State by Constantine, nor of the general judgment (Revelation 20:11 sqq.), but of the extermination of Antichrist by the warrior who rides on the white horse, Revelation 19:11 sqq. Among modern interpreters Gesenius, Hitzig, Umbreit, Beck, Seinecke, see in this prophecy a threatening against Edom expressed in the form of a vision representing an act of vengeance as completed; while Knobel, according to his peculiar way of judging, thinks that he can discern here the battle of Sardis (Herod, 1:80; Cyrop. Isaiah 7:1) depicted in prophetic colors. Stier is of the opinion that the one who is seen as coming is Christ, coming from the fulfilment of what is related Revelation 14:20; Revelation 19:18; Revelation 19:21. Delitzsch finds the historical fulfilment of our prophecy in what befel the Edomites at the hands of the Maccabean princes and of Simon of Gerasa (Jos.
Bell. jud. iv. 9, 7), while its final fulfilment is the destruction of Antichrist and his hosts (Revelation 19:11 sqq.). [The destruction of Antichrist is regarded by Delitzsch simply as the New Testament counterparty this piece.—D. M.]. The Catholic interpreters Rohling and Neteler do not exclude the historical fulfilment (through Simon of Gerasa; so Rohling), but yet regard as the fulfiller of our prophecy the Servant of Jehovah, who, according to chapter 53 should give His life as an offering for sin, and who is, on the other hand, the destroyer of Antichrist, and is thus sprinkled both with His own blood and that of others. [Dr. Naegelsbach regards the victory of Amaziah, king of Judah, over the Edomites (2 Chronicles 25:5-12) as furnishing the historical foundation for this prophecy. Amaziah returning from the slaughter of the Edomites is the type of the Anointed of the Lord who here appears as redeeming Israel by executing judgment on Israel’s enemies. But this is an opinion which is quite peculiar to our Author, and which no one before him has ventured to express.
It is strange that any one should think of finding in this glorious Conqueror, who comes travelling in the greatness of His strength, who speaks in righteousness and is mighty to save, the antitype of that Amaziah who set up for worship the gods of the vanquished Edomites, and was afterwards completely overcome by Joash, king of Israel. Edom is a representative people. It is not an emblematic name of the great world-power, in its violence and tyranny, for which Babylon is made to stand. But Edom, the inveterate enemy of Israel, and occupying a bad pre-eminence in hatred against Israel, is the representative of the world that hates the people of God. So Delitzsch, who remarks the emblematizing tendency which Isaiah here, as in chaps, 21–22:14, manifests. The name Edom is made an emblem of its future doom.
The apparel of Jehovah, the avenger, is seen to be ΰָ ?γֹ ?ν, red, with the blood of Edom. The name Bozrah, too, readily suggests αָּ ?φַ ?γ, to gather the vintage of grapes. The image of treading grapes is here used to picture the Lord’s crushing of the inhabitants of Bozrah, who are as the vintage in the wine-press. We cannot study the picture without recognizing the emblematic significance of the names Edom and Bozrah. The question arises: Are we, in the interpretation of this prophecy, to think of Judas Maccabeus, Hyrcanus, and Simon of Gerasa, or even of the proper Edomites? The answer depends on the way in which we must answer another question.
Did Judas, or either of the other Jewish chiefs mentioned, return in triumph from the Idumean city Bozrah specified by Isaiah? Of this there is no evidence. Lowth has called attention to a very important point which, in his view, excludes from this prophecy Judas Maccabeus, and even the Idumeans properly so called. “The Idumea of the Prophet’s time was quite a different country from that which Judas conquered. For during the Babylonish captivity the Nabatheans had driven the Edomites out of their country, who upon that took possession of the southern parts of Judea, and settled themselves there; that is, in the country of the whole tribe of Simeon, and in half of that of Judah. And the metropolis of the Edomites, and of the country which Judas took, was Hebron, 1Ma 5:63, not Botsra” (Bozrah). This consideration is fatal to all attempts of the literalizing school to interpret this prophecy.—D.
M.]. The question, Who is this? is purely rhetorical. The Prophet well knows who He is whom he sees. The question is put to awaken and direct our attention to Him who is seen coming by the Prophet. (Comp. Isaiah 60:8; Son 3:6). Many are inclined to understand ηξευαβγιν not of the color of blood, but of the red (purple) color of the garments, as kings and warriors frequently wore red garments (comp.
Knobel on this place; Judges 8:26; Justin Isaiah 20:3), and, as they say, the soiling with blood would be incompatible with δָ ?γεּ ?ψ. But it is just the being sprinkled with blood which is the most prominent and important mark in the appearance of the hero; and while this doubtless stains His garments it is glorious to Himself. Bozrah (comp. Isaiah 34:6; Amos 1:12) was after Petra one of the most important cities of Edom (comp. Jeremiah 49:13; Jeremiah 49:22). It lay north of Petra.
Beside this Edomite Bozrah, there was a city of this name in Moabitis (Jeremiah 48:24), and another in Auranitis, which latter is not mentioned in the Holy Scriptures (see Comment, on Jeremiah 48:24). The Prophet has of the Edomite cities made mention of Bozrah, because αָּ ?φְ ?ψָ ?δ (although the name of the city probably denotes Septum, munimentum) on account of the signification vindemiavit belonging to the verb from which it is derived, admirably suits the comparison with a treader of the wine-press. ξִ ?αָּ ?φְ ?ψָ ?δ as ξֵ ?ΰְ ?γֶ ?εֹ ?ν depends on αּ ?ΰ. Observe the gradation. In the first member the Prophet mentions simply the coming from Edom, then he specifies the red garments in the second member, and then in the third, which begins with a repetition of ζֶ ?δ, he speaks of the glorious apparel and the proud bearing. [“δָ ?γεּ ?γ properly means swollen, inflated, but is here metaphorically used in the sense of adorned, or, as Vitringa thinks, terrible, inspiring awe.” Alexander.—D. M.]. I take φֹ ?ςֶ ?δ in the sense of resupinus.
The root occurs five times in the Old Testament, and has the signification of bending, inclining. It here characterizes one who protrudes the breast, and proudly throws back the head. [Delitzsch agrees with Vitringa in understanding φֹ ?ςֶ ?δ to mean se huc illuc motitans.—D.M.]. To the question ξιζδεβεΧ the Person seen Himself answers. His answer is first of a general character. He does not mention at first the act of judgment which He has just executed on Edom, but, as if He would remove the impression that He is a worldly prince given to deeds of violence, who, as a beast of prey, unjustly makes an incursion for plunder and slaughter, fie declares His nature in general to be that of One who works righteousness and salvation. He says ξְ ?γַ ?αֵּ ?ψ not γִּ ?αַּ ?ψְ ?ϊִּ ?ι.
By this participle He designates as His permanent property the speaking, i. e., acting, transacting in righteousness. The context requires us to understand γִּ ?αֶּ ?ψ not of the mere speaking or teaching with words which should have righteousness for their subject, or should be spoken in righteousness. But γִּ ?αֶּ ?ψαφγχδ relates here to a judicial speaking or transacting. [Better Delitzsch, who compares Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 45:13 : “He speaks in righteousness, while He in the zeal of His holiness threatens judgment to oppressors, and promises salvation to the oppressed, and also carries out by His power what He threatens and promises.” Comp. further Isaiah 45:23; Isaiah 59:16, which places show that the speaker is no one less than Jehovah. Henderson justly remarks that the I name The Word given to the Warrior, Revelation 19:13, exactly corresponds to ξְ ?γַ ?αֵּ ?ψ, by which He here characterizes Himself. The description, too, Revelation 19:13, “He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood” is manifestly drawn from this place in Isaiah. The Logos is faithful and true (Revelation 19:11).
He is One who speaks in righteousness. It is unwarranted to say with Dr. Naegelsbach that I that speak in righteousness marks the hero’s relation to His enemies as a strict judge; and that the words mighty to save tell what He is for Israel.—D. M.]. ψַ ?α is not to be confounded with ψָ ?αpropugnator, Isaiah 19:20. After the hero has answered the question who is this? more in the sense of qualis? than of quis? the Prophet further inquires: Why is it red in thine apparel? The μְ intimates that the redness is not something inherent in the raiment, but something that has come to it from without.
This is more clearly expressed by the second part of Isa 63:2. The spots that have arisen through spurting recall to mind the dress of one who treads in the wine-press (γψκ with αְּ as Isaiah 59:8). It is not yet intimated that these are spots of blood. The pith of the matter is ingeniously and gradually reached. [“It is a slight but effective stroke in this fine picture, that the first verse seems to speak of the stranger as still at a distance, whereas in the second He has come so near as to be addressed directly.” Alexander.—D. M.]. The hero accepts the comparison drawn from treading in the wine-press.
It is true, says He, I have in a certain sense trodden in the wine-vat, and that alone, by Myself. τּ ?εּ ?ψָ ?δ (from τּ ?εּ֤ ?ψ=τָּֽ ?ψַ ?ψfregit, only here and Haggai 2:16) is synonymous with βַּ ?ϊ, but is to be distinguished from ιֶ ?χֶ ?α (comp. on Isaiah 5:2; Isaiah 16:10), for βַּ ?ϊ or τּ ?εּ ?ψָ ?δ is the upper vat, out of which the juice flows off into the lower trough or ιֶ ?χֶ ?α from which it is drawn (comp. Leyrer in Herz.R.-Enc. 7. p. 509). The hero, therefore, compares the bloody judgment which He has executed on Edom with treading in the winepress. He falls back on an older prophetic utterance, Joel 4:13; while John had both these passages before him; in Revelation 14:14-20 chiefly the words of Joel; but in Revelation 19:13-15 chiefly this passage of Isaiah. The hero whom the Prophet beholds, states emphatically that He trod the wine-press alone, as of the nations there was not a man with Him. The statement indicates the universal antichristian spirit of the nations. [“When He adds ‘that of the nations there was no one with Him,’ it follows that the wine-vat was so great that He could have used the cooperation of whole nations.
And when He continues: And I trod them in mine anger,etc., the riddle in this declaration is explained. To the people themselves the knife has been applied. They were cut off as grape-clusters and cast into the wine-vat.”—Delitzsch. The reader can judge whether the lofty terms of this prediction are satisfied by the exposition of Henderson, which I subjoin: “When the victor declares that none [no man] of the peoples or nations rendered Him any assistance in the attack on Edom, he refers to the fact, that vengeance had not been taken upon that nation, as it had been upon Tyre, Moab, Egypt, etc., through foreign intervention. Identifying the Jews under the Maccabees and Hyrcanus with Himself by whom they were employed as native instruments, He vindicates the glory of the deed from all aid obtained from an extraneous source.” But it would be difficult to suppose Jehovah identifying Himself with Simon of Gerasa and his lawless followers who inflicted the sorest judgment on the Edomites. Besides, ςַ ?ξִּ ?ιν, peoples in general (see Isaiah 63:6), and not the Edomites only are the objects of God’s crushing judgment.
We append here Delitzsch’s remarks on Isaiah 63:5-6 : “The meaning is that no one, in conscious willingness to assist the God of judgment and salvation in His purpose, associated himself with Him. The church devoted to Him was the object of redemption; the mass of those alienated from God was the object of judgment. He saw Himself alone; neither human co-operation, nor the natural course of things aided the execution of His design; therefore He renounced human assistance, and interrupted the natural course of things by a wonderful deed of His own.”—Delitzsch. D. M.]. The words εΰγψλν to ςμΞαβγι are to be taken as a parenthesis.
The guilt of the nations, of whom no one was with Him, presses so forcibly on the mind of the speaker that He, immediately interrupting His speech, sees Himself compelled to declare their punishment also. Because they, when He trod the wine-press in Edom, were not to be found on His side, He will tread and trample them to pieces, so that their juice squirts upon His clothes. [But the assumption of this parenthesis is very unnatural. Many interpreters, as Henderson and Delitzsch, translate And I trod them in my anger and trampled them in my fury,etc. On the whole this is the easiest construction which regards the future tense as used for the past in this animated discourse. Comp. εְ ?ΰַ ?αִּ ?ιθetc., in Isaiah 63:5. D.
M.]. πֵ ?φַ ?η, from πָ ?φַ ?η = πָ ?ζָ ?δfudit, therefore effusum, humor, succus, only here and Isaiah 63:6 : the word is chosen, because not merely the blood, but also other fluids, especially the matter of the brain, are to be denoted. Isaiah 63:4. [If we render Isaiah 63:3 in the past tense, then we must consistently employ the past tense in Isaiah 63:4. For a day of vengeance (was) in my heart,etc.] We have in Isaiah 63:4 a repetition of words in Isaiah 61:2 a [comp. also Isaiah 34:8]. But the clauses are transposed, and instead of ψָ ?φεֹ ?ο we have the word that does not elsewhere occur, πְּ ?ΰεּ ?μִ ?ιν. [Dr. Naegelsb. takes manifestly, βְ ?ΰεּ ?μַ ?ι, as many other interpreters do, in the sense of my redemptions, making an abstract noun of the plural of the passive participle. But the obvious and natural rendering is that of the E.V., my redeemed.
There is a year appointed for the redeemed of Jehovah, comp. Isaiah 62:12. D. M.] Isaiah 63:5-6. It will happen again as it did in the day of Edom. The Lord will see none of the peoples of the world on His side.
He expresses this thought twice in parallel members, and the second time emphasizes it by saying that He will perceive His standing alone with astonishment. For there is only a little flock that will follow Him (Isaiah 6:13). Many are called, but few chosen. The astonishment which is ascribed to the Lord is an anthropopathic expression which has only rhetorical significance. Comp. Isaiah 59:16.
The second part of Isa 63:5 passes over into the language of narration. The expression ΰֲ ?ωַׁ ?λְּ ?ψֵ ?ν (the Targum and some codd. and editions read ΰֲ ?ωַׁ ?αְּ ?ψֵ ?ν, which is appropriate, but unnecessary, and insufficiently attested) involves a bold turn of thought: the judged are not only objects, but also vessels of wrath; they are not merely grapes that spurt their juice, but are themselves full of the wine of the wrath of God (comp. Isaiah 29:9; Isaiah 49:26; Isaiah 51:21).
AND ETHICAL1. On 63. 1–6. Till the time of Calvin it was the prevailing opinion that the treader in the wine-press is Christ, not as judging the nations, but as Himself suffering death, and by His death depriving the devil of his power. “Christ, as He contends mightily in His suffering, and after His suffering triumphs gloriously,” was regarded as the theme of this prophecy. The blood on His garment was accordingly to be understood of the blood of demons. Jerome remarks on I have trodden the wine-press alone: “Neque enim angelus, aut archangelus, throni, dominationes, aut ulla coelestium potestatum humanum corpus assumsit et pro nobis passus est et conculcavit adversarias fortitudines atque contrivit.” But the blood of the demons is to be understood τροπικῶς. A synopsis of the old expositions of the passage in this sense is found in a dissertation by Leyrer on this place, published in 1648. (It is reprinted in Exercitationum philologico-historicarum fasces quinque by Thomas Crenius, Ludg.
Bat., 1697 and 1700). Calvin pronounces this interpretation a perversion of Scripture (“hoc caput violenter torserunt in Christum”). His view was adopted especially by Reformed interpreters, as Wolfg. Musculus, Abr. Scultetus (Idea concionum in Jes. hab. p. 844), Vitringa and others. Vitringa makes these points prominent. “The hero is not set forth as suffering, but as acting, not as sprinkled with His own blood, but with the blood of enemies, not as satisfying the justice of God for sins, but as executing the justice of God in punishing enemies.” However, even Lutheran theologians, as Joh.
Tarnov (in the Exercitt. bibl. Libri 4, Rostock, 1627, p. 118, Num de Christo patiente hic agatur), and the anonymous author of a Disputatio de Victore Idumaeorum Jes. lxiii. maintained substantially the view of Calvin. Since the old interpreters, as Foerster says, applied the place ὁμοθυμαδόν to the passion of Christ, we can understand how Isaiah 63 was a very favorite Lesson in Holy Week.
2. “The prophecy which is here directed against Edom is to be regarded as a prophecy of the judgment which will befall the antichristian, persecuting world in the last days. On this account the Seer of the New Testament, John, has described the Lord as coming to judge the world after the model of Isaiah 63. (Revelation 19).”—Weber.3. On Isaiah 63:3. “When at other times the Lord holds judgment, nations who will execute it stand at His disposal. He ‘hisses for the fly that is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt, and for the bee that is in the land of Assyria.’ He calls the mighty of Egypt and Babylon to serve Him (Isaiah 7:18-19). Why is no people ready to help Him in His judgment on Edom? This is a hint that the judgment on Edom must be at the same time that judgment in which the Lord judges all nations.
Only in this way can we understand that none of them can here help Him, as they themselves are all objects of the judgment.”—Weber.4. Hector Pintus says, in his Commentary, on this passage: “Non sine causa dicit: non est virmecum, ne scilicet excludat Mariam virginem, quae usque ad mortem ei comes fuit, et cui gladius doloris cor pertransivit.” This reminds one of what the Jansenist, Antoine Arnaud, in the treatise “Difficultιs proposιes ΰ Mr. Steyaert, etc.: Cologne. 1691,” relates of various preachers who publicly declared, that if the foolish virgins instead of saying, “Domine, domine aperi nobis,” had said, “Domina aperi nobis,” they certainly would have found an open door.
HINTSOn Isaiah 63:1-6. [Messiah is the conqueror of Edom, as Balaam of old predicted (Numbers 24:17-18). Not till He raises up the fallen tabernacle of David, is possession in the highest sense taken of Edom and of all the heathen (Amos 9:11-12. As we understand the Lord’s work of destruction depicted in Psalms 110:5-6, so must we understand the judgment on Edom here described. Who are the enemies that Messiah is commissioned to subdue? How does He destroy His foes? This last question admits of a two-fold answer.—D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 63:1-6. When Christ was suffering in Gethsemane, was bleeding before Pilate and dying on the cross, He did not look like a Judge and Conqueror. And yet He was such. Just then it was that He took from the devil his might (Hebrews 2:14), and spoiled principalities and powers, and made a show of them openly (Colossians 2:15). It is only on the basis of this judgment, which He the one seemingly judged, performed upon the cross, that He will be hereafter able to hold the last judgment in His state of exaltation.
3. On Isaiah 63:1-6. “Our text bids us 1) To look to the Man of Sorrows, who redeemed us; 2) To contemplate in faith the great work which He has accomplished for us; 3) For this to render to Him the thank-offering which we owe Him.”—Ziethe, Manch. Gaben. und Ein Geist, 1870. [It is strange that an eminent modern preacher should so misrepresent the teaching of this passage. If we wish to lead men to contemplate Christ as the Man of Sorrows, by whose blood we are redeemed, we should choose a passage of Scripture that exhibits Him in this character. But it is either culpable ignorance, or something worse, to affirm that the Scripture before us contains the lessons set forth in the above-mentioned heads of a sermon.—D. M.].
Footnotes:Heb. decked,marching proudly.juice.vital juice.
IV.—THE FOURTH The Prophet in Spirit puts Himself in the Place of the Exiled Church, and bears its Cause in Prayer before the Lords Isaiah 63:7 to Isaiah 64:11 Chapters 60–63. 6, are like a prophetic high plateau, which the Prophet, by means of chapters 58 and 59 has ascended out of his own time. In this fourth discourse he comes down again to the present time, that is to say, to a time relatively present, to that of the people in exile. He transports himself entirely into this time, as if he were passing through it, and sets before the Lord the temporal and spiritual need of the people living in exile. He does this by first taking a retrospect of the past, and showing what the Lord formerly was to the people (Isaiah 63:7-14). Then he entreats the Lord as the Father of His people to look upon them (Isaiah 63:15-19); then he prays that the Lord, for their complete deliverance, would visibly come to them with a grand manifestation of His divine majesty (64).
___________________
1. OF WHAT THE LORD WAS TO THE PEOPLE
Isaiah 63:7-147 I will mention the loving-kindnesses of the Lord,And the praises of the Lord,According to all that the Lord hath bestowed on us,
And the great goodness toward the house of Israel,
Which he hath bestowed on them according to his mercies,
And according to the multitude of his loving-kindnesses.
8 For he said, Surely they are my people,
Children that will not lie:
So he was their Saviour.
9 In all their affliction he was afflicted,
And the angel of his presence saved them:
In his love and in his pity he redeemed them;
And he bare them, and carried them all the days of old.
10 But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit:
Therefore he was turned to be their enemy,
And he fought against them.
11 Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying,
Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock?
Where is he that put his holy Spirit within him?
12 That led them by the right hand of Moses with his glorious arm,
Dividing the water before them,
To make himself an everlasting name?
13 That led them through the deep, as an horse in the wilderness,
That they should not stumble.
14 As a beast goeth down into the valley,
The Spirit of the Lord caused him to rest:
So didst thou lead thy people,
To make thyself a glorious name.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_63:7. The words ςμλμΰωׁ ?ψΞβξμπειΧ are to be taken as one term, to which λְּ, in the sense of secundum, is prefixed. ςμ stands in a causal sense [λְּ ?ςַ ?μ is = uti par est propter]. ψַ ?αΞθεּ ?α is to be regarded as the object dependent on ΰζλιψ rather than as dependent on λְּ in λְּ ?ςַ ?μ.
Isaiah 63:9. Instead of the Kethibh μִֹ ?ΰ we must with the K’ri read μεֹ, as μΰֹ, however it may be explained, does not yield an appropriate sense [?]. Some take φָ ?ψ for φַ ?ψ in pause, either in the passive sense: in all their affliction there was (to them) no distress )φַ ?ψ as, e.g., Isaiah 25:4; Isaiah 26:16, comp. pressi non oppressi), or in the active sense=oppressor, adversary (Isaiah 63:18; Isaiah 64:1; Isaiah 1:24; Isaiah 9:10, et saepe). Both these views are set forth under the most manifold modifications (comp. Stier). But whichever of the two constructions we choose, there is an abruptness in the expression.
We should expect μָ ?δֶ ?ν, or, if φָ ?ψ should refer to Jehovah, the pronoun δεּ ?ΰ is wanting: In all their affliction He was not an oppressor. It is better, therefore, to follow the K’ri, although all the old versions support μΰ. Our place belongs, then, to the fifteen, or according to another enumeration (comp. on Isaiah 9:2 and Isaiah 49:5) eighteen places, in which according to the opinion of the Masoretes μεֹ is to be read instead μֹ ?ΰ. Drechsler is certainly right when he remarks (on Isaiah 9:2) that the unusual position of μεֹ, which was originally in the text, caused it to be altered into μΰֹ which was more current and sounded more familiar in such a position. [But this is a confession that instead of μεφψ we should find φψμε if με were the original reading. We dislike departing from the textual reading when it is supported by all ancient versions. In order to get the meaning “He was afflicted,” we must not only alter the negative μΰ into μεֹ, but must also suppose an abnormal collocation of the words.
Add to these considerations that φψμε does not mean simply, “he was afflicted, or grieved,” but “he was reduced to a strait, was ἐνἀπορίᾳ,” (Kay). This could not be predicated of Jehovah; though it could be said of Him anthropopathically, as in Judges 10:16, that God’s soul was grieved. But there the expression is quite different in the original. If we take φψ in the sense of adversary: “In all their affliction He (God) was not an adversary to them,” the absence of μָ ?δֶ ?ν need not so much surprise us, as it occurs in the close of the preceding verse, where God is declared to have been a Saviour μָ ?δֶ ?ν. The proof that God was not an adversary to them is given in the next clause, when it is said: and the angel of his presence saved them, etc. Kay justly remarks that God was the reverse of an adversary to Israel. “His heaviest chastisements were sent with the view of frustrating the designs of their worst enemies, and were removed as soon as that work was accomplished.”—D.
M.].
Isaiah 63:11. δַ ?ξַּ ?ςֲ ?μֵ ?ν is not grammatically quite normal. [“The suffix refers to the forefathers, and the participle has both the article and suffix because it is not to be conceived as a noun, nor as the expression of a finished act (ὁἀναγηοχώς), but is to be thought as possessing continued verbal force (Ges. Gr., § 135, 2), and is to be construed as an imperfect: ille qui sursum ducebat, educebat; on this account the suffix has the accusative or objective form em as Psalms 68:28, not am, comp. Job 40:19; Psalms 103:4.” Delitzsch.—D. M.]. I am inclined, with De Rossi, to believe that δξςμδ (which is found in one very old codex cited by Kennicott, and in two of De Rossi’s, one of which is very accurate), is the right reading. The LXX., Peshito and the Arabic version in the London Polyglott, favor this reading. [But there is here no necessity for correcting the text.—D. M.].
AND 1. The prayer commences with a historical retrospect. For, as the suppliant intends to entreat new grace from God, he gives this prayer an appropriate foundation by first of all making mention of the former mercies of Jehovah. He, therefore, begins, Isaiah 63:7-8, by recalling the election of the people, and the glorious succor rendered to them in what might be called the time of their birth and childhood (Isaiah 63:9). The whole time from the deliverance out of Egyptian bondage to the Babylonish exile is comprehended in the brief words of Isa 63:10, the first part of which indicates the various apostasies of the people, and the last part the punishments which they suffered. Out of the depths of the last and greatest of these, the punishment of the Exile, there arises, Isaiah 63:11-14, a melancholy sigh and the question; where is He now who saved Israel from the first, the Egyptian captivity, so wonderfully by the hand of Moses?
2. I will mention—loving-kindnesses.Isaiah 63:7. The aim of this verse is to gain in the manifestations of favor in the past a foundation for the supplication in regard to the future. On ηֶ ?ρֶ ?γ (see the List). ϊְּ ?δִ ?μּ ?εֹ ?ϊ stands here as frequently (comp. Deuteronomy 26:19) as abstract for the concrete: laudationes for res laudatae, res laudabiliter gestae. [There is no reason for departing from the proper meaning of the term—praises. D.
M.]. λְּ ?ςַ ?μ occurs only here and Isaiah 59:18. We must take θεּ ?α in the abstract signification benignitas (comp. Psalms 25:7; Psalms 31:20 et saepe), although the following relative sentence seems at first sight rather to recommend the concrete signification “bona, optima dona” (comp. Jeremiah 31:12; Jeremiah 31:14). But against this view is the connection of θεα with αιϊιωׂ ?ψΰμ by the simple preposition μְ.θεα is, therefore, God’s goodness, kindness, benevolence which springs from His love which is merciful (i.e., moved by the sight of distress), and gracious (i.e., which does not punish according to desert).
3. For he said—fought against them.Isaiah 63:8-10. The first manifestation of the divine goodness spoken of in Isaiah 63:7 is introduced by ειΰξψ. The Vav in ειΰξψ makes a connection, not with the historical facts just referred to, but with the loving disposition in God. In brief, emphatic, words the Prophet describes the founding of the covenant relation between Jehovah and Israel. Jehovah formed it of Himself by His free purpose of election.
He declared Israel to be His people κατ’ ἐξοχήν. ΰַ ?κְ has here, too, (comp. Isaiah 14:15; Isaiah 34:14-15) on the basis of its restrictive signification, a strongly affirmative force. The Lord in declaring Israel to be His people does this with the hope that this His confidence will be perceived and justified. μΰιωׁ ?χψε refers, therefore, to the hope of fidelity, of obedience. (They will not deceive, disappoint this hope). And in this hope Jehovah became Israel’s ξεֹ ?ωִׁ ?ιςַ, i.e., Deliverer, Saviour (comp. Isaiah 19:20; Isaiah 43:11; Isaiah 44:15; Isaiah 44:21; Isaiah 47:15; Isaiah 49:26; Isaiah 60:10). [This eighth verse is literally rendered “Only my people are they; children will not lie, or prove false; and He was to them a Saviour.” The Prophet tells us that the Lordsaid this. We may look, then, in the books of Moses for language employed by the Lord of which this is a fair representation.
That Israel is God’s chosen people is often declared in the Pentateuch. In Deuteronomy 14:1-2 they are called both children and the Lord’speople. Comp. Deuteronomy 7:6 sqq., et saepe. But the Lord never states regarding Israel that they are children that will not lie. On the contrary He testifies of them, Deuteronomy 32:20 that they are “children in whom is no faith.” The Lord said to the children of Israel: “If ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my commandments, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people.
And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” Exodus 19:5-6. But we look in vain in the Pentateuch for any declaration in which the Lord expresses the confident expectation that Israel would prove faithful to the covenant. So far from doing this, God foretells that Israel would prove unfaithful. We must, then, take the words children will not lie, prohibitively and as expressing what is required of children, and not the Lord’s expectation; children shall not lie. The sentiment that Israel, as being God’s children, ought not to act perfidiously, is expressed Deuteronomy 32:6. Comp.
Deuteronomy 17:16-17 where we have as here μֹ ?ΰ with the third person of the future to express not what a king of Israel would not do, but what he ought not to do. The last clause should bestrictly rendered and He was to them a Saviour.—There is no need, then, of assuming here a very strong example of anthropopathism in which God declares Himself disappointed. D. M.]. From Isaiah 63:9 we see that the suppliant has first of all in view that most ancient, glorious deliverance which was vouchsafed to the people in Egypt in the commencement of their history. We have, therefore, to refer αλμΞφψϊν to the oppression of the people by Pharaoh.
And of this oppression it is said that it was one which the Lord Himself felt. [Rather, In all their oppression He was not an oppressor. See under Textual and Grammatical.—D. M.]. That under this affliction the sufferings of the Israelites in Egypt are to be understood, is shown by the following sentence. For by “the angel of His face” who saved them, the suppliant evidently intends ξμΰκιδεδ, by whom the redemption of the people from Egyptian slavery was effected. The expression ξμΰκτπιε refers immediately to Exodus 33:14-15, where to the request of Moses that the Lord would let him know whom He intends to send with them (Isaiah 63:12-13), the answer is given τָ ?πַ ?ιιֵ ?μֵ ?λεּ.
Moses thereupon rejoins: “If τָּ ?πֶ ?ικָ (thy face) go not, carry us not up hence.” It is impossible to discuss fully here the exceedingly difficult question of the ξμΰκιδεδ. I refer to Lange’s thorough exposition on Genesis 12:1 sqq. In reference to the chief question, whether the ξμΰκιΧ is to be regarded as a created angel, or as a precursory and partial manifestation of the Logos corresponding to the Old Testament standpoint, I would only briefly remark: 1) When Paul, 1 Corinthians 10:4, regards the rock out of which Moses struck water, and which remained fixed and immovable, and did not accompany them, as a symbol of “the Spiritual Rock that followed them” of which he says: “that Rock was Christ,” we must still more assume that he saw a manifestation of Christ in the angel of the face, of whom it is further said, Exodus 23:21 : my name is in Him;αְּ ?χִ ?ψְ ?αּ ?εֹ. 2) Further, in Hebrews 3:1 Jesus is called the Apostle and high-priest of our profession. The word ἀπόστολος cannot but be in that place which is pervaded by typological ideas a translation of the Hebrew ξַ ?μְ ?ΰָ ?κְ. The author of the epistle to the Hebrews designedly avoided the use of the word ἄγγελος, because lie wished to point to the man Jesus and to His human official life, i.e., to the fidelity which He displayed in it. He means to say: If He, who was so much higher than Moses, inasmuch as the Lord and Son of the house is higher than the house itself, was faithful, this exalted pattern must impel you also to fidelity.
Plainly, then, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews likewise saw in the angel of the Lord a manifestation of Christ. 3) With these considerations agree the expressions τָּ ?πִ ?ιν and ωְׁ ?ξִ ?ιαְ ?χִ ?ψְ ?αּ ?εֹ. For the face is the external side which is outwardly visible. Thus in Hebrew the surface of the earth and of the heaven, etc., is called τְָּ ?πִ ?ιν, because the surface is that which may be seen outwardly and—we may add—is that which sees. He now, who is called God’s τָּ ?πִ ?ιν, must therefore be He by whom God both sees and is seen. The latter is in not a few places of the New Testament most clearly declared regarding the Son of God. See Matthew 11:27; John 1:18 (comp.
John 6:46; 1 John 4:12; 1 Timothy 6:16); John 12:45; John 14:9. But the other idea also, that God sees through Him who is His τָּ ?πִ ?ιν, face, appears from this, that not only is creation effected by Him, but also the conservation of things created (Colossians 1:16-17), the visitation, sustentation, direction and redemption of the world. And in this Mediator is the name of God. For what God is, expresses itself in Him. We should not know that God is, and what God is, if the Mediator did not reveal it. But in the Old Covenant this face of God has not become manifest in His full equality with God, and yet at the same time in His distinction from Him.
The knowledge of this mystery was reserved for the New Covenant. Nevertheless the light of the relation of the Trinity breaks through even in the Old Testament in traces here and there. In the form of an angel and under the name of angel He appears in the Old Covenant, who in the New has appeared as the Son of man. There was for Him in the Old Covenant no other form of manifestation. But He is so characterized that we can distinguish Him readily from common angels. This is, in brief, my unpretending view of this subject. ΰδαδ is the positive, fundamental notion, ηξμδ (only here in Isaiah, comp.
Genesis 19:16) is the negative, accessory notion. For it denotes forbearance, refraining from the right of punishing (comp. Isaiah 9:18; Isaiah 30:14). The sentence ειπθμνεβεΧ seems to state that this bearing and carrying maternal love of God lasted not merely during the period of the deliverance from Egypt, but during the whole time that, from the standpoint of the Prophet, belonged to the days long gone by. This is seen from Isaiah 63:10 sqq., where the so oft-repeated, alternating relation of apostasy, punishment and return to God is comprehensively depicted. For during the whole time which passed between the Egyptian and the Babylonian captivity, what in Isaiah 63:10 sqq. is described was repeated. ξָ ?ψεּ and ςִ ?φְּ ?αεּ have both ψεη for their object (comp.
Isaiah 3:8 and Ephesians 4:30). They were rebellious against and grieved the Holy Spirit by resisting the drawings of His grace and by offending His holy nature with doing evil. The expression ψεηχγωׁ occurs in the Old Testament besides here and Isaiah 63:11 only further in Psalms 51:13. The adjective χָ ?γεֹ ?ωׁ is never joined with ψεּ ?ηַ. The necessary consequence of resisting the Holy Spirit is that the Lord too is changed into an adversary of him who resists Him. δεΰ stands emphatically before πμηρΞαν: How dreadful it is to have Him as an adversary!
4. Then He remembered—glorious name, Isaiah 63:11-14. Jehovah’s being their enemy brought so many evils on the people that they out of the depths of the last and greatest distress long earnestly for the restoration of the old friendship. The question: Where is He that brought them up?etc., can come only from the mouth of the people. For this reason the subject of ειζλψ can only be ςַ ?ξּ ?ε not Moses or the indefinite “they” (German man). The people remembered the old days of Moses, i.e. the days when Moses led the people and procured for them the wonderful manifestations of the favor of God.
The accumulation of substantives in the genitive characterizes the language of Isaiah; at all events, this form of expression occurs in, no book of the Old Testament so frequently and in such intensity as in Isaiah. Comp. Isaiah 18:1, where two words follow in the construct state. There are three such words in Isaiah 13:4; Isaiah 28:1; four in Isaiah 10:12; five in Isaiah 21:17. Comp. Ewald, § 291 a.—[Dr.
Naegelsbach (see under Text, and Gram.) would drop the suffix in δξςμν, and would render: “Where is He that brought up out of the sea the shepherd of His flock?” The sea here is the Nile, and the shepherd, Moses; and the fact referred to, the deliverance of Moses when an infant from drowning. But this view is exposed to obvious and insuperable objections. Delitzsch refers the suffix in δξςμν to the forefathers of Israel, takes ΰֵ ?ϊ as=una cum, and is disposed to read ψςֵ ?ι, which is strongly attested, instead of the singular. By the shepherds of the flock he understands Moses and Aaron with Miriam, Ps. 77:21; Micah 6:4. If we, with the E. V., regard God as the subject of “remembered,” then it is better, with Kay, to put a full stop at “people,” and omit the word “saying,” and regard the appeal that follows as made by the Prophet in the people’s name.
It is unsuitable to put it in the mouth of Jehovah. Against making ςַ ?ξּ ?ε the subject of ειζλψ, the remoteness of its position is an obvious objection. Such an asyndeton as that in ξֹ ?ωֶׁ ?δςַ ?ξּ ?εֹ is of frequent occurrence, and, on the whole, the rendering of the E. V., if we only strike out the supplied word saying, is the most obvious and natural.—D. M.] God gave Moses His Holy Spirit, and with Him the gift to perform miracles, and to lead and teach the people (comp. Numbers 11:17).—[But the suffix in αχψαε refers to ςν, the people, and not to Moses alone.—D.
M.]—The beginning of Isa 63:12 is literally rendered: who made the arm of His glory to go at the right hand of Moses. The most remarkable effect of this was the dividing of the water before them, the Israelites (properly away from the face of them, so that the waters went out of the way). Hitzig, Umbreit, Knobel, understand the words of the water from the rock (Exodus 17:5 sqq.). But this event, as belonging to a later time, could not well be placed before the passage through the Red Sea. Moreover, αχς is especially employed of this dividing of the waves of the sea, Exodus 14:21; Psalms 78:13; Nehemiah 9:11. These great and wonderful deeds of God had the design to make known, first to the people of Israel, and then to other nations also, the name of Jehovah, i. e. the nature of that God who is called Jehovah; and thus to bring them to the knowledge of His exclusive Godhead (Nehemiah 9:10; Isaiah 55:13; Isaiah 63:14).
The depths, Isaiah 63:13, are plainly the depths of the Red Sea (not of the Jordan, as Knobel thinks).—[This is clear from comparing Psalms 106:9.—D. M.]—One might suppose that Israel would have trodden with trembling, uncertain steps the strange way over the bottom of the sea on which human foot was never set, with the walls of the standing waters on the right hand and on the left. But it was not so. Rapidly and surely, as the desert horse goes over the flat, smooth desert, without tottering, so did they march over that strange, perilous road. The Israelites are the subject of ιλωׁ ?με The image of the cattle descending into the valley is very appropriate for marking the arrival of the Israelites in the promised land after the journeying in the desert. For the dry, stony deserts through which Israel had to march were really higher than the fertile regions watered by the Nile and the Jordan.
It seems to me, too, that the Prophet here thinks of the herds of Nomades that must cross a mountain range or a plateau in order to reach regions rich in pasture. Just so the Spirit of the Lord, who by means of the leaders directed the march of Israel, brought the people to rest. The Prophet could justly designate the arrival of Israel in Palestine after the long journeying as an attaining to rest. The same thing had been said before (Deuteronomy 12:9; Joshua 1:13; Joshua 21:44; Joshua 22:4; Joshua 23:1; Psalms 95:11; comp. Hebrews 3:11; Hebrews 3:18; Hebrews 4:1; Hebrews 4:3; Hebrews 4:9). The last sentence of Isa 63:14 is a recapitulation. λֵּ ?ο refers to all that goes before, and the words to make thyself a glorious name declare that the design of the Lord was not merely to confer a benefit on the Israelites of that time, but to prepare the way for the knowledge and acknowledgment of His name among all nations and to all times (Isaiah 63:12).
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 63:7. [“God does good because He is good; what He bestows upon us must be run up to the original, it is according to His mercies, not according to our merits, andaccording to the multitude of His loving-kindnesses, which can never be spent. Thus we should magnify God’s goodness, and speak honorably of it, not only when we plead it (as David Psalms 51:1), but when we praise it.” Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 63:9. The angel of the face or presence belongs to “the deep things of God" (1 Corinthians 2:10). It is not right to imagine that a certain and exhaustive knowledge is possible in reference to these things. The humility which becomes even science, imposes on it the duty to write everywhere a non liquet, where, through the nature of things, limits are placed to human knowledge. Not to regard these limitations is the manner of the pseudo-scientific, immodest scholasticism. What, therefore, we have said regarding the angel of the face makes no higher pretension than that of a modest hypothesis. [Comp. in Hengstenberg’s Christology, Vol. Isaiah 1 : The Angel of the Lord in the books of Moses and in the book of Joshua.—D. M.].
3. On Isaiah 63:10. “There are two ways in which the Holy Ghost is offended or vexed. One way is of a less dreadful nature. It is when a man takes from the Holy Spirit the opportunity to work in the soul for its joy, as He is wont to communicate to it His gracious influence and His gracious operations. When such is the case, then as an offended friend when He perceives that no heed is given to most of His counsels, the Holy Spirit is grieved, and, although reluctantly, ceases for a time to advise the stubborn, ut carendo discat quantum peccaverit. Of this kind of grieving Paul speaks Ephesians 4:30.
It can be committed by the godly and the elect. But the Holy Spirit can be offended and vexed in a gross and flagitious way, when one not only does not believe and follow Him, but also obstinately resists Him, despises all His counsel, reviles and blasphemes Him, will none of His reproof (Proverbs 1:24-25), gives the lie to His truth, and so speaks against the sun… This the Scripture calls ἀντιπίπτειν (Acts 7:51), ἐνυβρίζειν (Hebrews 10:29), βλασφημεῖν (Matthew 12:31), θεομαχεῖν (Acts 5:39). Let us, therefore, not grieve the Holy Spirit with evil desires, words and deeds, that we may be able on the future day of redemption to show that seal uninjured with which we were sealed on that day of our redemption when we were regenerated. To this end let us assiduously breathe forth the prayers of David Psalms 143:10; Psalms 51:12-14.” Leigh.4. On Isaiah 63:10. [They rebelled and vexed His Holy Spirit. This statement implies the personality of the Holy Ghost, or the Spirit of God’s holiness.
He is represented as a person whom we can grieve. We have in this passage clear indications of the doctrine of the Trinity. In Isaiah 63:9 we have the Angel of God’s face, and in Isaiah 63:10 we have the Spirit of His holiness, both clearly distinguished from God the fountain of their being.—D. M.].
5. On Isaiah 63:11. “Faith asks after God and so does unbelief, but in different ways. Both put the question, Where? Faith does it to seek God in time of need, and to tell Him trustfully of His old kindnesses. Unbelief does it to tempt God, to deny Him, to lead others into temptation, and to make them doubt regarding the divine presence and providence. Therefore it asks: “Where is the God of judgment” (Malachi 2:17)? “Where is now thy God "(Psalms 42:4; Psalms 42:11; Psalms 79:10; Psalms 115:2)?
If you, as the praying Church here does, ask in the former manner diligently after God, you will be preserved from the other kind of asking.” Leigh.6. On Isaiah 63:15. “Meritum meum miseratio Domini. Non sum meriti inops, quando ille miserationum Dominus non defuerit, et si misericordiae Domini multae, multus ego sum in meritis.” Augustine.7. On Isaiah 63:16. “We can from this sentence [?] cogently refute the doctrine of the invocation of the Saints. For the Saints know nothing of us, and are not personally acquainted with us, much less can they know the concerns of our hearts, or hear our cry, for they are not omnipresent. If it be alleged that God makes matters known to them and that they then pray for us, what a round-about business this would be!
It would justify the prayer said to have been made by a simple man: “Ah Lord God! tell it, I beseech thee, to the blessed Mary that I have told thee to tell it again to her, that she should tell thee that I have wished to say to her by so many Ave Marias and Pater Nosters, that she should say to thee to be pleased to be gracious unto me.” Meyer, de Rosariis, cap. III., thes. V., p. 52). With how much more brevity and efficacy do we pray with the penitent publican: God be merciful to me, a sinner! ”Leigh.8. On Isaiah 63:17. “There is no more heinous sin than to accuse God of being the cause of our sin. Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God (James 1:13; Psalms 5:5; Deuteronomy 32:4; Ps. 92:16).
He commands what is good, forbids and punishes what is evil. How then could He be the cause of it? But when He punishes sin with sin, i.e., when He at last withdraws from the sinner His grace that has been persistently despised, then He acts as a righteous Judge who inflicts the judgment of hardening the heart on those who wilfully resist His Spirit.” Leigh.9. On Isaiah 66 [“This chapter is a model of affectionate and earnest entreaty for the divine interposition in the day of calamity. With such tender and affectionate earnestness may we learn to plead with God! Thus may all His people learn to approach Him as a Father; thus feel that they have the inestimable privilege in the times of trial of making known their wants to the High and Holy One.
Thus when calamity presses on us; when as individuals or families we are afflicted; or when our country or the church is suffering under long trials, may we go to God, and humbly confess our sins, and urge His promises, and take hold of His strength, and plead with Him to interpose. Thus pleading, He will hear us; thus presenting our cause, He will interpose to save us.” Barnes. D. M.].
10. On Isaiah 64:3-4 a. [4, 5 a]. The God who appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, called Moses, and led by him the people of Israel out of Egypt, who chose Joshua, Samuel, David and others to be His servants and glorified Himself by them, this God alone has shown Himself to be the true and living God, and we can hope from Him that He will yet do more, and manifest Himself still more signally.
11. On Isaiah 64:4 [5]. [“Note what God expects from us in order to our having communion with Him. First, We must make conscience of doing our duty in everything, we must work righteousness, must do that which is good, and which the Lord our God requires of us, and must do it well. Secondly, We must be cheerful in doing our duty; we must rejoice and work righteousness, must delight ourselves in God and His law, must be pleasant in His service and sing at our work. God loves a cheerful giver, a cheerful worshipper; we must serve the Lord with gladness. Thirdly, We must conform ourselves to all the methods of His providence concerning us, and be suitably affected with them; must remember Him in Hisways, in all the ways wherein He walks, whether He walks towards us, or walks contrary to us; we must mind Him, and make mention of Him, with thanksgiving, when His ways are ways of mercy, for in a day of prosperity we mustbe joyful, with patience and submission when He contends with us, for in a day of adversity we must consider.” Henry.
D. M.].
12. On Isaiah 64:7 [8]. [“This whole verse is an acknowledgment of the sovereignty of God. It expresses the feeling which all have when under conviction of sin, and when they are sensible that they are exposed to the divine displeasure for their transgressions. Then they feel that if they are to be saved, it must be by the mere Sovereignty of God; and they implore His interposition to ‘mould and guide them at His will.’ It may be added, that it is only when sinners have this feeling that they hope for relief; and then they will feel that if they are lost, it will be right; if saved, it will be because God moulds them as the potter does the clay.” Barnes. D. M.].
HINTS1. On Isaiah 63:7. Text for a Thanksgiving Sermon. What is our duty after that the Lord has shown us great loving kindness? 1) To remember what He has done to us. 2) To be mindful of what we ought to render to Him for the same.
2. On Isaiah 63:8-17. The history of the people of Israel a mirror in which we too may perceive the history of our relation to God. 1) God is to us from the beginning a loving and faithful Father (Isaiah 63:8-9). 2) We repay His love with ingratitude, as Israel did (Isaiah 63:10 a). 3) God punishes us for this as He punished Israel (Isaiah 63:10 b). 4) God receives us again to His favor when we, as Israel, call on Him in penitence (Isaiah 63:11-17).
On Isaiah 63:7-17. “If God in Christ has become our Father, He remains our Father to all eternity. 1) He is our Father in Christ. 2) He abides faithful even when we waIsa Isaiah 63:3) When we have fallen, His arms still stand open to receive us.” Deichert in Manch. G. u. ein Geist, 1868, page 65.
4. On Isaiah 64:5-7. Joh. Ben. Carpzov has a sermon on this text, in which he treats of righteousness, and shows 1) justitiam salvantem, i. e., the righteousness with which one enters the kingdom of heaven; 2) justitiam damnantem, i. e., the righteousness with which a man enters the fire of hell; 3) justitiam testantem, i. e., the righteousness by which a man testifies that he has attained the true righteousness.
5. On Isaiah 64:6-9. “Let us hear from our text an earnest and affecting confession of sin, and at the same time consider 1) the doctrine of repentance; 2) the comfort of forgiveness which believers receive.”—Eichhorn.6. On Isaiah 64:6. (We all do fade, etc.) “These are very instructive words, from which we learn what a noxious plant sin is, and what fruit it brings forth. First, says he, we fade as a leaf. This means that sin brings with it the curse of God, and deprives us of His blessing both for the body and the soul, so that the heart is dissatisfied and distressed. Then it robs us of the highest treasure, confidence in the grace of God.
For sin and an evil conscience awaken dread of God. As it is impossible to call upon God aright without faith and a sure persuasion of His aid, it follows that sin hinders prayer also, and thus robs us of the highest comfort. When men have no faith and cannot pray, then the awful punishment comes upon them, that God hides His face and leaves them to pine in their sins. For they cannot help themselves, and have lost the consolation and protection which they need in life.”—Veit Diet.Footnotes:Then kit people remembered the old days of Moses.brought up out of the sea the shepherd of his flock.Or, shepherds.that put at the right hand of Moses his glorious arm.
2. PRAYER THAT THE LORD MIGHT LOOK UPON THEN AND REMOVE SIN AND ITS
Chap Isaiah 63:15-19 a (19)15 Look down from heaven, and behold from the habitation of thy holiness and of thy glory:
Where is thy zeal and thy strength,
The sounding of thy bowels and of thy mercies toward me?
Are they restrained?
16 Doubtless thou art our father,
Though Abraham be ignorant of us,
And Israel acknowledge us not:
Thou, O Lord, art our father, our redeemer;
Thy name is from everlasting.
17 O Lord, why hast thou made us to err from thy ways,
And hardened our heart from thy fear?
Return for thy servants’ sake,
The tribes of thine inheritance.
18 The people of thy holiness have possessed it but a little while:
Our adversaries have trodden down thy sanctuary.
19 We are thine:Thou never barest rule over them:
They were not called by thy name.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_63:16. [“According to the accents the words ξςεμνβΰμπε are connected together. The more correct accentuation would be βΰμπε Tifha, ξςεμν Mercha. From remote antiquity Jahve had acted toward Israel in such a way that the latter could call him βΰμπε. What takes place in the present time is so different as to put faith to a hard trial. Translate: Our Redeemer is from ancient time thy name.” Delitzsch.—D. M.].
Isaiah 63:18. αερρε, Pilel from αּ ?εּ ?ν (Isaiah 63:6; Isaiah 14:19; Isaiah 14:25) is to tread dow, καταπατεῖν, and includes the idea of profaning and defiling.
AND 1. After laying the foundation for His prayer by the retrospect of what Jehovah had been of old to His people, the suppliant now passes over to the entreaty that the Lord would graciously look down from heaven on the present distress, and not restrain His love and might (Isaiah 63:15). He still remains the Father of the people, after Abraham and Israel, who had been long ago removed by death, have become strangers to them so far as rendering actual aid is concerned (Isaiah 63:16). With great boldness the Lord is expostulated with for permitting the people to go astray and to become hardened, and He is called upon to change His conduct towards His elect people (Isaiah 63:17). The complaint is made to Him that the people had possessed only for a short time the land promised to them as an inheritance for ever, while the centre of the land, the Sanctuary, which alone gives the country its value, had been trodden down by their enemies (Isaiah 63:18), so that Israel is now situated as if Jehovah had never been their Lord, and His name had never been called upon them (Isaiah 63:19 a).
2. Look down from heaven—restrained.Isaiah 63:15.ψָ ?ΰָ ?δ more frequently follows than precedes δִ ?αִּ ?ιθ. The Lord has to look down from heaven, for thither He has as it were retired. He is no more to be found in His earthly sanctuary, but only in His heavenly. [But compare Deuteronomy 26:15; Psalms 115:3. The prayer is rather founded on the acknowledged truth, “The Lord looketh from heaven. …. From the place of His habitation He looketh upon all the inhabitants of the earth.” Psalms 33:13-14.
D. M.]. Solomon had said in his dedicatory prayer (1 Kings 8:13 comp. 2 Chronicles 6:2) “I have built thee a house to dwell in (αֵּ ?ιϊζְ ?αֻ ?μ).” To this passage the suppliant seems to allude, when he asks the Lord to look down from the habitation of His holiness and glory. For the earthly αֵּ ?ιϊζְ ?αֻ ?μ is destroyed. The word ζְ ?αֻ ?μ is found only here in Isaiah. Once more the suppliant returns to what he misses.
He asks again with ΰַ ?ιֵּ ?δ: Where is thy zeal and thy mighty deeds? The zeal of Jehovah is twofold: against His people, so far they make common cause with those who hate the Lord. For then they have the Lord who is a zealous God (Exodus 20:5; Deuteronomy 4:24; Deuteronomy 5:9) against them. But the zeal of Jehovah, is also active for His people, against the enemies of the theocracy (comp. Isaiah 9:6; Isaiah 26:11; Isaiah 37:32; Isaiah 42:13; Isaiah 59:17). The expression δξεοξςιν, strepitus viscerum, as image of the emotion of compassion, of commiseratio, is found in the form of a substantive only here, but the verbal expression occurs, Isaiah 16:11; Jeremiah 31:20; Jeremiah 48:30.In ΰֵ ?μַ ?ι observe the change of number. δϊΰτχ, se cohibere, comp.
Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 54:11.
3. Doubtless thou——everlasting.Isaiah 63:16. [The E. V. departs in two instances in this verse from the proper signification of λִּ ?ι, rendering it in the first, doubtless, and in the second, though. In both cases its strict sense of for, because, can be retained, as is—done by Dr. Naegelsbach. But we prefer taking the second λִּ ?ι as=when, which in this connection does not differ much from though. D. M.].
Isaiah 63:16 declares the reason why Israel entreats the Lord to be pleased to look upon their need and to manifest His power and love on them. Jehovah alone is the true Father of Israel. They have indeed also human progenitors who stand in high honor and authority; Abraham (comp. Isaiah 51:2) as their remote, and Israel, the strong contender with God (Genesis 32:28), their immediate ancestor. But these are men, are long dead, and incapable from their present abode outside this world, to take knowledge (δִ ?λִּ ?ιψdignovit, Isaiah 61:9) of Israel’s lot; not to say that they could not possibly interpose to render them active support. [This is not very satisfactory, though the view of Vitringa, Delitzsch and the best interpreters. But if we take the second λִּ ?ι in the common sense of when, and translate “For thou art our Father when Abraham does not know us, and Israel does not recognize us,” then the idea would be that natural affection and regard would cease rather than that God’s paternal love should fail, or His covenant of adoption be annulled.
Such a sense is very appropriate. See Psalms 27:10. Comp. Calvin on our passage. Kay remarks, “This verse and Isaiah 64:8 are the only places in the Old Testament where the address Our Father is used in prayer. The Spirit of adoption was not yet given (Galatians 4:4-6).” D.M.].
4. O Lord, why hast thou—thy name. Isaiah 63:17-19 a. Jerome understands the words of ver.17 as an utterance of the apostate Jews. As Paul in the Epistles to the Corinthians addresses pious and ungodly persons, so here both the pious and the ungodly speak to God. These latter are said here, “movere Domino quaestionem, et suam culpam referre in Deum.” Jerome, however, vindicates God, and says that in reality God is not the cause of error and hardness of heart, but that error and obduracy are only mediately occasioned by His patience, while He does not chastise offenders.
Theodoret makes the Jews here directly reproach God with having by His patience incurred the guilt of their delinquencies. Oecolampadius regards this passage as having a double sense. As an utterance of the ungodly it contains actual blasphemy (blasphema inter precandum dicunt: suam culpam in Deum transcribunt), while in the mouth of the godly it expresses only the painful confession that they, after the withdrawal of the divine grace and help, could not but go astray. Calvin disputes all softening of the language by the assumption of foreknowledge or permission. But he makes a distinction. He distinguishes between an indirect or negative hardening (rite excoecare, indurare, inclinare dicitur, quibus facultatem videndi, parendi, recte exsequendi adimit), and a direct or positive (when He per Satanam et consilia reproborum destinat, quo visum est, et voluntates excitat et conatus firmat).
As instances of the latter kind he cites Pharaoh (Exodus 4:21; Exodus 7:3; Exodus 10:1, etc.), and Sihon the king of the Amorites (Deuteronomy 2:30). For the first-mentioned kind he appeals to Ezekiel 7:26; Psalms 107:40; Job 12:20; Job 12:24 and to the passage before us (comp. Institutio II, 4, 3 sq.). Whether that indirect hardening, of which Calvin speaks, is essentially different from the permissive, may be doubted. I therefore believe that all those interpreters—and they form the majority—who understand this passage of the divine permission, mean nothing else than what Calvin intends by tbat former kind of hardening. For the cessatio directionis divinae, the ablatio spiritus, the sublatio luminis is just nothing else than that procedure of God by which He makes sin possible, or permits it.
Luther, in particular, belongs to those who explain our place in the permissive sense, and with his fine feeling he is able, without doing violence to the words, to remove what causes offence from them. He says: “Sunt verba ardentis affectus. Ah, Domine, quare sinis nos sic errare? Nos hunc affectum non intelligimus, quare privative accipiemus, ut sit sententia: quia noluimusaudire tuum verbum, permisisti nos errare et peccare; sicut fit, peccatum peccati est poena.” And certainly in the mouth of the suppliant church Isaiah 63:17 can never be taken as a blasphemous reproach. But the church in the deepest sorrow, and during a momentary eclipse of the future prospect before her, feels herself driven to put this question, Why ? Not as if she would say that there exists no reason, or only a bad one, but simply to intimate that she does not perceive the reason, that here the providence of God appears to her dark, inexplicable.
The church mourns because the Lord has not hindered her going astray, her hardening in evil, which exists not indeed in all, but in many of her members. She thinks that He, the Almighty, could have done it, if He had wished. That He has not willed it is to her inconceivable. She does not even see how this, her partial apostasy must, on the whole, co-operate to the realization of God’s gracious counsel. The statement in this verse is in harmony with Isaiah 6:9-10, and with Isaiah 29:10; Isaiah 45:7. [But in Isaiah 45:7 the evil which God creates is physical evil or pain, the opposite of peace.—D. M.].
For here, as there, God is apparently designated as the author of evil, while yet God can never will evil as such. But when men do not will the good, then they must at last will the evil. It becomes a necessity in the way of punishment, in order that they may be thoroughly acquainted with it, and be thereby healed (see on Isaiah 6:9 sq. and Isaiah 29:10). As an unauthorized weakening of the genuine meaning of this place I must regard it when Seb. Schmidt and Grotius understand the words de futuro: Why shall it then come to this, that we go astray and harden ourselves in idolatry? The imperfects (futures) ϊϊςπε and ϊχωׁ ?ιη can only be taken to mean an action not yet finished, and therefore only in the sense of the enduring present.
If we ask what sin the Prophet specially has in view when he speaks of erring and hardening, we must say that this erring and hardening can take place in all forms of sin, but that, in the end, all these evil fruits have a common root, namely, the sin against the first (second) commandment, idolatry. We must, of course, think here not only of gross, but also of refined idolatry. The Rabbinical commentators are of the opinion that the Prophet has here in view, doubt, despair and unbelief as the consequences of the long duration of the Exile. This is quite possible, if we think not merely of the Babylonish Captivity, but also, and specially, of the present exile that still continues. But the look of the Prophet is primarily directed to the Babylonian exile, and regarding it we must say that it became to many Jews an occasion even of visible apostacy from Jehovah and of gross idolatry. χָ ?ωַׁ ?η (certainly hardened from χָ ?ωָׁ ?δ) occurs besides here only in Job 39:16, where it has the signification “to regard or treat harshly.” before ιψΰϊκ has here a negative force, and the sentence expresses a consequence, so as not to fear thee. Comp.
Isaiah 62:10; Isaiah 59:1-2 et saepe. While the Prophet sees the Lord, as it were, engaged in a woful work, the work namely of judicially hardening ever more the mass of Israel after the flesh, he becomes anxious for Israel as a body. If this continues, what shall become of the elect people? Who will be able to withstand the current of inward and outward corruption? Therefore he entreats the Lord not to continue to act in this way, but to revorse the course He is pursuing. The Prophet has very probably Numbers 10:36 before his mind in using the word ωׁ ?εּ ?α.
Accordingly, as the verb is intransitive, we have to regard ωׁ ?αθιπΧ, not as in apposition to ςαψικ, but as the accusative of place dependent on ωׁ ?εּ ?α. Then we obtain the idea that the Prophet conceives the erring and hardening spoken of as caused by the Lord turning away from Israel, and leaving them to their fate. He is here besought, in opposition to this, to return to the tribes of His inheritance, and that for His servants’ sake. Who are these servants? They can only be those who faithfully serve the Lord in distinction from those who err and harden themselves. But the Prophet means by these servants not merely those who in the present time have remained faithful, but all faithful servants of Jehovah of all times.
He thinks especially of the patriarchs who first received the promises. It is for the sake of all His faithful servants that the Lord does not entirely reject Israel. That Israel here bears the designation the tribes of thine inheritance is doubtless because the Prophet wishes thereby to point to Jehovah’s election of Israel to be His ρְ ?βֻּ ?μָּ ?δ (Exodus 19:5; Deuteronomy 7:6 et saepe), His specially dear to Him and inalienable inheritance (Isaiah 19:25; Isaiah 47:6). To the complaint of the decay of religious life (Isaiah 63:17) there is added (Isaiah 63:18-19 a) a complaint regarding the mournful external relations, the fruit of that internal decay. The subject of ιָֽ ?ψְ ?ωׁ ?εּ can only be ςρΞχγωׁ ?κ. If we take φψιπε as subject, as many do, we must then take μַ ?ξּ ?φְ ?ςָ ?ψ in a signification which it has not.
For ξִ ?φְ ?ςָ ?ψ (besides here Genesis 19:20; Job 8:7; Psalms 42:7; 2 Chronicles 24:24) is the harder form of ξִ ?ζְ ?ςָ ?ψ, which latter occurs in no other Old Testament writer than Isaiah, who has it in Isaiah 10:25; Isaiah 29:17; Isaiah 16:14; Isaiah 14:6. The signification is everywhere paulum, a little. The word is synonymous with ξְ ?ςַ ?θ, which word in all these places of Isaiah (with exception of the last-mentioned, Isaiah 24:6,) is joined to ξζςψ. If now we take φψιπε as subject, we must take μξεςψ in the sense of pro-pemodum, parum abest quin, almost, nearly, as Cocceius, Luther and Stier do. But then the form should be λְּ ?ξִ ?εְ ?ςָ ?ψ after the analogy of λִּ ?ξְ ?ςַ ?θ. Further,μξφςψ can neither be=ξφςψ without μְ (LXX.) nor=nullo pretio, sine labore (Jerome). μξφςψ can only be a particle of time, and mean for a short time.
Many are inclined to regard ξχψωׁ ?κ as the common object of ιψωׁ ?ε and αερρε, while they take ξχγωׁ either as a designation of the whole land, or of the temple alone. But the whole land is never called ξχγωׁ, and the expression ιγωׁ cannot well be employed of the temple. We must, too, in that case refer μξφςψ to both sentences. For it stands as emphatically at the beginning as ξχγωׁ ?κ stands at the close. I, therefore, agree with Delitzsch in taking ιψωׁ ?ε absolutely, and in understanding as its object the land. This object could be easily omitted, as ιγωׁ is used countless times both of the taking of the holy land into possession, and of the holding of it in possession.
The word, too, is often employed absolutely: Deuteronomy 2:24; Deuteronomy 2:31; Genesis 21:10; 2 Samuel 14:7; Micah 1:15, et saepe. Although μξφςγ is a rhetorical hyperbole, it is yet justified, inasmuch as, if the Lord does not hear the prayer contained inIsa Isaiah 63:17 b, the time during which Israel possessed the land would be short in comparison with the following permanent exclusion from its possession. The treading down of the Sanctuary is regarded as the dissolving of the bond of connection between Israel and his God. Israel stands, therefore, now as a people over which Jehovah has never ruled. It is no more distinguished in anything from the heathen nations. Before ξςεμν, which must be connected with what follows, ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?γ is to be supplied.
According to our way of speaking λַּֽ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ would be required. [In the E. V. the important word thine is arbitrarily supplied. Dr. Naegelsbach’s rendering is here to be preferred: We are become as those over whom thou never barest rule, (or didst not rule from ancient time), on whom thy name was never called.—D. M.]. That Israel has been, as it were, marked with the name of Jehovah, and thus distinguished from all nations, is always set forth as one of its greatest privileges (comp.
Deuteronomy 28:10; 2 Chronicles 7:14; Jeremiah 14:9, et saepe. Comp. Isaiah 43:7; Isaiah 65:1). [The first verse of chap. 44 in the E. V. forms the latter part of Isa 63:19 of the preceding chapter in the Hebrew text. It is convenient in the Commentary to adhere to the division of chapters and verses observed in the Hebrew Bible. Accordingly, what stands in the English Bible as the first verse of chap 64 appears in the Commentary as the conclusion of Isa 63:19.
And in conformity with this arrangement chap, 64 instead of twelve, has only eleven verses.—D. M.].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 63:7. [“God does good because He is good; what He bestows upon us must be run up to the original, it is according to His mercies, not according to our merits, andaccording to the multitude of His loving-kindnesses, which can never be spent. Thus we should magnify God’s goodness, and speak honorably of it, not only when we plead it (as David Psalms 51:1), but when we praise it.” Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 63:9. The angel of the face or presence belongs to “the deep things of God" (1 Corinthians 2:10). It is not right to imagine that a certain and exhaustive knowledge is possible in reference to these things. The humility which becomes even science, imposes on it the duty to write everywhere a non liquet, where, through the nature of things, limits are placed to human knowledge. Not to regard these limitations is the manner of the pseudo-scientific, immodest scholasticism. What, therefore, we have said regarding the angel of the face makes no higher pretension than that of a modest hypothesis. [Comp. in Hengstenberg’s Christology, Vol. Isaiah 1 : The Angel of the Lord in the books of Moses and in the book of Joshua.—D. M.].
3. On Isaiah 63:10. “There are two ways in which the Holy Ghost is offended or vexed. One way is of a less dreadful nature. It is when a man takes from the Holy Spirit the opportunity to work in the soul for its joy, as He is wont to communicate to it His gracious influence and His gracious operations. When such is the case, then as an offended friend when He perceives that no heed is given to most of His counsels, the Holy Spirit is grieved, and, although reluctantly, ceases for a time to advise the stubborn, ut carendo discat quantum peccaverit. Of this kind of grieving Paul speaks Ephesians 4:30.
It can be committed by the godly and the elect. But the Holy Spirit can be offended and vexed in a gross and flagitious way, when one not only does not believe and follow Him, but also obstinately resists Him, despises all His counsel, reviles and blasphemes Him, will none of His reproof (Proverbs 1:24-25), gives the lie to His truth, and so speaks against the sun… This the Scripture calls ἀντιπίπτειν (Acts 7:51), ἐνυβρίζειν (Hebrews 10:29), βλασφημεῖν (Matthew 12:31), θεομαχεῖν (Acts 5:39). Let us, therefore, not grieve the Holy Spirit with evil desires, words and deeds, that we may be able on the future day of redemption to show that seal uninjured with which we were sealed on that day of our redemption when we were regenerated. To this end let us assiduously breathe forth the prayers of David Psalms 143:10; Psalms 51:12-14.” Leigh.4. On Isaiah 63:10. [They rebelled and vexed His Holy Spirit. This statement implies the personality of the Holy Ghost, or the Spirit of God’s holiness.
He is represented as a person whom we can grieve. We have in this passage clear indications of the doctrine of the Trinity. In Isaiah 63:9 we have the Angel of God’s face, and in Isaiah 63:10 we have the Spirit of His holiness, both clearly distinguished from God the fountain of their being.—D. M.].
5. On Isaiah 63:11. “Faith asks after God and so does unbelief, but in different ways. Both put the question, Where? Faith does it to seek God in time of need, and to tell Him trustfully of His old kindnesses. Unbelief does it to tempt God, to deny Him, to lead others into temptation, and to make them doubt regarding the divine presence and providence. Therefore it asks: “Where is the God of judgment” (Malachi 2:17)? “Where is now thy God "(Psalms 42:4; Psalms 42:11; Psalms 79:10; Psalms 115:2)?
If you, as the praying Church here does, ask in the former manner diligently after God, you will be preserved from the other kind of asking.” Leigh.6. On Isaiah 63:15. “Meritum meum miseratio Domini. Non sum meriti inops, quando ille miserationum Dominus non defuerit, et si misericordiae Domini multae, multus ego sum in meritis.” Augustine.7. On Isaiah 63:16. “We can from this sentence [?] cogently refute the doctrine of the invocation of the Saints. For the Saints know nothing of us, and are not personally acquainted with us, much less can they know the concerns of our hearts, or hear our cry, for they are not omnipresent. If it be alleged that God makes matters known to them and that they then pray for us, what a round-about business this would be!
It would justify the prayer said to have been made by a simple man: “Ah Lord God! tell it, I beseech thee, to the blessed Mary that I have told thee to tell it again to her, that she should tell thee that I have wished to say to her by so many Ave Marias and Pater Nosters, that she should say to thee to be pleased to be gracious unto me.” Meyer, de Rosariis, cap. III., thes. V., p. 52). With how much more brevity and efficacy do we pray with the penitent publican: God be merciful to me, a sinner! ”Leigh.8. On Isaiah 63:17. “There is no more heinous sin than to accuse God of being the cause of our sin. Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God (James 1:13; Psalms 5:5; Deuteronomy 32:4; Ps. 92:16).
He commands what is good, forbids and punishes what is evil. How then could He be the cause of it? But when He punishes sin with sin, i.e., when He at last withdraws from the sinner His grace that has been persistently despised, then He acts as a righteous Judge who inflicts the judgment of hardening the heart on those who wilfully resist His Spirit.” Leigh.9. On Isaiah 66 [“This chapter is a model of affectionate and earnest entreaty for the divine interposition in the day of calamity. With such tender and affectionate earnestness may we learn to plead with God! Thus may all His people learn to approach Him as a Father; thus feel that they have the inestimable privilege in the times of trial of making known their wants to the High and Holy One.
Thus when calamity presses on us; when as individuals or families we are afflicted; or when our country or the church is suffering under long trials, may we go to God, and humbly confess our sins, and urge His promises, and take hold of His strength, and plead with Him to interpose. Thus pleading, He will hear us; thus presenting our cause, He will interpose to save us.” Barnes. D. M.].
10. On Isaiah 64:3-4 a. [4, 5 a]. The God who appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, called Moses, and led by him the people of Israel out of Egypt, who chose Joshua, Samuel, David and others to be His servants and glorified Himself by them, this God alone has shown Himself to be the true and living God, and we can hope from Him that He will yet do more, and manifest Himself still more signally.
11. On Isaiah 64:4 [5]. [“Note what God expects from us in order to our having communion with Him. First, We must make conscience of doing our duty in everything, we must work righteousness, must do that which is good, and which the Lord our God requires of us, and must do it well. Secondly, We must be cheerful in doing our duty; we must rejoice and work righteousness, must delight ourselves in God and His law, must be pleasant in His service and sing at our work. God loves a cheerful giver, a cheerful worshipper; we must serve the Lord with gladness. Thirdly, We must conform ourselves to all the methods of His providence concerning us, and be suitably affected with them; must remember Him in Hisways, in all the ways wherein He walks, whether He walks towards us, or walks contrary to us; we must mind Him, and make mention of Him, with thanksgiving, when His ways are ways of mercy, for in a day of prosperity we mustbe joyful, with patience and submission when He contends with us, for in a day of adversity we must consider.” Henry.
D. M.].
12. On Isaiah 64:7 [8]. [“This whole verse is an acknowledgment of the sovereignty of God. It expresses the feeling which all have when under conviction of sin, and when they are sensible that they are exposed to the divine displeasure for their transgressions. Then they feel that if they are to be saved, it must be by the mere Sovereignty of God; and they implore His interposition to ‘mould and guide them at His will.’ It may be added, that it is only when sinners have this feeling that they hope for relief; and then they will feel that if they are lost, it will be right; if saved, it will be because God moulds them as the potter does the clay.” Barnes. D. M.].
HINTS1. On Isaiah 63:7. Text for a Thanksgiving Sermon. What is our duty after that the Lord has shown us great loving kindness? 1) To remember what He has done to us. 2) To be mindful of what we ought to render to Him for the same.
2. On Isaiah 63:8-17. The history of the people of Israel a mirror in which we too may perceive the history of our relation to God. 1) God is to us from the beginning a loving and faithful Father (Isaiah 63:8-9). 2) We repay His love with ingratitude, as Israel did (Isaiah 63:10 a). 3) God punishes us for this as He punished Israel (Isaiah 63:10 b). 4) God receives us again to His favor when we, as Israel, call on Him in penitence (Isaiah 63:11-17).
On Isaiah 63:7-17. “If God in Christ has become our Father, He remains our Father to all eternity. 1) He is our Father in Christ. 2) He abides faithful even when we waIsa Isaiah 63:3) When we have fallen, His arms still stand open to receive us.” Deichert in Manch. G. u. ein Geist, 1868, page 65.
4. On Isaiah 64:5-7. Joh. Ben. Carpzov has a sermon on this text, in which he treats of righteousness, and shows 1) justitiam salvantem, i. e., the righteousness with which one enters the kingdom of heaven; 2) justitiam damnantem, i. e., the righteousness with which a man enters the fire of hell; 3) justitiam testantem, i. e., the righteousness by which a man testifies that he has attained the true righteousness.
5. On Isaiah 64:6-9. “Let us hear from our text an earnest and affecting confession of sin, and at the same time consider 1) the doctrine of repentance; 2) the comfort of forgiveness which believers receive.”—Eichhorn.6. On Isaiah 64:6. (We all do fade, etc.) “These are very instructive words, from which we learn what a noxious plant sin is, and what fruit it brings forth. First, says he, we fade as a leaf. This means that sin brings with it the curse of God, and deprives us of His blessing both for the body and the soul, so that the heart is dissatisfied and distressed. Then it robs us of the highest treasure, confidence in the grace of God.
For sin and an evil conscience awaken dread of God. As it is impossible to call upon God aright without faith and a sure persuasion of His aid, it follows that sin hinders prayer also, and thus robs us of the highest comfort. When men have no faith and cannot pray, then the awful punishment comes upon them, that God hides His face and leaves them to pine in their sins. For they cannot help themselves, and have lost the consolation and protection which they need in life.”—Veit Diet.Footnotes:Or, the multitude.they are restrained.because.Or, our redeemer from everlasting is thy name.Why dost thou make us err.to the tribes.We have become as those over whom thou never barest rule, on whom thy name was not called.Or, thy name was not called upon them.
3. PRAYER THAT THE LORD WOULD VISIBLY , AND SO PROVE HIMSELF TO BE, AS OF OLD, THE GOD AND FATHERr OF ISRAEL
Isaiah 63:19 b to Isaiah 64:11. (Isaiah 64:1-12)Chap Isaiah 63:19 b. Oh that thou wouldest rend the heavens,
That thou wouldest come down,
That the mountains might flow down at thy presence,
Chap Isaiah 64:1 As when the melting fire burneth,
The fire causeth the waters to boil,
To make thy name known to thine adversaries,
That the nations may tremble at thy presence!
2 When thou didst terrible things which we looked not for,
Thou camest down, the mountains flowed down at thy presence.
3 For since the beginning of the world men have not heard, nor perceived by the ear,
Neither hath the eye seen, O God, beside thee,
What he hath prepared for him that waiteth for him.
4 Thou meetest him that rejoiceth and worketh righteousness,
Those that remember thee in thy ways:
Behold, thou art wroth; for we have sinned:
In those is continuance, and we shall be saved.
5 But we are all as an unclean thing,
And all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags:
And we all do fade as a leaf;
And our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
6 And there is none that calleth upon thy name,
That stirreth up himself to take hold of thee:
For thou hast hid thy face from us,
And hast consumed us, because of our iniquities.
7 But now, O Lord, thou art our father;
We are the clay, and thou our potter;
And we all are the work of thy hand.
8 Be not wroth very sore, O Lord,Neither remember iniquity for ever:
Behold, see, we beseech thee, we are all thy people.
9 Thy holy cities are a wilderness,
Zion is a wilderness, Jerusalem a desolation.
10 Our holy and our beautiful house, where our fathers praised thee,
Is burned up with fire:
And all our pleasant things are laid waste.
11 Wilt thou refrain thyself for these things, O Lord?
Wilt thou hold thy peace, and afflict us very sore?
TEXTUAL AND Isa_63:19 b. Regarding the division into chapters, there can be no doubt that what follows from Isaiah 63:19 b is closely connected with what precedes. There is no reason for beginning a new chapter here. It would be appropriate to make the chapter begin at Isaiah 63:15. But it is quite awkward to commence the chapter with λִּ ?χְ ?γֹ ?ηַ. With ςμιδν, Isaiah 63:19 a, the verse ought properly to close.—[Delitzsch, while he condemns the beginning of a new chapter with λִּ ?χְ ?γֹ ?ηַ, defends the Masoretic division of verses, and maintains that Isaiah 63:19 b could not be united with Isaiah 64:1, for the verse thus formed would be beyond measure overladen.
This sigh, too, belongs really to 19 a, as it arises out of the depths of the complaint there expressed.—D. M.]—πָ ?ζֹ ?μּ ?εּ is probably a mongrel form from πָ ?ζַ ?μּ ?εּ and ιִ ?ζֹ ?μεּ. For from ζָ ?μַ ?μ. to shake, comes the perfect Niphal πָ ?ζַ ?μּ ?εּ. But the Prophet wished to speak not merely of a shaking, but also of a dissolving, a flowing down of the mountains (comp. Psalms 44:7 [6]). For this purpose he availed himself of the freedom allowed in forming the Niphal of verbs, ςςΧ.
The Niphal of these verbs can be inflected, as if its normal third person masculine were an independent stem. Thus we have πָ ? ?ֽ ?ρְ ?αָ ?δ, Ezekiel 41:7; πָ ?ζְ ?μεּ, Judges 5:5, as if these were forms of the Kal, πָ ?ρַ ?α,πָ ?ζַ ?μ. There occur, moreover, Niphal forms which suppose a Kal perfect e or o, from which they are formed: πָ ?ρֵ ?πָּ ?δ, Ezekiel 26:2; πָ ?αֹ ?ζּ ?εּ, Amos 3:11; πָ ?βֹ ?μּ ?εּ, Isaiah 34:4, etc. In this way πָ ?ζֹ ?μּ ?εּ has arisen, and the occasion of its formation seems to have been the endeavor to unite the significations of the stems ζָ ?μַ ?μ and πָ ?ζַ ?μ. The one of these stems has given the consonants and the vocalization of the first syllable, the other, the vocalization of the second syllable (comp. Olshausen, § 263, 6, p. 592).—[It is hard to imagine that the Prophet intended by the irregular form which he employed to unite in it both the meaning of ζָ ?μַ ?μ, to shake, and that of πָ ?ζַ ?μ, to flow.
Most modern interpreters prefer to assume as the stem ζָ ?μַ ?μ.—D. M.]
Isaiah 64:4. The combination ωׂ ?ωׂ εςωδφγχ is manifestly formed in the genuine style of Isaiah for the sake of the alliteration.—[There is here no example of alliteration.—D. M.]—This combination is grammatically admissible according to the usage which allows us to add to a verb a nearer specification by means of a second verb in the same verbal form and connected by wav (comp. Job 6:9; 2 Samuel 7:29; Deuteronomy 5:19, et saepe).
Isaiah 64:5. εַ ?πָּ ?αֶ ?μ is, it appears to me, Hiphil from (αָּ ?μָ ?δ, marcuit, absumtus, confectus est.—[Delitzsch regards it as the Hiphil from αָּ ?μַ ?μ, or from πָ ?αֵ ?μ=αּ ?εּ ?μ.—D.M.]—The Hiphil is directly causative, to produce withering, i. e. to wither away.Isaiah 64:6. εϊξεβπε is Kal, which is here exceptionally used in a transitive signification (comp. on αָּ ?ςָ ?δ ,χָ ?ψַ ?η, Isaiah 64:1). αιγ marks the terminus in quem, and recalls Genesis 14:20.
AND 1. In violent agitation the suppliant expresses the wish that God would put an end to all this misery by a visible and grand manifestation of His might and majesty, that He would come down upon the earth, so that all His enemies must flee trembling before Him (Isaiah 63:19 to Isaiah 64:2). And Jehovah can do this, for He alone has proved Himself by deeds to be the living God to those who hope in Him (Isaiah 64:3-4 a). God’s procedure hitherto, in ever visiting Israel with repeated punishment, has been of no avail. Israel has not reformed thereby, but has only sunk deeper in impurity, corruption and decay (Isaiah 64:4 b–6). But Jehovah is Israel’s Father, Israel is the clay in His hand, and He is the Potter.
Is not Israel then, such as it is, properly His work? (Isaiah 64:7) [?] Let it please Him, then, not to exercise wrath to the utmost degree, but to consider that Israel is His people (Isaiah 64:8). All the cities of the holy land lie waste and desolate, even Zion and Jerusalem (Isaiah 64:9). The temple is burnt down, and all places in which Israel once delighted are ruins (Isaiah 64:10). Can Jehovah endure this? Can He be silent at it, and only continue to afflict His people? (Isaiah 64:11).
2. Oh, that thou wouldest rend—thy ways.—Isaiah 63:19 to Isaiah 64:4 a. At the head of the preceding paragraph (Isaiah 63:15-19 a) we read the prayer that the Lord would graciously look down from heaven on the misery of His people (Isaiah 63:15). How needful it is that He should do this is then shown by various negative and positive reasons. The suppliant is now not satisfied with a mere looking down. He has come to know (Isaiah 63:17 sqq.) how great the gulf is which separates Israel inwardly and outwardly from its God.
Inwardly, a great part of the nation has gone astray from Jehovah, and is even confirmed, hardened in this apostasy: externally, the people have been expelled from the land of their inheritance and from their sanctuary. The suppliant now thinks that in order to heal all these evils, there is needed a grand and signal manifestation of the divine majesty which should strike down all unbelief and annihilate all opposition. He desires, therefore, that God would rend the heaven, remove as it were the curtain which now conceals Him from the bodily eye, and thus makes unbelief and its consequences possible. Something is here asked, which is far more than the bowing of the heaven and coming down which is described in Psalms 18:10 as having taken place, and which is implored in Psalms 144:5. In these places by the bowing of the heaven and coming down only a manifestation by means of a tempest is denoted, while Isaiah here prays that Jehovah would show Himself in His terrible majesty, as according to Ezekiel 1:1 He did really show Himself to His prophet. μεּ ?ΰ comp. on Isaiah 48:18. The perfect after μεּ ?ΰ depicts impatience.
The rending of the heaven and coming down is set forth not as something merely possible, but as something in regard to which merely the wish is expressed that it may have already happened. In what way the Prophet pictures to himself the occurrence indicated by πζμε, he explains in Isaiah 44:1 by two comparisons. He supposes the δόξα which surrounds the Lord as consuming fire penetrating the mountains, though these are properly not combustible, and kindling them as easily and rapidly as fire ignites a fagot, yea, dissolving them despite their hardness and consistency into a boiling, seething mass, just as fire causes liquid water to boil (comp. Psalms 83:15; Psalms 97:5) χָ ?γַ ?η stands in Deuteronomy 32:22; Jeremiah 15:14 in an intransitive sense, but in the parallel passage Jeremiah 17:4, and in Isaiah 1:11, it is transitive. αָּ ?ςָ ?δ too, which from the radical meaning “ebullire” has, on the one hand, the signification of hot desire, longing, asking (Isaiah 21:12 bis), on the other, that of blowing one’s self up, swelling (Isaiah 30:13), possesses both a transitive and an intransitive power, as is the case with so many Hebrew verbal stems. δֲ ?ξָ ?ρִ ?ιν, ἄπ. λεγ., which the LXX. render by κηρός, wax, and the Vulgate by tabescere, was perceived by De Dieu and Schultens to be related to the Arabic hams and haschim (dry herb, dry, brittle wood). It denotes sarmenta, dry wood of the vine or of branches, brushwood. [Instead of “as when the melting fire burneth (E. V.), translate as fire kindles brushwood.” D.
M.]. The aim of this indubitable manifestation of Jehovah is that He may make His name (i.e., the knowledge of His being comprised in word) known to his enemies,i.e., to all those who stray from Him and harden themselves in this alienation (Isaiah 63:17), whether they are Israelites or heathen. The Prophet evidently hopes that this manifestation as demonstratio ad oculos will compel all Israelites, who hitherto did not believe the instruction given to them (because its evidence was not palpable enough) to know and acknowledge their God. If, however, there should be some among the βειν, who, notwithstanding this revelation apparent to the senses, should not be disposed to believe, these must at least flee vanquished and incapable of resistance. On ξτπικ comp. on Isaiah 63:12. αςωׂ ?εϊκεβεΧ in Isaiah 63:2 is dependent on μδεγις. The knowledge of the name of God will be imparted to men, so far as this rending and coming down is a deed, not merely an instruction by word.
This is a thought quite after Isaiah’s manner, as may be seen from comparing Isaiah 26:8-10, the remarks on which passage may be consulted. After the statement of the design to make thy name known,etc., the manner of doing this is also declared: in thy doing terrible thingsetc. [Not: When thou didst terrible,etc.—E. V.]. And then there is mention again made of the visible event which should precede the making known of Jehovah’s name to His adversaries. For at the close of verse 2 we have a repetition of the conclusion of Isa 63:19 (Oh, that) thou wouldest come down, etc. [Not, as in the E. V.: Thou comest down,etc.].
By this recurrence of the same words the verses Isaiah 63:19 to Isaiah 64:2 are shown to form logically and rhetorically an inseparable whole. The words of the third verse [fourth in E. V.] stand manifestly in a causal relation to what precedes. The Prophet had expressed the bold wish that the Lord might no longer remain concealed, but might visibly display His Godhead. Can this happen? Imaginary gods cannot, indeed, comply with such a requirement.
But Jehovah is no fictitious god. He is the true, the living God. And He alone has shown Himself as such from the beginning. For from primeval time men have not seen nor heard a God beside Jehovah who showed Himself by living deed to him who hopes in Him. I take ε before ξςεμν in a causal sense=and truly, as we had it frequently already (e.g., Isaiah 24:5; Isaiah 38:17; Isaiah 39:1, comp. with 2 Kings 20:12). That ΰμδιν is to be taken as the accusative, and not as the vocative, is clear, because neither in itself nor in this connection is it a suitable thought to say: None but Thou, O God, has seen and heard what Thou wilt do to those who hope in Thee.
For it is self-evident that no one previously saw and heard what God intends. And what, too, is intended by this strange sentence in this connection? And how explain the change of person in ιςωׂ ?δ? It is objected that δΰζιο is not in other cases followed by the accusative. But this is not the case. δΰζιο has frequently, when in the parallelism ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ς corresponds to it, the accusative after it (Genesis 4:23; Job 33:1), and we may say that in the passage before us δΰζιπε is subordinated to the ωׁ ?ξςε as a merely rhetorical repetition, and forms one idea with it. Even if the construction of δΰζιο with the accusative could not in any way be justified, this would not signify.
For the accusative ΰμδιν can also depend on the verb ψΰϊδ alone as the nearest verb. Delitzsch rightly remarks: “We cannot in chapters 40–66 hear the words ΰμδινζεμϊκ preceded by a negation, without at once receiving the impression that Jahve’s [Jehovah’s] exclusive Godhead is attested (Isaiah 45:5; Isaiah 45:21)." ιςωׂ ?δ stands in a pregnant sense, as in Ps. 22:32; 37:5; 52:11; Jeremiah 14:7; Daniel 8:24; Daniel 11:17; Daniel 11:28; Daniel 11:30. The God, who from the beginning has proved Himself to be a real, living God by working, i.e., by such indubitable proofs in deeds as only a real, living power could show—this God can also do that which the Prophet (Isaiah 63:19 to Isaiah 64:2) with such intense ardor desires to see. I, too, believe that Paul freely quotes this passage in 1 Corinthians 2:9. But I think, on account of the words “καὶἐπὶκαρδίανἀνθρώπουοὐκἀνέβη,” that the place Isaiah 65:17 was also before the Apostle’s mind. [Paul’s quotation of this place is seen to be appropriate when we reflect that the Object perceived by no ear, seen by no eye, is, as Delitzsch puts it, not God in Himself, but the God who acts for His people, who justifies their waiting on Him.—D. M.].
What the Prophet had intimated by the one word ιςωׂ ?δ, he expands in the first part of verse 4. τָּ ?βַ ?ς is a strong expression, and is intended to denote a friendly impingere, but one which is right sensibly felt, an occursus which leaves no doubt as to the reality of the person who meets us, though He should be invisible. τָּ ?βַ ?ς stands with the accusative in the general sense of meeting (Exodus 5:20; Exodus 23:4; 1 Samuel 10:5; Amos 5:19; comp. Exodus 5:3; Isaiah 47:3). The Lord meets in a way that is perceptible to Him who loves righteousness and practises it, i.e., does it with joy. [“He who rejoices and works righteousness is one in whom joy and doing right are united. The expression is therefore equivalent to rejoices to do righteousness. But it is, perhaps, more correct, with Hofmann, to take φֶ ?γֶ ?χ as the object of both verbs: Such as let what is right be their joy and their work; for ωׂ ?εּ ?ωׂ (ωִׂ ?ιωׂ), though it cannot immediately (see Isaiah 8:6; Isaiah 35:1), can mediately, as here and Isaiah 65:18, be joined with the accusative of the object.”—Delitzsch.—D. M.].
As the Prophet, in Isaiah 64:4 b passes over to a new, specifically different thought, δֵ ?οΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δ in must begin a new verse.
3. Behold, thou art wroth——us away. Isaiah 64:4-6. With these words the Prophet sets that procedure which the Lord had hitherto pursued over against that which he himself so ardently longs for as certainly leading to the desired end. Hitherto the Lord has been wroth. Although individuals might experience the assisting grace of their God, yet, on the whole, His conduct toward His people was characterized by anger.
And what was the result? Was Israel thereby reformed? No. The old sin ever succeeded punishment. Sin, punishment, and sin again, that has been the whole history of Israel from the beginning. This is, in my judgment, the meaning of the words αָּ ?δֶ ?νςεֹ ?μָ ?ν.
Thus χφτϊ retains its full force as a perfect, and επηθΰ retains unimpaired the signification of an aoristic imperfect. αָּ ?δֶ ?ν has a neuter force: in (with, during) these (things) which are indicated by thou wast angry, and we sinned, is (contained, elapsed) an ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν, i.e., an eternity, a period of incalculable duration. The writer means the ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν so often spoken of previously (Isaiah 63:9; Isaiah 63:11; Isaiah 63:16; Isaiah 63:19; Isaiah 64:3): the past of the people of Israel. Its history was really since the journeying in the wilderness an uninterrupted series of transgressions and punishments. It cannot be objected that δָ ?ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν would be required. For the Prophet will not press the idea “time past,” or even “the past of the Israelitish people.” He just wishes to say that an eternity has passed in such an alternation of things. That αָּ ?δֶ ?ν can be used thus indefinitely, is beyond doubt (comp.
Isaiah 38:16; Ezekiel 33:18; Jeremiah 18:13, etc.). So, in the main, Delitzsch. But he translates: “In this state we have been already long.” It appears to me, that in order to express this, the Prophet would have written ξֵ ?ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν. I, too, take εְ ?πִ ?εָּ ?ωֵׁ ?ςַ as a question (comp., e.g., Ezekiel 20:31). If punishing and correcting have already lasted for an eternity without good result, can this be the right way to save Israel? [This question is hardly becoming. And such correction is really God’s successful way of turning Israel from their sins (comp.
Isaiah 27:9; Hosea 5:5, etc.). If under αָּ ?δֶ ?ν we understand God’s wrath and Israel’s sin, then we must take επεως as a question, which looks a somewhat arbitrary construction. The translators of the English version evidently regarded αָּ ?δֶ ?ν as referring to αγψλικ in the preceding hemistich. This view is still held by many interpreters, and it is, perhaps, on the whole entitled to the preference. Adopting it Alexander thus paraphrases this verse: “Although Thou hast cast off Israel as a nation, Thou hast nevertheless met or favorably answered every one rejoicing to do righteousness, and in Thy ways or future dispensations such shall still remember and acknowledge Thee: Thou hast been angry, and with cause, for we have sinned; but in them, Thy purposed dispensations, there is perpetuity, and we shall be saved.”—D. M.] That the discipline hitherto applied has not been of any help is shown by the Prophet still more in detail in what follows.
Very far from being healed and sanctified, the whole people became rather as a man rendered unclean by leprosy, who must be expelled from human society (Leviticus 13:44 sqq.). The people, therefore, that had become unclean through the leprosy of sin, must as one man be cast out of the holy land into exile. The same thing is declared under another image. The moral habitus of the people (their righteousness, i.e., juste facta, Isaiah 33:15; Isaiah 45:24) is compared with a menstruous garment(ςִ ?γִּ ?ιν, ἅπ. λεγ. from ςָ ?γַ ?γ, counted time), whose touch makes unclean. But moral pollution deprives people of firmness and strength. Therefore the suppliant further acknowledges that they are withered as a leaf.
But leaves when they are dry and fall off, become the prey of the wind. Thus iniquities (ςַ ?εֹ ?πֵ ?πεּ is defectively written plural for ςַ ?εֹ ?πְ ?ιπεֹ, Isaiah 64:6; Jeremiah 14:7; Daniel 9:13) have mediately swept the people into exile with the irresistible force of a tempest. And in exile the mass of the people have not been improved. Although, as this prayer itself proves, the stem is not quite dead (Isaiah 6:13), it may yet be said, if we consider the great mass of the people, that there is no one who calls upon the name of the Lord, no one who would have roused himself as a man to make the necessary moral effort to take fast hold of Jehovah. [God’s hiding his face stood in a causal relation to the absence of prayer on the part of the people. The neglect of calling on Jehovah’s name and the want of importunity in prayer are traced to the withdrawal of the divine favor and to the abandonment of the people to the consequences of their sins.—D. M.]
4. But now, O Lord—
Very sore.Isaiah 64:7-11. εְ ?ςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ is emphatic, Isaiah 64:7. It is as if he would say: “Our condition is very dreadful. The worst is to be feared. But now, Thou art our Father. Therefore there is still hope.” With ΰαιπε he returns to the thought which he had already expressed, Isaiah 63:16. [“Instead of relying upon any supposed merits of their own, they appeal to their own dependence upon God as a reason why He should have mercy upon them. The paternity ascribed to God is not that of natural creation in the case of individuals, but the creation of the church or chosen people, and of Israel as a spiritual and ideal person.
The figure of the potter and the clay, implying absolute authority and power, is used twice before (Isaiah 29:6; Isaiah 45:9), and is one of the connecting links between this book and the acknowledged Isaiah.” Alexander.—D. M.] On the double declaration that the Lord is not only Father, but also Potter, the prayer, Isaiah 64:8, is founded that He would not be wroth very sore, nor remember iniquity forever, but rather consider that all Israel is His people. This short emphatic exclamation δοδαθΞπΰςξκλμπε forms plainly the highest point of the prayer, and here it could accordingly come to an end. [?] I regard it as possible that the verses 9–11 have been inserted by an Israelite living in the Exile, to whom the sad condition of the holy land, of the holy city and of the holy house seemed to be for God and Israel the thing most unendurable.
We could thus explain the singularly vivid and exact description of the state in which the home of the exiles was at the time here supposed. For certainly the words of Isa 64:9 and Isaiah 64:10 do not sound as those of one who viewed the things from a distance, but as the words of one who saw them most closely. [Here our author’s arbitrary theory of prophecy misleads him, comp. Introduction, foot-note, pp. 17,18. Dr. Naegelsbach has himself told us in the heading of this fourth discourse, Isaiah 63:7 to Isaiah 64:11, that “the Prophet transports himself in spirit into the situation of the church of the Exile.” He lives in spirit in the Exile, and speaks of the misery prevailing in it as if he were an immediate eye-witness. This is in accordance with the custom of the Prophet.
That condition of things which Isaiah by prophetic anticipation here describes as existing, is clearly predicted by his cotemporary Micah (Micah 3:12). It was after the Prophet had described the treading down of the sanctuary (Isaiah 63:18) that he exclaimed, Oh that thou wouldest rend the heavens and come down,etc.; and it is strange that Isaiah 63:9-10 should not be considered by our author as a most appropriate close to the prayer, and that these verses should be regarded by him as the language of carnal Israel, and as an interpolation by a later hand.—D. M.]. Thy holy cities are the cities of the land. χγωׁ is to be taken in an abstract sense: urbes tuae sanctitatis, thy holy cities (comp. Psalms 78:54; Zech. 2:16). Zion is here the mount Zion, the seat of the kingdom, the political centre of the theocracy; Jerusalem is the entire holy city, the national centre.
There is added in Isaiah 64:10 the religious centre, the temple. [“The people call it house of our holiness and our glory; Jahve’s holiness and glory have in the temple transplanted, as it were, heaven on the earth (comp. Isaiah 63:15 with Isaiah 60:7), and this earthly dwelling-place of God is Israel’s possession, and thereby Israel’s χγωׁ and ϊτΰψϊ. The relative sentence tells what sacred historical recollections are attached to it. ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ is here=ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψωָׁ ?νwhere, as Genesis 39:20; Numbers 20:13 et saepe” Delitzsch.—D. M.]. ΰֵ ?ωׁ ωְׂ ?ψֵ ?τַ ?ϊ is found only here. But comp. Isaiah 9:4. λֹּ ?μ with the predicate in the singular is uncommon; this urns loquendi does not occur elsewhere in Isaiah (comp.
Ew. Gr. § 317 c; Proverbs 15:2; Ezekiel 31:15). We shall not err if we understand under our pleasant things, in opposition to the previously mentioned sacred localities, the buildings in private possession. [Delitzsch holds that the parallelism leads us under pleasant things to think of objects connected with the worship of God in which the people had a holy joy.—D. M.]. The singular ηָ ?ψְ ?αָּ ?δ is found in Isaiah only here (see the List). The expression δָ ?ιָ ?δμְ ?ηָ ?ψְ ?αָּ ?δ occurs no where else in Isaiah.
But it is found frequently in Jeremiah, and in Ezekiel 38:8. After the Prophet had set this sad picture before the Lord, he closes with the question, whether the Lord can in such circumstances restrain himself (Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 63:15) be silent (Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 57:11; Isaiah 62:1; Isaiah 62:6; Isaiah 65:6) and so let His people be oppressed to the utmost (comp. Isaiah 40:27 sqq.)?
Footnotes:Heb. the fire of meltings.As fire kindles brushwood.When thou dost terrible deeds which we did not expect,—that thou wouldest come down, that mountains might flow down before thee! Or, seen a God beside thee, which doeth so for him, etc.In thy ways they remember thee.for a long time it is so; and shall we, be saved?We were all as the unclean (person), etc.Heb. melted.Heb. by the hand of. AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 63:7. [“God does good because He is good; what He bestows upon us must be run up to the original, it is according to His mercies, not according to our merits, andaccording to the multitude of His loving-kindnesses, which can never be spent. Thus we should magnify God’s goodness, and speak honorably of it, not only when we plead it (as David Psalms 51:1), but when we praise it.” Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 63:9. The angel of the face or presence belongs to “the deep things of God" (1 Corinthians 2:10). It is not right to imagine that a certain and exhaustive knowledge is possible in reference to these things. The humility which becomes even science, imposes on it the duty to write everywhere a non liquet, where, through the nature of things, limits are placed to human knowledge. Not to regard these limitations is the manner of the pseudo-scientific, immodest scholasticism. What, therefore, we have said regarding the angel of the face makes no higher pretension than that of a modest hypothesis. [Comp. in Hengstenberg’s Christology, Vol. Isaiah 1 : The Angel of the Lord in the books of Moses and in the book of Joshua.—D. M.].
3. On Isaiah 63:10. “There are two ways in which the Holy Ghost is offended or vexed. One way is of a less dreadful nature. It is when a man takes from the Holy Spirit the opportunity to work in the soul for its joy, as He is wont to communicate to it His gracious influence and His gracious operations. When such is the case, then as an offended friend when He perceives that no heed is given to most of His counsels, the Holy Spirit is grieved, and, although reluctantly, ceases for a time to advise the stubborn, ut carendo discat quantum peccaverit. Of this kind of grieving Paul speaks Ephesians 4:30.
It can be committed by the godly and the elect. But the Holy Spirit can be offended and vexed in a gross and flagitious way, when one not only does not believe and follow Him, but also obstinately resists Him, despises all His counsel, reviles and blasphemes Him, will none of His reproof (Proverbs 1:24-25), gives the lie to His truth, and so speaks against the sun… This the Scripture calls ἀντιπίπτειν (Acts 7:51), ἐνυβρίζειν (Hebrews 10:29), βλασφημεῖν (Matthew 12:31), θεομαχεῖν (Acts 5:39). Let us, therefore, not grieve the Holy Spirit with evil desires, words and deeds, that we may be able on the future day of redemption to show that seal uninjured with which we were sealed on that day of our redemption when we were regenerated. To this end let us assiduously breathe forth the prayers of David Psalms 143:10; Psalms 51:12-14.” Leigh.4. On Isaiah 63:10. [They rebelled and vexed His Holy Spirit. This statement implies the personality of the Holy Ghost, or the Spirit of God’s holiness.
He is represented as a person whom we can grieve. We have in this passage clear indications of the doctrine of the Trinity. In Isaiah 63:9 we have the Angel of God’s face, and in Isaiah 63:10 we have the Spirit of His holiness, both clearly distinguished from God the fountain of their being.—D. M.].
5. On Isaiah 63:11. “Faith asks after God and so does unbelief, but in different ways. Both put the question, Where? Faith does it to seek God in time of need, and to tell Him trustfully of His old kindnesses. Unbelief does it to tempt God, to deny Him, to lead others into temptation, and to make them doubt regarding the divine presence and providence. Therefore it asks: “Where is the God of judgment” (Malachi 2:17)? “Where is now thy God "(Psalms 42:4; Psalms 42:11; Psalms 79:10; Psalms 115:2)?
If you, as the praying Church here does, ask in the former manner diligently after God, you will be preserved from the other kind of asking.” Leigh.6. On Isaiah 63:15. “Meritum meum miseratio Domini. Non sum meriti inops, quando ille miserationum Dominus non defuerit, et si misericordiae Domini multae, multus ego sum in meritis.” Augustine.7. On Isaiah 63:16. “We can from this sentence [?] cogently refute the doctrine of the invocation of the Saints. For the Saints know nothing of us, and are not personally acquainted with us, much less can they know the concerns of our hearts, or hear our cry, for they are not omnipresent. If it be alleged that God makes matters known to them and that they then pray for us, what a round-about business this would be!
It would justify the prayer said to have been made by a simple man: “Ah Lord God! tell it, I beseech thee, to the blessed Mary that I have told thee to tell it again to her, that she should tell thee that I have wished to say to her by so many Ave Marias and Pater Nosters, that she should say to thee to be pleased to be gracious unto me.” Meyer, de Rosariis, cap. III., thes. V., p. 52). With how much more brevity and efficacy do we pray with the penitent publican: God be merciful to me, a sinner! ”Leigh.8. On Isaiah 63:17. “There is no more heinous sin than to accuse God of being the cause of our sin. Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God (James 1:13; Psalms 5:5; Deuteronomy 32:4; Ps. 92:16).
He commands what is good, forbids and punishes what is evil. How then could He be the cause of it? But when He punishes sin with sin, i.e., when He at last withdraws from the sinner His grace that has been persistently despised, then He acts as a righteous Judge who inflicts the judgment of hardening the heart on those who wilfully resist His Spirit.” Leigh.9. On Isaiah 66 [“This chapter is a model of affectionate and earnest entreaty for the divine interposition in the day of calamity. With such tender and affectionate earnestness may we learn to plead with God! Thus may all His people learn to approach Him as a Father; thus feel that they have the inestimable privilege in the times of trial of making known their wants to the High and Holy One.
Thus when calamity presses on us; when as individuals or families we are afflicted; or when our country or the church is suffering under long trials, may we go to God, and humbly confess our sins, and urge His promises, and take hold of His strength, and plead with Him to interpose. Thus pleading, He will hear us; thus presenting our cause, He will interpose to save us.” Barnes. D. M.].
10. On Isaiah 64:3-4 a. [4, 5 a]. The God who appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, called Moses, and led by him the people of Israel out of Egypt, who chose Joshua, Samuel, David and others to be His servants and glorified Himself by them, this God alone has shown Himself to be the true and living God, and we can hope from Him that He will yet do more, and manifest Himself still more signally.
11. On Isaiah 64:4 [5]. [“Note what God expects from us in order to our having communion with Him. First, We must make conscience of doing our duty in everything, we must work righteousness, must do that which is good, and which the Lord our God requires of us, and must do it well. Secondly, We must be cheerful in doing our duty; we must rejoice and work righteousness, must delight ourselves in God and His law, must be pleasant in His service and sing at our work. God loves a cheerful giver, a cheerful worshipper; we must serve the Lord with gladness. Thirdly, We must conform ourselves to all the methods of His providence concerning us, and be suitably affected with them; must remember Him in Hisways, in all the ways wherein He walks, whether He walks towards us, or walks contrary to us; we must mind Him, and make mention of Him, with thanksgiving, when His ways are ways of mercy, for in a day of prosperity we mustbe joyful, with patience and submission when He contends with us, for in a day of adversity we must consider.” Henry.
D. M.].
12. On Isaiah 64:7 [8]. [“This whole verse is an acknowledgment of the sovereignty of God. It expresses the feeling which all have when under conviction of sin, and when they are sensible that they are exposed to the divine displeasure for their transgressions. Then they feel that if they are to be saved, it must be by the mere Sovereignty of God; and they implore His interposition to ‘mould and guide them at His will.’ It may be added, that it is only when sinners have this feeling that they hope for relief; and then they will feel that if they are lost, it will be right; if saved, it will be because God moulds them as the potter does the clay.” Barnes. D. M.].
HINTS1. On Isaiah 63:7. Text for a Thanksgiving Sermon. What is our duty after that the Lord has shown us great loving kindness? 1) To remember what He has done to us. 2) To be mindful of what we ought to render to Him for the same.
2. On Isaiah 63:8-17. The history of the people of Israel a mirror in which we too may perceive the history of our relation to God. 1) God is to us from the beginning a loving and faithful Father (Isaiah 63:8-9). 2) We repay His love with ingratitude, as Israel did (Isaiah 63:10 a). 3) God punishes us for this as He punished Israel (Isaiah 63:10 b). 4) God receives us again to His favor when we, as Israel, call on Him in penitence (Isaiah 63:11-17).
On Isaiah 63:7-17. “If God in Christ has become our Father, He remains our Father to all eternity. 1) He is our Father in Christ. 2) He abides faithful even when we waIsa Isaiah 63:3) When we have fallen, His arms still stand open to receive us.” Deichert in Manch. G. u. ein Geist, 1868, page 65.
4. On Isaiah 64:5-7. Joh. Ben. Carpzov has a sermon on this text, in which he treats of righteousness, and shows 1) justitiam salvantem, i. e., the righteousness with which one enters the kingdom of heaven; 2) justitiam damnantem, i. e., the righteousness with which a man enters the fire of hell; 3) justitiam testantem, i. e., the righteousness by which a man testifies that he has attained the true righteousness.
5. On Isaiah 64:6-9. “Let us hear from our text an earnest and affecting confession of sin, and at the same time consider 1) the doctrine of repentance; 2) the comfort of forgiveness which believers receive.”—Eichhorn.6. On Isaiah 64:6. (We all do fade, etc.) “These are very instructive words, from which we learn what a noxious plant sin is, and what fruit it brings forth. First, says he, we fade as a leaf. This means that sin brings with it the curse of God, and deprives us of His blessing both for the body and the soul, so that the heart is dissatisfied and distressed. Then it robs us of the highest treasure, confidence in the grace of God.
For sin and an evil conscience awaken dread of God. As it is impossible to call upon God aright without faith and a sure persuasion of His aid, it follows that sin hinders prayer also, and thus robs us of the highest comfort. When men have no faith and cannot pray, then the awful punishment comes upon them, that God hides His face and leaves them to pine in their sins. For they cannot help themselves, and have lost the consolation and protection which they need in life.”—Veit Diet.
V.—THE FIFTH The Death and Life-bringing End-PeriodIsaiah 65-66These two chapters are closely connected. They form one discourse. Their commencement is obviously related to the preceding prayer, in which the people had been regarded as a unity without distinguishing between the godly and the wicked. In chap. 65 it is shown that Israel will neither be entirely saved (Isaiah 65:1-7), nor entirely cast off (Isaiah 65:8-12). The true and righteous God will act according to the rule “suum cuique” (Isaiah 65:13-16). The Prophet then describes the salvation destined for the godly as new life.
He depicts it, Isaiah 65:17-25, from its outward side, and, Isaiah 66:1-3 a, from its inward side. I must regard the verses Isaiah 66:3-6 as an interpolation. [But see the exposition.—D. M.] In Isaiah 66:7-9 the Prophet describes the new life in a quite peculiar relation. He shows the wonderfully intensive power with which the new life will unfold itself, and find its realization in posterity that cannot be numbered. The fundamental, ethical character of the new order of life, which will express itself both in the relation of the redeemed to one another, and in the relation of the Lord Himself to the redeemed, shall be maternal love (Isaiah 66:10-14). In conclusion, the Prophet draws another comprehensive picture of the time of the end, in which he first views collectively all its elements of judgment, and then shows how the distinction between Israel and the Gentile world will cease, and the entire human race will be one new Israel, raised to a higher elevation (Isaiah 66:15-24).
1. NOT ALL ISRAEL SHALL BE SAVED
Isaiah 65:1-71 I am sought of them that asked not for me;I am found of them that sought me not;
I said, Behold me, behold me,
Unto a nation that was not called by my name.
2 I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people,
Which walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts;
3 A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face;
That sacrificeth in gardens,
And burneth incense upon altars of brick,
4 Which remain among the graves,
And lodge in the monuments,
Which eat swine’s flesh,
And broth of abominable things is in their vessels;
5 Which say, Stand by thyself, come not near to me;
For I am holier than thou.
These are a smoke in my nose,
A fire that burneth all the day.
6 Behold, it is written before me:
I will not keep silence, dbut will recompense,
Even recompense into their bosom,
7 Your iniquities, and the iniquities of your fathers together, saith the Lord,Which have burned incense upon the mountains,
And blasphemed me upon the hills:
eTherefore will I measure their former work into their bosom.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_65:1. The dative after the passive πγψωׁ stands here as Ezekiel 14:3; Ezekiel 20:3; Ezekiel 20:31; Ezekiel 36:37, according to a well-known usus loquendi. ΰωׁ ?ψ is to be supplied before μΰ. [Ges., Gr., §123, 3. The Pual of χָ ?ψָ ?ΰ is of not unfrequent occurrence in the latter part of Isa 48:8; Isaiah 48:12; Isaiah 58:12; Isaiah 61:3; Isaiah 62:2. Isaiah 65:6. εωׁ ?μξϊι has the accent on the final syllable on account of the future signification, to distinguish it from the first ωׁ ?μξϊι, which has the accent on the penult.
AND 1. Chaps. 65 and 66 are a Yes—but [an affirmative answer with qualifications] to the prayer of the church. For that prayer shall assuredly be heard, but quite otherwise than she imagines [?]. First of all the Lord makes a distinction, which was not made in the prayer, between the persons, according to their religious and moral condition. The prayer takes the people as an undistinguished unity in what is good as in what is bad. The good are not excepted where the transgression of the people is spoken of (Isaiah 63:10; Isaiah 63:17; Isaiah 64:4-6), and where deliverance and salvation are spoken of, the evil are not excepted (Isaiah 63:16; Isaiah 54:7-8). [It is not the case that the prayer altogether ignores the distinction between the good and the bad in the community.
This distinction is prominently made in the latter part of Isa 63:17 : Return for thy servants’ sake to the tribes of thine inheritance (amended translation). Jehovah’s answer is exactly conformable to this prayer. Comp. Isaiah 65:8 sq.: So will I do for my servants’ sakes. When the prayer speaks of the whole nation being God’s people, the reference is to the original relation established between them and God. The prayer distinctly declares that it is for those that wait for Him that God acts, and that it is he who rejoiceth and worketh righteousness whom God meets, Isaiah 64:4-5.
Moreover, this prayer, which the church is supposed to utter, testifies, notwithstanding its strong confession of prevalent and general ungodliness, to the existence of a faithful, praying remnant. Dr. Naegelsbach fails to appreciate the prayer that precedes chap. 65, and attributes to it defects and blemishes which it does not really contain.—D. M.]. In chap. 65 there is a sharp line of separation drawn between the servants of Jehovah who have sought Him (Isaiah 65:8-10; Isaiah 65:13 sqq.), and the persons who have forsaken Him (Isaiah 65:11 sqq.) But it is not the intention of the Lord. that Israel should be reduced by the exclusion of the ungodly to a little flock, and that the old patriarchal promise of an innumerable progeny should find but a scanty realization in the glorious time of salvation. In the Messianic time Israel shall be not only blessed and glorious, but also numerous (comp.
Ezekiel 36:37). Just think of places such as Isaiah 49:13 sqq.; Isaiah 54:1 sqq.; Isaiah 60:4 sqq.! But the Lord will take the members of His redeemed church not merely out of Israel. He takes them out of all nations. For, connection with the church of the redeemed is no longer dependent on natural descent from Abraham and circumcision in the flesh, but on being born of God and circumcision of the heart. [We give here Dr. J.
A. Alexander’s analysis of this section: “The great enigma of Israel’s simultaneous loss and gain is solved by a prediction of the calling of the Gentiles, Isaiah 65:1. This is connected with the obstinate unfaithfulness of the chosen people, Isaiah 65:2. They are represented, under the two main aspects of their character at different periods, as gross idolaters and as Pharisaical bigots, Isaiah 65:3-5. Their casting off was not occasioned by the sins of one generation, but of many, Isaiah 65:6-7. But even in this rejected race there was a chosen remnant, in whom the promises shall be fulfilled, Isaiah 65:8-10.”—D.
M.].
2. I am sought——called by my name. Isaiah 65:1. The Apostle Paul understands Isaiah 65:1 of the Gentiles while he adheres to the Septuagint, with a transposition of the clauses (Romans 10:20). The Jewish commentators (with exception of Chiquitilla or Gecatilia, comp. RosenmuellerSchol. in loc.) and most modern interpreters refer the words to the unbelieving Jews.
Only Hendewerk, who supposes the Persians specifically to be here meant, Stier and von Hofmann are exceptions. I agree with these latter. For 1) if Isaiah 65:1 is to refer to the Jews, then πξφΰϊι ,πγψωׁ ?ϊι must signify: quaerendum, inveniendum me obtuli, and not “I let Myself be asked for, be found,” which signification the Niphal undoubtedly has in Ezekiel 14:3; Ezekiel 20:3; Ezekiel 20:31; Ezekiel 36:37 (Niph. tolerativum). For, in fact, the Jews have not sought the Lord, and therefore have not asked for and found Him. If then we would take the verbs πγψωׁ ?ϊι and πξφΰϊι in the sense in which πγψωׁ occurs in the places quoted from Ezekiel, that would be affirmed regarding the Jews in the place before us which was not true of them. We must then take πγψωׁ and πξφΰ in the sense of quaerendum, inveniendum me obtuli, or in the sense “I was capable of being asked for, capable of being found;” but this sense the perfect Niphal cannot bear.
In reference to πγψωׁ, an examination of the places in Ezekiel makes this clear. But in reference to πξφΰ appeal is made to Isaiah 55:6. There it is said: Seek the Lordαְּ ?δִ ?ξָּֽ ?φְ ?ΰεֹ which may be rendered while he may be found.—For everything which is found, may be found. But does it follow that πξּ ?φΰ can mean “to be capable of being found” to the exclusion of the signification “to be actually found?” But that must be the case if Isaiah 65:1 is to be referred to the Jews. 2) βειμΰχֹ ?ψָ ?ΰαωξι is appropriately applied only to Gentiles, as even Delitzsch confesses. [Delitzsch also calls attention to the use of βּ ?εֹ ?ι (comp. Isaiah 55:5) in Isaiah 65:1 and of ςַ ?ν in Isaiah 65:2, as indicating that Isaiah 65:1 relates to the Gentiles and Isaiah 65:2 to the Jews.—D. M.].
With the words δππιδππι the Lord wishes to declare that He offers Himself lovingly and pressingly to the nation hitherto strangers to Him (comp. Isaiah 58:9).
3. I have spread out——their bosom.Isaiah 65:2-7. In opposition to what the Lord will be in fact to the Gentiles we are told in these verses what the Lord wished to be to Israel, but was not on account of the stubbornness of this people. With infinite, compassionate love the Lord spread out His hands to Israel λμΞδιεν (comp. Isaiah 65:5; Isaiah 28:24; Isaiah 51:13; Isaiah 52:5; Isaiah 62:6), i. e,, continually. He would gladly have enclosed them in His arms as dear children (λּ ?ψωׂ see the List.).
But they were a refractory people. He calls them ςַ ?ν not βּ ?εֹ ?ι as, Isaiah 65:1, the Gentiles; but they were ςνρεψψ. How they proved refractory is declared in what follows. They pursued evil, perverse ways, and this was the necessary consequence of their following, not the thoughts of Jehovah, but only their own thoughts (comp. Isaiah 55:7; Isaiah 59:7; Jeremiah 18:12). But not only by omitting to do what the Lord desired, did they offend Him, but also by defiant and open (ςμΞλּ ?πι, comp.
Job 1:11; Job 6:28; Job 21:31, probably, too, alluding to Exodus 20:3) doing of that which is contrary to the chief commandment of the theocracy, by gross idolatry which they practised, while they sacrificed in gardens or groves (comp. on Isaiah 1:29; Isaiah 66:17), and burnt incense on altars which, contrary to the law, were built of bricks. According to the Mosaic law only an altar of earth or of unhewn stones [or of wooden boards overlaid with brass] was allowed (Exodus 20:24 sqq.; Isaiah 27:1 sqq.; Isaiah 30:1 sqq.). The bricks recall Babylon, the land of lateres cocti from ancient time (Genesis 11:3). Another form of their idolatry consisted in their frequenting groves and other kept (i. e., secret, not easily accessible) places, where they even passed the night in order to obtain mantic revelations through the demons, or through the spirits of the dead, a thing which was strictly forbidden in the law (Deuteronomy 18:11; comp. Isaiah 8:19). Even Jerome and Theodoret have so understood this place.
Jerome says: . . “Sedens . . vel habitans in sepulchris et in delubris idolorum dormiens, ubi stratis pellibus hostiarum incubare soliti erant, ut somniis futura cognoscerent.” Other passages from ancient authors regarding this usage are given by Rosenmueller,in loc. It seems to me less appropriate to think of purificatory offerings presented for the dead (inferiae, februationes, Vitringa), as these offerings and not require a lengthened sitting or passing the night in sepulchral caves. πְ ?φεּ ?ιν are loca abscondita, as Isaiah 48:6πְ ?φεּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊres absconditae, as πָ ?φַ ?ψ easily obtains the signification of hiding from the signification custodire, observare (comp. Proverbs 7:10). The swine which divides the hoof, but does not chew the cud, is according to the law unclean, and durst not be eaten (Leviticus 11:7; Deuteronomy 14:18). Quamdiu stetit Judaeorum respublica, in Judaea nulli erant sues,” says Bochart (Hieroz. I. p. 804, comp.
Luke 15:11; Luke 8:26; Luke 8:32). It is doubtful whether in our place the common or the ritual use of swine’s flesh (at the sacrificial meal) is spoken of. Both are possible. Where swine are eaten, there they can also be used in sacrifice, and where they are sacrificed, there they are also eaten. In Isaiah 66:17, too, both profane and sacred uses can be promiscuously spoken of. That among many heathen nations of antiquity swine were offered in sacrifice has been sufficiently proved by Spencer (De legg.
Hebr. p. 137), Bochart (Hieroz. II. p. 381 sqq.), Saubert (De sacrificiis veterum cap. 23, p. 572 sqq.); Movers (Phoen. I. p. 218 sqq.). That the Babylonians sacrificed and ate swine seems to be implied in what is here said [?], but is not confirmed by other testimonies (comp. Delitzschin loc.). λָּ ?ψָ ?χ from λָּ ?ψַ ?χto rend, to tear in pieces (comp. Genesis 27:40; Psalms 7:3 et saepe) is ἅπ. λεγ.
The signification must be that which is torn to pieces, broken. [Gesenius assigns to the word the meaning of broth, soup, which is so called from the fragments or crumbs of bread on which the broth is poured.—D. M.]. λִּ ?βּ ?εּ ?μ is res foeda, abominabilis, abomination (comp. Leviticus 7:18; Leviticus 19:7; Ezekiel 4:14). Broken bits (a ragout, a medley) of abominations are their dishes. The expression is metonymical [synecdochical, comp. Jeremiah 24:2].
The K’ri reads ξְ ?ψַ ?χ, which, according to Judges 6:19-20, must mean broth. But the alteration is not needed. In Isaiah 65:5 the Prophet alludes to idolatrous rites of purification or sanctification which were not sanctioned by the law. They were probably connected with the celebration of mysteries. One recalls appropriately here the, word of Horaceodi profanum vulgus et arceo. [Henderson thinks the class here described to be entirely different from the idolaters spoken of in Isaiah 65:3-4. “Having specified the sins for which the Jews were notorious, during what may be called the idolatrous period of their history, Jehovah now portrays their character during the self-righteous period, or that which succeeded the return from the captivity—including Pharisaism, Talmudism, and modern Judaism.” Comp. Isaiah 58:1-3; Luke 18:11; Romans 10:3—D.
M.]. χψαΰμικ recalls expressions such as we find Isaiah 49:20; Genesis 19:9; Genesis 19:3; Genesis 19:2; Proverbs 9:4; Proverbs 9:16. [“The literal translation is approach to thyself, which implies removal from the speaker. The E. V., stand by thyself suggests the idea of standing alone, whereas all that is expressed by the Hebrew phrase is the act of standing away from the speaker, for which Lowth has found the idiomatic equivalent keep to thyself.” Alexander. D. M.]. πָ ?πַ ?ωׁ stands only here with αְּ, probably because there lies in the word the idea of an approach that would be offensive, disturbing. χγωׁ ?ϊικ is one of the rare cases in which the verbal suffix has the signification of the dative (comp. Isaiah 44:21). [I am holy to thee,i. e., unapproachable.—Del.].
If the words which we read from Isaiah 65:3 b, to Isaiah 65:5 a, really portray such idolatry as the exiles committed in Babylon, we must regard them as an interpolation. For the description is so particular that it could proceed from no one but an eyewitness. [Here again our author would alter the text to make it conform to his theory of the nature of prophecy. It was such idolatry as is here described that brought on the Jews the punishment of the Exile. Comp. Isaiah 1:29; Isaiah 57:3-8. The Babylonish captivity had the effect of making them turn with abhorrence from such gross idolatry.—D.
M]. By means of a strong figurative expression the Lord makes known how much those idolatrous practices call for His retributive justice. He describes those sinners as the prey of an unquenchable fire (comp. Isaiah 66:24), whose smoke ascends perpetually before Him (see similar images Isaiah 9:18; Isaiah 10:17; Isaiah 30:27). In order to prove that He is in terrible earnest with the threatening in Isaiah 65:5 b, the Lord attests in Isaiah 65:6 that it is written before Him. He does not mean that the sin of those idolaters is recorded before Him, for what is recorded is stated in what goes before and follows.
But immediately before and after, mention is made not of sin, but of punishment. The Lord intends to say: it is not merely decreed, but recorded, set down in a document (Job 13:26; Jeremiah 22:30), that I will not be silent till I have recompensed. εωׁ ?μξϊι assures that the recompense will not remain intention but will become fact. ςμΞηιχν comp. Jeremiah 32:18; Psalms 79:12 (Luke 6:38). These are the only other places in which the expression occurs in the Old Testament. In them ΰμ is found instead of ςμ, as in the K’ri on Isaiah 65:7. These two particles are frequently substituted the one for the other (comp. on Isaiah 10:3).
It is worthy of remark that Jeremiah (Isaiah 32:18) had this place manifestly in his mind. The quick change of person sounds very hard. Isaiah 65:6 closes with their bosom; and Isaiah 65:7 in reference to the same persons proceeds to say your iniquities, in the second person. [The form of the address shows that ςεπϊιλνεβεΧִ, Isaiah 65:7 a, is not governed by εωׁ ?μξϊι but by an ΰְַ ?ωַׁ ?μֵּ ?ν which is easily understood from it.” Delitzsch.). εξγϊιεβεΧ connects itself with εξγϊιεβεΧ Isaiah 65:6, so that the words ςεπϊιλν to ηψτεπι appear as a parenthesis. τςμϊνψΰωׁ ?πδ cannot mean: what they have first deserved, their first, earliest guilt.—For why should the Lord punish only this? But if the meaning was intended to be: their total guilt from the beginning, why do we not read ξֵ ?ψֵ ?ΰωִׁ ?ιϊ, or some similar expression? ψΰωׁ ?πδ can therefore only be an adverb, and signify primum. The Prophet has the people of the Exile in his eye. The people suffering the Exile endure in it only the beginning of the punishment for the national guilt.
This punishment extends beyond it. And the people redeemed from exile still suffer under it. The first restoration from the captivity was a poor one. Israel was never after the Exile again independent. And on the first exile a second still worse followed. For the second destruction by the Romans was total, while the first by Nebuchadnezzar was only partial.
After the first exile the Israelites could organize themselves again according to their law. After the second this could no more be done. This thought lies also at the basis of the passage Jeremiah 16:18 (comp. my remarks on this place), which manifestly depends on the one before us.
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 65:1-2. Our Lord has said, “He that seeketh findeth” (Matthew 7:8). How, then, does it come that the Jews do not find what they seek, but the heathen find what they did not seek? The Apostle Paul puts this question and answers it, Romans 9:30 sqq.; Isaiah 10:19 sqq.; Isaiah 11:7. [See also Isaiah 10:3]. All depends on the way in which we seek.
Luther says: Quaerere fit dupliciter. Primo, secundum praescriptum verbi Dei, et sic invenitur Deus, Secundo, quaeritur nostris studiis et consiliis, et sic non invenitur.” The Jews, with exception of the ἐκλογή (Romans 11:7), sought only after their own glory and merit. They sought what satisfies the flesh. They did not suffer the spirit in the depths of their heart to speak,—the spirit which can be satisfied only by food fitted for it. The law which was given to them that they might perceive by means of it their own impotence, became a snare to them. For they perverted it, made what was of minor importance the chief matter, and then persuaded themselves that they had fulfilled it and were righteous.
But the Gentiles who had not the law, had not this snare. They were not tempted to abuse the pζdagogical discipline of the law. They felt simply that they were forsaken by God. Their spirit was hungry. And when for the first time God’s word in the Gospel was presented to them, then they received it the more eagerly in proportion to the poverty, wretchedness and hunger in which they had been. The Jews did not find what they sought, because they had not a spiritual, but a carnal apprehension of the law, and, like the elder brother of the prodigal son, were full, and blind for that which was needful for them.
But the Gentiles found what they did not seek, because they were like the prodigal son, who was the more receptive of grace, the more he needed it, and the less claim he had to it. [There is important truth stated in the foregoing remarks. But it does not fully explain why the Lord is found of those who sought Him not. The sinner who has obtained mercy when he asks why? must have recourse to a higher cause, a cause out of himself, even free, sovereign, efficacious grace. “It is of God that showeth mercy,” Romans 9:16. “Though in after-communion God is found of those that seek Him (Proverbs 8:17), yet in the first conversion He is found of those that seek Him not; for therefore we love Him, because He first loved us.” Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 65:2. God’s long-suffering is great. He stretches out His hands the whole day and does not grow weary. What man would do this? The disobedient people contemns Him, as if He knew nothing, and could do nothing.
3. On Isaiah 65:2. “It is clear from this verse gratiam esse resistibilem. Christ earnestly stretched out His hands to the Jews. He would, but they would not. This doctrine the Remonstrants prove from this place, and rightly too, in Actis Synodi Dodrac. P. 3. p. 76.” Leigh. [The grace of God which is signified by His stretching out His hands can be, and is, resisted.
That figurative expression denotes warning, exhorting, entreating, and was never set forth by Reformed theologians as indicating such grace as was necessarily productive of conversion. The power by which God quickens those who were dead in sins (Ephesians 2:5), by which He gives a new heart (Ezekiel 36:26), by which He draws to the Son (John 6:44-45; John 6:65), is the grace which is called irresistible. The epithet is admitted on all hands to be faulty; but the grace denoted by it is, from the nature of the case, not resisted. Turrettin in treating De Vocatione et Fide thus replies to this objection, “Aliud est Deo monenti et vocanti externe resistere; Aliud est conversionem intendenti et efficaciter ac interne vocanti. Prius asseritur Isa. lxv. 2, 3. Quum dicit Propheta se expandisse totβ die manus ad populum perversum etc., non posterius.
Expansio brachiorum notat quidem blandam et benevolam Dei invitationem, quβ illos extrinsecus sive Verbo, sive beneficiis alliciebat, non semel atque iterum, sed quotidie ministerio servorum suorum eos compellando. Sed non potest designate potentem et efficacem operationem, quβ brachium Domini illis revelatur qui docentur α Deo et trahuntur a Patre, etc.” Locus XV.; Quaestio VI .25.—D. M.].
4. On Isaiah 65:2. (Who walk after their own thoughts.)
Duc me, nec sine, me per me, Deus optime, duci.
Nam duce me pereo, te duce certus eo.
[“If our guide be our own thoughts, our way is not likely to be good; for every imagination of the thought of our hearts is only evil.” Henry. D. M.].
5. On Isaiah 65:3 sq. “The sweetest wine is turned into the sourest vinegar; and when God’s people apostatize from God, they are worse than the heathen (Jeremiah 3:11).” Starke.
6. On Isaiah 65:5. [I am holier than thou. “A deep insight is here given us into the nature of the mysterious fascination which heathenism exercised on the Jewish people. The law humbled them at every turn with mementoes of their own sin and of God’s unapproachable holiness. Paganism freed them from this, and allowed them (in the midst of moral pollution) to cherish lofty pretensions to sanctity. The man, who had been offering incense on the mountain-top, despised the penitent who went to the temple to present ‘a broken and contrite heart.’ If Pharisaism led to a like result, it was because it, too, had emptied the law of its spiritual import, and turned its provisions into intellectual idols.” Kay. D. M.].
7. On Isaiah 65:6-7. “The longer God forbears, the harder He punishes at last. The greatness of the punishment compensates for the delay (Psalms 50:21).” Starke after Leigh.
8. On Isaiah 65:8 sqq. [“This is expounded by St. Paul, Romans 11:1-5, where, when upon occasion of the rejection of the Jews, it is asked Hath God then cast away His people? He answers, no; for, at this time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. This prophecy has reference to that distinguished remnant…Our Saviour has told us that for the sake of these elect the days of the destruction of the Jews should be shortened, and a stop put to the desolation, which otherwise would have proceeded to that degree that no flesh should be saved. Matthew 24:22. Henry. D. M.].
9. On Isaiah 65:15. The judgment which came upon Israel by the hand of the Romans, did not altogether destroy the people, but it so destroyed the Old Covenant, i.e., the Mosaic religion, that the Jews can no more observe its precepts in essential points. For no Jew knows to what tribe he belongs. Therefore, they have no priests, and, consequently, no sacrifices. The Old Covenant is now only a ruin.
We see here most clearly that the Old Covenant, as it was designed only for one nation, and for one country, was to last only for a certain time. If we consider, moreover, the way in which the judgment was executed, (comp. Josephus), we can truly say that the Jews bear in themselves the mark of a curse. They bear the stamp of the divine judgment. The beginning of the judgment on the world has been executed on them as the house of God. But how comes it that the Jews have become so mighty, so insolent in the present time, and are not satisfied with remaining on the defensive in their attitude toward the Christian church, but have passed over to the offensive?
This has arisen solely from Christendom having to a large extent lost the consciousness of its new name. There are many Christians who scoff at the name of Christian, and seek their honor in combating all that is called Christian. This is the preparation for the judgment on Christendom itself. If Christendom would hold fast her jewel, she would remain strong, and no one would dare to mock or to assail her. For she would then partake of the full blessing which lies in the principle of Christianity, and every one would be obliged to show respect for the fruits of this principle. But an apostate Christendom, that is ashamed of her glorious Christian name, is something more miserable than the Jews, judged though they have been, who still esteem highly their name, and what remains to them of their old religion.
Thus Christendom, in so far as it denies the worth and significance of its name, is gradually reaching a condition in which it will be so ripe for the second act of the judgment on the world, that this will be longed for as a benefit. For, this apostate Christendom will be the kingdom of Antichrist, as Antichrist will manifest himself in Satanic antagonism to God by sitting in the temple of God, and pretending to be God (2 Thessalonians 2:3 sqq.). [We do not quite share all the sentiments expressed in this paragraph. We are far from being so despondent as to the prospects of Christendom, and think that there is a more obvious interpretation of the prophecy quoted from 2 Thess., than that indicated.—D. M.].
10. On Isaiah 65:17. [If we had only the present passage to testify of new heavens and a new earth, we might say, as many good interpreters do, that the language is figurative, and indicates nothing more than a great moral and spiritual revolution. But we cannot thus explain 2 Peter 3:10-13. The present earth and heavens shall pass away; (comp. Isaiah 51:6; Psalms 102:25-26). But how can we suppose that our Prophet here refers to the new heavens and new earth, which are to succeed the destruction of the world by fire?
In the verses that follow Isaiah 65:17, a condition of things is described which, although better than the present, is not so good as that perfectly sinless, blessed state of the redeemed, which we look for after the coming of the day of the Lord. Yet the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:13) evidently regards the promise before us of new heavens and a new earth, as destined to receive its accomplishment after the conflagration which is to take place at the end of the world. If we had not respect to other Scriptures, and if we overlooked the use made by Peter of this passage, we should not take it literally. But we can take it literally, if we suppose that the Prophet brings together future events not according to their order in time. He sees the new heavens and new earth arise. Other scenes are disclosed to his prophetic eye of a grand and joy-inspiring nature.
He announces them as future. But these scenes suppose the continued prevalence of death and labor (Isaiah 65:20 sqq.), which, we know from definite statements of Scripture, will not exist when the new heaven and new earth appear (comp. Revelation 21:1-4). The proper view then of Isa 65:17 is to take its prediction literally, and to hold at the same time that in the following description (which is that of the millennium) future things are presented to us which are really prior, and not posterior to the promised complete renovation of heaven and earth. Nor should this surprise us, as Isaiah and the other Prophets place closely together in their pictures future things which belong to different times. They do not draw the line sharply between this world and the next.
Compare Isaiah’s prophecy of the abolition of death (Isaiah 25:8) in connection with other events that must happen long before that state of perfect blessedness.—D. M.].
11. On Isaiah 65:20. [“The extension of the Gospel every where,—of its pure principles of temperance in eating and drinking, in restraining the passions, in producing calmness of mind, and in arresting war, would greatly lengthen out the life of man. The image here employed by the Prophet is more than mere poetry; it is one that is founded in reality, and is designed to convey most important truth.” Barnes. D. M.].
12. On Isaiah 65:24. [It occurs to me that an erroneous application is frequently made of the promise, Before they call, etc. This declaration is made in connection with the glory and blessedness of the last days. It belongs specifically to the millennium. There are, indeed, occasions when God even now seems to act according to this law. (Comp. Daniel 9:23). But Paul had to pray thrice before he received the answer of the Lord (2 Corinthians 12:8). Compare the parable of the importunate widow, Luke 18:1-7. The answer to prayer may be long delayed. This is not only taught in the Bible, but is verified in Christian experience. But the time will come when the Lord will not thus try and exercise the faith of His people.—D. M.].
13. On Isaiah 65:25. “If the lower animals live in hostility in consequence of the sin of man, a state of peace must be restored to them along with our redemption from sin.” J. G. Mueller in Herz. R.-Encycl. xvi. p. 45. [“By the serpent in this place there seems every reason to believe that Satan, the old seducer and author of discord and misery, is meant. During the millennium he is to be subject to the lowest degradation. Compare for the force of the phrase to lick the dust, Psalms 72:9; Micah 7:17. This was the original doom of the tempter, Genesis 3:14, and shall be fully carried into execution. Comp. Revelation 20:1-3.” Henderson. D. M.].
14. On Isaiah 66:1. [“Having held up in every point of view the true design, mission and vocation of the church or chosen people, its relation to the natural descendants of Abraham, the causes which required that the latter should be stripped of their peculiar privileges, and the vocation of the Gentiles as a part of the divine plan from its origin, the Prophet now addresses the apostate and unbelieving Jews at the close of the old dispensation, who, instead of preparing for the general extension of the church and the exchange of ceremonial for spiritual worship, were engaged in the rebuilding and costly decoration of the temple at Jerusalem. The pride and interest in this great public work, felt not only by the Herods but by all the Jews, is clear from incidental statements of the Scriptures (John 2:20; Matthew 24:1), as well as from the ample and direct assertions of Josephus. That the nation should have been thus occupied precisely at the time when the Messiah came, is one of those agreements between prophecy and history, which cannot be accounted for except upon the supposition of a providential and designed assimilation.” Alexander after Vitringa. D. M.].
15. On Isaiah 66:1-2. What a grand view of the nature of God and of the way in which He is made known lies at the foundation of these words! God made all things. He is so great that it is an absurdity to desire to build a temple for Him. The whole universe cannot contain Him (1 Kings 8:27)!
But He, who contains all things and can be contained by nothing, has His greatest joy in a poor, humble human heart that fears Him. He holds it worthy of His regard, it pleases Him, He enters into it, He makes His abode in it. The wise and prudent men of science should learn hence what is chiefly necessary in order to know God. We cannot reach Him by applying force, by climbing up to Him, by attempting to take Him by storm. And if science should place ladder upon ladder upwards and downwards, she could not attain His height or His depth. But He enters of His own accord into a child-like, simple heart.
He lets Himself be laid hold of by it, kept and known. It is not, therefore, by the intellect [alone] but by the heart that we can know God.
16. On Isaiah 66:3. He who under the Christian dispensation would retain the forms of worship of the ancient ritual of shadows would violate the fundamental laws of the new time, just as a man by killing would offend against the foundation of the moral law, or as he would by offering the blood of dogs or swine offend against the foundation of the ceremonial law. For when the body, the substance has appeared, the type must vanish. He who would retain the type along with the reality would declare the latter to be insufficient, would, therefore, found his salvation not upon God only, but also in part on his own legal performance. But God will brook no rival.
He is either our All, or nothing. Christianity could tolerate animal sacrifices just as little as the Old Testament law could tolerate murder or the offering of abominable things.
17. On Isaiah 66:5. [“The most malignant and cruel persecutions of the friends of God have been originated under the pretext of great zeal in His service, and with a professed desire to honor His name. So it was with the Jews when they crucified the Lord Jesus. So it is expressly said it would be when His disciples would be excommunicated and put to death, John 16:2. So it was in fact in the persecutions excited against the apostles and early Christians. See Acts 6:13-14; Acts 21:28-31. So it was in all the persecutions of the Waldenses, in all the horrors of the Inquisition, in all the crimes of the Duke of Alva. So it was in the bloody reign of Mary; and so it has ever been in all ages and in all countries where Christians have been persecuted.” Barnes.—D. M.].
18. On Isaiah 66:10. “The idea which is presented in this verse is, that it is the duty of all who love Zion to sympathize in her joy. The true friends of God should rejoice in every real revival of religion, they should rejoice in all the success which attends the Gospel in heathen lands. And they will rejoice. It is one evidence of piety to rejoice in her joy; and they who have no joy when souls are born into the kingdom of God, when He pours down His Spirit and in a revival of religion produces changes as sudden and transforming as if the earth were suddenly to pass from the desolation of winter to the verdure and bloom of summer, or when the Gospel makes sudden and rapid advances in the heathen world, have no true evidence that they love God and His cause. They have no religion.” Barnes.—D. M.
19. On Isaiah 66:13. The Prophet is here completely governed by the idea that in the glorious time of the end, love, maternal love will reign. Thus He makes Zion appear as a mother who will bring forth with incredible ease and rapidity innumerable children (Isaiah 66:7-9). Then the Israelites are depicted as little children who suck the breasts of their mother. Further, the heathen who bring back the Israelites into their home, must do this in the same way in which mothers in the Orient are wont to carry their little children.
Lastly, even to the Lord Himself maternal love is ascribed (comp. Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 49:15), and such love as a mother manifests to her adult son. Thus the Israelites will be surrounded in that glorious time on all sides by maternal love. Maternal love will be the characteristic of that period.
20. On Isaiah 66:19 sqq. The Prophet describes remote things by words which are borrowed from the relations and conceptions of his own time, but which stand in strange contrast to the reality of the future which he beholds. Thus the Prophet speaks of escaped persons who go to Tarshish, Pul, Lud, Tubal, and Javan. Here he has rightly seen that a great act of judgment must have taken place. And this act of judgment must have passed on Israel, because they who escape, who go to the Gentiles to declare to them the glory of Jehovah, must plainly be Jews How accurately, in spite of the strange manner of expression, is the fact here stated that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was proclaimed to the Gentiles exactly at the time when the old theocracy was destroyed!
How justly does he indicate that there was a causal connection between these events! He did not, indeed, know that the shattering of the old form was necessary in order that the eternal truth enclosed in it might be set free, and fitted for filling the whole earth. For the Old Covenant cannot exist along with the New, the Law cannot stand with equal dignity beside the Gospel. The Law must be regarded as annulled, in order that the Gospel may come into force. How remarkably strange is it, however, that he calls the Gentile nations Tarshish, Pul, Lud, etc. And how singular it sounds to be told that the Israelites shall be brought by the Gentiles to Jerusalem as an offering for Jehovah!
But how accurately has he, notwithstanding, stated the fact, which, indeed, still awaits its fulfilment, that it is the conversion of the heathen world which will induce Israel to acknowledge their Saviour, and that they both shall gather round the Lord as their common centre! How strange it sounds that then priests and Levites shall be taken from the Gentiles also, and that new moon and Sabbath shall be celebrated by all flesh in the old Jewish fashion! But how accurately is the truth thereby stated that in the New Covenant there will be no more the priesthood restricted to the family of Aaron, but a higher spiritual and universal priesthood, and that, instead of the limited local place of worship of the Old Covenant, the whole earth will be a temple of the Lord! Verily the prophecy of the two last chapters of Isaiah attests a genuine prophet of Jehovah. He cannot have been an anonymous unknown person. He can have been none other than Isaiah the son of Amoz!
HINTS1. On Isaiah 65:1 sq. [I. “It is here foretold that the Gentiles, who had been afar off, should be made nigh, Isaiah 65:1. II. It is here foretold that the Jews, who had long been a people near to God, should be cast off, and set at a distance, Isaiah 65:2.” Henry, III. We are informed of the cause of the rejection of the Jews. It was owing to their rebellion, waywardness and flagrant provocations, Isaiah 65:2 sqq.—D. M.]
2. On Isaiah 65:1-7. A Fast-Day Sermon. When the Evangelical Church no more holds fast what she has; when apostasy spreads more and more, and modern heathenism (Isaiah 65:3-5 a) gains the ascendency in her, then it can happen to her as it did to the people of Israel, and as it happened to the Church in the Orient. Her candlestick can be removed out of its place.—[By the Evangelical Church we are not to understand here the Church universal, for her perpetuity is certain. The Evangelical Church is in Germany the Protestant Church, and more particularly the Lutheran branch of it.—D. M.]
3. On Isaiah 65:8-10. Sermon on behalf of the mission among the Jews. Israel’s hope. 1) On what it is founded (Israel is still a berry in which drops of the divine blessing are contained); 2) To what this hope is directed (Israel’s Restoration).
4. On Isaiah 65:13-16. [“The blessedness of those that serve God, and the woful condition of those that rebel against him, are here set the one over against the other, that they may serve as a foil to each other. The difference of their states here lies in two things: 1) In point of comfort and satisfaction, a. God’s servants shall eat and drink; they shall have the bread of life to feed, to feast upon continually, and shall want nothing that is good for them. But those who set their hearts upon the world, and place their happiness in it, shall be hungry and thirsty, always empty, always craving. In communion with God and dependence upon Him there is full satisfaction; but in sinful pursuits there is nothing but disappointment. b.
God’s servants shall rejoice and sing for joy of heart; they have constant cause for joy, and there is nothing that may be an occasion of grief to them but they have an allay sufficient for it. But, on the other hand, they that forsake the Lord shut themselves out from all true joy, for they shall be ashamed of their vain confidence in themselves, and their own righteousness, and the hopes they had built thereon. When the expectations of bliss, wherewith they had flattered themselves, are frustrated, O what confusion will fill their faces! Then shall they cry for sorrow of heart and howl for vexation of spirit. 2) In point of honor and reputation, Isaiah 65:15-16. The memory of the just is, and shall be, blessed; but the memory of the wicked shall rot.” Henry.—D. M.]
5. On Isaiah 66:1-2. Carpzov has a sermon on this text. He places it in parallel with Luke 18:9-14, and considers, 1) The rejection of spiritual pride; 2) The commendation of filial fear.
6. On Isaiah 66:2 Arndt, in his True Christianity I. cap. 10, comments on this text. He says among other things: “The man who will be something is the material out of which God makes nothing, yea, out of which He makes fools. But a man who will be nothing, and regards himself as nothing, is the material out of which God makes something, even glorious, wise people in His sight.”
7. On Isaiah 66:3. [Saurin has a sermon on this text entitled “Sur l’ Insuffisance du culte exterieur” in the eighth volume of his sermons.—D. M.]
8. On Isaiah 66:13. As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you. “These words stand, let us consider it, 1) In the Old Testament; 2) In the heart of God always; 3) But are they realized in our experience?” Koegel in “Aus dem Vorhof ins Heiligthum, II. Bd., p. 242, 1876.
9. On Isaiah 66:24. The punishment of sin is twofold—inward and outward. The inward is compared with a worm that dies not; the outward with a fire that is not quenched. This worm and this fire are at work even in this life. He who is alarmed by them and hastens to Christ can now be delivered from them.—[“It is better not to fall into this fire and never to have any experience of this worm, even though, as some imagine, eternity should not be eternal, and the unquenchable fire might be quenched, and the worm that shall never die, should die, and Jesus and His apostles should not have expressed themselves quite in accordance with the compassionate taste of our time. Better, I say, is better. Save thyself and thy neighbor before the fire begins to burn, and the smoke to ascend.” Gossner.—D. M.]
Footnotes:Heb. upon bricks,secret places.their dishes are a mixture of abominations.Or, pieces.1 am holy to thee.Or, anger.
2. Not All Israel Shall Be Cast Off
Isaiah 65:8-128 Thus saith the Lord,As the new wine is found in the cluster,
And one saith, Destroy it not; for a blessing is in it:
So will I do for my servants’ sakes,
That I may not destroy them all.
9 And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob,
And out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains:
And mine elect shall inherit it,
And my servants shall dwell there.
10 And Sharon shall be a fold of flocks,
And the valley of Achor a place for the herds to lie down in,
For my people that have sought me.
11 But ye are they that forsake the Lord,That forget my holy mountain,
That prepare a table for that troop,
And that furnish the drink-offering unto that number.
12 Therefore will I number you to the sword,
And ye shall all bow down to the slaughter:
Because when I called, ye did not answer;
When I spake, ye did not hear:
But did evil before mine eyes,
And did choose that wherein I delighted not.
AND 1. This section stands to the one which precedes it in the same relation (Isaiah 65:1-7) in which this latter stands to the prayer in 63 and 64. For as the Prophet in Isaiah 65:1 sqq. opposes the expectation [?] that all Israel will be saved (Isaiah 64:7-8), so Isaiah 65:8 sqq. repels the opposite error that all Israel will be cast off. This opinion might have been drawn from Isaiah 65:2 sqq. For there Israel is quite generally designated as a rebellious people to which the Lord spreads out His hands in vain, that provokes Him by defiant idolatry, and therefore will have to bear the whole burden of the guilt accumulated from their fathers. It might accordingly ,be supposed that Israel should be entirely cast off, and their place taken by the Gentiles (Isaiah 65:1).
This misunderstanding the Prophet here combats. He compares Israel with a cluster of grapes on which many berries may be rotten. Is the whole cluster, therefore, cast away? No! much of the blessing of God is still therein. So for His servants’ sake the Lord will not destroy all Israel (Isaiah 65:8). He will yet cause to come forth from the remnant a race that will consist of the elect of the Lord, and that will possess the holy land (Isaiah 65:9).
This will be fertile in all its parts and be fitted for excellent pasture (Isaiah 65:10). But they who forget the Lord and set their heart on the false gods of the land of the Exile (Isaiah 65:11) shall for their disobedience be extirpated (Isaiah 65:12).
2. Thus saith the Lord——sought me.Isaiah 65:8-10. The image does not appear to me to be correctly explained when the intended antitheses are supposed to be: only stalk and husks should be destroyed, not the berries; or, only the degenerate vine or vineyard (Isaiah 5:4; Isaiah 18:5) is to be destroyed, not the grapes. For who needs to be told that he should not treat the berries as the stalk and husk, or that he should spare the grapes but destroy the vine or vineyard? Whence are grape-clusters to be had if the latter are destroyed? It seems to me that the Prophet has in his mind a bunch of grapes on which together with many bad and rotten berries, there are some good ones.
One is tempted to throw away such a cluster entirely. The Prophet forbids this. [“The image really presented by the Prophet, as Vitringa clearly shows, and most later writers have admitted, is that of a good cluster, in which juice is found, while others are unripe or rotten.”—Alexander.δַ ?ϊִּ ?ιψεֹ ?ωׁ has the article which the Hebrew was wont to employ in comparisons. See Ges.Gr. § 109. Note 1.—D. M.]. There is a blessing in it seems to be taken in a double sense: 1) Even the smallest quantity of the noble fruit is valuable and not to be despised; 2) God can bless even the smallest quantity, i. e., He can multiply it (John 6:9; John 6:12). [The simple, obvious meaning is: A blessing is in the cluster, because new wine, which was considered a blessing (Judges 9:13; Isaiah 62:8), is in it.—D.
M.]. εְ ?ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψ is used as Isaiah 25:9; Isaiah 45:24; Isaiah 57:14. For His servants’ sake the Lord will not entirely destroy Israel. For these are the true Israelites. They prove that Israel is capable and worthy to continue to exist. There shall, therefore, seed (posterity) yet proceed out of Israel, that shall possess the mountains of Canaan (comp. Isaiah 14:25, and in a wider sense Isaiah 49:11).
This shall be a holy seed (Isaiah 6:13). For only the elect of the Lord shall possess it (the land, ΰψυ which is ideally contained in δψι), and His servants shall dwell therein. [“My mountains is supposed by Vitringa to denote Mount Zion and Moriah, or Jerusalem as built upon them; but the later writers more correctly suppose it to describe the whole of Palestine, as being an uneven, hilly country. See the same use of the plural in Isaiah 14:25, and the analogous phrase, mountains of Israel, repeatedly employed by Ezekiel (Isaiah 36:1; Isaiah 36:8; Isaiah 38:8). … The adverb at the end of the sentence properly means thither, and is never perhaps put for there, except in cases where a change of place is previously mentioned or implied.”—Alexander.—D. M.] Isaiah 65:10. The land shall be fertile and glorious. Sharon shall be pasture for sheep, the valley of Achor a pasture for black cattle.
Sharon is the well-known fertile plain in the west of Palestine, stretching from Caesarea northwards to Carmel (comp. on Isaiah 33:9; Isaiah 35:2). Achor is the valley in the east of the tribe of Judah, in which, according to Joshua 7:24-26, Achan was stoned. This valley is further mentioned only in Joshua 15:7; Hosea 2:17. It must have been a stony place, for according to Joshua 7:25 sq., there were there stones enough to stone Achan, together with all belonging to him, and to raise up a great heap of stones. In Hosea 2:17 [E. V. 15] it is said that the valley of Achor will be unto converted and restored Israel a door of hope.
This means: When Israel, returning from the Exile, shall pass through the valley of Achor, it shall be to them no more a monument of the wrath of God, which it formerly was, with its heap of stones and its stony ground; but even this valley shall be to them a door of hope, for the place shall be altered. There shall be seen in it the traces of the blessing which, according to Isaiah 65:20 sqq., shall be spread over the whole land. Then, according to this passage, the valley of Achor shall become a fertile pasture, even more fertile than Sharon, for sheep are content with much poorer pasture than neat-cattle (comp. Herzog) R. Enc. VI., p. 150; Si tibi lanitium curae, fuge pabula laeta.VirgilGeorg.
III., 384).
3. But ye are they——delighted not. Isaiah 65:11-12. What in verse 8 had been denied in reference to all Israel is here affirmed in reference to a part. The wicked Israelites shall certainly perish. These are described as those that forsake Jehovah (comp. on Isaiah 1:28.
The expression occurs further only Isaiah 1:24; Isaiah 1:28), that forget the holy mountain of Jehovah. The writer has here evidently exiles in his eye, who in a heathen land were seduced to worship the local gods of the heathen, and so forgot the worship that prevailed in their own country, and the place where their fathers worshipped God. Such forgetting must often have happened in the Exile, and have been for the faithful Israelites a subject of great grief and vexation. We see this from Psalms 137:5-6 [?]. In what follows the Prophet specifies more particularly the idolatry of those apostates, while he describes them as those who “prepare a table for Gad, and fill for Meni mixed drink.” The Prophet here speaks of a cultus of which there is no mention in the history of the people before the Exile. He has evidently in his mind the so-called lectisternia.
That these lectisternia were observed by the Babylonians is proved from Bar 6:26, and from Bel and the Dragon, Isaiah 65:11 sqq. What Herodotus (I. 181) relates of the golden table, which stood in the highest room of the temple-tower beside the κλίνημεγάληεὖἐστρωμένη, seems to have reference to such a lectisternium (comp. Leyrer in Herz.R. E. 13, p. 470). As an appellative noun, βַ ?γ means fortune, good luck. As the name of a divinity, it denotes the star of fortune, of which the Babylonians had two, Jupiter and Venus (comp.
DunckerGesch. des Alterth., Vol. I, p. 117; Plutarch de Is. et Osir, § 48). The Arabs named the former “Great Fortune,” and the latter “Little Fortune.” Many are disposed to connect ξְ ?πִ ?ι, which is found only here, with Μήν, Μήνη, and to understand it of the moon (comp. especially Knobelin loc.). The matter is not yet decided. ξִ ?ξְ ?ρָ ?κְ (comp. Proverbs 23:30, and in reference to the verb, Isaiah 5:22; Isaiah 19:14) is mixed wine, spiced wine (see on Isaiah 5:22). With allusion to the name ξְ ?πִ ?ι, the Lord threatens these sinners that He will number (Isaiah 53:12) them to the sword, and they all must bow down (Isaiah 10:4; Isaiah 44:1-2,) to be slaughtered, because they did not answer to the call of the Lord, yea, did not even hearken to His word, but did that which the Lord regarded as evil, and chose what displeased Him.
For recurring expressions see Isaiah 66:4; Isaiah 56:4. The expression ςωׂ ?δδψςαςιπιεΧ occurs first in Numbers 32:13, then frequently in Deut, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Chron. It is found once in the Psalms (Isaiah 51:6), three times in Jeremiah (Jeremiah 7:30; Jeremiah 18:10; Jeremiah 32:30). It occurs in Isaiah only here and Isaiah 66:4 (comp. Isaiah 38:3). What was remarked in regard to Isaiah 65:3-5 a applies to Isaiah 65:11-12.
If they portray an idolatry specifically Babylonian which the Jews practised in exile, the verses are an interpolation. [Delitzsch, who is inclined to identify βַּ ?γ with Jupiter, confesses that it is only from this place in Isaiah that we know that Gad was worshipped by the Babylonians. The Babylonian Pantheon, in Rawlinson’sMonarchies, does not contain this name. The application of the name Meni is admitted to be doubtful. We could as easily connect the worship and the divinities mentioned here with Egypt, Syria, or Arabia, as with Babylonia. The Jews that fled to Egypt had their Lectisternia there (Jeremiah 44:17-19), and the destruction with which Isaiah threatens the apostates that he has in mind, is denounced by Jeremiah against the idolatrous Jews in Egypt. Jeremiah 44:12-14.
Moreover, the Jews had their Lectistenia in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem before the captivity (Jeremiah 7:17-18) But suppose that the worship here described by Isaiah could be proved to be distinctively and exclusively Babylonian, must the real Isaiah be supposed to be ignorant of it? Knowing the disposition of the Jews to follow the ways of the heathen around them, he could anticipate, even without Divine inspiration, that many of the captive Jews would practise the peculiar religious rites of the Babylonians. Even an anti-supernaturalist could defend the genuineness of Isa 65:11-12; much more one who believes that a true Prophet of God could utter a definite prediction. We may add that verse 13 supposes the sins mentioned in Isaiah 65:11-12 as the ground of the threatening which it contains, and cannot be connected immediately with Isaiah 65:10. Henderson, who thinks that the terms in Isaiah 65:11 may have been borrowed from the nomenclature of idolaters, takes Gad as meaning Fortune and Meni Fate, and applies the passage to the impenitent and worldly Jews of the restoration, who had no god but riches, and regarded human affairs as governed by fortune.—D. M.].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 65:1-2. Our Lord has said, “He that seeketh findeth” (Matthew 7:8). How, then, does it come that the Jews do not find what they seek, but the heathen find what they did not seek? The Apostle Paul puts this question and answers it, Romans 9:30 sqq.; Isaiah 10:19 sqq.; Isaiah 11:7. [See also Isaiah 10:3]. All depends on the way in which we seek.
Luther says: Quaerere fit dupliciter. Primo, secundum praescriptum verbi Dei, et sic invenitur Deus, Secundo, quaeritur nostris studiis et consiliis, et sic non invenitur.” The Jews, with exception of the ἐκλογή (Romans 11:7), sought only after their own glory and merit. They sought what satisfies the flesh. They did not suffer the spirit in the depths of their heart to speak,—the spirit which can be satisfied only by food fitted for it. The law which was given to them that they might perceive by means of it their own impotence, became a snare to them. For they perverted it, made what was of minor importance the chief matter, and then persuaded themselves that they had fulfilled it and were righteous.
But the Gentiles who had not the law, had not this snare. They were not tempted to abuse the pζdagogical discipline of the law. They felt simply that they were forsaken by God. Their spirit was hungry. And when for the first time God’s word in the Gospel was presented to them, then they received it the more eagerly in proportion to the poverty, wretchedness and hunger in which they had been. The Jews did not find what they sought, because they had not a spiritual, but a carnal apprehension of the law, and, like the elder brother of the prodigal son, were full, and blind for that which was needful for them.
But the Gentiles found what they did not seek, because they were like the prodigal son, who was the more receptive of grace, the more he needed it, and the less claim he had to it. [There is important truth stated in the foregoing remarks. But it does not fully explain why the Lord is found of those who sought Him not. The sinner who has obtained mercy when he asks why? must have recourse to a higher cause, a cause out of himself, even free, sovereign, efficacious grace. “It is of God that showeth mercy,” Romans 9:16. “Though in after-communion God is found of those that seek Him (Proverbs 8:17), yet in the first conversion He is found of those that seek Him not; for therefore we love Him, because He first loved us.” Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 65:2. God’s long-suffering is great. He stretches out His hands the whole day and does not grow weary. What man would do this? The disobedient people contemns Him, as if He knew nothing, and could do nothing.
3. On Isaiah 65:2. “It is clear from this verse gratiam esse resistibilem. Christ earnestly stretched out His hands to the Jews. He would, but they would not. This doctrine the Remonstrants prove from this place, and rightly too, in Actis Synodi Dodrac. P. 3. p. 76.” Leigh. [The grace of God which is signified by His stretching out His hands can be, and is, resisted.
That figurative expression denotes warning, exhorting, entreating, and was never set forth by Reformed theologians as indicating such grace as was necessarily productive of conversion. The power by which God quickens those who were dead in sins (Ephesians 2:5), by which He gives a new heart (Ezekiel 36:26), by which He draws to the Son (John 6:44-45; John 6:65), is the grace which is called irresistible. The epithet is admitted on all hands to be faulty; but the grace denoted by it is, from the nature of the case, not resisted. Turrettin in treating De Vocatione et Fide thus replies to this objection, “Aliud est Deo monenti et vocanti externe resistere; Aliud est conversionem intendenti et efficaciter ac interne vocanti. Prius asseritur Isa. lxv. 2, 3. Quum dicit Propheta se expandisse totβ die manus ad populum perversum etc., non posterius.
Expansio brachiorum notat quidem blandam et benevolam Dei invitationem, quβ illos extrinsecus sive Verbo, sive beneficiis alliciebat, non semel atque iterum, sed quotidie ministerio servorum suorum eos compellando. Sed non potest designate potentem et efficacem operationem, quβ brachium Domini illis revelatur qui docentur α Deo et trahuntur a Patre, etc.” Locus XV.; Quaestio VI .25.—D. M.].
4. On Isaiah 65:2. (Who walk after their own thoughts.)
Duc me, nec sine, me per me, Deus optime, duci.
Nam duce me pereo, te duce certus eo.
[“If our guide be our own thoughts, our way is not likely to be good; for every imagination of the thought of our hearts is only evil.” Henry. D. M.].
5. On Isaiah 65:3 sq. “The sweetest wine is turned into the sourest vinegar; and when God’s people apostatize from God, they are worse than the heathen (Jeremiah 3:11).” Starke.
6. On Isaiah 65:5. [I am holier than thou. “A deep insight is here given us into the nature of the mysterious fascination which heathenism exercised on the Jewish people. The law humbled them at every turn with mementoes of their own sin and of God’s unapproachable holiness. Paganism freed them from this, and allowed them (in the midst of moral pollution) to cherish lofty pretensions to sanctity. The man, who had been offering incense on the mountain-top, despised the penitent who went to the temple to present ‘a broken and contrite heart.’ If Pharisaism led to a like result, it was because it, too, had emptied the law of its spiritual import, and turned its provisions into intellectual idols.” Kay. D. M.].
7. On Isaiah 65:6-7. “The longer God forbears, the harder He punishes at last. The greatness of the punishment compensates for the delay (Psalms 50:21).” Starke after Leigh.
8. On Isaiah 65:8 sqq. [“This is expounded by St. Paul, Romans 11:1-5, where, when upon occasion of the rejection of the Jews, it is asked Hath God then cast away His people? He answers, no; for, at this time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. This prophecy has reference to that distinguished remnant…Our Saviour has told us that for the sake of these elect the days of the destruction of the Jews should be shortened, and a stop put to the desolation, which otherwise would have proceeded to that degree that no flesh should be saved. Matthew 24:22. Henry. D. M.].
9. On Isaiah 65:15. The judgment which came upon Israel by the hand of the Romans, did not altogether destroy the people, but it so destroyed the Old Covenant, i.e., the Mosaic religion, that the Jews can no more observe its precepts in essential points. For no Jew knows to what tribe he belongs. Therefore, they have no priests, and, consequently, no sacrifices. The Old Covenant is now only a ruin.
We see here most clearly that the Old Covenant, as it was designed only for one nation, and for one country, was to last only for a certain time. If we consider, moreover, the way in which the judgment was executed, (comp. Josephus), we can truly say that the Jews bear in themselves the mark of a curse. They bear the stamp of the divine judgment. The beginning of the judgment on the world has been executed on them as the house of God. But how comes it that the Jews have become so mighty, so insolent in the present time, and are not satisfied with remaining on the defensive in their attitude toward the Christian church, but have passed over to the offensive?
This has arisen solely from Christendom having to a large extent lost the consciousness of its new name. There are many Christians who scoff at the name of Christian, and seek their honor in combating all that is called Christian. This is the preparation for the judgment on Christendom itself. If Christendom would hold fast her jewel, she would remain strong, and no one would dare to mock or to assail her. For she would then partake of the full blessing which lies in the principle of Christianity, and every one would be obliged to show respect for the fruits of this principle. But an apostate Christendom, that is ashamed of her glorious Christian name, is something more miserable than the Jews, judged though they have been, who still esteem highly their name, and what remains to them of their old religion.
Thus Christendom, in so far as it denies the worth and significance of its name, is gradually reaching a condition in which it will be so ripe for the second act of the judgment on the world, that this will be longed for as a benefit. For, this apostate Christendom will be the kingdom of Antichrist, as Antichrist will manifest himself in Satanic antagonism to God by sitting in the temple of God, and pretending to be God (2 Thessalonians 2:3 sqq.). [We do not quite share all the sentiments expressed in this paragraph. We are far from being so despondent as to the prospects of Christendom, and think that there is a more obvious interpretation of the prophecy quoted from 2 Thess., than that indicated.—D. M.].
10. On Isaiah 65:17. [If we had only the present passage to testify of new heavens and a new earth, we might say, as many good interpreters do, that the language is figurative, and indicates nothing more than a great moral and spiritual revolution. But we cannot thus explain 2 Peter 3:10-13. The present earth and heavens shall pass away; (comp. Isaiah 51:6; Psalms 102:25-26). But how can we suppose that our Prophet here refers to the new heavens and new earth, which are to succeed the destruction of the world by fire?
In the verses that follow Isaiah 65:17, a condition of things is described which, although better than the present, is not so good as that perfectly sinless, blessed state of the redeemed, which we look for after the coming of the day of the Lord. Yet the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:13) evidently regards the promise before us of new heavens and a new earth, as destined to receive its accomplishment after the conflagration which is to take place at the end of the world. If we had not respect to other Scriptures, and if we overlooked the use made by Peter of this passage, we should not take it literally. But we can take it literally, if we suppose that the Prophet brings together future events not according to their order in time. He sees the new heavens and new earth arise. Other scenes are disclosed to his prophetic eye of a grand and joy-inspiring nature.
He announces them as future. But these scenes suppose the continued prevalence of death and labor (Isaiah 65:20 sqq.), which, we know from definite statements of Scripture, will not exist when the new heaven and new earth appear (comp. Revelation 21:1-4). The proper view then of Isa 65:17 is to take its prediction literally, and to hold at the same time that in the following description (which is that of the millennium) future things are presented to us which are really prior, and not posterior to the promised complete renovation of heaven and earth. Nor should this surprise us, as Isaiah and the other Prophets place closely together in their pictures future things which belong to different times. They do not draw the line sharply between this world and the next.
Compare Isaiah’s prophecy of the abolition of death (Isaiah 25:8) in connection with other events that must happen long before that state of perfect blessedness.—D. M.].
11. On Isaiah 65:20. [“The extension of the Gospel every where,—of its pure principles of temperance in eating and drinking, in restraining the passions, in producing calmness of mind, and in arresting war, would greatly lengthen out the life of man. The image here employed by the Prophet is more than mere poetry; it is one that is founded in reality, and is designed to convey most important truth.” Barnes. D. M.].
12. On Isaiah 65:24. [It occurs to me that an erroneous application is frequently made of the promise, Before they call, etc. This declaration is made in connection with the glory and blessedness of the last days. It belongs specifically to the millennium. There are, indeed, occasions when God even now seems to act according to this law. (Comp. Daniel 9:23). But Paul had to pray thrice before he received the answer of the Lord (2 Corinthians 12:8). Compare the parable of the importunate widow, Luke 18:1-7. The answer to prayer may be long delayed. This is not only taught in the Bible, but is verified in Christian experience. But the time will come when the Lord will not thus try and exercise the faith of His people.—D. M.].
13. On Isaiah 65:25. “If the lower animals live in hostility in consequence of the sin of man, a state of peace must be restored to them along with our redemption from sin.” J. G. Mueller in Herz. R.-Encycl. xvi. p. 45. [“By the serpent in this place there seems every reason to believe that Satan, the old seducer and author of discord and misery, is meant. During the millennium he is to be subject to the lowest degradation. Compare for the force of the phrase to lick the dust, Psalms 72:9; Micah 7:17. This was the original doom of the tempter, Genesis 3:14, and shall be fully carried into execution. Comp. Revelation 20:1-3.” Henderson. D. M.].
14. On Isaiah 66:1. [“Having held up in every point of view the true design, mission and vocation of the church or chosen people, its relation to the natural descendants of Abraham, the causes which required that the latter should be stripped of their peculiar privileges, and the vocation of the Gentiles as a part of the divine plan from its origin, the Prophet now addresses the apostate and unbelieving Jews at the close of the old dispensation, who, instead of preparing for the general extension of the church and the exchange of ceremonial for spiritual worship, were engaged in the rebuilding and costly decoration of the temple at Jerusalem. The pride and interest in this great public work, felt not only by the Herods but by all the Jews, is clear from incidental statements of the Scriptures (John 2:20; Matthew 24:1), as well as from the ample and direct assertions of Josephus. That the nation should have been thus occupied precisely at the time when the Messiah came, is one of those agreements between prophecy and history, which cannot be accounted for except upon the supposition of a providential and designed assimilation.” Alexander after Vitringa. D. M.].
15. On Isaiah 66:1-2. What a grand view of the nature of God and of the way in which He is made known lies at the foundation of these words! God made all things. He is so great that it is an absurdity to desire to build a temple for Him. The whole universe cannot contain Him (1 Kings 8:27)!
But He, who contains all things and can be contained by nothing, has His greatest joy in a poor, humble human heart that fears Him. He holds it worthy of His regard, it pleases Him, He enters into it, He makes His abode in it. The wise and prudent men of science should learn hence what is chiefly necessary in order to know God. We cannot reach Him by applying force, by climbing up to Him, by attempting to take Him by storm. And if science should place ladder upon ladder upwards and downwards, she could not attain His height or His depth. But He enters of His own accord into a child-like, simple heart.
He lets Himself be laid hold of by it, kept and known. It is not, therefore, by the intellect [alone] but by the heart that we can know God.
16. On Isaiah 66:3. He who under the Christian dispensation would retain the forms of worship of the ancient ritual of shadows would violate the fundamental laws of the new time, just as a man by killing would offend against the foundation of the moral law, or as he would by offering the blood of dogs or swine offend against the foundation of the ceremonial law. For when the body, the substance has appeared, the type must vanish. He who would retain the type along with the reality would declare the latter to be insufficient, would, therefore, found his salvation not upon God only, but also in part on his own legal performance. But God will brook no rival.
He is either our All, or nothing. Christianity could tolerate animal sacrifices just as little as the Old Testament law could tolerate murder or the offering of abominable things.
17. On Isaiah 66:5. [“The most malignant and cruel persecutions of the friends of God have been originated under the pretext of great zeal in His service, and with a professed desire to honor His name. So it was with the Jews when they crucified the Lord Jesus. So it is expressly said it would be when His disciples would be excommunicated and put to death, John 16:2. So it was in fact in the persecutions excited against the apostles and early Christians. See Acts 6:13-14; Acts 21:28-31. So it was in all the persecutions of the Waldenses, in all the horrors of the Inquisition, in all the crimes of the Duke of Alva. So it was in the bloody reign of Mary; and so it has ever been in all ages and in all countries where Christians have been persecuted.” Barnes.—D. M.].
18. On Isaiah 66:10. “The idea which is presented in this verse is, that it is the duty of all who love Zion to sympathize in her joy. The true friends of God should rejoice in every real revival of religion, they should rejoice in all the success which attends the Gospel in heathen lands. And they will rejoice. It is one evidence of piety to rejoice in her joy; and they who have no joy when souls are born into the kingdom of God, when He pours down His Spirit and in a revival of religion produces changes as sudden and transforming as if the earth were suddenly to pass from the desolation of winter to the verdure and bloom of summer, or when the Gospel makes sudden and rapid advances in the heathen world, have no true evidence that they love God and His cause. They have no religion.” Barnes.—D. M.
19. On Isaiah 66:13. The Prophet is here completely governed by the idea that in the glorious time of the end, love, maternal love will reign. Thus He makes Zion appear as a mother who will bring forth with incredible ease and rapidity innumerable children (Isaiah 66:7-9). Then the Israelites are depicted as little children who suck the breasts of their mother. Further, the heathen who bring back the Israelites into their home, must do this in the same way in which mothers in the Orient are wont to carry their little children.
Lastly, even to the Lord Himself maternal love is ascribed (comp. Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 49:15), and such love as a mother manifests to her adult son. Thus the Israelites will be surrounded in that glorious time on all sides by maternal love. Maternal love will be the characteristic of that period.
20. On Isaiah 66:19 sqq. The Prophet describes remote things by words which are borrowed from the relations and conceptions of his own time, but which stand in strange contrast to the reality of the future which he beholds. Thus the Prophet speaks of escaped persons who go to Tarshish, Pul, Lud, Tubal, and Javan. Here he has rightly seen that a great act of judgment must have taken place. And this act of judgment must have passed on Israel, because they who escape, who go to the Gentiles to declare to them the glory of Jehovah, must plainly be Jews How accurately, in spite of the strange manner of expression, is the fact here stated that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was proclaimed to the Gentiles exactly at the time when the old theocracy was destroyed!
How justly does he indicate that there was a causal connection between these events! He did not, indeed, know that the shattering of the old form was necessary in order that the eternal truth enclosed in it might be set free, and fitted for filling the whole earth. For the Old Covenant cannot exist along with the New, the Law cannot stand with equal dignity beside the Gospel. The Law must be regarded as annulled, in order that the Gospel may come into force. How remarkably strange is it, however, that he calls the Gentile nations Tarshish, Pul, Lud, etc. And how singular it sounds to be told that the Israelites shall be brought by the Gentiles to Jerusalem as an offering for Jehovah!
But how accurately has he, notwithstanding, stated the fact, which, indeed, still awaits its fulfilment, that it is the conversion of the heathen world which will induce Israel to acknowledge their Saviour, and that they both shall gather round the Lord as their common centre! How strange it sounds that then priests and Levites shall be taken from the Gentiles also, and that new moon and Sabbath shall be celebrated by all flesh in the old Jewish fashion! But how accurately is the truth thereby stated that in the New Covenant there will be no more the priesthood restricted to the family of Aaron, but a higher spiritual and universal priesthood, and that, instead of the limited local place of worship of the Old Covenant, the whole earth will be a temple of the Lord! Verily the prophecy of the two last chapters of Isaiah attests a genuine prophet of Jehovah. He cannot have been an anonymous unknown person. He can have been none other than Isaiah the son of Amoz!
HINTS1. On Isaiah 65:1 sq. [I. “It is here foretold that the Gentiles, who had been afar off, should be made nigh, Isaiah 65:1. II. It is here foretold that the Jews, who had long been a people near to God, should be cast off, and set at a distance, Isaiah 65:2.” Henry, III. We are informed of the cause of the rejection of the Jews. It was owing to their rebellion, waywardness and flagrant provocations, Isaiah 65:2 sqq.—D. M.]
2. On Isaiah 65:1-7. A Fast-Day Sermon. When the Evangelical Church no more holds fast what she has; when apostasy spreads more and more, and modern heathenism (Isaiah 65:3-5 a) gains the ascendency in her, then it can happen to her as it did to the people of Israel, and as it happened to the Church in the Orient. Her candlestick can be removed out of its place.—[By the Evangelical Church we are not to understand here the Church universal, for her perpetuity is certain. The Evangelical Church is in Germany the Protestant Church, and more particularly the Lutheran branch of it.—D. M.]
3. On Isaiah 65:8-10. Sermon on behalf of the mission among the Jews. Israel’s hope. 1) On what it is founded (Israel is still a berry in which drops of the divine blessing are contained); 2) To what this hope is directed (Israel’s Restoration).
4. On Isaiah 65:13-16. [“The blessedness of those that serve God, and the woful condition of those that rebel against him, are here set the one over against the other, that they may serve as a foil to each other. The difference of their states here lies in two things: 1) In point of comfort and satisfaction, a. God’s servants shall eat and drink; they shall have the bread of life to feed, to feast upon continually, and shall want nothing that is good for them. But those who set their hearts upon the world, and place their happiness in it, shall be hungry and thirsty, always empty, always craving. In communion with God and dependence upon Him there is full satisfaction; but in sinful pursuits there is nothing but disappointment. b.
God’s servants shall rejoice and sing for joy of heart; they have constant cause for joy, and there is nothing that may be an occasion of grief to them but they have an allay sufficient for it. But, on the other hand, they that forsake the Lord shut themselves out from all true joy, for they shall be ashamed of their vain confidence in themselves, and their own righteousness, and the hopes they had built thereon. When the expectations of bliss, wherewith they had flattered themselves, are frustrated, O what confusion will fill their faces! Then shall they cry for sorrow of heart and howl for vexation of spirit. 2) In point of honor and reputation, Isaiah 65:15-16. The memory of the just is, and shall be, blessed; but the memory of the wicked shall rot.” Henry.—D. M.]
5. On Isaiah 66:1-2. Carpzov has a sermon on this text. He places it in parallel with Luke 18:9-14, and considers, 1) The rejection of spiritual pride; 2) The commendation of filial fear.
6. On Isaiah 66:2 Arndt, in his True Christianity I. cap. 10, comments on this text. He says among other things: “The man who will be something is the material out of which God makes nothing, yea, out of which He makes fools. But a man who will be nothing, and regards himself as nothing, is the material out of which God makes something, even glorious, wise people in His sight.”
7. On Isaiah 66:3. [Saurin has a sermon on this text entitled “Sur l’ Insuffisance du culte exterieur” in the eighth volume of his sermons.—D. M.]
8. On Isaiah 66:13. As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you. “These words stand, let us consider it, 1) In the Old Testament; 2) In the heart of God always; 3) But are they realized in our experience?” Koegel in “Aus dem Vorhof ins Heiligthum, II. Bd., p. 242, 1876.
9. On Isaiah 66:24. The punishment of sin is twofold—inward and outward. The inward is compared with a worm that dies not; the outward with a fire that is not quenched. This worm and this fire are at work even in this life. He who is alarmed by them and hastens to Christ can now be delivered from them.—[“It is better not to fall into this fire and never to have any experience of this worm, even though, as some imagine, eternity should not be eternal, and the unquenchable fire might be quenched, and the worm that shall never die, should die, and Jesus and His apostles should not have expressed themselves quite in accordance with the compassionate taste of our time. Better, I say, is better. Save thyself and thy neighbor before the fire begins to burn, and the smoke to ascend.” Gossner.—D. M.]
Footnotes:But ye who forsake Jehovah.Gad.Gad.fill for the goddess of fortune a mingled drink.Meni.
3. THE TRUE AND GOD GIVES TO EVERY ONE HIS OWN
Isaiah 65:13-1613 Therefore thus saith the Lord God, [Jehovah]
Behold, my servants shall eat, but ye shall be hungry:
Behold, my servants shall drink, but ye shall be thirsty:
Behold, my servants shall rejoice, but ye shall be ashamed:
14 Behold, my servants shall sing for joy of heart,
But ye shall cry for sorrow of heart,
And shall howl for vexation of spirit.
15 And ye shall leave your name for a curse unto my chosen:
For the Lord God [Jehovah] shall slay thee,
And call his servants by another name:
16 That he who blesseth himself in the earth
Shall bless himself in the God of truth;
And he that sweareth in the earth
Shall swear by the God of truth;
Because the former troubles are forgotten,
And because they are hid from mine eyes.
AND 1. [“On the ground of the renewed mention of the offence there is a fresh announcement of punishment, and the different lot of the servants of Jahve, and of those who despised Him, is expressed in five clauses and antithetic clauses.”—Del.] The servants of Jehovah will eat, drink, rejoice (comp. Isaiah 25:6 sqq.; Isaiah 55:1; Isaiah 56:9), the wicked will do the opposite of all this (Isaiah 65:13-14). The name of the wicked will only remain to serve the servants of Jehovah for an oath; they themselves will be dead, and the Lord will give His servants another name (Isaiah 65:15). Then will both the promises and the threatenings of Jehovah be fulfilled. Jehovah will have proved Himself as the true One. He who blesses himself and he who swears, will do this henceforward only in the name of this true God. All tribulation of the former time shall be forgotten, and shall have disappeared (Isaiah 65:16).
2. Therefore, thus saith——mine eyes. Isaiah 65:13-16. [“These verses merely carry out the general threatening of the one preceding, in a series of poetical antitheses, where hunger, thirst, disgrace and anguish take the place of sword and slaughter, and determine these to be symbolical or emblematic terms.” Alexander.—D. M.] θεּ ?αμֵ ?α recalls θεּ ?αμֵ ?αָ ?αDeuteronomy 28:47. The expression does not elsewhere occur. The adjectival construction is found 1 Kings 8:66; 2 Chronicles 7:10; Esther 1:10; Esther 5:9; Proverbs 15:15.
The expression λΰαμα (comp. Isaiah 17:11; Proverbs 14:13) occurs only here, ωֶׁ ?αֶ ?ψψεּ ?ηַ, too, occurs only here (comp. Psalms 51:19). The punishment of the wicked shall not cease with the termination of a wretched life; after death it shall be continued in a memory laden with a curse. This last point the Prophet mentions first as the climax of the punishment, and only parenthetically introduces the threatening of destruction. The threatening: Ye shall leave your name for an oath, supposes the death of those threatened.
This matter the Prophet afterwards refers to as a thing of only minor importance. For all men must die. But in the words, the Lord God shall slay thee, there is intimated a death which should be a marked expression of the Divine displeasure. εְ before δξιϊκ is to be taken as causal. The sudden change of number need no more surprise us than the sudden change of person elsewhere. Comp. Isaiah 1:23; Isaiah 5:23; Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 17:10; Isaiah 19:25; Isaiah 29:13.
The singular may perhaps be here employed for a rhetorical reason. It renders the speech more concise and emphatic. The wicked will be destroyed so that nothing will remain of them but a name on which a curse rests. To such a degree will they appear as objects of the curse, that one in swearing will believe that he cannot take a stronger oath than by invoking on himself the curse of those wicked persons, in case of being guilty of falsehood (comp. Numbers 5:21; Jeremiah 29:22; Psalms 102:9). One name originally united the wicked and the godly.
For they were both called Israelites. Can the elect of the Lord continue to bear the name which, after the judgments of God, has become accursed? No. The Lord will therefore give His servants another name. He does not say: A new name, as Isaiah 62:2, but another name. The Prophet’s look surveys rapidly the whole period which embraces thousands of years, from the beginning till the completion of redemption, i. e., from the end of the Exile till the last day.
He sees how in this period the separation between the enemies and the friends of Jehovah is accomplished, but he does not distinguish the stages of time, but all events which he beholds present themselves to him on one and the same plane. He sees only a decrease of the Ἰσραὴλσαρκικός; he sees this carnal Israel endure great pain and distress—a judgment of God resting on it, in consequence of which it appears as accursed. Further, the Prophet beholds a people of God, with another name, in the place of the old Israel. Is not the new covenant, that should come in the place of the old, in this way intimated? It seems to me that Jerome is not altogether wrong in regard to the main point, when he says: “Nomen autem novum sive aliud nullum est, nisi quod ex Christi nomine derivatur, ut nequaquam vocetur populus Dei Jacob et Juda et Israel et Ephraim et Joseph, sed Christianus.” [“According to the usage of the prophecies the promise of another name imports a different character and state, and in this sense the promise has been fully verified. But in addition to this general fulfilment, which no one calls in question, it is matter of history that the Jewish commonwealth or nation is destroyed; that the name of Jew has been for centuries a bye-word and a formula of execration, and that they who have succeeded to the spiritual honors of this once favored race, although they claim historical identity therewith, have never borne its name, but another, which from its very nature could have no existence until Christ had come, and which in the common parlance of the Christian world is treated as the opposite of Jew.” Alexander.—D.
M.]. The destruction of the wicked supposes as corresponding to it the salvation of the godly. Through both the veracity of God is attested. Is Jehovah shown to be true by the history of the world, then no one naturally will think of uttering an oath or benediction by another God than by Him. ΰְַ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ is therefore=quare, quapropter, or in a demonstrative sense=so that (comp. Genesis 13:16; Deuteronomy 3:24; Deuteronomy 28:27; Deuteronomy 28:51, et saepe). δϊαψκ with αְּ stands here as Jeremiah 4:2, which place seems to refer to ours. The expression ΰμδιΰξο occurs only here. [“A remarkable expression; lit. “the God of Amen,”—of what is firm and true.
Vulg. in Deo Amen. The God to whom that quality of covenant-keeping truth essentially belongs, is He in whom all shall bless themselves. A comparison of Gen 22:18 and Psalms 72:17 with the present verse shows that ‘the Seed of Abraham’ and ‘the Son of David’ are to be identified with this God of truth:—a mystery completely realized in Him who is the ‘Amen, the Faithful and True Witness’ (Revelation 3:14; comp. Isaiah 19:11). In Him ‘all the promises of God are…Amen’ (2 Corinthians 1:20”). Kay.—D.
M.]. “When all promises are fulfilled, then, too, all troubles must necessarily be past. For the promises of God have respect not to partial, limited, but to full, complete salvation. In the time, then, when men will swear and bless by none other than the true and veracious God, all troubles will end, so that men will know no more what trouble is. But not only this. There could still be danger of new troubles. But this will not be, for God Himself will with His all-seeing eye perceive no where the trace of a trouble. λִּ ?ιΞεְ ?λִ ?ι is=because—and because (Genesis 33:11; Joshua 10:2; 1 Samuel 19:4).
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 65:1-2. Our Lord has said, “He that seeketh findeth” (Matthew 7:8). How, then, does it come that the Jews do not find what they seek, but the heathen find what they did not seek? The Apostle Paul puts this question and answers it, Romans 9:30 sqq.; Isaiah 10:19 sqq.; Isaiah 11:7. [See also Isaiah 10:3]. All depends on the way in which we seek.
Luther says: Quaerere fit dupliciter. Primo, secundum praescriptum verbi Dei, et sic invenitur Deus, Secundo, quaeritur nostris studiis et consiliis, et sic non invenitur.” The Jews, with exception of the ἐκλογή (Romans 11:7), sought only after their own glory and merit. They sought what satisfies the flesh. They did not suffer the spirit in the depths of their heart to speak,—the spirit which can be satisfied only by food fitted for it. The law which was given to them that they might perceive by means of it their own impotence, became a snare to them. For they perverted it, made what was of minor importance the chief matter, and then persuaded themselves that they had fulfilled it and were righteous.
But the Gentiles who had not the law, had not this snare. They were not tempted to abuse the pζdagogical discipline of the law. They felt simply that they were forsaken by God. Their spirit was hungry. And when for the first time God’s word in the Gospel was presented to them, then they received it the more eagerly in proportion to the poverty, wretchedness and hunger in which they had been. The Jews did not find what they sought, because they had not a spiritual, but a carnal apprehension of the law, and, like the elder brother of the prodigal son, were full, and blind for that which was needful for them.
But the Gentiles found what they did not seek, because they were like the prodigal son, who was the more receptive of grace, the more he needed it, and the less claim he had to it. [There is important truth stated in the foregoing remarks. But it does not fully explain why the Lord is found of those who sought Him not. The sinner who has obtained mercy when he asks why? must have recourse to a higher cause, a cause out of himself, even free, sovereign, efficacious grace. “It is of God that showeth mercy,” Romans 9:16. “Though in after-communion God is found of those that seek Him (Proverbs 8:17), yet in the first conversion He is found of those that seek Him not; for therefore we love Him, because He first loved us.” Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 65:2. God’s long-suffering is great. He stretches out His hands the whole day and does not grow weary. What man would do this? The disobedient people contemns Him, as if He knew nothing, and could do nothing.
3. On Isaiah 65:2. “It is clear from this verse gratiam esse resistibilem. Christ earnestly stretched out His hands to the Jews. He would, but they would not. This doctrine the Remonstrants prove from this place, and rightly too, in Actis Synodi Dodrac. P. 3. p. 76.” Leigh. [The grace of God which is signified by His stretching out His hands can be, and is, resisted.
That figurative expression denotes warning, exhorting, entreating, and was never set forth by Reformed theologians as indicating such grace as was necessarily productive of conversion. The power by which God quickens those who were dead in sins (Ephesians 2:5), by which He gives a new heart (Ezekiel 36:26), by which He draws to the Son (John 6:44-45; John 6:65), is the grace which is called irresistible. The epithet is admitted on all hands to be faulty; but the grace denoted by it is, from the nature of the case, not resisted. Turrettin in treating De Vocatione et Fide thus replies to this objection, “Aliud est Deo monenti et vocanti externe resistere; Aliud est conversionem intendenti et efficaciter ac interne vocanti. Prius asseritur Isa. lxv. 2, 3. Quum dicit Propheta se expandisse totβ die manus ad populum perversum etc., non posterius.
Expansio brachiorum notat quidem blandam et benevolam Dei invitationem, quβ illos extrinsecus sive Verbo, sive beneficiis alliciebat, non semel atque iterum, sed quotidie ministerio servorum suorum eos compellando. Sed non potest designate potentem et efficacem operationem, quβ brachium Domini illis revelatur qui docentur α Deo et trahuntur a Patre, etc.” Locus XV.; Quaestio VI .25.—D. M.].
4. On Isaiah 65:2. (Who walk after their own thoughts.)
Duc me, nec sine, me per me, Deus optime, duci.
Nam duce me pereo, te duce certus eo.
[“If our guide be our own thoughts, our way is not likely to be good; for every imagination of the thought of our hearts is only evil.” Henry. D. M.].
5. On Isaiah 65:3 sq. “The sweetest wine is turned into the sourest vinegar; and when God’s people apostatize from God, they are worse than the heathen (Jeremiah 3:11).” Starke.
6. On Isaiah 65:5. [I am holier than thou. “A deep insight is here given us into the nature of the mysterious fascination which heathenism exercised on the Jewish people. The law humbled them at every turn with mementoes of their own sin and of God’s unapproachable holiness. Paganism freed them from this, and allowed them (in the midst of moral pollution) to cherish lofty pretensions to sanctity. The man, who had been offering incense on the mountain-top, despised the penitent who went to the temple to present ‘a broken and contrite heart.’ If Pharisaism led to a like result, it was because it, too, had emptied the law of its spiritual import, and turned its provisions into intellectual idols.” Kay. D. M.].
7. On Isaiah 65:6-7. “The longer God forbears, the harder He punishes at last. The greatness of the punishment compensates for the delay (Psalms 50:21).” Starke after Leigh.
8. On Isaiah 65:8 sqq. [“This is expounded by St. Paul, Romans 11:1-5, where, when upon occasion of the rejection of the Jews, it is asked Hath God then cast away His people? He answers, no; for, at this time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. This prophecy has reference to that distinguished remnant…Our Saviour has told us that for the sake of these elect the days of the destruction of the Jews should be shortened, and a stop put to the desolation, which otherwise would have proceeded to that degree that no flesh should be saved. Matthew 24:22. Henry. D. M.].
9. On Isaiah 65:15. The judgment which came upon Israel by the hand of the Romans, did not altogether destroy the people, but it so destroyed the Old Covenant, i.e., the Mosaic religion, that the Jews can no more observe its precepts in essential points. For no Jew knows to what tribe he belongs. Therefore, they have no priests, and, consequently, no sacrifices. The Old Covenant is now only a ruin.
We see here most clearly that the Old Covenant, as it was designed only for one nation, and for one country, was to last only for a certain time. If we consider, moreover, the way in which the judgment was executed, (comp. Josephus), we can truly say that the Jews bear in themselves the mark of a curse. They bear the stamp of the divine judgment. The beginning of the judgment on the world has been executed on them as the house of God. But how comes it that the Jews have become so mighty, so insolent in the present time, and are not satisfied with remaining on the defensive in their attitude toward the Christian church, but have passed over to the offensive?
This has arisen solely from Christendom having to a large extent lost the consciousness of its new name. There are many Christians who scoff at the name of Christian, and seek their honor in combating all that is called Christian. This is the preparation for the judgment on Christendom itself. If Christendom would hold fast her jewel, she would remain strong, and no one would dare to mock or to assail her. For she would then partake of the full blessing which lies in the principle of Christianity, and every one would be obliged to show respect for the fruits of this principle. But an apostate Christendom, that is ashamed of her glorious Christian name, is something more miserable than the Jews, judged though they have been, who still esteem highly their name, and what remains to them of their old religion.
Thus Christendom, in so far as it denies the worth and significance of its name, is gradually reaching a condition in which it will be so ripe for the second act of the judgment on the world, that this will be longed for as a benefit. For, this apostate Christendom will be the kingdom of Antichrist, as Antichrist will manifest himself in Satanic antagonism to God by sitting in the temple of God, and pretending to be God (2 Thessalonians 2:3 sqq.). [We do not quite share all the sentiments expressed in this paragraph. We are far from being so despondent as to the prospects of Christendom, and think that there is a more obvious interpretation of the prophecy quoted from 2 Thess., than that indicated.—D. M.].
10. On Isaiah 65:17. [If we had only the present passage to testify of new heavens and a new earth, we might say, as many good interpreters do, that the language is figurative, and indicates nothing more than a great moral and spiritual revolution. But we cannot thus explain 2 Peter 3:10-13. The present earth and heavens shall pass away; (comp. Isaiah 51:6; Psalms 102:25-26). But how can we suppose that our Prophet here refers to the new heavens and new earth, which are to succeed the destruction of the world by fire?
In the verses that follow Isaiah 65:17, a condition of things is described which, although better than the present, is not so good as that perfectly sinless, blessed state of the redeemed, which we look for after the coming of the day of the Lord. Yet the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:13) evidently regards the promise before us of new heavens and a new earth, as destined to receive its accomplishment after the conflagration which is to take place at the end of the world. If we had not respect to other Scriptures, and if we overlooked the use made by Peter of this passage, we should not take it literally. But we can take it literally, if we suppose that the Prophet brings together future events not according to their order in time. He sees the new heavens and new earth arise. Other scenes are disclosed to his prophetic eye of a grand and joy-inspiring nature.
He announces them as future. But these scenes suppose the continued prevalence of death and labor (Isaiah 65:20 sqq.), which, we know from definite statements of Scripture, will not exist when the new heaven and new earth appear (comp. Revelation 21:1-4). The proper view then of Isa 65:17 is to take its prediction literally, and to hold at the same time that in the following description (which is that of the millennium) future things are presented to us which are really prior, and not posterior to the promised complete renovation of heaven and earth. Nor should this surprise us, as Isaiah and the other Prophets place closely together in their pictures future things which belong to different times. They do not draw the line sharply between this world and the next.
Compare Isaiah’s prophecy of the abolition of death (Isaiah 25:8) in connection with other events that must happen long before that state of perfect blessedness.—D. M.].
11. On Isaiah 65:20. [“The extension of the Gospel every where,—of its pure principles of temperance in eating and drinking, in restraining the passions, in producing calmness of mind, and in arresting war, would greatly lengthen out the life of man. The image here employed by the Prophet is more than mere poetry; it is one that is founded in reality, and is designed to convey most important truth.” Barnes. D. M.].
12. On Isaiah 65:24. [It occurs to me that an erroneous application is frequently made of the promise, Before they call, etc. This declaration is made in connection with the glory and blessedness of the last days. It belongs specifically to the millennium. There are, indeed, occasions when God even now seems to act according to this law. (Comp. Daniel 9:23). But Paul had to pray thrice before he received the answer of the Lord (2 Corinthians 12:8). Compare the parable of the importunate widow, Luke 18:1-7. The answer to prayer may be long delayed. This is not only taught in the Bible, but is verified in Christian experience. But the time will come when the Lord will not thus try and exercise the faith of His people.—D. M.].
13. On Isaiah 65:25. “If the lower animals live in hostility in consequence of the sin of man, a state of peace must be restored to them along with our redemption from sin.” J. G. Mueller in Herz. R.-Encycl. xvi. p. 45. [“By the serpent in this place there seems every reason to believe that Satan, the old seducer and author of discord and misery, is meant. During the millennium he is to be subject to the lowest degradation. Compare for the force of the phrase to lick the dust, Psalms 72:9; Micah 7:17. This was the original doom of the tempter, Genesis 3:14, and shall be fully carried into execution. Comp. Revelation 20:1-3.” Henderson. D. M.].
14. On Isaiah 66:1. [“Having held up in every point of view the true design, mission and vocation of the church or chosen people, its relation to the natural descendants of Abraham, the causes which required that the latter should be stripped of their peculiar privileges, and the vocation of the Gentiles as a part of the divine plan from its origin, the Prophet now addresses the apostate and unbelieving Jews at the close of the old dispensation, who, instead of preparing for the general extension of the church and the exchange of ceremonial for spiritual worship, were engaged in the rebuilding and costly decoration of the temple at Jerusalem. The pride and interest in this great public work, felt not only by the Herods but by all the Jews, is clear from incidental statements of the Scriptures (John 2:20; Matthew 24:1), as well as from the ample and direct assertions of Josephus. That the nation should have been thus occupied precisely at the time when the Messiah came, is one of those agreements between prophecy and history, which cannot be accounted for except upon the supposition of a providential and designed assimilation.” Alexander after Vitringa. D. M.].
15. On Isaiah 66:1-2. What a grand view of the nature of God and of the way in which He is made known lies at the foundation of these words! God made all things. He is so great that it is an absurdity to desire to build a temple for Him. The whole universe cannot contain Him (1 Kings 8:27)!
But He, who contains all things and can be contained by nothing, has His greatest joy in a poor, humble human heart that fears Him. He holds it worthy of His regard, it pleases Him, He enters into it, He makes His abode in it. The wise and prudent men of science should learn hence what is chiefly necessary in order to know God. We cannot reach Him by applying force, by climbing up to Him, by attempting to take Him by storm. And if science should place ladder upon ladder upwards and downwards, she could not attain His height or His depth. But He enters of His own accord into a child-like, simple heart.
He lets Himself be laid hold of by it, kept and known. It is not, therefore, by the intellect [alone] but by the heart that we can know God.
16. On Isaiah 66:3. He who under the Christian dispensation would retain the forms of worship of the ancient ritual of shadows would violate the fundamental laws of the new time, just as a man by killing would offend against the foundation of the moral law, or as he would by offering the blood of dogs or swine offend against the foundation of the ceremonial law. For when the body, the substance has appeared, the type must vanish. He who would retain the type along with the reality would declare the latter to be insufficient, would, therefore, found his salvation not upon God only, but also in part on his own legal performance. But God will brook no rival.
He is either our All, or nothing. Christianity could tolerate animal sacrifices just as little as the Old Testament law could tolerate murder or the offering of abominable things.
17. On Isaiah 66:5. [“The most malignant and cruel persecutions of the friends of God have been originated under the pretext of great zeal in His service, and with a professed desire to honor His name. So it was with the Jews when they crucified the Lord Jesus. So it is expressly said it would be when His disciples would be excommunicated and put to death, John 16:2. So it was in fact in the persecutions excited against the apostles and early Christians. See Acts 6:13-14; Acts 21:28-31. So it was in all the persecutions of the Waldenses, in all the horrors of the Inquisition, in all the crimes of the Duke of Alva. So it was in the bloody reign of Mary; and so it has ever been in all ages and in all countries where Christians have been persecuted.” Barnes.—D. M.].
18. On Isaiah 66:10. “The idea which is presented in this verse is, that it is the duty of all who love Zion to sympathize in her joy. The true friends of God should rejoice in every real revival of religion, they should rejoice in all the success which attends the Gospel in heathen lands. And they will rejoice. It is one evidence of piety to rejoice in her joy; and they who have no joy when souls are born into the kingdom of God, when He pours down His Spirit and in a revival of religion produces changes as sudden and transforming as if the earth were suddenly to pass from the desolation of winter to the verdure and bloom of summer, or when the Gospel makes sudden and rapid advances in the heathen world, have no true evidence that they love God and His cause. They have no religion.” Barnes.—D. M.
19. On Isaiah 66:13. The Prophet is here completely governed by the idea that in the glorious time of the end, love, maternal love will reign. Thus He makes Zion appear as a mother who will bring forth with incredible ease and rapidity innumerable children (Isaiah 66:7-9). Then the Israelites are depicted as little children who suck the breasts of their mother. Further, the heathen who bring back the Israelites into their home, must do this in the same way in which mothers in the Orient are wont to carry their little children.
Lastly, even to the Lord Himself maternal love is ascribed (comp. Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 49:15), and such love as a mother manifests to her adult son. Thus the Israelites will be surrounded in that glorious time on all sides by maternal love. Maternal love will be the characteristic of that period.
20. On Isaiah 66:19 sqq. The Prophet describes remote things by words which are borrowed from the relations and conceptions of his own time, but which stand in strange contrast to the reality of the future which he beholds. Thus the Prophet speaks of escaped persons who go to Tarshish, Pul, Lud, Tubal, and Javan. Here he has rightly seen that a great act of judgment must have taken place. And this act of judgment must have passed on Israel, because they who escape, who go to the Gentiles to declare to them the glory of Jehovah, must plainly be Jews How accurately, in spite of the strange manner of expression, is the fact here stated that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was proclaimed to the Gentiles exactly at the time when the old theocracy was destroyed!
How justly does he indicate that there was a causal connection between these events! He did not, indeed, know that the shattering of the old form was necessary in order that the eternal truth enclosed in it might be set free, and fitted for filling the whole earth. For the Old Covenant cannot exist along with the New, the Law cannot stand with equal dignity beside the Gospel. The Law must be regarded as annulled, in order that the Gospel may come into force. How remarkably strange is it, however, that he calls the Gentile nations Tarshish, Pul, Lud, etc. And how singular it sounds to be told that the Israelites shall be brought by the Gentiles to Jerusalem as an offering for Jehovah!
But how accurately has he, notwithstanding, stated the fact, which, indeed, still awaits its fulfilment, that it is the conversion of the heathen world which will induce Israel to acknowledge their Saviour, and that they both shall gather round the Lord as their common centre! How strange it sounds that then priests and Levites shall be taken from the Gentiles also, and that new moon and Sabbath shall be celebrated by all flesh in the old Jewish fashion! But how accurately is the truth thereby stated that in the New Covenant there will be no more the priesthood restricted to the family of Aaron, but a higher spiritual and universal priesthood, and that, instead of the limited local place of worship of the Old Covenant, the whole earth will be a temple of the Lord! Verily the prophecy of the two last chapters of Isaiah attests a genuine prophet of Jehovah. He cannot have been an anonymous unknown person. He can have been none other than Isaiah the son of Amoz!
HINTS1. On Isaiah 65:1 sq. [I. “It is here foretold that the Gentiles, who had been afar off, should be made nigh, Isaiah 65:1. II. It is here foretold that the Jews, who had long been a people near to God, should be cast off, and set at a distance, Isaiah 65:2.” Henry, III. We are informed of the cause of the rejection of the Jews. It was owing to their rebellion, waywardness and flagrant provocations, Isaiah 65:2 sqq.—D. M.]
2. On Isaiah 65:1-7. A Fast-Day Sermon. When the Evangelical Church no more holds fast what she has; when apostasy spreads more and more, and modern heathenism (Isaiah 65:3-5 a) gains the ascendency in her, then it can happen to her as it did to the people of Israel, and as it happened to the Church in the Orient. Her candlestick can be removed out of its place.—[By the Evangelical Church we are not to understand here the Church universal, for her perpetuity is certain. The Evangelical Church is in Germany the Protestant Church, and more particularly the Lutheran branch of it.—D. M.]
3. On Isaiah 65:8-10. Sermon on behalf of the mission among the Jews. Israel’s hope. 1) On what it is founded (Israel is still a berry in which drops of the divine blessing are contained); 2) To what this hope is directed (Israel’s Restoration).
4. On Isaiah 65:13-16. [“The blessedness of those that serve God, and the woful condition of those that rebel against him, are here set the one over against the other, that they may serve as a foil to each other. The difference of their states here lies in two things: 1) In point of comfort and satisfaction, a. God’s servants shall eat and drink; they shall have the bread of life to feed, to feast upon continually, and shall want nothing that is good for them. But those who set their hearts upon the world, and place their happiness in it, shall be hungry and thirsty, always empty, always craving. In communion with God and dependence upon Him there is full satisfaction; but in sinful pursuits there is nothing but disappointment. b.
God’s servants shall rejoice and sing for joy of heart; they have constant cause for joy, and there is nothing that may be an occasion of grief to them but they have an allay sufficient for it. But, on the other hand, they that forsake the Lord shut themselves out from all true joy, for they shall be ashamed of their vain confidence in themselves, and their own righteousness, and the hopes they had built thereon. When the expectations of bliss, wherewith they had flattered themselves, are frustrated, O what confusion will fill their faces! Then shall they cry for sorrow of heart and howl for vexation of spirit. 2) In point of honor and reputation, Isaiah 65:15-16. The memory of the just is, and shall be, blessed; but the memory of the wicked shall rot.” Henry.—D. M.]
5. On Isaiah 66:1-2. Carpzov has a sermon on this text. He places it in parallel with Luke 18:9-14, and considers, 1) The rejection of spiritual pride; 2) The commendation of filial fear.
6. On Isaiah 66:2 Arndt, in his True Christianity I. cap. 10, comments on this text. He says among other things: “The man who will be something is the material out of which God makes nothing, yea, out of which He makes fools. But a man who will be nothing, and regards himself as nothing, is the material out of which God makes something, even glorious, wise people in His sight.”
7. On Isaiah 66:3. [Saurin has a sermon on this text entitled “Sur l’ Insuffisance du culte exterieur” in the eighth volume of his sermons.—D. M.]
8. On Isaiah 66:13. As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you. “These words stand, let us consider it, 1) In the Old Testament; 2) In the heart of God always; 3) But are they realized in our experience?” Koegel in “Aus dem Vorhof ins Heiligthum, II. Bd., p. 242, 1876.
9. On Isaiah 66:24. The punishment of sin is twofold—inward and outward. The inward is compared with a worm that dies not; the outward with a fire that is not quenched. This worm and this fire are at work even in this life. He who is alarmed by them and hastens to Christ can now be delivered from them.—[“It is better not to fall into this fire and never to have any experience of this worm, even though, as some imagine, eternity should not be eternal, and the unquenchable fire might be quenched, and the worm that shall never die, should die, and Jesus and His apostles should not have expressed themselves quite in accordance with the compassionate taste of our time. Better, I say, is better. Save thyself and thy neighbor before the fire begins to burn, and the smoke to ascend.” Gossner.—D. M.]
Footnotes:Heb. breaking.an oath.the God of Amen.
4. THE NEW LIFE IN ITS OUTWARD
Isaiah 65:17-2517 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth:
And the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
18 But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create:
For, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing,
And her people a joy.
19 And I will rejoice in Jerusalem,
And joy in my people:
And the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her,
Nor the voice of crying.
20 There shall be no more thence an infant of days,
Nor an old man that hath not filled his days:
For the child shall die an hundred years old;
But the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed.
21 And they shall build houses, and inhabit them;
And they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them.
22 They shall not build, and another inhabit;
They shall not plant, and another eat:
For as the days of a tree are the days of my people,
And mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands.
23 They shall not labour in vain,
Nor bring forth for trouble;
For they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord,
And their offspring with them.
24 And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer;
And while they are yet speaking, I will hear.
25 The wolf and the lamb shall feed together,
And the lion shall eat straw like the bullock:
And dust shall be the serpent’s meat.
They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain,
Saith the Lord.
AND 1. The Prophet had previously declared that mighty changes would take place in consequence of severe judgments on the one hand, and of glorious saving grace on the other. Here he states that the Lord will create a new heaven and a new earth which will entirely efface the remembrance of the old (Isaiah 65:17). For this new glorious creation will cause such joy that it will make the misery of the old world to be quite forgotten. Jerusalem and its people will be nothing but joy, and the Lord, too, will only rejoice over His people. Among the people of God nothing more will be heard of mourning and lamentation (Isaiah 65:19).
The vital force of mankind will then appear undiminished (Isaiah 65:20-21). Death will no longer prevent a man from enjoying the fruits of his labor. None will labor in vain, or beget children for speedy death, for all will be a blessed race (Isaiah 65:23); and if they have anything to ask from the Lord, their prayer will be immediately answered (Isaiah 65:24). There will be a renovation even of the animal world. It will be in harmony with the spirit of peace and love which will prevail in the entire new creation (Isaiah 65:25).
2. For, behold, I create——crying.
Isaiah 65:17-19. The Prophet manifestly distinguishes stadia in the accomplishment of salvation, although he says nothing of their relative times. Objects which are represented in one perspective on different planes, so that those in the background can be seen through the intervening spaces of those on the foreground, appear to be on one plane to him who regards them at a distance. We can here also distinguish three really distinct stadia, although the Prophet in no way indicates a difference of time. The first stadium he describes Isaiah 65:9-10. He there speaks of again taking possession of the holy land.
This was first accomplished by the return from Exile. He brings us, Isaiah 65:13-16, to another stadium. In it he sees the wicked and the godly together; but he perceives the godless Israel judged and cursed, and the elect that are saved from the judgment called by another name. We enter on the third stadium Isaiah 65:17. In it everything becomes new. A new higher life pervades the whole of nature.
To this highest stadium the preceding are related as organic preparation. This is the meaning of the λִּ ?ι in the beginning of Isa 65:17. [The Prophet had said at the close of Isa 65:16 that the former evils had entirely passed away. “That they had passed away he establishes by joining, as in Isaiah 9:3-5, one λִּ ?ι to another, Isaiah 65:17-19.” Del.—D. M.]. By ψΰωׁ ?πεϊ many understand merely tempora superiora, the former evil times, others, only the old heaven and the old earth. But why should not both be intended by it? Would it be possible to remember the old earth and the old heaven, and not at the same time think of the times passed on the one and under the other?
The Prophet certainly does not mean to say that people will have lost their memory in the new world. But his meaning is only this, that all misery and distress of the old world will be so completely got rid of that the images of the same will no more present themselves as a disturbing element in the happiness of the new world. ςμδςμμα is=come to mind, to be suggested. Comp. Jeremiah 3:16, which place is of similar import with the one before us, and seems to be formed after it. The expression is found only in Isaiah and Jeremiah (Jeremiah 3:16; Jeremiah 7:31; Jeremiah 19:5; Jeremiah 32:35; Jeremiah 44:21). The words, Isaiah 65:18, Be ye glad and rejoice agree admirably with our explanation of Isa 65:17 b.
The servants of God shall not suffer their happiness to be disturbed by gloomy recollections, but they shall enjoy it to the full and uninterruptedly. Why should they not do this? Is it not a creation of the Lord? And all that the Lord creates is good (Genesis 1:31). Neither ωׂ ?εּ ?ωׂ nor βִּ ?ιμ are ever construed with the accusative of the object. ΰְַ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ is therefore to be taken as causal=because. The Prophet then repeats emphatically: for behold I create Jerusalem a rejoicing and its people a joy. βִּ ?ιμָ ?δ and ξָ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ωׂ are abstracts to be taken as concretes.
This form of expression is particularly emphatic (Isaiah 60:17; Isaiah 11:10; Isaiah 13:9, et saepe; Psalms 120:2; Psalms 120:7, et saepe). Jerusalem shall be nothing but rejoicing, its people nothing but joy. But more than that! Not only shall Jerusalem rejoice with its people. The Lord Himself will rejoice over Jerusalem and its people; which supposes on the part of the latter a state of perfect righteousness, such a renovation, in short, as (Isaiah 65:17) is promised to the heaven and the earth (Isaiah 62:5). Where there is no more sin, there is no more trouble, and where there is no more trouble, there is no more pain (comp.
Isaiah 25:8; Isaiah 35:10; Isaiah 51:11; Revelation 7:17; Revelation 21:4).
3. There shall be no more——saith the LORD.
Isaiah 65:20-25. In what follows the Prophet gives examples of the state of things in the new world. The illustrations given are to serve as a measure for estimating the new relation. ξִ ?ωָׁ ?ν is not=from then. For ωָׁ ?ν is never used in regard to time. [The examples given by Gesenius of ωָׁ ?ν in the sense of then do not bear examination. The particle is not used of time in Hebrew as it is in Arabic.—D. M.]. ξִ ?ο marks in Hebrew the terminus unde, which according to the usage of the language is found where we employ the terminus ubi. ωָׁ ?ν refers to Jerusalem and the Holy Land.
Thence will no suckling ever appear (comp. Isaiah 59:19; Isaiah 40:15) who will be only days old (comp. e. g., Genesis 24:55), or an old man who has not reached the normal measure of human age. [Alexander, following Kimchi, supposes there shall be no more from thence to mean there shall be no more taken away thence, or carried thence to burial. But δָ ?ιָ ?δ means properly to come into existence, and we are to understand the statement thus: there shall no suckling thence arise or come into being who shall live only some days, whose age shall be counted by days.—D. M.]. What follows, strictly taken, contradicts what has been said. For if no one, not even an old man, falls short of the normal measure, then no one can die as a boy. [But the Prophet does not say that no one, not even an old man, falls short of the normal measure, in the former part of Isa 65:20.
When one who dies at the age of a hundred years is counted a boy, and when a sinner who dies a hundred years old is regarded as prematurely cut off by the judgment of God, this is no contradiction of the declaration that the suckling’s age will not be reckoned by days, and that old men will fill up the measure of their days. For the hundred years old sinner will not be included in the category of old men. There is no need then of adopting the forced construction proposed by Dr. Naegelsbach to get rid of an imaginary contradiction. The examples here given he holds to be unreal and only supposed by way of illustration. If it were possible that there should still be sinners, one of them, who should be punished with death when a hundred years old, would be regarded as cursed by God, and forever excluded from mercy.
And if one of a hundred years should die a natural death, (supposing such a case, which from what has been said cannot really occur), he would be only a boy at his death.—D. M.]. There is clear reference here to the Mosaic law which promises long life and a numerous posterity to the godly, and, on the contrary, threatens shortening of life and speedy extinction of name to the wicked (Exodus 20:5-6; Exodus 20:12; Exodus 23:26). That the Prophet here at the same time thinks of the longevity of the [antediluvian] patriarchs is very probable. The thought of a return of this longevity is not unbiblical. It is expressed in Revelation 20:4 [?].
The form δַ ?ηεֹ ?θֶ ?ΰ with Segol is as if from ηָ ?θָ ?δ. The longevity which, Isaiah 65:20, is promised to the servants of God, shall as a secondary consequence, have also the good effect that the curse of fruitless cultivation, planting and begetting, with which the wicked are threatened by the law (Leviticus 26:16; Deuteronomy 28:30 sqq.), will be removed from the people of God (comp. Isaiah 62:8-9; Jeremiah 31:5; Amos 9:14-15). That men shall build houses and not dwell therein, and plant vineyards and not enjoy them, is threatened as a curse Deuteronomy 28:30. These curses will be transformed into the corresponding blessings in consequence of longevity; for the people of God shall live as long as trees (comp. Psalms 92:13 sqq.). [“Some trees, such as the oak, the terebinth, and the banyan, reach the age of a thousand years.” Henderson.
The cedars of Lebanon that are still found there “may be fairly presumed to have existed in Biblical times.” (Royle). αִּ ?μָּ ?δ means not only to use, but to use up, consume (Del.).—D. M.]. Isaiah 65:23 a alludes to Leviticus 26:16; Leviticus 26:20; for μָ ?ψִ ?ιχ and αֶּ ?δָ ?μָ ?η are borrowed from the two places. [“The sense of sudden destruction given to αֶּ ?δָ ?μָ ?δ by some modern writers, is a mere conjecture from the context....The Hebrew word properly denotes extreme agitation and alarm, and the meaning of the clause is that they shall not bring forth children merely to be the subjects of distressing solicitude.” Alexander. D. M.]. The meaning of ζψςαψελιιΧ is plainly not a posterity that springs from those blessed of the Lord, but a posterity, a seed which consists of those who are blessed.
Comp. on Isaiah 1:4). [This is not so plain as it is affirmed to be. And Alexander is right in saying that it adds greatly to the strength of the expression if we take it to mean that they are themselves the offspring of those blessed of God, and thus give ζֶ ?ψַ ?ς its usual sense. D. M.]. ΰִ ?ϊָּ ?ν is not to be regarded as merely marking addition to, but as denoting simultaneous, common enjoyment. It includes the idea that the children will enjoy these things not after the parents, but with the parents. But if notwithstanding the abundance of blessing that surrounds them, any trouble or the lack of any good thing should be felt, they have only to bring their concern in prayer to the Lord.
The answer will be given even before the request is expressed, or at latest, while he that prays is yet speaking (comp. Isaiah 58:9; Isaiah 30:19). Isaiah 65:25 adds an eschatological feature which is abridged from Isaiah 11:6-9. I cannot avoid the impression that these words are an awkward addition, and are not of one piece with what precedes. Have we here again to mark the hand of him who has retouched in various ways the original work of the Prophet in these last chapters? [Delitzsch declares that those who affirm that the speaker in Isaiah 65:25 is one later than Isaiah, because this verse is only loosely attached to what precedes, make an assertion which is unfair and untrue. As in chapter 11. so here, the picture of the new time closes with the peace in the world of nature, which in chapters 40–66, just as in chapters 1–39, appears as standing in the closest mutual relation to man.
The repetition of what was already uttered in chapter 11. speaks in favor of unity of authorship Dr. Naegelsbach, following Knobel, urges the substitution of ιַ ?ηְ ?γָּ ?ε for λְּ ?ΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ as marking the hand of a later writer. But λְּ ?ΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ is more than ιַ ?ηְ ?γָּ ?ε, together. It means as one, and is a perfectly simple and natural Hebrew form. No argument can be drawn from its appearing besides only in such late books as 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah and Ecclesiastes. ιַ ?ηְ ?γָּ ?ε also occurs in Nehemiah. We have, too, λְּ ?ΰִ ?ιωׁ ΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ in early books, in Judges 20:8; 1 Samuel 11:7.
This phase is essentially one with the expression in our text, and cannot be referred to the later Hebrew, though it occurs in Ezra 3:1 and Nehemiah 8:1, as well as in Judges and 1 Samuel. We find also in our verse the stronger expression θָ ?μֶ ?δ, a young lamb, substituted for the word λֶּ ?αֶ ?ωׁ, a well-grown lamb, which is used in Isaiah 11:6. There is, then, no valid reason for suspecting here an addition by a later hand. See Kayin loc. “Most of the modern writers construe πָ ?ηָ ?ωׁ as a nominative absolute, as for the serpent, dust (shall be) his food. A more obvious construction is to repeat the verb shall eat, and consider dust and food as in apposition....“The sense seems to be that, in accordance with his ancient doom, he shall be rendered harmless, robbed of his favorite nutriment, and made to bite the dust at the feet of his conqueror (Genesis 3:15; Romans 16:20; 1 John 3:8).”—Alexander. Isaiah, in writing “Dust shall be the serpent’s meat,” has evidently Micah 7:17 before him: “They shall lick the dust like a serpent.” This borrowing from Micah is characteristic of Isaiah, and attests the genuineness of this passage.
Delitzsch, at the close of this chapter, asks when the state of things shall be realized that is here depicted, when the antediluvian length of life shall return, and man and the lower animals shall be in harmony and peace? He replies that it is absurd to refer this prophecy to the state of final blessedness, as it supposes a continued mixture of righteous and sinful men, and only a limitation of the power of death, not its complete destruction by the fulfilment of the promise in Isaiah 35:8 a. But is this state to follow the creation of new heavens and a new earth mentioned in Isaiah 65:17? And what have we to understand by the creation of new heavens and a new earth here spoken of? On these questions see under Doctrinal and Ethical, No. 10.—D. M.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 65:1-2. Our Lord has said, “He that seeketh findeth” (Matthew 7:8). How, then, does it come that the Jews do not find what they seek, but the heathen find what they did not seek? The Apostle Paul puts this question and answers it, Romans 9:30 sqq.; Isaiah 10:19 sqq.; Isaiah 11:7. [See also Isaiah 10:3]. All depends on the way in which we seek.
Luther says: Quaerere fit dupliciter. Primo, secundum praescriptum verbi Dei, et sic invenitur Deus, Secundo, quaeritur nostris studiis et consiliis, et sic non invenitur.” The Jews, with exception of the ἐκλογή (Romans 11:7), sought only after their own glory and merit. They sought what satisfies the flesh. They did not suffer the spirit in the depths of their heart to speak,—the spirit which can be satisfied only by food fitted for it. The law which was given to them that they might perceive by means of it their own impotence, became a snare to them. For they perverted it, made what was of minor importance the chief matter, and then persuaded themselves that they had fulfilled it and were righteous.
But the Gentiles who had not the law, had not this snare. They were not tempted to abuse the pζdagogical discipline of the law. They felt simply that they were forsaken by God. Their spirit was hungry. And when for the first time God’s word in the Gospel was presented to them, then they received it the more eagerly in proportion to the poverty, wretchedness and hunger in which they had been. The Jews did not find what they sought, because they had not a spiritual, but a carnal apprehension of the law, and, like the elder brother of the prodigal son, were full, and blind for that which was needful for them.
But the Gentiles found what they did not seek, because they were like the prodigal son, who was the more receptive of grace, the more he needed it, and the less claim he had to it. [There is important truth stated in the foregoing remarks. But it does not fully explain why the Lord is found of those who sought Him not. The sinner who has obtained mercy when he asks why? must have recourse to a higher cause, a cause out of himself, even free, sovereign, efficacious grace. “It is of God that showeth mercy,” Romans 9:16. “Though in after-communion God is found of those that seek Him (Proverbs 8:17), yet in the first conversion He is found of those that seek Him not; for therefore we love Him, because He first loved us.” Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 65:2. God’s long-suffering is great. He stretches out His hands the whole day and does not grow weary. What man would do this? The disobedient people contemns Him, as if He knew nothing, and could do nothing.
3. On Isaiah 65:2. “It is clear from this verse gratiam esse resistibilem. Christ earnestly stretched out His hands to the Jews. He would, but they would not. This doctrine the Remonstrants prove from this place, and rightly too, in Actis Synodi Dodrac. P. 3. p. 76.” Leigh. [The grace of God which is signified by His stretching out His hands can be, and is, resisted.
That figurative expression denotes warning, exhorting, entreating, and was never set forth by Reformed theologians as indicating such grace as was necessarily productive of conversion. The power by which God quickens those who were dead in sins (Ephesians 2:5), by which He gives a new heart (Ezekiel 36:26), by which He draws to the Son (John 6:44-45; John 6:65), is the grace which is called irresistible. The epithet is admitted on all hands to be faulty; but the grace denoted by it is, from the nature of the case, not resisted. Turrettin in treating De Vocatione et Fide thus replies to this objection, “Aliud est Deo monenti et vocanti externe resistere; Aliud est conversionem intendenti et efficaciter ac interne vocanti. Prius asseritur Isa. lxv. 2, 3. Quum dicit Propheta se expandisse totβ die manus ad populum perversum etc., non posterius.
Expansio brachiorum notat quidem blandam et benevolam Dei invitationem, quβ illos extrinsecus sive Verbo, sive beneficiis alliciebat, non semel atque iterum, sed quotidie ministerio servorum suorum eos compellando. Sed non potest designate potentem et efficacem operationem, quβ brachium Domini illis revelatur qui docentur α Deo et trahuntur a Patre, etc.” Locus XV.; Quaestio VI .25.—D. M.].
4. On Isaiah 65:2. (Who walk after their own thoughts.)
Duc me, nec sine, me per me, Deus optime, duci.
Nam duce me pereo, te duce certus eo.
[“If our guide be our own thoughts, our way is not likely to be good; for every imagination of the thought of our hearts is only evil.” Henry. D. M.].
5. On Isaiah 65:3 sq. “The sweetest wine is turned into the sourest vinegar; and when God’s people apostatize from God, they are worse than the heathen (Jeremiah 3:11).” Starke.
6. On Isaiah 65:5. [I am holier than thou. “A deep insight is here given us into the nature of the mysterious fascination which heathenism exercised on the Jewish people. The law humbled them at every turn with mementoes of their own sin and of God’s unapproachable holiness. Paganism freed them from this, and allowed them (in the midst of moral pollution) to cherish lofty pretensions to sanctity. The man, who had been offering incense on the mountain-top, despised the penitent who went to the temple to present ‘a broken and contrite heart.’ If Pharisaism led to a like result, it was because it, too, had emptied the law of its spiritual import, and turned its provisions into intellectual idols.” Kay. D. M.].
7. On Isaiah 65:6-7. “The longer God forbears, the harder He punishes at last. The greatness of the punishment compensates for the delay (Psalms 50:21).” Starke after Leigh.
8. On Isaiah 65:8 sqq. [“This is expounded by St. Paul, Romans 11:1-5, where, when upon occasion of the rejection of the Jews, it is asked Hath God then cast away His people? He answers, no; for, at this time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. This prophecy has reference to that distinguished remnant…Our Saviour has told us that for the sake of these elect the days of the destruction of the Jews should be shortened, and a stop put to the desolation, which otherwise would have proceeded to that degree that no flesh should be saved. Matthew 24:22. Henry. D. M.].
9. On Isaiah 65:15. The judgment which came upon Israel by the hand of the Romans, did not altogether destroy the people, but it so destroyed the Old Covenant, i.e., the Mosaic religion, that the Jews can no more observe its precepts in essential points. For no Jew knows to what tribe he belongs. Therefore, they have no priests, and, consequently, no sacrifices. The Old Covenant is now only a ruin.
We see here most clearly that the Old Covenant, as it was designed only for one nation, and for one country, was to last only for a certain time. If we consider, moreover, the way in which the judgment was executed, (comp. Josephus), we can truly say that the Jews bear in themselves the mark of a curse. They bear the stamp of the divine judgment. The beginning of the judgment on the world has been executed on them as the house of God. But how comes it that the Jews have become so mighty, so insolent in the present time, and are not satisfied with remaining on the defensive in their attitude toward the Christian church, but have passed over to the offensive?
This has arisen solely from Christendom having to a large extent lost the consciousness of its new name. There are many Christians who scoff at the name of Christian, and seek their honor in combating all that is called Christian. This is the preparation for the judgment on Christendom itself. If Christendom would hold fast her jewel, she would remain strong, and no one would dare to mock or to assail her. For she would then partake of the full blessing which lies in the principle of Christianity, and every one would be obliged to show respect for the fruits of this principle. But an apostate Christendom, that is ashamed of her glorious Christian name, is something more miserable than the Jews, judged though they have been, who still esteem highly their name, and what remains to them of their old religion.
Thus Christendom, in so far as it denies the worth and significance of its name, is gradually reaching a condition in which it will be so ripe for the second act of the judgment on the world, that this will be longed for as a benefit. For, this apostate Christendom will be the kingdom of Antichrist, as Antichrist will manifest himself in Satanic antagonism to God by sitting in the temple of God, and pretending to be God (2 Thessalonians 2:3 sqq.). [We do not quite share all the sentiments expressed in this paragraph. We are far from being so despondent as to the prospects of Christendom, and think that there is a more obvious interpretation of the prophecy quoted from 2 Thess., than that indicated.—D. M.].
10. On Isaiah 65:17. [If we had only the present passage to testify of new heavens and a new earth, we might say, as many good interpreters do, that the language is figurative, and indicates nothing more than a great moral and spiritual revolution. But we cannot thus explain 2 Peter 3:10-13. The present earth and heavens shall pass away; (comp. Isaiah 51:6; Psalms 102:25-26). But how can we suppose that our Prophet here refers to the new heavens and new earth, which are to succeed the destruction of the world by fire?
In the verses that follow Isaiah 65:17, a condition of things is described which, although better than the present, is not so good as that perfectly sinless, blessed state of the redeemed, which we look for after the coming of the day of the Lord. Yet the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:13) evidently regards the promise before us of new heavens and a new earth, as destined to receive its accomplishment after the conflagration which is to take place at the end of the world. If we had not respect to other Scriptures, and if we overlooked the use made by Peter of this passage, we should not take it literally. But we can take it literally, if we suppose that the Prophet brings together future events not according to their order in time. He sees the new heavens and new earth arise. Other scenes are disclosed to his prophetic eye of a grand and joy-inspiring nature.
He announces them as future. But these scenes suppose the continued prevalence of death and labor (Isaiah 65:20 sqq.), which, we know from definite statements of Scripture, will not exist when the new heaven and new earth appear (comp. Revelation 21:1-4). The proper view then of Isa 65:17 is to take its prediction literally, and to hold at the same time that in the following description (which is that of the millennium) future things are presented to us which are really prior, and not posterior to the promised complete renovation of heaven and earth. Nor should this surprise us, as Isaiah and the other Prophets place closely together in their pictures future things which belong to different times. They do not draw the line sharply between this world and the next.
Compare Isaiah’s prophecy of the abolition of death (Isaiah 25:8) in connection with other events that must happen long before that state of perfect blessedness.—D. M.].
11. On Isaiah 65:20. [“The extension of the Gospel every where,—of its pure principles of temperance in eating and drinking, in restraining the passions, in producing calmness of mind, and in arresting war, would greatly lengthen out the life of man. The image here employed by the Prophet is more than mere poetry; it is one that is founded in reality, and is designed to convey most important truth.” Barnes. D. M.].
12. On Isaiah 65:24. [It occurs to me that an erroneous application is frequently made of the promise, Before they call, etc. This declaration is made in connection with the glory and blessedness of the last days. It belongs specifically to the millennium. There are, indeed, occasions when God even now seems to act according to this law. (Comp. Daniel 9:23). But Paul had to pray thrice before he received the answer of the Lord (2 Corinthians 12:8). Compare the parable of the importunate widow, Luke 18:1-7. The answer to prayer may be long delayed. This is not only taught in the Bible, but is verified in Christian experience. But the time will come when the Lord will not thus try and exercise the faith of His people.—D. M.].
13. On Isaiah 65:25. “If the lower animals live in hostility in consequence of the sin of man, a state of peace must be restored to them along with our redemption from sin.” J. G. Mueller in Herz. R.-Encycl. xvi. p. 45. [“By the serpent in this place there seems every reason to believe that Satan, the old seducer and author of discord and misery, is meant. During the millennium he is to be subject to the lowest degradation. Compare for the force of the phrase to lick the dust, Psalms 72:9; Micah 7:17. This was the original doom of the tempter, Genesis 3:14, and shall be fully carried into execution. Comp. Revelation 20:1-3.” Henderson. D. M.].
14. On Isaiah 66:1. [“Having held up in every point of view the true design, mission and vocation of the church or chosen people, its relation to the natural descendants of Abraham, the causes which required that the latter should be stripped of their peculiar privileges, and the vocation of the Gentiles as a part of the divine plan from its origin, the Prophet now addresses the apostate and unbelieving Jews at the close of the old dispensation, who, instead of preparing for the general extension of the church and the exchange of ceremonial for spiritual worship, were engaged in the rebuilding and costly decoration of the temple at Jerusalem. The pride and interest in this great public work, felt not only by the Herods but by all the Jews, is clear from incidental statements of the Scriptures (John 2:20; Matthew 24:1), as well as from the ample and direct assertions of Josephus. That the nation should have been thus occupied precisely at the time when the Messiah came, is one of those agreements between prophecy and history, which cannot be accounted for except upon the supposition of a providential and designed assimilation.” Alexander after Vitringa. D. M.].
15. On Isaiah 66:1-2. What a grand view of the nature of God and of the way in which He is made known lies at the foundation of these words! God made all things. He is so great that it is an absurdity to desire to build a temple for Him. The whole universe cannot contain Him (1 Kings 8:27)!
But He, who contains all things and can be contained by nothing, has His greatest joy in a poor, humble human heart that fears Him. He holds it worthy of His regard, it pleases Him, He enters into it, He makes His abode in it. The wise and prudent men of science should learn hence what is chiefly necessary in order to know God. We cannot reach Him by applying force, by climbing up to Him, by attempting to take Him by storm. And if science should place ladder upon ladder upwards and downwards, she could not attain His height or His depth. But He enters of His own accord into a child-like, simple heart.
He lets Himself be laid hold of by it, kept and known. It is not, therefore, by the intellect [alone] but by the heart that we can know God.
16. On Isaiah 66:3. He who under the Christian dispensation would retain the forms of worship of the ancient ritual of shadows would violate the fundamental laws of the new time, just as a man by killing would offend against the foundation of the moral law, or as he would by offering the blood of dogs or swine offend against the foundation of the ceremonial law. For when the body, the substance has appeared, the type must vanish. He who would retain the type along with the reality would declare the latter to be insufficient, would, therefore, found his salvation not upon God only, but also in part on his own legal performance. But God will brook no rival.
He is either our All, or nothing. Christianity could tolerate animal sacrifices just as little as the Old Testament law could tolerate murder or the offering of abominable things.
17. On Isaiah 66:5. [“The most malignant and cruel persecutions of the friends of God have been originated under the pretext of great zeal in His service, and with a professed desire to honor His name. So it was with the Jews when they crucified the Lord Jesus. So it is expressly said it would be when His disciples would be excommunicated and put to death, John 16:2. So it was in fact in the persecutions excited against the apostles and early Christians. See Acts 6:13-14; Acts 21:28-31. So it was in all the persecutions of the Waldenses, in all the horrors of the Inquisition, in all the crimes of the Duke of Alva. So it was in the bloody reign of Mary; and so it has ever been in all ages and in all countries where Christians have been persecuted.” Barnes.—D. M.].
18. On Isaiah 66:10. “The idea which is presented in this verse is, that it is the duty of all who love Zion to sympathize in her joy. The true friends of God should rejoice in every real revival of religion, they should rejoice in all the success which attends the Gospel in heathen lands. And they will rejoice. It is one evidence of piety to rejoice in her joy; and they who have no joy when souls are born into the kingdom of God, when He pours down His Spirit and in a revival of religion produces changes as sudden and transforming as if the earth were suddenly to pass from the desolation of winter to the verdure and bloom of summer, or when the Gospel makes sudden and rapid advances in the heathen world, have no true evidence that they love God and His cause. They have no religion.” Barnes.—D. M.
19. On Isaiah 66:13. The Prophet is here completely governed by the idea that in the glorious time of the end, love, maternal love will reign. Thus He makes Zion appear as a mother who will bring forth with incredible ease and rapidity innumerable children (Isaiah 66:7-9). Then the Israelites are depicted as little children who suck the breasts of their mother. Further, the heathen who bring back the Israelites into their home, must do this in the same way in which mothers in the Orient are wont to carry their little children.
Lastly, even to the Lord Himself maternal love is ascribed (comp. Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 49:15), and such love as a mother manifests to her adult son. Thus the Israelites will be surrounded in that glorious time on all sides by maternal love. Maternal love will be the characteristic of that period.
20. On Isaiah 66:19 sqq. The Prophet describes remote things by words which are borrowed from the relations and conceptions of his own time, but which stand in strange contrast to the reality of the future which he beholds. Thus the Prophet speaks of escaped persons who go to Tarshish, Pul, Lud, Tubal, and Javan. Here he has rightly seen that a great act of judgment must have taken place. And this act of judgment must have passed on Israel, because they who escape, who go to the Gentiles to declare to them the glory of Jehovah, must plainly be Jews How accurately, in spite of the strange manner of expression, is the fact here stated that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was proclaimed to the Gentiles exactly at the time when the old theocracy was destroyed!
How justly does he indicate that there was a causal connection between these events! He did not, indeed, know that the shattering of the old form was necessary in order that the eternal truth enclosed in it might be set free, and fitted for filling the whole earth. For the Old Covenant cannot exist along with the New, the Law cannot stand with equal dignity beside the Gospel. The Law must be regarded as annulled, in order that the Gospel may come into force. How remarkably strange is it, however, that he calls the Gentile nations Tarshish, Pul, Lud, etc. And how singular it sounds to be told that the Israelites shall be brought by the Gentiles to Jerusalem as an offering for Jehovah!
But how accurately has he, notwithstanding, stated the fact, which, indeed, still awaits its fulfilment, that it is the conversion of the heathen world which will induce Israel to acknowledge their Saviour, and that they both shall gather round the Lord as their common centre! How strange it sounds that then priests and Levites shall be taken from the Gentiles also, and that new moon and Sabbath shall be celebrated by all flesh in the old Jewish fashion! But how accurately is the truth thereby stated that in the New Covenant there will be no more the priesthood restricted to the family of Aaron, but a higher spiritual and universal priesthood, and that, instead of the limited local place of worship of the Old Covenant, the whole earth will be a temple of the Lord! Verily the prophecy of the two last chapters of Isaiah attests a genuine prophet of Jehovah. He cannot have been an anonymous unknown person. He can have been none other than Isaiah the son of Amoz!
HINTS1. On Isaiah 65:1 sq. [I. “It is here foretold that the Gentiles, who had been afar off, should be made nigh, Isaiah 65:1. II. It is here foretold that the Jews, who had long been a people near to God, should be cast off, and set at a distance, Isaiah 65:2.” Henry, III. We are informed of the cause of the rejection of the Jews. It was owing to their rebellion, waywardness and flagrant provocations, Isaiah 65:2 sqq.—D. M.]
2. On Isaiah 65:1-7. A Fast-Day Sermon. When the Evangelical Church no more holds fast what she has; when apostasy spreads more and more, and modern heathenism (Isaiah 65:3-5 a) gains the ascendency in her, then it can happen to her as it did to the people of Israel, and as it happened to the Church in the Orient. Her candlestick can be removed out of its place.—[By the Evangelical Church we are not to understand here the Church universal, for her perpetuity is certain. The Evangelical Church is in Germany the Protestant Church, and more particularly the Lutheran branch of it.—D. M.]
3. On Isaiah 65:8-10. Sermon on behalf of the mission among the Jews. Israel’s hope. 1) On what it is founded (Israel is still a berry in which drops of the divine blessing are contained); 2) To what this hope is directed (Israel’s Restoration).
4. On Isaiah 65:13-16. [“The blessedness of those that serve God, and the woful condition of those that rebel against him, are here set the one over against the other, that they may serve as a foil to each other. The difference of their states here lies in two things: 1) In point of comfort and satisfaction, a. God’s servants shall eat and drink; they shall have the bread of life to feed, to feast upon continually, and shall want nothing that is good for them. But those who set their hearts upon the world, and place their happiness in it, shall be hungry and thirsty, always empty, always craving. In communion with God and dependence upon Him there is full satisfaction; but in sinful pursuits there is nothing but disappointment. b.
God’s servants shall rejoice and sing for joy of heart; they have constant cause for joy, and there is nothing that may be an occasion of grief to them but they have an allay sufficient for it. But, on the other hand, they that forsake the Lord shut themselves out from all true joy, for they shall be ashamed of their vain confidence in themselves, and their own righteousness, and the hopes they had built thereon. When the expectations of bliss, wherewith they had flattered themselves, are frustrated, O what confusion will fill their faces! Then shall they cry for sorrow of heart and howl for vexation of spirit. 2) In point of honor and reputation, Isaiah 65:15-16. The memory of the just is, and shall be, blessed; but the memory of the wicked shall rot.” Henry.—D. M.]
5. On Isaiah 66:1-2. Carpzov has a sermon on this text. He places it in parallel with Luke 18:9-14, and considers, 1) The rejection of spiritual pride; 2) The commendation of filial fear.
6. On Isaiah 66:2 Arndt, in his True Christianity I. cap. 10, comments on this text. He says among other things: “The man who will be something is the material out of which God makes nothing, yea, out of which He makes fools. But a man who will be nothing, and regards himself as nothing, is the material out of which God makes something, even glorious, wise people in His sight.”
7. On Isaiah 66:3. [Saurin has a sermon on this text entitled “Sur l’ Insuffisance du culte exterieur” in the eighth volume of his sermons.—D. M.]
8. On Isaiah 66:13. As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you. “These words stand, let us consider it, 1) In the Old Testament; 2) In the heart of God always; 3) But are they realized in our experience?” Koegel in “Aus dem Vorhof ins Heiligthum, II. Bd., p. 242, 1876.
9. On Isaiah 66:24. The punishment of sin is twofold—inward and outward. The inward is compared with a worm that dies not; the outward with a fire that is not quenched. This worm and this fire are at work even in this life. He who is alarmed by them and hastens to Christ can now be delivered from them.—[“It is better not to fall into this fire and never to have any experience of this worm, even though, as some imagine, eternity should not be eternal, and the unquenchable fire might be quenched, and the worm that shall never die, should die, and Jesus and His apostles should not have expressed themselves quite in accordance with the compassionate taste of our time. Better, I say, is better. Save thyself and thy neighbor before the fire begins to burn, and the smoke to ascend.” Gossner.—D. M.]
Footnotes:Heb. come upon the heart.
because I create it.
there a suckling that counts only days.
boy.
will be considered accursed.
wear out.
Heb. shall make them continue long, or, shall wear out.
quick passing away.
ox or cow.
5. THE NEW LIFE IN ITS INWARD Isaiah 66:1-3 a.1 Thus saith the Lord,The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool:
Where is the house that ye build unto me?
And where is the place of my rest?
2 For all those things hath mine hand made,
And all those things have been, saith the Lord:But to this man will I look,
Even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit,
And trembleth at my word.
3 aHe that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man;
He that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog’s neck;
He that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine’s blood;
He that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol.
AND 1. The Prophet continues to describe the condition of things which is to be expected in the time of the end when there will be a new heaven and a new earth. Here he has respect more to the inward life, as in Isaiah 65:17 sqq. he had depicted the renovation of the life of nature. What he here declares is to be regarded only as a measure to help us to estimate what will take place. The question, it is true, “What house will ye build me, and what shall be the place of my rest?” appears primarily to have practical application to those returning home from Exile, while it looks as if this question interdicted them from building a temple in Jerusalem. But this cannot possibly have been the design of the Prophet.
For that the Lord desired for that time the erection of a temple is proved most clearly by such places as Isaiah 44:28; Isaiah 56:7; Isaiah 60:7; Ezra 1:2-4; Haggai 1, 2 This, then, must be the meaning of the words, that the external temple is at all times a thing of minor importance, and that hereafter, in the time of the new heaven and the new earth, the external temple will exist no longer (Isaiah 66:1). For all that the Lord has made belongs to Him. If He needed a house, the whole vast world would be at His command. But He does not dwell in temples built by human hands. In the hearts of the afflicted, contrite and obedient He will make His spiritual dwelling (Isaiah 66:2). And as He needs no temple, so He needs no external ceremonial worship.
In the time when all things will be new, every act of the old, external, ceremonial worship must rather be regarded as an offence against the spirit of the new aeon (Isaiah 66:3 a).
2. Thus saith the Lord—an idol.Isaiah 66:1-3 a. The Prophet begins by setting forth the infinite greatness and majesty of God by means of a figure used elsewhere in holy Scripture. For we read that the heaven is God’s throne also in Psalms 11:4; Psalms 103:19; Matthew 5:34; Matthew 23:22. That the earth is his footstool is directly stated only here and Matthew 5:35, which latter place is based on the one before us. But the thought is indirectly contained in those places where the holy mountain or the temple is named the footstool of God: Psalms 99:5, comp.
Psalms 66:9; Psalms 132:7; Lamentations 2:1; 1 Chronicles 28:2. With this view of the greatness and majesty of God the idea of an earthly habitation for God stands in contradiction, if God is conceived as a local god like the heathen divinities, and the temple is a space that encloses Him. This is a view from which even the Israelites (comp., e.g., the prophet Jonah) could not get free. Even the Christian martyr Stephen had to protest against this vain imagination (Acts 7:48 sqq.), and in doing so he appeals to our place (comp. Acts 17:24 sq.). But the idea of a temple did not contradict God’s infinity, when the temple was regarded as a place in which God was present only partially and repraesentativo modo, with a shining forth of His glory.
The Rabbis call this effulgence of the absolute glory the Shekinah, and appeal to passages such as Exodus 25:21 sq.; Leviticus 16:2; Leviticus 26:11 sqq.; Numbers 7:89; 1 Samuel 4:4, etc. Solomon, too, was fully conscious that the heaven and heaven of heavens could not contain God, much less a house built on the earth (1 Kings 8:27). He therefore did not think of building a place for the Deity which should enclose Him in His totality. Our Prophet, in asking the question, “What house will ye build?” has manifestly the returning exiles before his mind, and while he rejects an external temple and temple-worship, he has in view the remotest end of the time of salvation, the time of the new heaven and new earth, when, according to Revelation 21:22, there shall be no temple. The form of a question is intentionally chosen in the sentence ΰιΞζηαιϊεβεΧ. For it makes known that the Lord declares an earthly place to be insufficient to be a habitation for His Godhead, without directly forbidding the erection of such a habitation.
Such a prohibition He could not possibly design to make. For, in fact, He plainly disclosed to the returning exiles His will that His house should be rebuilt in Jerusalem (comp. the close of chap. 46; Ezra 1:2 sqq.; Haggai 1:2 sqq.). There is no indication that the rebuilding of the temple and the re-institution of the Mosaic cultus were hindered by the place before us. Doubtless there was found in Isaiah 66:1 b merely the thought that there is no place which, as a dwelling, corresponds in the least degree to the greatness of God, and that the Prophet warns against such rude childish notions as formerly were entertained in Israel, that Jehovah really dwells in the most holy place of the temple as a man dwells in his house. The thought would readily suggest itself when this passage would be considered, that the new temple was not intended to be a place to contain God, but only to be the restoration of the old place where God revealed Himself. ξְ ?πεּ ?ηָ ?δ is=place of rest, Psalms 132:14. The second question is literally rendered: what place is my resting place?
I will not undertake to decide whether it was also seen that the look of the Prophet is here directed also to the time of the end. But we can have no doubt on this point. For it is undeniable that all through chapters 65 and 66 even the remotest time of the end is present to the spirit of the Prophet. And in this last time there will really, according to Revelation 21:22, be no temple. For God is then inwardly and outwardly ever present to all. He is then Himself their temple.
The Prophet assigns as reasons for the questions which he puts: First, God has heaven for His throne, the earth for His footstool. Secondly, he declares that God has made all these, that all have arisen through His almighty “Let there be.” He evidently alludes to the word of the Creator in Genesis 1, ιְ ?δִ ?ι. He thus lets it be known that God, if He wished, could build Himself a temple. For what would that be for Him who made “all these,” heaven and earth? And thirdly and lastly, he tells why God does not do this, although He could do it. He needs no temple.
Hearts that feel their misery, that with contrition (comp. Isaiah 16:7; Proverbs 15:13; Proverbs 17:22; Proverbs 18:14) are conscious of their sin, and humbly hearken to His word (ηָ ?ψֵ ?γ, comp. Judges 7:3; 1 Samuel 4:13; Ezra 9:4; Ezra 10:3. ςַ ?μ for ΰֶ ?μ, comp. Isaiah 66:5; Isaiah 60:5; Isaiah 10:3) are the temple which He most desires and values. On these He looks, these He regards and loves, and in these He will dwell. And because He is in them, they also are in Him.
They are His temple, and He is their temple. While I cannot believe that the Prophet in Isaiah 66:1-2 absolutely repels the design of the returning Israelites to build God a temple, still less can I believe that he in Isaiah 66:3 a declares only to those estranged from God that the Lord will accept no religious services from them. Where is it by a single syllable intimated that Isaiah 66:3 is addressed solely to those estranged from God?—[See the words immediately following Isaiah 66:3 b and Isaiah 66:4.—D. M.]—Delitzsch indeed affirms that the sentence: “He who slays in the new Jerusalem an ox in sacrifice is like one who slays a man,” could not possibly be contained in the Old Testament. If under the “new Jerusalem” he means the city rebuilt by the exiles on their return, I admit that Delitzsch is perfectly right. But distingue tempora et concordabit Scriptura!
The Prophet does not distinguish the times. He surveys the whole time of salvation from the end of the Exile to the αἰὼνμέλλων at one view, and in this space of time he perceives really a temple and sacrificial worship; but he declares both to be insufficient. He utters no absolute prohibition; but he declares most unambiguously that this temple must disappear and give place to a better. And when this shall have happened, then (this the Prophet sees quite clearly, as it is also self-evident), an animal sacrifice will be an abomination. He who in the Christian church would present an ox or a sheep as as sin-offering—would he not commit a crime, which in its way would be as great as if a Jew should present a sacrifice of a man or of a dog? Would he not thus despise the blood of the Lamb of God?
If in chaps. 56 and 60 and also in our chapter, Isaiah 66:6; Isaiah 66:20 sqq., a temple and sacrificial worship are still spoken of, are we to suppose that the old temple of stone, with its material, bloody offerings, is intended? Verily chaps. 53 and 55 testify that the Prophet knew of an infinitely better offering and of an infinitely better way of appropriating salvation. Even Jeremiah can speak of a time in which the ark of the covenant will be no more thought of (Jeremiah 3:16). And Isaiah emphatically testifies that the religious conception of the Israelites of his time will be superseded by one infinitely higher (Isaiah 55:8 sqq.). I cannot therefore agree with those who propose this explanation: “He who with a disposition unholy and estranged from God offers an ox, a sheep, etc., is like one who kills a man, etc.” For in the time present to the mind of the Prophet every animal sacrifice will be a crimen laesae majestatis. Still less is that explanation to be approved which Hahn, not after the example of Gesenius, whom he misunderstands, but after the example of Lowth, adopts: “He who slays an ox kills at the same time a man,” etc.
According to it the Prophet is supposed to censure those who, while they offer sacrifice to the Lord in His sanctuary, outside of it commit all possible abominations; a course of conduct which is reproved by Ezekiel 23:39, and in the New Testament by our Lord,Matthew 23:14. We have here sentences containing comparisons in which the figure and the thing compared are put in the relation of subject and predicate, whereby they are not absolutely, but yet relatively, identified. The offerer of an ox is a manslayer,i. e. he is, viewed as to his religious worth, a manslayer. He stands before God on the same level with one who now should offer a human sacrifice. For according to the context the Prophet does not mean to compare animal sacrifices in the time of the end with every kind of offence, but with offerings which would be abominable in the present time. Human sacrifices in general are not expressly forbidden in the law.
Implicitly they are prohibited by all the places of the law which command Israel to shun all the abominations of the heathen (comp. Exodus 23:24; Leviticus 18:3, et saepe). But the offering of children, such as was practised in the worship of Baal, is in various places most strictly prohibited (comp. Leviticus 18:21; Leviticus 20:2 sqq.; Deuteronomy 12:31, et saepe). Regarding the custom of sacrificing dogs practised by the Carians, Lacedaemonians, Macedonians and other Greeks, see Bochart,Hieroz. I., p. 798 sqq., ed Lips.ςֹ ?ψֵ ?σ is part. act.
Kal. from ςָ ?ψַ ?σ, verb. denom. from ςֹ ?ψֵ ?σ, the neck (comp. Exodus 13:13; Deuteronomy 21:4; Deuteronomy 21:7; Hosea 10:2). It means to break the neck.—In the clause ξςμδξπηδγΧηΧ we have in order to complete the sentence simply to repeat ξςμδ before γν (comp. Isaiah 57:6). On the offering of swine, comp. on Isaiah 65:4. Dogs and swine are in the Scriptures, as in profane authors, often joined together (comp.
Matthew 7:6; 2 Peter 2:22; 1 Kings 21:19; 1 Kings 22:38 in several codices of the LXX. Horatii,Epist. I. 2, 26; II. 2, 75). ΰַ ?ζְ ?λִּ ?ιψ stands only here as direct causative Hiphil in the sense of to make an ΰַ ?ζְ ?λָּ ?ψָ ?δ, to offer as ξַ ?ζְ ?λָּ ?ψָ ?δΰָ ?εֶ ?ο is taken by most interpreters correctly in the sense of vanum, i. e.idolum (comp. 1 Samuel 15:23; Hosea 10:8; Hosea 12:12), for this particular meaning corresponds better to the context than the general one of iniquitas, scelus, wickedness (Luther).
____________________
6. TO THE WICKED! REWARD TO THE
Isaiah 66:3-63 b Yea, they have chosen their own ways,
And their soul delighteth in their abominations.
4 I also will choose their delusions,
And will bring their fears upon them;
Because when I called, none did answer;
When I spake, they did not hear:
But they did evil before mine eyes,
And chose that in which I delighted not.
5 Hear the word of the Lord, ye that tremble at his word;
Your brethren that hated you,
That cast you out for my name’s sake, said,
Let the Lord be glorified:
But he shall appear to your joy,
And they shall be ashamed.
6 A voice of noise from the city,
A voice from the temple,
A voice of the Lord that rendereth recompence to his enemies.
AND 1. There were among the exiles in Babylon not a few who forsook Jehovah and forgot His holy mountain (Isaiah 65:11). These looked upon the theocracy as a played-out game. Jehovah had not protected them against the gods of Babylon. To these, therefore, they now attached themselves. Between such persons and the faithful Israelites there existed naturally a hostile relation.
The apostates mocked those who remained faithful, while the latter abhorred the others as shameful apostates, and threatened them with the wrath of Jehovah. We repeatedly find traces of this enmity in chaps. 65 and 66. It appears that one of those who remained faithful used every opportunity which he could find in chapters 65 and 66 in order to attach to the words of the Prophet a commination against the abhorred apostates [!]. If we must discard the opinion that the Prophet in Isaiah 66:3 a rejects only the sacrifices of the wicked, we cannot avoid perceiving that a wide chasm exists between Isaiah 66:3 a and b. For Isaiah 66:3 a relates to the glorious time of the end. Yea, the highest elevation of its spiritual life is indicated by these words.
But Isaiah 66:3 b–6 bring us back into the particular relations of the Exile.—[Dr. Naegelsbach accordingly condemns Isaiah 66:3 b–6 as an interpolation. The interpolator we are asked to regard as a faithful servant of Jehovah. But assuredly he was not one “who trembled at Jehovah’s word,” else he would have shrunk with horror from corrupting that holy word. Even the Pharisees did not venture to alter the text of Scripture to make it support their views. The apostates, too, whom the interpolator is supposed to threaten, having openly renounced the worship of Jehovah, would pay no regard to the fictitious or real utterances of His Prophet.
Were the transition in Isaiah 66:3 a–3b sqq. as abrupt as our author supposes, from the time of the end to concrete existing relations, such a transition could not be pronounced unparalleled. Look, e.g. at the surroundings of the glorious promise respecting the abolition of death contained in Hosea 13:14. Shall we say that what follows that promise is to be rejected as spurious? But the want of coherence, of which our author here complains, is only imaginary. If we adopt the view of Isa 66:3 a taken by Delitzsch and others “that not the temple-offerings in themselves are rejected, but the offerings of those whose heart is divided between Jahve and the false gods, and who refuse Him the offering which is most dear to Him (Psalms 51:19; comp. Psalms 50:23),” then there is no difficulty in perceiving the coherence of the words that follow.
But if we should (as I believe Dr. Naegelsbach rightly does) regard the Prophet as here predicting the future abolition of the temple-service under a more glorious dispensation, we should be at no loss to perceive the coherence of Isa 66:3 b, 4 with such a prediction. The language can be aptly applied to those Jews who obstinately refused to obey the revealed will of God, and persisted in practising rites which were superseded by the establishment of the new and better economy. This is the view taken by many interpreters who, in order to justify it, do not find it necessary to condemn the Hebrew text as interpolated. Henderson,e.g., looks upon Isaiah 66:3 a “as teaching the absolute unlawfulness of sacrifices under the Christian dispensation. When the Jews are converted to the faith of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, they must acquiesce in the doctrine taught in the ninth and tenth chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews, that the one offering which He presented on the cross forever set aside all the animal sacrifices and oblations which had been appointed by the law of Moses.
Any attempt to revive the practice is here declared to be upon a par with the cruel and abominable customs of the heathen, who offered human sacrifices and such animals as the ancient people of God were taught to hold in abomination.” And he finds what follows Isaiah 66:3 b to have this connection with the aforesaid teaching: “In retribution of the unbelieving and rebellious persistence of the Jews in endeavoring to establish the old ritual, Jehovah threatens them with condign punishment: while such of them as may render themselves obnoxious to their brethren by receiving the doctrines of the Gospel on the subject, have a gracious promise of divine approbation and protection given to them.” In no case, then, is there any necessity for supposing the hand of an interpolator to have been here at work. Strange would be the course taken by this assumed interpolator! The sentiments which he utters do not look like those of one who would recklessly alter the sacred text, and give out his own words for those of Jehovah. See especially Isaiah 66:5 where the writer addresses those who tremble at God’s word. Can we suppose that he was, while using this language, corrupting the word of God and making his own additions to it? The character of this passage strongly attests its genuineness.
We have to add that Isaiah 66:3 b, 4, should not have been separated from what precedes, as the close connection between the two parts has been pointed out.—D. M.]
2. “Yea, they have chosen—delighted not, Isaiah 66:3 b–4. βρΞβν are related as et-et, tamquam (comp. Genesis 24:25; Jeremiah 51:12, et saepe). γֶּ ?ψֶ ?οְ stands here, as often (comp. Amos 8:14; Psalms 139:24), in the signification of the religious bent. ωִׁ ?χּ ?εּ ?υ is likewise used frequently of the abominations of idolatry (comp. 1 Kings 11:5; 1 Kings 11:7; Jeremiah 7:30, et saepe). The word is found only here in Isaiah. ϊςμεμ (in which word the signification of the Hithpael δִ ?ϊְ ?ςַ ?μֵּ ?μ with αְּ following (comp. Judges 19:25) is reflected) is ἄπ. λεγ.—[This is an error. The word occurs in Isaiah 3:4 in the plural as here.
There it means the petulances, the puerilities of boys. Here it retains the kindred notion of annoyances, vexations. The occurrence of this peculiar word here and in Isaiah 3:4 speaks in favor of identity of authorship. The rendering of the E. V. delusions, in the sense of childish, wayward follies, may be defended. These childish delusions would mock and disappoint those who entertained them.
God could be said to choose their delusions by allowing them in His providence, and causing the people to eat the fruit of them. Their fears,ξְ ?βεּ ?ψֹ ?ϊ, may be taken as what is feared by them, or, with Delitzsch, situations, conditions, which inspire dread. The latter part of Isa 66:4 from becauseDr. Naegelsbach regards as a needless repetition from Isaiah 65:12; but Alexander rightly judges that the repetition serves not only to connect the passages as parts of an unbroken composition, but also to identify the subjects of discourse in the two places.—D. M.]
3. Hear the word—His enemies, Isaiah 66:5-6. These words are a consolation for the faithful adherents of Jehovah, who tremble at His word. The verb πָ ?γָ ?δ occurs only in Piel, and is found only here and Amos 6:3. In later Hebrew the word is employed of removal, exclusion from the community, or excommunication (comp. Luke 6:22; John 9:22; John 12:42; John 16:2).
The Rabbis use the word πִ ?γּ ?εּ ?ι to denote the lowest of the three grades of excommunication (comp. Buxtorf,Lex. Chal., p. 1303). The Masoretes connect μξςοωׁ ?ξι with what follows, because they could not conceive, or would not admit that an Israelite was ever put out of the community for the sake of the name of Jehovah. But this is what the forsakers of Jehovah did in the Exile where they had the power [?]. And they scoffingly called out to the excommunicated: “Let Jehovah be (appear as) glorious (comp.
Job 14:21; Ezekiel 27:25), and we will (in consequence) behold with delight your joy.” They thus mock the Lord and their brethren, regarding whom they do not think that they will experience the joy of seeing their hopes fulfilled. But this scoffing misses the mark. Not those who are scoffed at, but the scoffers will be put to shame.—[Barnes, Alexander and Kay think with Vitringa that in this verse we are brought down to New Testament times. Vitringa applies it “to the rejection of the first Christian converts by the unbelieving Jews: Hear the word (or promise) of Jehovah, ye that wait for it with trembling confidence: your brethren (the unconverted Jews) who hate you and cast you out for my name’s sake, have said (in so doing): Jehovah will be glorious (or glorify Himself on your behalf no doubt), and we shall witness your salvation (a bitter irony like that in Isaiah 5:19); but they (who thus speak) shall themselves be confounded (by beholding what they now consider so incredible). The phrase those hating you may be compared with John 15:18; John 17:14; Matthew 10:22; 1 Thessalonians 2:14; and casting you out with John 16:2; and Matthew 18:17 : for my name’s sake, with Matthew 24:9; John 15:21.” Alexander.And they shall be ashamed. “How true this has been of the Jews who persecuted the early Christians! How entirely were they confounded and overwhelmed!
God established permanently the persecuted; He scattered the persecutors to the ends of the earth.” Barnes Isaiah 66:6. “The Hebrew word ωֳַ ?ΰεο is never applied elsewhere to a joyful cry or a cry of lamentation, but to the tumult of war, the rushing sound of armies and the shock of battle, in which sense it is repeatedly employed by Isaiah. The enemies here mentioned must of course be those who had just been described as the despisers and persecutors of the brethren. The description cannot without violence be understood of foreign or external enemies.” Alexander. Barnes observes here: “1) that it is recompense taken on those who had cast out their brethren (Isaiah 66:5). 2) It is vengeance taken within the city, and on the internal, not the external enemies. 3) It is vengeance taken in the midst of this tumult. All this is a striking description of the scene when the city and temple were taken by the Roman armies; and it seems to me that it is to be regarded as descriptive of that event. It was the vengeance which was to precede the glorious triumph of truth and of the cause of the true religion.”—D.
M.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 65:1-2. Our Lord has said, “He that seeketh findeth” (Matthew 7:8). How, then, does it come that the Jews do not find what they seek, but the heathen find what they did not seek? The Apostle Paul puts this question and answers it, Romans 9:30 sqq.; Isaiah 10:19 sqq.; Isaiah 11:7. [See also Isaiah 10:3]. All depends on the way in which we seek.
Luther says: Quaerere fit dupliciter. Primo, secundum praescriptum verbi Dei, et sic invenitur Deus, Secundo, quaeritur nostris studiis et consiliis, et sic non invenitur.” The Jews, with exception of the ἐκλογή (Romans 11:7), sought only after their own glory and merit. They sought what satisfies the flesh. They did not suffer the spirit in the depths of their heart to speak,—the spirit which can be satisfied only by food fitted for it. The law which was given to them that they might perceive by means of it their own impotence, became a snare to them. For they perverted it, made what was of minor importance the chief matter, and then persuaded themselves that they had fulfilled it and were righteous.
But the Gentiles who had not the law, had not this snare. They were not tempted to abuse the pζdagogical discipline of the law. They felt simply that they were forsaken by God. Their spirit was hungry. And when for the first time God’s word in the Gospel was presented to them, then they received it the more eagerly in proportion to the poverty, wretchedness and hunger in which they had been. The Jews did not find what they sought, because they had not a spiritual, but a carnal apprehension of the law, and, like the elder brother of the prodigal son, were full, and blind for that which was needful for them.
But the Gentiles found what they did not seek, because they were like the prodigal son, who was the more receptive of grace, the more he needed it, and the less claim he had to it. [There is important truth stated in the foregoing remarks. But it does not fully explain why the Lord is found of those who sought Him not. The sinner who has obtained mercy when he asks why? must have recourse to a higher cause, a cause out of himself, even free, sovereign, efficacious grace. “It is of God that showeth mercy,” Romans 9:16. “Though in after-communion God is found of those that seek Him (Proverbs 8:17), yet in the first conversion He is found of those that seek Him not; for therefore we love Him, because He first loved us.” Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 65:2. God’s long-suffering is great. He stretches out His hands the whole day and does not grow weary. What man would do this? The disobedient people contemns Him, as if He knew nothing, and could do nothing.
3. On Isaiah 65:2. “It is clear from this verse gratiam esse resistibilem. Christ earnestly stretched out His hands to the Jews. He would, but they would not. This doctrine the Remonstrants prove from this place, and rightly too, in Actis Synodi Dodrac. P. 3. p. 76.” Leigh. [The grace of God which is signified by His stretching out His hands can be, and is, resisted.
That figurative expression denotes warning, exhorting, entreating, and was never set forth by Reformed theologians as indicating such grace as was necessarily productive of conversion. The power by which God quickens those who were dead in sins (Ephesians 2:5), by which He gives a new heart (Ezekiel 36:26), by which He draws to the Son (John 6:44-45; John 6:65), is the grace which is called irresistible. The epithet is admitted on all hands to be faulty; but the grace denoted by it is, from the nature of the case, not resisted. Turrettin in treating De Vocatione et Fide thus replies to this objection, “Aliud est Deo monenti et vocanti externe resistere; Aliud est conversionem intendenti et efficaciter ac interne vocanti. Prius asseritur Isa. lxv. 2, 3. Quum dicit Propheta se expandisse totβ die manus ad populum perversum etc., non posterius.
Expansio brachiorum notat quidem blandam et benevolam Dei invitationem, quβ illos extrinsecus sive Verbo, sive beneficiis alliciebat, non semel atque iterum, sed quotidie ministerio servorum suorum eos compellando. Sed non potest designate potentem et efficacem operationem, quβ brachium Domini illis revelatur qui docentur α Deo et trahuntur a Patre, etc.” Locus XV.; Quaestio VI .25.—D. M.].
4. On Isaiah 65:2. (Who walk after their own thoughts.)
Duc me, nec sine, me per me, Deus optime, duci.
Nam duce me pereo, te duce certus eo.
[“If our guide be our own thoughts, our way is not likely to be good; for every imagination of the thought of our hearts is only evil.” Henry. D. M.].
5. On Isaiah 65:3 sq. “The sweetest wine is turned into the sourest vinegar; and when God’s people apostatize from God, they are worse than the heathen (Jeremiah 3:11).” Starke.
6. On Isaiah 65:5. [I am holier than thou. “A deep insight is here given us into the nature of the mysterious fascination which heathenism exercised on the Jewish people. The law humbled them at every turn with mementoes of their own sin and of God’s unapproachable holiness. Paganism freed them from this, and allowed them (in the midst of moral pollution) to cherish lofty pretensions to sanctity. The man, who had been offering incense on the mountain-top, despised the penitent who went to the temple to present ‘a broken and contrite heart.’ If Pharisaism led to a like result, it was because it, too, had emptied the law of its spiritual import, and turned its provisions into intellectual idols.” Kay. D. M.].
7. On Isaiah 65:6-7. “The longer God forbears, the harder He punishes at last. The greatness of the punishment compensates for the delay (Psalms 50:21).” Starke after Leigh.
8. On Isaiah 65:8 sqq. [“This is expounded by St. Paul, Romans 11:1-5, where, when upon occasion of the rejection of the Jews, it is asked Hath God then cast away His people? He answers, no; for, at this time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. This prophecy has reference to that distinguished remnant…Our Saviour has told us that for the sake of these elect the days of the destruction of the Jews should be shortened, and a stop put to the desolation, which otherwise would have proceeded to that degree that no flesh should be saved. Matthew 24:22. Henry. D. M.].
9. On Isaiah 65:15. The judgment which came upon Israel by the hand of the Romans, did not altogether destroy the people, but it so destroyed the Old Covenant, i.e., the Mosaic religion, that the Jews can no more observe its precepts in essential points. For no Jew knows to what tribe he belongs. Therefore, they have no priests, and, consequently, no sacrifices. The Old Covenant is now only a ruin.
We see here most clearly that the Old Covenant, as it was designed only for one nation, and for one country, was to last only for a certain time. If we consider, moreover, the way in which the judgment was executed, (comp. Josephus), we can truly say that the Jews bear in themselves the mark of a curse. They bear the stamp of the divine judgment. The beginning of the judgment on the world has been executed on them as the house of God. But how comes it that the Jews have become so mighty, so insolent in the present time, and are not satisfied with remaining on the defensive in their attitude toward the Christian church, but have passed over to the offensive?
This has arisen solely from Christendom having to a large extent lost the consciousness of its new name. There are many Christians who scoff at the name of Christian, and seek their honor in combating all that is called Christian. This is the preparation for the judgment on Christendom itself. If Christendom would hold fast her jewel, she would remain strong, and no one would dare to mock or to assail her. For she would then partake of the full blessing which lies in the principle of Christianity, and every one would be obliged to show respect for the fruits of this principle. But an apostate Christendom, that is ashamed of her glorious Christian name, is something more miserable than the Jews, judged though they have been, who still esteem highly their name, and what remains to them of their old religion.
Thus Christendom, in so far as it denies the worth and significance of its name, is gradually reaching a condition in which it will be so ripe for the second act of the judgment on the world, that this will be longed for as a benefit. For, this apostate Christendom will be the kingdom of Antichrist, as Antichrist will manifest himself in Satanic antagonism to God by sitting in the temple of God, and pretending to be God (2 Thessalonians 2:3 sqq.). [We do not quite share all the sentiments expressed in this paragraph. We are far from being so despondent as to the prospects of Christendom, and think that there is a more obvious interpretation of the prophecy quoted from 2 Thess., than that indicated.—D. M.].
10. On Isaiah 65:17. [If we had only the present passage to testify of new heavens and a new earth, we might say, as many good interpreters do, that the language is figurative, and indicates nothing more than a great moral and spiritual revolution. But we cannot thus explain 2 Peter 3:10-13. The present earth and heavens shall pass away; (comp. Isaiah 51:6; Psalms 102:25-26). But how can we suppose that our Prophet here refers to the new heavens and new earth, which are to succeed the destruction of the world by fire?
In the verses that follow Isaiah 65:17, a condition of things is described which, although better than the present, is not so good as that perfectly sinless, blessed state of the redeemed, which we look for after the coming of the day of the Lord. Yet the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:13) evidently regards the promise before us of new heavens and a new earth, as destined to receive its accomplishment after the conflagration which is to take place at the end of the world. If we had not respect to other Scriptures, and if we overlooked the use made by Peter of this passage, we should not take it literally. But we can take it literally, if we suppose that the Prophet brings together future events not according to their order in time. He sees the new heavens and new earth arise. Other scenes are disclosed to his prophetic eye of a grand and joy-inspiring nature.
He announces them as future. But these scenes suppose the continued prevalence of death and labor (Isaiah 65:20 sqq.), which, we know from definite statements of Scripture, will not exist when the new heaven and new earth appear (comp. Revelation 21:1-4). The proper view then of Isa 65:17 is to take its prediction literally, and to hold at the same time that in the following description (which is that of the millennium) future things are presented to us which are really prior, and not posterior to the promised complete renovation of heaven and earth. Nor should this surprise us, as Isaiah and the other Prophets place closely together in their pictures future things which belong to different times. They do not draw the line sharply between this world and the next.
Compare Isaiah’s prophecy of the abolition of death (Isaiah 25:8) in connection with other events that must happen long before that state of perfect blessedness.—D. M.].
11. On Isaiah 65:20. [“The extension of the Gospel every where,—of its pure principles of temperance in eating and drinking, in restraining the passions, in producing calmness of mind, and in arresting war, would greatly lengthen out the life of man. The image here employed by the Prophet is more than mere poetry; it is one that is founded in reality, and is designed to convey most important truth.” Barnes. D. M.].
12. On Isaiah 65:24. [It occurs to me that an erroneous application is frequently made of the promise, Before they call, etc. This declaration is made in connection with the glory and blessedness of the last days. It belongs specifically to the millennium. There are, indeed, occasions when God even now seems to act according to this law. (Comp. Daniel 9:23). But Paul had to pray thrice before he received the answer of the Lord (2 Corinthians 12:8). Compare the parable of the importunate widow, Luke 18:1-7. The answer to prayer may be long delayed. This is not only taught in the Bible, but is verified in Christian experience. But the time will come when the Lord will not thus try and exercise the faith of His people.—D. M.].
13. On Isaiah 65:25. “If the lower animals live in hostility in consequence of the sin of man, a state of peace must be restored to them along with our redemption from sin.” J. G. Mueller in Herz. R.-Encycl. xvi. p. 45. [“By the serpent in this place there seems every reason to believe that Satan, the old seducer and author of discord and misery, is meant. During the millennium he is to be subject to the lowest degradation. Compare for the force of the phrase to lick the dust, Psalms 72:9; Micah 7:17. This was the original doom of the tempter, Genesis 3:14, and shall be fully carried into execution. Comp. Revelation 20:1-3.” Henderson. D. M.].
14. On Isaiah 66:1. [“Having held up in every point of view the true design, mission and vocation of the church or chosen people, its relation to the natural descendants of Abraham, the causes which required that the latter should be stripped of their peculiar privileges, and the vocation of the Gentiles as a part of the divine plan from its origin, the Prophet now addresses the apostate and unbelieving Jews at the close of the old dispensation, who, instead of preparing for the general extension of the church and the exchange of ceremonial for spiritual worship, were engaged in the rebuilding and costly decoration of the temple at Jerusalem. The pride and interest in this great public work, felt not only by the Herods but by all the Jews, is clear from incidental statements of the Scriptures (John 2:20; Matthew 24:1), as well as from the ample and direct assertions of Josephus. That the nation should have been thus occupied precisely at the time when the Messiah came, is one of those agreements between prophecy and history, which cannot be accounted for except upon the supposition of a providential and designed assimilation.” Alexander after Vitringa. D. M.].
15. On Isaiah 66:1-2. What a grand view of the nature of God and of the way in which He is made known lies at the foundation of these words! God made all things. He is so great that it is an absurdity to desire to build a temple for Him. The whole universe cannot contain Him (1 Kings 8:27)!
But He, who contains all things and can be contained by nothing, has His greatest joy in a poor, humble human heart that fears Him. He holds it worthy of His regard, it pleases Him, He enters into it, He makes His abode in it. The wise and prudent men of science should learn hence what is chiefly necessary in order to know God. We cannot reach Him by applying force, by climbing up to Him, by attempting to take Him by storm. And if science should place ladder upon ladder upwards and downwards, she could not attain His height or His depth. But He enters of His own accord into a child-like, simple heart.
He lets Himself be laid hold of by it, kept and known. It is not, therefore, by the intellect [alone] but by the heart that we can know God.
16. On Isaiah 66:3. He who under the Christian dispensation would retain the forms of worship of the ancient ritual of shadows would violate the fundamental laws of the new time, just as a man by killing would offend against the foundation of the moral law, or as he would by offering the blood of dogs or swine offend against the foundation of the ceremonial law. For when the body, the substance has appeared, the type must vanish. He who would retain the type along with the reality would declare the latter to be insufficient, would, therefore, found his salvation not upon God only, but also in part on his own legal performance. But God will brook no rival.
He is either our All, or nothing. Christianity could tolerate animal sacrifices just as little as the Old Testament law could tolerate murder or the offering of abominable things.
17. On Isaiah 66:5. [“The most malignant and cruel persecutions of the friends of God have been originated under the pretext of great zeal in His service, and with a professed desire to honor His name. So it was with the Jews when they crucified the Lord Jesus. So it is expressly said it would be when His disciples would be excommunicated and put to death, John 16:2. So it was in fact in the persecutions excited against the apostles and early Christians. See Acts 6:13-14; Acts 21:28-31. So it was in all the persecutions of the Waldenses, in all the horrors of the Inquisition, in all the crimes of the Duke of Alva. So it was in the bloody reign of Mary; and so it has ever been in all ages and in all countries where Christians have been persecuted.” Barnes.—D. M.].
18. On Isaiah 66:10. “The idea which is presented in this verse is, that it is the duty of all who love Zion to sympathize in her joy. The true friends of God should rejoice in every real revival of religion, they should rejoice in all the success which attends the Gospel in heathen lands. And they will rejoice. It is one evidence of piety to rejoice in her joy; and they who have no joy when souls are born into the kingdom of God, when He pours down His Spirit and in a revival of religion produces changes as sudden and transforming as if the earth were suddenly to pass from the desolation of winter to the verdure and bloom of summer, or when the Gospel makes sudden and rapid advances in the heathen world, have no true evidence that they love God and His cause. They have no religion.” Barnes.—D. M.
19. On Isaiah 66:13. The Prophet is here completely governed by the idea that in the glorious time of the end, love, maternal love will reign. Thus He makes Zion appear as a mother who will bring forth with incredible ease and rapidity innumerable children (Isaiah 66:7-9). Then the Israelites are depicted as little children who suck the breasts of their mother. Further, the heathen who bring back the Israelites into their home, must do this in the same way in which mothers in the Orient are wont to carry their little children.
Lastly, even to the Lord Himself maternal love is ascribed (comp. Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 49:15), and such love as a mother manifests to her adult son. Thus the Israelites will be surrounded in that glorious time on all sides by maternal love. Maternal love will be the characteristic of that period.
20. On Isaiah 66:19 sqq. The Prophet describes remote things by words which are borrowed from the relations and conceptions of his own time, but which stand in strange contrast to the reality of the future which he beholds. Thus the Prophet speaks of escaped persons who go to Tarshish, Pul, Lud, Tubal, and Javan. Here he has rightly seen that a great act of judgment must have taken place. And this act of judgment must have passed on Israel, because they who escape, who go to the Gentiles to declare to them the glory of Jehovah, must plainly be Jews How accurately, in spite of the strange manner of expression, is the fact here stated that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was proclaimed to the Gentiles exactly at the time when the old theocracy was destroyed!
How justly does he indicate that there was a causal connection between these events! He did not, indeed, know that the shattering of the old form was necessary in order that the eternal truth enclosed in it might be set free, and fitted for filling the whole earth. For the Old Covenant cannot exist along with the New, the Law cannot stand with equal dignity beside the Gospel. The Law must be regarded as annulled, in order that the Gospel may come into force. How remarkably strange is it, however, that he calls the Gentile nations Tarshish, Pul, Lud, etc. And how singular it sounds to be told that the Israelites shall be brought by the Gentiles to Jerusalem as an offering for Jehovah!
But how accurately has he, notwithstanding, stated the fact, which, indeed, still awaits its fulfilment, that it is the conversion of the heathen world which will induce Israel to acknowledge their Saviour, and that they both shall gather round the Lord as their common centre! How strange it sounds that then priests and Levites shall be taken from the Gentiles also, and that new moon and Sabbath shall be celebrated by all flesh in the old Jewish fashion! But how accurately is the truth thereby stated that in the New Covenant there will be no more the priesthood restricted to the family of Aaron, but a higher spiritual and universal priesthood, and that, instead of the limited local place of worship of the Old Covenant, the whole earth will be a temple of the Lord! Verily the prophecy of the two last chapters of Isaiah attests a genuine prophet of Jehovah. He cannot have been an anonymous unknown person. He can have been none other than Isaiah the son of Amoz!
HINTS1. On Isaiah 65:1 sq. [I. “It is here foretold that the Gentiles, who had been afar off, should be made nigh, Isaiah 65:1. II. It is here foretold that the Jews, who had long been a people near to God, should be cast off, and set at a distance, Isaiah 65:2.” Henry, III. We are informed of the cause of the rejection of the Jews. It was owing to their rebellion, waywardness and flagrant provocations, Isaiah 65:2 sqq.—D. M.]
2. On Isaiah 65:1-7. A Fast-Day Sermon. When the Evangelical Church no more holds fast what she has; when apostasy spreads more and more, and modern heathenism (Isaiah 65:3-5 a) gains the ascendency in her, then it can happen to her as it did to the people of Israel, and as it happened to the Church in the Orient. Her candlestick can be removed out of its place.—[By the Evangelical Church we are not to understand here the Church universal, for her perpetuity is certain. The Evangelical Church is in Germany the Protestant Church, and more particularly the Lutheran branch of it.—D. M.]
3. On Isaiah 65:8-10. Sermon on behalf of the mission among the Jews. Israel’s hope. 1) On what it is founded (Israel is still a berry in which drops of the divine blessing are contained); 2) To what this hope is directed (Israel’s Restoration).
4. On Isaiah 65:13-16. [“The blessedness of those that serve God, and the woful condition of those that rebel against him, are here set the one over against the other, that they may serve as a foil to each other. The difference of their states here lies in two things: 1) In point of comfort and satisfaction, a. God’s servants shall eat and drink; they shall have the bread of life to feed, to feast upon continually, and shall want nothing that is good for them. But those who set their hearts upon the world, and place their happiness in it, shall be hungry and thirsty, always empty, always craving. In communion with God and dependence upon Him there is full satisfaction; but in sinful pursuits there is nothing but disappointment. b.
God’s servants shall rejoice and sing for joy of heart; they have constant cause for joy, and there is nothing that may be an occasion of grief to them but they have an allay sufficient for it. But, on the other hand, they that forsake the Lord shut themselves out from all true joy, for they shall be ashamed of their vain confidence in themselves, and their own righteousness, and the hopes they had built thereon. When the expectations of bliss, wherewith they had flattered themselves, are frustrated, O what confusion will fill their faces! Then shall they cry for sorrow of heart and howl for vexation of spirit. 2) In point of honor and reputation, Isaiah 65:15-16. The memory of the just is, and shall be, blessed; but the memory of the wicked shall rot.” Henry.—D. M.]
5. On Isaiah 66:1-2. Carpzov has a sermon on this text. He places it in parallel with Luke 18:9-14, and considers, 1) The rejection of spiritual pride; 2) The commendation of filial fear.
6. On Isaiah 66:2 Arndt, in his True Christianity I. cap. 10, comments on this text. He says among other things: “The man who will be something is the material out of which God makes nothing, yea, out of which He makes fools. But a man who will be nothing, and regards himself as nothing, is the material out of which God makes something, even glorious, wise people in His sight.”
7. On Isaiah 66:3. [Saurin has a sermon on this text entitled “Sur l’ Insuffisance du culte exterieur” in the eighth volume of his sermons.—D. M.]
8. On Isaiah 66:13. As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you. “These words stand, let us consider it, 1) In the Old Testament; 2) In the heart of God always; 3) But are they realized in our experience?” Koegel in “Aus dem Vorhof ins Heiligthum, II. Bd., p. 242, 1876.
9. On Isaiah 66:24. The punishment of sin is twofold—inward and outward. The inward is compared with a worm that dies not; the outward with a fire that is not quenched. This worm and this fire are at work even in this life. He who is alarmed by them and hastens to Christ can now be delivered from them.—[“It is better not to fall into this fire and never to have any experience of this worm, even though, as some imagine, eternity should not be eternal, and the unquenchable fire might be quenched, and the worm that shall never die, should die, and Jesus and His apostles should not have expressed themselves quite in accordance with the compassionate taste of our time. Better, I say, is better. Save thyself and thy neighbor before the fire begins to burn, and the smoke to ascend.” Gossner.—D. M.]
Footnotes:What.what.began to be.Or, kid.Heb. maketh a memorial of.[“From the whole strain of the prophecy and particularly from Isaiah 66:3-5, it seems probable that it refers to the time when the temple which Herod had reared was finishing; when the nation was full of pride, self-righteousness and hypocrisy, and when all sacrifices were about to be superseded by the one great sacrifice which the Messiah was about to make of Himself for the sins of the world.” Barnes.—D. M.].
As they have chosen.So I also will choose.Or, devices.vexations.Let Jehovah be glorified that we may see your joy!But.tumult.
7. THE POWER OF THE NEW OF LIFE.
Isaiah 66:7-97 Before she travailed, she brought forth;
Before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child.
8 Who hath heard such a thing?
Who hath seen such things?
Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day?
Or shall a nation be born at once?
For as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.
9 Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth? saith the Lord:Shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy God.
AND 1. With wonderful rapidity Zion will be surrounded by the blessing of numerous children (Isaiah 66:7). In other cases a long time is needed for a land to be peopled, for a family to expand into a nation. But in the case of Zion this will happen with incredible quickness (Isaiah 66:8). Such is the power inherent in that new principle of life which Jehovah cannot possibly in a forced and artificial way restrain (Isaiah 66:9).—[Our author speaks of a new principle of life and its wonderful power. The Prophet, however, makes no mention of this new principle of life, but of the working of Jehovah Himself.—D. M.]
2. Before she travailed—saith thy God, Isaiah 66:7-9.—[While the immediately preceding verses speak of judgment falling on the disobedient and rebellious mass of the people, we learn here how the Israel of God shall receive a sudden and unexampled enlargement. Vitringa sees here a prophecy of the vocation of the Gentiles and of their accession to the Church, while the unbelieving Jews are cast off.—D. M.]—We have here in the main the same thought which the Prophet had expressed, Isaiah 49:18 sqq.; Isaiah 54:1 sqq.; Isaiah 60:4 sqq. Here he makes specially prominent the rapidity and suddenness with which, contrary to the ordinary Jaws of nature, Zion will be enlarged, and this he does most ingeniously and in a manner characteristic of Isaiah. δִ ?ξְ ?μִ ?ιθ, to let slip away, is used as Piel Isaiah 34:15 (comp. Job 21:10). ζָ ?λָ ?ψ must in this connection be primarily chosen to intimate that the birth takes place easily and quickly, though the child is a male.
For male children are wont to be larger and stronger; hence their birth is attended with more difficulty. But it is just as certain that the Prophet does not think of the birth of a single child in a literal sense. In Isaiah 66:8 he puts αָּ ?πֶ ?ιδָ for ζָ ?λָ ?ψ. He means, therefore, that ζָ ?λָ ?ψ should be taken collectively, and at the same time wishes to indicate that this collective birth is a male child strong and vigorous. This seems to be the meaning put upon our place in Revelation 12:5, which latter passage evidently refers to the one before us. However erroneous it would be to apply this solely to the birth of Christ, it would in my opinion be equally one-sided to exclude the latter.
For does not the whole New Testament blessing of abundance of children begirt with the birth of Christ? Without the birth of Christ this blessing could not be realized. “Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given,” the Prophet had said Isaiah 9:5. And to this child is promised “increase of government,” consequently, a populous and mighty kingdom,—this child, with what belongs to it, is it not a male, strong child? I look upon it as possible that the Prophet had here before him his earlier utterance Isaiah 9:5. [This view is in accordance with the Targum: “Before distress cometh upon her, she shall be redeemed: and before trembling cometh upon her, as travail upon a woman with child, her king shall be revealed.”—D. M.]. Such a case never before occurred that a land (ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ must denote here both land and people, the idea of the people being predominant, and hence the word is used as a masculine, comp. on Isaiah 14:17) or nation suddenly, all at once arose. [“The causative sense given to ιεּ ?ηַ ?μ in the English and some other versions is not approved by the later lexicographers, who make it a simple passive.” Alexander.].
How comes it that in the case of Zion, travailing and bringing forth her children coincided? Everything was well arranged beforehand for the birth. The time was fulfilled. The proper moment had come. Peter’s speech on the day of Pentecost and the conversion of the three thousand are facts in which the rapidity of that process of bringing forth is mirrored. And when such an astonishing and rapid success is founded in the nature of the case, can the Lord interfere to check and restrain?
This is the meaning of Isa 66:8. [Dr. Naegelsbach interprets the first part of Isa 66:9 by describing the process of parturition with a particularity which some would think hardly in accordance with good taste. It is sufficient to give the explanation of Gesenius in his Lexicon: “Shall I cause to break open (the womb), and not cause to bring forth?” D. M.]. The second hemistich of Isa 66:9 repeats according to the law of the Parallelismus membrorum the same thought in another form. ςָ ?φַ ?ψ is often used of the closing of the uterus, i. e., of the barrenness of a woman. But here it is not the making unfruitful, but the hindering of the birth that is spoken of.
It is, therefore, better to take ςָ ?φַ ?ψ in the sense of cohibere, retinere, in which it occurs frequently elsewhere (comp. e.g., Judges 13:15-16). [The words of Hezekiah are here almost taken up Isaiah 37:3.” Shall that long and painful national history not have for its issue the birth of a true Israel?” Kay. “The meaning of the whole is, that God designed the great and sudden increase of His Church; that the plan was long laid; and that having done this, He would not abandon it, but would certainly effect His designs.” Barnes. D. M.]. In regard to the alternating ιΰֹ ?ξַ ?ψεβεΧ and ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψΰΧ in Isaiah 66:9, I refer in general to the remarks on Isaiah 40:1. In the place before us, the Prophet has certainly no other reason for the change than a rhetorical one.
8. THE OF NEW ORDER OF LIFE
Isaiah 66:10-1410 Rejoice ye with Jerusalem, and be glad with her, all ye that love her:
Rejoice for joy with her, all ye that mourn for her:
11 That ye may suck, and be satisfied with the breasts of her consolations;
That ye may milk out, and be delighted with the abundance of her glory
12 For thus saith the Lord,Behold, I will extend peace to her like a river,
And the glory of the Gentiles like a flowing stream:
Then shall ye suck, ye shall be borne upon her sides,
And be dandled upon her knees.
13 As one whom his mother comforteth,
So will I comfort you;
And ye shall be comforted in Jerusalem.
14 And when ye see this, your heart shall rejoice,
And your bones shall flourish like an herb:
And the hand of the Lord shall be known toward his servants,
And his indignation toward his enemies.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_66:10. βִּ ?ιμ with αְּ of the object is the common construction, comp. Isaiah 65:19; Proverbs 24:17. ωׂ ?ιωׂ ?εξωׂ ?εωׂ On this connection of a verb with a substantive instead of the infinitive absolute comp. Isaiah 22:17-18; Isaiah 24:19; Isaiah 24:22; Isaiah 42:17.
Isaiah 66:12. The Masoretes take λαεγβειν as the object of both clauses, and consequently πָ ?δָ ?ψωָׁ ?μεֹ ?ν=a river which is peace, a peaceful river. But this is artificial. ωָׁ ? ?ֽ ?ςֲ ?ωַׁ ?ς is Pulpal from ωׁ ?ςς. The word is one which is used especially by Isaiah. It is found besides here Isaiah 6:10; Isaiah 11:8; Isaiah 29:9 (bis).
Isaiah 66:14. There should properly be a λִּ ?ι before ιγΞιδεδ. But the thrice-repeated conjunction Vav in the preceding part of the verse, as it were, governed the flow of speech, and carried it over the syntax. Therefore επεγςδ stands as resumption of ψΰιϊν, which is for ψְ ?ΰִ ?ιϊֶ ?νλִּ ?ι. I therefore take εְ ?ωָׂ ?ωׂ to ϊִ ?τְ ?ψַ ?ηִ ?πָ ?ν as a parenthesis which is intended to declare by what emotions that “seeing” will be accompanied. [But it is much easier, with the E. V., to supply the pronoun this or it, meaning the fulfilment of the promise, after ψΰιϊν, and then there will be no need of assuming a break in the sentence and a parenthesis.—D.
M.]. In the clause ιγιΧΰϊΞςΧ we have to take ΰϊ as a preposition, while before ΰιαιε it marks the accusative. [In the E. V. ζָ ?ςַ ?ν is regarded as a noun. But the noun would have Pattach under its first syllable. The verb governs the accusative.—D. M.].
AND 1. After all that has been said, all the friends of Jerusalem, who had before mourned over her, are now justly called upon to rejoice over her (Isaiah 66:10), and gloriously to participate in her happiness (Isaiah 66:11). For the Lord will turn to her peace and all glory in abundance; the Israelites will be treated with the tenderest care (Isaiah 66:12). The Lord Himself will comfort them with a mother’s love (Isaiah 66:13). Then they shall have joy, and the Lord’s hand will be manifest on them; but His enemies will be made to feel the indignation of the Lord (Isaiah 66:14).
2. Rejoice ye—His enemies.Isaiah 66:10-14. The joy at Jerusalem’s prosperity is also the condition of participation in that prosperity. For he who has not mourned with Jerusalem and does not rejoice with her will not be regarded as her child, and is not suffered to satiate himself with delight on her maternal breast. This is, I think, the meaning of μξςο Isaiah 66:11. [“Jerusalem is thought of as a mother, and the rich consolation (not in word but in deed) which she receives (Isaiah 51:3) as the milk which comes into her breasts (ωֹׁ ?γ as Isaiah 60:16), with which she now nourishes her children abundantly.” Del.]. The image of suckling to designate the most loving and assiduous care, has been already before us Isaiah 49:23; Isaiah 60:16.
We should rather expect the consolations of her breast; but the putting of ωֹׁ ?γ first is the effect of the idea of sucking being before the mind of the writer. [“Sack and be satisfied, milk out and enjoy yourselves, may be regarded as examples of hendiadys, meaning suck to satiety, and milk out with delight; but no such change in the form of translation is required or admissible.” Alexander. D. M.]. The word ζִ ?ιζ which stands parallel with ωֹׁ ?γ, is found besides here only Psalms 50:11; Psalms 80:14. Its signification is still disputed. Some take ζεּ ?ζ = φεּ ?υ in the signification micare, emicare, and hence ζִ ?ιζ = lac ex ubere radiatim defluens (Schroeder, Gesen.). [So Gesen. in Thes.; but in Lexicon he gives the meaning, full breast.
D. M.]. But the signification of shining forth, belongs essentially to φεּ ?υφִ ?ιυ, whence φִ ?ιυ, a shining plate, a flower, a glittering feather. ζִ ?ιζ on the contrary, denotes according to the meaning of its root, which occurs in Syriac, though not in Hebrew, id quod movetur, that which moves itself to and fro. Hence ζִ ?ιζPsalms 50:11; Psalms 80:14, the beasts that move about on the field. Hence here, too, ζִ ?ιζ is synonymous with mamma, the breast that moves this way and that. So Delitzsch. [Delitzsch assigns to ζִ ?ιζ the meaning abundance (Ueberschwang) as the E.
V., does, and, moreover, he expressly states that the parallelism does not force us to give to the word the signification of teats, dugs. See his comment, in loc. 2 Ed. D. M.]. The joy to which the Prophet, Isaiah 66:10, summons the friends of Jerusalem is well-founded. For the Lord Himself declares that He will extend, (direct) to Jerusalem peace, the highest of all inward blessings, as a river (comp.
Isaiah 48:18; Isaiah 8:7), and as a torrent (πַ ?ηַ ?μ Arabic Wadi, comp. Isaiah 30:28) the glory of the Gentiles, which comprehends all desirable outward things (comp. Isaiah 16:14; Isaiah 17:4; Isaiah 21:16; Isaiah 35:2). And because the Prophet has here before his mind the image of maternal love and solicitude on the one hand, and on the other that of a child’s wants, he adds here, and ye shall suck. Herewith he points back to Isaiah 66:11, where he had designated Jerusalem as the source of consolations. Here he tells us that the spring of that spring will be the Lord.
But that maternal care is not restricted to the affording of nourishment. The children shall also be faithfully carried (ςμΞφγon the hip, after the common oriental custom, Isaiah 60:4). They will also be lovingly played with, caressed, and rocked on the knees. The Lordhere again ascribes to Himself maternal love and maternal conduct (comp. Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 46:3 sq.; Isaiah 49:15). Is the term ΰִֹ ?ωׁ to be pressed?
I believe that it ought, for it contains a fine climax. A mother who comforts her child is an affecting image. But a mother’s love is still more gloriously displayed when it shows itself to be strong enough to raise up again the son, the strong man, who is bowed down by misfortune. [“The E. V. here dilutes a man to one. The same liberty is taken by many other versions. But comp.
Genesis 24:67; Judges 17:2; 1 Kings 19:19-20, and the affecting scenes between Thetis and Achilles in the Iliad.”—Alexander. “The Prophet now thinks of the people as one man. Before he had thought of them as children. Israel is as a man returned from a foreign country, escaped from bondage, full of sad recollections, which are wholly obliterated in the maternal arms of divine love yonder in Jerusalem, the dear home, which even in a strange land was the home of their thoughts.”—Delitzsch. “The in Jerusalem suggests the only means by which these blessings are to be secured, viz., a union of affection and of interest with the Israel of God to whom alone they are promised.” Alexander.—D. M.]. The beginning of Isa 66:14 recalls Isaiah 60:5. In this place, too, the meaning of the Prophet is, that what Jerusalem shall see is the manifestation of the power of Jehovah on His friends and foes.
For the aim and scope of all divine training is that God may be known from all nature and history as the supreme good (comp. Isaiah 41:20; Isaiah 42:12 sqq.; Isaiah 43:10 sqq.; Isaiah 45:3 sqq. et saepe). The heart, the centre of life, shall rejoice, the bones, the parts forming the periphery, will shoot as young grass, i. e., they will feel themselves excited to fresh, vigorous manifestation of life (comp. Isaiah 44:4; Isaiah 58:11; Isaiah 61:3). [The latter part of the verse is “in accordance with the Prophet’s constant practice of presenting the salvation of God’s people as coincident and simultaneous with the destruction of His enemies.” Alexder.—D. M.].
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 65:1-2. Our Lord has said, “He that seeketh findeth” (Matthew 7:8). How, then, does it come that the Jews do not find what they seek, but the heathen find what they did not seek? The Apostle Paul puts this question and answers it, Romans 9:30 sqq.; Isaiah 10:19 sqq.; Isaiah 11:7. [See also Isaiah 10:3]. All depends on the way in which we seek.
Luther says: Quaerere fit dupliciter. Primo, secundum praescriptum verbi Dei, et sic invenitur Deus, Secundo, quaeritur nostris studiis et consiliis, et sic non invenitur.” The Jews, with exception of the ἐκλογή (Romans 11:7), sought only after their own glory and merit. They sought what satisfies the flesh. They did not suffer the spirit in the depths of their heart to speak,—the spirit which can be satisfied only by food fitted for it. The law which was given to them that they might perceive by means of it their own impotence, became a snare to them. For they perverted it, made what was of minor importance the chief matter, and then persuaded themselves that they had fulfilled it and were righteous.
But the Gentiles who had not the law, had not this snare. They were not tempted to abuse the pζdagogical discipline of the law. They felt simply that they were forsaken by God. Their spirit was hungry. And when for the first time God’s word in the Gospel was presented to them, then they received it the more eagerly in proportion to the poverty, wretchedness and hunger in which they had been. The Jews did not find what they sought, because they had not a spiritual, but a carnal apprehension of the law, and, like the elder brother of the prodigal son, were full, and blind for that which was needful for them.
But the Gentiles found what they did not seek, because they were like the prodigal son, who was the more receptive of grace, the more he needed it, and the less claim he had to it. [There is important truth stated in the foregoing remarks. But it does not fully explain why the Lord is found of those who sought Him not. The sinner who has obtained mercy when he asks why? must have recourse to a higher cause, a cause out of himself, even free, sovereign, efficacious grace. “It is of God that showeth mercy,” Romans 9:16. “Though in after-communion God is found of those that seek Him (Proverbs 8:17), yet in the first conversion He is found of those that seek Him not; for therefore we love Him, because He first loved us.” Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 65:2. God’s long-suffering is great. He stretches out His hands the whole day and does not grow weary. What man would do this? The disobedient people contemns Him, as if He knew nothing, and could do nothing.
3. On Isaiah 65:2. “It is clear from this verse gratiam esse resistibilem. Christ earnestly stretched out His hands to the Jews. He would, but they would not. This doctrine the Remonstrants prove from this place, and rightly too, in Actis Synodi Dodrac. P. 3. p. 76.” Leigh. [The grace of God which is signified by His stretching out His hands can be, and is, resisted.
That figurative expression denotes warning, exhorting, entreating, and was never set forth by Reformed theologians as indicating such grace as was necessarily productive of conversion. The power by which God quickens those who were dead in sins (Ephesians 2:5), by which He gives a new heart (Ezekiel 36:26), by which He draws to the Son (John 6:44-45; John 6:65), is the grace which is called irresistible. The epithet is admitted on all hands to be faulty; but the grace denoted by it is, from the nature of the case, not resisted. Turrettin in treating De Vocatione et Fide thus replies to this objection, “Aliud est Deo monenti et vocanti externe resistere; Aliud est conversionem intendenti et efficaciter ac interne vocanti. Prius asseritur Isa. lxv. 2, 3. Quum dicit Propheta se expandisse totβ die manus ad populum perversum etc., non posterius.
Expansio brachiorum notat quidem blandam et benevolam Dei invitationem, quβ illos extrinsecus sive Verbo, sive beneficiis alliciebat, non semel atque iterum, sed quotidie ministerio servorum suorum eos compellando. Sed non potest designate potentem et efficacem operationem, quβ brachium Domini illis revelatur qui docentur α Deo et trahuntur a Patre, etc.” Locus XV.; Quaestio VI .25.—D. M.].
4. On Isaiah 65:2. (Who walk after their own thoughts.)
Duc me, nec sine, me per me, Deus optime, duci.
Nam duce me pereo, te duce certus eo.
[“If our guide be our own thoughts, our way is not likely to be good; for every imagination of the thought of our hearts is only evil.” Henry. D. M.].
5. On Isaiah 65:3 sq. “The sweetest wine is turned into the sourest vinegar; and when God’s people apostatize from God, they are worse than the heathen (Jeremiah 3:11).” Starke.
6. On Isaiah 65:5. [I am holier than thou. “A deep insight is here given us into the nature of the mysterious fascination which heathenism exercised on the Jewish people. The law humbled them at every turn with mementoes of their own sin and of God’s unapproachable holiness. Paganism freed them from this, and allowed them (in the midst of moral pollution) to cherish lofty pretensions to sanctity. The man, who had been offering incense on the mountain-top, despised the penitent who went to the temple to present ‘a broken and contrite heart.’ If Pharisaism led to a like result, it was because it, too, had emptied the law of its spiritual import, and turned its provisions into intellectual idols.” Kay. D. M.].
7. On Isaiah 65:6-7. “The longer God forbears, the harder He punishes at last. The greatness of the punishment compensates for the delay (Psalms 50:21).” Starke after Leigh.
8. On Isaiah 65:8 sqq. [“This is expounded by St. Paul, Romans 11:1-5, where, when upon occasion of the rejection of the Jews, it is asked Hath God then cast away His people? He answers, no; for, at this time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. This prophecy has reference to that distinguished remnant…Our Saviour has told us that for the sake of these elect the days of the destruction of the Jews should be shortened, and a stop put to the desolation, which otherwise would have proceeded to that degree that no flesh should be saved. Matthew 24:22. Henry. D. M.].
9. On Isaiah 65:15. The judgment which came upon Israel by the hand of the Romans, did not altogether destroy the people, but it so destroyed the Old Covenant, i.e., the Mosaic religion, that the Jews can no more observe its precepts in essential points. For no Jew knows to what tribe he belongs. Therefore, they have no priests, and, consequently, no sacrifices. The Old Covenant is now only a ruin.
We see here most clearly that the Old Covenant, as it was designed only for one nation, and for one country, was to last only for a certain time. If we consider, moreover, the way in which the judgment was executed, (comp. Josephus), we can truly say that the Jews bear in themselves the mark of a curse. They bear the stamp of the divine judgment. The beginning of the judgment on the world has been executed on them as the house of God. But how comes it that the Jews have become so mighty, so insolent in the present time, and are not satisfied with remaining on the defensive in their attitude toward the Christian church, but have passed over to the offensive?
This has arisen solely from Christendom having to a large extent lost the consciousness of its new name. There are many Christians who scoff at the name of Christian, and seek their honor in combating all that is called Christian. This is the preparation for the judgment on Christendom itself. If Christendom would hold fast her jewel, she would remain strong, and no one would dare to mock or to assail her. For she would then partake of the full blessing which lies in the principle of Christianity, and every one would be obliged to show respect for the fruits of this principle. But an apostate Christendom, that is ashamed of her glorious Christian name, is something more miserable than the Jews, judged though they have been, who still esteem highly their name, and what remains to them of their old religion.
Thus Christendom, in so far as it denies the worth and significance of its name, is gradually reaching a condition in which it will be so ripe for the second act of the judgment on the world, that this will be longed for as a benefit. For, this apostate Christendom will be the kingdom of Antichrist, as Antichrist will manifest himself in Satanic antagonism to God by sitting in the temple of God, and pretending to be God (2 Thessalonians 2:3 sqq.). [We do not quite share all the sentiments expressed in this paragraph. We are far from being so despondent as to the prospects of Christendom, and think that there is a more obvious interpretation of the prophecy quoted from 2 Thess., than that indicated.—D. M.].
10. On Isaiah 65:17. [If we had only the present passage to testify of new heavens and a new earth, we might say, as many good interpreters do, that the language is figurative, and indicates nothing more than a great moral and spiritual revolution. But we cannot thus explain 2 Peter 3:10-13. The present earth and heavens shall pass away; (comp. Isaiah 51:6; Psalms 102:25-26). But how can we suppose that our Prophet here refers to the new heavens and new earth, which are to succeed the destruction of the world by fire?
In the verses that follow Isaiah 65:17, a condition of things is described which, although better than the present, is not so good as that perfectly sinless, blessed state of the redeemed, which we look for after the coming of the day of the Lord. Yet the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:13) evidently regards the promise before us of new heavens and a new earth, as destined to receive its accomplishment after the conflagration which is to take place at the end of the world. If we had not respect to other Scriptures, and if we overlooked the use made by Peter of this passage, we should not take it literally. But we can take it literally, if we suppose that the Prophet brings together future events not according to their order in time. He sees the new heavens and new earth arise. Other scenes are disclosed to his prophetic eye of a grand and joy-inspiring nature.
He announces them as future. But these scenes suppose the continued prevalence of death and labor (Isaiah 65:20 sqq.), which, we know from definite statements of Scripture, will not exist when the new heaven and new earth appear (comp. Revelation 21:1-4). The proper view then of Isa 65:17 is to take its prediction literally, and to hold at the same time that in the following description (which is that of the millennium) future things are presented to us which are really prior, and not posterior to the promised complete renovation of heaven and earth. Nor should this surprise us, as Isaiah and the other Prophets place closely together in their pictures future things which belong to different times. They do not draw the line sharply between this world and the next.
Compare Isaiah’s prophecy of the abolition of death (Isaiah 25:8) in connection with other events that must happen long before that state of perfect blessedness.—D. M.].
11. On Isaiah 65:20. [“The extension of the Gospel every where,—of its pure principles of temperance in eating and drinking, in restraining the passions, in producing calmness of mind, and in arresting war, would greatly lengthen out the life of man. The image here employed by the Prophet is more than mere poetry; it is one that is founded in reality, and is designed to convey most important truth.” Barnes. D. M.].
12. On Isaiah 65:24. [It occurs to me that an erroneous application is frequently made of the promise, Before they call, etc. This declaration is made in connection with the glory and blessedness of the last days. It belongs specifically to the millennium. There are, indeed, occasions when God even now seems to act according to this law. (Comp. Daniel 9:23). But Paul had to pray thrice before he received the answer of the Lord (2 Corinthians 12:8). Compare the parable of the importunate widow, Luke 18:1-7. The answer to prayer may be long delayed. This is not only taught in the Bible, but is verified in Christian experience. But the time will come when the Lord will not thus try and exercise the faith of His people.—D. M.].
13. On Isaiah 65:25. “If the lower animals live in hostility in consequence of the sin of man, a state of peace must be restored to them along with our redemption from sin.” J. G. Mueller in Herz. R.-Encycl. xvi. p. 45. [“By the serpent in this place there seems every reason to believe that Satan, the old seducer and author of discord and misery, is meant. During the millennium he is to be subject to the lowest degradation. Compare for the force of the phrase to lick the dust, Psalms 72:9; Micah 7:17. This was the original doom of the tempter, Genesis 3:14, and shall be fully carried into execution. Comp. Revelation 20:1-3.” Henderson. D. M.].
14. On Isaiah 66:1. [“Having held up in every point of view the true design, mission and vocation of the church or chosen people, its relation to the natural descendants of Abraham, the causes which required that the latter should be stripped of their peculiar privileges, and the vocation of the Gentiles as a part of the divine plan from its origin, the Prophet now addresses the apostate and unbelieving Jews at the close of the old dispensation, who, instead of preparing for the general extension of the church and the exchange of ceremonial for spiritual worship, were engaged in the rebuilding and costly decoration of the temple at Jerusalem. The pride and interest in this great public work, felt not only by the Herods but by all the Jews, is clear from incidental statements of the Scriptures (John 2:20; Matthew 24:1), as well as from the ample and direct assertions of Josephus. That the nation should have been thus occupied precisely at the time when the Messiah came, is one of those agreements between prophecy and history, which cannot be accounted for except upon the supposition of a providential and designed assimilation.” Alexander after Vitringa. D. M.].
15. On Isaiah 66:1-2. What a grand view of the nature of God and of the way in which He is made known lies at the foundation of these words! God made all things. He is so great that it is an absurdity to desire to build a temple for Him. The whole universe cannot contain Him (1 Kings 8:27)!
But He, who contains all things and can be contained by nothing, has His greatest joy in a poor, humble human heart that fears Him. He holds it worthy of His regard, it pleases Him, He enters into it, He makes His abode in it. The wise and prudent men of science should learn hence what is chiefly necessary in order to know God. We cannot reach Him by applying force, by climbing up to Him, by attempting to take Him by storm. And if science should place ladder upon ladder upwards and downwards, she could not attain His height or His depth. But He enters of His own accord into a child-like, simple heart.
He lets Himself be laid hold of by it, kept and known. It is not, therefore, by the intellect [alone] but by the heart that we can know God.
16. On Isaiah 66:3. He who under the Christian dispensation would retain the forms of worship of the ancient ritual of shadows would violate the fundamental laws of the new time, just as a man by killing would offend against the foundation of the moral law, or as he would by offering the blood of dogs or swine offend against the foundation of the ceremonial law. For when the body, the substance has appeared, the type must vanish. He who would retain the type along with the reality would declare the latter to be insufficient, would, therefore, found his salvation not upon God only, but also in part on his own legal performance. But God will brook no rival.
He is either our All, or nothing. Christianity could tolerate animal sacrifices just as little as the Old Testament law could tolerate murder or the offering of abominable things.
17. On Isaiah 66:5. [“The most malignant and cruel persecutions of the friends of God have been originated under the pretext of great zeal in His service, and with a professed desire to honor His name. So it was with the Jews when they crucified the Lord Jesus. So it is expressly said it would be when His disciples would be excommunicated and put to death, John 16:2. So it was in fact in the persecutions excited against the apostles and early Christians. See Acts 6:13-14; Acts 21:28-31. So it was in all the persecutions of the Waldenses, in all the horrors of the Inquisition, in all the crimes of the Duke of Alva. So it was in the bloody reign of Mary; and so it has ever been in all ages and in all countries where Christians have been persecuted.” Barnes.—D. M.].
18. On Isaiah 66:10. “The idea which is presented in this verse is, that it is the duty of all who love Zion to sympathize in her joy. The true friends of God should rejoice in every real revival of religion, they should rejoice in all the success which attends the Gospel in heathen lands. And they will rejoice. It is one evidence of piety to rejoice in her joy; and they who have no joy when souls are born into the kingdom of God, when He pours down His Spirit and in a revival of religion produces changes as sudden and transforming as if the earth were suddenly to pass from the desolation of winter to the verdure and bloom of summer, or when the Gospel makes sudden and rapid advances in the heathen world, have no true evidence that they love God and His cause. They have no religion.” Barnes.—D. M.
19. On Isaiah 66:13. The Prophet is here completely governed by the idea that in the glorious time of the end, love, maternal love will reign. Thus He makes Zion appear as a mother who will bring forth with incredible ease and rapidity innumerable children (Isaiah 66:7-9). Then the Israelites are depicted as little children who suck the breasts of their mother. Further, the heathen who bring back the Israelites into their home, must do this in the same way in which mothers in the Orient are wont to carry their little children.
Lastly, even to the Lord Himself maternal love is ascribed (comp. Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 49:15), and such love as a mother manifests to her adult son. Thus the Israelites will be surrounded in that glorious time on all sides by maternal love. Maternal love will be the characteristic of that period.
20. On Isaiah 66:19 sqq. The Prophet describes remote things by words which are borrowed from the relations and conceptions of his own time, but which stand in strange contrast to the reality of the future which he beholds. Thus the Prophet speaks of escaped persons who go to Tarshish, Pul, Lud, Tubal, and Javan. Here he has rightly seen that a great act of judgment must have taken place. And this act of judgment must have passed on Israel, because they who escape, who go to the Gentiles to declare to them the glory of Jehovah, must plainly be Jews How accurately, in spite of the strange manner of expression, is the fact here stated that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was proclaimed to the Gentiles exactly at the time when the old theocracy was destroyed!
How justly does he indicate that there was a causal connection between these events! He did not, indeed, know that the shattering of the old form was necessary in order that the eternal truth enclosed in it might be set free, and fitted for filling the whole earth. For the Old Covenant cannot exist along with the New, the Law cannot stand with equal dignity beside the Gospel. The Law must be regarded as annulled, in order that the Gospel may come into force. How remarkably strange is it, however, that he calls the Gentile nations Tarshish, Pul, Lud, etc. And how singular it sounds to be told that the Israelites shall be brought by the Gentiles to Jerusalem as an offering for Jehovah!
But how accurately has he, notwithstanding, stated the fact, which, indeed, still awaits its fulfilment, that it is the conversion of the heathen world which will induce Israel to acknowledge their Saviour, and that they both shall gather round the Lord as their common centre! How strange it sounds that then priests and Levites shall be taken from the Gentiles also, and that new moon and Sabbath shall be celebrated by all flesh in the old Jewish fashion! But how accurately is the truth thereby stated that in the New Covenant there will be no more the priesthood restricted to the family of Aaron, but a higher spiritual and universal priesthood, and that, instead of the limited local place of worship of the Old Covenant, the whole earth will be a temple of the Lord! Verily the prophecy of the two last chapters of Isaiah attests a genuine prophet of Jehovah. He cannot have been an anonymous unknown person. He can have been none other than Isaiah the son of Amoz!
HINTS1. On Isaiah 65:1 sq. [I. “It is here foretold that the Gentiles, who had been afar off, should be made nigh, Isaiah 65:1. II. It is here foretold that the Jews, who had long been a people near to God, should be cast off, and set at a distance, Isaiah 65:2.” Henry, III. We are informed of the cause of the rejection of the Jews. It was owing to their rebellion, waywardness and flagrant provocations, Isaiah 65:2 sqq.—D. M.]
2. On Isaiah 65:1-7. A Fast-Day Sermon. When the Evangelical Church no more holds fast what she has; when apostasy spreads more and more, and modern heathenism (Isaiah 65:3-5 a) gains the ascendency in her, then it can happen to her as it did to the people of Israel, and as it happened to the Church in the Orient. Her candlestick can be removed out of its place.—[By the Evangelical Church we are not to understand here the Church universal, for her perpetuity is certain. The Evangelical Church is in Germany the Protestant Church, and more particularly the Lutheran branch of it.—D. M.]
3. On Isaiah 65:8-10. Sermon on behalf of the mission among the Jews. Israel’s hope. 1) On what it is founded (Israel is still a berry in which drops of the divine blessing are contained); 2) To what this hope is directed (Israel’s Restoration).
4. On Isaiah 65:13-16. [“The blessedness of those that serve God, and the woful condition of those that rebel against him, are here set the one over against the other, that they may serve as a foil to each other. The difference of their states here lies in two things: 1) In point of comfort and satisfaction, a. God’s servants shall eat and drink; they shall have the bread of life to feed, to feast upon continually, and shall want nothing that is good for them. But those who set their hearts upon the world, and place their happiness in it, shall be hungry and thirsty, always empty, always craving. In communion with God and dependence upon Him there is full satisfaction; but in sinful pursuits there is nothing but disappointment. b.
God’s servants shall rejoice and sing for joy of heart; they have constant cause for joy, and there is nothing that may be an occasion of grief to them but they have an allay sufficient for it. But, on the other hand, they that forsake the Lord shut themselves out from all true joy, for they shall be ashamed of their vain confidence in themselves, and their own righteousness, and the hopes they had built thereon. When the expectations of bliss, wherewith they had flattered themselves, are frustrated, O what confusion will fill their faces! Then shall they cry for sorrow of heart and howl for vexation of spirit. 2) In point of honor and reputation, Isaiah 65:15-16. The memory of the just is, and shall be, blessed; but the memory of the wicked shall rot.” Henry.—D. M.]
5. On Isaiah 66:1-2. Carpzov has a sermon on this text. He places it in parallel with Luke 18:9-14, and considers, 1) The rejection of spiritual pride; 2) The commendation of filial fear.
6. On Isaiah 66:2 Arndt, in his True Christianity I. cap. 10, comments on this text. He says among other things: “The man who will be something is the material out of which God makes nothing, yea, out of which He makes fools. But a man who will be nothing, and regards himself as nothing, is the material out of which God makes something, even glorious, wise people in His sight.”
7. On Isaiah 66:3. [Saurin has a sermon on this text entitled “Sur l’ Insuffisance du culte exterieur” in the eighth volume of his sermons.—D. M.]
8. On Isaiah 66:13. As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you. “These words stand, let us consider it, 1) In the Old Testament; 2) In the heart of God always; 3) But are they realized in our experience?” Koegel in “Aus dem Vorhof ins Heiligthum, II. Bd., p. 242, 1876.
9. On Isaiah 66:24. The punishment of sin is twofold—inward and outward. The inward is compared with a worm that dies not; the outward with a fire that is not quenched. This worm and this fire are at work even in this life. He who is alarmed by them and hastens to Christ can now be delivered from them.—[“It is better not to fall into this fire and never to have any experience of this worm, even though, as some imagine, eternity should not be eternal, and the unquenchable fire might be quenched, and the worm that shall never die, should die, and Jesus and His apostles should not have expressed themselves quite in accordance with the compassionate taste of our time. Better, I say, is better. Save thyself and thy neighbor before the fire begins to burn, and the smoke to ascend.” Gossner.—D. M.]
9. GENERAL PICTURE OF THE TIME OF THE END AS THE TIME OF TO LIFE AND TO DEATH
Isaiah 66:15-2415 For, behold, the Lord will come with fire,
And with his chariots like a whirlwind,
To render his anger with fury,
And his rebuke with flames of fire.
16 For by fire and by his sword
Will the Lord plead with all flesh:
And the slain of the Lord shall be many.
17 They that sanctify themselves and purify themselves in the gardens,
Behind one tree in the midst,
Eating swine’s flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse,
Shall be consumed together, saith the Lord.18 For I know their works and their thoughts:
It shall come, that I will gather all nations and tongues;
And they shall come, and see my glory.
19 And I will set a sign among them,
And I will send those that escape of them unto the nations,
To Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, that draw the bow,
To Tubal and Javan, to the isles afar off,
That have not heard my fame,
Neither have seen my glory;
And they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles.
20 And they shall bring all your brethren for an offering unto the Lord
Out of all nations
Upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters,
And upon mules, and upon swift beasts,
To my holy mountain Jerusalem, saith the Lord,As the children of Israel bring an offering
In a clean vessel into the house of the Lord.21 And I will also take of them
For priests and for Levites, saith the Lord.22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make,
Shall remain before me, saith the Lord,So shall your seed and your name remain.
23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another,
And from one Sabbath to another,
Shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.24 And they shall go forth, and look
Upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me:
For their worm shall not die,
Neither shall their fire be quenched;
And they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.
TEXTUAL AND Isa_66:15. The words ελρετδξψλαϊιε occur exactly as here Jeremiah 4:13. There, too, they stand as second subject of the verb ιַ ?ςֲ ?μֶ ?δ, which is first in order. Jeremiah quotes there Habakkuk 1:8 also. ξֶ ?ψְ ?λָּ ?αָ ?δ is never used by Jeremiah elsewhere; he employs the word ψֶ ?λֶ ?α (Jeremiah 17:25; Jeremiah 22:4; Jeremiah 46:9; Jeremiah 47:3; Jeremiah 50:37; Jeremiah 51:21). But Isaiah uses ξψλαδ three times, namely Isaiah 2:7; Isaiah 22:18, in addition to the present case. ρεּ ?λָּ ?δ, too, is never elsewhere used by Jeremiah. He employs always instead of it ρַ ?ςַ ?ψ (Jeremiah 23:19; Jeremiah 25:32; Jeremiah 30:23) and ρְ ?ςָ ?ψָ ?δ (Jeremiah 23:19; Jeremiah 30:23).
But Isaiah has ρελּ ?δ five times, including the present place, Isaiah 5:28; Isaiah 17:13; Isaiah 21:1; Isaiah 29:6. On these grounds we can maintain that the words in Jeremiah are a quotation from the place before us.
Isaiah 66:16. ΰֵ ?ϊ is not the sign of the accusative, but a preposition as 1 Samuel 12:7; Jeremiah 2:35; Ezekiel 17:20; Ezekiel 20:35 sq.; Isaiah 38:22; Jeremiah 25:31. This last place recalls forcibly the one before us.
Isaiah 66:17. I hold this verse to be interpolated by the same hand which inserted Isaiah 64:9 sqq.; Isaiah 65:3-5; Isaiah 65:11; Isaiah 66:3-6. My reasons are, 1) The-special mention of the Israelites who had apostatized to heathenism is not at all necessary in this connection. For Isaiah 66:15-16 speak of the general judgment extending to all flesh (Isaiah 66:16). For what purpose then this particular specification of a single class of men? [Criticism of this kind is not worthy of our author. We might apply it to establish the spuriousness of the greater part of the discourse recorded in Matthew 25:31-46.
There, too, is an account of the judgment of all nations. Yet only a class of persons guilty of a particular sin of omission is condemned by the Judge. It is enough to say that our Lord and the Prophet had their reasons for particularly specifying a certain class of men as the objects of divine judgment.—D. M.]. 2) This verse, as Isaiah 65:3; Isaiah 65:11, contains clear allusion to foreign, in particular, to Babylonian heathenism. Such an allusion is suspicious. It cannot be explained from the stand-point of Isaiah.
For Isaiah sees into the distant future, it is true, but he does not see as a person standing near. He does not distinguish specific, individual features. [In his remarks on Isaiah 65:4 Dr. Naegelsbach admits that there is no evidence outside the book of Isaiah that the Babylonians either offered swine in sacrifice, or used them for food. There is really nothing mentioned in this verse which can be proved to be specifically Babylonian. The gardens were connected with idolatrous worship practised by the Israelites at home. See Isaiah 1:29.
The statement that the Prophet could not foresee the practices here mentioned depends on the erroneous theory of prophecy which Dr. Naegelsbach has adopted, and which is animadverted on in the Introduction, pp. 17,18, footnote.—D. M.]. 3) The words are very appropriate in the mouth of an exile who thought that he must apply particularly to the renegades of his time the threatening of judgment contained in Isaiah 66:15-16. [But the words are quite appropriate in the mouth of the Prophet Isaiah, and we are not warranted to assume that these forms of idolatry were practised by the exiles in Babylon. Unless Isaiah is supposed to testify to this fact, we have no evidence of it. In the Babylonian Captivity the people were cured of their propensity to gross idolatry—D. M.]. 4) The singular phrase ΰηψΰηγαϊεο clearly betrays a foreign, later hand; and the manifest corruption of the text in the beginning of Isa 66:18 is also to be regarded as an indication of changes in the original text. [The occurrence of the singular phrase referred to is no sign of the hand of an interpolator, who would rather be careful to avoid saying what would be obscure and ambiguous.
An interpolator, too, who understood Hebrew, would hardly have left the difficulty complained of in the beginning of Isa 66:18.—D. M.].
AND 1. The Prophet here, too, represents the future under the forms of the present. He seta forth its leading features, and again brings together what is homogeneous without regard to intervening spaces of time. He begins, Isaiah 66:15-16; Isaiah 66:18, by describing the judgment of retribution on the wicked. [On Isaiah 66:17 see under Text. and Gram.]. The Prophet surveys together the beginning and end of the judgment. As we see from Isaiah 66:19, the beginning of the judgment of the world is for him the judgment on Israel.
He, therefore, Isaiah 66:19 sqq., tells what shall take place after the destruction of the visible theocracy. He beholds a sign set in Israel. We clearly perceive here in the light of the fulfilment what he only obscurely, as through a mist, descried. He intends Him who is set for a sign that is spoken against. After this sign has appeared and been rejected, the judgment begins on the earthly Jerusalem. Persons escaped from this great catastrophe go to the heathen to publish to them the glory of Jehovah (Isaiah 66:19).
And the heathen world turns to Jehovah, and in grateful love brings along with it to the holy mountain the scattered members of Israel that had been visited with judgment. These are as a meat-offering which Jehovah receives from the hand of the Gentiles as willingly as He welcomes a pure meat-offering from the hand of an Israelite (Isaiah 66:20). And then from Gentiles and Jews a new race arises. The wall of separation is removed. The Lord takes priests and Levites indiscriminately from both (Isaiah 66:21). The new life which throbs in men, as well as in heaven and earth, is eternal life.
Hence the new race of men stand on the new earth and under the new heaven eternally before the Lord (Isaiah 66:22). And all flesh will then render to the Lord true worship forever (Isaiah 66:23). But the wicked, of whom the Prophet had declared at the close of the first and second Ennead that they have no peace, will be excluded from the society of the blessed, to be a prey of the undying worm and unquenchable fire, and an object of abhorrence.
2. For, behold, the LORD——my glory.
Isaiah 66:15-18. The Prophet sees the Lord come to judgment in flaming fire, and he beholds His chariots rush along as a tempest. The image is here, as Psalms 18:9; Psalms 18:13, borrowed from a thunderstorm. It appears to me better to regard ξψλλϊιε as second subject to ιָ ?αֹ ?ΰ than to supply in the translation the substantive verb. For the chariots are not in themselves like a stormy wind, but their rolling is compared with the rushing of a tempest. The plural is certainly the proper plural.
For as an earthly commander of an army is accompanied by many chariots, so too is the “Lord of hosts.” Kleinert justly observes on Habakkuk 3 that the elements, clouds and winds, as media of manifestation, are compared with Jehovah’s horses and chariots. In Psalms 104:3 the Lord is expressly described as He who “maketh the clouds his chariot.” δֵ ?ωִׁ ?ιαΰַ ?σ cannot possibly denote here as Job 9:13; Psalms 78:38, to take away wrath. Here retribution is the subject of discourse. We must, therefore, compare places such as Hosea 12:3, where δωׁ ?ια standing alone means to recompense, and Deuteronomy 32:41; Deuteronomy 32:43, where it is joined with πָ ?χָ ?ν in like signification. In the day of judgment they who have sown evil must reap the wrath of God as necessary harvest (comp. Galatians 6:7).
God will render his anger to them in the form of ηֵ ?ξָ ?δ, i.e., of burning fury (comp. Isaiah 42:25; Isaiah 59:18), and his rebuke comp. Isaiah 30:17; Isaiah 50:2; Isaiah 51:20), in flames of fire (comp Isaiah 13:8; Isaiah 29:6; Isaiah 30:30). Fire must serve not only to indicate the violence of the divine wrath, but also as a real instrument of judgment. for the first judgment of the world was accomplished by water (Genesis 7), the second will be effected by fire. At the first act of the second judgment of the world, the destruction of Jerusalem, fire was not wanting (comp. Joseph.
B.J. VI. 7, 2; 8, 5). With fire and sword, igne ferroque, the Lord judges. [“What is here said of fire, sword and slaughter, was fulfilled not only as a figurative prophecy of general destruction, but in its strictest sense in the terrific carnage which attended the extinction of the Jewish State, of which, more emphatically than of any other event outwardly resembling it, it might be said that many were the slain of Jehovah.” Alexander. D. M.]. Isaiah 66:17.
Here people are spoken of, who make a religious consecration of themselves by sanctifying (comp. Isaiah 30:29; Isaiah 65:6; Exodus 19:22; Numbers 11:18 et saepe) and purifying themselves (ξθδψ in Isaiah only here, comp. Leviticus 14:4; Leviticus 14:7-8 et saepe; Ezra 6:20; Nehemiah 12:30; Nehemiah 13:22). They do this ΰֶ ?μΞδַ ?βַּ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊ (comp. Isaiah 1:29-30; Isaiah 61:11; Isaiah 65:3). The preposition ΰֶ ?μ might be taken, with Hahn, as a case of constr. praegnans, if it were possible to find the idea of motion to a place latent in the verbs δθδψ and δϊχγωׁ.
We must, therefore, take ΰֵ ?μ in the sense of “in relation to, in respect to,” i.e. = for (comp. e.g., 1 Samuel 1:27; Ezekiel 6:10). [In performing their lustrations they have respect to the gardens as places of worship. Translate: that purify themselves for the gardens, not in the gardens as in the E. V.—D. M.]. The words ΰηψΰηγαϊεκ are very obscure. The old translators (LXX., Targ., Syr., Arab., Theodoret, Symmachus, Hieronymus) were evidently puzzled with the text, and conjectured its meaning rather than explained it according to certain principles.
The later interpreters can be classified according to what they understand by ΰַ ?ηַ ?ϊ ,ΰַ ?ηַ ?γ) ΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ, the last is the reading of the K’ri). Seb. Schmidt and Bochart think (after Saadia) of one of the trees, or of a reservoir in the garden, behind or in which the lustration was performed. Others refer ΰηγ to an idol. Abenezra thinks that ΰηϊ (K’ri) is Astarte. Very many interpreters (after Scaliger) take ΰηγ to be the name of a Syrian divinity, Ἄδωδος, who is called in Eusebius (Praep.
Ev. I. 10) King of gods. And this explanation has been the rather adopted, because Macrobius (Saturn. I, 23) gives as the meaning of this name “unus;” a statement which is manifestly owing to his want of knowledge of the language. Clericus sees in ΰηϊ the name ‘ Εκάτη;. Ben.
Carpzov, who is followed by Hahn and Maurer, understands an idol of some kind. Stier, not satisfied with Antichrist, who is thought of by Neteler, understands under the one the “idol of the world in the strictest sense, whose place of concealment is the tree of knowledge in the midst of the garden.” Majus (�con. p. 984) takes ΰηψΰηγ in the sense of praeter unum, i.e., beside the only true God (Deuteronomy 6:4) they follow an idol set in the midst. But this meaning the words will not bear. That explanation has most in its favor, which refers ΰηγ to a human being. Here we must set aside as philologically untenable the view which, after the Targ. Jon., and the Syriac, would in any way bring out the sense alius post alium.
After the example of Pfeifer in the Dubia Vexata, it is better to understand a person placed in the midst who acted as leader, initiator, or hierophant. So Gesenius, Hitzig, Hendewerk, Beck, Umbreit, Knobel, Delitzsch, Seinecke, Rohlingαַּ ?ϊָּ ?εֶ ?κְ is understood by Hitzig, Hendewerk, Beck, Umbreit, Ewald of the middle of the house, the impluvium, the court. But Knobel, Delitzsch, Seinecke, Rohling think of the hierophant standing in the midst, so that ΰַ ?ηַ ?ψ is not to be understood in the local sense, but in that of acting after, or imitation. Ewald proposes instead of ΰηψΰηγ to read a double ΰηψ: Boettcher would strike out the words ΰηψΰηγ. Cheyne regards the place as quite corrupt. It seems to me that the words ΰηψΰηγαϊεκ are either a corrupt reading, or a later expression current in those Babylonian forms of worship.
But we have not hitherto been able to explain their meaning satisfactorily. [That Babylonian rites are here referred to is a gratuitous assumption. Of the interpretations put upon the statement that purify themselves for the gardens after one in the midst, the one most entitled to our acceptance is that which regards it as descriptive of a crowd of devotees surrounding their priest or leader, and doing after him the rites which he exhibits for their imitation. Delitzsch is so satisfied with this explanation that he declares that it leaves nothing to be desired. The use of ΰηγ, one, has its reason in the opposition of the one leader of the ceremonies to the many repeaters of the rites after him. D. M.]. ΰλμιαωׂ ?ψδΧεΧ is one of the subjects of ιρετε.
Comp. on Isaiah 65:4. ωֶׁ ?χֶ ?υ stands frequently in Leviticus parallel with ωֶׁ ?ψֶ ?υ, reptile, e. g., Leviticus 11:20 comp. ibid. vers, 10, 23, 41. Probably, then, reptiles, such as the snail, lizard and the like, are here chiefly intended. ςַ ?λְ ?αָּ ?ψ is the mouse (comp. Leviticus 11:29; 1 Samuel 6:4 sqq.). On edible mice, or rats (glires) see Delitzsch, Comment. in loc., Bochart, Hieroz. II. p. 432 sqq., Herz. R.-Encycl.
XIV. p. 602. [“The actual use of any kind of mouse in the ancient heathen rites has never been established, the modern allegations of the fact being founded on the place before us.” Alexander. This commentator contends that the Prophet is still treating of the excision of the Jews and the vocation of the Gentiles. And although the generation of Jews “upon whom the final blow fell were hypocrites, not idolaters, the misdeeds of their fathers entered into the account, and they were cast off not merely as the murderers of the Lord of Life, but as apostates who insulted Jehovah to His face by bowing down to stocks and stones, in groves and gardens, and by eating swine’s flesh, the abomination, and the mouse.” Isaiah would naturally make prominent, in assigning the causes of divine judgment, the most flagrant transgressions of the law that prevailed in his own time. We have had many examples of his practice to depict the future in the colors of the present.—D. M.]. Isaiah 66:18 is very difficult.
It appears to me impossible to obtain an appropriate sense from the text as it stands. I must therefore hold it to be corrupt. The old versions do not enable us to detect any corruption that has taken place since they were made. They all give such translations that they evidently suppose the present Masoretic text. They all use the first person in the rendering of αָּ ?ΰָ ?δ. But this does not justify our inferring a difference of text.
It is merely a free translation. The predicate to εΰπλι is wanting. Some would supply ιָ ?γַ ?ςְ ?ϊּ ?ι [as the E. V.], or ΰֶ ?τְ ?χֹ ?γ (Delitzsch), as was done in some manuscripts of the LXX. But is it possible that the writer omitted the predicate? [“The ellipsis is like that in Virgil Quos ego (Aen. I. 139), and belongs to the rhetorical figure of aposiopesis: and I, their works and thoughts—(will know to punish).” Delitzsch.
If an ellipsis is to be supplied, there is none more facile than that assumed in the English version, and which can plead the support of the Targum. But it seems to me better to retain the aposiopesis of the original, with Knobel, Ewald, Alexander and Kay. The last mentioned has this remark: “The sentence is interrupted; as if it were too great a condescension to comment on their folly,—so soon to be made evident by the course of events. And I—as for their works and their thoughts, the time cometh for gathering all nations.”—D. M.]. So much can be seen from Isaiah 66:18, that God’s judgments will rest on a bringing to light not only of the works, but also of the thoughts of the heart (Hebrews 4:12). αָּ ?ΰָ ?δ is according to the accents to be taken as a participle.
The feminine is to be understood in a neuter sense [i.e., it is used impersonally]. αָּ ?ΰ stands for the arrival of the right moment: it is come to this that all nations, etc., comp. Ezekiel 39:8. The words χαִ ?υΰϊΞλμΞδβειν seem to be borrowed from Joel 4:2. On the other hand, the Prophet Zephaniah (Isaiah 3:8) seems to have had this place of Isaiah before him. The expression λμΞδβειν does not occur exactly elsewhere. We can compare, on the one hand, Genesis 10:20; Genesis 10:31 (comp.
Isaiah 66:5), on the other, Daniel 3:4; Daniel 3:7; Daniel 5:19; Daniel 6:26; Daniel 7:14. Comp. Zechariah 8:23. If this expression really belonged to a later age, we should find in it a confirmation of the supposition that the text of Isa 66:18 also has been corrupted by an interpolator. [“The use of the word tongues as an equivalent to nations has reference to national distinctions springing from diversity of language, and is founded on Genesis 10:5; Genesis 10:20; Genesis 10:31, by the influence of which passage and the one before us, it became a phrase of frequent use in Daniel, whose predictions turn so much upon the calling of the Gentiles (Daniel 3:4; Daniel 5:19). The representation of this form of speech as an Aramaic idiom by some modern critics is characteristic of their candor.” Alexander. Some suppose the glory of Jehovah which all nations will be assembled to see to be a gracious display of His glory, and others think that a grand manifestation of judgment is here referred to.
In the preceding part of the chapter a revelation of both grace and judgment is foretold. We can take the expression in a general sense for the revelation of Jehovah’s perfections. But here a difficulty arises. If in this verse all nations are represented as gathered, as having come to see the glory of the Lord, where are the distant nations who are to be visited according to the following verse by those that have escaped from the judgment? The seeming inconsistency is removed, if we regard Isaiah 66:19 as describing the way in which the nations will be brought to see the glory of God, and take the εְ as causal: For I will set a sign, etc. For this causal force of εְ comp. on Isaiah 64:3.
This is better than to suppose, with Delitzsch, that all nations and tongues in Isaiah 66:18 are not to be understood of all nations without exception.—D. M.].
3. And I will set——all flesh.
Isaiah 66:19-24. [This verse explains the gathering of all nations mentioned in the previous verse. The Hebrew often employs the simple connective and where we would use for.—D. M.]. The mention of τμιθιν, Isaiah 66:19, implies that the judgment from which they have escaped is not the general judgment. After it there will remain no nations on the earth to whom the messengers could come to announce Jehovah’s glory. That judgment, then, from which the messengers have escaped, must be only the first act of the general judgment, i.e., the judgment on Israel.
If we consider this place in the light of fulfilment, we must take the destruction of the theocracy by the Romans for this first act of the general judgment, which the Prophet views together with its last act or last acts, just as our Lord does in His oratio eschatological, Matthew 24. They who have escaped from that dreadful catastrophe which befalls the church of the Old Covenant are the church of the New Covenant, for whose flight and deliverance the Lord has so significantly cared in that discourse (Matthew 24:16 sqq.). If this is the case, what opinion have we to form regarding the sign, which the Lord, according to the words commencing Isaiah 66:19, will set “among them,” i.e., among those on whom that first great act of judgment has fallen? The expression ωׂ ?εּ ?νΰεֹ ?ϊ occurs Genesis 4:15; Exodus 10:2; Jeremiah 32:20; Psalms 78:43; Psalms 105:27. It alternates with πָ ?δַ ?ο or ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δΰεֹ ?ϊ (Deuteronomy 13:2; Joshua 2:12; Judges 6:17; Psalms 86:17 et saepe). Of these forms ωׂ ?εּ ?νΰεֹ ?ϊ is the most emphatic.
It denotes, we might say, setting a sign as a monument for general and permanent observation. To regard this sign as a signal to call the nations does not suit the context [?], for the nations are not called to the judgment upon Israel. The announcement is rather borne to them. Calvin’s explanation “I make a sign on them,” namely, on the elect for their deliverance, is justified by the language; but the suffixes in αָּ ?δֶ ?ν and ξֵ ?δֶ ?ν refer to those who are judged, and not to those who are saved. The old orthodox explanation, according to which the “sign” is the Spirit poured out upon the disciples as evidence of their divine mission, is exposed to the same objection. When, on the other hand, Hitzig and Knobel consider as the sign, the judgment upon the heathen, a great slaughter, there is this objection that it is to the heathen that they who escaped the judgment go.
And when Stier refers the sign to the judgment upon Israel, it seems strange that mention should be made of the sign after the description of the judgment and its happy consequences, and they shall come and see my glory. [But if we regard the εְ at the beginning of Isa 66:19 as explicative or causal, this objection falls away,—D. M.]. Ewald, Umbreit, Delitzsch, Seinecke think that the escape of some from the all-destroying slaughter is itself the miracle. But is it something so extraordinary and wonderful that individuals should escape from a slaughter, be it ever so bloody? I would not say with the Catholic interpreters that this ΰεֹ ?ϊ is the sign of the cross. But I think that Luke [Simeon] when he, Luke 2:34, speaks of Him who is set for a sign which shall be spoken against had our place before him.
And I would refer the sign of the Son of man (Matthew 24:30) to the same source. It was the purpose of God, which Isaiah here announces without knowing how it should be fulfilled, that out of the ashes of the old covenant the ph�nix of the new should arise. [Alexander, who sees in the τְ ?μֵ ?ιθִ ?ιν who go to the nations the first preachers of the Gospel, who were escaped Jews, saved from that perverse generation (Acts 2:40), thinks that the sign to be set denotes “the whole miraculous display of divine power, in bringing the old dispensation to a close and introducing the new, including the destruction of the unbelieving Jews, on the one hand, and, on the other, all those signs and wonders, and divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost (Hebrews 2:4), which Paul calls the signs of an apostle (2 Corinthians 12:12), and which Christ Himself had promised should follow them that believed (Mark 16:17). All these were signs placed among them, i.e., among the Jews, to the greater condemnation of the unbelievers, and to the salvation of such as should be saved.” But if we compare Isaiah 11:10 and its connection with the place before us and the context, it would appear that Messiah is the sign here spoken of.—D. M.]. The following names of nations represent the entire heathen world. The Prophet designedly mentions the names of the most remote nations to intimate that to all, even the most distant peoples, the joyful message (εὐαγγέλιον) should come.
Respecting Tarshish (comp. on Isaiah 2:16) The name Pul occurs as the name of a people only here (as name of a person, comp. 2 Kings 15:19). In Jeremiah 46:9; Ezekiel 27:10; Ezekiel 30:5, the name τεּ ?θ is mentioned in conjunction with μεּ ?γ. The LXX., too, have in our place Φούδ. In the places in Jer. and Ezek. just cited the LXX. have Δίβυες for τεּ ?θ. Bochart understands by Pul the island Philae. Most scholars hold the identity of τεּ ?μ and τεּ ?θ, and assume either an error in writing, or an interchange of θ and μ (Hitzig).
Regarding τεּ ?θ, it is pretty generally held, after the LXX., to be Libyia. Ebers, indeed, affirms that on the Egyptian monuments Punt or Put always denotes a country east of Egypt, namely, Arabia. We must in regard to this point defer a decision. It is not quite certain what people we have to understand under μεּ ?γ. In Genesis 10:13μεּ ?γιν is named as the first son of Mizraim; but there, too, in Isaiah 66:22 the fourth son of Shem is called Lud. Ebers holds, with Rougemont (L’age du bronze), the son of Shem for the Lutennu, i.e., Syrians, while according to him the Ludu or Rutu are the native Egyptians in opposition to the non-Egyptian elements of the kingdom of Pharaoh.
Ebers properly leaves it undecided whether these native Egyptians, or “the fourth son of Shem” is here meant. We cannot apply to the place before us a strict ethnographical measure. We cannot expect that the Prophet should mention the nations of only one part of the world, or that he should mention the nations in regular succession. He means only to name very distant peoples. Do the Egyptians who are never called in the Old Testament by another name than ξִ ?φְ ?ψַ ?ιִ ?ν belong to these? The Ludim are celebrated as archers also in Jeremiah 46:9.
Under Tubal (Genesis 10:2; Ezekiel 27:13; Ezekiel 32:26; Ezekiel 38:2-3; Ezekiel 39:1) the Tibareni, a tribe in the south-eastern corner of the Black Sea, are, since the time of Bochart, supposed to be intended. That ιָ ?εָ ?ο are the Greeks is universally acknowledged (comp. Genesis 10:2; Ezekiel 27:13; Daniel 8:21; Zechariah 9:13). There will take place a centrifugal and a centripetal motion. After the judgment on Israel, the holy centre will be forsaken, yea, trodden, down (Luke 21:24; Revelation 11:2). The escaped of Israel will carry out from the destroyed centre the salvation of Israel to the heathen.
The heathen will receive it; but Israel shall not be mixed with them.—[But the escaped Israelites who brought salvation to the Gentiles have been in fact blended with the Gentiles who embraced it. That these escaped Israelites should remain distinct from the converted Gentiles is not here affirmed.—D. M.]—But when the time shall have come (according to Paul: “when the fulness of the Gentiles shall have come in,” Romans 11:25), a centripetal streaming back will take place, which will find the Israelites still existing among the nations. But they are no longer hated, but loved and highly honored. Jerusalem will again have become a centre, but not for Israel only, but for all nations. The nations will then flow to Jerusalem (Isaiah 2:2 sqq.; Isaiah 60:4 sqq.), and take with them the Israelites who will now know aright the Lord their God.—[Alexander understands the subject of δֵ ?αִ ?ιΰεּ, Isaiah 66:20, to be the messengers of Isa 66:19; but the subject of the verb is clearly “the heathen won for Jehovah by the testimony of those escaped ones” that had gone to them.
The messengers could hardly be supposed to be those who supply the multifarious means of conveyance mentioned here. They who do this are moreover, evidently regarded as different from the children of Israel named at the close of the verse. If the subject of the δֵ ?αִ ?ιΰεּ is the Gentile nations, then your brethren would naturally be regarded as the scattered Jews rather than the converted Gentiles. Comp. Zephaniah 3:10 : “From beyond the rivers of Cush will they (the Gentiles) bring my worshippers, the daughter of my dispersed, to me as an offering (ξִ ?πְ ?ηָ ?δ) This passage of Zephaniah is an abbreviation of what Isaiah here says, and determines the sense of ΰֲ ?ηֵ ?ιλֶ ?ν as referring to the Jews. See Keil on Zephaniah 3:10.—D.
M.]—The nations will conduct back the scattered Jews most honorably. On horses, in chariots, on couches (comp. Numbers 7:3), on mules (τֶ ?ψֶ ?γ only here in Isaiah), on dromedaries (λִּ ?ψְ ?λָּ ?ψָ ?η, ἅπ. λεγ. from the root λַּ ?ψ, currere, saltare), will they be brought. And this bringing of His people the Lord will regard as a precious, unbloody offering which the Gentiles render to Him. Heretofore the Gentiles durst not tread the temple of Jehovah to make offerings on His altar in the holy place. But then they will be admitted to this service; and their offering will be as acceptable to the Lord as a pure ξִ ?πְ ?ηָ ?δ presented to Him by Israelites (comp.
Isaiah 56:7; Malachi 1:11; Malachi 3:3). ιαιΰε is not to be taken as the future, as if in the present time the meat-offering were not brought in a clean vessel. But it is the imperfect which indicates a lasting condition. αιϊι is Acc. localis in answer to the question where? For the act of offering is performed in the house of Jehovah by the presentation of the offering (Isaiah 43:23), not on the way thither. But the offering of the Israelites as a ξִ ?πְ ?ηָ ?δ consists not in offering them in the house of the Lord, but in bringing them to the house of the Lord. The Gentiles, who bring them thither on their horses, mules, etc., are, as it were, the clean vessel (comp. Isaiah 18:7; Psalms 68:32).
But a still greater thing will happen. The Gentiles will be admitted not only to the congregation of Israel; they will also be admitted to the office of priests and Levites. However much the Prophet is seen to be governed in respect to form by the time to which he belonged, we clearly perceive how in respect to the substance he boldly breaks through the limits of the present time, and prophesies a quite new order of things. For it was a fundamental law of the old theocracy that only those belonging to the tribe of Levi could be admitted to the office of Levites and priests. But in the glorious time future the middle wall of partition (Ephesians 2:14) will be taken away. Then twain will be made one; there will be one flock and one Shepherd (John 10:16).
Then the Lord will choose not only out of all the tribes of Israel, but also from the Gentiles, those whom He will add to the Aaronic priests and to the Levites. We are not to explain μַ ?λֹּ ?δֲ ?πִ ?ιν and μַ ?μְ ?εִ ?ιִ ?νfor priests and Levites, but in addition to the already existing priests and Levites. All things will become new. The explanation which refers ξֵ ?δֶ ?ν, Isaiah 66:21, to the ΰַ ?ηִ ?ιν (Isaiah 66:20) is at variance with the context.—[Against this interpretation, which applies of them to the restored Israelites, an interpretation which, beside Jewish writers and Grotius, Hitzig and Knobel have put forward, it may be objected that the promise in this view of it would be needless, as the priests and Levites would not have forfeited their right to their hereditary office by a foreign residence. Hofmann shows well how it suits the context to understand εְ ?βַ ?νξֵ ?δֶ ?ν of the Gentiles: “God recompenses this bringing of an offering, by taking to Himself out of the number of those who make the offering, priests, who as such are added to the Levitical priests.” Instead of I will also take of them, as in the E. V., translate: also of them will I take, etc.
The expression implies that those to be chosen to the offices of priests and Levites are not the ordinary and regular priests and Levites—D. M.]—The time will be that of the καινὴκτίσις. Without it that fundamental change could not be conceived. For in it the powers of the ζωὴαἰώνιος manifest themselves. In Isaiah 66:22 there are two thoughts combined into one: for as heaven and earth so shall ye also be new, and this new life will be eternal. In Isaiah 66:23-24 also we perceive this singular blending of what belongs specifically to the present, and of what belongs to a totally different future.
The Prophet still sees the old forms of worship, Sabbath and new moon. But at the same time the relations are so fundamentally new that what was not possible even to the Israelites will be possible to all flesh.—[“The Prophet, in accordance with his constant practice, speaks of the emancipated church in language borrowed from her state of bondage.” Alexander.]—The males of the Israelites, from their twelfth year, had to appear before the Lord three times in the year. To appear every new moon and Sabbath would have been impossible even for the inhabitants of circumscribed Palestine. But according to the Prophet’s declaration, this will be in that remote future possible for all flesh. Comp. for a real parallel Zechariah 14:16. I do not see what objection can be made to taking ηֹ ?γֶ ?ωׁ and ωַׁ ?αָּ ?ϊ in a double sense here. ηֹ ?γωׁ (renovatio) is first, the new moon, then, the month beginning with the new moon, governed, as it were, by it. ξγιΞηγωׁ αηΧ is pro ratione mensis novilunio suo, i.e. every month on the new moon belonging to it.
And ξγιωׁ ?αϊαωׁ ?αϊ is every week on the Sabbath belonging to it. ωַׁ ?αָּ ?ϊ is used even in the Old Testament in the signification of week, Numbers 23:15; comp. the parallel place, Deuteronomy 16:4. And in the New Testament σάββατον and σάββατα denote a week.—[But there is no need of taking ηγωׁ and ωׁ ?αϊ in a double sense. We cannot take ωִׁ ?αָּ ?δ in a double sense in Zechariah 14:16 and 1 Samuel 7:16, where the construction is similar. Comp. these places with the one before us to see that there is a valid objection, which our author did not see, to the construction which he proposes.—D. M.]—The last verse carries out more fully the refrain: There is no peace to the wicked (Isaiah 48:22; Isaiah 57:21). The Prophet has here, too, the outlines of the topography of the old Jerusalem before his eyes.
As this has outside its walls, but in its immediate neighborhood, a place into which all the filth of the city is thrown, because it was a place profaned by abominable idolatry, namely, the valley of Hinnom, he conceives of Gehenna as adjacent to the new Jerusalem. Our Lord appropriates this view of the Prophet so far that he, too, describes γέεννα as the place “where their worm dieth not, and their fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:43-48). ψָ ?ΰָ ?δ with following αְּ denotes a qualified seeing, as with pleasure, with abhorrence, with interest. [Here with horror, as appears from the last clause.—D. M.] (Comp. Isaiah 66:5; Isaiah 53:2; Ps. 22:18; 54:9; Genesis 21:16; Genesis 44:34, et saepe.) Regarding the worm that dies not and the fire that is not quenched, we are to guard against the extremes of a gross material view and of an abstract ideal one.—[“Ordinarily, the worm feeds on the disorganized body, and then dies; the fire consumes its fuel, and goes out. But here is a strange mystery of suffering—a worm not dying, a fire not becoming extinct; a remorseful memory of past guilt, and all-penetrating sense of Divine justice.” Kay.—D. M.]—γֵּ ?ψָ ?ΰεֹ ?ο is found besides here only Daniel 12:2.
The root γּ ?ψΰ does not occur in Hebrew. The word is explained from Arabic roots which denote repellere, taedio, contemtui esse. [“The Prophet had spoken in Isaiah 38:14, also, of ‘everlasting burnings.’ He, whose lips have been touched with the ‘live coal’ from the heavenly altar, understood that Holy Love must be to all that is unholy ‘a consuming fire’ ” (Hebrews 12:29). Kay.—D. M.]
AND ETHICAL1. On Isaiah 65:1-2. Our Lord has said, “He that seeketh findeth” (Matthew 7:8). How, then, does it come that the Jews do not find what they seek, but the heathen find what they did not seek? The Apostle Paul puts this question and answers it, Romans 9:30 sqq.; Isaiah 10:19 sqq.; Isaiah 11:7. [See also Isaiah 10:3]. All depends on the way in which we seek.
Luther says: Quaerere fit dupliciter. Primo, secundum praescriptum verbi Dei, et sic invenitur Deus, Secundo, quaeritur nostris studiis et consiliis, et sic non invenitur.” The Jews, with exception of the ἐκλογή (Romans 11:7), sought only after their own glory and merit. They sought what satisfies the flesh. They did not suffer the spirit in the depths of their heart to speak,—the spirit which can be satisfied only by food fitted for it. The law which was given to them that they might perceive by means of it their own impotence, became a snare to them. For they perverted it, made what was of minor importance the chief matter, and then persuaded themselves that they had fulfilled it and were righteous.
But the Gentiles who had not the law, had not this snare. They were not tempted to abuse the pζdagogical discipline of the law. They felt simply that they were forsaken by God. Their spirit was hungry. And when for the first time God’s word in the Gospel was presented to them, then they received it the more eagerly in proportion to the poverty, wretchedness and hunger in which they had been. The Jews did not find what they sought, because they had not a spiritual, but a carnal apprehension of the law, and, like the elder brother of the prodigal son, were full, and blind for that which was needful for them.
But the Gentiles found what they did not seek, because they were like the prodigal son, who was the more receptive of grace, the more he needed it, and the less claim he had to it. [There is important truth stated in the foregoing remarks. But it does not fully explain why the Lord is found of those who sought Him not. The sinner who has obtained mercy when he asks why? must have recourse to a higher cause, a cause out of himself, even free, sovereign, efficacious grace. “It is of God that showeth mercy,” Romans 9:16. “Though in after-communion God is found of those that seek Him (Proverbs 8:17), yet in the first conversion He is found of those that seek Him not; for therefore we love Him, because He first loved us.” Henry. D. M.].
2. On Isaiah 65:2. God’s long-suffering is great. He stretches out His hands the whole day and does not grow weary. What man would do this? The disobedient people contemns Him, as if He knew nothing, and could do nothing.
3. On Isaiah 65:2. “It is clear from this verse gratiam esse resistibilem. Christ earnestly stretched out His hands to the Jews. He would, but they would not. This doctrine the Remonstrants prove from this place, and rightly too, in Actis Synodi Dodrac. P. 3. p. 76.” Leigh. [The grace of God which is signified by His stretching out His hands can be, and is, resisted.
That figurative expression denotes warning, exhorting, entreating, and was never set forth by Reformed theologians as indicating such grace as was necessarily productive of conversion. The power by which God quickens those who were dead in sins (Ephesians 2:5), by which He gives a new heart (Ezekiel 36:26), by which He draws to the Son (John 6:44-45; John 6:65), is the grace which is called irresistible. The epithet is admitted on all hands to be faulty; but the grace denoted by it is, from the nature of the case, not resisted. Turrettin in treating De Vocatione et Fide thus replies to this objection, “Aliud est Deo monenti et vocanti externe resistere; Aliud est conversionem intendenti et efficaciter ac interne vocanti. Prius asseritur Isa. lxv. 2, 3. Quum dicit Propheta se expandisse totβ die manus ad populum perversum etc., non posterius.
Expansio brachiorum notat quidem blandam et benevolam Dei invitationem, quβ illos extrinsecus sive Verbo, sive beneficiis alliciebat, non semel atque iterum, sed quotidie ministerio servorum suorum eos compellando. Sed non potest designate potentem et efficacem operationem, quβ brachium Domini illis revelatur qui docentur α Deo et trahuntur a Patre, etc.” Locus XV.; Quaestio VI .25.—D. M.].
4. On Isaiah 65:2. (Who walk after their own thoughts.)
Duc me, nec sine, me per me, Deus optime, duci.
Nam duce me pereo, te duce certus eo.
[“If our guide be our own thoughts, our way is not likely to be good; for every imagination of the thought of our hearts is only evil.” Henry. D. M.].
5. On Isaiah 65:3 sq. “The sweetest wine is turned into the sourest vinegar; and when God’s people apostatize from God, they are worse than the heathen (Jeremiah 3:11).” Starke.
6. On Isaiah 65:5. [I am holier than thou. “A deep insight is here given us into the nature of the mysterious fascination which heathenism exercised on the Jewish people. The law humbled them at every turn with mementoes of their own sin and of God’s unapproachable holiness. Paganism freed them from this, and allowed them (in the midst of moral pollution) to cherish lofty pretensions to sanctity. The man, who had been offering incense on the mountain-top, despised the penitent who went to the temple to present ‘a broken and contrite heart.’ If Pharisaism led to a like result, it was because it, too, had emptied the law of its spiritual import, and turned its provisions into intellectual idols.” Kay. D. M.].
7. On Isaiah 65:6-7. “The longer God forbears, the harder He punishes at last. The greatness of the punishment compensates for the delay (Psalms 50:21).” Starke after Leigh.
8. On Isaiah 65:8 sqq. [“This is expounded by St. Paul, Romans 11:1-5, where, when upon occasion of the rejection of the Jews, it is asked Hath God then cast away His people? He answers, no; for, at this time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. This prophecy has reference to that distinguished remnant…Our Saviour has told us that for the sake of these elect the days of the destruction of the Jews should be shortened, and a stop put to the desolation, which otherwise would have proceeded to that degree that no flesh should be saved. Matthew 24:22. Henry. D. M.].
9. On Isaiah 65:15. The judgment which came upon Israel by the hand of the Romans, did not altogether destroy the people, but it so destroyed the Old Covenant, i.e., the Mosaic religion, that the Jews can no more observe its precepts in essential points. For no Jew knows to what tribe he belongs. Therefore, they have no priests, and, consequently, no sacrifices. The Old Covenant is now only a ruin.
We see here most clearly that the Old Covenant, as it was designed only for one nation, and for one country, was to last only for a certain time. If we consider, moreover, the way in which the judgment was executed, (comp. Josephus), we can truly say that the Jews bear in themselves the mark of a curse. They bear the stamp of the divine judgment. The beginning of the judgment on the world has been executed on them as the house of God. But how comes it that the Jews have become so mighty, so insolent in the present time, and are not satisfied with remaining on the defensive in their attitude toward the Christian church, but have passed over to the offensive?
This has arisen solely from Christendom having to a large extent lost the consciousness of its new name. There are many Christians who scoff at the name of Christian, and seek their honor in combating all that is called Christian. This is the preparation for the judgment on Christendom itself. If Christendom would hold fast her jewel, she would remain strong, and no one would dare to mock or to assail her. For she would then partake of the full blessing which lies in the principle of Christianity, and every one would be obliged to show respect for the fruits of this principle. But an apostate Christendom, that is ashamed of her glorious Christian name, is something more miserable than the Jews, judged though they have been, who still esteem highly their name, and what remains to them of their old religion.
Thus Christendom, in so far as it denies the worth and significance of its name, is gradually reaching a condition in which it will be so ripe for the second act of the judgment on the world, that this will be longed for as a benefit. For, this apostate Christendom will be the kingdom of Antichrist, as Antichrist will manifest himself in Satanic antagonism to God by sitting in the temple of God, and pretending to be God (2 Thessalonians 2:3 sqq.). [We do not quite share all the sentiments expressed in this paragraph. We are far from being so despondent as to the prospects of Christendom, and think that there is a more obvious interpretation of the prophecy quoted from 2 Thess., than that indicated.—D. M.].
10. On Isaiah 65:17. [If we had only the present passage to testify of new heavens and a new earth, we might say, as many good interpreters do, that the language is figurative, and indicates nothing more than a great moral and spiritual revolution. But we cannot thus explain 2 Peter 3:10-13. The present earth and heavens shall pass away; (comp. Isaiah 51:6; Psalms 102:25-26). But how can we suppose that our Prophet here refers to the new heavens and new earth, which are to succeed the destruction of the world by fire?
In the verses that follow Isaiah 65:17, a condition of things is described which, although better than the present, is not so good as that perfectly sinless, blessed state of the redeemed, which we look for after the coming of the day of the Lord. Yet the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:13) evidently regards the promise before us of new heavens and a new earth, as destined to receive its accomplishment after the conflagration which is to take place at the end of the world. If we had not respect to other Scriptures, and if we overlooked the use made by Peter of this passage, we should not take it literally. But we can take it literally, if we suppose that the Prophet brings together future events not according to their order in time. He sees the new heavens and new earth arise. Other scenes are disclosed to his prophetic eye of a grand and joy-inspiring nature.
He announces them as future. But these scenes suppose the continued prevalence of death and labor (Isaiah 65:20 sqq.), which, we know from definite statements of Scripture, will not exist when the new heaven and new earth appear (comp. Revelation 21:1-4). The proper view then of Isa 65:17 is to take its prediction literally, and to hold at the same time that in the following description (which is that of the millennium) future things are presented to us which are really prior, and not posterior to the promised complete renovation of heaven and earth. Nor should this surprise us, as Isaiah and the other Prophets place closely together in their pictures future things which belong to different times. They do not draw the line sharply between this world and the next.
Compare Isaiah’s prophecy of the abolition of death (Isaiah 25:8) in connection with other events that must happen long before that state of perfect blessedness.—D. M.].
11. On Isaiah 65:20. [“The extension of the Gospel every where,—of its pure principles of temperance in eating and drinking, in restraining the passions, in producing calmness of mind, and in arresting war, would greatly lengthen out the life of man. The image here employed by the Prophet is more than mere poetry; it is one that is founded in reality, and is designed to convey most important truth.” Barnes. D. M.].
12. On Isaiah 65:24. [It occurs to me that an erroneous application is frequently made of the promise, Before they call, etc. This declaration is made in connection with the glory and blessedness of the last days. It belongs specifically to the millennium. There are, indeed, occasions when God even now seems to act according to this law. (Comp. Daniel 9:23). But Paul had to pray thrice before he received the answer of the Lord (2 Corinthians 12:8). Compare the parable of the importunate widow, Luke 18:1-7. The answer to prayer may be long delayed. This is not only taught in the Bible, but is verified in Christian experience. But the time will come when the Lord will not thus try and exercise the faith of His people.—D. M.].
13. On Isaiah 65:25. “If the lower animals live in hostility in consequence of the sin of man, a state of peace must be restored to them along with our redemption from sin.” J. G. Mueller in Herz. R.-Encycl. xvi. p. 45. [“By the serpent in this place there seems every reason to believe that Satan, the old seducer and author of discord and misery, is meant. During the millennium he is to be subject to the lowest degradation. Compare for the force of the phrase to lick the dust, Psalms 72:9; Micah 7:17. This was the original doom of the tempter, Genesis 3:14, and shall be fully carried into execution. Comp. Revelation 20:1-3.” Henderson. D. M.].
14. On Isaiah 66:1. [“Having held up in every point of view the true design, mission and vocation of the church or chosen people, its relation to the natural descendants of Abraham, the causes which required that the latter should be stripped of their peculiar privileges, and the vocation of the Gentiles as a part of the divine plan from its origin, the Prophet now addresses the apostate and unbelieving Jews at the close of the old dispensation, who, instead of preparing for the general extension of the church and the exchange of ceremonial for spiritual worship, were engaged in the rebuilding and costly decoration of the temple at Jerusalem. The pride and interest in this great public work, felt not only by the Herods but by all the Jews, is clear from incidental statements of the Scriptures (John 2:20; Matthew 24:1), as well as from the ample and direct assertions of Josephus. That the nation should have been thus occupied precisely at the time when the Messiah came, is one of those agreements between prophecy and history, which cannot be accounted for except upon the supposition of a providential and designed assimilation.” Alexander after Vitringa. D. M.].
15. On Isaiah 66:1-2. What a grand view of the nature of God and of the way in which He is made known lies at the foundation of these words! God made all things. He is so great that it is an absurdity to desire to build a temple for Him. The whole universe cannot contain Him (1 Kings 8:27)!
But He, who contains all things and can be contained by nothing, has His greatest joy in a poor, humble human heart that fears Him. He holds it worthy of His regard, it pleases Him, He enters into it, He makes His abode in it. The wise and prudent men of science should learn hence what is chiefly necessary in order to know God. We cannot reach Him by applying force, by climbing up to Him, by attempting to take Him by storm. And if science should place ladder upon ladder upwards and downwards, she could not attain His height or His depth. But He enters of His own accord into a child-like, simple heart.
He lets Himself be laid hold of by it, kept and known. It is not, therefore, by the intellect [alone] but by the heart that we can know God.
16. On Isaiah 66:3. He who under the Christian dispensation would retain the forms of worship of the ancient ritual of shadows would violate the fundamental laws of the new time, just as a man by killing would offend against the foundation of the moral law, or as he would by offering the blood of dogs or swine offend against the foundation of the ceremonial law. For when the body, the substance has appeared, the type must vanish. He who would retain the type along with the reality would declare the latter to be insufficient, would, therefore, found his salvation not upon God only, but also in part on his own legal performance. But God will brook no rival.
He is either our All, or nothing. Christianity could tolerate animal sacrifices just as little as the Old Testament law could tolerate murder or the offering of abominable things.
17. On Isaiah 66:5. [“The most malignant and cruel persecutions of the friends of God have been originated under the pretext of great zeal in His service, and with a professed desire to honor His name. So it was with the Jews when they crucified the Lord Jesus. So it is expressly said it would be when His disciples would be excommunicated and put to death, John 16:2. So it was in fact in the persecutions excited against the apostles and early Christians. See Acts 6:13-14; Acts 21:28-31. So it was in all the persecutions of the Waldenses, in all the horrors of the Inquisition, in all the crimes of the Duke of Alva. So it was in the bloody reign of Mary; and so it has ever been in all ages and in all countries where Christians have been persecuted.” Barnes.—D. M.].
18. On Isaiah 66:10. “The idea which is presented in this verse is, that it is the duty of all who love Zion to sympathize in her joy. The true friends of God should rejoice in every real revival of religion, they should rejoice in all the success which attends the Gospel in heathen lands. And they will rejoice. It is one evidence of piety to rejoice in her joy; and they who have no joy when souls are born into the kingdom of God, when He pours down His Spirit and in a revival of religion produces changes as sudden and transforming as if the earth were suddenly to pass from the desolation of winter to the verdure and bloom of summer, or when the Gospel makes sudden and rapid advances in the heathen world, have no true evidence that they love God and His cause. They have no religion.” Barnes.—D. M.
19. On Isaiah 66:13. The Prophet is here completely governed by the idea that in the glorious time of the end, love, maternal love will reign. Thus He makes Zion appear as a mother who will bring forth with incredible ease and rapidity innumerable children (Isaiah 66:7-9). Then the Israelites are depicted as little children who suck the breasts of their mother. Further, the heathen who bring back the Israelites into their home, must do this in the same way in which mothers in the Orient are wont to carry their little children.
Lastly, even to the Lord Himself maternal love is ascribed (comp. Isaiah 42:14; Isaiah 49:15), and such love as a mother manifests to her adult son. Thus the Israelites will be surrounded in that glorious time on all sides by maternal love. Maternal love will be the characteristic of that period.
20. On Isaiah 66:19 sqq. The Prophet describes remote things by words which are borrowed from the relations and conceptions of his own time, but which stand in strange contrast to the reality of the future which he beholds. Thus the Prophet speaks of escaped persons who go to Tarshish, Pul, Lud, Tubal, and Javan. Here he has rightly seen that a great act of judgment must have taken place. And this act of judgment must have passed on Israel, because they who escape, who go to the Gentiles to declare to them the glory of Jehovah, must plainly be Jews How accurately, in spite of the strange manner of expression, is the fact here stated that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was proclaimed to the Gentiles exactly at the time when the old theocracy was destroyed!
How justly does he indicate that there was a causal connection between these events! He did not, indeed, know that the shattering of the old form was necessary in order that the eternal truth enclosed in it might be set free, and fitted for filling the whole earth. For the Old Covenant cannot exist along with the New, the Law cannot stand with equal dignity beside the Gospel. The Law must be regarded as annulled, in order that the Gospel may come into force. How remarkably strange is it, however, that he calls the Gentile nations Tarshish, Pul, Lud, etc. And how singular it sounds to be told that the Israelites shall be brought by the Gentiles to Jerusalem as an offering for Jehovah!
But how accurately has he, notwithstanding, stated the fact, which, indeed, still awaits its fulfilment, that it is the conversion of the heathen world which will induce Israel to acknowledge their Saviour, and that they both shall gather round the Lord as their common centre! How strange it sounds that then priests and Levites shall be taken from the Gentiles also, and that new moon and Sabbath shall be celebrated by all flesh in the old Jewish fashion! But how accurately is the truth thereby stated that in the New Covenant there will be no more the priesthood restricted to the family of Aaron, but a higher spiritual and universal priesthood, and that, instead of the limited local place of worship of the Old Covenant, the whole earth will be a temple of the Lord! Verily the prophecy of the two last chapters of Isaiah attests a genuine prophet of Jehovah. He cannot have been an anonymous unknown person. He can have been none other than Isaiah the son of Amoz!
HINTS1. On Isaiah 65:1 sq. [I. “It is here foretold that the Gentiles, who had been afar off, should be made nigh, Isaiah 65:1. II. It is here foretold that the Jews, who had long been a people near to God, should be cast off, and set at a distance, Isaiah 65:2.” Henry, III. We are informed of the cause of the rejection of the Jews. It was owing to their rebellion, waywardness and flagrant provocations, Isaiah 65:2 sqq.—D. M.]
2. On Isaiah 65:1-7. A Fast-Day Sermon. When the Evangelical Church no more holds fast what she has; when apostasy spreads more and more, and modern heathenism (Isaiah 65:3-5 a) gains the ascendency in her, then it can happen to her as it did to the people of Israel, and as it happened to the Church in the Orient. Her candlestick can be removed out of its place.—[By the Evangelical Church we are not to understand here the Church universal, for her perpetuity is certain. The Evangelical Church is in Germany the Protestant Church, and more particularly the Lutheran branch of it.—D. M.]
3. On Isaiah 65:8-10. Sermon on behalf of the mission among the Jews. Israel’s hope. 1) On what it is founded (Israel is still a berry in which drops of the divine blessing are contained); 2) To what this hope is directed (Israel’s Restoration).
4. On Isaiah 65:13-16. [“The blessedness of those that serve God, and the woful condition of those that rebel against him, are here set the one over against the other, that they may serve as a foil to each other. The difference of their states here lies in two things: 1) In point of comfort and satisfaction, a. God’s servants shall eat and drink; they shall have the bread of life to feed, to feast upon continually, and shall want nothing that is good for them. But those who set their hearts upon the world, and place their happiness in it, shall be hungry and thirsty, always empty, always craving. In communion with God and dependence upon Him there is full satisfaction; but in sinful pursuits there is nothing but disappointment. b.
God’s servants shall rejoice and sing for joy of heart; they have constant cause for joy, and there is nothing that may be an occasion of grief to them but they have an allay sufficient for it. But, on the other hand, they that forsake the Lord shut themselves out from all true joy, for they shall be ashamed of their vain confidence in themselves, and their own righteousness, and the hopes they had built thereon. When the expectations of bliss, wherewith they had flattered themselves, are frustrated, O what confusion will fill their faces! Then shall they cry for sorrow of heart and howl for vexation of spirit. 2) In point of honor and reputation, Isaiah 65:15-16. The memory of the just is, and shall be, blessed; but the memory of the wicked shall rot.” Henry.—D. M.]
5. On Isaiah 66:1-2. Carpzov has a sermon on this text. He places it in parallel with Luke 18:9-14, and considers, 1) The rejection of spiritual pride; 2) The commendation of filial fear.
6. On Isaiah 66:2 Arndt, in his True Christianity I. cap. 10, comments on this text. He says among other things: “The man who will be something is the material out of which God makes nothing, yea, out of which He makes fools. But a man who will be nothing, and regards himself as nothing, is the material out of which God makes something, even glorious, wise people in His sight.”
7. On Isaiah 66:3. [Saurin has a sermon on this text entitled “Sur l’ Insuffisance du culte exterieur” in the eighth volume of his sermons.—D. M.]
8. On Isaiah 66:13. As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you. “These words stand, let us consider it, 1) In the Old Testament; 2) In the heart of God always; 3) But are they realized in our experience?” Koegel in “Aus dem Vorhof ins Heiligthum, II. Bd., p. 242, 1876.
9. On Isaiah 66:24. The punishment of sin is twofold—inward and outward. The inward is compared with a worm that dies not; the outward with a fire that is not quenched. This worm and this fire are at work even in this life. He who is alarmed by them and hastens to Christ can now be delivered from them.—[“It is better not to fall into this fire and never to have any experience of this worm, even though, as some imagine, eternity should not be eternal, and the unquenchable fire might be quenched, and the worm that shall never die, should die, and Jesus and His apostles should not have expressed themselves quite in accordance with the compassionate taste of our time. Better, I say, is better. Save thyself and thy neighbor before the fire begins to burn, and the smoke to ascend.” Gossner.—D. M.]