summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/30608-h/30608-h.htm
blob: 1c8fca9b68a5a7d5a96c8fd2a6d6b92aa622c82e (plain) 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
1300
1301
1302
1303
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
1357
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
1400
1401
1402
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
1408
1409
1410
1411
1412
1413
1414
1415
1416
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
1425
1426
1427
1428
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433
1434
1435
1436
1437
1438
1439
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
1446
1447
1448
1449
1450
1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
1460
1461
1462
1463
1464
1465
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470
1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476
1477
1478
1479
1480
1481
1482
1483
1484
1485
1486
1487
1488
1489
1490
1491
1492
1493
1494
1495
1496
1497
1498
1499
1500
1501
1502
1503
1504
1505
1506
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
1513
1514
1515
1516
1517
1518
1519
1520
1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545
1546
1547
1548
1549
1550
1551
1552
1553
1554
1555
1556
1557
1558
1559
1560
1561
1562
1563
1564
1565
1566
1567
1568
1569
1570
1571
1572
1573
1574
1575
1576
1577
1578
1579
1580
1581
1582
1583
1584
1585
1586
1587
1588
1589
1590
1591
1592
1593
1594
1595
1596
1597
1598
1599
1600
1601
1602
1603
1604
1605
1606
1607
1608
1609
1610
1611
1612
1613
1614
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619
1620
1621
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
1627
1628
1629
1630
1631
1632
1633
1634
1635
1636
1637
1638
1639
1640
1641
1642
1643
1644
1645
1646
1647
1648
1649
1650
1651
1652
1653
1654
1655
1656
1657
1658
1659
1660
1661
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666
1667
1668
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
1674
1675
1676
1677
1678
1679
1680
1681
1682
1683
1684
1685
1686
1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692
1693
1694
1695
1696
1697
1698
1699
1700
1701
1702
1703
1704
1705
1706
1707
1708
1709
1710
1711
1712
1713
1714
1715
1716
1717
1718
1719
1720
1721
1722
1723
1724
1725
1726
1727
1728
1729
1730
1731
1732
1733
1734
1735
1736
1737
1738
1739
1740
1741
1742
1743
1744
1745
1746
1747
1748
1749
1750
1751
1752
1753
1754
1755
1756
1757
1758
1759
1760
1761
1762
1763
1764
1765
1766
1767
1768
1769
1770
1771
1772
1773
1774
1775
1776
1777
1778
1779
1780
1781
1782
1783
1784
1785
1786
1787
1788
1789
1790
1791
1792
1793
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799
1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
1811
1812
1813
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
1821
1822
1823
1824
1825
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831
1832
1833
1834
1835
1836
1837
1838
1839
1840
1841
1842
1843
1844
1845
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855
1856
1857
1858
1859
1860
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
1866
1867
1868
1869
1870
1871
1872
1873
1874
1875
1876
1877
1878
1879
1880
1881
1882
1883
1884
1885
1886
1887
1888
1889
1890
1891
1892
1893
1894
1895
1896
1897
1898
1899
1900
1901
1902
1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
2051
2052
2053
2054
2055
2056
2057
2058
2059
2060
2061
2062
2063
2064
2065
2066
2067
2068
2069
2070
2071
2072
2073
2074
2075
2076
2077
2078
2079
2080
2081
2082
2083
2084
2085
2086
2087
2088
2089
2090
2091
2092
2093
2094
2095
2096
2097
2098
2099
2100
2101
2102
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
2108
2109
2110
2111
2112
2113
2114
2115
2116
2117
2118
2119
2120
2121
2122
2123
2124
2125
2126
2127
2128
2129
2130
2131
2132
2133
2134
2135
2136
2137
2138
2139
2140
2141
2142
2143
2144
2145
2146
2147
2148
2149
2150
2151
2152
2153
2154
2155
2156
2157
2158
2159
2160
2161
2162
2163
2164
2165
2166
2167
2168
2169
2170
2171
2172
2173
2174
2175
2176
2177
2178
2179
2180
2181
2182
2183
2184
2185
2186
2187
2188
2189
2190
2191
2192
2193
2194
2195
2196
2197
2198
2199
2200
2201
2202
2203
2204
2205
2206
2207
2208
2209
2210
2211
2212
2213
2214
2215
2216
2217
2218
2219
2220
2221
2222
2223
2224
2225
2226
2227
2228
2229
2230
2231
2232
2233
2234
2235
2236
2237
2238
2239
2240
2241
2242
2243
2244
2245
2246
2247
2248
2249
2250
2251
2252
2253
2254
2255
2256
2257
2258
2259
2260
2261
2262
2263
2264
2265
2266
2267
2268
2269
2270
2271
2272
2273
2274
2275
2276
2277
2278
2279
2280
2281
2282
2283
2284
2285
2286
2287
2288
2289
2290
2291
2292
2293
2294
2295
2296
2297
2298
2299
2300
2301
2302
2303
2304
2305
2306
2307
2308
2309
2310
2311
2312
2313
2314
2315
2316
2317
2318
2319
2320
2321
2322
2323
2324
2325
2326
2327
2328
2329
2330
2331
2332
2333
2334
2335
2336
2337
2338
2339
2340
2341
2342
2343
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2353
2354
2355
2356
2357
2358
2359
2360
2361
2362
2363
2364
2365
2366
2367
2368
2369
2370
2371
2372
2373
2374
2375
2376
2377
2378
2379
2380
2381
2382
2383
2384
2385
2386
2387
2388
2389
2390
2391
2392
2393
2394
2395
2396
2397
2398
2399
2400
2401
2402
2403
2404
2405
2406
2407
2408
2409
2410
2411
2412
2413
2414
2415
2416
2417
2418
2419
2420
2421
2422
2423
2424
2425
2426
2427
2428
2429
2430
2431
2432
2433
2434
2435
2436
2437
2438
2439
2440
2441
2442
2443
2444
2445
2446
2447
2448
2449
2450
2451
2452
2453
2454
2455
2456
2457
2458
2459
2460
2461
2462
2463
2464
2465
2466
2467
2468
2469
2470
2471
2472
2473
2474
2475
2476
2477
2478
2479
2480
2481
2482
2483
2484
2485
2486
2487
2488
2489
2490
2491
2492
2493
2494
2495
2496
2497
2498
2499
2500
2501
2502
2503
2504
2505
2506
2507
2508
2509
2510
2511
2512
2513
2514
2515
2516
2517
2518
2519
2520
2521
2522
2523
2524
2525
2526
2527
2528
2529
2530
2531
2532
2533
2534
2535
2536
2537
2538
2539
2540
2541
2542
2543
2544
2545
2546
2547
2548
2549
2550
2551
2552
2553
2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
2561
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
2577
2578
2579
2580
2581
2582
2583
2584
2585
2586
2587
2588
2589
2590
2591
2592
2593
2594
2595
2596
2597
2598
2599
2600
2601
2602
2603
2604
2605
2606
2607
2608
2609
2610
2611
2612
2613
2614
2615
2616
2617
2618
2619
2620
2621
2622
2623
2624
2625
2626
2627
2628
2629
2630
2631
2632
2633
2634
2635
2636
2637
2638
2639
2640
2641
2642
2643
2644
2645
2646
2647
2648
2649
2650
2651
2652
2653
2654
2655
2656
2657
2658
2659
2660
2661
2662
2663
2664
2665
2666
2667
2668
2669
2670
2671
2672
2673
2674
2675
2676
2677
2678
2679
2680
2681
2682
2683
2684
2685
2686
2687
2688
2689
2690
2691
2692
2693
2694
2695
2696
2697
2698
2699
2700
2701
2702
2703
2704
2705
2706
2707
2708
2709
2710
2711
2712
2713
2714
2715
2716
2717
2718
2719
2720
2721
2722
2723
2724
2725
2726
2727
2728
2729
2730
2731
2732
2733
2734
2735
2736
2737
2738
2739
2740
2741
2742
2743
2744
2745
2746
2747
2748
2749
2750
2751
2752
2753
2754
2755
2756
2757
2758
2759
2760
2761
2762
2763
2764
2765
2766
2767
2768
2769
2770
2771
2772
2773
2774
2775
2776
2777
2778
2779
2780
2781
2782
2783
2784
2785
2786
2787
2788
2789
2790
2791
2792
2793
2794
2795
2796
2797
2798
2799
2800
2801
2802
2803
2804
2805
2806
2807
2808
2809
2810
2811
2812
2813
2814
2815
2816
2817
2818
2819
2820
2821
2822
2823
2824
2825
2826
2827
2828
2829
2830
2831
2832
2833
2834
2835
2836
2837
2838
2839
2840
2841
2842
2843
2844
2845
2846
2847
2848
2849
2850
2851
2852
2853
2854
2855
2856
2857
2858
2859
2860
2861
2862
2863
2864
2865
2866
2867
2868
2869
2870
2871
2872
2873
2874
2875
2876
2877
2878
2879
2880
2881
2882
2883
2884
2885
2886
2887
2888
2889
2890
2891
2892
2893
2894
2895
2896
2897
2898
2899
2900
2901
2902
2903
2904
2905
2906
2907
2908
2909
2910
2911
2912
2913
2914
2915
2916
2917
2918
2919
2920
2921
2922
2923
2924
2925
2926
2927
2928
2929
2930
2931
2932
2933
2934
2935
2936
2937
2938
2939
2940
2941
2942
2943
2944
2945
2946
2947
2948
2949
2950
2951
2952
2953
2954
2955
2956
2957
2958
2959
2960
2961
2962
2963
2964
2965
2966
2967
2968
2969
2970
2971
2972
2973
2974
2975
2976
2977
2978
2979
2980
2981
2982
2983
2984
2985
2986
2987
2988
2989
2990
2991
2992
2993
2994
2995
2996
2997
2998
2999
3000
3001
3002
3003
3004
3005
3006
3007
3008
3009
3010
3011
3012
3013
3014
3015
3016
3017
3018
3019
3020
3021
3022
3023
3024
3025
3026
3027
3028
3029
3030
3031
3032
3033
3034
3035
3036
3037
3038
3039
3040
3041
3042
3043
3044
3045
3046
3047
3048
3049
3050
3051
3052
3053
3054
3055
3056
3057
3058
3059
3060
3061
3062
3063
3064
3065
3066
3067
3068
3069
3070
3071
3072
3073
3074
3075
3076
3077
3078
3079
3080
3081
3082
3083
3084
3085
3086
3087
3088
3089
3090
3091
3092
3093
3094
3095
3096
3097
3098
3099
3100
3101
3102
3103
3104
3105
3106
3107
3108
3109
3110
3111
3112
3113
3114
3115
3116
3117
3118
3119
3120
3121
3122
3123
3124
3125
3126
3127
3128
3129
3130
3131
3132
3133
3134
3135
3136
3137
3138
3139
3140
3141
3142
3143
3144
3145
3146
3147
3148
3149
3150
3151
3152
3153
3154
3155
3156
3157
3158
3159
3160
3161
3162
3163
3164
3165
3166
3167
3168
3169
3170
3171
3172
3173
3174
3175
3176
3177
3178
3179
3180
3181
3182
3183
3184
3185
3186
3187
3188
3189
3190
3191
3192
3193
3194
3195
3196
3197
3198
3199
3200
3201
3202
3203
3204
3205
3206
3207
3208
3209
3210
3211
3212
3213
3214
3215
3216
3217
3218
3219
3220
3221
3222
3223
3224
3225
3226
3227
3228
3229
3230
3231
3232
3233
3234
3235
3236
3237
3238
3239
3240
3241
3242
3243
3244
3245
3246
3247
3248
3249
3250
3251
3252
3253
3254
3255
3256
3257
3258
3259
3260
3261
3262
3263
3264
3265
3266
3267
3268
3269
3270
3271
3272
3273
3274
3275
3276
3277
3278
3279
3280
3281
3282
3283
3284
3285
3286
3287
3288
3289
3290
3291
3292
3293
3294
3295
3296
3297
3298
3299
3300
3301
3302
3303
3304
3305
3306
3307
3308
3309
3310
3311
3312
3313
3314
3315
3316
3317
3318
3319
3320
3321
3322
3323
3324
3325
3326
3327
3328
3329
3330
3331
3332
3333
3334
3335
3336
3337
3338
3339
3340
3341
3342
3343
3344
3345
3346
3347
3348
3349
3350
3351
3352
3353
3354
3355
3356
3357
3358
3359
3360
3361
3362
3363
3364
3365
3366
3367
3368
3369
3370
3371
3372
3373
3374
3375
3376
3377
3378
3379
3380
3381
3382
3383
3384
3385
3386
3387
3388
3389
3390
3391
3392
3393
3394
3395
3396
3397
3398
3399
3400
3401
3402
3403
3404
3405
3406
3407
3408
3409
3410
3411
3412
3413
3414
3415
3416
3417
3418
3419
3420
3421
3422
3423
3424
3425
3426
3427
3428
3429
3430
3431
3432
3433
3434
3435
3436
3437
3438
3439
3440
3441
3442
3443
3444
3445
3446
3447
3448
3449
3450
3451
3452
3453
3454
3455
3456
3457
3458
3459
3460
3461
3462
3463
3464
3465
3466
3467
3468
3469
3470
3471
3472
3473
3474
3475
3476
3477
3478
3479
3480
3481
3482
3483
3484
3485
3486
3487
3488
3489
3490
3491
3492
3493
3494
3495
3496
3497
3498
3499
3500
3501
3502
3503
3504
3505
3506
3507
3508
3509
3510
3511
3512
3513
3514
3515
3516
3517
3518
3519
3520
3521
3522
3523
3524
3525
3526
3527
3528
3529
3530
3531
3532
3533
3534
3535
3536
3537
3538
3539
3540
3541
3542
3543
3544
3545
3546
3547
3548
3549
3550
3551
3552
3553
3554
3555
3556
3557
3558
3559
3560
3561
3562
3563
3564
3565
3566
3567
3568
3569
3570
3571
3572
3573
3574
3575
3576
3577
3578
3579
3580
3581
3582
3583
3584
3585
3586
3587
3588
3589
3590
3591
3592
3593
3594
3595
3596
3597
3598
3599
3600
3601
3602
3603
3604
3605
3606
3607
3608
3609
3610
3611
3612
3613
3614
3615
3616
3617
3618
3619
3620
3621
3622
3623
3624
3625
3626
3627
3628
3629
3630
3631
3632
3633
3634
3635
3636
3637
3638
3639
3640
3641
3642
3643
3644
3645
3646
3647
3648
3649
3650
3651
3652
3653
3654
3655
3656
3657
3658
3659
3660
3661
3662
3663
3664
3665
3666
3667
3668
3669
3670
3671
3672
3673
3674
3675
3676
3677
3678
3679
3680
3681
3682
3683
3684
3685
3686
3687
3688
3689
3690
3691
3692
3693
3694
3695
3696
3697
3698
3699
3700
3701
3702
3703
3704
3705
3706
3707
3708
3709
3710
3711
3712
3713
3714
3715
3716
3717
3718
3719
3720
3721
3722
3723
3724
3725
3726
3727
3728
3729
3730
3731
3732
3733
3734
3735
3736
3737
3738
3739
3740
3741
3742
3743
3744
3745
3746
3747
3748
3749
3750
3751
3752
3753
3754
3755
3756
3757
3758
3759
3760
3761
3762
3763
3764
3765
3766
3767
3768
3769
3770
3771
3772
3773
3774
3775
3776
3777
3778
3779
3780
3781
3782
3783
3784
3785
3786
3787
3788
3789
3790
3791
3792
3793
3794
3795
3796
3797
3798
3799
3800
3801
3802
3803
3804
3805
3806
3807
3808
3809
3810
3811
3812
3813
3814
3815
3816
3817
3818
3819
3820
3821
3822
3823
3824
3825
3826
3827
3828
3829
3830
3831
3832
3833
3834
3835
3836
3837
3838
3839
3840
3841
3842
3843
3844
3845
3846
3847
3848
3849
3850
3851
3852
3853
3854
3855
3856
3857
3858
3859
3860
3861
3862
3863
3864
3865
3866
3867
3868
3869
3870
3871
3872
3873
3874
3875
3876
3877
3878
3879
3880
3881
3882
3883
3884
3885
3886
3887
3888
3889
3890
3891
3892
3893
3894
3895
3896
3897
3898
3899
3900
3901
3902
3903
3904
3905
3906
3907
3908
3909
3910
3911
3912
3913
3914
3915
3916
3917
3918
3919
3920
3921
3922
3923
3924
3925
3926
3927
3928
3929
3930
3931
3932
3933
3934
3935
3936
3937
3938
3939
3940
3941
3942
3943
3944
3945
3946
3947
3948
3949
3950
3951
3952
3953
3954
3955
3956
3957
3958
3959
3960
3961
3962
3963
3964
3965
3966
3967
3968
3969
3970
3971
3972
3973
3974
3975
3976
3977
3978
3979
3980
3981
3982
3983
3984
3985
3986
3987
3988
3989
3990
3991
3992
3993
3994
3995
3996
3997
3998
3999
4000
4001
4002
4003
4004
4005
4006
4007
4008
4009
4010
4011
4012
4013
4014
4015
4016
4017
4018
4019
4020
4021
4022
4023
4024
4025
4026
4027
4028
4029
4030
4031
4032
4033
4034
4035
4036
4037
4038
4039
4040
4041
4042
4043
4044
4045
4046
4047
4048
4049
4050
4051
4052
4053
4054
4055
4056
4057
4058
4059
4060
4061
4062
4063
4064
4065
4066
4067
4068
4069
4070
4071
4072
4073
4074
4075
4076
4077
4078
4079
4080
4081
4082
4083
4084
4085
4086
4087
4088
4089
4090
4091
4092
4093
4094
4095
4096
4097
4098
4099
4100
4101
4102
4103
4104
4105
4106
4107
4108
4109
4110
4111
4112
4113
4114
4115
4116
4117
4118
4119
4120
4121
4122
4123
4124
4125
4126
4127
4128
4129
4130
4131
4132
4133
4134
4135
4136
4137
4138
4139
4140
4141
4142
4143
4144
4145
4146
4147
4148
4149
4150
4151
4152
4153
4154
4155
4156
4157
4158
4159
4160
4161
4162
4163
4164
4165
4166
4167
4168
4169
4170
4171
4172
4173
4174
4175
4176
4177
4178
4179
4180
4181
4182
4183
4184
4185
4186
4187
4188
4189
4190
4191
4192
4193
4194
4195
4196
4197
4198
4199
4200
4201
4202
4203
4204
4205
4206
4207
4208
4209
4210
4211
4212
4213
4214
4215
4216
4217
4218
4219
4220
4221
4222
4223
4224
4225
4226
4227
4228
4229
4230
4231
4232
4233
4234
4235
4236
4237
4238
4239
4240
4241
4242
4243
4244
4245
4246
4247
4248
4249
4250
4251
4252
4253
4254
4255
4256
4257
4258
4259
4260
4261
4262
4263
4264
4265
4266
4267
4268
4269
4270
4271
4272
4273
4274
4275
4276
4277
4278
4279
4280
4281
4282
4283
4284
4285
4286
4287
4288
4289
4290
4291
4292
4293
4294
4295
4296
4297
4298
4299
4300
4301
4302
4303
4304
4305
4306
4307
4308
4309
4310
4311
4312
4313
4314
4315
4316
4317
4318
4319
4320
4321
4322
4323
4324
4325
4326
4327
4328
4329
4330
4331
4332
4333
4334
4335
4336
4337
4338
4339
4340
4341
4342
4343
4344
4345
4346
4347
4348
4349
4350
4351
4352
4353
4354
4355
4356
4357
4358
4359
4360
4361
4362
4363
4364
4365
4366
4367
4368
4369
4370
4371
4372
4373
4374
4375
4376
4377
4378
4379
4380
4381
4382
4383
4384
4385
4386
4387
4388
4389
4390
4391
4392
4393
4394
4395
4396
4397
4398
4399
4400
4401
4402
4403
4404
4405
4406
4407
4408
4409
4410
4411
4412
4413
4414
4415
4416
4417
4418
4419
4420
4421
4422
4423
4424
4425
4426
4427
4428
4429
4430
4431
4432
4433
4434
4435
4436
4437
4438
4439
4440
4441
4442
4443
4444
4445
4446
4447
4448
4449
4450
4451
4452
4453
4454
4455
4456
4457
4458
4459
4460
4461
4462
4463
4464
4465
4466
4467
4468
4469
4470
4471
4472
4473
4474
4475
4476
4477
4478
4479
4480
4481
4482
4483
4484
4485
4486
4487
4488
4489
4490
4491
4492
4493
4494
4495
4496
4497
4498
4499
4500
4501
4502
4503
4504
4505
4506
4507
4508
4509
4510
4511
4512
4513
4514
4515
4516
4517
4518
4519
4520
4521
4522
4523
4524
4525
4526
4527
4528
4529
4530
4531
4532
4533
4534
4535
4536
4537
4538
4539
4540
4541
4542
4543
4544
4545
4546
4547
4548
4549
4550
4551
4552
4553
4554
4555
4556
4557
4558
4559
4560
4561
4562
4563
4564
4565
4566
4567
4568
4569
4570
4571
4572
4573
4574
4575
4576
4577
4578
4579
4580
4581
4582
4583
4584
4585
4586
4587
4588
4589
4590
4591
4592
4593
4594
4595
4596
4597
4598
4599
4600
4601
4602
4603
4604
4605
4606
4607
4608
4609
4610
4611
4612
4613
4614
4615
4616
4617
4618
4619
4620
4621
4622
4623
4624
4625
4626
4627
4628
4629
4630
4631
4632
4633
4634
4635
4636
4637
4638
4639
4640
4641
4642
4643
4644
4645
4646
4647
4648
4649
4650
4651
4652
4653
4654
4655
4656
4657
4658
4659
4660
4661
4662
4663
4664
4665
4666
4667
4668
4669
4670
4671
4672
4673
4674
4675
4676
4677
4678
4679
4680
4681
4682
4683
4684
4685
4686
4687
4688
4689
4690
4691
4692
4693
4694
4695
4696
4697
4698
4699
4700
4701
4702
4703
4704
4705
4706
4707
4708
4709
4710
4711
4712
4713
4714
4715
4716
4717
4718
4719
4720
4721
4722
4723
4724
4725
4726
4727
4728
4729
4730
4731
4732
4733
4734
4735
4736
4737
4738
4739
4740
4741
4742
4743
4744
4745
4746
4747
4748
4749
4750
4751
4752
4753
4754
4755
4756
4757
4758
4759
4760
4761
4762
4763
4764
4765
4766
4767
4768
4769
4770
4771
4772
4773
4774
4775
4776
4777
4778
4779
4780
4781
4782
4783
4784
4785
4786
4787
4788
4789
4790
4791
4792
4793
4794
4795
4796
4797
4798
4799
4800
4801
4802
4803
4804
4805
4806
4807
4808
4809
4810
4811
4812
4813
4814
4815
4816
4817
4818
4819
4820
4821
4822
4823
4824
4825
4826
4827
4828
4829
4830
4831
4832
4833
4834
4835
4836
4837
4838
4839
4840
4841
4842
4843
4844
4845
4846
4847
4848
4849
4850
4851
4852
4853
4854
4855
4856
4857
4858
4859
4860
4861
4862
4863
4864
4865
4866
4867
4868
4869
4870
4871
4872
4873
4874
4875
4876
4877
4878
4879
4880
4881
4882
4883
4884
4885
4886
4887
4888
4889
4890
4891
4892
4893
4894
4895
4896
4897
4898
4899
4900
4901
4902
4903
4904
4905
4906
4907
4908
4909
4910
4911
4912
4913
4914
4915
4916
4917
4918
4919
4920
4921
4922
4923
4924
4925
4926
4927
4928
4929
4930
4931
4932
4933
4934
4935
4936
4937
4938
4939
4940
4941
4942
4943
4944
4945
4946
4947
4948
4949
4950
4951
4952
4953
4954
4955
4956
4957
4958
4959
4960
4961
4962
4963
4964
4965
4966
4967
4968
4969
4970
4971
4972
4973
4974
4975
4976
4977
4978
4979
4980
4981
4982
4983
4984
4985
4986
4987
4988
4989
4990
4991
4992
4993
4994
4995
4996
4997
4998
4999
5000
5001
5002
5003
5004
5005
5006
5007
5008
5009
5010
5011
5012
5013
5014
5015
5016
5017
5018
5019
5020
5021
5022
5023
5024
5025
5026
5027
5028
5029
5030
5031
5032
5033
5034
5035
5036
5037
5038
5039
5040
5041
5042
5043
5044
5045
5046
5047
5048
5049
5050
5051
5052
5053
5054
5055
5056
5057
5058
5059
5060
5061
5062
5063
5064
5065
5066
5067
5068
5069
5070
5071
5072
5073
5074
5075
5076
5077
5078
5079
5080
5081
5082
5083
5084
5085
5086
5087
5088
5089
5090
5091
5092
5093
5094
5095
5096
5097
5098
5099
5100
5101
5102
5103
5104
5105
5106
5107
5108
5109
5110
5111
5112
5113
5114
5115
5116
5117
5118
5119
5120
5121
5122
5123
5124
5125
5126
5127
5128
5129
5130
5131
5132
5133
5134
5135
5136
5137
5138
5139
5140
5141
5142
5143
5144
5145
5146
5147
5148
5149
5150
5151
5152
5153
5154
5155
5156
5157
5158
5159
5160
5161
5162
5163
5164
5165
5166
5167
5168
5169
5170
5171
5172
5173
5174
5175
5176
5177
5178
5179
5180
5181
5182
5183
5184
5185
5186
5187
5188
5189
5190
5191
5192
5193
5194
5195
5196
5197
5198
5199
5200
5201
5202
5203
5204
5205
5206
5207
5208
5209
5210
5211
5212
5213
5214
5215
5216
5217
5218
5219
5220
5221
5222
5223
5224
5225
5226
5227
5228
5229
5230
5231
5232
5233
5234
5235
5236
5237
5238
5239
5240
5241
5242
5243
5244
5245
5246
5247
5248
5249
5250
5251
5252
5253
5254
5255
5256
5257
5258
5259
5260
5261
5262
5263
5264
5265
5266
5267
5268
5269
5270
5271
5272
5273
5274
5275
5276
5277
5278
5279
5280
5281
5282
5283
5284
5285
5286
5287
5288
5289
5290
5291
5292
5293
5294
5295
5296
5297
5298
5299
5300
5301
5302
5303
5304
5305
5306
5307
5308
5309
5310
5311
5312
5313
5314
5315
5316
5317
5318
5319
5320
5321
5322
5323
5324
5325
5326
5327
5328
5329
5330
5331
5332
5333
5334
5335
5336
5337
5338
5339
5340
5341
5342
5343
5344
5345
5346
5347
5348
5349
5350
5351
5352
5353
5354
5355
5356
5357
5358
5359
5360
5361
5362
5363
5364
5365
5366
5367
5368
5369
5370
5371
5372
5373
5374
5375
5376
5377
5378
5379
5380
5381
5382
5383
5384
5385
5386
5387
5388
5389
5390
5391
5392
5393
5394
5395
5396
5397
5398
5399
5400
5401
5402
5403
5404
5405
5406
5407
5408
5409
5410
5411
5412
5413
5414
5415
5416
5417
5418
5419
5420
5421
5422
5423
5424
5425
5426
5427
5428
5429
5430
5431
5432
5433
5434
5435
5436
5437
5438
5439
5440
5441
5442
5443
5444
5445
5446
5447
5448
5449
5450
5451
5452
5453
5454
5455
5456
5457
5458
5459
5460
5461
5462
5463
5464
5465
5466
5467
5468
5469
5470
5471
5472
5473
5474
5475
5476
5477
5478
5479
5480
5481
5482
5483
5484
5485
5486
5487
5488
5489
5490
5491
5492
5493
5494
5495
5496
5497
5498
5499
5500
5501
5502
5503
5504
5505
5506
5507
5508
5509
5510
5511
5512
5513
5514
5515
5516
5517
5518
5519
5520
5521
5522
5523
5524
5525
5526
5527
5528
5529
5530
5531
5532
5533
5534
5535
5536
5537
5538
5539
5540
5541
5542
5543
5544
5545
5546
5547
5548
5549
5550
5551
5552
5553
5554
5555
5556
5557
5558
5559
5560
5561
5562
5563
5564
5565
5566
5567
5568
5569
5570
5571
5572
5573
5574
5575
5576
5577
5578
5579
5580
5581
5582
5583
5584
5585
5586
5587
5588
5589
5590
5591
5592
5593
5594
5595
5596
5597
5598
5599
5600
5601
5602
5603
5604
5605
5606
5607
5608
5609
5610
5611
5612
5613
5614
5615
5616
5617
5618
5619
5620
5621
5622
5623
5624
5625
5626
5627
5628
5629
5630
5631
5632
5633
5634
5635
5636
5637
5638
5639
5640
5641
5642
5643
5644
5645
5646
5647
5648
5649
5650
5651
5652
5653
5654
5655
5656
5657
5658
5659
5660
5661
5662
5663
5664
5665
5666
5667
5668
5669
5670
5671
5672
5673
5674
5675
5676
5677
5678
5679
5680
5681
5682
5683
5684
5685
5686
5687
5688
5689
5690
5691
5692
5693
5694
5695
5696
5697
5698
5699
5700
5701
5702
5703
5704
5705
5706
5707
5708
5709
5710
5711
5712
5713
5714
5715
5716
5717
5718
5719
5720
5721
5722
5723
5724
5725
5726
5727
5728
5729
5730
5731
5732
5733
5734
5735
5736
5737
5738
5739
5740
5741
5742
5743
5744
5745
5746
5747
5748
5749
5750
5751
5752
5753
5754
5755
5756
5757
5758
5759
5760
5761
5762
5763
5764
5765
5766
5767
5768
5769
5770
5771
5772
5773
5774
5775
5776
5777
5778
5779
5780
5781
5782
5783
5784
5785
5786
5787
5788
5789
5790
5791
5792
5793
5794
5795
5796
5797
5798
5799
5800
5801
5802
5803
5804
5805
5806
5807
5808
5809
5810
5811
5812
5813
5814
5815
5816
5817
5818
5819
5820
5821
5822
5823
5824
5825
5826
5827
5828
5829
5830
5831
5832
5833
5834
5835
5836
5837
5838
5839
5840
5841
5842
5843
5844
5845
5846
5847
5848
5849
5850
5851
5852
5853
5854
5855
5856
5857
5858
5859
5860
5861
5862
5863
5864
5865
5866
5867
5868
5869
5870
5871
5872
5873
5874
5875
5876
5877
5878
5879
5880
5881
5882
5883
5884
5885
5886
5887
5888
5889
5890
5891
5892
5893
5894
5895
5896
5897
5898
5899
5900
5901
5902
5903
5904
5905
5906
5907
5908
5909
5910
5911
5912
5913
5914
5915
5916
5917
5918
5919
5920
5921
5922
5923
5924
5925
5926
5927
5928
5929
5930
5931
5932
5933
5934
5935
5936
5937
5938
5939
5940
5941
5942
5943
5944
5945
5946
5947
5948
5949
5950
5951
5952
5953
5954
5955
5956
5957
5958
5959
5960
5961
5962
5963
5964
5965
5966
5967
5968
5969
5970
5971
5972
5973
5974
5975
5976
5977
5978
5979
5980
5981
5982
5983
5984
5985
5986
5987
5988
5989
5990
5991
5992
5993
5994
5995
5996
5997
5998
5999
6000
6001
6002
6003
6004
6005
6006
6007
6008
6009
6010
6011
6012
6013
6014
6015
6016
6017
6018
6019
6020
6021
6022
6023
6024
6025
6026
6027
6028
6029
6030
6031
6032
6033
6034
6035
6036
6037
6038
6039
6040
6041
6042
6043
6044
6045
6046
6047
6048
6049
6050
6051
6052
6053
6054
6055
6056
6057
6058
6059
6060
6061
6062
6063
6064
6065
6066
6067
6068
6069
6070
6071
6072
6073
6074
6075
6076
6077
6078
6079
6080
6081
6082
6083
6084
6085
6086
6087
6088
6089
6090
6091
6092
6093
6094
6095
6096
6097
6098
6099
6100
6101
6102
6103
6104
6105
6106
6107
6108
6109
6110
6111
6112
6113
6114
6115
6116
6117
6118
6119
6120
6121
6122
6123
6124
6125
6126
6127
6128
6129
6130
6131
6132
6133
6134
6135
6136
6137
6138
6139
6140
6141
6142
6143
6144
6145
6146
6147
6148
6149
6150
6151
6152
6153
6154
6155
6156
6157
6158
6159
6160
6161
6162
6163
6164
6165
6166
6167
6168
6169
6170
6171
6172
6173
6174
6175
6176
6177
6178
6179
6180
6181
6182
6183
6184
6185
6186
6187
6188
6189
6190
6191
6192
6193
6194
6195
6196
6197
6198
6199
6200
6201
6202
6203
6204
6205
6206
6207
6208
6209
6210
6211
6212
6213
6214
6215
6216
6217
6218
6219
6220
6221
6222
6223
6224
6225
6226
6227
6228
6229
6230
6231
6232
6233
6234
6235
6236
6237
6238
6239
6240
6241
6242
6243
6244
6245
6246
6247
6248
6249
6250
6251
6252
6253
6254
6255
6256
6257
6258
6259
6260
6261
6262
6263
6264
6265
6266
6267
6268
6269
6270
6271
6272
6273
6274
6275
6276
6277
6278
6279
6280
6281
6282
6283
6284
6285
6286
6287
6288
6289
6290
6291
6292
6293
6294
6295
6296
6297
6298
6299
6300
6301
6302
6303
6304
6305
6306
6307
6308
6309
6310
6311
6312
6313
6314
6315
6316
6317
6318
6319
6320
6321
6322
6323
6324
6325
6326
6327
6328
6329
6330
6331
6332
6333
6334
6335
6336
6337
6338
6339
6340
6341
6342
6343
6344
6345
6346
6347
6348
6349
6350
6351
6352
6353
6354
6355
6356
6357
6358
6359
6360
6361
6362
6363
6364
6365
6366
6367
6368
6369
6370
6371
6372
6373
6374
6375
6376
6377
6378
6379
6380
6381
6382
6383
6384
6385
6386
6387
6388
6389
6390
6391
6392
6393
6394
6395
6396
6397
6398
6399
6400
6401
6402
6403
6404
6405
6406
6407
6408
6409
6410
6411
6412
6413
6414
6415
6416
6417
6418
6419
6420
6421
6422
6423
6424
6425
6426
6427
6428
6429
6430
6431
6432
6433
6434
6435
6436
6437
6438
6439
6440
6441
6442
6443
6444
6445
6446
6447
6448
6449
6450
6451
6452
6453
6454
6455
6456
6457
6458
6459
6460
6461
6462
6463
6464
6465
6466
6467
6468
6469
6470
6471
6472
6473
6474
6475
6476
6477
6478
6479
6480
6481
6482
6483
6484
6485
6486
6487
6488
6489
6490
6491
6492
6493
6494
6495
6496
6497
6498
6499
6500
6501
6502
6503
6504
6505
6506
6507
6508
6509
6510
6511
6512
6513
6514
6515
6516
6517
6518
6519
6520
6521
6522
6523
6524
6525
6526
6527
6528
6529
6530
6531
6532
6533
6534
6535
6536
6537
6538
6539
6540
6541
6542
6543
6544
6545
6546
6547
6548
6549
6550
6551
6552
6553
6554
6555
6556
6557
6558
6559
6560
6561
6562
6563
6564
6565
6566
6567
6568
6569
6570
6571
6572
6573
6574
6575
6576
6577
6578
6579
6580
6581
6582
6583
6584
6585
6586
6587
6588
6589
6590
6591
6592
6593
6594
6595
6596
6597
6598
6599
6600
6601
6602
6603
6604
6605
6606
6607
6608
6609
6610
6611
6612
6613
6614
6615
6616
6617
6618
6619
6620
6621
6622
6623
6624
6625
6626
6627
6628
6629
6630
6631
6632
6633
6634
6635
6636
6637
6638
6639
6640
6641
6642
6643
6644
6645
6646
6647
6648
6649
6650
6651
6652
6653
6654
6655
6656
6657
6658
6659
6660
6661
6662
6663
6664
6665
6666
6667
6668
6669
6670
6671
6672
6673
6674
6675
6676
6677
6678
6679
6680
6681
6682
6683
6684
6685
6686
6687
6688
6689
6690
6691
6692
6693
6694
6695
6696
6697
6698
6699
6700
6701
6702
6703
6704
6705
6706
6707
6708
6709
6710
6711
6712
6713
6714
6715
6716
6717
6718
6719
6720
6721
6722
6723
6724
6725
6726
6727
6728
6729
6730
6731
6732
6733
6734
6735
6736
6737
6738
6739
6740
6741
6742
6743
6744
6745
6746
6747
6748
6749
6750
6751
6752
6753
6754
6755
6756
6757
6758
6759
6760
6761
6762
6763
6764
6765
6766
6767
6768
6769
6770
6771
6772
6773
6774
6775
6776
6777
6778
6779
6780
6781
6782
6783
6784
6785
6786
6787
6788
6789
6790
6791
6792
6793
6794
6795
6796
6797
6798
6799
6800
6801
6802
6803
6804
6805
6806
6807
6808
6809
6810
6811
6812
6813
6814
6815
6816
6817
6818
6819
6820
6821
6822
6823
6824
6825
6826
6827
6828
6829
6830
6831
6832
6833
6834
6835
6836
6837
6838
6839
6840
6841
6842
6843
6844
6845
6846
6847
6848
6849
6850
6851
6852
6853
6854
6855
6856
6857
6858
6859
6860
6861
6862
6863
6864
6865
6866
6867
6868
6869
6870
6871
6872
6873
6874
6875
6876
6877
6878
6879
6880
6881
6882
6883
6884
6885
6886
6887
6888
6889
6890
6891
6892
6893
6894
6895
6896
6897
6898
6899
6900
6901
6902
6903
6904
6905
6906
6907
6908
6909
6910
6911
6912
6913
6914
6915
6916
6917
6918
6919
6920
6921
6922
6923
6924
6925
6926
6927
6928
6929
6930
6931
6932
6933
6934
6935
6936
6937
6938
6939
6940
6941
6942
6943
6944
6945
6946
6947
6948
6949
6950
6951
6952
6953
6954
6955
6956
6957
6958
6959
6960
6961
6962
6963
6964
6965
6966
6967
6968
6969
6970
6971
6972
6973
6974
6975
6976
6977
6978
6979
6980
6981
6982
6983
6984
6985
6986
6987
6988
6989
6990
6991
6992
6993
6994
6995
6996
6997
6998
6999
7000
7001
7002
7003
7004
7005
7006
7007
7008
7009
7010
7011
7012
7013
7014
7015
7016
7017
7018
7019
7020
7021
7022
7023
7024
7025
7026
7027
7028
7029
7030
7031
7032
7033
7034
7035
7036
7037
7038
7039
7040
7041
7042
7043
7044
7045
7046
7047
7048
7049
7050
7051
7052
7053
7054
7055
7056
7057
7058
7059
7060
7061
7062
7063
7064
7065
7066
7067
7068
7069
7070
7071
7072
7073
7074
7075
7076
7077
7078
7079
7080
7081
7082
7083
7084
7085
7086
7087
7088
7089
7090
7091
7092
7093
7094
7095
7096
7097
7098
7099
7100
7101
7102
7103
7104
7105
7106
7107
7108
7109
7110
7111
7112
7113
7114
7115
7116
7117
7118
7119
7120
7121
7122
7123
7124
7125
7126
7127
7128
7129
7130
7131
7132
7133
7134
7135
7136
7137
7138
7139
7140
7141
7142
7143
7144
7145
7146
7147
7148
7149
7150
7151
7152
7153
7154
7155
7156
7157
7158
7159
7160
7161
7162
7163
7164
7165
7166
7167
7168
7169
7170
7171
7172
7173
7174
7175
7176
7177
7178
7179
7180
7181
7182
7183
7184
7185
7186
7187
7188
7189
7190
7191
7192
7193
7194
7195
7196
7197
7198
7199
7200
7201
7202
7203
7204
7205
7206
7207
7208
7209
7210
7211
7212
7213
7214
7215
7216
7217
7218
7219
7220
7221
7222
7223
7224
7225
7226
7227
7228
7229
7230
7231
7232
7233
7234
7235
7236
7237
7238
7239
7240
7241
7242
7243
7244
7245
7246
7247
7248
7249
7250
7251
7252
7253
7254
7255
7256
7257
7258
7259
7260
7261
7262
7263
7264
7265
7266
7267
7268
7269
7270
7271
7272
7273
7274
7275
7276
7277
7278
7279
7280
7281
7282
7283
7284
7285
7286
7287
7288
7289
7290
7291
7292
7293
7294
7295
7296
7297
7298
7299
7300
7301
7302
7303
7304
7305
7306
7307
7308
7309
7310
7311
7312
7313
7314
7315
7316
7317
7318
7319
7320
7321
7322
7323
7324
7325
7326
7327
7328
7329
7330
7331
7332
7333
7334
7335
7336
7337
7338
7339
7340
7341
7342
7343
7344
7345
7346
7347
7348
7349
7350
7351
7352
7353
7354
7355
7356
7357
7358
7359
7360
7361
7362
7363
7364
7365
7366
7367
7368
7369
7370
7371
7372
7373
7374
7375
7376
7377
7378
7379
7380
7381
7382
7383
7384
7385
7386
7387
7388
7389
7390
7391
7392
7393
7394
7395
7396
7397
7398
7399
7400
7401
7402
7403
7404
7405
7406
7407
7408
7409
7410
7411
7412
7413
7414
7415
7416
7417
7418
7419
7420
7421
7422
7423
7424
7425
7426
7427
7428
7429
7430
7431
7432
7433
7434
7435
7436
7437
7438
7439
7440
7441
7442
7443
7444
7445
7446
7447
7448
7449
7450
7451
7452
7453
7454
7455
7456
7457
7458
7459
7460
7461
7462
7463
7464
7465
7466
7467
7468
7469
7470
7471
7472
7473
7474
7475
7476
7477
7478
7479
7480
7481
7482
7483
7484
7485
7486
7487
7488
7489
7490
7491
7492
7493
7494
7495
7496
7497
7498
7499
7500
7501
7502
7503
7504
7505
7506
7507
7508
7509
7510
7511
7512
7513
7514
7515
7516
7517
7518
7519
7520
7521
7522
7523
7524
7525
7526
7527
7528
7529
7530
7531
7532
7533
7534
7535
7536
7537
7538
7539
7540
7541
7542
7543
7544
7545
7546
7547
7548
7549
7550
7551
7552
7553
7554
7555
7556
7557
7558
7559
7560
7561
7562
7563
7564
7565
7566
7567
7568
7569
7570
7571
7572
7573
7574
7575
7576
7577
7578
7579
7580
7581
7582
7583
7584
7585
7586
7587
7588
7589
7590
7591
7592
7593
7594
7595
7596
7597
7598
7599
7600
7601
7602
7603
7604
7605
7606
7607
7608
7609
7610
7611
7612
7613
7614
7615
7616
7617
7618
7619
7620
7621
7622
7623
7624
7625
7626
7627
7628
7629
7630
7631
7632
7633
7634
7635
7636
7637
7638
7639
7640
7641
7642
7643
7644
7645
7646
7647
7648
7649
7650
7651
7652
7653
7654
7655
7656
7657
7658
7659
7660
7661
7662
7663
7664
7665
7666
7667
7668
7669
7670
7671
7672
7673
7674
7675
7676
7677
7678
7679
7680
7681
7682
7683
7684
7685
7686
7687
7688
7689
7690
7691
7692
7693
7694
7695
7696
7697
7698
7699
7700
7701
7702
7703
7704
7705
7706
7707
7708
7709
7710
7711
7712
7713
7714
7715
7716
7717
7718
7719
7720
7721
7722
7723
7724
7725
7726
7727
7728
7729
7730
7731
7732
7733
7734
7735
7736
7737
7738
7739
7740
7741
7742
7743
7744
7745
7746
7747
7748
7749
7750
7751
7752
7753
7754
7755
7756
7757
7758
7759
7760
7761
7762
7763
7764
7765
7766
7767
7768
7769
7770
7771
7772
7773
7774
7775
7776
7777
7778
7779
7780
7781
7782
7783
7784
7785
7786
7787
7788
7789
7790
7791
7792
7793
7794
7795
7796
7797
7798
7799
7800
7801
7802
7803
7804
7805
7806
7807
7808
7809
7810
7811
7812
7813
7814
7815
7816
7817
7818
7819
7820
7821
7822
7823
7824
7825
7826
7827
7828
7829
7830
7831
7832
7833
7834
7835
7836
7837
7838
7839
7840
7841
7842
7843
7844
7845
7846
7847
7848
7849
7850
7851
7852
7853
7854
7855
7856
7857
7858
7859
7860
7861
7862
7863
7864
7865
7866
7867
7868
7869
7870
7871
7872
7873
7874
7875
7876
7877
7878
7879
7880
7881
7882
7883
7884
7885
7886
7887
7888
7889
7890
7891
7892
7893
7894
7895
7896
7897
7898
7899
7900
7901
7902
7903
7904
7905
7906
7907
7908
7909
7910
7911
7912
7913
7914
7915
7916
7917
7918
7919
7920
7921
7922
7923
7924
7925
7926
7927
7928
7929
7930
7931
7932
7933
7934
7935
7936
7937
7938
7939
7940
7941
7942
7943
7944
7945
7946
7947
7948
7949
7950
7951
7952
7953
7954
7955
7956
7957
7958
7959
7960
7961
7962
7963
7964
7965
7966
7967
7968
7969
7970
7971
7972
7973
7974
7975
7976
7977
7978
7979
7980
7981
7982
7983
7984
7985
7986
7987
7988
7989
7990
7991
7992
7993
7994
7995
7996
7997
7998
7999
8000
8001
8002
8003
8004
8005
8006
8007
8008
8009
8010
8011
8012
8013
8014
8015
8016
8017
8018
8019
8020
8021
8022
8023
8024
8025
8026
8027
8028
8029
8030
8031
8032
8033
8034
8035
8036
8037
8038
8039
8040
8041
8042
8043
8044
8045
8046
8047
8048
8049
8050
8051
8052
8053
8054
8055
8056
8057
8058
8059
8060
8061
8062
8063
8064
8065
8066
8067
8068
8069
8070
8071
8072
8073
8074
8075
8076
8077
8078
8079
8080
8081
8082
8083
8084
8085
8086
8087
8088
8089
8090
8091
8092
8093
8094
8095
8096
8097
8098
8099
8100
8101
8102
8103
8104
8105
8106
8107
8108
8109
8110
8111
8112
8113
8114
8115
8116
8117
8118
8119
8120
8121
8122
8123
8124
8125
8126
8127
8128
8129
8130
8131
8132
8133
8134
8135
8136
8137
8138
8139
8140
8141
8142
8143
8144
8145
8146
8147
8148
8149
8150
8151
8152
8153
8154
8155
8156
8157
8158
8159
8160
8161
8162
8163
8164
8165
8166
8167
8168
8169
8170
8171
8172
8173
8174
8175
8176
8177
8178
8179
8180
8181
8182
8183
8184
8185
8186
8187
8188
8189
8190
8191
8192
8193
8194
8195
8196
8197
8198
8199
8200
8201
8202
8203
8204
8205
8206
8207
8208
8209
8210
8211
8212
8213
8214
8215
8216
8217
8218
8219
8220
8221
8222
8223
8224
8225
8226
8227
8228
8229
8230
8231
8232
8233
8234
8235
8236
8237
8238
8239
8240
8241
8242
8243
8244
8245
8246
8247
8248
8249
8250
8251
8252
8253
8254
8255
8256
8257
8258
8259
8260
8261
8262
8263
8264
8265
8266
8267
8268
8269
8270
8271
8272
8273
8274
8275
8276
8277
8278
8279
8280
8281
8282
8283
8284
8285
8286
8287
8288
8289
8290
8291
8292
8293
8294
8295
8296
8297
8298
8299
8300
8301
8302
8303
8304
8305
8306
8307
8308
8309
8310
8311
8312
8313
8314
8315
8316
8317
8318
8319
8320
8321
8322
8323
8324
8325
8326
8327
8328
8329
8330
8331
8332
8333
8334
8335
8336
8337
8338
8339
8340
8341
8342
8343
8344
8345
8346
8347
8348
8349
8350
8351
8352
8353
8354
8355
8356
8357
8358
8359
8360
8361
8362
8363
8364
8365
8366
8367
8368
8369
8370
8371
8372
8373
8374
8375
8376
8377
8378
8379
8380
8381
8382
8383
8384
8385
8386
8387
8388
8389
8390
8391
8392
8393
8394
8395
8396
8397
8398
8399
8400
8401
8402
8403
8404
8405
8406
8407
8408
8409
8410
8411
8412
8413
8414
8415
8416
8417
8418
8419
8420
8421
8422
8423
8424
8425
8426
8427
8428
8429
8430
8431
8432
8433
8434
8435
8436
8437
8438
8439
8440
8441
8442
8443
8444
8445
8446
8447
8448
8449
8450
8451
8452
8453
8454
8455
8456
8457
8458
8459
8460
8461
8462
8463
8464
8465
8466
8467
8468
8469
8470
8471
8472
8473
8474
8475
8476
8477
8478
8479
8480
8481
8482
8483
8484
8485
8486
8487
8488
8489
8490
8491
8492
8493
8494
8495
8496
8497
8498
8499
8500
8501
8502
8503
8504
8505
8506
8507
8508
8509
8510
8511
8512
8513
8514
8515
8516
8517
8518
8519
8520
8521
8522
8523
8524
8525
8526
8527
8528
8529
8530
8531
8532
8533
8534
8535
8536
8537
8538
8539
8540
8541
8542
8543
8544
8545
8546
8547
8548
8549
8550
8551
8552
8553
8554
8555
8556
8557
8558
8559
8560
8561
8562
8563
8564
8565
8566
8567
8568
8569
8570
8571
8572
8573
8574
8575
8576
8577
8578
8579
8580
8581
8582
8583
8584
8585
8586
8587
8588
8589
8590
8591
8592
8593
8594
8595
8596
8597
8598
8599
8600
8601
8602
8603
8604
8605
8606
8607
8608
8609
8610
8611
8612
8613
8614
8615
8616
8617
8618
8619
8620
8621
8622
8623
8624
8625
8626
8627
8628
8629
8630
8631
8632
8633
8634
8635
8636
8637
8638
8639
8640
8641
8642
8643
8644
8645
8646
8647
8648
8649
8650
8651
8652
8653
8654
8655
8656
8657
8658
8659
8660
8661
8662
8663
8664
8665
8666
8667
8668
8669
8670
8671
8672
8673
8674
8675
8676
8677
8678
8679
8680
8681
8682
8683
8684
8685
8686
8687
8688
8689
8690
8691
8692
8693
8694
8695
8696
8697
8698
8699
8700
8701
8702
8703
8704
8705
8706
8707
8708
8709
8710
8711
8712
8713
8714
8715
8716
8717
8718
8719
8720
8721
8722
8723
8724
8725
8726
8727
8728
8729
8730
8731
8732
8733
8734
8735
8736
8737
8738
8739
8740
8741
8742
8743
8744
8745
8746
8747
8748
8749
8750
8751
8752
8753
8754
8755
8756
8757
8758
8759
8760
8761
8762
8763
8764
8765
8766
8767
8768
8769
8770
8771
8772
8773
8774
8775
8776
8777
8778
8779
8780
8781
8782
8783
8784
8785
8786
8787
8788
8789
8790
8791
8792
8793
8794
8795
8796
8797
8798
8799
8800
8801
8802
8803
8804
8805
8806
8807
8808
8809
8810
8811
8812
8813
8814
8815
8816
8817
8818
8819
8820
8821
8822
8823
8824
8825
8826
8827
8828
8829
8830
8831
8832
8833
8834
8835
8836
8837
8838
8839
8840
8841
8842
8843
8844
8845
8846
8847
8848
8849
8850
8851
8852
8853
8854
8855
8856
8857
8858
8859
8860
8861
8862
8863
8864
8865
8866
8867
8868
8869
8870
8871
8872
8873
8874
8875
8876
8877
8878
8879
8880
8881
8882
8883
8884
8885
8886
8887
8888
8889
8890
8891
8892
8893
8894
8895
8896
8897
8898
8899
8900
8901
8902
8903
8904
8905
8906
8907
8908
8909
8910
8911
8912
8913
8914
8915
8916
8917
8918
8919
8920
8921
8922
8923
8924
8925
8926
8927
8928
8929
8930
8931
8932
8933
8934
8935
8936
8937
8938
8939
8940
8941
8942
8943
8944
8945
8946
8947
8948
8949
8950
8951
8952
8953
8954
8955
8956
8957
8958
8959
8960
8961
8962
8963
8964
8965
8966
8967
8968
8969
8970
8971
8972
8973
8974
8975
8976
8977
8978
8979
8980
8981
8982
8983
8984
8985
8986
8987
8988
8989
8990
8991
8992
8993
8994
8995
8996
8997
8998
8999
9000
9001
9002
9003
9004
9005
9006
9007
9008
9009
9010
9011
9012
9013
9014
9015
9016
9017
9018
9019
9020
9021
9022
9023
9024
9025
9026
9027
9028
9029
9030
9031
9032
9033
9034
9035
9036
9037
9038
9039
9040
9041
9042
9043
9044
9045
9046
9047
9048
9049
9050
9051
9052
9053
9054
9055
9056
9057
9058
9059
9060
9061
9062
9063
9064
9065
9066
9067
9068
9069
9070
9071
9072
9073
9074
9075
9076
9077
9078
9079
9080
9081
9082
9083
9084
9085
9086
9087
9088
9089
9090
9091
9092
9093
9094
9095
9096
9097
9098
9099
9100
9101
9102
9103
9104
9105
9106
9107
9108
9109
9110
9111
9112
9113
9114
9115
9116
9117
9118
9119
9120
9121
9122
9123
9124
9125
9126
9127
9128
9129
9130
9131
9132
9133
9134
9135
9136
9137
9138
9139
9140
9141
9142
9143
9144
9145
9146
9147
9148
9149
9150
9151
9152
9153
9154
9155
9156
9157
9158
9159
9160
9161
9162
9163
9164
9165
9166
9167
9168
9169
9170
9171
9172
9173
9174
9175
9176
9177
9178
9179
9180
9181
9182
9183
9184
9185
9186
9187
9188
9189
9190
9191
9192
9193
9194
9195
9196
9197
9198
9199
9200
9201
9202
9203
9204
9205
9206
9207
9208
9209
9210
9211
9212
9213
9214
9215
9216
9217
9218
9219
9220
9221
9222
9223
9224
9225
9226
9227
9228
9229
9230
9231
9232
9233
9234
9235
9236
9237
9238
9239
9240
9241
9242
9243
9244
9245
9246
9247
9248
9249
9250
9251
9252
9253
9254
9255
9256
9257
9258
9259
9260
9261
9262
9263
9264
9265
9266
9267
9268
9269
9270
9271
9272
9273
9274
9275
9276
9277
9278
9279
9280
9281
9282
9283
9284
9285
9286
9287
9288
9289
9290
9291
9292
9293
9294
9295
9296
9297
9298
9299
9300
9301
9302
9303
9304
9305
9306
9307
9308
9309
9310
9311
9312
9313
9314
9315
9316
9317
9318
9319
9320
9321
9322
9323
9324
9325
9326
9327
9328
9329
9330
9331
9332
9333
9334
9335
9336
9337
9338
9339
9340
9341
9342
9343
9344
9345
9346
9347
9348
9349
9350
9351
9352
9353
9354
9355
9356
9357
9358
9359
9360
9361
9362
9363
9364
9365
9366
9367
9368
9369
9370
9371
9372
9373
9374
9375
9376
9377
9378
9379
9380
9381
9382
9383
9384
9385
9386
9387
9388
9389
9390
9391
9392
9393
9394
9395
9396
9397
9398
9399
9400
9401
9402
9403
9404
9405
9406
9407
9408
9409
9410
9411
9412
9413
9414
9415
9416
9417
9418
9419
9420
9421
9422
9423
9424
9425
9426
9427
9428
9429
9430
9431
9432
9433
9434
9435
9436
9437
9438
9439
9440
9441
9442
9443
9444
9445
9446
9447
9448
9449
9450
9451
9452
9453
9454
9455
9456
9457
9458
9459
9460
9461
9462
9463
9464
9465
9466
9467
9468
9469
9470
9471
9472
9473
9474
9475
9476
9477
9478
9479
9480
9481
9482
9483
9484
9485
9486
9487
9488
9489
9490
9491
9492
9493
9494
9495
9496
9497
9498
9499
9500
9501
9502
9503
9504
9505
9506
9507
9508
9509
9510
9511
9512
9513
9514
9515
9516
9517
9518
9519
9520
9521
9522
9523
9524
9525
9526
9527
9528
9529
9530
9531
9532
9533
9534
9535
9536
9537
9538
9539
9540
9541
9542
9543
9544
9545
9546
9547
9548
9549
9550
9551
9552
9553
9554
9555
9556
9557
9558
9559
9560
9561
9562
9563
9564
9565
9566
9567
9568
9569
9570
9571
9572
9573
9574
9575
9576
9577
9578
9579
9580
9581
9582
9583
9584
9585
9586
9587
9588
9589
9590
9591
9592
9593
9594
9595
9596
9597
9598
9599
9600
9601
9602
9603
9604
9605
9606
9607
9608
9609
9610
9611
9612
9613
9614
9615
9616
9617
9618
9619
9620
9621
9622
9623
9624
9625
9626
9627
9628
9629
9630
9631
9632
9633
9634
9635
9636
9637
9638
9639
9640
9641
9642
9643
9644
9645
9646
9647
9648
9649
9650
9651
9652
9653
9654
9655
9656
9657
9658
9659
9660
9661
9662
9663
9664
9665
9666
9667
9668
9669
9670
9671
9672
9673
9674
9675
9676
9677
9678
9679
9680
9681
9682
9683
9684
9685
9686
9687
9688
9689
9690
9691
9692
9693
9694
9695
9696
9697
9698
9699
9700
9701
9702
9703
9704
9705
9706
9707
9708
9709
9710
9711
9712
9713
9714
9715
9716
9717
9718
9719
9720
9721
9722
9723
9724
9725
9726
9727
9728
9729
9730
9731
9732
9733
9734
9735
9736
9737
9738
9739
9740
9741
9742
9743
9744
9745
9746
9747
9748
9749
9750
9751
9752
9753
9754
9755
9756
9757
9758
9759
9760
9761
9762
9763
9764
9765
9766
9767
9768
9769
9770
9771
9772
9773
9774
9775
9776
9777
9778
9779
9780
9781
9782
9783
9784
9785
9786
9787
9788
9789
9790
9791
9792
9793
9794
9795
9796
9797
9798
9799
9800
9801
9802
9803
9804
9805
9806
9807
9808
9809
9810
9811
9812
9813
9814
9815
9816
9817
9818
9819
9820
9821
9822
9823
9824
9825
9826
9827
9828
9829
9830
9831
9832
9833
9834
9835
9836
9837
9838
9839
9840
9841
9842
9843
9844
9845
9846
9847
9848
9849
9850
9851
9852
9853
9854
9855
9856
9857
9858
9859
9860
9861
9862
9863
9864
9865
9866
9867
9868
9869
9870
9871
9872
9873
9874
9875
9876
9877
9878
9879
9880
9881
9882
9883
9884
9885
9886
9887
9888
9889
9890
9891
9892
9893
9894
9895
9896
9897
9898
9899
9900
9901
9902
9903
9904
9905
9906
9907
9908
9909
9910
9911
9912
9913
9914
9915
9916
9917
9918
9919
9920
9921
9922
9923
9924
9925
9926
9927
9928
9929
9930
9931
9932
9933
9934
9935
9936
9937
9938
9939
9940
9941
9942
9943
9944
9945
9946
9947
9948
9949
9950
9951
9952
9953
9954
9955
9956
9957
9958
9959
9960
9961
9962
9963
9964
9965
9966
9967
9968
9969
9970
9971
9972
9973
9974
9975
9976
9977
9978
9979
9980
9981
9982
9983
9984
9985
9986
9987
9988
9989
9990
9991
9992
9993
9994
9995
9996
9997
9998
9999
10000
10001
10002
10003
10004
10005
10006
10007
10008
10009
10010
10011
10012
10013
10014
10015
10016
10017
10018
10019
10020
10021
10022
10023
10024
10025
10026
10027
10028
10029
10030
10031
10032
10033
10034
10035
10036
10037
10038
10039
10040
10041
10042
10043
10044
10045
10046
10047
10048
10049
10050
10051
10052
10053
10054
10055
10056
10057
10058
10059
10060
10061
10062
10063
10064
10065
10066
10067
10068
10069
10070
10071
10072
10073
10074
10075
10076
10077
10078
10079
10080
10081
10082
10083
10084
10085
10086
10087
10088
10089
10090
10091
10092
10093
10094
10095
10096
10097
10098
10099
10100
10101
10102
10103
10104
10105
10106
10107
10108
10109
10110
10111
10112
10113
10114
10115
10116
10117
10118
10119
10120
10121
10122
10123
10124
10125
10126
10127
10128
10129
10130
10131
10132
10133
10134
10135
10136
10137
10138
10139
10140
10141
10142
10143
10144
10145
10146
10147
10148
10149
10150
10151
10152
10153
10154
10155
10156
10157
10158
10159
10160
10161
10162
10163
10164
10165
10166
10167
10168
10169
10170
10171
10172
10173
10174
10175
10176
10177
10178
10179
10180
10181
10182
10183
10184
10185
10186
10187
10188
10189
10190
10191
10192
10193
10194
10195
10196
10197
10198
10199
10200
10201
10202
10203
10204
10205
10206
10207
10208
10209
10210
10211
10212
10213
10214
10215
10216
10217
10218
10219
10220
10221
10222
10223
10224
10225
10226
10227
10228
10229
10230
10231
10232
10233
10234
10235
10236
10237
10238
10239
10240
10241
10242
10243
10244
10245
10246
10247
10248
10249
10250
10251
10252
10253
10254
10255
10256
10257
10258
10259
10260
10261
10262
10263
10264
10265
10266
10267
10268
10269
10270
10271
10272
10273
10274
10275
10276
10277
10278
10279
10280
10281
10282
10283
10284
10285
10286
10287
10288
10289
10290
10291
10292
10293
10294
10295
10296
10297
10298
10299
10300
10301
10302
10303
10304
10305
10306
10307
10308
10309
10310
10311
10312
10313
10314
10315
10316
10317
10318
10319
10320
10321
10322
10323
10324
10325
10326
10327
10328
10329
10330
10331
10332
10333
10334
10335
10336
10337
10338
10339
10340
10341
10342
10343
10344
10345
10346
10347
10348
10349
10350
10351
10352
10353
10354
10355
10356
10357
10358
10359
10360
10361
10362
10363
10364
10365
10366
10367
10368
10369
10370
10371
10372
10373
10374
10375
10376
10377
10378
10379
10380
10381
10382
10383
10384
10385
10386
10387
10388
10389
10390
10391
10392
10393
10394
10395
10396
10397
10398
10399
10400
10401
10402
10403
10404
10405
10406
10407
10408
10409
10410
10411
10412
10413
10414
10415
10416
10417
10418
10419
10420
10421
10422
10423
10424
10425
10426
10427
10428
10429
10430
10431
10432
10433
10434
10435
10436
10437
10438
10439
10440
10441
10442
10443
10444
10445
10446
10447
10448
10449
10450
10451
10452
10453
10454
10455
10456
10457
10458
10459
10460
10461
10462
10463
10464
10465
10466
10467
10468
10469
10470
10471
10472
10473
10474
10475
10476
10477
10478
10479
10480
10481
10482
10483
10484
10485
10486
10487
10488
10489
10490
10491
10492
10493
10494
10495
10496
10497
10498
10499
10500
10501
10502
10503
10504
10505
10506
10507
10508
10509
10510
10511
10512
10513
10514
10515
10516
10517
10518
10519
10520
10521
10522
10523
10524
10525
10526
10527
10528
10529
10530
10531
10532
10533
10534
10535
10536
10537
10538
10539
10540
10541
10542
10543
10544
10545
10546
10547
10548
10549
10550
10551
10552
10553
10554
10555
10556
10557
10558
10559
10560
10561
10562
10563
10564
10565
10566
10567
10568
10569
10570
10571
10572
10573
10574
10575
10576
10577
10578
10579
10580
10581
10582
10583
10584
10585
10586
10587
10588
10589
10590
10591
10592
10593
10594
10595
10596
10597
10598
10599
10600
10601
10602
10603
10604
10605
10606
10607
10608
10609
10610
10611
10612
10613
10614
10615
10616
10617
10618
10619
10620
10621
10622
10623
10624
10625
10626
10627
10628
10629
10630
10631
10632
10633
10634
10635
10636
10637
10638
10639
10640
10641
10642
10643
10644
10645
10646
10647
10648
10649
10650
10651
10652
10653
10654
10655
10656
10657
10658
10659
10660
10661
10662
10663
10664
10665
10666
10667
10668
10669
10670
10671
10672
10673
10674
10675
10676
10677
10678
10679
10680
10681
10682
10683
10684
10685
10686
10687
10688
10689
10690
10691
10692
10693
10694
10695
10696
10697
10698
10699
10700
10701
10702
10703
10704
10705
10706
10707
10708
10709
10710
10711
10712
10713
10714
10715
10716
10717
10718
10719
10720
10721
10722
10723
10724
10725
10726
10727
10728
10729
10730
10731
10732
10733
10734
10735
10736
10737
10738
10739
10740
10741
10742
10743
10744
10745
10746
10747
10748
10749
10750
10751
10752
10753
10754
10755
10756
10757
10758
10759
10760
10761
10762
10763
10764
10765
10766
10767
10768
10769
10770
10771
10772
10773
10774
10775
10776
10777
10778
10779
10780
10781
10782
10783
10784
10785
10786
10787
10788
10789
10790
10791
10792
10793
10794
10795
10796
10797
10798
10799
10800
10801
10802
10803
10804
10805
10806
10807
10808
10809
10810
10811
10812
10813
10814
10815
10816
10817
10818
10819
10820
10821
10822
10823
10824
10825
10826
10827
10828
10829
10830
10831
10832
10833
10834
10835
10836
10837
10838
10839
10840
10841
10842
10843
10844
10845
10846
10847
10848
10849
10850
10851
10852
10853
10854
10855
10856
10857
10858
10859
10860
10861
10862
10863
10864
10865
10866
10867
10868
10869
10870
10871
10872
10873
10874
10875
10876
10877
10878
10879
10880
10881
10882
10883
10884
10885
10886
10887
10888
10889
10890
10891
10892
10893
10894
10895
10896
10897
10898
10899
10900
10901
10902
10903
10904
10905
10906
10907
10908
10909
10910
10911
10912
10913
10914
10915
10916
10917
10918
10919
10920
10921
10922
10923
10924
10925
10926
10927
10928
10929
10930
10931
10932
10933
10934
10935
10936
10937
10938
10939
10940
10941
10942
10943
10944
10945
10946
10947
10948
10949
10950
10951
10952
10953
10954
10955
10956
10957
10958
10959
10960
10961
10962
10963
10964
10965
10966
10967
10968
10969
10970
10971
10972
10973
10974
10975
10976
10977
10978
10979
10980
10981
10982
10983
10984
10985
10986
10987
10988
10989
10990
10991
10992
10993
10994
10995
10996
10997
10998
10999
11000
11001
11002
11003
11004
11005
11006
11007
11008
11009
11010
11011
11012
11013
11014
11015
11016
11017
11018
11019
11020
11021
11022
11023
11024
11025
11026
11027
11028
11029
11030
11031
11032
11033
11034
11035
11036
11037
11038
11039
11040
11041
11042
11043
11044
11045
11046
11047
11048
11049
11050
11051
11052
11053
11054
11055
11056
11057
11058
11059
11060
11061
11062
11063
11064
11065
11066
11067
11068
11069
11070
11071
11072
11073
11074
11075
11076
11077
11078
11079
11080
11081
11082
11083
11084
11085
11086
11087
11088
11089
11090
11091
11092
11093
11094
11095
11096
11097
11098
11099
11100
11101
11102
11103
11104
11105
11106
11107
11108
11109
11110
11111
11112
11113
11114
11115
11116
11117
11118
11119
11120
11121
11122
11123
11124
11125
11126
11127
11128
11129
11130
11131
11132
11133
11134
11135
11136
11137
11138
11139
11140
11141
11142
11143
11144
11145
11146
11147
11148
11149
11150
11151
11152
11153
11154
11155
11156
11157
11158
11159
11160
11161
11162
11163
11164
11165
11166
11167
11168
11169
11170
11171
11172
11173
11174
11175
11176
11177
11178
11179
11180
11181
11182
11183
11184
11185
11186
11187
11188
11189
11190
11191
11192
11193
11194
11195
11196
11197
11198
11199
11200
11201
11202
11203
11204
11205
11206
11207
11208
11209
11210
11211
11212
11213
11214
11215
11216
11217
11218
11219
11220
11221
11222
11223
11224
11225
11226
11227
11228
11229
11230
11231
11232
11233
11234
11235
11236
11237
11238
11239
11240
11241
11242
11243
11244
11245
11246
11247
11248
11249
11250
11251
11252
11253
11254
11255
11256
11257
11258
11259
11260
11261
11262
11263
11264
11265
11266
11267
11268
11269
11270
11271
11272
11273
11274
11275
11276
11277
11278
11279
11280
11281
11282
11283
11284
11285
11286
11287
11288
11289
11290
11291
11292
11293
11294
11295
11296
11297
11298
11299
11300
11301
11302
11303
11304
11305
11306
11307
11308
11309
11310
11311
11312
11313
11314
11315
11316
11317
11318
11319
11320
11321
11322
11323
11324
11325
11326
11327
11328
11329
11330
11331
11332
11333
11334
11335
11336
11337
11338
11339
11340
11341
11342
11343
11344
11345
11346
11347
11348
11349
11350
11351
11352
11353
11354
11355
11356
11357
11358
11359
11360
11361
11362
11363
11364
11365
11366
11367
11368
11369
11370
11371
11372
11373
11374
11375
11376
11377
11378
11379
11380
11381
11382
11383
11384
11385
11386
11387
11388
11389
11390
11391
11392
11393
11394
11395
11396
11397
11398
11399
11400
11401
11402
11403
11404
11405
11406
11407
11408
11409
11410
11411
11412
11413
11414
11415
11416
11417
11418
11419
11420
11421
11422
11423
11424
11425
11426
11427
11428
11429
11430
11431
11432
11433
11434
11435
11436
11437
11438
11439
11440
11441
11442
11443
11444
11445
11446
11447
11448
11449
11450
11451
11452
11453
11454
11455
11456
11457
11458
11459
11460
11461
11462
11463
11464
11465
11466
11467
11468
11469
11470
11471
11472
11473
11474
11475
11476
11477
11478
11479
11480
11481
11482
11483
11484
11485
11486
11487
11488
11489
11490
11491
11492
11493
11494
11495
11496
11497
11498
11499
11500
11501
11502
11503
11504
11505
11506
11507
11508
11509
11510
11511
11512
11513
11514
11515
11516
11517
11518
11519
11520
11521
11522
11523
11524
11525
11526
11527
11528
11529
11530
11531
11532
11533
11534
11535
11536
11537
11538
11539
11540
11541
11542
11543
11544
11545
11546
11547
11548
11549
11550
11551
11552
11553
11554
11555
11556
11557
11558
11559
11560
11561
11562
11563
11564
11565
11566
11567
11568
11569
11570
11571
11572
11573
11574
11575
11576
11577
11578
11579
11580
11581
11582
11583
11584
11585
11586
11587
11588
11589
11590
11591
11592
11593
11594
11595
11596
11597
11598
11599
11600
11601
11602
11603
11604
11605
11606
11607
11608
11609
11610
11611
11612
11613
11614
11615
11616
11617
11618
11619
11620
11621
11622
11623
11624
11625
11626
11627
11628
11629
11630
11631
11632
11633
11634
11635
11636
11637
11638
11639
11640
11641
11642
11643
11644
11645
11646
11647
11648
11649
11650
11651
11652
11653
11654
11655
11656
11657
11658
11659
11660
11661
11662
11663
11664
11665
11666
11667
11668
11669
11670
11671
11672
11673
11674
11675
11676
11677
11678
11679
11680
11681
11682
11683
11684
11685
11686
11687
11688
11689
11690
11691
11692
11693
11694
11695
11696
11697
11698
11699
11700
11701
11702
11703
11704
11705
11706
11707
11708
11709
11710
11711
11712
11713
11714
11715
11716
11717
11718
11719
11720
11721
11722
11723
11724
11725
11726
11727
11728
11729
11730
11731
11732
11733
11734
11735
11736
11737
11738
11739
11740
11741
11742
11743
11744
11745
11746
11747
11748
11749
11750
11751
11752
11753
11754
11755
11756
11757
11758
11759
11760
11761
11762
11763
11764
11765
11766
11767
11768
11769
11770
11771
11772
11773
11774
11775
11776
11777
11778
11779
11780
11781
11782
11783
11784
11785
11786
11787
11788
11789
11790
11791
11792
11793
11794
11795
11796
11797
11798
11799
11800
11801
11802
11803
11804
11805
11806
11807
11808
11809
11810
11811
11812
11813
11814
11815
11816
11817
11818
11819
11820
11821
11822
11823
11824
11825
11826
11827
11828
11829
11830
11831
11832
11833
11834
11835
11836
11837
11838
11839
11840
11841
11842
11843
11844
11845
11846
11847
11848
11849
11850
11851
11852
11853
11854
11855
11856
11857
11858
11859
11860
11861
11862
11863
11864
11865
11866
11867
11868
11869
11870
11871
11872
11873
11874
11875
11876
11877
11878
11879
11880
11881
11882
11883
11884
11885
11886
11887
11888
11889
11890
11891
11892
11893
11894
11895
11896
11897
11898
11899
11900
11901
11902
11903
11904
11905
11906
11907
11908
11909
11910
11911
11912
11913
11914
11915
11916
11917
11918
11919
11920
11921
11922
11923
11924
11925
11926
11927
11928
11929
11930
11931
11932
11933
11934
11935
11936
11937
11938
11939
11940
11941
11942
11943
11944
11945
11946
11947
11948
11949
11950
11951
11952
11953
11954
11955
11956
11957
11958
11959
11960
11961
11962
11963
11964
11965
11966
11967
11968
11969
11970
11971
11972
11973
11974
11975
11976
11977
11978
11979
11980
11981
11982
11983
11984
11985
11986
11987
11988
11989
11990
11991
11992
11993
11994
11995
11996
11997
11998
11999
12000
12001
12002
12003
12004
12005
12006
12007
12008
12009
12010
12011
12012
12013
12014
12015
12016
12017
12018
12019
12020
12021
12022
12023
12024
12025
12026
12027
12028
12029
12030
12031
12032
12033
12034
12035
12036
12037
12038
12039
12040
12041
12042
12043
12044
12045
12046
12047
12048
12049
12050
12051
12052
12053
12054
12055
12056
12057
12058
12059
12060
12061
12062
12063
12064
12065
12066
12067
12068
12069
12070
12071
12072
12073
12074
12075
12076
12077
12078
12079
12080
12081
12082
12083
12084
12085
12086
12087
12088
12089
12090
12091
12092
12093
12094
12095
12096
12097
12098
12099
12100
12101
12102
12103
12104
12105
12106
12107
12108
12109
12110
12111
12112
12113
12114
12115
12116
12117
12118
12119
12120
12121
12122
12123
12124
12125
12126
12127
12128
12129
12130
12131
12132
12133
12134
12135
12136
12137
12138
12139
12140
12141
12142
12143
12144
12145
12146
12147
12148
12149
12150
12151
12152
12153
12154
12155
12156
12157
12158
12159
12160
12161
12162
12163
12164
12165
12166
12167
12168
12169
12170
12171
12172
12173
12174
12175
12176
12177
12178
12179
12180
12181
12182
12183
12184
12185
12186
12187
12188
12189
12190
12191
12192
12193
12194
12195
12196
12197
12198
12199
12200
12201
12202
12203
12204
12205
12206
12207
12208
12209
12210
12211
12212
12213
12214
12215
12216
12217
12218
12219
12220
12221
12222
12223
12224
12225
12226
12227
12228
12229
12230
12231
12232
12233
12234
12235
12236
12237
12238
12239
12240
12241
12242
12243
12244
12245
12246
12247
12248
12249
12250
12251
12252
12253
12254
12255
12256
12257
12258
12259
12260
12261
12262
12263
12264
12265
12266
12267
12268
12269
12270
12271
12272
12273
12274
12275
12276
12277
12278
12279
12280
12281
12282
12283
12284
12285
12286
12287
12288
12289
12290
12291
12292
12293
12294
12295
12296
12297
12298
12299
12300
12301
12302
12303
12304
12305
12306
12307
12308
12309
12310
12311
12312
12313
12314
12315
12316
12317
12318
12319
12320
12321
12322
12323
12324
12325
12326
12327
12328
12329
12330
12331
12332
12333
12334
12335
12336
12337
12338
12339
12340
12341
12342
12343
12344
12345
12346
12347
12348
12349
12350
12351
12352
12353
12354
12355
12356
12357
12358
12359
12360
12361
12362
12363
12364
12365
12366
12367
12368
12369
12370
12371
12372
12373
12374
12375
12376
12377
12378
12379
12380
12381
12382
12383
12384
12385
12386
12387
12388
12389
12390
12391
12392
12393
12394
12395
12396
12397
12398
12399
12400
12401
12402
12403
12404
12405
12406
12407
12408
12409
12410
12411
12412
12413
12414
12415
12416
12417
12418
12419
12420
12421
12422
12423
12424
12425
12426
12427
12428
12429
12430
12431
12432
12433
12434
12435
12436
12437
12438
12439
12440
12441
12442
12443
12444
12445
12446
12447
12448
12449
12450
12451
12452
12453
12454
12455
12456
12457
12458
12459
12460
12461
12462
12463
12464
12465
12466
12467
12468
12469
12470
12471
12472
12473
12474
12475
12476
12477
12478
12479
12480
12481
12482
12483
12484
12485
12486
12487
12488
12489
12490
12491
12492
12493
12494
12495
12496
12497
12498
12499
12500
12501
12502
12503
12504
12505
12506
12507
12508
12509
12510
12511
12512
12513
12514
12515
12516
12517
12518
12519
12520
12521
12522
12523
12524
12525
12526
12527
12528
12529
12530
12531
12532
12533
12534
12535
12536
12537
12538
12539
12540
12541
12542
12543
12544
12545
12546
12547
12548
12549
12550
12551
12552
12553
12554
12555
12556
12557
12558
12559
12560
12561
12562
12563
12564
12565
12566
12567
12568
12569
12570
12571
12572
12573
12574
12575
12576
12577
12578
12579
12580
12581
12582
12583
12584
12585
12586
12587
12588
12589
12590
12591
12592
12593
12594
12595
12596
12597
12598
12599
12600
12601
12602
12603
12604
12605
12606
12607
12608
12609
12610
12611
12612
12613
12614
12615
12616
12617
12618
12619
12620
12621
12622
12623
12624
12625
12626
12627
12628
12629
12630
12631
12632
12633
12634
12635
12636
12637
12638
12639
12640
12641
12642
12643
12644
12645
12646
12647
12648
12649
12650
12651
12652
12653
12654
12655
12656
12657
12658
12659
12660
12661
12662
12663
12664
12665
12666
12667
12668
12669
12670
12671
12672
12673
12674
12675
12676
12677
12678
12679
12680
12681
12682
12683
12684
12685
12686
12687
12688
12689
12690
12691
12692
12693
12694
12695
12696
12697
12698
12699
12700
12701
12702
12703
12704
12705
12706
12707
12708
12709
12710
12711
12712
12713
12714
12715
12716
12717
12718
12719
12720
12721
12722
12723
12724
12725
12726
12727
12728
12729
12730
12731
12732
12733
12734
12735
12736
12737
12738
12739
12740
12741
12742
12743
12744
12745
12746
12747
12748
12749
12750
12751
12752
12753
12754
12755
12756
12757
12758
12759
12760
12761
12762
12763
12764
12765
12766
12767
12768
12769
12770
12771
12772
12773
12774
12775
12776
12777
12778
12779
12780
12781
12782
12783
12784
12785
12786
12787
12788
12789
12790
12791
12792
12793
12794
12795
12796
12797
12798
12799
12800
12801
12802
12803
12804
12805
12806
12807
12808
12809
12810
12811
12812
12813
12814
12815
12816
12817
12818
12819
12820
12821
12822
12823
12824
12825
12826
12827
12828
12829
12830
12831
12832
12833
12834
12835
12836
12837
12838
12839
12840
12841
12842
12843
12844
12845
12846
12847
12848
12849
12850
12851
12852
12853
12854
12855
12856
12857
12858
12859
12860
12861
12862
12863
12864
12865
12866
12867
12868
12869
12870
12871
12872
12873
12874
12875
12876
12877
12878
12879
12880
12881
12882
12883
12884
12885
12886
12887
12888
12889
12890
12891
12892
12893
12894
12895
12896
12897
12898
12899
12900
12901
12902
12903
12904
12905
12906
12907
12908
12909
12910
12911
12912
12913
12914
12915
12916
12917
12918
12919
12920
12921
12922
12923
12924
12925
12926
12927
12928
12929
12930
12931
12932
12933
12934
12935
12936
12937
12938
12939
12940
12941
12942
12943
12944
12945
12946
12947
12948
12949
12950
12951
12952
12953
12954
12955
12956
12957
12958
12959
12960
12961
12962
12963
12964
12965
12966
12967
12968
12969
12970
12971
12972
12973
12974
12975
12976
12977
12978
12979
12980
12981
12982
12983
12984
12985
12986
12987
12988
12989
12990
12991
12992
12993
12994
12995
12996
12997
12998
12999
13000
13001
13002
13003
13004
13005
13006
13007
13008
13009
13010
13011
13012
13013
13014
13015
13016
13017
13018
13019
13020
13021
13022
13023
13024
13025
13026
13027
13028
13029
13030
13031
13032
13033
13034
13035
13036
13037
13038
13039
13040
13041
13042
13043
13044
13045
13046
13047
13048
13049
13050
13051
13052
13053
13054
13055
13056
13057
13058
13059
13060
13061
13062
13063
13064
13065
13066
13067
13068
13069
13070
13071
13072
13073
13074
13075
13076
13077
13078
13079
13080
13081
13082
13083
13084
13085
13086
13087
13088
13089
13090
13091
13092
13093
13094
13095
13096
13097
13098
13099
13100
13101
13102
13103
13104
13105
13106
13107
13108
13109
13110
13111
13112
13113
13114
13115
13116
13117
13118
13119
13120
13121
13122
13123
13124
13125
13126
13127
13128
13129
13130
13131
13132
13133
13134
13135
13136
13137
13138
13139
13140
13141
13142
13143
13144
13145
13146
13147
13148
13149
13150
13151
13152
13153
13154
13155
13156
13157
13158
13159
13160
13161
13162
13163
13164
13165
13166
13167
13168
13169
13170
13171
13172
13173
13174
13175
13176
13177
13178
13179
13180
13181
13182
13183
13184
13185
13186
13187
13188
13189
13190
13191
13192
13193
13194
13195
13196
13197
13198
13199
13200
13201
13202
13203
13204
13205
13206
13207
13208
13209
13210
13211
13212
13213
13214
13215
13216
13217
13218
13219
13220
13221
13222
13223
13224
13225
13226
13227
13228
13229
13230
13231
13232
13233
13234
13235
13236
13237
13238
13239
13240
13241
13242
13243
13244
13245
13246
13247
13248
13249
13250
13251
13252
13253
13254
13255
13256
13257
13258
13259
13260
13261
13262
13263
13264
13265
13266
13267
13268
13269
13270
13271
13272
13273
13274
13275
13276
13277
13278
13279
13280
13281
13282
13283
13284
13285
13286
13287
13288
13289
13290
13291
13292
13293
13294
13295
13296
13297
13298
13299
13300
13301
13302
13303
13304
13305
13306
13307
13308
13309
13310
13311
13312
13313
13314
13315
13316
13317
13318
13319
13320
13321
13322
13323
13324
13325
13326
13327
13328
13329
13330
13331
13332
13333
13334
13335
13336
13337
13338
13339
13340
13341
13342
13343
13344
13345
13346
13347
13348
13349
13350
13351
13352
13353
13354
13355
13356
13357
13358
13359
13360
13361
13362
13363
13364
13365
13366
13367
13368
13369
13370
13371
13372
13373
13374
13375
13376
13377
13378
13379
13380
13381
13382
13383
13384
13385
13386
13387
13388
13389
13390
13391
13392
13393
13394
13395
13396
13397
13398
13399
13400
13401
13402
13403
13404
13405
13406
13407
13408
13409
13410
13411
13412
13413
13414
13415
13416
13417
13418
13419
13420
13421
13422
13423
13424
13425
13426
13427
13428
13429
13430
13431
13432
13433
13434
13435
13436
13437
13438
13439
13440
13441
13442
13443
13444
13445
13446
13447
13448
13449
13450
13451
13452
13453
13454
13455
13456
13457
13458
13459
13460
13461
13462
13463
13464
13465
13466
13467
13468
13469
13470
13471
13472
13473
13474
13475
13476
13477
13478
13479
13480
13481
13482
13483
13484
13485
13486
13487
13488
13489
13490
13491
13492
13493
13494
13495
13496
13497
13498
13499
13500
13501
13502
13503
13504
13505
13506
13507
13508
13509
13510
13511
13512
13513
13514
13515
13516
13517
13518
13519
13520
13521
13522
13523
13524
13525
13526
13527
13528
13529
13530
13531
13532
13533
13534
13535
13536
13537
13538
13539
13540
13541
13542
13543
13544
13545
13546
13547
13548
13549
13550
13551
13552
13553
13554
13555
13556
13557
13558
13559
13560
13561
13562
13563
13564
13565
13566
13567
13568
13569
13570
13571
13572
13573
13574
13575
13576
13577
13578
13579
13580
13581
13582
13583
13584
13585
13586
13587
13588
13589
13590
13591
13592
13593
13594
13595
13596
13597
13598
13599
13600
13601
13602
13603
13604
13605
13606
13607
13608
13609
13610
13611
13612
13613
13614
13615
13616
13617
13618
13619
13620
13621
13622
13623
13624
13625
13626
13627
13628
13629
13630
13631
13632
13633
13634
13635
13636
13637
13638
13639
13640
13641
13642
13643
13644
13645
13646
13647
13648
13649
13650
13651
13652
13653
13654
13655
13656
13657
13658
13659
13660
13661
13662
13663
13664
13665
13666
13667
13668
13669
13670
13671
13672
13673
13674
13675
13676
13677
13678
13679
13680
13681
13682
13683
13684
13685
13686
13687
13688
13689
13690
13691
13692
13693
13694
13695
13696
13697
13698
13699
13700
13701
13702
13703
13704
13705
13706
13707
13708
13709
13710
13711
13712
13713
13714
13715
13716
13717
13718
13719
13720
13721
13722
13723
13724
13725
13726
13727
13728
13729
13730
13731
13732
13733
13734
13735
13736
13737
13738
13739
13740
13741
13742
13743
13744
13745
13746
13747
13748
13749
13750
13751
13752
13753
13754
13755
13756
13757
13758
13759
13760
13761
13762
13763
13764
13765
13766
13767
13768
13769
13770
13771
13772
13773
13774
13775
13776
13777
13778
13779
13780
13781
13782
13783
13784
13785
13786
13787
13788
13789
13790
13791
13792
13793
13794
13795
13796
13797
13798
13799
13800
13801
13802
13803
13804
13805
13806
13807
13808
13809
13810
13811
13812
13813
13814
13815
13816
13817
13818
13819
13820
13821
13822
13823
13824
13825
13826
13827
13828
13829
13830
13831
13832
13833
13834
13835
13836
13837
13838
13839
13840
13841
13842
13843
13844
13845
13846
13847
13848
13849
13850
13851
13852
13853
13854
13855
13856
13857
13858
13859
13860
13861
13862
13863
13864
13865
13866
13867
13868
13869
13870
13871
13872
13873
13874
13875
13876
13877
13878
13879
13880
13881
13882
13883
13884
13885
13886
13887
13888
13889
13890
13891
13892
13893
13894
13895
13896
13897
13898
13899
13900
13901
13902
13903
13904
13905
13906
13907
13908
13909
13910
13911
13912
13913
13914
13915
13916
13917
13918
13919
13920
13921
13922
13923
13924
13925
13926
13927
13928
13929
13930
13931
13932
13933
13934
13935
13936
13937
13938
13939
13940
13941
13942
13943
13944
13945
13946
13947
13948
13949
13950
13951
13952
13953
13954
13955
13956
13957
13958
13959
13960
13961
13962
13963
13964
13965
13966
13967
13968
13969
13970
13971
13972
13973
13974
13975
13976
13977
13978
13979
13980
13981
13982
13983
13984
13985
13986
13987
13988
13989
13990
13991
13992
13993
13994
13995
13996
13997
13998
13999
14000
14001
14002
14003
14004
14005
14006
14007
14008
14009
14010
14011
14012
14013
14014
14015
14016
14017
14018
14019
14020
14021
14022
14023
14024
14025
14026
14027
14028
14029
14030
14031
14032
14033
14034
14035
14036
14037
14038
14039
14040
14041
14042
14043
14044
14045
14046
14047
14048
14049
14050
14051
14052
14053
14054
14055
14056
14057
14058
14059
14060
14061
14062
14063
14064
14065
14066
14067
14068
14069
14070
14071
14072
14073
14074
14075
14076
14077
14078
14079
14080
14081
14082
14083
14084
14085
14086
14087
14088
14089
14090
14091
14092
14093
14094
14095
14096
14097
14098
14099
14100
14101
14102
14103
14104
14105
14106
14107
14108
14109
14110
14111
14112
14113
14114
14115
14116
14117
14118
14119
14120
14121
14122
14123
14124
14125
14126
14127
14128
14129
14130
14131
14132
14133
14134
14135
14136
14137
14138
14139
14140
14141
14142
14143
14144
14145
14146
14147
14148
14149
14150
14151
14152
14153
14154
14155
14156
14157
14158
14159
14160
14161
14162
14163
14164
14165
14166
14167
14168
14169
14170
14171
14172
14173
14174
14175
14176
14177
14178
14179
14180
14181
14182
14183
14184
14185
14186
14187
14188
14189
14190
14191
14192
14193
14194
14195
14196
14197
14198
14199
14200
14201
14202
14203
14204
14205
14206
14207
14208
14209
14210
14211
14212
14213
14214
14215
14216
14217
14218
14219
14220
14221
14222
14223
14224
14225
14226
14227
14228
14229
14230
14231
14232
14233
14234
14235
14236
14237
14238
14239
14240
14241
14242
14243
14244
14245
14246
14247
14248
14249
14250
14251
14252
14253
14254
14255
14256
14257
14258
14259
14260
14261
14262
14263
14264
14265
14266
14267
14268
14269
14270
14271
14272
14273
14274
14275
14276
14277
14278
14279
14280
14281
14282
14283
14284
14285
14286
14287
14288
14289
14290
14291
14292
14293
14294
14295
14296
14297
14298
14299
14300
14301
14302
14303
14304
14305
14306
14307
14308
14309
14310
14311
14312
14313
14314
14315
14316
14317
14318
14319
14320
14321
14322
14323
14324
14325
14326
14327
14328
14329
14330
14331
14332
14333
14334
14335
14336
14337
14338
14339
14340
14341
14342
14343
14344
14345
14346
14347
14348
14349
14350
14351
14352
14353
14354
14355
14356
14357
14358
14359
14360
14361
14362
14363
14364
14365
14366
14367
14368
14369
14370
14371
14372
14373
14374
14375
14376
14377
14378
14379
14380
14381
14382
14383
14384
14385
14386
14387
14388
14389
14390
14391
14392
14393
14394
14395
14396
14397
14398
14399
14400
14401
14402
14403
14404
14405
14406
14407
14408
14409
14410
14411
14412
14413
14414
14415
14416
14417
14418
14419
14420
14421
14422
14423
14424
14425
14426
14427
14428
14429
14430
14431
14432
14433
14434
14435
14436
14437
14438
14439
14440
14441
14442
14443
14444
14445
14446
14447
14448
14449
14450
14451
14452
14453
14454
14455
14456
14457
14458
14459
14460
14461
14462
14463
14464
14465
14466
14467
14468
14469
14470
14471
14472
14473
14474
14475
14476
14477
14478
14479
14480
14481
14482
14483
14484
14485
14486
14487
14488
14489
14490
14491
14492
14493
14494
14495
14496
14497
14498
14499
14500
14501
14502
14503
14504
14505
14506
14507
14508
14509
14510
14511
14512
14513
14514
14515
14516
14517
14518
14519
14520
14521
14522
14523
14524
14525
14526
14527
14528
14529
14530
14531
14532
14533
14534
14535
14536
14537
14538
14539
14540
14541
14542
14543
14544
14545
14546
14547
14548
14549
14550
14551
14552
14553
14554
14555
14556
14557
14558
14559
14560
14561
14562
14563
14564
14565
14566
14567
14568
14569
14570
14571
14572
14573
14574
14575
14576
14577
14578
14579
14580
14581
14582
14583
14584
14585
14586
14587
14588
14589
14590
14591
14592
14593
14594
14595
14596
14597
14598
14599
14600
14601
14602
14603
14604
14605
14606
14607
14608
14609
14610
14611
14612
14613
14614
14615
14616
14617
14618
14619
14620
14621
14622
14623
14624
14625
14626
14627
14628
14629
14630
14631
14632
14633
14634
14635
14636
14637
14638
14639
14640
14641
14642
14643
14644
14645
14646
14647
14648
14649
14650
14651
14652
14653
14654
14655
14656
14657
14658
14659
14660
14661
14662
14663
14664
14665
14666
14667
14668
14669
14670
14671
14672
14673
14674
14675
14676
14677
14678
14679
14680
14681
14682
14683
14684
14685
14686
14687
14688
14689
14690
14691
14692
14693
14694
14695
14696
14697
14698
14699
14700
14701
14702
14703
14704
14705
14706
14707
14708
14709
14710
14711
14712
14713
14714
14715
14716
14717
14718
14719
14720
14721
14722
14723
14724
14725
14726
14727
14728
14729
14730
14731
14732
14733
14734
14735
14736
14737
14738
14739
14740
14741
14742
14743
14744
14745
14746
14747
14748
14749
14750
14751
14752
14753
14754
14755
14756
14757
14758
14759
14760
14761
14762
14763
14764
14765
14766
14767
14768
14769
14770
14771
14772
14773
14774
14775
14776
14777
14778
14779
14780
14781
14782
14783
14784
14785
14786
14787
14788
14789
14790
14791
14792
14793
14794
14795
14796
14797
14798
14799
14800
14801
14802
14803
14804
14805
14806
14807
14808
14809
14810
14811
14812
14813
14814
14815
14816
14817
14818
14819
14820
14821
14822
14823
14824
14825
14826
14827
14828
14829
14830
14831
14832
14833
14834
14835
14836
14837
14838
14839
14840
14841
14842
14843
14844
14845
14846
14847
14848
14849
14850
14851
14852
14853
14854
14855
14856
14857
14858
14859
14860
14861
14862
14863
14864
14865
14866
14867
14868
14869
14870
14871
14872
14873
14874
14875
14876
14877
14878
14879
14880
14881
14882
14883
14884
14885
14886
14887
14888
14889
14890
14891
14892
14893
14894
14895
14896
14897
14898
14899
14900
14901
14902
14903
14904
14905
14906
14907
14908
14909
14910
14911
14912
14913
14914
14915
14916
14917
14918
14919
14920
14921
14922
14923
14924
14925
14926
14927
14928
14929
14930
14931
14932
14933
14934
14935
14936
14937
14938
14939
14940
14941
14942
14943
14944
14945
14946
14947
14948
14949
14950
14951
14952
14953
14954
14955
14956
14957
14958
14959
14960
14961
14962
14963
14964
14965
14966
14967
14968
14969
14970
14971
14972
14973
14974
14975
14976
14977
14978
14979
14980
14981
14982
14983
14984
14985
14986
14987
14988
14989
14990
14991
14992
14993
14994
14995
14996
14997
14998
14999
15000
15001
15002
15003
15004
15005
15006
15007
15008
15009
15010
15011
15012
15013
15014
15015
15016
15017
15018
15019
15020
15021
15022
15023
15024
15025
15026
15027
15028
15029
15030
15031
15032
15033
15034
15035
15036
15037
15038
15039
15040
15041
15042
15043
15044
15045
15046
15047
15048
15049
15050
15051
15052
15053
15054
15055
15056
15057
15058
15059
15060
15061
15062
15063
15064
15065
15066
15067
15068
15069
15070
15071
15072
15073
15074
15075
15076
15077
15078
15079
15080
15081
15082
15083
15084
15085
15086
15087
15088
15089
15090
15091
15092
15093
15094
15095
15096
15097
15098
15099
15100
15101
15102
15103
15104
15105
15106
15107
15108
15109
15110
15111
15112
15113
15114
15115
15116
15117
15118
15119
15120
15121
15122
15123
15124
15125
15126
15127
15128
15129
15130
15131
15132
15133
15134
15135
15136
15137
15138
15139
15140
15141
15142
15143
15144
15145
15146
15147
15148
15149
15150
15151
15152
15153
15154
15155
15156
15157
15158
15159
15160
15161
15162
15163
15164
15165
15166
15167
15168
15169
15170
15171
15172
15173
15174
15175
15176
15177
15178
15179
15180
15181
15182
15183
15184
15185
15186
15187
15188
15189
15190
15191
15192
15193
15194
15195
15196
15197
15198
15199
15200
15201
15202
15203
15204
15205
15206
15207
15208
15209
15210
15211
15212
15213
15214
15215
15216
15217
15218
15219
15220
15221
15222
15223
15224
15225
15226
15227
15228
15229
15230
15231
15232
15233
15234
15235
15236
15237
15238
15239
15240
15241
15242
15243
15244
15245
15246
15247
15248
15249
15250
15251
15252
15253
15254
15255
15256
15257
15258
15259
15260
15261
15262
15263
15264
15265
15266
15267
15268
15269
15270
15271
15272
15273
15274
15275
15276
15277
15278
15279
15280
15281
15282
15283
15284
15285
15286
15287
15288
15289
15290
15291
15292
15293
15294
15295
15296
15297
15298
15299
15300
15301
15302
15303
15304
15305
15306
15307
15308
15309
15310
15311
15312
15313
15314
15315
15316
15317
15318
15319
15320
15321
15322
15323
15324
15325
15326
15327
15328
15329
15330
15331
15332
15333
15334
15335
15336
15337
15338
15339
15340
15341
15342
15343
15344
15345
15346
15347
15348
15349
15350
15351
15352
15353
15354
15355
15356
15357
15358
15359
15360
15361
15362
15363
15364
15365
15366
15367
15368
15369
15370
15371
15372
15373
15374
15375
15376
15377
15378
15379
15380
15381
15382
15383
15384
15385
15386
15387
15388
15389
15390
15391
15392
15393
15394
15395
15396
15397
15398
15399
15400
15401
15402
15403
15404
15405
15406
15407
15408
15409
15410
15411
15412
15413
15414
15415
15416
15417
15418
15419
15420
15421
15422
15423
15424
15425
15426
15427
15428
15429
15430
15431
15432
15433
15434
15435
15436
15437
15438
15439
15440
15441
15442
15443
15444
15445
15446
15447
15448
15449
15450
15451
15452
15453
15454
15455
15456
15457
15458
15459
15460
15461
15462
15463
15464
15465
15466
15467
15468
15469
15470
15471
15472
15473
15474
15475
15476
15477
15478
15479
15480
15481
15482
15483
15484
15485
15486
15487
15488
15489
15490
15491
15492
15493
15494
15495
15496
15497
15498
15499
15500
15501
15502
15503
15504
15505
15506
15507
15508
15509
15510
15511
15512
15513
15514
15515
15516
15517
15518
15519
15520
15521
15522
15523
15524
15525
15526
15527
15528
15529
15530
15531
15532
15533
15534
15535
15536
15537
15538
15539
15540
15541
15542
15543
15544
15545
15546
15547
15548
15549
15550
15551
15552
15553
15554
15555
15556
15557
15558
15559
15560
15561
15562
15563
15564
15565
15566
15567
15568
15569
15570
15571
15572
15573
15574
15575
15576
15577
15578
15579
15580
15581
15582
15583
15584
15585
15586
15587
15588
15589
15590
15591
15592
15593
15594
15595
15596
15597
15598
15599
15600
15601
15602
15603
15604
15605
15606
15607
15608
15609
15610
15611
15612
15613
15614
15615
15616
15617
15618
15619
15620
15621
15622
15623
15624
15625
15626
15627
15628
15629
15630
15631
15632
15633
15634
15635
15636
15637
15638
15639
15640
15641
15642
15643
15644
15645
15646
15647
15648
15649
15650
15651
15652
15653
15654
15655
15656
15657
15658
15659
15660
15661
15662
15663
15664
15665
15666
15667
15668
15669
15670
15671
15672
15673
15674
15675
15676
15677
15678
15679
15680
15681
15682
15683
15684
15685
15686
15687
15688
15689
15690
15691
15692
15693
15694
15695
15696
15697
15698
15699
15700
15701
15702
15703
15704
15705
15706
15707
15708
15709
15710
15711
15712
15713
15714
15715
15716
15717
15718
15719
15720
15721
15722
15723
15724
15725
15726
15727
15728
15729
15730
15731
15732
15733
15734
15735
15736
15737
15738
15739
15740
15741
15742
15743
15744
15745
15746
15747
15748
15749
15750
15751
15752
15753
15754
15755
15756
15757
15758
15759
15760
15761
15762
15763
15764
15765
15766
15767
15768
15769
15770
15771
15772
15773
15774
15775
15776
15777
15778
15779
15780
15781
15782
15783
15784
15785
15786
15787
15788
15789
15790
15791
15792
15793
15794
15795
15796
15797
15798
15799
15800
15801
15802
15803
15804
15805
15806
15807
15808
15809
15810
15811
15812
15813
15814
15815
15816
15817
15818
15819
15820
15821
15822
15823
15824
15825
15826
15827
15828
15829
15830
15831
15832
15833
15834
15835
15836
15837
15838
15839
15840
15841
15842
15843
15844
15845
15846
15847
15848
15849
15850
15851
15852
15853
15854
15855
15856
15857
15858
15859
15860
15861
15862
15863
15864
15865
15866
15867
15868
15869
15870
15871
15872
15873
15874
15875
15876
15877
15878
15879
15880
15881
15882
15883
15884
15885
15886
15887
15888
15889
15890
15891
15892
15893
15894
15895
15896
15897
15898
15899
15900
15901
15902
15903
15904
15905
15906
15907
15908
15909
15910
15911
15912
15913
15914
15915
15916
15917
15918
15919
15920
15921
15922
15923
15924
15925
15926
15927
15928
15929
15930
15931
15932
15933
15934
15935
15936
15937
15938
15939
15940
15941
15942
15943
15944
15945
15946
15947
15948
15949
15950
15951
15952
15953
15954
15955
15956
15957
15958
15959
15960
15961
15962
15963
15964
15965
15966
15967
15968
15969
15970
15971
15972
15973
15974
15975
15976
15977
15978
15979
15980
15981
15982
15983
15984
15985
15986
15987
15988
15989
15990
15991
15992
15993
15994
15995
15996
15997
15998
15999
16000
16001
16002
16003
16004
16005
16006
16007
16008
16009
16010
16011
16012
16013
16014
16015
16016
16017
16018
16019
16020
16021
16022
16023
16024
16025
16026
16027
16028
16029
16030
16031
16032
16033
16034
16035
16036
16037
16038
16039
16040
16041
16042
16043
16044
16045
16046
16047
16048
16049
16050
16051
16052
16053
16054
16055
16056
16057
16058
16059
16060
16061
16062
16063
16064
16065
16066
16067
16068
16069
16070
16071
16072
16073
16074
16075
16076
16077
16078
16079
16080
16081
16082
16083
16084
16085
16086
16087
16088
16089
16090
16091
16092
16093
16094
16095
16096
16097
16098
16099
16100
16101
16102
16103
16104
16105
16106
16107
16108
16109
16110
16111
16112
16113
16114
16115
16116
16117
16118
16119
16120
16121
16122
16123
16124
16125
16126
16127
16128
16129
16130
16131
16132
16133
16134
16135
16136
16137
16138
16139
16140
16141
16142
16143
16144
16145
16146
16147
16148
16149
16150
16151
16152
16153
16154
16155
16156
16157
16158
16159
16160
16161
16162
16163
16164
16165
16166
16167
16168
16169
16170
16171
16172
16173
16174
16175
16176
16177
16178
16179
16180
16181
16182
16183
16184
16185
16186
16187
16188
16189
16190
16191
16192
16193
16194
16195
16196
16197
16198
16199
16200
16201
16202
16203
16204
16205
16206
16207
16208
16209
16210
16211
16212
16213
16214
16215
16216
16217
16218
16219
16220
16221
16222
16223

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>

<head>
<title>Christology of the Old Testament, and a Commentary on the Messianic
Predictions. Vol. II.</title>
<meta name="Author" content="Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg">
<meta name="Publisher" content="T. & T. Clark">
<meta name="Date" content="1861">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
<style type="text/css">
body            {
                 line-height:150%;
                 font-size: 14pt;
                 margin-left:10%;
                 margin-right:10%;
                 background-color:#FFFFFF
}

p.normal        {
                 text-indent:.25in;
                 text-align: justify;
}
p.center        {
                 text-align:center;
                 margin-top:9pt;
}

p.hang1        { margin-left:2em;
                 text-indent:-2em;
                 text-align: justify;
}


p.right         {
                 text-align:right;
                 margin-top: 9pt;
}
p.continue    	{
                 text-indent: 0in;
                 margin-top:9pt;
}
h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6	{
                 text-align: center;
                 font-weight: bold
}



table.page2        {
                   width:6in;
                   font-size:10pt;

}

span.sc		       { font-variant: small-caps }
span.space         {letter-spacing: 2pt; }

hr.ftn		       { text-align:left; width:30%; margin-top:48pt; color:black; }
div.ftn            { font-size: 100%; margin-top:9pt; color:#000000}
sup.ftnRef         {font-size:100%; color:black; }
p.ftnText          { margin-left: 3em; text-indent:  -1em; margin-top:14pt; text-align:justify; }
div.ftnlast        { font-size: 90%; margin-top:9pt; margin-bottom:64pt; color:#000000}



.pagenum           {
                    display: inline;
                    font-size:80%;
                    text-align: left;
                    position: absolute; left: 1%;
}



hr.W10		     {
                   width:10%;
                   margin-top:12pt;
                   margin-bottom:12pt;
                   color:black;
}
hr.W20           {
                   width:20%;
                   margin-top:12pt;
                   margin-bottom:12pt;
                   color:black;
}


span.Greek	     {
                   font-family: 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Gentium', 'GentiumAlt', 'Palatino Linotype', 'Times New Roman';
                   font-size:100%;
                   color: red;
}
span.Hebrew      {
                   font-family: 'Arial Unicode MS', 'Gentium', 'GentiumAlt', 'Palatino Linotype', 'Times New Roman';
                   font-size:150%;
}
</style>
</head>

<body>


<pre>

The Project Gutenberg EBook of Christology of the Old Testament: And a
Commentary on the Messianic Predictions. Vol. 2, by Ernst Hengstenberg

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org


Title: Christology of the Old Testament: And a Commentary on the Messianic Predictions. Vol. 2

Author: Ernst Hengstenberg

Translator: Theodore Meyer

Release Date: December 5, 2009 [EBook #30608]

Language: English

Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CHRISTOLOGY OF OLD TESTAMENT, V2 ***




Produced by Charles Bowen, from images obtained from Google Books.





</pre>

<p class="normal">Transcriber&#39;s Note: Images taken from the 1861 edition, found
at http://Books.Google.com., is the source of the text used for this ebook.</p>
<p class="normal">Unclear or missing punctuation marks were corrected by reference
to the 1856 edition of this work.</p>

<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg i]</span></p>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<h1><span class="space">CLARK</span>&#39;S</h1>
<br>
<h2>FOREIGN</h2>
<br>
<h1>THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY</h1>
<br>
<br>
<h2>NEW SERIES.<br>
VOL. IX.</h2>
<br>
<br>
<h2>Hengstenberg&#39;s Christology of the Old Testament.<br>
VOL. II.</h2>
<br>
<br>
<h2>EDINBURGH:</h2>
<h2>T. &amp; T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.</h2>
<h3>LONDON: J. GLADDING; WARD AND CO.; AND JACKSON AND WALFORD.<br>
DUBLIN: JOHN ROBERTSON.</h3>
<hr class="W10">
<h3>MDCCCLXI.</h3>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg ii]</span></p>
<p class="continue">[Blank Page] </p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg iii]</span></p>
<h1><span class="space">CHRISTOLOGY</span></h1>
<h4>OF</h4>
<h1><span class="space">THE OLD TESTAMENT</span>,</h1>
<h4>AND A</h4>
<h2>COMMENTARY ON THE MESSIANIC PREDICTIONS</h2>
<br>
<h4>BY</h4>
<h2>E. W. HENGSTENBERG,</h2>
<h5>DR. AND PROF. OF THEOL. IN BERLIN.</h5>
<br>
<hr class="W20">
<h3>SECOND EDITION GREATLY IMPROVED.</h3>
<hr class="W20"><br>
<h3>TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN</h3>
<h5>BY</h5>
<h2><span class="space">THE REV. THEOD. MEYER,</span></h2>
<h5>HEBREW TUTOR IN THE NEW COLLEGE, EDINBURGH.</h5>
<h2>VOL. II.</h2>
<hr class="W20">
<h2>EDINBURGH:</h2>
<h2>T. &amp; T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.</h2>
<h3>LONDON: HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO.; SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, AND CO.; WARD AND CO.;
JACKSON AND WALFORD, ETC. DUBLIN: JOHN ROBERTSON, AND HODGES AND SMITH.</h3>
<hr class="W10">
<h3>MDCCCLXI.</h3>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg iv]</span></p>
<h2>NOTICE.</h2>
<h3><i>This Work is copyright in this country by arrangement with the Author.</i></h3>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg v]</span></p>
<h2>LIST OF CONTENTS.</h2>
<hr class="W20">
<table cellpadding="0" class="page2">
	<colgroup>
		<col style="width:1em"><col style="width:1em"><col style="90%">
		<col style="width:5%; vertical-align: top; text-align:right">
	</colgroup>
	<tr>
		<td colspan="3"></td>
		<td><span class="sc">Page</span></td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td colspan="4"><span class="sc">Messianic Predictions in the Prophets.</span></td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td colspan="3"><a name="div1Ref_1" href="#div1_1"><span class="sc">The
		Prophet Isaiah.</span></a></td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_1" href="#div2_1">General Preliminary Remarks,</a></td>
		<td>1</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_10" href="#div2_10">Chap. ii.-iv.--The Sprout of the
		Lord,</a></td>
		<td>10</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_26" href="#div2_26">Chap. vii.--Immanuel,</a></td>
		<td>26</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_66" href="#div2_66">Chap. viii. 23-ix. 6--Unto us a
		Child is born,</a></td>
		<td>66</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_75" href="#div2_75">Chap. ix. 1-7,</a></td>
		<td>75</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_94" href="#div2_94">Chap. xi., xii.--The Twig of Jesse,</a></td>
		<td>94</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_106" href="#div2_106">On Matthew ii. 23,</a></td>
		<td>106</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_133" href="#div2_133">Chap. xii.,</a></td>
		<td>133</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_135" href="#div2_135">Chaps. xiii. 1-xiv. 27,</a></td>
		<td>135</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_137" href="#div2_137">Chaps. xvii., xviii.,</a></td>
		<td>137</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_141" href="#div2_141">Chap. xix.,</a></td>
		<td>141</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_146" href="#div2_146">Chap. xxiii.--The Burden upon
		Tyre,</a></td>
		<td>146</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_149" href="#div2_149">Chaps. xxiv.-xxvii.,</a></td>
		<td>149</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_154" href="#div2_154">Chaps. xxviii.-xxxiii.,</a></td>
		<td>154</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_158" href="#div2_158">Chap. xxxv.,</a></td>
		<td>158</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_163" href="#div2_163">General Preliminary Remarks on
		Chaps, xl.-lxvi.,</a></td>
		<td>163</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_196" href="#div2_196">Chap. xlii. 1-9,</a></td>
		<td>196</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_226" href="#div2_226">Chap. xlix. 1-9</a>,</td>
		<td>226</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_247" href="#div2_247">Chap. 1. 4-11,</a></td>
		<td>246</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_257" href="#div2_257">Chap. li. 16,</a></td>
		<td>256</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_260" href="#div2_260">Chaps. lii. 13-liii. 12,</a></td>
		<td>259</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td colspan="2"><a name="div2Ref_311" href="#div2_311">I. History of the
		Interpretation.</a></td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><p style="margin-left:1em;">
		<a name="div3Ref_311" href="#div3_311">A. With the Jews,</a></p></td>
		<td>311</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><p style="margin-left:1em;">
		<a name="div3Ref_319" href="#div3_319">B. History of the Interpretation
		with the Christians,</a></p></td>
		<td>319</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_327" href="#div2_327">II. The Arguments against the
		Messianic Interpretation,</a></td>
		<td>327</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_330" href="#div2_330">III. The Arguments in favour
		of the Messianic Interpretation,</a></td>
		<td>330</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_334" href="#div2_334">IV. Examination of the Non-Messianic
		Interpretation,</a></td>
		<td>334</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_342" href="#div2_342">Chap. lv. 1-5,</a></td>
		<td>343</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_351" href="#div2_351">Chap. lxi. 1-3,</a></td>
		<td>351</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td colspan="2"><a name="div1Ref_356" href="#div1_356"><span class="sc">
		The Prophet Zephaniah,</span></a></td>
		<td>356</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td colspan="3"><a name="div1Ref_362" href="#div1_362"><span class="sc">
		The Prophet Jeremiah.</span></a></td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_362" href="#div2_362">General Preliminary Remarks,</a></td>
		<td>362</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_373" href="#div2_373">Chap. iii. 14-17,</a></td>
		<td>373</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_398" href="#div2_398">Chap. xxiii. 1-8,</a></td>
		<td>398</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_424" href="#div2_424">Chap. xxxi. 31-40,</a></td>
		<td>424</td>
	</tr>
	<tr>
		<td></td>
		<td></td>
		<td><a name="div2Ref_459" href="#div2_459">Chap. xxxiii. 14-26,</a></td>
		<td>459</td>
	</tr>
</table>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg vi]</span></p>
<p class="continue">[Blank Page]</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 1]</span></p>
<h2><a name="div1_1" href="#div1Ref_1">THE PROPHET ISAIAH.</a></h2>
<h3><a name="div2_1" href="#div2Ref_1">GENERAL PRELIMINARY REMARKS.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">Isaiah is the principal prophetical figure in the first period
of canonical prophetism, <i>i.e.</i>, the Assyrian period, just as Jeremiah is in
the second, <i>i.e.</i>, the Babylonian. With Isaiah are connected in the kingdom
of Judah: Joel, Obadiah, and Micah; in the kingdom of Israel: Hosea, Amos, and Jonah.</p>
<p class="normal">The name &quot;Isaiah&quot; signifies the &quot;Salvation of the Lord.&quot; In this
name we have the key-note of his prophecies, just as the name Jeremiah: &quot;The Lord
casts down,&quot; indicates the nature of his prophecies, in which the prevailing element
is entirely of a threatening character. That the proclamation of salvation occupies
a very prominent place in Isaiah, was seen even by the Fathers of the Church. <i>
Jerome</i> says: &quot;I shall expound Isaiah in such a manner that he shall appear not
as a prophet only, but as an Evangelist and an Apostle;&quot; and in another passage:
&quot;Isaiah seems to me to have uttered not a prophecy but a Gospel.&quot; And <i>Augustine</i>
says, <i>De Civ. Dei</i>, 18, c. 29, that, according to the opinion of many, Isaiah,
on account of his numerous prophecies of Christ and the Church, deserved the name
of an Evangelist rather than that of a Prophet. When, after his conversion, <i>Augustine</i>
applied to <i>Ambrose</i> with the question, which among the Sacred Books he should
read in preference to all others, he proposed to him Isaiah, &quot;because before all
others it was he who had more openly declared the Gospel and the calling of the
Gentiles.&quot; (<i>Aug. Conf.</i> ix. 5.) With the Fathers of the Church <i>Luther</i>
coincides. He says in commendation of Isaiah: &quot;He is full of loving, comforting,
cheering words for all poor consciences, and wretched, afflicted hearts.&quot; Of course,
there is in Isaiah no want of severe reproofs and threatenings. If it were
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 2]</span> otherwise, he would have gone beyond the boundary
by which true prophetism is separated from false. &quot;There is in it,&quot; as Luther says,
&quot;enough of threatenings and terrors against the hardened, haughty, obdurate heads
of the wicked, if it might be of some use.&quot; But the threatenings never form the
close in Isaiah; they always at last run out into the promise; and while, for example,
in the great majority of Jeremiah&#39;s prophecies, the promise, which cannot be wanting
in any true prophet, is commonly only short, and hinted at, sometimes consisting
only of words which are thrown into the midst of the several threatenings, <i>e.
g.</i>, iv. 27: &quot;Yet will I not make a full end,&quot;--in Isaiah the stream of consolation
flows in the richest fulness. The promise absolutely prevails in the second part,
from chap. xl.-lxvi. The reason of this peculiarity is to be sought for chiefly
in the historical circumstances. Isaiah lived at a time in which, in the kingdom
of Judah, the corruption was far from having already reached its greatest height,--in
which there still existed, in that kingdom, a numerous &quot;election&quot; which gathered
round the prophet as their spiritual centre. With a view to this circle, Isaiah
utters the words: &quot;Comfort ye, comfort ye my people.&quot; The contemporary prophets
of the kingdom of the ten tribes, which was poisoned in its very first origin, found
a different state of things; the field there was already ripe for the harvest of
judgment. And at the time of Jeremiah, Judah had become like her apostate sister.
At that time it was not so much needed to comfort the miserable, as to terrify sinners
in their security. It was only after the wrath of God had manifested itself in deeds,
only after the judgment of God had been executed upon Jerusalem, or was immediately
at hand,--it was only then that, in Jeremiah, and so in Ezekiel also, the stream
of promise broke forth without hinderance.</p>
<p class="normal">Chronology is, throughout, the principle according to which the
Prophecies of Isaiah are arranged. In the first six chapters, we obtain a survey
of the Prophet&#39;s ministry under Uzziah and Jotham. Chap. vii. to x. 4 belongs to
the time of Ahaz. From chap. x. 4 to the close of chap. xxxv. every thing belongs
to the time of the Assyrian invasion in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah; in the
face of which invasion the prophetic gift of Isaiah was displayed as it had never
been before. The section, chap. xxxvi.-xxxix., furnishes us with the historical
commentary on the preceding <span class="pagenum">[Pg 3]</span> prophecies from
the Assyrian period, and forms, at the same time, the transition to the second part,
which still belongs to the same period, and the starting point of which is Judah&#39;s
deliverance from Asshur. In this most remarkable year of the Prophet&#39;s life--a year
rich in the manifestation of God&#39;s glory in judgment and mercy--his prophecy flowed
out in full streams, and spread to every side. Not the destinies of Judah only,
but those of the Gentile nations also are drawn within its sphere. The Prophet does
not confine himself to the events immediately at hand, but in his ecstatic state,
the state of an elevated, and, as it were, armed consciousness, in which he was
during this whole period, his eye looks into the farthest distances. He sees, especially,
that, at some future period, the Babylonian power, which began, even in his time,
to germinate, would take the place of the Assyrian,--that, like it, it would find
the field of Judah white for the harvest,--that, for this oppressor of the world,
destruction is prepared by <i>Koresh</i> (Cyrus), the conqueror from the East, and
that he will liberate the people from their exile; and, at the close of the development,
he beholds the Saviour of the world, whose image he depicts in the most glowing
colours.</p>
<p class="normal">Isaiah has especially brought out the view of the Prophetic and
Priestly offices of Christ, while in the former prophecies it was almost alone the
Kingly office which appeared; it is only in Deut. xviii. that the Prophetic office,
and in Ps. cx. that the Priestly office, is pointed at. Of the two states of Christ,
it is the doctrine of the state of humiliation, the doctrine of the suffering Christ,
which here meets us, while formerly it was the state of exaltation which was prominently
brought before us,--although Isaiah too can very well describe it when it is necessary
to meet the fears regarding the destruction of the Theocracy by the assaults of
the powerful heathen nations. The first attempt at a description of the humbled,
suffering, and expiating Christ, is found in chap. xi. 1. The real seat of this
proclamation is, however, in the second part, which is destined more for the election,
than for the whole nation. In chap. xlii. we meet the servant of God, who, as a
Saviour meek and lowly in heart, does not break the bruised reed, nor quench the
smoking flax, and by this merciful love establishes righteousness on the whole earth.
In chap. xlix., the Prophet describes how the covenant-people requite with ingratitude
the faithful labours of the Servant of God, but that <span class="pagenum">[Pg 4]</span>
the Lord, to recompense Him for the obstinacy of Israel, gives Him the Gentiles
for an inheritance. In chap. l. we have presented to us that aspect of the sufferings
of the Servant of God which is common to Christ and His people--viz., how, in fulfilling
His calling. He offered His back to the smiters, and did not hide His face from
shame and spitting. Then, finally, in chap. liii.--that culminating point of the
prophecy of the Old Testament--Christ is placed before our eyes in His highest work,
in His atoning and vicarious suffering, as the truth of both the Old Testament high-priest,
and the Old Testament sin-offering.</p>
<p class="normal">There are still the following Messianic features which are peculiar
to Isaiah. A clear Old Testament witness for the divinity of Christ is offered by
chap. ix. 5 (6); the birth by a virgin, closely connected with His divinity, is
announced in chap. vii. 14; according to chap. viii. 23 (ix. 1.) Galilee, and, in
general, the country surrounding the Sea of Gennesareth, being that part of the
country which hitherto had chiefly been covered with disgrace, are, in a very special
manner, to be honoured by the appearance of the Saviour, who shall come to have
mercy upon the miserable, and to seek that which was lost. Isaiah has, further,
first taught that, by the redemption, the consequences of the Fall would disappear
in the irrational creation also, and that it should return to paradisaic innocence,
chap. xi. 6-9. He has first announced to the people of God the glorious truth, that
death, as it had not existed in the beginning, should, at the end also, be expelled,
chap. xxv. 8; xxvi. 19. The healing powers which by Christ should be imparted to
miserable mankind, Isaiah has described in chap xxxv. in words, which by the fulfilment
have, in a remarkable manner, been confirmed.</p>
<p class="normal">Let us endeavour to form, from the single scattered features which
occur in the prophecies of Isaiah, a comprehensive view of his prospects into the
future.</p>
<p class="normal">The announcement first uttered by Moses of an impending exile
of the people, and desolation of the country, is brought before us by Isaiah in
the first six chapters, in the prophecies belonging to the time of Uzziah and Jotham,
at which the future had not yet been so clearly laid open before the Prophet as
it was at a later period, at the time of Ahaz, and, very especially, in the fourteenth
year of Hezekiah. A reference to <span class="pagenum">[Pg 5]</span> the respective
announcements of the Pentateuch is found in chap. xxxvii. 26, where, in opposition
to the imagination of the King of Asshur, that, by his own power, he had penetrated
as a conqueror as far as Judah, Isaiah asks him whether he had not heard that the
Lord, long ago and from ancient times, had formed such a resolution regarding His
people. These words can be referred only to the threatenings of the Pentateuch,
which a short-sighted criticism endeavoured to ascribe to a far later period, without
considering that the germ of this knowledge of the future is found in the Decalogue
also, the genuineness of which is, at present, almost unanimously conceded: &quot;In
order that thy (Israel&#39;s) days may be long in the land which the Lord thy God giveth
thee.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">In the solemnly introduced short summary of the history of the
covenant-people, in chap. vi., there is, after the announcement of the impending
complete desolation of the country and the carrying away of its inhabitants in vers.
11, 12, the indication of a <i>second</i> judgment which will not less make an end,
in ver. 13: &quot;But yet there is a tenth part in it, and it shall again be destroyed;&quot;
and this goes hand in hand with the promise that the <i>election</i> shall become
partakers of the Messianic salvation.</p>
<p class="normal">The Prophet clearly sees that, by the <i>Syrico-Ephraemitic</i>
war, the full realization of that threatening of the Pentateuch will not be brought
about, as far as Judah is concerned; that here a faint prelude only to the real
fulfilment is the point in question. Although the allied kings speak in chap. vii.
6: &quot;Let us go up against Judea and vex it, and let us conquer it for us, and set
a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeal,&quot; the Lord speaks in chap. vii.
7: &quot;It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.&quot; And although the heart of
the king and the heart of his people were moved as the trees of the wood are moved
with the wind, the Prophet says: &quot;Fear not, let not thy heart be tender for the
tails of those two smoking firebrands.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">It is Asshur that shall do more for the realization of that divine
decree first revealed by Moses. It is he who, immediately after that expedition
against Judah, shall break the power of the kingdom of the ten tribes, chap. viii.
4: &quot;Before the child shall be able to cry: &#39;My father and my mother,&#39; the riches
of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be carried before the King of
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 6]</span> Assyria.&quot; The communion of guilt into which
it has entered with Damascus shall also implicate it in a communion of punishment
with it, chap. xvii. 3. The adversaries of Rezin shall devour Israel with open mouth,
chap. ix. 11, 12. Yea Asshur shall, some time afterwards, put an end altogether
to the kingdom of Israel; &quot;Within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken
that it shall not be a people any more,&quot; chap. vii. 8. Upon Judah also severe sufferings
shall be inflicted by Asshur. He shall invade and devastate their land, chap. vii.
17, and chap. viii. He shall irresistibly penetrate to the neighbourhood of Jerusalem,
chap. x. 28-32. But when he is just preparing to inflict the mortal blow upon the
head of the people of God, the Lord shall put a stop to him: &quot;He shall cut down
the thickets of the forest with iron, and Lebanon shall fall by the mighty one,&quot;
chap. x. 34. &quot;Asshur shall be broken in the land of the Lord, and upon His mountains
be trodden under foot; and his yoke shall depart from off them, and his burden depart
from off their shoulders,&quot; chap. xiv. 25. &quot;And Asshur shall fall with the sword
not of a man,&quot; chap. xxxi. 8. These prophecies found their fulfilment in the destruction
of Sennacherib&#39;s host before Jerusalem,--an event which no human ingenuity could
have known even a day beforehand. But Isaiah does not content himself with promising
to trembling Zion the help of God against Asshur in that momentary calamity. In
harmony with Hosea and Micah, he promises to Judah, in general, security from Asshur.
He says to Hezekiah, after that danger was over, in chap. xxxviii. 6: &quot;And I will
deliver thee and this city out of the hand of the King of Assyria, and I will defend
this city.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Behind the Assyrian kingdom, the Prophet beholds a new power germinating,
viz., the Babylonian or Chaldean; and he announces most distinctly and repeatedly
that from this shall proceed a comprehensive execution of the threatenings against
unfaithful Judah. According to chap. xxiii. 13, the Chaldeans overturn the Assyrian
monarchy, and conquer proud Tyre which had resisted the assault of the Assyrians.
Shinar or Babylon appears in chap. xi. 11, in the list of the places to which Judah
has been removed in punishment. In chap. xiii. 1-xiv. 27, Babylon is, for the first
time, distinctly and definitely mentioned as the threatening power of the future,
by which Judah is to be carried into captivity. The corresponding announcement in
chap. xxxix. is so <span class="pagenum">[Pg 7]</span> closely and intimately interwoven
with the historical context, that even <i>Gesenius</i> did not venture to deny its
origin by Isaiah, just as he was compelled also to acknowledge the genuineness of
the prophecy against Tyre, in which the Babylonian dominion is most distinctly foretold,
and even the duration of that dominion is fixed. The 70 years of Jeremiah have here
already their foundation.</p>
<p class="normal">The Prophet sees distinctly and definitely that Egypt, the rival
African world&#39;s power, on which the sharp-sighted politicians of his time founded
their hope for deliverance, would not be equal to the Asiatic world&#39;s power representing
itself in the Assyrian and Babylonian phases. He knows what he could not know from
any other source than by immediate communication of the Spirit of God, that, by
its struggle against the Asiatic power, Egypt would altogether lose its old political
importance, and would never recover it; compare remarks on chap. xix.</p>
<p class="normal">As the power which is to overthrow the Babylonian Empire appear,
in chap. xxxiii. 17, the Medes. In chap. xxi. 2, Elam, which, according to the
<i>usus loquendi</i> of Isaiah, means Persia, is mentioned besides Media. This power,
and at its head, the conqueror from the East, Cyrus, will bring deliverance to Judah.
By it they obtain a restoration to their native land.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_7a" href="#ftn_7a">[1]</a></sup>
Nevertheless Elam appears in chap. xxii. 16 as the representative of the world&#39;s
power oppressing Judah in the future; and from chap. xi. 11 we are likewise led
to expect that the world&#39;s power will in future shew itself in an Elamitic phase
also, and that the difference between Babel and Elam is one of degree only, just
as, indeed, it appeared in history; comp. Neh. ix. 36, 37.</p>
<p class="normal">An intimation of an European phasis of the world&#39;s power, hostile
to the kingdom of God, is to be found in chap. xi. 11.</p>
<p class="normal">After the Kingdom of God has, for such protracted periods, been
subject to the world&#39;s power, the relation will suddenly be reversed; at the end
of the days the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be exalted above all the
hills, and all nations shall flow into it, chap. ii. 2.</p>
<p class="normal">This great change shall be accomplished by the Messiah, chaps.
iv., ix., xi., xxxiii. 17, who proceeds from the house of <span class="pagenum">
[Pg 8]</span> David, chap. ix. 6 (7), lv. 3, but only after it has sunk down to
the utmost lowliness, chap. xi. 1. With the human, He combines the divine nature.
This appears not only from the names which are given to Him in chap. ix. 5 (6),but
also from the works which are assigned to Him,--works by far exceeding human power.
He rules over the whole earth, according to chap. xi.; He slays, according to xi.
4, the wicked with the breath of His mouth (compare chap. l. 11, where likewise
He appears as a partaker of the omnipotent punitive power of God); He removes the
consequences of sin even from the irrational creation, chap. xi. 6-9; by His absolute
righteousness He is enabled to become the substitute of the whole human race, and
thereby to accomplish their salvation resting on this substitution, chap. liii.</p>
<p class="normal">The Messiah appears at first in the form of a servant, low and
humble, chap. xi. 1, liii. 2. His ministry is quiet and concealed, chap. xlii. 2,
as that of a Saviour who with tender love applies himself to the miserable, chap.
xlii. 3, lxi. 1. At first it is limited to Israel, chap. xlix. 1-6, where it is
enjoyed especially by the most degraded of all the parts of the country, viz., that
around the sea of Galilee, chap. viii. 23 (ix. 1.) Severe sufferings will be inflicted
upon Him in carrying out His ministry. These proceed from the same people whom He
has come to raise up, and to endow (according to chap. xlii. 6, xlix. 8), with the
full truth of the covenant into which the Lord has entered with them. The Servant
of God bears these suffering&#39;s with unbroken courage. They bring about, through
His mediation, the punishment of God upon those from whom they proceeded, and become
the reason why the salvation passes over to the Gentiles, by whose deferential homage
the Servant of God is indemnified for what He has lost in the Jews, chap. xlix.
1-9, l. 4-11. (The foundation for the detailed announcement in these passages is
given already in the sketch in chap. vi.,--according to which an election only of
the people attain to salvation, while the mass becomes a prey to destruction.) But
it is just by these sufferings, which issue at last in a violent death, that the
Servant of God reaches the full height of His destination. They possess a vicarious
character, and effect the reconciliation of a whole sinful world, chap. lii. 13-liii.
12. Subsequently to the suffering, and on the ground of it, begins the exercise
of the Kingly office of Christ, chap. liii. 12. He brings law and righteousness
to the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 9]</span> Gentile world, chap. xlii. 1; light into
their darkness, chap. xlii. 6. He becomes the centre around which the whole Gentile
world gathers, chap. xi. 10: &quot;And it shall come to pass in that day, the root of
Jesse which shall stand for an ensign of the people, to it shall the Gentiles seek,
and His rest shall be glory;&quot; comp. chap. lx., where the delighted eye of the Prophet
beholds how the crowds of the nations from the whole earth turn to Zion; chap. xviii.,
where the future reception of the Ethiopians into the Kingdom of God is specially
prophecied; chap. xix., according to which Egypt turns to the God of Israel, and
by the tie of a common love to Him, is united with Asshur, his rival in the time
of the Prophet, and so likewise with Israel, which has so much to suffer from him;
chap. xxiii., according to which, in the time of salvation. Tyre also does homage
to the God of Israel. The Servant of God becomes, at the same time, the <i>Witness</i>,
and the Prince and Lawgiver of the nations, chap. lv. 4. Just as the Spirit of the
Lord rests upon Him, chap. xi. 2, xlii. 1, lxi. 1, so there takes place in His days
an outpouring of the Holy Spirit, chap. xxxii. 15, xliv. 3, comp. with chap. liv.
13. Sin is put an end to by Him, chap. xi. 9, and an end is put especially to war,
chap. ii. 4. The Gentiles gathered to the Lord become at last the medium of His
salvation for the covenant-people, who at first had rejected it, chap. xi. 12, lx.
9, lxvi. 20, 21. The end is the restoration of the paradisaic condition, chap. xi.
6-9, lxv. 25; the new heavens and the new earth, chap. lxv. 17, lxvi. 22; but the
wicked shall inherit eternal condemnation, chap. lxvi. 24.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_7a" href="#ftnRef_7a"><sup class="ftnRef">[1]</sup></a>
	<i>Vitringa</i>: There are no predictions in reference to the temporal deliverance
	of the Jewish Church, in which the Prophet shews himself more than in those
	which relate to the downfall of the Babylonian Empire, and the deliverance of
	the people of God by Cyrus.]</p>
</div>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 10]</span></p>
<br>
<br>
<h2><a name="div2_10" href="#div2Ref_10">THE PROPHECY--CHAP. II.-IV.</a></h2>
<h3>THE SPROUT OF THE LORD.</h3>
<p class="normal">It has been already proved, in Vol. i., p. 416 ff., that this discourse belongs
to the first period of the Prophet&#39;s ministry. It consists of three parts. In the
first, chap. ii. 2-4, the Prophet draws a picture of the Messianic time, at which
the Kingdom of God, now despised, should be elevated above all the kingdoms of the
world, should exercise an attractive power over the Gentiles, and should cause peace
to dwell among them; comp. Vol. i., p. 437 ff. In the second part, from chap. ii.
5-iv. 1, the Prophet describes the prevailing corruption, exhorts to repentance,
threatens divine judgments. This part is introduced, and is connected with the preceding,
by the admonition in ii. 5, addressed to the people, to prepare, by true godliness,
for a participation in that blessedness, to beware lest they should be excluded
through their own fault. In the third part, chap. iv. 2-6, the prophet returns to
the proclamation of salvation, so that the whole is, as it were, surrounded by the
promise. It was necessary that this should be prominently brought out, in order
that sinners might not only be terrified by fear, but also allured by hope, to repentance,--and
in order that the elect might not imagine that the sin of the masses, and the judgment
inflicted in consequence of it, did away with the mercy of the Lord towards His
people, and with His faithfulness to His promises. Salvation does not come without
judgment. This feature, by which true prophetism is distinguished from false, which,
divesting God of His righteousness, announced salvation to unreformed sinners, to
the whole rude mass of the people,--this feature is once more prominently brought
out in ver. 4. But salvation for the elect comes as necessarily as judgment does
upon the sinners. In the midst of the deepest abasement of the people of God, God
raises from out of the midst of them the Saviour by whom they are raised to the
highest glory, chap. iv. 2. They are installed into the dignity of the saints of
God, after the penitent ones have been renewed by His Spirit, and the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 11]</span> obstinate sinners have been exterminated by
His judgment, ver. 3, 4. God&#39;s gracious presence affords them protection from their
enemies, and from all tribulation and danger, ver. 5, 6.</p>
<p class="normal">The first part, in which Isaiah follows Micah (comp. the arguments
in proof of originality in Micah, Vol. i., p. 413 ff.), has already been expounded
on a former occasion. We have here only to answer the question, why it is that the
Prophet opens his discourse with a proclamation of salvation borrowed from Micah?
His object certainly was to render the minds of the people susceptible of the subsequent
admonition and reproof, by placing at the head a promise which had already become
familiar and precious to the people. The position which the Messianic proclamation
occupies in Isaiah is altogether misunderstood if, with <i>Kleinert</i> and <i>Ewald</i>,
we assume that the passage does not, in Isaiah, belong to the real substance of
the prophecy; that it is merely placed in front as a kind of text, the abuse and
misinterpretation of which the Prophet meets in that which follows, so that the
sense would be: the blessed time promised by former prophets will come <i>indeed</i>,
but <i>only</i> after severe, rigorous judgments upon all who had forsaken Jehovah.
It is especially ver. 5 which militates against this interpretation, where, in the
words: &quot;Come ye and let us walk in the light of the Lord,&quot;<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_11a" href="#ftn_11a">[1]</a></sup>
the prophet gives an <i>express declaration</i> as to the object of the description
which he has placed in front, and expresses himself in regard to it in perfect harmony
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 12]</span> with Heb. iv. 1:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#966;&#959;&#946;&#951;&#952;&#8182;&#956;&#949;&#957; &#959;&#8022;&#957; &#956;&#8132;&#960;&#959;&#964;&#949; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#953;&#960;&#959;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#951;&#962; &#7952;&#960;&#945;&#947;&#947;&#949;&#955;&#943;&#945;&#962; ...
&#948;&#959;&#954;&#8135; &#964;&#953;&#962; &#7952;&#958; &#8017;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#8016;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#961;&#951;&#954;&#941;&#957;&#945;&#953;.</span> This shows, that after the manner of an evangelical
preacher, and in conformity with his name, he wishes to allure to repentance by
pointing to the great salvation of the future;--that the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7972;&#947;&#947;&#953;&#954;&#949; &#7969; &#946;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#955;&#949;&#943;&#945; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#959;&#8016;&#961;&#945;&#957;&#8182;&#957;</span> of the first
part serves as a foundation to the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#957;&#959;&#949;&#8150;&#964;&#949; &#959;&#8023;&#957;</span>
of the second.</p>
<p class="normal">The threatening of punishment contained in the second part is
destitute of any particular reference. It bears a general character, comprehending
the whole of the mischief with which the Lord is to visit the unfaithfulness of
His people. Most thoroughly was the animating idea realized in the Roman catastrophe,
the consequence of which is the helplessness which still presses upon the people.
The preparatory steps were the decay of the people at the time of Ahaz--especially
the Chaldean overthrow--and, generally, everything which the people had to suffer
in the time of the dominion of the Assyrian, Chaldean, Medo-Persian, and Greek kingdoms.
As none of these kingdoms were as yet on the stage, or in sight, it is quite natural
that the threatening here keeps altogether within general terms; it was given to
Isaiah himself afterwards to individualize it much more.</p>
<p class="normal">It is with the third part only that we have here more particularly
to employ ourselves.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 2. &quot;<i>In that day the Sprout of the Lord becomes for beauty
and glory, and the fruit of the land for exaltation and ornament, to the escaped
of Israel.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. &quot;<i>And it shall come to pass, he that was left in Zion,
and was spared in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, every one that is written to
life in Jerusalem.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. &quot;<i>When the Lord has washed away the filth of the daughters
of Zion, and shall remove the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof by the spirit
of right and the spirit of destruction.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 5. &quot;<i>And the Lord creates over the place of Mount Zion,
and over her assemblies clouds by day and smoke, and the brightness of flaming fire
by night, for above all glory is a covering.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 6. &quot;<i>And a tabernacle shall be for a shadow by day from
the heat, and, for a refuge and covert from storm and from rain.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal" dir="ltr">Ver. 2. &quot;<i>In that day</i>&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, not by any
means <i>after</i> the suffering, but <i>in the midst of it</i>, comp. chap. iii.
18; iv. 1, where, by <span class="pagenum">[Pg 13]</span> the words &quot;in that day,&quot;
contemporaneousness is likewise expressed. Parallel is chap. ix. 1 (2),where the
people that walketh in darkness seeth a great light. According to Micah v. 2 (3)
also, the people are given up to the dominion of the world&#39;s powers until the time
that she who is bearing has brought forth. Inasmuch as the Messianic proclamation
bears the same general comprehensive character as the threatening of punishment,
and includes in itself beginning and end, the suffering may partly also reach into
the Messianic time. It dismisses from its discipline those who are delivered up
to it, gradually only, after they have become ripe for a participation in the Messianic
salvation.--There cannot be any doubt that, by the &quot;<i>Sprout of the Lord</i>&quot; the
Messiah is designated,--an explanation which we meet with so early as in the Chaldee
Paraphrast (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1468;&#1456;&#1506;&#1491;&#1468;&#1464;&#1504;&#1464;&#1488; &#1492;&#1463;&#1492;&#1493;&#1468;&#1488; &#1497;&#1456;&#1492;&#1461;&#1497; &#1502;&#1456;&#1513;&#1473;&#1460;&#1497;&#1495;&#1464;&#1488; &#1491;&#1463;&#1497;&#1464;&#1497;
&#1500;&#1456;&#1495;&#1462;&#1491;&#1456;&#1493;&#1464;&#1492; &#1493;&#1456;&#1500;&#1460;&#1497;&#1511;&#1464;&#1512;</span>), from which even <i>Kimchi</i> did not venture to differ,
which was in the Christian Church, too, the prevailing one, and which Rationalism
was the first to give up. The Messiah is here quite in His proper place. The Prophet
had, in chap. iii. 12-15, in a very special manner, derived the misery of the people
from their bad rulers. What is now more rational, therefore, than that he should
connect the salvation and prosperity likewise with the person of a Divine Ruler?
comp. chap. i. 26. In the adjoining prophecies of Isaiah, especially in chaps. vii.,
ix., and xi., the person of the Messiah likewise forms the centre of the proclamation
of salvation; so that, <i>a priori</i>, a mention of it must be expected here. To
the same result we are led by the analogy of Micah; comp. Vol. i. p. 443-45, 449.
<i>Farther</i>--The representation of the Messiah, under the image of a sprout or
shoot, is very common in Scripture; comp. chap. xi. 1-10; liii. 2; Rev. v. 5. But
of decisive weight are those passages in which precisely our word
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1502;&#1495;</span> occurs as a designation of the Messiah.
The two passages, Jer. xxiii. 5: &quot;Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, and I raise
unto David a righteous Sprout;&quot; and xxxiii. 15: &quot;In those days, and at that time,
shall I cause the Sprout of righteousness to grow up unto David,&quot; may at once and
plainly be considered as an <i>interpretation</i> of the passage before us, and
as a commentary upon it; and that so much the more that there, as well as here,
all salvation is connected with this Sprout of Jehovah; comp. Jer. xxiii. 6: &quot;In
His days Judah <span class="pagenum">[Pg 14]</span> shall be saved, and Israel shall
dwell safely, and this is His name whereby he shall be called: The Lord our righteousness.&quot;
The two other passages, Zech. iii. 8: &quot;Behold, I bring my servant <i>Zemach</i>,&quot;
and vi. 12: &quot;Behold, a man whose name is <i>Zemach</i>&quot; are of so much the greater
consequence that in them <i>Zemach</i> (<i>i.e.</i>, Sprout) occurs as a kind of
<i>nomen proprium</i>, the sense of which is supposed as being known from former
prophecies to which the Prophet all but expressly refers; or as <i>Vitringa</i>
remarks on these passages: &quot;That man who, in the oracles of the preceding Prophets
(Is. and Jer.) bears the name of &#39;Sprout.&#39;&quot; Of no less consequence, <i>finally</i>,
is the parallel passage, chap. xxviii. 5: &quot;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.&quot;
The words <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1489;&#1497;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1508;&#1488;&#1512;&#1514;</span> there meet us again. The same is there
ascribed to the Lord which is here attributed to the Sprout of the Lord. That can
be readily accounted for, only if the Sprout of the Lord be the Messiah. For the
Messiah appears everywhere as the channel through which the Lord imparts to His
Church all the fulness of His blessings, as the Immanuel by whom the promise given
at the very threshold of the Old Testament: &quot;I dwell in the midst of them,&quot; is most
perfectly realized. &quot;This is the name whereby He shall be called: The Lord our righteousness,&quot;
says Jeremiah, in the passage quoted.--The &quot;Sprout of the Lord&quot; may designate either
him whom the Lord causes to sprout, or him who has sprouted forth from the Lord,
<i>i.e.</i>, the Son of God. Against the latter interpretation it is objected by
<i>Hoffmann</i> (<i>Weissagung und Erfüllung.</i> Th. 1, S. 214): &quot;<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1502;&#1495;</span>
is an intransitive verb, so that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1462;&#1502;&#1463;&#1495;</span> may
be as well connected with a noun which says, who causes to sprout forth, as with
one which says, whence the thing sprouts forth. Now it is quite obvious that, in
the passage before us, the former case applies, and not the latter, inasmuch as
one cannot say that something, or even some one, sprouts forth from Jehovah; it
is only with a thing, not with a person, that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1502;&#1495;</span>
can be connected.&quot; But it is impossible to admit that this objection is well founded.
The person may very well be conceived of as the soil from which the sprout goes
forth. Yet we must, indeed, acknowledge that the Messiah is nowhere called a Sprout
of David. But what decides in favour of the first view are the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 15]</span> parallel passages. In Jer. xxiii. 5, xxxiii.
15, the Lord raises up to David a righteous Sprout, and causes Him to grow up unto
David. Hence here, too, the Sprout will in that sense only be the Lord&#39;s, that he
does not sprout forth out of Him, but through Him. In Zech. iii. 8 the Lord brings
his servant <i>Zemach</i>; in Ps. cxxxii. 17, it is said: &quot;There I cause a horn
to sprout to David,&quot; and already in the fundamental passage, 2 Sam. xxiii. 5, which
contains the first germ of our passage, David says: &quot;For all my salvation and all
my pleasure should He not make it to <i>sprout</i> forth.&quot;--As the words &quot;Sprout
of the Lord&quot; denote the heavenly origin of the Redeemer, so do the words
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1512;&#1497; &#1492;&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span> the earthly one, the soil from which
the Lord causes the Saviour to sprout up. These words are, by <i>Vitringa</i> and
others, translated: &quot;the fruit of the earth,&quot; but the correct translation is &quot;the
fruit of the <i>land</i>.&quot; The passages, Num. xiii. 26: &quot;And shewed them the fruit
of the land;&quot; and Deut. i. 25: &quot;And they took in their hands of the fruit of the
land, and brought it unto us, and brought us word again, and said, good is the land
which the Lord our God doth give us,&quot;--these two passages are, besides that under
consideration, the only ones in which the phrase <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1508;&#1512;&#1497; &#1492;&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span> occurs; and there is here, no doubt, an allusion to them. The excellent
natural fruit of ancient times is a type of the spiritual fruit. To the same result--that
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span> designates the definite land, that land
which, in the preceding verses, in the description of the prevailing conniption,
and of the divine judgments, was always spoken of,--to this result we are led by
the fact also, that everywhere in the Old Testament where the contrariety of the
divine and human origin of the Messiah is mentioned, the human origin is more distinctly
qualified and limited. This is especially the case in those passages which, being
dependent upon that before us, maybe considered as a commentary upon it; in Jer.
xxiii. 5, xxxiii. 15, where the Lord raises a Sprout unto <i>David</i>, and Zech.
vi. 12, where the man whose name is <i>Zemach</i> (Sprout) grows up out of its soil;
comp. Heb. vii. 14, where, in allusion to the Old Testament passages of the Sprout--the
verb <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#957;&#945;&#964;&#941;&#955;&#955;&#949;&#953;&#957;</span> is commonly used of the sprouting
forth of the plants (see <i>Bleek</i> on this passage)--it is said:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#958; &#7992;&#959;&#973;&#948;&#945; &#7936;&#957;&#945;&#964;&#941;&#964;&#945;&#955;&#954;&#949;&#957; &#8001; &#922;&#973;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#962; &#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957;</span>, <i>Bengel</i>:
<i>ut germen justitiae</i>; farther, Mic. v. 1 (2), where the eternal existence
of the Messiah, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 16]</span> and His birth in Bethlehem
are contrasted with one another; Is. ix. 5, (6), where the words: &quot;Unto <i>us</i>
a child is born, unto <i>us</i> a son is given,&quot; are contrasted with the various
designations of the Messiah, according to His divine majesty. This qualification
and limitation which everywhere takes place, have their ground in the circumstance
that the Messiah is constantly represented to the covenant-people as their property;
and that He, indeed, was, inasmuch as salvation went out from Jews (John iv. 22),
and was destined for the Jews, into whose communion the Gentiles were to be received;
comp. my Commentary on Revel. vii. 4. &quot;The Sprout of the Lord,&quot; &quot;the fruit of the
land,&quot; is accordingly He whom the Lord shall make to sprout forth from Israel. The
Sprout of the Lord, the fruit of the land is to become to the escaped of Israel
for <i>beauty</i> and <i>glory</i>, for <i>exaltation</i> and <i>ornament</i>. The
passages to be compared are 2 Sam. i. 19, where Saul and Jonathan are called
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1489;&#1497; &#1497;&#1513;&#1512;&#1488;&#1500;</span>; <i>farther</i>, Is. xxviii. 5:
&quot;In that day shall the Lord of hosts be for a crown of beauty, and for a diadem
of ornament unto the residue of His people,&quot; where the words
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1489;&#1497;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1508;&#1488;&#1512;&#1514;</span><!--see Biblos web site; fnal 'h' not 't'-->
are likewise used; <i>finally</i>, chap. xxiv. 16, where, in reference to the Messianic
time, it is said: &quot;From the uttermost part of the earth do we hear songs of praise:
beauty (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1489;&#1497;</span>) to the righteous.&quot; By the appearance
of Christ, the covenant-people, hitherto despised, were placed in the centre of
the world&#39;s history; by it the Lord took away the rebuke of His people from off
all the earth, chap. xxv. 8. There is evidently in these words a reference to the
preceding threatening of punishment, especially to chap. iii. 18: &quot;In that day the
Lord will take away the ornament,&quot; &amp;c.: But <i>Drechsler</i> is wrong in fixing
and expressing this reference thus: &quot;Instead of farther running after strange things,
Israel will find its glory and ornament in Him who is the long promised seed of
Abrahamitic descent.&quot; For it is not the position which Israel takes that is spoken
of, but that which is granted to them. The antithesis is between the false glory
which God takes away, and the true glory which He gives. The Lord cannot, by any
possibility, for any length of time, appear merely <i>taking away</i>; He takes
those seeming blessings, only in order to be able to give the true ones. Every taking
away is a prophecy of giving.--&quot;<i>To the escaped of Israel</i>,&quot; who, according
to the idea of a people of God, and according to <span class="pagenum">[Pg 17]</span>
the promise of the Law (comp. Deut. xxx. 1, ff.) can never be wanting, as little
as it is possible that the salvation should be partaken of by the whole <i>mass</i>
of the people; sifting judgments must necessarily go before and along with it. True
prophetism everywhere knows of salvation for a remnant only. On
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1500;&#1497;&#1496;&#1492;</span>, which does not mean &quot;deliverance,&quot;
so that the abstract would thus here stand for the concrete, but &quot;that which has
escaped,&quot; comp. remarks on Joel iii. 5, Vol. 1, p. 338.</p>
<p class="normal">All which now remains is to examine those explanations of this
verse which differ from the Messianic interpretation. 1. Following the interpretation
of <i>Grotius</i> and others, <i>Gesenius</i>, in his Commentary, understands by
the Sprout of the Lord the new growth of the people after their various defeats.
His explanation is: &quot;Then the sprout of Jehovah will be splendid and glorious, and
the fruit of the land excellent and beautiful for the escaped of Israel.&quot; <i>Fruit
of the land</i> he takes in its literal sense, and understands it to mean the product
of the land. The same view is held by <i>Knobel</i>: &quot;<i>He becomes for beauty and
glory</i>,<!--deleted quote--> <i>i.e.</i>, the people, having reformed, prosper
and form a splendid, glorious state.&quot; And <i>Maurer</i> in his Dictionary says:
&quot;The Sprout of Jehovah seems to be the morally improved remnant, the new, sanctified
increase of the people.&quot; But in opposition to such a view there is, <i>first</i>,
the circumstance, that according to it the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span>
before <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1510;&#1489;&#1497;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1499;&#1489;&#1493;&#1512;</span> must be understood differently from
what it is in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1490;&#1488;&#1493;&#1503;</span>, and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1514;&#1508;&#1488;&#1512;&#1514;</span> which immediately follow and exactly
correspond with them. There are, <i>secondly</i>, the parallel passages chap. xxviii.
5, xxiv. 16, according to which <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1489;&#1497;</span> &quot;beauty&quot;
is conferred upon the escaped, but they themselves do not become beauty. <i>Finally</i>--It
is always most natural to suppose that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1502;&#1495; &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span>
and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1512;&#1497; &#1492;&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span> correspond with one another,
and denote the same subject which is here described after his various aspects only.
For in the same manner as <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1502;&#1495;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1512;&#1497;</span> go hand in hand, both being taken from
the territory of botany, so <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span> also stand in a contrast which is not
to be mistaken. 2. <i>Hitzig</i>, <i>Ewald</i>, <i>Meier</i>, and others not only
refer &quot;the fruit of the land,&quot; but also the &quot;Sprout of Jehovah&quot; to that which Jehovah
makes to sprout forth.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_17a" href="#ftn_17a">[2]</a></sup>
It is true that, in the prophetic <span class="pagenum">[Pg 18]</span> announcements,
among the blessings of the future the rich produce of the land is also mentioned
(comp. chap. xxx. 23-25), and the same is very expressly done in the Law also; but
in not a single one of these passages does the strange expression occur, that this
fruitfulness should serve to the escaped for beauty and glory, for exaltation and
ornament, or any other that bears the slightest resemblance to it. Against this
explanation there is, <i>in addition</i>, the circumstance that the barrenness of
the country is not at all pointed out in the preceding context. <i>Finally</i>--When
we understand this expression as referring to the Messiah, this verse, standing
as it does at the head of the proclamation of salvation, contains the fundamental
thought; and in what follows we obtain the expansion. In the verse before us we
are told that in Christ the people attain to glory,--and, in those which follow,
how this glory is manifested in them. But according to this view, every internal
connexion of the verse before us with what follows is entirely destroyed. 3. According
to <i>Hendewerk</i>, by the &quot;Sprout of the Lord,&quot; &quot;the collective person of the
ruling portion in the state during the Messianic happy time,&quot; is designated. This
opinion is the beginning of a return to the Messianic interpretation. But then only
could that ideal person be here referred to, if elsewhere in Isaiah too it would
come out strongly and decidedly. As this, however, is not the case; as, on the contrary,
the Messiah everywhere in Isaiah meets us in shining clearness, it would be arbitrary
to give up the <i>person</i> in favour of a <i>personification</i>. 4. <i>Umbreit</i>
acknowledges that, in the case of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1502;&#1495; &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span>,
the Messianic interpretation is the only correct one. &quot;The two subsequent prophecies
in chap. ix. and xi.,&quot; he says, &quot;are to be considered as a commentary on our short
text.&quot; But it is characteristic of his compromising manner that by &quot;the fruit of
the land&quot; he understands &quot;the consequences of the dominion of the Messiah for the
land, the fruits which, in consequence of his appearing, the consecrated soil brings
forth,&quot;--thus plainly overlooking the clear <span class="pagenum">[Pg 19]</span>
contrast between the Sprout of the Lord, and the fruit of the land, by which evidently
the same thing is designated from different aspects.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. The Prophet now begins to show, more in detail, in how
far the Sprout of the Lord and the fruit of the land would serve for the honour
and glory of the Church. The words: &quot;He that was left in Zion and was spared in
Jerusalem,&quot; take up the idea suggested by the &quot;escaped of Israel&quot; in ver. 2. The
double designation is intended to direct attention to the thought that the remnant,
and the remnant only, are called to a participation in the glory. <i>Zion</i> and
<i>Jerusalem</i>, as the centre of the covenant-people, here represent the whole;
this is evident from the circumstance that at the close of ver. 2, which is here
resumed, the escaped of <i>Israel</i> were spoken of Ever since the sanctuary and
the royal palace were founded at Zion, it was in a spiritual point of view, the
residence of all Israel, who even personally met there at the high festivals.--Whoever
is left in Zion &quot;<i>shall be called holy</i>.&quot; The fundamental notion of holiness
is that of separation. God is holy, inasmuch as He is separated from all that is
created and finite, and is elevated above all that is finite; comp. my Commentary
on Rev. iv. 8. <i>Believers</i> are holy, because they are separated from the world
as regards their moral existence and their destiny. Here only the latter aspect
is considered. Holy in a moral sense they were already, inasmuch as it is this which
forms the condition of their being spared in the divine judgments. They became holy
because they are partakers of the beauty, of the exaltation, and ornament which
are to be bestowed upon the escaped by the Sprout of the Lord. The circumstance
that they have been installed into the dignity of the saints of God implies that,
when the Spirit of the Lord has appeared, the world&#39;s power has no longer any dominion
over them, but that, on the contrary, they shall judge the world. In like manner
we read in Exod. xix. 6, in the description of the <i>reward</i> for faithfulness:
&quot;And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation;&quot; comp. ver. 5:
&quot;And now if you will obey my voice and keep my covenant, ye shall be a property
unto me out of all people.&quot; In reference to the exalted dignity and glory, holiness
occurs in Deut. vii. 6: &quot;For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God; the
Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself out of all the
people that are upon <span class="pagenum">[Pg 20]</span> the face of the earth.&quot;
When the company of Korah said: &quot;All the congregation, they are holy&quot; (Numb. xvi.
3), they had in view, not the moral holiness but the dignity--a circumstance which
is quite obvious from words added: &quot;And in the midst of them is the Lord.&quot; And so
Moses likewise speaks of the dignity in Numb. xvi. 7: &quot;Whom the Lord shall choose,
he is the holy one.&quot; In Rom. i. 7; Heb. iii. 1, holiness is declared to consist
in being loved, called, and chosen by God.--As regards the fulfilment of this promise,
it has its <i>horas</i> and <i>moras</i>. It began with the first appearance of
Christ, by which the position of the true Israel to the world was substantially
and fundamentally changed. It was not without meaning that, as early as in the apostolic
times, the &quot;Saints&quot; was a kind of <i>nomen proprium</i> of believers, comp. Acts
ix. 13, 32. We are even now the sons of God, and hence even already installed into
an important portion of the inheritance of holiness; but it has not yet appeared
what we shall be, 1 John iii. 2. But the beginning, and the continuation pervading
all ages, viz., God&#39;s dealings throughout the whole of history, whereby he ever
anew lifts up His Church from the dust of lowliness, afford to us the guarantee
for the completion, which is, with graphic vividness, described in the last two
chapters of Revelation.--&quot;<i>To be called</i>&quot; is more than merely &quot;to be;&quot; it indicates
that the <i>being</i> is so marked as to procure for itself acknowledgment.--The
words: &quot;<i>Every one that is written to life in Jerusalem</i>&quot; anew point out that
judgment will go before, and by the side of grace. The meaning of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1497;&#1497;&#1501;</span> is, according to the fundamental passage
in Ps. lxix. 29, &quot;not living ones&quot; (<i>Hoffmann</i>, <i>Weiss.</i> i. S. 208), but
&quot;life.&quot; In Revelation, too, the book of life, and not the book of the living ones,
is spoken of &quot;To be written to life&quot; is equivalent to being ordained to life, Acts
xiii. 48; comp. my Comment. on Ps. lxix. 29; Rev. iii. 5. Life is not naked life,--a
miserable life is, according to the view of Scripture, not to be called a life,
but is a form of death only--but life in the full enjoyment of the favour of God;
comp. my Comment. on Ps. xvi. 11, xxx. 6, xxxvi. 10; xlii. 9; lxiii. 4. The Chaldean
thus paraphrases it: &quot;All they that are written to eternal life shall see the consolation
of Jerusalem, <i>i.e.</i> the Messiah.&quot; Comp. Dan. xii. 1; Rev. iii. 5, xiii. 8,
xx. 15, xxii. 19; Phil. iv. 3; Luke x. 20. The bodily death of believers cannot
exclude them from a participation in being written to <span class="pagenum">[Pg
21]</span> life; for, being a mere transition to life, it can, in truth, not be
called a death. Here, too, the word of Christ applies: &quot;The maid is not dead but
sleepeth,&quot; Matt. ix. 24. The fact that there is no contradiction between bodily
death and life, <i>i.e.</i> a participation in the blessings of the Kingdom of Christ,
is pointed out by Isaiah himself in chap. xxvi. 19: &quot;Thy dead men shall <i>live</i>,
my dead bodies shall arise, for a dew of light is thy dew.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. The Prophet points out that before the Church is raised
to the dignity of the saints of God, a thorough change of its moral conditions,
an energetic expunging of the sin now prevailing in her, must take place, &quot;<i>When
the Lord has washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion.</i>&quot; The &quot;daughters
of Zion&quot; are none other than those whose haughtiness, luxury, and wantonness were
described in chap. iii. 16 ff., and to whom the deepest abasement was then threatened.
The filth, under the image of which sin is here represented (comp. Prov. xxx. 12);
&quot;A generation pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness,&quot;
forms the contrast to the splendid attire which is there spoken of Behind this splendid
attire the filthiness is concealed. The filth is not washed away (1 Cor. vi. 11;
Eph. v. 26) from the daughters of Jerusalem,--for, inasmuch as this washing away
is accomplished by means of the spirit of destruction, it could not apply to them--but
from Jerusalem; comp. the phrase, &quot;from the midst thereof,&quot; which immediately follows.
Jerusalem, the city of the Lord, in which no unclean person, and no unclean thing
are permitted to dwell, is cleansed from the filth with which its unworthy daughters
contaminate it. &quot;<i>And shall remove the blood of Jerusalem.</i>&quot; The &quot;blood of
Jerusalem&quot; is the blood which attaches to Jerusalem, which has been shed in it.
The connection of the punishment of the sins of avarice on the part of the rulers,
in chap. iii. 13-15, with the punishment of the luxury and ostentation on the part
of the women, is illustrative of the relation of filth and blood to each other.
Blood is shed in order to furnish pride and vanity with the means of their gratification.
The avarice of the rulers, and their shedding of blood, are put together in Ezek.
xxii. 13; comp. ver. 27: &quot;Her princes are in the midst thereof like wolves ravening
the prey, shedding blood, destroying souls, to get dishonest gain.&quot; Bloodguiltiness
those too incur who deprive the poor of the necessary means of support, Mic. iii.
2, 3. The comparison of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 22]</span> chap. i. 15: &quot;Your
hands are full of blood,&quot; and of ver. 21: &quot;But now murderers,&quot; compared with vers.
17, 23, 26, shews that we have to think especially of unjust judges and avaricious
rulers. Yet, there is no reason for limiting ourselves to the nobles and rulers
<i>alone</i>; comp. Ezek. xxii. 29: &quot;The people of the land use oppression, and
boldly practice robbery, and vex the poor and needy, and oppress the stranger.&quot;
Where sins so gross are still prevalent, where the law of the Lord is so wantonly
broken, an installation into the dignity of the saints of God is out of the question.
For that, it is absolutely essential that exertions be made that the high destination
of the people: &quot;Ye shall be holy for I am holy,&quot; become a truth; that in a moral
point of view it show itself as truly separated from the world,--and that is something
so infinitely great, that men are utterly unable for it, that it can proceed from
God only, with whom nothing is impossible.--The last words of the verse are commonly
explained: &quot;by the spirit of <i>judgment</i>, and by the spirit of destruction or
burning.&quot; In that case the putting away of the filth and blood by the judging activity
of the Lord, by the destruction of sin, would be spoken of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1508;&#1496;</span>, however, may also be taken in the sense
of &quot;right:&quot; by the spirit of right which lays hold of, and changes the well disposed
(comp. Mic. iii. 8: &quot;But I am full of power by the Spirit of the Lord, and of <i>
right</i> and might&quot;), and by the spirit of destruction which consumes the disobedient.
In favour of the latter view are the parallel passages; above all, chap. xxviii.
6, where it is said of the Messianic time, &quot;In that day the Lord will become, &amp;c.,&quot;
&quot;And for a spirit of right to him that sitteth for right;&quot; farther, chap. i. 27,
28: &quot;Zion shall be redeemed by right, and her converts by righteousness. But the
transgressors and sinners are destroyed together, and they that forsake the Lord
are consumed.&quot; Comp. Matt. iii. 11: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#8017;&#956;&#8118;&#962; &#946;&#945;&#960;&#964;&#943;&#963;&#949;&#953;
&#7952;&#957; &#960;&#957;&#949;&#973;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#953; &#7937;&#947;&#943;&#8179; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#965;&#961;&#943;</span>, where likewise a double washing, that of grace
and that of wrath, is spoken of. In chap. xxxii. 15: &quot;Until the Spirit be poured
out upon us from on high,&quot; Isaiah likewise points to the regeneration which, in
the Messianic time, will be accomplished by the Spirit; and it is, according to
the whole <i>usus loquendi</i> of the Old Testament, most natural to think of the
Spirit transforming from within The Spirit of God scarcely occurs elsewhere in the
Old Testament as the executor of God&#39;s judgments; so that the supposition is
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 23]</span> very natural that the spirit of destruction
has been brought in by the spirit of right only.--The word
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1512;</span> is, by some, understood as &quot;burning,&quot;
by others, as &quot;destruction.&quot; We ourselves decide in favour of the latter signification,
which occurs also in chap. iv. 13, for this reason, that it is in that signification
that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1512;</span> is, in Deuteronomy, used as the
<i>terminus technicus</i> of the extirpation of the wicked. If the Church does not
comply with the command: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#958;&#940;&#961;&#949;&#8150;&#964;&#949; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#960;&#959;&#957;&#951;&#961;&#8056;&#957; &#7952;&#958; &#8017;&#956;&#8182;&#957;
&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8182;&#957;</span>, 1 Cor. v. 13; Deut. xiii. 6 (5), God himself will enforce His authority
by His Spirit, who carries out the judgments of the avenging God, just as He carries
out every influence of the Creator upon the created. On the &quot;Spirit of the Lord,&quot;
comp. my remarks on Rev. i. 4.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 5. The image is here taken from the journey of Israel through
the wilderness. During that journey, they were guided and protected by a symbol
of God&#39;s presence, which by day presented itself as smoke, and by night assumed
the form of flaming fire. By this symbol the God of Israel was designated as the
jealous God, as the living, personal energy, energetic in His love for His people,
energetic in wrath against His and their enemies. Comp. especially Exod. xiii. 21:
&quot;And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud to lead them on the
way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light;&quot; and xl. 38: &quot;For a cloud
was upon the tabernacle by day, and fire was on it by night;&quot; comp. Numb. ix. 15,
16. The same phenomenon is to be repeated in future, although in a different form.
In a manner the most real, the Lord will manifest himself as the living energy of
His Church, dwelling in the midst of her, and ruling over her as a protector, so
that the world&#39;s power can no longer injure her. That such will be done in and by
His <i>Sprout</i>, in Christ, appears from the relation of the verse under consideration
to ver. 2; for the verse before us still belongs to the expansion of the proposition
placed at the head of the whole: &quot;The <i>Sprout</i> of the Lord becomes for beauty
and glory, and the fruit of the land for exaltation and ornament to the escaped
of Israel.&quot; Christ in His person and Spirit is the true Shechinah, the true indwelling
of God in His Church. This indwelling is, even in the Law, designated as the highest
privilege of the covenant-people; its being raised to a higher power is therefore
to the Prophet the highest blessing of the future, the source from which all other
blessings flow. That which the heathen in vain longed <span class="pagenum">Pg 24]</span>
for and imagined; that which Israel hitherto possessed only very imperfectly, a
<i>praesens numen</i>, whereby the antithesis of heaven and earth is done away with,
and earth is glorified into a heaven;--that, the purified Church of the Lord possesses
in the most perfect and real manner, and in it, absolute security against the world,
a decided victory over it. The words: &quot;<i>Over her assemblies</i>,&quot; show that the
whole life of the people shall then bear a religious character, and shall be a continual
service of God, comp. Acts ii. 42, where, as a type of the completion of the Church,
it is said: &quot;And they continued stedfastly in the Apostles&#39; doctrine and fellowship,
and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1511;&#1512;&#1488;</span>
is only the name for that which is called, &quot;the assembly,&quot; and stands in Levit.
xxiii. and Is. i. 13 of the religious assemblies which were held on the holy days,
comp. my pamphlet: <i>Ueber den Tag des Herrn S</i>. 32. The same phenomenon is,
according to its appearance by day, designated, at the same time, as <i>clouds</i>
and <i>smoke</i>. Smoke is never &quot;vapour, vapoury clouds&quot; (<i>Knobel</i>); and here
the smoke by day corresponds with the <i>flaming fire</i> by night. If then the
smoke can be considered as a product of the fire only (comp. my remarks on Rev.
xv. 8), the cloud cannot come into consideration according to its matter, but according
to its form only. The smoke assumes the form of a cloud which affords protection
from the burning sun of tribulations, as once, in the burning desert, from the scorching
heat of the natural sun, comp. Num. x. 34: &quot;And the cloud of the Lord was upon them;&quot;
Ps. cv. 39: &quot;He spread a cloud for a covering;&quot; Is. xxv. 5. The cloud which thus
affords protection to the Church turns a threatening face towards her enemies. Rev.
xv. 8.--The words: &quot;<i>For above all glory is a covering</i>,&quot; point to the ground
of the protecting, gracious presence of God in the Church. Several interpreters
explain the sense thus: &quot;As we cover and preserve precious things more carefully,
in order that they may not be injured, so does God in His grace surround His Church,
which has been adorned with glorious virtues, and raised to the high dignity of
the saints of God, and protects her from every danger.&quot; Others understand by
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1500;&#1470;&#1499;&#1489;&#1493;&#1491;</span> the whole glory mentioned in the preceding
context; but in that case we should expect the article. One may also supply the
limitation: For, <i>in the Kingdom of God</i>, there is a covering over all glory.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 25]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 6. God--this is the same sense--protects His Church from
every danger and calamity. By His gracious presence in His Sprout, He affords to
them that protection which a hut does from sun, storms, and rain. Luther says: &quot;In
this passage, accordingly, Christ is held up to us as He who in all tribulations,
bodily as well as spiritual, is our protection.&quot; There is an allusion to the 21st
verse of Ps. xxxi. (which was written by David): &quot;Thou hidest them in the secret
of thy countenance from the conspiracy of every one; thou keepest them secretly
in a pavilion from the strife of tongues.&quot; The pavilion in this Psalm is a spiritual
one, viz., God&#39;s grace and protection. That word of David shall be gloriously fulfilled
when the Sprout of the Lord shall appear.--The &quot;<i>Sun</i>&quot; comes into consideration
in its scorching quality; and the &quot;<i>heat</i>&quot; is in Scripture the image of temptations,
sufferings, and trials; comp. remarks on Rev. viii. 12, xvi. 8; Song of Sol. i.
6; Ps. cxxi. 6; Matt. xiii. 6, compared with v. 21; Is. xlix. 10, xxv. 4; and, according
to the last passage, we must especially have in view the enmity and assaults of
the world&#39;s power. The &quot;<i>rain</i>&quot; appears as an image of tribulation in the Song
of Sol. ii. 11; Is. xxv. 4: &quot;The spirit of the terrible ones (the passions of the
kings of the world, and conquerors) is like a violent shower against the wall;&quot;
xxxii. 2.--A comparison of the Messianic prophecy in chap ii. with that which we
have now considered shows very clearly how necessary it is to regard the single
Messianic prophecies as fragments only, supplementing one another, inasmuch as commonly
a few aspects only were presented to the spiritual eye of the Prophet. Just as the
description in chap. ii. receives an important supplement from the passage now considered,
inasmuch as the latter contains the mention of the personal Messiah, so it, again,
supplements that before us by announcing the participation by the Gentiles in the
blessings of the Messianic Kingdom.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_11a" href="#ftnRef_11a"><sup class="ftnRef">
	[1]</sup></a> Light is the image of salvation; to walk in the light is to enjoy
	a participation in it. Israel is not wantonly to wander away from the path of
	light which the Lord has opened up to them, into the dark desolation of misery.
	In the words <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1499;&#1493; &#1493;&#1504;&#1500;&#1499;&#1492;</span> there is a clear
	reference to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1499;&#1493; &#1493;&#1504;&#1506;&#1500;&#1492;</span> of the Gentile
	nations in ver. 3. If the Gentiles apply with such zeal for a participation
	in the blessings of the Kingdom of God, how disgraceful would it be if you,
	the people of the covenant, the children of the Kingdom, should lose your glorious
	possession by your ungodly walk. In vers. 6-11 the Prophet states the grounds
	of his admonition to the people to walk in the light of the Lord which he had
	expressed in the preceding verse. This admonition implies that there existed
	a danger of losing a participation in the light; and it is this danger which
	the Prophet here more particularly details. It is not without reason, so the
	words may be paraphrased, that I say: &quot;Walk ye in the light of the Lord,&quot; for
	at present the Lord has <i>forsaken</i> the people on account of their sins,
	and with that, a participation in His light is incompatible. By being full of
	heathenish superstition, of false confidence in earthly things, yea, even of
	the most disgraceful that can be imagined for Israel, viz., gross idolatry,
	they rather become more and more ripe for the divine judgment which will break
	in irresistibly upon them.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_17a" href="#ftnRef_17a"><sup class="ftnRef">
	[2]</sup></a> So <i>Gesenius</i> also in the <i>Thesaurus</i>: &quot;The whole earth
	shall be holy and shall more beautifully bloom and be adorned with plenty of
	fruits and corn for the benefit of those who have escaped from those calamities.&quot;
	<i>Gesenius&#39;</i> wavering clearly shows how little satisfaction the non-Messianic
	explanation affords to its own abettors. Besides the explanations of
	<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1502;&#1495; &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span> by &quot;the new growth of the people,&quot;
	and &quot;the rich produce of the country,&quot; he advances still a third one, viz.,
	&quot;a divinely favoured ruler,&quot;--an explanation which has even the grammar against
	it, as we are at liberty to translate only: &quot;The Sprout of the Lord;&quot; and likewise
	the analogy of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1512;&#1497; &#1492;&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span>, according to
	which the Genitive can have a reference to the <i>origin</i> only.</p>
</div>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 26]</span></p>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<h2><a name="div2_26" href="#div2Ref_26">THE PROPHECY, CHAP. VII.</a></h2>
<h3>IMMANUEL.</h3>
<p class="normal">A crisis of the most important nature in the history of Israel
is formed by the Syrico-Ephraemitic war, by the expedition of the allied kings,
Rezin of Damascus, and Pekah of Samaria, which had been already prepared under the
reign of Jotham, and which broke out in the first years of Ahaz. It was in consequence
of this war that Asshur came into the land. The inroad of the Assyrian King, Pul,
under Menahem of Israel, had been transitory only, comp. Vol. 1. p. 165. It was
only with the invasion under Ahaz that the tendency of Asshur began of making lasting
conquests on the other side of the Euphrates, which could not fail to bring about
a collision with the Egyptian power. The succeeding powers in Asia and Europe followed
Asshur&#39;s steps. &quot;Hitherto,&quot;--so says <i>Caspari</i>, in his pamphlet on the Syrico-Ephraemitic
war, S. 17 ff.--&quot;hitherto Israel had to do with the small neighbouring nations only,--now,
in punishment of their sins, oppressed by them; then, in reward of their obedience,
oppressing and ruling over them. And the Syrico-Ephraemitic war itself had been
a link only in the chain of these attacks--its last link. Israel, having arrived
at the point of being hardened, and having entered upon a path in accordance with
this tendency, required another more severe corrective--its being crushed by the
mighty world&#39;s power. The appearance of these mighty powers, just at the period
when Israel entered upon their hardening, is most providential.--The beginning of
the end of the kingdom of the ten tribes had come, and the breaking up of its independent
political existence had commenced. As enmity to Judah had given its origin to the
kingdom of the ten tribes, so also did it bring about its destruction; born out
of it, it died of it. It owed its existence to the incipient enmity; when the latter
was accomplished (Isa. vii. 6,) it caused its death.--The Assyrians came to the
help of Judah, but charged a high price for their help, viz., Judah&#39;s submission
and fealty. Thirty heavy years of servitude, and, to a great part, of
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 27]</span> fears of the worst, 2 Kings xvi. 18; Is. xxxiii.
18 (?); xxxvii. 3, followed for this kingdom also; and when, at the close of this
period, it freed itself from them after the fashion of the kingdom of Israel, it
shared nearly the same fate, 2 Kings xviii. 31 ff. It was only to the mercy of the
Lord, who looked graciously upon the feeble beginnings of conversion, that it owed
its deliverance. The Assyrian power, which had put an end to the kingdoms of Damascus
and Israel, and which was the first power that appeared on the stage of history
and came into conflict with the people of God, became a significant sign of the
final fate of the world&#39;s power in its attacks upon the Kingdom of God. But, as
a prelude to the long series of visitations which it had to endure from the world&#39;s
power in its different phases, Judah was even now led to the very brink of destruction;
there came a period, the 14th year of Hezekiah, when almost nothing more of it was
to be seen by the outward eye than its metropolis exposed to the utmost danger.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">A remarkable proof of the fact that the spirit which filled the
prophets was a higher one than their own, is the fact that Isaiah recognized so
distinctly and clearly the importance of the decisive moment.</p>
<p class="normal">In close connection with the great crisis at which the history
of the people of God had arrived, stands the richer display of the Messianic announcement
which begins with the chapter before us. Messiah is henceforth represented to Judah
as an Immanuel against the world&#39;s powers, as the surety for its deliverance from
the severe oppressions hanging over it, as He who at last, at His appearance, would
conquer the world, and lay it at the feet of the people of God.</p>
<p class="normal">After these general introductory remarks, let us turn more particularly
to the contents of the chapter before us. It was told to the house of David: &quot;Aram
is encamped in Ephraim.&quot; The position of Ahaz was, humanly considered, desperate.
His enemies were far superior to him, and he could scarcely hope for help from heaven,
for he had an evil conscience. The idea of seeking help from Asshur was natural.
Isaiah received a commission to oppose this idea before it became a firm resolution.
In doing so he, by no means, occupies the position of an ingenious politician. On
the contrary, the whole commission is <span class="pagenum">[Pg 28]</span> forced
upon him. It can scarcely be doubted that the Assyrians would have penetrated to
Western Asia, even if Ahaz had not called them to his assistance. The expedition
of the Syrians and Ephraimites with the view of making conquests, could not but
turn their attention to that quarter. As the instruments of the judgments upon Damascus
and Samaria, which Isaiah announced as impending under any circumstances, we can
surely think of none but Asshur. But if once they came into these regions, in order
to chastise the haughtiness of the Syrians and Ephraimites, who would set up as
a new conquering power, then was Judah too threatened by them. <i>In a political
point of view it did not make any great difference whether Ahaz sought help from
the Assyrians, or not</i>; on the contrary, the king of Asshur could not but be
more favourably disposed towards him for so doing. <i>Isaiah, throughout, rather
occupies the position of the man of God.</i> The kings of the people of God were,
in general, not prevented from forming alliances; but such alliances must belong
to the category of permitted human resources. Such, however, was not the case here.
Asshur was a conquering power, altogether selfish. His help had to be purchased
with dependance, and with the danger of entire destruction; to stay upon him was
to stay upon their destroyer, Is. x. 20. Such an alliance was a <i>de facto</i>
denial of the God of Israel, an insult to His omnipotence and grace. If Ahaz had
obeyed Him; if he had limited himself to the use of the human means granted to him
by the Lord without trusting in them, and had placed all his confidence in the Lord,
He would have delivered him in the same manner as He afterwards delivered Hezekiah,
in the first instance from Aram and Ephraim, and then from Asshur also. But although
Ahaz did not follow the prophet, his mission was by no means in vain. Even before
the mission, this result lay open before the Lord who sent him. The great point
was to establish, before the first conflict of Israel with the world&#39;s power, thus
much, that this conflict had been brought about by the sin of the house of David,
and that hence it did not afford any cause for doubting the omnipotence and mercy
of the Lord whose help had been offered, but rejected.</p>
<p class="normal">The Prophet seeks out the king at a place to which he had been
driven by his despairing disquietude which was clinging convulsively to human resources.
He endeavours, first, to exert <span class="pagenum">[Pg 29]</span> an influence
upon him by taking with him his son, whose symbolical name, containing a prophecy
of the future destinies of the people, indicated that the king&#39;s fear of a total
destruction of the State was without foundation. After the king has thus been prepared,
he endeavours to make a deeper impression upon him by the announcement, distinct
and referring to the present case, that the enemies should not only entirely fail
in their intention of conquering and dividing between themselves the kingdom of
Judah; but that the kingdom of Ephraim was itself hastening towards that destruction
which it was preparing for its brethren, and that after sixty-five years it should
altogether lose its national independence and existence, ver. 1-9. But Ahaz makes
no reply; and his whole deportment shows that he does not follow the Prophet&#39;s exhortation
to &quot;take heed and be quiet,&quot; and that the words: &quot;If ye do not believe, ye shall
not be established,&quot; with which the Prophet closes his address, have not made any
impression upon him. In order that the greatness of the king&#39;s hardness of heart
may become manifest, the Prophet offers, in the commission of the Lord, to confirm
the certainty of his statement by a miraculous sign, which the king himself is called
upon to fix, without any restriction, in order that any suspicion of imposition
may be removed. &quot;But Ahaz, the unbeliever, is afraid of heavenly communications,
has already chosen his help, wishes that every thing should go on in an easy human
manner, and refuses the Lord&#39;s offer in a polite turn which even refers to the Law.
A sign is then forced upon him, because as the king of Judah, he must see and hear
for all Judah that the Lord is faithful and good.&quot;<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_29a" href="#ftn_29a">[1]</a></sup>
The Prophet, in ver. 14, points to the birth of the Saviour by a Virgin. How then
was it possible that in the present collision that people should be destroyed, among
whom, according to former promises. He was to be born; that that family should be
extinguished from which he was to be descended? The name &quot;Immanuel,&quot; by which the
future Saviour is designated as &quot;He in whom the Lord is, in the truest manner, to
be with His people,&quot; is a guarantee for His help in the present distress also. The
Prophet then states the time in which the land shall be entirely delivered from
its present enemies. The contemporaries, as the representative of whom
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 30]</span> the child appears (the Prophet, in the energy
of his faith, has transferred the birth of this child from the future to the present),
shall, after the short space of about two years, again obtain the full enjoyment
of the products of the land, ver. 15. For, before this period has elapsed, destruction
will fall upon the hostile kings in their own land, ver. 16. The danger, however--and
this is pointed out in ver. 17-25--will come from just that quarter from which Ahaz
expects help, viz., from Asshur. But the security for deliverance from this danger
also--the conqueror of the world&#39;s power which was soon to begin its course in Asshur,
is none other than Immanuel, whom the Prophet, in the beginning of the humiliation
of the people of God, makes, so to say, to become man, in order that, during the
impending deep humiliation of the people of God, He may accompany it in its history
during all the stages of its existence, until He should really become man. He is,
however in this discourse, not yet pointed out as the deliverer from Asshur, and
the world&#39;s power represented by him. The darkness of the misery to be inflicted
by Asshur should not, and could not, in the meantime, be cleared up for Ahaz; the
picture must end in night. But in the following discourse, chap. viii. 1, ix. 6
(7), which serves as a necessary supplement to the one before us, the Saviour is
depicted before the eyes of those despairing in the sight of Asshur; and the two-fold
repetition of His name Immanuel, in chap. viii. 8, 10, serves to show that the two
discourses are intimately connected, and form one whole.</p>
<p class="normal">Ahaz persevered in his unbelief, according to 2 Kings xvi. 7,
8. He sent messengers with large presents to Tiglath-pileser, King of Assyria, saying:
&quot;I am <i>thy servant</i> and <i>thy son</i> (a word as ominous as that:
<!--changed quote-->&#39;We have no king but Cæsar,&#39;<!--changed quote--> in John xix.
35); come up and save me out of the hand of the King of Aram, and out of the hand
of the King of Israel which rise up against me.&quot; But before the asked-for help came,
king and people had to endure very severe sufferings from Aram and Ephraim. Ahaz,
after having first made preparations to secure Jerusalem against the impending siege,
sent out his armies. They met with a twofold heavy defeat from the divided armies
of the allied kings,<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_30a" href="#ftn_30a">[2]</a></sup>
from which he might have been spared by <span class="pagenum">[Pg 31]</span> being
still, and hoping. The hostile armies then came up to Jerusalem, and laid siege
to it. It was probably by the intelligence of the advance of Asshur that they were
induced to raise the siege. It was now confirmed that the Prophet had been right
in designating the two hostile kings as mere tails of smoking firebrands. Damascus
was taken by the King of Ophir; the inhabitants were carried away into exile to
Kir; Rezin was slain, 2 Kings xvi. 9: the land of Israel was devastated; a portion
of its inhabitants was carried away into exile; the king was made tributary, 2 Kings
xv. 29. Exactly at the time fixed by the Prophet, the overthrow of the two hostile
kingdoms took place; but the deliverance which, without any farther sacrifice, Ahaz
would have obtained, if he had believed the Prophet, had now to be purchased by
very heavy sacrifices; and with perfect justice it is said in 2 Chron. xxviii. 20,
21, that the king of Asshur did not help him, but rather, by coming unto him, distressed
him. Ahaz purchased this help at the price of his independence, and had probably
to submit to very hard claims being made upon him. (<i>Caspari</i>, S. 60.) The
world&#39;s power, to which Ahaz had offered a finger, seized, more and more, the whole
hand, and held it by a firm grasp. Under Hezekiah, faith broke through the consequences
of the sin of the family; but this interruption lasted as long only as did the faith.
In addition to that which Ahaz had, for his unbelief, to suffer from Aram, Ephraim,
and Asshur, came the rebellion of the neighbouring nations,--of the Edomites, according
to 2 Chron. xxviii. 17, and of the Philistines, according to ver. 18.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 1. &quot;<i>And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz, the son of
Jotham, the son of Uzziah, that Rezin, the king of Aram, and Pekah the son of Remaliah,
the king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem, to war against it, and could not fight
against it.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">In thus tracing back the pedigree of Ahaz to Uzziah, there is
a reference to chap. vi. 1: &quot;In the year that King Uzziah <span class="pagenum">
[Pg 32]</span> died,&quot; &amp;c. These two chapters stand related to each other as prophecy
and fulfilment. It was in the year of Uzziah&#39;s death that the Prophet had been seized
with fearful forebodings; and by the divine word these fearful forebodings had soon
been raised into a clear knowledge of the threatening judgments which were impending.
Under Ahaz, the second successor of Uzziah, this knowledge began to be realized,
keeping pace with the hardening which in Ahaz had become personified. He, the type
of the unbelieving Jewish people, did not hear and understand, did not see and perceive;
and the announcement of the Prophet served merely to increase his hardening. Even
as early as that, the germ of the carrying away of the people, announced by the
Prophet in chap. vi., was formed.--The circumstance of the hostile kings being introduced
as <i>going up</i> implies the spiritual elevation of Jerusalem; comp. remarks on
Ps. xlviii. 3; xlviii. 17. The city of God is unconquerable unless her inhabitants
and, above all, the anointed one of God, make, by their unbelief, their glorious
privilege of no avail. In the last words: &quot;<i>And could not fight against it</i>,&quot;
(the singular <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1499;&#1500;</span> because Rezin is the chief
person, Rezin and Pekah being identical with Rezin with Pekah, comp. Esth. iv. 16),
the result of the siege is anticipated; and this is easily accounted for by the
consideration that ver. 1 serves as an introduction to the whole account, stating,
in general terms, the circumstances which induced the Prophet to come publicly forward.
In the following verses, the share only is mentioned which the Prophet took in the
matter; and the account is closed after he has discharged his commission. The apparent
contradiction to 2 Kings xvi. 5, according to which Jerusalem was really besieged,--a
contradiction which occurs also in that passage itself: &quot;And they besieged Ahaz,
and could not fight&quot;--is most simply reconciled by the remark that a fruitless struggle
can, as it were, not be called a struggle, just as, <i>e. g.</i>, in the Old Testament,
such as have a name little known are spoken of as being without a name.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 2, &quot;<i>And it was told to the house of David, saying: Aram
rests upon Ephraim. Then his heart trembled, and the heart of his people, like as
the trembling of the trees of the wood before the wind.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The representative of the house of David was, according to
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 33]</span> ver. 1, Ahaz, to whom the suffix in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1489;&#1489;&#1493;</span> refers. It is thereby intimated that
Ahaz does not come into consideration as an individual, but as a representative
of the whole Davidic family, of which the members were responsible, conjunctly and
severally, and which in Ahaz denied their God, and gave themselves up to the world&#39;s
power,--a deed of the family from the consequences of which a heroic faith only,
like that of Hezekiah, could deliver, but in such a manner only that it at once
became valid again when this faith ceased, until at length in Christ the house of
David was raised to glory. Ver. 19 shows that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1493;&#1495;</span>
must be taken in the signification &quot;to let oneself down,&quot; &quot;to sit down,&quot; &quot;to encamp.&quot;
The anguish of the natural man, who has not his strength in God at the breaking
in of danger, is most graphically described.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. &quot;<i>And the Lord said to Isaiah: Go out to meet Ahaz,
thou and Shearjashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool, in the
highway of the fuller&#39;s field.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Why is the Prophet to seek out the king just at this place? The
answer is given by chap. xxii. 2. &quot;And a reservoir you make between the two walls
for the waters of the old pool: and not do ye look unto him who makes it (viz.,
the impending calamity), and not do ye regard him who fashioned it long ago.&quot;<!--inserted quote-->
When a siege of Jerusalem was imminent, in the lower territory, the first task was
to cut off the water from the hostile army. This measure Hezekiah, according to
2 Chron. xxxii. 3, took against Sennacherib: &quot;And he took counsel with his princes
and his mighty men, to stop the waters of the fountains which were without the city,
and they helped him.&quot; That might be done in faith; but he who, like Ahaz, did not
stand in the faith, sought in it, <i>per se</i>, his safety; his despairing heart
clung to such measures. The stopping of the fountains was, in his case, on a level
with seeking help from the Assyrians. It is thus in the midst of his sin that the
Prophet seeks out the king, and recalls to his conscience: &quot;take heed and be quiet.&quot;
But why did the Prophet take his son Shearjashub with him? It surely cannot be without
significance; for otherwise it would not have been recorded, far less would it have
been done at the express command of the Lord. As the boy does not appear actively,
the reason can only be in the signification of the name. According to chap. viii.,
the Prophet was accustomed to give to <span class="pagenum">[Pg 34]</span> his sons
symbolical names which had a relation to the destinies of the nation. They were,
according to chap. viii. 18, &quot;for signs and for wonders in Israel.&quot; But as an interpretation
of the name, the passage chap. x. 21 is to be considered: &quot;The remnant shall return,
the remnant of Jacob unto the mighty God.&quot; The word
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1493;&#1489;</span> can, accordingly, be understood of returning
to the Lord, of repentance only, comp. chap. i. 27; Hos. iii. 5. But with repentance
the recovery of salvation is indissolubly connected. The reason why it is impossible
that they who commit the sin against the Holy Ghost shall never recover salvation
lies solely in the circumstance, that it is impossible that they should be renewed
to repentance. The fundamental passage, which is comprehended in the name of the
Prophet&#39;s son: &quot;And thou returnest unto the Lord thy God.... And the Lord thy God
turneth thy captivity (<i>i.e.</i>, thy misery), and hath compassion upon thee,
and returneth and gathereth thee from all the nations&quot; (Deut. xxx. 2, 3), emphatically
points out the indissoluble connection of the return to the Lord, and of the return
of the Lord to His people. This connection comes out so much the more clearly, when
we consider that, according to Scripture, repentance is not the work of man but
of God, and is nothing else but the beginning of the bestowal of salvation; comp.
Deut. xxx. 6: &quot;And the Lord thy God circumciseth thine heart, and the heart of thy
seed to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that
thou mayest live;&quot; Zech. xii. 10. King and people feared entire destruction; and
it was at this that their powerful enemies aimed. Isaiah took his son with him,
&quot;as the living proof of the preservation of the nation, even amidst the most fearful
destruction of the greater part of it.&quot; After having in this manner endeavoured
to free their minds from the extreme of fear, he seeks to elevate them to joyful
hopes, by the prophetical announcement proper, which showed that, from this quarter,
not even the future great judgment, which would leave a portion only, was to be
feared.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. &quot;<i>And say unto him: Take heed and be quiet; fear not,
nor let thy heart be tender for the two ends of these smoking firebrands, for the
fierce anger of Rezin and Aram, and of the son of Remaliah.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 35]</span></p>
<p class="normal">The words &quot;<i>Take heed</i>&quot; point to the dangerous consequences
of fear; comp. ver. 9: &quot;If ye do not believe, ye shall not be established.&quot; On the
words &quot;<i>be quiet</i>,&quot; lit., make quiet, viz., thy heart and walk, comp. chap.
xxx. 15: &quot;For thus saith the Lord: By returning and rest ye shall be saved; in
<i>quietness</i> and confidence shall be your strength; and ye would not.&quot; Such
as he was, Ahaz could not respond to the exhortations to be quiet. Quietness is
a product of <i>faith</i>. But the way of faith stood open to Ahaz every moment,
and by his promising word and by his example, the Prophet invited him to enter upon
it. In the words: &quot;Fear not,&quot; &amp;c., there is an unmistakable reference to Deut. xx.
1, ff., according to which passage the priest was, on the occasion of hostile oppression,
to speak to the people: &quot;Let not your hearts be tender, and be not terrified.&quot; That
which, in the Law, the priest was commanded to do, is here done by the Prophet,
who was obliged so often to step in as a substitute, when the class of the ordinary
servants fell short of the height of their calling.--The &quot;firebrand&quot; is the image
of the conqueror who destroys countries by the fire of war, comp. remarks on Rev.
viii. 8. The Prophet is just about to announce to the hostile kings their impending
overthrow; for this reason, he calls them <i>ends</i> of firebrands, which no longer
blaze, but only glimmer. He calls them thus because he considers them with the eye
of <i>faith</i>; to the bodily eye a bright flame still presented itself, as the
last words: &quot;For the fierce anger,&quot; &amp;c., and vers. 5 and 6 show. <i>Chrysostom</i>
remarks: &quot;He calls these kings &#39;firebrands,&#39; to indicate at the same time their
violence, and that they are to be easily overcome; and it is for this reason, that
he adds &#39;smoking,&#39; <i>i.e.</i>, that they were near being altogether extinguished.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Vers. 5, 6. &quot;<i>Because Aram meditates evil against thee, Ephraim
and the son of Remaliah, saying: Let us go up against Judah, and drive it to extremity,
and conquer it for us, and set up as a king in the midst of it the son of Tabeal.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">We have here, farther carried out, the thought indicated by the
words: &quot;for the fierce anger,&quot; &amp;c. The interval, in the original text, between vers.
6 and 7, is put in to prevent the false connection of these verses with ver. 7 (<i>Hitzig</i>
and <i>Ewald</i>).--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1493;&#1509;</span> always means &quot;to loathe,&quot;
&quot;to experience disgust;&quot; here, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 36]</span> in Hiph., &quot;to
cause disgust,&quot; &quot;to drive to extremity;&quot; comp. my work on Balaam, Rem. on Num. xxii.
3.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1511;&#1506;</span> means always: &quot;to cleave asunder,&quot;
&quot;to open,&quot; &quot;to conquer.&quot;--The words: &quot;<i>For us</i>,&quot; show that Tabeal is to be
the vassal only of the two kings. The absolute confidence with which the Prophet
recognizes the futility of the plan of the two kings, forms a glaring contrast to
the modern view of Prophetism, Ver. 2 shows in what light ordinary consciousness
did, and could not fail to look on the then existing state of things.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 7. &quot;<i>Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: It shall not stand, neither
shall it come to pass.</i>&quot; (A plan stands when it is carried out.)</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 8. &quot;<i>For the head of Aram is Damascus, and the head of
Damascus is Rezin, and in threescore and five years more, Ephraim shall be broken,
and be no more a people.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 9. &quot;<i>And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of
Samaria is Remaliah&#39;s son. If ye believe not, ye shall not be established.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Each of these two verses forms a complete whole.--The words: &quot;For
the head of Aram,&quot; &amp;c., to &quot;Rezin&quot; receive their explanation from the antithesis
to vers. 5 and 6, where the king of Aram and the king of Ephraim had declared their
intention of extending their dominion over Judah. As, concerning this intention
and this hope, the Lord has declared His will that it shall not be, we must understand:
Not as regards Judah, and not as regards Jerusalem. It is in vain that men&#39;s thoughts
exalt themselves against the purposes of God. From Aram, the Prophet turns, in the
second part of the verse, to Ephraim: &quot;And even Ephraim! What could it prevail against
the Lord and His Kingdom! It surely should give up all attempts to get more; its
days are numbered, the sword is already suspended over its own head.&quot; But inasmuch
as it is possible, although not likely, that Ephraim, before its own overthrow,
may still bring evil upon Judah, this is expressly denied in ver. 9: Samaria, according
to the counsel of God, and the limit assigned to it, is the head of Ephraim only,
and not, at the same time, of Judah, &amp;c. With this are then connected the closing
words: &quot;If ye believe not, ye shall not be established&quot; (properly, the consequence
will be that ye do not continue), which are equivalent to it: it is hence not Samaria
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 37]</span> and the son of Remaliah that you have to fear;
the enemy whom you have to dread, whom you have to contend against with prayer and
supplication, is in yourselves. Take heed lest a similar cause produce a similar
effect, as in the last clause of ver. 8 it has been threatened against Ephraim.--This
prophecy and warning, one would have expected to have produced an effect so much
the deeper, because they were not uttered by some obscure fanatic, but by a worthy
member of a class which had in its favour the sanction of the Lawgiver, and which
in the course of centuries had been so often and so gloriously owned and acknowledged
by God.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_37a" href="#ftn_37a">[3]</a></sup></p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 38]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Vers. 10, 11. &quot;<i>And the Lord spoke farther unto Ahaz, saying,
Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God; ask it from the depth, or above from the height.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ahaz observed a dignified silence after those words of the Prophet;
but his whole manner shews the Prophet that they have not made any impression upon
him. If David&#39;s spirit had rested on Ahaz, he would surely, if he had wavered at
all, have, on the word of the Prophet, thrown himself into the arras of his God.
But in order that the depth of his apostacy, the greatness of his guilt, and the
justice of the divine judgments may become manifest, God shows him even a deeper
condescension. The Prophet offers to prove the truth of his announcement by any
miraculous work which the king himself should determine, and from which he might,
at the same time, see God&#39;s omnipotence, and the Divine mission of the Prophet.
As Ahaz refused the offered sign, the word 2 Tim. ii. 12, 13:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#949;&#7984; &#7936;&#961;&#957;&#959;&#8059;&#956;&#949;&#952;&#945;, &#954;&#7936;&#954;&#949;&#8150;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#7936;&#961;&#957;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#7969;&#956;&#8118;&#962;· &#949;&#7984; &#7936;&#960;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#8166;&#956;&#949;&#957;,
&#7952;&#954;&#949;&#8150;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#960;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#956;&#941;&#957;&#949;&#953;&#903;--&#7936;&#961;&#957;&#942;&#963;&#945;&#963;&#952;&#945;&#953; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#7953;&#945;&#965;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#959;&#8016; &#948;&#973;&#957;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span> came into application.
According to Deut. vii. 9 ff. the truth and faithfulness of God must now manifest
itself in the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 39]</span> infliction of severe visitations
upon the house of David.--The character of a <i>sign</i> is, in general, borne by
everything which serves for certifying facts which belong to the territory of faith,
and not to that of sight. 1. In some instances, the sign consists in a mere naked
word; thus in Exod. iii. 12: &quot;And this shall be the sign unto thee that I have sent
thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon
this mountain.&quot; Moses&#39; doubts of the truth of his Divine mission originated in the
consciousness of his own unworthiness, and in the condition of those to whom he
was sent. From these doubts he was delivered by the announcement that, at the place
where he had been called, he, at the head of the delivered people, should serve
his God. This was to him a <i>sign</i> that God was in earnest in calling him. 2.
In other instances the assurance given by the sign consists in its perceptibility
and corporeality; so that the word assumes, as it were, flesh and blood. A case
of this kind it is, <i>e.g.</i>, when, in chap. viii. 18, Isaiah calls his two sons,
to whom, at the command of God, he had given symbolical names, expressive of the
future salvation of the covenant-people, &quot;Signs and wonders in Israel;&quot; farther,
chap. xx. 3, where the Prophet walks naked and barefoot for a sign of the calamity
impending over Egypt and Ethiopia in three years. 3. In another class of signs,
a fact is announced which is, in itself, natural, but not to be foreseen by any
human combination, the coming to pass of which, in the immediate future, furnishes
the proof that, at a distant future, that will be fulfilled which was foretold as
impending. The wonderful element, and the demonstrative power do not, in such a
case, lie in the matter of the sign, but in the telling of it beforehand. It is
in this sense that, in 1 Sam. x., Samuel gives several <i>signs</i> to Saul, that
God had destined him to be king, <i>e.g.</i>, that in a place exactly fixed, he
would meet two men who would bring him the intelligence that the lost asses were
found; that, farther onwards, he would meet with three men, one of whom would be
carrying three kids, another, three loaves of bread, and another, a bottle of wine,
&amp;c. In 1 Sam. ii. 34, the sudden death of his two sons is given to Eli as a sign
that all the calamities threatened against his family should certainly come to pass.
In Jer. xliv. 29, 30, the impending defeat of Pharaoh-Hophras is given as a <i>sign</i>
of the divine vengeance breaking in upon the Jews in Egypt. Even before the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 40]</span> thing came to pass, it could not in such a
case, be otherwise than that the previous condition and foundation brought before
the eyes in a lively manner (Jer. xliv. 30:
<!--inserted quote-->&quot;<i>Behold</i>, I give Pharaoh-Hophras into the hands of his
enemies&quot;) gave a powerful shock to the doubts as to whether the fact in question
would come to pass. 4. In other cases, the assurance was given in such a manner,
that all doubts as to the truth of the announcement were set at rest by the immediate
performance of a miraculous work going beyond the ordinary laws of nature. Thus,
<i>e.g.</i>, Isaiah says to Hezekiah, in chap. xxviii. 7: &quot;And this shall be the
sign unto thee from the Lord, that the Lord will do this thing which He has spoken,&quot;
and, as a <i>sign</i> that the Lord would add fifteen years to the life of the King,
who was sick unto death, he makes the shadow on the sun-dial of Ahaz to go back
ten degrees. Of this description were also the signs granted to Gideon, and, in
many respects, the plagues in Egypt also. In the passage before us, no other sign
can possibly be spoken of than one of the <i>two last classes</i>. For it was a
real, miraculous sign only which could possibly exert any influence on a mind so
darkened as was that of Ahaz, and it was the vain offer of such an one only which
was fitted to bring to light his obduracy. If, then, the Prophet was willing and
able to give a real, miraculous sign, why, then, is the answer of Ahaz so unsuitable?
And we can surely not suppose, as <i>Meier</i> does, that he should have intentionally
misunderstood the Prophet. The temptation of the Lord by the children of Israel,
to which the word of the Lord, Deut. vi. 16, quoted by Ahaz, refers, consisted,
according to Exod. xvii., in their having asked <i>water</i>, as a <i>miraculous
sign</i> that the Lord was truly in the midst of them. How could the Prophet reproach
Ahaz with having offended, not men merely, but God, unless he had offered to prove,
by a fact which lay absolutely beyond the limits of nature, the truth of his announcement,
the divinity of Him who gave it, the divinity of his own mission, and the soundness
of his advice? <i>Hendewerk</i> is of opinion that &quot;it is difficult to say what
the author would have made to be the sign in the heavens; probably, a very simple
thing.&quot; But in making this objection it is forgotten that Isaiah gives <i>free choice</i>
to the king. <i>Hitzig</i> says: &quot;Without knowing it, Isaiah here plays a very dangerous
game. For if Ahaz had accepted his proposition, Jehovah would
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 41]</span> probably have left His servant in the lurch,
and he would have begun to doubt of his God and of himself.&quot; In these words, at
all events, it is conceded that the prophets themselves would not be what people
in modern times would have them to be. If such was their position towards <i>miracles</i>,
then, in their own convictions, <i>prophecies</i>, too, must be something else than
general descriptions, and indefinite forebodings. But how should it have been possible
that an order could have maintained itself for centuries, the most prominent members
of which gave themselves up to such enthusiastic imprudence and rashness? Moreover,
it is overlooked that afterwards, to Hezekiah, our Prophet grants that in reality
which here he offers to Ahaz in vain,--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1506;&#1502;&#1511;</span>
and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1490;&#1489;&#1492;</span> are <i>Infin. absol.</i> &quot;going high,&quot;
&quot;going low.&quot; The Imperat. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1488;&#1500;&#1492;</span> must be understood
after <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1490;&#1489;&#1492;</span> also. Some explain
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1488;&#1500;&#1492;</span> by &quot;to hell,&quot; &quot;down to hell;&quot; but this
is against the form of the word, which it would be arbitrary to change. Nor does
one exactly see how, if we except, perhaps, the apparition of one dead, Isaiah could
have given to the king a sign from the Sheol; and in other passages, too (comp.
Joel iii. 3 [ii. 30]), signs in the heavens and in the earth are contrasted with
one another. <i>Theodoret</i> remarks that both kinds of miracles, among which the
Lord here allowed a choice to Ahaz, were granted by Him to his pious son, Hezekiah,
inasmuch as He wrought a phenomenon in <i>heaven</i> which affected the going back
of the shadow on the sun-dial of Ahaz; and on <i>earth</i>, inasmuch as He, in a
wonderful manner, destroyed the Assyrians, and restored the king to health. <i>Jerome</i>
farther remarks, that, from among the plagues in Egypt, the lice, frogs, &amp;c., were
signs on earth; the hail, fire, and three day&#39;s darkness, were signs in the heaven.
It is on the passage before us that the Pharisees take their stand, when in Matt.
xvi. 1 they ask from the Lord that He should grant them a sign from heaven. If even
the Prophet Isaiah offered to prove in such a manner his divine mission, then, according
to their opinion, Christ was much more bound to do this, inasmuch as He set up far
higher claims. But they overlooked the circumstance that enough had already been
granted for convincing those who were well disposed, and that it can never be a
duty to convince obstinate unbelief in a manner so palpable.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 42]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 12. &quot;<i>And Ahaz said: I will not ask, neither will I tempt
the Lord.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ahaz declines the offer by referring to Deut. vi. 16., and thus
assuming the guise of reverence for God and His commandment. &quot;He pretends,&quot; says
<i>Calvin</i>, &quot;to have faith in the words of the Prophet, and not to require anything
besides the word.&quot; The same declarations of the Law, the Lord opposes to Satan,
when the latter would induce Him to do something for which he had no word of God,
Matt. iv. 7. That would really have been a tempting of God. Ahaz had no doubt that
the miracle would really be performed; but he had a dislike to enter within the
mystical sphere. Who knows whether the God who grants the miracle is really the
highest God? comp. Is. x. 10, 11, xxxvi. 18&#8211;20, xxxvii. 10&#8211;12. Who knows whether
He is not laying for him a trap; whether, by preventing him from seeking the help
of man. He is not to bring upon him the destruction which his conscience tells him
he has so richly deserved? At all events the affording of His help is clogged with
a condition which he is resolved not to fulfil, viz., his conversion. A better and
easier bargain, he thought, could be struck with the Assyrians; how insatiable soever
they might be, they did not ask the heart. How many do even now-a-days rather perish
in sin and misery, than be converted!</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 13. &quot;<i>And he said: Hear ye now, O house of David: Is it
too little for you to provoke man, that you provoke also my God?</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">When Ahaz had before refused to believe in the simple announcement
of the Prophet, his sin was more pardonable; for, inasmuch as Isaiah had not proved
himself outwardly as a divine ambassador, Ahaz sinned to a certain degree against
man only, against the Prophet only, by unjustly suspecting him of a deceitful pretension
to a divine revelation. Hence, Isaiah continues mild and gentle. But when Ahaz declined
the offered sign, <i>God himself</i> was provoked by him, and his wickedness came
evidently to light. It is substantially the same difference as that between the
sin against the <i>Son of Man</i>, the Christ coming outwardly and as a man only
(Bengel: <i>quo statu conspicu, quatenus aequo tum loco cum hominibus conversabatur</i>),
and the sin against the Holy Ghost who powerfully glorifies Him outwardly and inwardly.
It is the antithesis <span class="pagenum">[Pg 43]</span> of the relative ignorance
of what one is doing, and of the absolute unwillingness which purposely hardens
itself to the truth known, or easy to be known. We say <i>relative</i> ignorance;
for an element of obduracy and hardening already existed, if he did not believe
the Prophet, even without a sign. For the fact that the Prophet was sent by God,
and spoke God&#39;s word, was testified to all who would hear it, even by the inner
voice, just as in every sin against the Son of Man there is always already an element
of the sin against the Holy Ghost.--The truth that godlessness is the highest folly
is here seen in a very evident manner. The same Ahaz who rejects the offer of the
living God, who palpably wishes to reveal to him that He is a living God, sacrifices
his son to the dead idol Moloch, who never yet gave the smallest sign of life! In
this mirror we may see the condition of human nature.--The circumstance that it
is not Ahaz, but the house of David that is addressed, indicates that the deed is
a deed of the whole house.--The Prophet says, &quot;<i>My God</i>,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, the
God whose faithful servant I am, and in whom ye hypocrites have no more any share.
In Ver. 11, the Prophet had still called Him the God of Ahaz.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 14. &quot;<i>Therefore the Lord himself giveth you a sign: Behold
the Virgin is with child, and heareth a Son, and thou callest his name Immanuel.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ahaz had refused the proffered sign; the whole depth of his apostacy
had become manifest; no further regard was to be had to him. But it was necessary
to strengthen those who feared God, in their confidence in the Lord, and in their
hope in him. For this reason, the Prophet gives a sign, even against the will of
Ahaz, by which the announcement of the deliverance from the two kings was confirmed.
Your weak, prostrate faith, he says, may erect itself on the certain fact that,
in the Son of the Virgin, the Lord will some day be with us in the truest manner,
and may perceive therein a guarantee and a pledge of the lower help in the present
danger also.--&quot;Therefore&quot;--because ye will not fix upon a sign. <i>Reinke</i>, in
the ably written Monograph on this passage, assigns to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1499;&#1503;</span> the signification, &quot;nevertheless,&quot; which
is not supported by the <i>usus loquendi</i>.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1514;&#1503;</span>
must be translated as a Present; for the pregnancy of the Virgin and birth of Immanuel
are present to <span class="pagenum">[Pg 44]</span> the Prophet; and the fact cannot
serve as a sign, in so far as it manifests itself outwardly, but only in so far
as, by being foretold, it is realized as present.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1493;&#1488;</span>
<i>He</i>, <i>i.e.</i>, of His own accord without any co-operation, such as would
have taken place if Ahaz had asked the sign.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1499;&#1501;</span>
refers by its form to the house of David; but in determining the sign, it is not
the real condition of its representative at that time which is regarded, but as
he ought to be. In substance, the sign given to ungodly Ahaz is destined for believers
only.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1504;&#1492;</span> &quot;behold&quot; indicates the energy with
which the Prophet anticipates the future; in his spirit it becomes to him the immediate
present. Thus it was understood as early as by <i>Chrysostom</i>:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#8057;&#957;&#959;&#957; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#8001;&#961;&#8182;&#957;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#7974;&#957; &#964;&#8048; &#947;&#953;&#957;&#8057;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#945; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#966;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#950;&#959;&#956;&#8051;&#957;&#959;&#965;
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#959;&#955;&#955;&#8052;&#957; &#7956;&#967;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#8017;&#960;&#949;&#961; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#961;&#951;&#956;&#8051;&#957;&#969;&#957; &#960;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#959;&#966;&#959;&#961;&#8055;&#945;&#957;, &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#7969;&#956;&#949;&#964;&#8051;&#961;&#969;&#957; &#8000;&#966;&#952;&#945;&#955;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#7952;&#954;&#949;&#8150;&#957;&#959;&#953;
&#963;&#945;&#966;&#8051;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#961;&#959;&#957; &#964;&#8048; &#956;&#8052; &#8001;&#961;&#8061;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#945; &#7956;&#946;&#955;&#949;&#960;&#959;&#957;.</span>--The article in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span> cannot refer to <i>the</i> virgin <i>
known</i> as the mother of the Saviour; for, besides the passage before us, it is
only Micah v. 2 (3) which mentions the mother of the Saviour, and it is our passage
only which speaks of her as a <i>virgin</i>. In harmony with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1504;&#1492;</span>, the article in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span> might be explained from the circumstance
that the Virgin is present to the inward perception of the Prophet--equivalent to
&quot;the virgin there.&quot; But since the use of the article in the <i>generic</i> sense
is so general, it is most natural to understand &quot;the virgin&quot;<!--inserted quote-->
as forming a contrast to the married or old woman, and hence, in substance, as here
equivalent to <i>a</i> virgin. To this view we are led also by the circumstance
that, in the parallel passage, Mic. v. 2 (3) <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1493;&#1500;&#1491;&#1492;</span>
&quot;a bearing woman&quot; is used without the article.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span>
is, by old expositors, commonly derived from <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1501;</span>
in the signification &quot;to conceal&quot; A virgin, they assume, is called a <i>concealed</i>
one, with reference to the customs of the East, where the virgins are obliged to
lead a concealed life. Thus it was understood by <i>Jerome</i> also:
<!--inserted quote-->&quot;<i>Almah</i> is not applied to girls or virgins generally,
but is used emphatically of a hidden and concealed virgin, who is never accessible
to the look of males, but who is with great care watched by the parents.&quot; But all
parties now rightly agree that the word is to be derived from
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1501;</span>, in the signification, &quot;to grow up.&quot; To
offer here any arguments in proof would be a work of supererogation, as they are
offered by all dictionaries. But with all that, <i>Luther&#39;s</i> remark is even now
in full force: &quot;If <span class="pagenum">[Pg 45]</span> a Jew or a Christian can
prove to me that in any passage of Scripture <i>Almah</i> means
<!--changeed quote-->&#39;a married woman,&#39;<!--changed quote--> I will give him a hundred
florins, although God alone knows where I may find them.&quot; It is true that
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span> is distinguished from
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1514;&#1493;&#1500;&#1492;</span>, which designates the virgin state as
such, and in this signification occurs in Joel i. 8. also where the bride laments
over her bridegroom whom she has lost by death. Inviolate chastity is, in itself,
not implied in the word. But certain it is that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span>
designates an unmarried person in the first years of youth; and if this be the case,
un violated chastity is a matter of course in this context; for if the mother of
the Saviour was to be an <i>unmarried</i> person, she could be a virgin only; and,
in general, it is inconceivable that the Prophet should have brought forward a relation
of impure love. In favour of &quot;an unmarried person&quot; is, in the first instance, the
derivation. Being derived from <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1501;</span>, &quot;to grow
up,&quot; &quot;to become marriageable,&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span> can denote
nothing else than <i>puella nubilis</i>. But still more decisive is the <i>usus
loquendi</i>. In Arabic and Syriac the corresponding words are never used of married
women, and <i>Jerome</i> remarks, that in the Punic dialect also a virgin proper
is called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span>. Besides in the passage before
us, the word occurs in Hebrew six times (Gen. xxiv. 43; Exod. ii. 8; Ps. lxviii.
26; Song of Sol. i. 3, vi. 8; Prov. xxx. 19); but in all these passages the word
is undeniably used of unmarried persons. In the two passages of the Song of Solomon,
the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1493;&#1514;</span> designate the nations which have
not yet attained to an union with the heavenly Solomon, but are destined for this
union. In chap. vi. 8, they are, as <i>brides</i>, expressly contrasted with the
<i>wives</i> of the first and second class. Marriage forms the boundary; the <i>
Almah</i> appears here distinctly as the anti-thesis to a married woman. It is the
passage in Proverbs only which requires a more minute examination, as the opponents
have given up all the other passages, and seek in it alone a support for their assertion
that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span> may be used of a married woman also.
The passage in its connection runs as follows: Ver. 18. &quot;There be three things which
are too wonderful for me, and four which I know not. Ver. 19. The way of an eagle
in the air, the way of a serpent upon the rock, the way of a ship in the heart of
the sea, and the way of a man with a maid. Ver. 20. This is the way of an adulterous
woman; she <span class="pagenum">[Pg 46]</span> eateth, and wipeth her mouth and
saith: I have done no wickedness.&quot; According to <i>De Wette</i>, <i>Bertheau</i>,
and others, the <i>tertium comparationis</i> for every thing is to lie in this only,
that the ways do not leave any trace that could be recognized. But the traceless
disappearing is altogether without foundation; there is not one word to indicate
it; and it is quite impossible that that on which every thing depends should have
been left to conjecture. Farther,--instead of the eagle, every other bird might
have been mentioned, and the words &quot;in the air&quot; would be without meaning, as well
as the words &quot;in the heart of the sea&quot; mentioned in reference to the ship. But the
real point of view is expressly stated in ver. 18. It is the <i>incomprehensible</i>.
It is thus only that ver. 20, for which the other verses prepare the way, falls
in with the tendency of the whole. In the way of the adulteress, that which is pointed
out is not that it cannot be known, but the moral incomprehensibility that she,
practising great wickedness which is worthy of death, and will unavoidably bring
destruction upon her, behaves as if there were nothing wrong, as if a permitted
enjoyment were the point in question, that she eats the poisoned bread of unchaste
enjoyment as if it were ordinary bread; comp. ix. 17, xx. 17; Ps. xiv. 4. Four incomprehensible
things in the natural territory are made use of to illustrate an incomprehensible
thing in the ethical territory. The whole purpose is <i>to point out the mystery
of sin</i>. In the case of the <i>eagle</i>, it is the boldness of his flight in
which the miraculous consists. The speed and boldness of his flight is elsewhere
also very commonly mentioned as the characteristic of the eagle; it is just that
which makes him the king of birds. In the case of the <i>serpent</i>, the wonder
is that, although wanting feet, it yet moves over the smooth rock which is inaccessible
to the proud horse; comp. Amos vi. 12: &quot;Do horses run upon the rock.&quot; In the <i>
ship</i>, it is the circumstance that she safely passes over the abyss which, as
it would appear, could not fail to swallow her up. <i>The way of a man with a maid</i>
occupies the last place in order to intimate that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1491;&#1512;&#1498;</span>, as in the case of the adulteress, denotes the <i>spiritual</i> way.
What is here meant is the relation of the man to the virgin, <i>generally</i>, for
if any <i>particular</i> aspect had been regarded, <i>e. g.</i>, that of boldness,
cunning, or secrecy, it <span class="pagenum">[Pg 47]</span> ought to have been
pointed at. The way of the man with the maid is the secret of which mention is made
as early as in Gen. ii. 24,--the union of the strong with the weak and tender (comp.
the parallel passage, Jer. xxxi. 22), the secret attraction which connects with
one another the hearts, and at last, the bodies. The end of the way is marriage.
It is the <i>young</i> love which specially bears the character of the mysterious;
after the relation has been established, it attracts less wonder.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1464;&#1512;&#1464;&#1492;</span>
is the femin. of the verbal adj. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1464;&#1512;&#1462;&#1492;</span>. The
fundamental passage, Gen. xvi. 11, where the angel of the Lord says to Hagar: &quot;Behold
thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael, because
the Lord has heard thy affliction,&quot; shows that we must translate: The virgin <i>
is</i> with child, and not: becomes with child. The allusion to that passage in
Genesis is very significant. In that case, as well as in the one under consideration,
salvation is brought into connection with the birth of a child. To the birth of
Ishmael, the despairing Hagar is directed as to a security for the divine favour;
to the birth of Immanuel, the desponding people are directed as to the actual proof
that God is with them. If the <i>Almah</i> represents herself to the Prophet as
being already with child, then passages such as Is. xxix. 8, Matt. xi. 5, are not
applicable. A virgin who is with child cannot be one who was a virgin.--The form
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1512;&#1488;&#1514;</span> may be 3d fem. for
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1512;&#1488;&#1492;</span>, comp. Jer. xliv. 23; but the fundamental
passage in Gen. xvi. 11 is decisive for considering it as the 2d fem.: &quot;<i>thou</i>
callest,&quot; as an address to the virgin; in which case the form is altogether regular.
It was not a rare occurrence in Israel that mothers gave the name to children, Gen.
iv. 1, 25, xix. 37, xxix. 32. The circumstance, therefore, that the giving of the
name is assigned to the mother (the virgin) affords no ground for supposing, as
many of the older expositors do, that this is an intimation that the child would
not have a human father. &quot;Thou callest&quot; can, on the contrary, according to the custom
then prevalent, be substantially equivalent to: they shall name, Matt.
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#955;&#8051;&#963;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#953;</span>, <i>Jerome</i>: <i>vocabitur</i>.
The name is, of course, not to be considered as an ordinary <i>nomen proprium</i>,
but as a designation of his nature and character. It may be understood in different
ways. Several interpreters, <i>e. g.</i>, <i>Jerome</i>, referring to passages such
as Ps. xlvi. 8, lxxxix. 25, Is. xliii. 2, Jer. i. 8, see <span class="pagenum">[Pg
48]</span> in it nothing else than an appeal to, and promise of divine aid. According
to others, the name is to be referred to God&#39;s becoming man in the Messiah; thus
<i>Theodoret</i> says: &quot;The name reveals the God who is with us, the God who became
man, the God who took upon Him the human nature.&quot; In a similar manner <i>Irenaeus</i>,
<i>Tertullian</i>, <i>Chrysostom</i>, <i>Lactantius</i>, <i>Calvin</i>, and others,
express themselves. But those very parallel passages just quoted show that the name
in itself has no distinct reference to the incarnation of God in Christ. But from
the passage chap. ix. 5, (6), which is so closely connected with the one before
us, and in which the Messiah is called <i>God-hero</i>, (the mighty God), and His
divine nature so emphatically pointed out (comp. also Mic. v. 1 [2],) it plainly
appears that the Prophet had in view the highest and truest form of God&#39;s being
with His people, such as was made manifest when the word became flesh. (Chrysostom
says: &quot;Then, above all, God was with us on earth, when He was seen on earth, and
conversed with man, and manifested so great care for us.&quot;)</p>
<p class="normal">According, then, to the interpretation given, this verse before
us affirms that, at some future period, the Messiah should be born by a virgin,
among the covenant people, who in the truest manner would bring God near to them,
and open the treasures of His salvation. In Vol. I. p. 500 ff., we proved that this
explanation occurs already in the Gospel according to St. Matthew. According to
the interpretation of the Apostle, the passage can refer to Christ only, and finds
in him not only the highest, but the only fulfilment. In the Christian Church, throughout
all ages, the Messianic explanation was the prevailing one. It was held by all the
Fathers of the Church, and by all other Christian commentators down to the middle
of the 18th century,--only that some, besides the higher reference to the Messiah,
assumed a lower one to some event of that period. With the revival of faith, this
view, too, has been revived. It is proved by the parallel passage, chap. ix. 5 (6).
That passage presents so remarkable an agreement with the one now under consideration,
that we cannot but assume the same subject in both. &quot;Behold, a virgin is with child,
and beareth a son&quot;--&quot;A child is born unto us, a son is given;&quot;--&quot;They call him Immanuel,&quot;
<i>i.e.</i>, Him in whom God will be with us in the truest manner--&quot;They call Him
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 49]</span> Wonder-Counsellor, the God-Hero, Ever-Father,
the Prince of Peace.&quot; Both of these passages can the less be separated from one
another, that chap. viii. 8 is evidently intended to lead from the one to the other.
In this passage it is said of the <i>world&#39;s power</i>, which in the meantime, and
in the first place, was represented by <i>Asshur</i>: &quot;And the stretchings out of
his wings are the fulness of the breadth of thy land, Immanuel,&quot; i. e., his wings
will cover the whole extent of thy land,--the stretching of the wings of this immense
bird of prey, Asshur, comprehends the whole land. In the words: &quot;Thy land, O Immanuel,&quot;
the prophecy of the wonderful Child, in chap. viii. 23&#8211;ix. 6 (ix. 1&#8211;7), is already
prepared. The land in which Immanuel is to be born, which belongs to Him, cannot
remain continually the property of heathen enemies. Every destruction is, at the
same time, a prophecy of the restoration. A look to the wonderful Child, and despair
must flee. Behind the clouds, the sun is shining. Every attempt to assign the Immanuel
to the lower sphere, must by this passage be rendered futile. For how, in that case,
could Canaan be called <i>His</i> land? The signification &quot;native country&quot; which
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span>, it is true, sometimes receives by the
context, does not suit here. For the passage just points out the contrast of reality
and idea, that the world&#39;s power takes possession of the land which <i>belongs</i>
to Immanuel, and hence prepares for the announcement contained in that which follows,
viz., that this contrast shall be done away with, and that this shall be done as
soon as the legitimate proprietor comes into His kingdom. Farther,--Decisive in
favour of the Messianic explanation is also the passage Mic. v. 1, 2, (2, 3), where,
in correspondence to <i>virgin</i> here, we have, <i>she who is bearing</i>. The
latter, indeed, is not expressly called a virgin; but it follows, as a matter of
course, that she be so, as she is to bear the Hero of Divine origin (&quot;<i>of eternity</i>&quot;),
who, hence, cannot have been begotten by any mortal. Both of the prophecies mutually
illustrate one another.
<!--uncertain quote start-->&quot;Micah designates the Divine origin of the Promised
One; Isaiah, the miraculous circumstances of His birth&quot; (<i>Rosenmüller</i>) Just
as Isaiah holds up the birth of Immanuel as the pledge that the covenant-people
would not perish in their present catastrophe; just as he points to the shining
form of Immanuel, announcing the victory over the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 50]</span>
world, in order to comfort them in the impending severe oppression by the world&#39;s
power (viii. 8);--so Micah makes the oppression by the world&#39;s power continue only
until the time that she who is bearing brings forth. As Micah, in v. 1 (2), contrasts
the divine dignity and nature with the birth in time, so, in Isaiah, Immanuel, He
in whom God will most truly be with His people, is born by a virgin.</p>
<p class="normal">The arguments which the Jews, and, following their example, the
rationalistic interpreters, especially <i>Gesenius</i>, and with them <i>Olshausen</i>,
have advanced against the Messianic explanation, prove nothing. They are these:</p>
<p class="normal">1. &quot;A reference to the Messiah who, after the lapse of centuries,
is to be born of a virgin, appears to be without meaning in the present circumstances.&quot;
This argument proves too much, and, hence, nothing. <i>It would be valid against
Messianic prophecies in general</i>, the existence of which certainly cannot be
denied. Do not Jeremiah and Ezekiel, at the time when the people were carried away
into captivity, comfort them by the announcement that the kingdom of God should,
in a far more glorious manner, be established by Messiah, whose appearance was yet
several centuries distant? The highest proof of Israel&#39;s dignity and election, was
the promise that, at some future time, the Messiah was to be born among them. How,
indeed, could the Lord leave, without the lower help in the present calamity, a
people with whom He was to be, at some future period, in the truest manner? The
Prophet refers to the future Saviour in a way quite similar to that in which the
Apostle refers to Him, after He had appeared: &quot;Who did not spare His only begotten
Son, but gave Him up for us all, how should He not in Him give us all things freely?&quot;
Let us only realize the truth that the hope in the Messiah formed the centre of
the life of believers; that this hope was, by fear, repressed only, but not destroyed.
All which was needed, therefore, was to revive this hope, and with it the special
hope for the present distress also was given--the assurance, firm as a rock, that
in it the covenant-people could not perish. This revival took place in this way,
that in the mind of the Prophet, the Messianic hope was, by the Holy Spirit, rekindled,
so that at his light all might kindle their lights. The Messianic idea here meets
us in such originality <span class="pagenum">[Pg 51]</span> and freshness, as if
here were its real fountain head. The faith already existing is only the foundation,
only the point of connexion. What is essential is the new revelation of the old
truth, and that could not fail to be affecting, overpowering to susceptible minds.</p>
<p class="normal">2. &quot;The ground of consolation is too <i>general</i>. The Messiah
might be born from the family of Ahaz without the Jewish state being preserved in
its then existing condition, and without Ahaz continuing on the throne. The Babylonish
captivity intervened, and yet Messiah was to be born. Isaiah would thus have made
himself guilty of a false sophistical argumentation.&quot;--We answer: What they, at
that time, feared, was the total destruction of state and people. This appears sufficiently
from the circumstance that the prophet takes his son Shearjashub with him; and indeed
the intentions of the enemy in this respect are expressed with sufficient clearness
in ver. 6. It is this <i>extreme</i> of fear which the Prophet here first opposes.
Just as, according to the preceding verses, he met the fear of entire destruction
by taking with him his son Shearjashub, &quot;the remnant will be converted,&quot; without
thereby excluding a temporary carrying away, so he there also prepares the mind
for the announcement contained in vers. 15, 16, of the near deliverance from the
present danger, by first representing the fear of an entire destruction to be unfounded.
A people, moreover, to whom, at some future period, although it may be at a very
remote future, a divine <i>Saviour</i> is to be sent, must, in the present also,
be under special divine protection. They may be visited by severe sufferings, they
may be brought to the very verge of destruction,--whether that shall be the case
the Prophet does not, as yet, declare,--but one thing is sure, that to them all
things must work together for good; and that is the main point. He who is convinced
of this, may calmly and quietly look at the course of events.</p>
<p class="normal">3. &quot;The sense in which <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1493;&#1514;</span>
is elsewhere used in Scripture, is altogether disregarded by this interpretation.
For, according to it, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1493;&#1514;</span> would refer to a
future event; but according to the <i>usus loquendi</i> elsewhere observed,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1493;&#1514;</span>
<!--changed quote-->&#39;is a prophesied second event, the earlier fulfilment of which
is to afford a sure guarantee for the fulfilment of the first, which is really the
point at issue.&#39;&quot;<!--inserted single quote--> But, in opposition to this, it is
sufficient to <span class="pagenum">[Pg 52]</span> refer to Exod. iii. 12, where
Moses receives this as a sign of his Divine mission, and of the deliverance of the
people to be effected by him: &quot;When thou hast brought forth my people out of Egypt,
ye shall serve God upon this mountain.&quot; In chap. xxxvii. 30, our Prophet himself,
as a confirmation of the word spoken in reference to the king of Asshur: &quot;I make
thee return by the way by which thou earnest,&quot; gives this sign, that, in the third
year after this, agriculture should already have altogether returned into its old
tracks, and the cultivation of the country should have been altogether restored.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_52a" href="#ftn_52a">[4]</a></sup>
The fact here given as a sign is later than that which is to be thereby made sure.
The sign consists only in this, that the idea is vividly called up and realized
in the mind, that the land would recover from the destruction; and this of course,
implies the destruction of the enemy. But in our chapter itself,--the name of Shearjashub
affords the example of a sign (comp. chap. vii. 18), which is taken from the territory
of the distant future. It is time that <i>commonly</i>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1493;&#1514;</span> is not used of future things; but this
has its reason not in the idea of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1493;&#1514;</span>, but
solely in the circumstance that, ordinarily, the future cannot serve as a sign of
assurance. But it is quite obvious that, in the present case, the Messianic announcement
<i>could</i> afford such a sign, and that in a far higher degree than the future
facts given as signs in Exod. iii., and Isa. xxxvii. The kingdom of glory which
has been promised to us, forms to us also a sure pledge that in all the distresses
of the Church, the Lord will not withhold His help from her. But the Covenant-people
stood in the same relation to the first appearance of Christ, as we do to the second.</p>
<p class="normal">(4.) &quot;The passage, chap. viii. 3, 4, presents the most marked
resemblance to the one before us. If <i>there</i> the Messianic explanation be decidedly
inadmissible, it must be so <i>here</i> also. The name and birth of a child serves,
there as here, for a sign of the deliverance from the Syrian dominion. If then
<i>there</i> the mother of the child be the wife of the Prophet, and the child a
son of his, the same must be the case <i>here</i> also.&quot; But it is <i>a priori</i>
improbable that the Prophet should have given <span class="pagenum">[Pg 53]</span>
to two of his sons names which had reference to the same event. To this must be
added the circumstance, that the <i>time is wanting</i> for the birth of two sons
of the Prophet. Before Immanuel knows to refuse the evil and choose the good, the
country of both the hostile kings shall be desolated, chap. vii. 15; before Mahershalalhashbaz
knows to cry My Father, My Mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria
shall be carried before the king of Assyria, chap. viii. 4. The two births hence
coincide. At all events, it is impossible to find the time for a double birth by
the same mother. Several interpreters (<i>Gesenius</i>, <i>Hitzig</i>, <i>Hendewerk</i>,)
assume the identity of Immanuel and Mahershalalhashbaz; but this is altogether inadmissible,
even from the difference of the names. It is the less admissible to assume a double
name for the child, as the name Shearjashub plainly enough shews that the Prophet
was in earnest with the names of his children; and indeed, unless they had been
real proper names, there would have existed no reason at all for giving them to
them. To have assigned several names to one child would have weakened their power.
The agreement must, therefore, rather be explained from the circumstance, that it
was by the announcement in chap. vii. 14 that the Prophet was induced to the symbolical
action in chap. viii. 3, 4. He has, in chap. vii. 14, given to the despairing people
the birth of a child, who would bring the highest salvation for Israel, as a pledge
of their deliverance. The birth of a child and its name were then required as an
actual prophecy of help in the present distress,--a help which was to be granted
with a view to that Child, who not only indicates, but grants deliverance from all
distresses, and to whom the Prophet reverts in chap. ix., and even already in chap.
viii. 8.--Moreover, besides the agreement there is found a thorough difference.
In chap. vii. the mother of the child is called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span>,
whereby a virgin only can be designated; in chap. viii., &quot;the prophetess.&quot; In chap.
vii. there is not even the slightest allusion to the Prophet&#39;s being the father;
while in chap. viii. this circumstance is expressly and emphatically pointed out.
In chap. vii. it is the mother who gives the name to the child; in chap. viii. it
is the Prophet. Far closer is the agreement of chap. ix. 5 (6) with chap. vii. 14.
It especially appears in the circumstances that in neither of them
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 54]</span> is the father of the child designated; and,
farther, in the correspondence of Immanuel with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;
&#1490;&#1489;&#1493;&#1512;</span>, God-Hero.</p>
<p class="normal">(5.) &quot;Against the Messianic explanation, and in favour of that
of a son of the Prophet, is the passage chap. viii. 18, where the Prophet says that
his sons have been given to him for signs and wonders in Israel.&quot; But although Immanuel
be erroneously reckoned among the sons of the Prophet, there still remain Shearjashub
and Mahershalalhashbaz. The latter name refers, <i>in the first instance only</i>,
to Aram and Ephraim specially; or the general truth which it declares is applied
to this relation only. But, just as the name Shearjashub announces new <i>salvation</i>
to the prostrate <i>people of God</i>, so the second name announces near <i>destruction</i>
to the triumphing <i>world</i> hostile to God; so that both the names supplement
one another. As <i>signs</i>, these two sons of the Prophet pointed to the future
deliverance and salvation of Israel, and the defeat of the world; and the very circumstance
that they did so when, humanly viewed, all seemed to be lost, was a subject for
wonder. But that we can in no case make Immanuel a third son of the Prophet, we
have already proved.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 15. <i>Cream and honey shall he eat, when he knows to refuse
the evil and choose the good.</i> Ver. 16. <i>For before the boy shall know to refuse
the evil and choose the good, the country shall be forsaken of the two kings of
which thou standest in awe.</i></p>
<p class="normal">The older Messianic explanation has, in these two verses, exposed
itself to the charge of being quite arbitrary. Most of the interpreters assume that,
in ver. 15, the true humanity of the Saviour is announced. The name Immanuel is
intended to indicate the divine nature; the eating of milk and honey the human nature.
Milk and honey are in this case considered as the ordinary food for babes; like
other children. He shall grow up, and, like them, gradually develope. Thus <i>Jerome</i>
says: &quot;I shall mention another feature still more wonderful: That you may not believe
that he will be born a phantasm. He will use the food of infants, will eat butter
and milk.&quot; <i>Calvin</i> says: &quot;In order that here we may not think of some spectre,
the Prophet states signs of humanity from which he proves that Christ, indeed put
on our flesh.&quot; In the same manner <i>Irenænus</i>, <i>Chrysostom</i>, <i>Basil</i>,
and, in our century, <i>Kleuker</i> and <i>Rosenmüller</i> speak.--But this explanation
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 55]</span> is altogether overthrown by ver. 16. Most interpreters
assume, in the latter verse, a change of subject; by
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1506;&#1512;</span>, not Immanuel, but Shearjashub, who accompanied
the Prophet, is to be understood. According to others, it is not any definite boy
who is designated by <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1506;&#1512;</span>; but it is said in
general, that the devastation of the hostile country would take place in a still
shorter time than that which elapses between the birth of a boy and his development.
Such is <i>Calvin&#39;s</i> view. But the supposition of a change of subject is altogether
excluded, even by the circumstance that one and the same quality, the distinction
between good and evil, is in both verses ascribed to the subject. Others, like
<i>J. H. Michaelis</i>, refer ver. 16 also to the Messiah, and seek to get out of
the difficulty by a <i>jam dudum</i>. It is not worth while to enter more particularly
upon these productions of awkward embarassment. All that is required is, to remove
the stone of offence which has caused these interpreters to stumble. Towards this
a good beginning has been made by <i>Vitringa</i>, without, however, completely
attaining the object. In ver. 14, the Prophet has seen the birth of the Messiah
as present. Holding fast this idea, and expanding it, the Prophet makes him who
has been born accompany the people through all the stages of its existence. We have
here an <i>ideal anticipation of the real incarnation</i>, the right of which lies
in the circumstance, that all blessings and deliverances which, before Christ, were
bestowed upon the covenant-people, had their root in His future birth, and the cause
of which was given in the circumstance, that the covenant-people had entered upon
the moment of their great crisis, of their conflict with the world&#39;s powers, which
could not but address a call to invest the comforting thought with, as it were,
flesh and blood, and in this manner to place it into the midst of the popular life.
What the Prophet means, and intends to say here is this, <i>that, in the space of
about a twelvemonth, the overthrow of the hostile kingdoms would already have taken
place</i>. As the representative of the cotemporaries, he brings forward the wonderful
child who, as it were, formed the soul of the popular life. <i>At the time when
this child knows to distinguish between good and bad food, hence, after the space
of about a twelvemonth, he will not have any want of nobler food,</i> ver. 15,
<i>for before he has entered upon this stage, the land of</i>
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 56]</span> <i>the two hostile kings shall be desolate.</i>
In the subsequent prophecy, the same wonderful child, grown up into a warlike hero,
brings the deliverance from Asshur, and the world&#39;s power represented by it.--We
have still to consider and discuss the particular. <i>What is indicated by the eating
of cream and honey?</i> The erroneous answer to this question, which has become
current ever since <i>Gesenius</i>, has put everything into confusion, and has misled
expositors such as <i>Hitzig</i> and <i>Meier</i> to cut the knot, by asserting
that ver. 15 is spurious. Cream and honey can come into consideration as the noblest
food only; the eating of them can indicate only a <i>condition of plenty and prosperity</i>.
&quot;A land flowing with milk and honey&quot; is, in the books of Moses, a standing expression
for designating the rich fulness of noble food which the Holy Land offers. A land
which flows with milk and honey is, according to Numb. xiv. 7, 8, a &quot;very good land.&quot;
The <i>cream</i> is, as it were, a gradation of <i>milk</i>. Considering the predilection
for fat and sweet food which we perceive everywhere in the Old Testament, there
can scarcely be anything better than cream and honey; and it is certainly not spoken
in accordance with Israelitish taste, if <i>Hofmann</i> (<i>Weiss</i>, i. S. 227)
thus paraphrases the sense: &quot;It is not because he does not know what tastes well
and better (cream and honey thus the evil!), that he will live upon the food which
an uncultivated land can afford, but because there is none other.&quot; In Deut. xxxii.
13, 14, cream and honey appear among the noblest products of the Holy Land. Abraham
places cream before his heavenly guests, Gen. xviii. 8. The plenty in honey and
cream appears in Job xx. 7, as a characteristic sign of the divine blessing of which
the wicked are deprived. It is solely and exclusively vers. 21 and 22 that are referred
to for establishing the erroneous interpretation. It is asserted that, according
to these verses, the eating of milk and honey must be considered as an evil, as
the sad consequence of a general devastation of the hind. But there are grave objections
to any attempt at explaining a preceding from a subsequent passage; the opposite
mode of proceeding is the right one. It is altogether wrong, however, to suppose
that vers. 21, 22, contain a threatening. In those verses the Prophet, on the contrary,
allows, as is usual with him, a <i>ray of light</i> to fall upon the dark picture
of the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 57]</span> calamity which threatens from Asshur;
and it could, indeed, <i>a priori</i>, be scarcely imagined that the threatening
should not be interrupted, at least by such a gentle allusion to the salvation to
be bestowed upon them after the misery (comp. in reference to a similar sudden breaking
through of the proclamation of salvation in Hosea, Vol. I., p. 175, and the remarks
on Micah ii. 12, 13); but then he returns to the threatening, because it was, in
the meantime, his principal vocation to utter it, and thereby to destroy the foolish
illusions of the God-forgetting king. It is in the subsequent prophecy only, chap
viii. 1; ix. 6 (7) that that which is alluded to in vers. 21, 22 is carried out.
The little which has been left--this is the sense--the Lord will bless so abundantly,
that those who are spared in the divine judgment will enjoy a rich abundance of
divine blessings. Parallel is the utterance of Isaiah in 2 Kings xix. 30: &quot;And the
escaped of the house of Judah, that which has been left, taketh root downward, and
beareth fruit upward.&quot;--If thus the eating of cream and honey be rightly understood,
there is no farther necessity for explaining, in opposition to the rules of grammar,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1491;&#1506;&#1514;&#1493;</span> by &quot;(only) until he knows&quot; (comp. against
this interpretation <i>Drechsler&#39;s Comment.</i>). <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1500;&#1491;&#1506;&#1514;&#1493;</span> can only mean: &quot;belonging to his knowledge, <i>i.e.</i>, when he knows.&quot;<!--inserted quote-->
<i>Good</i> and <i>evil</i> are, as early as Deut. i. 39: &quot;Your sons who to-day
do not know good and evil,&quot; used more in a physical than in a moral sense. Michaelis:
&quot;<i>rerum omnium ignari</i>.&quot; The parallel expression, &quot;not to be able to discern
between the right hand and the left hand,&quot; in Jonah iv. 11 (Michaelis: &quot;<i>discretio
rationis et judicii, ut sciant utra manus sit dextra aut sinistra</i>&quot;<!--inserted quote-->)
likewise loses sight of the moral sense. But good and evil are very decidedly used
in a physical sense in 2 Sam. xix. 36 (35), where Barzillai says: &quot;I am this day
fourscore years old, can I discern between good and evil, or has thy servant a taste
of what I eat or drink, or do I hear any more the voice of singing men or singing
women?&quot; The connection with the eating of cream and honey, by which the good and
evil is qualified, clearly proves that good and evil are, in our passage, used in
a similar sense. To the same result we are led by the circumstance also, that the
evil <i>precedes</i>, which must so much the rather have a meaning, that nowhere
else is this the case with this phrase. The evil, the <span class="pagenum">[Pg
58]</span> bad food in the time of war, precedes; the good follows after it: Cream
and honey, the good, he will eat when he knows to refuse the evil and choose the
good, <i>i.e.</i>, when he is beyond the time where he does not yet know to make
any great difference between the food, and in which, therefore, the evil, the bad
food, is felt as an evil. If the good and the evil be understood in a physical sense,
then, in harmony with chap. viii. 4, we must think of the period of about one year.
Moral consciousness develops much later than sensual liking and disliking.--The
construction of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1488;&#1505;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1495;&#1512;</span> with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span>
points to the affection which accompanies the action.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span>
in ver. 16 suits very well, according to the view which we have taken, in its ordinary
signification, &quot;for.&quot; The full enjoyment of the good things of the land will return
in the period of about twelve months (in chap. xxxvii. 30 a longer terra is fixed,
because the Assyrian desolation was much greater than the Aramean); <i>for</i>,
even before the year has expired, devastation shall be inflicted upon the land of
the enemies. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1488;&#1491;&#1502;&#1492;</span> comprehends at the same
time the Syrian and Ephraimitish land.</p>
<p class="normal">From ver. 17-25 the Prophet describes how the Assyrians, the object
of the hope of the house of David, and also the Egyptian attracted by them, who,
however, occupy a position altogether subordinate, shall fill the land, and change
it into a wilderness. The fundamental thought, ever true, is this: He who, instead
of seeking help from his God, seeks it from the world, is ruined by the world. This
truth, which, through the fault of Ahaz, did not gain any <i>saving</i> influence,
obtained an <i>accusing</i> one; it stood there as an incontrovertible testimony
that it was not the Lord who had forsaken His people, but that they had forsaken
themselves. It was a necessary condition of the blessed influence of the impending
calamity that such a testimony should exist; without it, the calamity would not
have led to repentance, but to despair and defiance.--From the circumstance that
in ver. 17, which contains the outlines of the whole, upon the words: &quot;The Lord
shall bring upon thee and thy people,&quot; there follow still the words: &quot;And upon thy
father&#39;s house,&quot; it appears that the fulfilment must not be sought for in the time
of Ahaz only. In the time of Ahaz, the <i>beginning</i> only of the calamities here
indicated can accordingly be sought for,--the <i>germ</i> from which all that followed
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 59]</span> was afterwards developed. Nor shall we be allowed
to limit ourselves to that which Judah suffered from the Assyrians, commonly so
called. It is significant that, in 2 Kings xxiii. 29, Nebuchadnezzar is called King
of Asshur. Asshur, as the first representative of the world&#39;s power, represents
the world&#39;s power in general.</p>
<hr class="W20">
<p class="normal">We have still to submit to an examination those explanations of
vers 14-16 which differ, in essential points, from that which we have given. Difference
of opinion--the characteristic sign of error--meets us here, and that in a very
striking manner, in those who oppose the convictions of the whole Christian Church.</p>
<p class="normal">1. <i>Rosenmüller</i> expressed his adherence to the Messianic
explanation, but supposed that the Prophet was of opinion that the Messiah would
be born in his time. Even <i>Bruno Bauer</i> (<i>Critik der Synopt.</i> i. S. 19)
could not resist the impression that Immanuel could be none other than the Messiah.
But he, too, is of opinion that Isaiah expected a Messiah, who was to be born at
once, and to become the &quot;deliverer from the collision of that time.&quot; This view has
been expanded especially by <i>Ewald</i>. &quot;False,&quot; so he says, &quot;is every interpretation
which does not see that the Prophet is here speaking of the Messiah to be born,
and hence of Him to whom the land really belongs, and in thinking of whom the Prophet&#39;s
heart beats with joyful hope, chap. viii. 8, ix. 5, 6 (6, 7).&quot; But not being able
to realize that which can be seen only by faith--a territory, in general, very inaccessible
to modern exposition of Scripture--he, in ver. 14, puts in the <i>real</i> Present
instead of the <i>ideal</i>, and thinks that the Prophet imagined that the conception
and birth of the Messiah would take place at once. By
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span> he understands, like ourselves, a virgin;
but such an one as is so at the present moment only, but will soon afterwards cease
to be so;--and in supposing this, he overlooks the fact that the virgin is introduced
as being already with child, and that her bearing appears as present. In ver. 15,
the time when the boy knows &amp;c., is, according to him, the maturer juvenile age
from ten to twenty years. It is during this that the devastation of the land by
the Assyrians is to take place, of which <span class="pagenum">[Pg 60]</span> the
Prophet treats more in detail afterwards in ver. 17 ff. But opposed to this view
is the circumstance that, even before the boy enters upon this maturer age (ver.
16), hence in a few years after this, the allied Damascus and Ephraim shall be desolated;
so little are these two kings able to conquer Jerusalem, and so certain is it that
a divine deliverance is in store for this country in the immediate future. And,
in every point of view, this explanation shows itself to be untenable. The supposition
that a <i>real</i> Present is spoken of in ver. 14 saddles upon the Prophet an absurd
hallucination; and nothing analogous to it can be referred to in the whole of the
Old Testament. According to statements of the Prophet in other passages, he sees
yet many things intervening between the Messianic time and his own; according to
chap. vi. 11-13, not only the entire carrying away of the whole people, (and he
cannot well consider the Assyrians as the instruments of it, were it only for this
reason, that he is always consistent in the announcement that they should not succeed
in the capture of Jerusalem), but also a later second divine judgment. According
to chap. xi., the Messiah is to grow up as a twig from the stem of Jesse completely
cut down. This supposition of His appearance, the complete decay of the Davidic
dynasty, did not in any way exist in the time of the Prophet. According to chap.
xxxix., and other passages, the Prophet recognised in Babylon the appearance of
a new phase of the world&#39;s power which would, at some future period, follow the
steps of the Assyrian power which existed at the time of the Prophet, and which
should execute upon Judah the judgment of the Lord. We pointed out (Vol. I. p. 417
ff.) that in the Prophet Micah also, the contemporary of Isaiah, there lies a long
series of events between the Present and the time when she who is bearing brings
forth. <i>Farther</i>--In harmony with all other Prophets, Isaiah too looks for
the Messiah from the house of David, with which, by the promise of Nathan in 2 Sam.
vii. salvation was indissolubly connected, and the high importance of which for
the weal and woe of the people appears also from the circumstance of its being several
times mentioned in our chapter. Hence it would be a son of Ahaz only of whom we
could here think; and then we should be shut up to Hezekiah, his first-born. But
in that case there arises the difficulty which Luther already brought forward against
the Jews: <span class="pagenum">[Pg 61]</span> &quot;The Jews understand thereby Hezekiah.
But the blind people, while anxious to remedy their error, themselves manifest their
laziness and ignorance; for Hezekiah was born nine years before this prophecy was
uttered!&quot;--&quot;The eating of cream and honey&quot; is, in this explanation, altogether erroneously
understood as a designation of the devastated condition of the land. From our remarks,
it sufficiently appears that the expression &quot;to refuse the evil,&quot; &amp;c., cannot denote
the maturer juvenile age. And many additional points might, in like manner, be urged.</p>
<p class="normal">2. Several interpreters do not indeed deny the reference to the
Messiah, but suppose that, <i>in the first instance</i>, the Prophet had in view
some occurrence of his own time. They assume that the Prophet, while speaking of
a boy of his own time, makes use, under the guidance of divine providence, of expressions,
which apply more to Christ, and can, in an improper and inferior sense only, be
true of this boy. This opinion was advanced as early as in the time of Jerome, by
some anonymous author who, on that account, is severely censured by him: &quot;Some Judaizer
from among us asserts that the Prophet had two sons, Shearjashub and Immanuel. Immanuel
too was, according to him, born by the prophetess, the wife of the Prophet, and
a type of the Saviour, our Lord; so that the former son Shearjashub (which means
&#39;remnant,&#39; or &#39;converting&#39;) designates the Jewish people that have been left and
afterwards converted; while the second son Immanuel, &#39;with us is God,&#39; signifies
the calling of the Gentiles after the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.&quot; This
explanation was defended by, among others <i>Grotius</i>, <i>Richard Simon</i>,
and <i>Clericus</i>; and then, in our century, by <i>Olshausen</i>, who says: &quot;The
unity of the reference lies in the name Immanuel; the son of Isaiah had the <i>name</i>
but Christ the <i>essence</i>. He was the visible God whom the former only represented.&quot;
In a modified form, this view is held by <i>Lowth</i>, <i>Koppe</i>, and <i>von
Meyer</i>, also. According to them, the Prophet is indeed not supposed to speak
of a definite boy who was to be born in his time, but yet, to connect the destinies
of his land with the name and destinies of a boy whose conception he, at the moment,
imagines to be possible. &quot;The most obvious meaning which would present itself to
Ahaz,&quot; says <i>von Meyer</i>, &quot;was this: If now a girl was to marry, to become
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 62]</span> pregnant, and to bear a child, she may call
him &#39;God with us,&#39; for God will be with us at his time.&quot; But the prophecy is, after
all, to have an ultimate reference to Christ. &quot;The prophecy,&quot; says <i>Lowth</i>,
&quot;is introduced in so solemn a manner; the sign, after Ahaz had refused the call
to fix upon any thing from the whole territory of nature according to his own choice,
is so emphatically declared to be one selected and given by God himself; the terms
of the prophecy are so unique in their kind, and the name of the child is so expressive;
they comprehend in them so much more than the circumstances of the birth of an ordinary
child require, or could even permit, that we may easily suppose, that in minds,
which were already prepared by the expectation of a great Saviour who was to come
forth from the house of David, they excited hopes which stretched farther than any
with which the present cause could inspire them, especially if it was found that
in the succeeding prophecy, published immediately afterwards, this child was, under
the name of Immanuel, treated as the Lord and Prince of the land of Judah. Who else
could this be than the heir of the throne of David, under which character a great,
and even divine person had been promised?&quot; The reasons for the Messianic explanation
are very well exhibited in these words of <i>Lowth</i>; but he, as little as any
other of these interpreters, has been able to vindicate the assumption of a <i>double
sense</i>. When more closely examined, the supposition is a mere makeshift. On the
one hand, they could not make up their minds to give up the Messianic explanation,
and, along with it, the authority of the Apostle Matthew. But, on the other hand,
they were puzzled by the <i>sanctum artificium</i> by which the Prophet, or rather
the Holy Spirit speaking through him, represents Christ as being born even before
His birth, places Him in the midst of the life of the people, and makes Him accompany
the nation through all the stages of its existence. In truth, if the real, or even
the nearest fulfilment is sought for in the time of Ahaz, there is no reason whatever
for supposing a higher reference to Christ. The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span>
is then one who was a virgin, who had nothing in common with the mother of Jesus,
Mary, who remained a virgin even after her pregnancy. The name Immanuel then refers
to the help which God is to afford in the present distress.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 63]</span></p>
<p class="normal">3. Many interpreters deny every reference to Christ. This interpretation
remained for a long time the exclusive property of the Jews, until <i>J. E. Faber</i>
(in his remarks on <i>Harmar&#39;s</i> observations on the East, i. S. 281), tried to
transplant it into the Christian soil.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_63a" href="#ftn_63a">[5]</a></sup>
He was followed by the Roman Catholic, <i>Isenbiehl</i> (<i>Neuer Versuch über die
Weissagung vom Immanuel</i>, 1778) who, in consequence of it, was deposed from his
theological professorship, and thrown into gaol. The principal tenets of his work
he had borrowed from the lectures of <i>J. D. Michaelis</i>. In their views about
the <i>Almah</i>, who is to bear Immanuel, these interpreters are very much at variance.</p>
<p class="hang1">(a) The more ancient Jews maintained that the <i>Almah</i> was
the wife of Ahaz, and Immanuel, his son Hezekiah. According to the <i>Dialog. c.
Tryph.</i> 66, 68, 71, 77, this view prevailed among them as early as the time of
<i>Justin</i>. But they were refuted by <i>Jerome</i>, who showed that Hezekiah
must, at that time, have already been at least nine years old. <i>Kimchi</i> and
<i>Abarbanel</i> then resorted to the hypothesis of a second wife of Ahaz.</p>
<p class="hang1">(b) According to the view of others, the <i>Almah</i> is some virgin
who cannot be definitely determined by us, who was present at the place where the
king and Isaiah were speaking to one another, and to whom the Prophet points with
his finger. This view was held by <i>Isenbiehl</i>, <i>Steudel</i> (in a Programme,
Tübingen, 1815), and others.</p>
<p class="hang1">(c) According to the view of others, the <i>Almah</i> is not a
<i>real</i> but only an <i>ideal</i> virgin. Thus <i>J. D. Michaelis</i>: &quot;At the
time when one, who at this moment is still a virgin, can bear,&quot; &amp;c. <i>Eichhorn</i>,
<i>Paulus</i>, <i>Stähelin</i>, and others. The sign is thus made to consist in
a mere poetical figure.</p>
<p class="hang1">(d) A composition of the two views last mentioned is the view of
<i>Umbreit</i>. The virgin is, according to him, an actual virgin whom the Prophet
perceived among those surrounding him; but the pregnancy and birth are imaginary
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 64]</span> merely, and the virgin is to suggest to the
Prophet the idea of pregnancy. But this explanation would saddle the Prophet with
something indecent. <i>Farther</i>: It is not a birth possible which is spoken of,
but an actual birth. From chap. viii. 8, it likewise appears that Immanuel is a
real individual, and He one of eminent dignity; and this passage is thus at once
in strict opposition to both of the explanations, viz. that of any ordinary virgin,
and that of the ideal virgin. It destroys also</p>
<p class="hang1">(e) The explanation of <i>Meier</i>, who by the virgin understands
the people of Judah, and conceives of the pregnancy and birth likewise in a poetical
manner. The fact, the acknowledgment of which has led <i>Meier</i> to get up this
hypothesis, altogether unfounded, and undeserving of any minute refutation, is this:
&quot;<i>The mother is, in the passage before us, called a virgin, and yet is designated
as being with child.</i> The words, when understood physically and outwardly, contain
a contradiction.&quot; But this fact is rather in favour of the Messianic explanation.</p>
<p class="hang1">(f) Others, farther, conjecture that the wife of the Prophet is
meant by the <i>Almah</i>. This view was advanced as early as by <i>Abenezra</i>
and <i>Jarchi</i>. By the authority of <i>Gesenius</i>, this view became, for a
time, the prevailing one. Against it, the following arguments are decisive; part
of them being opposed to the other conjectures also. As
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span> designates &quot;virgin&quot; only, and never a
young woman, and, far less, an older woman, it is quite impossible that the wife
of the Prophet, the mother of Shearjashub could be so designated, inasmuch as the
latter was already old enough to be able to accompany his father. Gesenius could
not avoid acknowledging the weight of this argument, and declared himself disposed
to assume that the Prophet&#39;s former wife had died, and that he had thereupon betrothed
himself to a virgin. <i>Olshausen</i>, <i>Maurer</i>, <i>Hendewerk</i>, and others,
have followed him in this. But this is a story entirely without foundation. In chap.
viii. 13, the wife of the Prophet is called simply &quot;the prophetess.&quot; Nor could one
well see how the Prophet could expect to be understood, if, by the general expression:
&quot;the virgin&quot; he wished to signify his presumptive betrothed. <i>There</i>
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 65]</span> <i>is an entire absence of every intimation
whatsoever of a nearer relation of the Almah to the Prophet</i>; and such an intimation
could not by any means be wanting if such a relation really existed. One would,
in that case at least, be obliged to suppose, as <i>Plüschke</i> does, that the
Prophet took his betrothed with him, and pointed to her with his finger,--a supposition
which too plainly exhibits the sign of embarrassment, just as is the case with the
remark of <i>Hendewerk</i>: &quot;Only that, in that case, we must also suppose that
his second wife was sufficiently known at court even then, when she was his betrothed
only, although her relation to Isaiah might be unknown; so that, for this very reason,
we could not think of a frustration of the sign on the part of the king.&quot; <i>Hitzig</i>
remarks: &quot;The supposition of a former wife of the Prophet is altogether destitute
of any foundation.&quot; He then, however, falls back upon the hypothesis which <i>Gesenius</i>
himself admitted to be untenable, that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1502;&#1492;</span>,
&quot;virgin&quot; might not only denote a young woman, but sometimes also an older woman.
Not even the semblance of a proof can be advanced in support of this. It is just
the juvenile age which forms the fundamental signification of the word. In the wife
of the Prophet we can the less think of such a juvenile age, that he himself had
already exercised his prophetic office for about twenty years. <i>Hitzig</i> has
indeed altogether declined to lead any such proof. A son of the Prophet, as, in
general, every subject except the Messiah, is excluded by the circumstance that
in chap viii. 8, Canaan is called the land of Immanuel.--<i>Farther</i>,--In all
these suppositions, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1493;&#1514;</span> is understood in an
inadmissible signification. It can here denote a fact only, whereby those who were
really susceptible were made decidedly certain of the impending deliverance. This
appears clearly enough from the relation of this sign to that which Ahaz had before
refused, according to which the difference must not be too great, and must not refer
to the substance. To this may be added the solemn tone which induces us to expect
something grand and important. A mere poetical image, such as would be before us
according to the hypothesis of the ideal virgin, or of the real virgin and the ideal
birth, does <span class="pagenum">[Pg 66]</span> surely not come up to the demand
which in this context must be made in reference to this <i>sign</i>. And if the
Prophet had announced so solemnly, and in words so sublime, the birth <i>of his
own</i> child, he would have made himself ridiculous. <i>Farther</i>,--How then
did the Prophet know that after nine months a child would be born to him, or, if
the pregnancy be considered as having already commenced, how did he know that just
a son would be born to him? That is a question to which most of these Rationalistic
interpreters take good care not to give any reply. <i>Plüschke</i>, indeed, is of
opinion that, upon a bold conjecture, the Prophet had ventured this statement. But
in that case it might easily have fared with him as in that well known story in
<i>Worms</i>, (<i>Eisenmenger</i>, <i>entdecktes Judenthum</i> ii. S. 664 ff.),
and his whole authority would have been forfeited if his conjecture had proved false.
And this argument holds true in reference to those also who do not share in the
Rationalistic view, of Prophetism. Predictions of such a kind may belong to the
territory of foretelling, but not to that of Prophecy.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_29a" href="#ftnRef_29a"><sup class="ftnRef">
	[1]</sup></a> <i>Meyer</i>, <i>Blätter für höhere Wahrheit</i>, iii. S. 101.]</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_30a" href="#ftnRef_30a"><sup class="ftnRef">
	[2]</sup></a> <i>Caspari</i> very justly remarks: &quot;Nothing can be clearer than
	that 2 Chron. xxviii. 5 ff. comes in between 2 Kings xvi. 5 a. b.; that the
	author of the books of the Kings gives a report of the beginning and end; the
	author of the Chronicles, of the middle of the campaign.&quot; But we cannot agree
	with <i>Caspari</i> in his transferring to Idumea the victory of Rezin. According
	to Is. vii. 2, Aram was encamped in Ephraim. According to 2 Kings xvi. 5, <i>
	both</i> of the kings came up to Jerusalem and besieged her. The expedition
	against Elath, 2 Kings xvi. 6, was secondary, and by the way only.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_37a" href="#ftnRef_37a"><sup class="ftnRef">
	[3]</sup></a> The words: &quot;In threescore and five years more, Ephraim shall be
	broken and be no more a people,&quot; have, by rationalistic critics, without and
	against all external arguments, been declared to be <i>spurious</i>. The reasons
	which serve as fig leaves to cover their doctrinal tendency are the following:
	(1) &quot;The time does not agree, inasmuch as the ten tribes sustained their first
	defeat very soon afterwards by Tiglath-pilezer; the second, nineteen to twenty-one
	years later, by Shalmanezer, who, in the sixth year of Hezekiah, carried the
	inhabitants of the kingdom of the ten tribes away into captivity.&quot; But the question
	here is <i>the complete destruction of the national existence of Israel</i>;
	and that took place only under King Manasseh, when, by Azarhaddon, new Gentile
	colonists were brought into the land, who expelled from it the old inhabitants
	who had again gathered themselves together; comp. 2 Kings xvii. 24 with Ezra
	iv. 2, 10. From that time, Israel amalgamated more and more with Judah, and
	never returned to a national independence. This happened exactly sixty-five
	years after the announcement by the Prophet. Chap. vi. 12 compared with ver.
	13 shows how little the desolation of the country (ver. 16) is connected with
	the breaking up as a nation. It is, moreover, at least as much the interest
	of those who assert the spuriousness, as it is ours to remove the chronological
	difficulties; for how could it be imagined that the supposed author should have
	introduced a false chronological statement? His object surely could be none
	other than to procure authority for the Prophet, by putting into his mouth a
	prophecy so very evidently and manifestly fulfilled. (2) &quot;The words contain
	an unsuitable consolation, as Ahaz could not be benefitted by so late a destruction
	of his enemy.&quot; But, immediately afterwards, he is even expressly assured that
	this enemy will not be able to do him any immediate harm. <i>Chrysostom</i>
	remarks: &quot;The king, hearing that they should be destroyed after sixty-five years,
	might say within himself: What about that? Although they be <i>then</i> overthrown,
	of what use is it to us, if they now take us? In order that the king might not
	speak thus, the Prophet says: Be of good cheer even as to the present. At that
	time they shall be <i>utterly</i> destroyed; but even now, they shall not have
	any more than their own land, for &#39;the head of Ephraim,&#39;&quot;<!--inserted quote-->
	&amp;c. The preceding distinct announcement of the last end of his enemy, however,
	was exceedingly well fitted to break in Ahaz the opinion of his invincibility,
	and to strengthen his faith in the God of Israel, who, with a firm hand, directs
	the destinies of nations, and, no less, the faith in <i>His servant</i> whom
	He raises to be privy to His secrets.--(3.) &quot;The use of numbers so exact is
	against the analogy of all oracles.&quot; But immediately afterwards (ver. 15 comp.
	with chap. viii. 4), the time of the defeat is as exactly fixed, although not
	in ciphers. In chap. xx. Isaiah announces that after three years the Egyptians
	and Ethiopians shall sustain a defeat; in chap. xxiii. 15, that Tyre would flourish
	anew seventy years after its fall; in chap. xxxviii. 5, he announces to Hezekiah,
	sick unto death, that God would add fifteen years to his life. According to
	Jeremiah, the Babylonish captivity is to last seventy years; and the fulfilment
	has shown that this date is not to be understood as a round number. And farther,
	the year-weeks in Daniel.--But in opposition to this view, and positively in
	favour of the genuineness, are the following arguments: The words have not only,
	as is conceded by <i>Ewald</i>, &quot;a true old-Hebrew colouring,&quot; but in their
	emphatic and solemn brevity (&quot;he shall be broken from [being] a people&quot;) they
	do not at all bear the character of an interpolation. If we blot them out, then
	the Prophet says less than from present circumstances, from ver. 4, where he
	calls the kings &quot;ends of smoking firebrands,&quot; in opposition to ver. 6, and from
	the analogy of ver. 9, where the threatening is much more severe, he was bound
	to say. His saying merely that they would not get any more, was not sufficient.
	He could make the right impression only when he reduced that declaration to
	its foundation--<i>i.e.</i>, their own destruction and overthrow. Ver. 16, too,
	would go far beyond what would be announced here, if we remove this clause.
	He announces destruction to the kings themselves. Finally, the symmetrical parallelism
	would be destroyed by striking out these words. The words: &quot;If ye believe not,
	ye shall not be established,&quot; would, in that case, be without the parallel members.
	They are connected with the clause under discussion so much the rather, that
	in them it is not specially Judah&#39;s deliverance from the Syrians and Ephraimites
	that is looked at, but its salvation in general.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_52a" href="#ftnRef_52a"><sup class="ftnRef">
	[4]</sup></a> By a minute and trifling exposition of what is to be understood
	as a whole, and comprehensively, many misunderstandings have been introduced
	into this passage. The defeat of Asshur should take place very soon, but the
	devastation of the country had been so complete that a longer time would be
	required before the fields would be again <i>completely</i> cultivated.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_63a" href="#ftnRef_63a"><sup class="ftnRef">
	[5]</sup></a> <i>Gesenius</i> mentions <i>Pellicanus</i> as the first defender
	of the Non-Messianic interpretation. But this statement seems to have proceeded
	from a cursory view of an annotation by <i>Cramer</i> on <i>Richard Simon&#39;s
	Kritische Schriften</i> i. S. 441, where the words: &quot;this historical interpretation
	<i>Pellicanus</i> too has preferred,&quot; do not refer to Isaiah but to Daniel.
	Nor is there any more ground for the intimation that <i>Theodorus</i> a Mopsuesta
	rejected the Messianic interpretation.</p>
</div>
<hr class="W20">
<h3><a name="div2_66" href="#div2Ref_66">THE PROPHECY, CHAP. VIII. 23-IX. 6.</a></h3>
<p class="center">(Chap. ix. 1-7.)</p>
<p class="center">UNTO US A CHILD IS BORN.</p>
<p class="normal">In the view of the Assyrian catastrophe, the Prophet is anxious
to bring it home to the consciences of the people that, by their own guilt, they
have brought down upon themselves this calamity, and, at the same time, to prevent
them from despairing. Hence it is that, soon after the prophecy in chap. vii., he
reverts once more to the subject of it. The circumstances in chap. viii. 1-ix. 6
(7) are identical with those in chap. vii. Judah is hard pressed by Ephraim and
Aram. Still, some time will elapse before the destruction of
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 67]</span> their territories. The term in chap. vii. 16:
&quot;Before the boy shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good,&quot; and in chap.
viii. 4: &quot;Before the boy shall know to cry, My father and my mother,&quot; is quite the
same. This is the less to be doubted when it is kept in mind that, in the former
passage, evil and good must be taken in a physical sense. The sense for the difference
of food is, in a child, developed at nearly the same time as the ability for speaking.
If it had not been the intention of the Prophet to designate one and the same period,
<i>he ought to have fixed more distinctly the limits between the two termini.</i>
It might, indeed, from chap. viii. 3, appear as if at least the nine months must
intervene between the two prophecies of the conception of the son of the Prophet,
and his birth. As, however, it cannot be denied that there is a connection between
the giving of the name, and the drawing up of the document in vers. 1 and 2, we
should be obliged to suppose that, in reference to the first two futures with <i>
Vav convers.</i> the same rule applies as in reference to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1497;&#1510;&#1512;</span>, in Gen. ii. 19. The progress lies first
in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1514;&#1500;&#1492;</span>; the event falling into that time
is the birth.</p>
<p class="normal">Chap. viii. 1-ix. 6 (7), forms the necessary <i>supplement</i>
to chap. vii., the germ of which is contained already in chap. vii. 21, 22. The
Prophet saw, by the light of the Spirit of God, that the fear of Aram and Ephraim
was unfounded; the enemy truly dangerous is Asshur, <i>i.e.</i>, <i>the whole world&#39;s
power first represented by Asshur.</i> For the King of Asshur is, so to say, an
ideal person to the Prophet. The different phases of the world&#39;s powers are intimated
as early as chap. viii. 9, where the Prophet addresses the &quot;nations,&quot; and &quot;all the
far-off countries;&quot; and, at a later period, he received disclosures regarding all
the single phases of the world&#39;s power which began its course with Asshur. With
this the Prophet had only threatened in chap. vii.; here, however, he is pre-eminently
employed with it, <i>exhorting</i>, <i>comforting</i>, <i>promising</i>, so that
thus the two sections form one whole in two divisions. <i>His main object is to
induce his people, in the impending oppression by the world&#39;s power, to direct their
eyes steadily to their heavenly Redeemer, who, in due time, will bring peace instead
of strife, salvation and prosperity instead of misery, dominion instead of oppression.</i>
As in chap. vii. 14, the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 68]</span> picture of Immanuel
is placed before the eyes of the people desponding on account of Aram and Ephraim,
so here the care, anxiety, and fear in the view of Asshur are overcome by pointing
to the declaration: &quot;Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given.&quot; It is of
great importance for the right understanding of the Messianic announcement in chap.
viii. 23, ix. 6, that the historical circumstances of the whole section, and its
tendency be clearly understood. As, in general, the Messianic announcement under
the Old Testament bears a one-sided character, so, for the <i>present occasion</i>,
those aspects only of the picture of the Saviour were required which were fitted
effectually to meet the despondency of the people in the view, and under the pressure
of the world&#39;s power.</p>
<p class="normal">After these preliminary remarks, we must enter still more in detail
upon the arrangement and construction of the section before us.</p>
<p class="normal">The Prophet receives, first, the commission to write down, like
a judicial document, the announcement of the speedy destruction of the present enemies,
and to get it confirmed by trust-worthy witnesses, chap. viii. 1, 2. He then, farther,
receives the commission to give, to a son that would be born to him about the same
time, a name expressive of the speedy destruction of the enemies, vers. 3, 4. Thus
far the announcement of the deliverance from Aram and Ephraim. There then follows,
from vers. 5-8, an announcement of the misery which is to be inflicted by <i>Asshur</i>,
of whom Ahaz and the unbelieving portion of the people expected nothing but deliverance.
<i>Up to this, there is a recapitulation only, and a confirmation of chap. vii.</i>
But this misery is not to last for ever, is not to end in destruction. In vers.
9, 10, the Prophet addresses exultingly the hostile nations, and announces to them,
what had already been gently hinted at at the close of ver. 8, that their attempts
to put an end to the covenant-people would be vain, and would lead to their own
destruction. The splendour of Asshur must <i>fade</i> before the bright image of
Immanuel, which calls to the people: &quot;Be ye of good cheer, I have overcome the world.&quot;
<i>Calvin</i> strikingly remarks: &quot;The Prophet may be conceived of, as it were,
standing on a watch tower, whence he beholds the defeat of the people, and the victorious
Assyrians insolently exulting. <span class="pagenum">[Pg 69]</span> But by the name
and view of Christ he recovers himself, forgets all the evils as if he had suffered
nothing, and, freed from all misery, he rises against the enemies whom the Lord
would immediately destroy.&quot; The Prophet then interrupts the announcement of deliverance,
and exhibits the subjective conditions upon which the bestowal of deliverance, or
rather the <i>partaking</i> in it, depends, along with the announcement of the fearful
misery which would befal them in case these conditions were not complied with. But,
so he continues in vers. 11-16, he who is to partake of the deliverance which the
Lord has destined for His people, must in firm faith expect it from Him, and thereby
inwardly separate himself from the unbelieving mass, who, at every appearance of
danger, tremble and give up all for lost. He who stands as ill as that mass in the
trial inflicted by the Lord; he to whom the danger becomes an occasion for manifesting
the unbelief of his heart;--he indeed will perish in it. At the close, the prophet
is emphatically admonished to impress this great and important truth upon the minds
of the susceptible ones. In ver. 17: &quot;And I waited upon the Lord,&quot; &amp;c., the Prophet
reports what effect was produced upon him by this revelation from the Lord,--thereby
teaching indirectly what effect it ought to produce upon all. In ver. 18, the Prophet
directs the desponding people to the example of himself who, according to ver. 17,
is joyful in his faith, and to the names of his sons which announced deliverance.
Deliverance and comfort are to be sought from the God of Israel only. Vain, therefore,--this
he brings out, vers. 19-22--are all other means by which people without faith seek
to procure help to themselves. They should return to God&#39;s holy Law which, in Deut.
xviii. 14, ff. commands to seek disclosures as regards the future, and comfort from
His servants the Prophets only, and which itself abounds in comfort and promise.
If such be not done, misery without any deliverance, despair without any comfort,
are the unavoidable consequences. From ver. 23, the Prophet continues the interrupted
announcement of deliverance. That which, in the preceding verses, he had threatened
in the case of apostacy from God&#39;s Word, and of unbelief, viz., <i>darkness</i>,
<i>i.e.</i>, the absence of deliverance, will, as the Prophet, according to vers.
21, 22, foresees, really befal them in future, as <span class="pagenum">[Pg 70]</span>
the people will not fulfil the conditions held forth in vers. 16 and 20, as they
will not speak: &quot;To the Law and to the testimony,&quot; as they will not in faith lay
hold of the promise, and trust in the Lord. The calamity having, in the preceding
verses, been represented as <i>darkness</i>, the deliverance which, by the grace
of the Lord, is to be bestowed upon the people (for the Lord indeed chastises His
people on account of their unbelief, but does not give them up to death), is now
represented as a great <i>light</i> which dispels the darkness. It shines most clearly
just where the darkness had been greatest--in that part of the country which, being
outwardly and inwardly given up to heathenism, seemed scarcely still to belong to
the land of the Lord, viz., the country lying around the lake of Gennesareth. The
people are filled with joy on account of the deliverance granted to them by the
Lord,--their deliverance from the yoke of their oppressors, from the bondage of
the world which now comes to an end. As the bestower of such deliverance, the Prophet
beholds a divine child who, having obtained dominion, will exercise it with the
skill of the God-man; who will, with fatherly love, in all eternity care for His
people and create peace to them; who will, at the same time, infinitely extend His
dominion, the kingdom of David, not by means of the force of arms, but by means
of right and righteousness, the exercise of which will attract the nations to Him;
so that with the increase of dominion, the increase of peace goes hand in hand.
The guarantee that these glorious results shall really take place is the zeal of
the Lord, and it is this to which the Prophet points at the close.</p>
<hr class="W20">
<p class="normal">Chap. viii. 23 (ix. 1). &quot;<i>For not is darkness to the land, to
which is distress; in the former time he has brought disgrace upon the land of Zebulun
and the hind of Naphtali, and in the after-time he brings it to honour, the region
on the sea, the other side of the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles.</i>&quot;</p>

<p class="normal"><span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span> stands in its ordinary
signification, &quot;for.&quot; Allow not yourselves to be turned away by anything from trusting
in the God of Israel; hold fast by His word alone, and by His servants,--such was
the fundamental thought of the whole preceding section. It meets us last in ver.
20, in the exhortation: <span class="pagenum">[Pg 71]</span> &quot;To the Law and to
the testimony!&quot; in so far as this is rich in consolation and promise. The Prophet,
after having, in the preceding verses, described the misery which will befal those
who do not follow this exhortation, supports and establishes it by referring to
the <i>help of the Lord</i> already alluded to in vers. 9 and 10, and to the <i>
light of His grace</i> which He will cause to shine into the darkness of the people,--a
darkness produced by their unbelief and apostacy; and this light shall be brightest
where the darkness was greatest. All the attempts at connecting this
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span> with the verse immediately preceding instead
of referring it to the main contents of the preceding section, have proved futile.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span> can neither mean &quot;nevertheless,&quot; nor &quot;yea;&quot;
and the strange assertion that it is almost without any meaning at all cannot derive
any support from Isaiah xv. 1: &quot;The <i>burden</i> of Moab, <i>for</i> in the night
the city of Moab is laid waste;&quot; for only in that case is
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span> without any meaning at all, if
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1488;</span> be falsely interpreted.--Ver. 22, where
the phrase <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1506;&#1493;&#1507; &#1510;&#1493;&#1511;&#1492;</span> &quot;darkness of distress&quot;
is equivalent to &quot;darkness which consists in distress&quot; (compare also: &quot;behold trouble
and darkness&quot; in the same verse), shows that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1493;&#1506;&#1507;</span>
and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1493;&#1510;&#1511;</span> are substantially of the same meaning.--Our
verse forms an antithesis to ver. 22; the latter verse described the darkness brought
on by the guilt of the people; the verse under consideration describes, in contrast
to it, the <i>removal</i> of it called forth by the grace of the Lord.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488;</span>
may either be connected with the noun, or it may be explained: not is darkness.
It cannot be objected to the latter view that, in that case,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1497;&#1503;</span> should rather have stood; while the analogy
of the phrase: &quot;Not didst thou increase the joy,&quot; in chap. ix. 2 (3), seems to be
in favour of it. Here we have the negative, the ceasing of darkness; in chap. ix.
1 (2) the positive, the appearance of light. The suffix, in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1492;</span> refers, just as the suffix, in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1492;</span> in ver. 21, to the omitted
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span>.--The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;</span>
in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1506;&#1514;</span> is, by many interpreters, asserted
to stand in the signification of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1488;&#1513;&#1512;</span>: &quot;Just
as the former time has brought disgrace,&quot;<!--inserted quote--> &amp;c. But as it cannot
be proved that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;</span> has ever the meaning, &quot;just
as;&quot; and as, on the other hand, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1506;&#1514;</span> frequently
occurs in the signification, &quot;at the time&quot; (compare my remarks on Numb. xxiii. 13
in my work on Balaam), we shall be obliged to take, here too, the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;</span> as a temporal particle, and to supply, as
the subject, Jehovah, who <span class="pagenum">[Pg 72]</span> always stands before
the Prophet&#39;s mind, and is often not mentioned when the matter itself excludes another
subject. Moreover, it is especially in favour of this view that, in vers. 3 (4),
the Lord himself is expressly addressed.--As regards
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1495;&#1512;&#1493;&#1503;</span>, either
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1506;&#1514;</span> may be supplied,--and this is simplest
and most natural--or it may be taken as an Accusative, &quot;for the whole after-time.&quot;--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1511;&#1500;</span>
means properly to &quot;make light,&quot; then &quot;to make contemptible,&quot; &quot;to cover with disgrace,&quot;
and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1499;&#1489;&#1497;&#1491;</span> properly then, &quot;to make heavy,&quot;
&quot;to honour,&quot;--a signification which indeed is peculiar to <i>Piel</i>, but in which
the <i>Hiphil</i>, too, occurs in Jer. xxx. 19; the two verbs thus form an antithesis.
The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;</span> <i>locale</i> in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1512;&#1510;&#1492;</span> (the word does not occur in Isaiah with
the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;</span> <i>paragog.</i>) shews that a certain
modification of the verbal notion must be assumed: &quot;to bring disgrace and honour.&quot;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1512;&#1510;&#1492;</span> thus would mean &quot;towards the land.&quot; The
scene of the disgrace and honour, which at first was designated in general only,
is afterwards <i>extended</i>. First, the land of Zebulun and Naphtali only is mentioned,
because it was upon it that the disgrace had pre-eminently fallen, and it was, therefore,
pre-eminently to be brought to honour; then the whole territory along the sea on
both sides of it.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1501;</span> can, in this context
which serves for a more definite qualification, mean the sea of Gennesareth only
(<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1501; &#1499;&#1504;&#1512;&#1514;</span> Numb. xxxiv. 11, and other passages),
just as, in Matt. iv. 13, the designation of Capernaum as
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7969; &#960;&#945;&#961;&#945;&#952;&#945;&#955;&#945;&#963;&#963;&#943;&#945;</span> receives its definite meaning
from the context.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1512;&#1498;</span> occurs elsewhere also
in the signification of <i>versus</i>, <i>e.g.</i>, Ezek. viii. 5, xl. 20, 46; it
will be necessary to supply after it <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span>,
just as in the case of the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1512; &#1492;&#1497;&#1512;&#1491;&#1503;</span> following.
It is without any instance that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1512;&#1498;</span> &quot;way&quot;
should stand for &quot;region,&quot; &quot;country.&quot; The region on the sea is then divided into
its two parts <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1512; &#1492;&#1497;&#1512;&#1491;&#1503;</span>,
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#8051;&#961;&#945;&#957; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7992;&#959;&#961;&#948;&#8049;&#957;&#959;&#965;</span>, the land on the east bank
of Jordan, and Galilee. The latter answers to the land of Zebulun and Naphtali;
for the territory of these two tribes occupied the centre and principal part of
Galilee. In opposition to the established <i>usus loquendi</i>, many would understand
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1512; &#1492;&#1497;&#1512;&#1491;&#1503;</span> as meaning the land &quot;on the side,&quot;
<i>i.e.</i>, this side &quot;of the Jordan,&quot; proceeding upon the supposition that the
local designations must, from beginning to end, be congruous. Opposed to it is also
the circumstance that, in 2 Kings, xv. 29, the most eastward and most northward
countries, Peraea and Galilee are connected. <span class="pagenum">[Pg 73]</span>
In that passage the single places are mentioned which Tiglath-pilezer took; then,
the whole districts, &quot;Gilead and Galilee, the whole land of Naphtali.&quot; By the latter
words, that part of Galilee is made especially prominent upon which the catastrophe
fell most severely and completely. In the phrase, &quot;Galilee of the Gentiles,&quot; Galilee
is a geographical designation which was already current at the time of the Prophet.
There is no reason for fixing the extent of ancient Galilee differently from that
of the more modern Galilee,--for assigning to it a more limited extent. We are told
in 1 Kings ix. 11, that the twenty cities which Solomon gave to Hiram lay in the
land of <i>Galil</i>, but not that the country was limited to them. The qualification,
&quot;of the Gentiles,&quot; is nowhere else met with in the Old Testament; it is peculiar
to the Prophet. It serves as a hint to point out in what the disgrace of Galilee
and Peraea consisted. This <i>Theodoret</i> also saw. He says: &quot;He calls it &#39;Galilee
of the Gentiles&#39; because it was inhabited by other tribes along with the Jews; for
this reason, he says also of the inhabitants of those countries, that they were
walking in darkness, and speaks of the inhabitants of that land as living in the
shadow and land of death, and promises the brightness of heavenly light.&quot; It is
of no small importance to observe that Isaiah does not designate Galilee according
to what it was at the time when this prophecy was uttered, <i>but according to what
it was to become in future</i>. The distress by the Gentiles appears in chap. vii.
and viii. everywhere as a <i>future one</i>. At the time when the Prophet prophesied,
the Jewish territory still existed in its integrity. In vers. 4, and 5-7, he announces
Asshur&#39;s inroad into the land of Israel as a <i>future one</i>; in the present moment,
it was the kingdom of the ten tribes in connection with Aram which attacked and
threatened Judea. The superior power of the world which, according to the clear
foresight of the Prophet, was threatening, could not but be sensibly felt in the
North and East. For these formed the border parts against the Asiatic world&#39;s power;
it was from that quarter that its invasions commonly took place; and it was to be
expected that there, in the first instance, the Gentiles would establish themselves,
just as, in former times, they had maintained themselves longest there; comp. Judges
i. 30-38; <i>Keil</i> on 1 Kings ix. 11. But very soon after this,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 74]</span> the name &quot;Galilee of the Gentiles&quot; ceased to
be one merely prophetical; Tiglathpilezer carried the inhabitants of Galilee and
Gilead into exile, 2 Kings xv. 29. <i>At a later period</i>, when the Greek empire
&quot;peopled Palestine, in the most attractive places, with new cities, restored many
which, in consequence of the destructive wars, had fallen into decay, filled all
of them, more or less, with Greek customs and institutions, and, along with the
newly-opened extensive commerce and traffic, everywhere spread Greek manners also,&quot;
this change was chiefly limited to Galilee and Peraea; Judea remained free from
it; comp. <i>Ewald</i>, <i>Geschichte Israels</i>, iii. 2 S. 264 ff. In 1 Maccab.
v. Galaaditis and Galilee appear as those parts of the country where the existence
of the Jews is almost hopelessly endangered by the Gentiles living in the midst
of, and mixed up with them. What is implied in &quot;Galilee of the Gentiles&quot; may be
learned from that chapter, where even the <i>expression</i> reverts in ver. 15.
With external dependence upon the Gentiles, however, the spiritual dependence went
hand in hand. These parts of the country could the less oppose any great resistance
to the influences of heathendom, that they were separated, by a considerable distance,
from the religious centre of the nation--the temple and <i>metropolis</i>, in which
the higher Israelitish life was concentrated. A consequence of this degeneracy was
the contempt in which the Galileans were held at the time of Christ, John i. 47,
vii. 52; Matt. xxvi. 69.--But in what consisted the <i>honour</i> or the <i>glorification</i>
which Galilee, along with Peraea, was to obtain in the after-time? Chap. ix. 5 (6),
where the deliverance and salvation announced in the preceding verses are connected
with the person of the <i>Redeemer</i>, show that we must not seek for it in any
other than that of the Messianic time. Our Lord spent the greater part of His public
life in the neighbourhood of the lake of Gennesareth; it was there that Capernaum--His
ordinary residence--was situated, Matt. ix. 1. From Galilee were most of His disciples.
In Galilee He performed many <i>miracles</i>; and it was there that the preaching
of the Gospel found much entrance, so that even the name of the Galileans passed
over in the first centuries to the Christians. <i>Theodoret</i> strikingly remarks:
&quot;Galilee was the native country of the holy Apostles; there the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 75]</span> Lord performed most of His miracles; there
He cleansed the leper; there He gave back to the centurion his servant sound; there
He removed the fever from Peter&#39;s wife&#39;s mother; there He brought back to life the
daughter of Jairus who was dead; there He multiplied the loaves; there He changed
the water into wine.&quot; Very aptly has <i>Gesenius</i> compared Micah v. 1 (2). Just
as in that passage the birth of the Messiah is to be for the honour of the small,
unimportant Bethlehem, so here Galilee, which hitherto was covered with disgrace,
which was reproached by the Jews, that there no prophet had ever risen, is to be
brought to honour, and to be glorified by the appearance of the Messiah. It was
from the passage under review that the opinion of the Jews was derived, that the
Messiah would appear in the land of Galilee. Comp. <i>Sohar</i>, p. 1. fol. 119
ed. Amstelod.; fol. 74 ed. Solisbae: <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1488;&#1512;&#1506;&#1514; &#1491;&#1490;&#1500;&#1497;&#1500;
&#1497;&#1514;&#1490;&#1500;&#1497; &#1502;&#1500;&#1499;&#1488; &#1502;&#1513;&#1497;&#1514;&#1488;</span><!--word order questionable; see 1856 ed. and other web sites-->.
&quot;King Messiah will reveal himself in the land of Galilee.&quot; But we must beware of
putting prophecy and fulfilment into a merely accidental outward relation, of changing
the former into a mere foretelling, and of supposing, in reference to the latter,
that, unless the letter of the prophecy had existed, Jesus might as well have made
Judea the exclusive scene of His ministry. Both prophecy and history are overruled
by a higher idea, by the truth absolutely valid in reference to the Church of the
Lord, that where the distress is greatest, help is nearest. If it was established
that the misery of the covenant-people, both outward and spiritual, was especially
concentrated in Galilee, then it is also sure that He who was sent to the lost sheep
of Israel must devote His principal care just to that part of the country. The prophecy
is not exhausted by the one fulfilment; and the fulfilment is a new prophecy. Wheresoever
in the Church we perceive a new Galilee of the Gentiles, we may, upon the ground
of this passage, confidently hope that the saving activity of the Lord will gloriously
display itself.</p>
<p class="normal"><a name="div2_75" href="#div2Ref_75">Chap. ix. 1 (2)</a>. &quot;<i>The
people that walk in darkness see a great light, they that dwell in the land of the
shadow of death, upon them light ariseth.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;The people&quot; are the inhabitants of the countries mentioned in
the preceding verse; but they are not viewed in contrast to, and exclusive of the
other members of the covenant-people,--for <span class="pagenum">[Pg 76]</span>
according to chap. viii. 22, darkness is to cover the whole of it--but only as that
portion which comes chiefly into consideration. <i>Light</i> is, in the symbolical
language of Scripture, salvation. That in which the <i>salvation</i> here consists
cannot be determined from the words themselves, but must follow from the context.
It will not be possible to deny that, according to it, the darkness consists, in
the first instance, in the oppression by the Gentiles, and, hence, salvation consists
in the <i>deliverance</i> from this oppression, and in being raised to the dominion
of the world; and in ver. 2 (3) ff., we have, indeed, the farther displaying of
the light, or deliverance. But it will be as little possible to deny that the sad
companion of outward oppression by the Gentile world is the <i>spiritual</i> misery
of the inward dependence upon it. <i>Farther</i>,--It is as certain that the elevation
of the covenant-people to the dominion of the world cannot take place all on a sudden,
and without any farther ceremony, inasmuch as, according to a fundamental view of
the Old Testament, all outward deliverance appears as depending upon conversion
and regeneration. &quot;Thou returnest,&quot; so we read in Deut. xxx. 2, 3, &quot;to the Lord
thy God, and the Lord thy God turneth to thy captivity.&quot; And in the same chapter,
vers. 6, 7: &quot;The Lord thy God circumciseth thy heart, and <i>then</i> the Lord thy
God putteth all these curses upon thine enemies.&quot; Before Gideon is called to be
the deliverer of the people from Midian, the Prophet must first hold up their sin
to the people, Judg. vi. 8 ff., and Gideon does not begin his work with a struggle
against the outward enemies, but must, first of all, as Jerubbabel, declare war
against sin. All the prosperous periods in the people&#39;s history are, at the same
time, periods of spiritual revival. We need only think of David, Jehoshaphat, and
Hezekiah. Outward deliverance always presents itself in history as an <i>addition</i>
only which is bestowed upon those seeking after the kingdom of God. Without the
inward foundation, the bestowal of the outward blessing would be only a mockery,
inasmuch as the holy God could not but immediately take away again what He had given.
But the circumstance that it is the <i>outward</i> salvation, the deliverance from
the heathen servitude, the elevation of the people of God to the dominion of the
world, as in Christ it so gloriously took <span class="pagenum">[Pg 77]</span> place,
which are here, in the first instance, looked at, is easily accounted for from the
historical cause of this prophetic discourse which, <i>in the first instance, is
directed against the fears of the destruction of the kingdom of God by the world&#39;s
power</i>. Ps. xxiii. 4; &quot;Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of
death, I fear no evil; for thou art with me, thy rod and thy staff they comfort
me,&quot; must so much the more he considered as the fundamental passage of the verse
under consideration, that the Psalm, too, refers to the whole Christian Church.
It was in the appearance of Christ, and the salvation brought through Him, in the
midst of the deepest misery, that this Psalm found its most glorious confirmation.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1500;&#1502;&#1493;&#1514;</span>,
&quot;darkness of death,&quot; is the darkness which prevails in death or in Sheol. Such compositions
commonly occur in proper names only, not in appellatives; and hence, by &quot;the land
of the darkness (shadow) of death,&quot; hell is to be understood. But darkness of hell
is, by way of a shortened comparison, not unfrequently used for designating the
deepest darkness. The point of comparison is here furnished by the first member
of the verse. Parallel is Ps. lxxxviii. 4 ff., where Israel laments that the Lord
had thrust it down into dark hell. The Preterite tense of the verbs in our verse
is to be explained from the prophetical view which converts the Future into the
Present. How little soever modern exegesis can realise this seeing by, and in faith,
and how much soever it is everywhere disposed to introduce the <i>real</i> Present
instead of the <i>ideal</i>, yet even <i>Ewald</i> is compelled to remark on the
passage under consideration: &quot;The Prophet, as if he were describing something which
in his mind he had seen as certain long ago, here represents everything in the past,
and scarcely makes an exception of this in the new start which he takes in the middle.&quot;
At the time when the Prophet uttered this Prophecy, even the <i>darkness</i> still
belonged to the future. As yet the world&#39;s power had not gained the ascendancy over
Israel; but here the light has already dispelled the darkness.</p>
<p class="normal">It now merely remains for us to view more particularly the quotation
of these two verses in Matt. iv. 12-17. <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7944;&#954;&#959;&#973;&#963;&#945;&#962; &#948;&#8050;</span>--thus
the section begins--<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8005;&#964;&#953; &#7992;&#969;&#940;&#957;&#957;&#951;&#962; &#960;&#945;&#961;&#949;&#948;&#972;&#952;&#951;, &#7936;&#957;&#949;&#967;&#974;&#961;&#951;&#963;&#949;&#957;
&#949;&#7984;&#962; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#915;&#945;&#955;&#953;&#955;&#945;&#943;&#945;&#957;.</span> Since, in these words, we are told that Jesus, after having
received the intelligence of the imprisonment of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 78]</span>
John, withdrew into Galilee, we cannot for a moment think of His having sought in
Galilee, safety from Herod; for Galilee just belonged to Herod, and Judea afforded
security against him. The verb <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#957;&#945;&#967;&#974;&#961;&#949;&#8150;&#957;</span> denotes,
on the contrary, the withdrawing into the <i>angulus terrae</i> Galilee, as contrasted
with the civil and ecclesiastical centre. The <i>time</i> of the beginning of Christ&#39;s
preaching (His ministry hitherto had been merely a kind of prelude) was determined
by the imprisonment of John, as certainly as, according to the prophecy of the Old
Testament, the territories of the activity of both were immediately bordering upon
one another, and by that very circumstance <i>the place</i>, too, was indirectly
determined; for it was fixed by the prophecy under consideration that Galilee was
to be the scene of the chief ministry of Christ. If, then, the time for the beginning
of the ministry had come, He must also depart into Galilee. The connection, therefore,
is this: After he had received the intelligence of the imprisonment of John--in
which the call to Him for the beginning of His ministry was implied--He departed
into Galilee, and especially to Capernaum, vers. 12, 13; for it was this part of
the country which, by the prophecy, was fixed as the main scene of His Messianic
activity, vers. 14-16. It was there, therefore, that He continued the preaching
of John, ver. 17.--<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#922;&#945;&#8054; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#955;&#953;&#960;&#8060;&#957; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#925;&#945;&#950;&#945;&#961;&#8050;&#964;</span>--it
is said in ver. 13--<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#955;&#952;&#8060;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#8180;&#954;&#951;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#922;&#945;&#960;&#949;&#961;&#957;&#945;&#959;&#8058;&#956;
&#964;&#8052;&#957; &#960;&#945;&#961;&#945;&#952;&#945;&#955;&#945;&#963;&#963;&#943;&#945;&#957;, &#7952;&#957; &#8001;&#961;&#943;&#959;&#953;&#962; &#918;&#945;&#946;&#959;&#965;&#955;&#8060;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#925;&#949;&#966;&#952;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#943;&#956;.</span> Christ had hitherto
had His settled abode at Nazareth, and thence undertook His wanderings. The immediate
reason why He did not remain there is not stated by Matthew; but we learn it from
Luke and John. In accordance with his object, Matthew takes cognizance of this one
circumstance only, that, according to the prophecy of the Old Testament, Capernaum
was very specially fitted for being the residence of Christ. The town was situated
on the western shore of the Lake of Gennesareth. Quite in opposition to his custom
elsewhere, Matthew describes the situation of the town 80 minutely, because this
knowledge served to afford a better insight into the fulfilment of the prophecy
of the Old Testament. The designation <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#8052;&#957; &#960;&#945;&#961;&#945;&#952;&#945;&#955;&#945;&#963;&#963;&#943;&#945;&#957;</span>
stands in reference to <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001;&#948;&#8056;&#957; &#952;&#945;&#955;&#940;&#963;&#963;&#951;&#962;</span>, in ver.
15. <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7960;&#957; &#8001;&#961;&#943;&#959;&#953;&#962;</span>, &amp;c., may either mean: &quot;In the
borders of Zebulun and Naphtali,&quot; <i>i. e.</i> in that place where
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 79]</span> the borders of both the countries meet,--or
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#8048; &#8005;&#961;&#953;&#945;</span> may, according to the analogy of the
Hebrew <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1489;&#1493;&#1500;&#1497;&#1501;</span>, denote the borders in the sense
of &quot;territory,&quot; as in Matt. ii. 16. From a comparison of
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#947;&#8134; &#918;&#945;&#946;&#959;&#965;&#955;&#8060;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#925;&#949;&#966;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#8055;&#956;</span> of the prophecy in
ver. 15, to which the words stand in direct reference, it follows that the latter
view is the correct one. Whether Capernaum lay just on the borders between the two
countries was of no consequence to the prophecy, and hence was of none to Matthew.--The
phrase <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7989;&#957;&#945; &#960;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#969;&#952;&#8135;</span> does not, according to the
very sound remark of <i>De Wette</i>, point to the intention, but to the objective
aim. The question, however, is to what the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7989;&#957;&#945; &#960;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#969;&#952;&#8134;</span>
is to be referred,--whether merely to that which immediately precedes, viz., the
change of residence from Nazareth to Capernaum, or, at the same time to
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#957;&#949;&#967;&#8061;&#961;&#951;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#957; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#915;&#945;&#955;&#953;&#955;&#945;&#8055;&#945;&#957;</span>. The latter is
alone correct. The prophecy which the Evangelist has in view referred mainly to
Galilee, or the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali in general; but, according to
the express remark of the Evangelist, Nazareth itself was likewise situated in Galilee.
The advantage which Capernaum had over it was this only, that in Capernaum the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001;&#948;&#8056;&#957; &#952;&#945;&#955;&#940;&#963;&#963;&#951;&#962;</span> of the prophecy was found again,
and that, therefore, thence the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#8051;&#961;&#945;&#957; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7992;&#959;&#961;&#948;&#8049;&#957;&#959;&#965;</span>
of the prophecy also could be better realized, inasmuch as across the lake there
was an easy communication from that place with the country beyond Jordan. The connection
is hence this: After the imprisonment of the Baptist, Jesus, in order to enter upon
His ministry, went to Galilee, and especially to Capernaum, which was situated on
the lake, in order that thus the prophecy of Isaiah as to the glorification of Galilee,
and of the region on the lake, might be fulfilled.--Matthew has abridged the passage.
From chap. viii. 23 (ix. 1) he has taken the designation of the part of the country,
in order that the agreement of fulfilment and prophecy might become visible. The
words from <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#947;&#8134;--&#964;&#8182;&#957; &#7952;&#952;&#957;&#8182;&#957;</span> may either be regarded
as a fragment taken out of its connection, so that they are viewed as a quotation,
and as forming a period by themselves (this, from a comparison of the original,
seems most natural);--or we may also suppose, that the Evangelist, having broken-up
the connection with the preceding, puts these words into a new connection, so that,
along with the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001; &#955;&#945;&#8057;&#962;</span>, which has become an
apposition, they form <span class="pagenum">[Pg 80]</span> the subject of the following
sentence. At all events, <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001;&#948;&#8057;&#957;</span> takes here the
place of the adverb, although it may not be possible to adduce instances and proofs
altogether analogous from the Greek <i>usus loquendi</i>.--The confidence with which
Matthew explains chap. viii. 23, and ix. 1 of Christ can be accounted for only from
the circumstance that he recognized Christ as He who in chap. ix. 5, 6, (6, 7) is
described as the author of all the blessings designated in the preceding verses.
It was therefore altogether erroneous in <i>Gesenius</i> to assert that there was
the less reason for holding the Messianic explanation of chap. ix. 5, 6, as there
was no testimony of the New Testament in favour of it.--It is quite obvious that
Matthew does not quote the Old Testament prophecy in reference to any single special
event which happened at Capernaum; but that rather the whole following account of
the glorious deeds of Christ in Galilee, as well as in Peraea, down to chap. xix.
1, serves to mark the fulfilment of this Old Testament prophecy, and is subservient
to this quotation. <i>This passage of Matthew explains the reason, why it is that
he, and Luke and Mark who closely follow him, report henceforth, until the last
journey of Jesus to Jerusalem, exclusively facts which happened in Galilee, and
in Peraea, which likewise was mentioned by Isaiah.</i> The circumstance that this
fact, which is so obvious, was not perceived, has called forth a number of miserable
conjectures, and has even led some interpreters to assail the credibility of the
Gospel. To Matthew, who wished to show that Jesus was the Christ, the Messiah promised
in the Old Testament, the interest must, in the view of the prophecy under consideration,
be necessarily concentrated upon Galilee; and Mark and Luke followed him in this,
perceiving that it was not becoming to them to open up a path altogether new. This
was reserved to the second Apostle from among the Evangelists.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 2 (3). &quot;<i>Thou multipliest the nation to which thou didst
not increase the joy; they joy before thee like the joy in harvest, and as they
rejoice when they divide the spoil.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The Prophet beholds the joy of the Messianic time as present;
he beholds the covenant-people numerous, free from all misery, and full of joy;
full of delight he turns to the Lord, and praises Him for what He has done to His
people.--One <span class="pagenum">[Pg 81]</span> of the privileges of the people
of God is the increase which at all times takes place after they are sifted and
thinned by judgments. Thus, <i>e.g.</i>, it happened at the time after their return
from the captivity, comp. Ps. cvii. 38, 39: &quot;And He blesseth them, and they are
multiplied greatly, and He suffereth not their cattle to decrease. They who were
minished and brought low through affliction, oppression, and sorrow.&quot; But this increase
took place most gloriously at the time of Christ, when a numerous multitude of adopted
sons from among the Gentiles were received into the Church of God, and thus the
promise to Abraham: &quot;I will make of thee a great nation&quot; (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1493;&#1497;</span>
as in the passage before us, and not <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;</span>),
received its final fulfilment. From the arguments which we advanced in Vol. i. on
Hosea ii. 1, it appears that the increase which the Church received by the reception
of the Gentiles is, according to the biblical view, to be considered as an increase
of the people of Israel. The fundamental thought of Ps. lxxxvii. is: Zion the birth-place
of the nations; by the new birth the Gentiles are received in Israel. The manner
in which the Gentiles show their anxiety to be received in Israel is described by
Isaiah in chap. xliv. 5. The commentary on the words: &quot;Thou multipliest the nation,&quot;
is furnished to us by chap. liv. 1 ff., where, in immediate connection with the
prophecy regarding the Servant of God who bears the sin of the world, it is said:
&quot;Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear, break forth into singing, and shout 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.&quot; Comp. also chap. lxvi. 7-9, and
Ezek. xxxvii. 25, 26: &quot;And my servant David shall be their prince for ever. And
I make a covenant with them and multiply them.&quot; Several interpreters, <i>e. g.</i>
<i>Calvin</i>, <i>Vitringa</i>, suppose that the Prophet in this verse (and so likewise
in the two following verses) speaks, in the first instance, of a nearer prosperity,
of the rapid increase of the people after the Babylonish captivity. <i>Vitringa</i>
directs attention to the fact, that the Jewish people after the captivity did not
only fill Judea, but spread also in Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, Greece,
and Italy. And surely we cannot deny that in this increase, no less than in the
new flourishing of the people after the defeat of Sennacherib also, there is a
<i>prelude</i> to the real fulfilment; <span class="pagenum">[Pg 82]</span> and
that so much the more that these precursory increases, happening, as they did, regularly
after the decreases, were bestowed upon the covenant-people with a view to the future
appearance of Christ. These increases enter into a still closer relation to the
prophecy under consideration, if we keep in mind that in chap. vii. the Prophet
anticipates in spirit the appearance of Christ, and that it is with this representation
that, in the Section before us, chap. viii. 8, 10 are connected. In order to refute
the explanation of <i>Umbriet</i>: &quot;Thou hast multiplied the <i>heathen</i>, and
thereby thou hast removed all joy; but now,&quot; &amp;c., it will be quite sufficient to
refer to the parallel passage, chap. xxvi. 15: &quot;Thou increasest the <i>people</i>,
O Lord, thou art glorified, thou removest all the boundaries of the land,&quot; where,
just as in the verse before us, by <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1490;&#1493;&#1497;</span> &quot;the
people,&quot; Israel is designated; and that is frequently the case where the notion
of the multitude, the mass only is concerned, comp. Gen. xii. 2.--&quot;<i>Thou didst
not increase the joy</i>&quot; stands for: to whom thou formerly didst not increase the
joy, to whom thou gavest but little joy, upon whom thou inflictedst severe sufferings.
The antithesis is quite the same as in chap. viii. 23 (ix. 1), where the former
distress is contrasted with the light which is now to shine upon them, the former
disgrace with the later glory; and in the same manner in chap. ix. 1 (2), where
the present <i>light</i> is rendered brighter by being contrasted with the former
<i>darkness</i>. The contrast of the present <i>increase</i> with the former absence
of joys shows that the joy is to be viewed as being connected with the increase,
and that if formerly the joy was less, the reason of it was chiefly in the <i>decrease</i>.
Ps. cvii. 38, 39, 41, shews how affliction and decrease, joy and increase, go hand
in hand; farther, Jerem. xxx. 19: &quot;And out of them proceed thanksgivings, and the
voice of the merry ones; and I multiply them, and they do not decrease; and I honour
them, and they are not small.&quot; The decrease is a single symptom only of a depressed,
joyless condition, which everywhere in the kingdom of God shall be brought to an
end by Christ. Most of the ancient translators (LXX., Chald., Syr.) follow the marginal
reading <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1493;</span>, &quot;<i>to him</i>&quot; hast thou increased
the joy. According to many modern interpreters, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488;</span>
is supposed to be a different mode of writing for <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1500;&#1493;</span>. But no <i>proof</i> that could stand the test can be brought forward
for <span class="pagenum">[Pg 83]</span> such a mode of writing; nor is there any
reason for supposing that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488;</span> stands here in
a different sense from what it does in chap. viii. 23, and it would indeed be strange
that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1493;</span> should have been placed before the
verb. At most, it might be supposed that the Prophet intended an ambiguous and double
sense: <sup>not</sup>/<sub>to him</sub> didst thou increase the joy. But altogether
apart from such an ambiguous and double sense, behind the negative, at all events,
the positive is concealed; thou multipliest the people, and increasest to them the
joy, thou who formerly didst decrease their joy, &amp;c.; and it is to this positive
that the words refer which, in Luke ii. 10, the angels address to the shepherds:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#8052; &#966;&#959;&#946;&#949;&#8150;&#963;&#952;&#949;, &#7984;&#948;&#959;&#8058; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#949;&#8016;&#945;&#947;&#947;&#949;&#955;&#943;&#950;&#959;&#956;&#945;&#953; &#8017;&#956;&#8150;&#957; &#967;&#945;&#961;&#8048;&#957; &#956;&#949;&#947;&#940;&#955;&#951;&#957;
&#7973;&#964;&#953;&#962; &#7956;&#963;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#960;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#8054; &#964;&#8183; &#955;&#945;&#8183; &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#7952;&#964;&#941;&#967;&#952;&#951; &#8017;&#956;&#8150;&#957; &#963;&#942;&#956;&#949;&#961;&#959;&#957; &#963;&#969;&#964;&#8052;&#961;, &#8005;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#953; &#935;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#922;&#973;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#962;</span>;
comp. Matth. ii. 10.--In the following words, the Prophet expresses, in the first
instance, the nature of the joy, then its greatness. The joy over the blessings
received is a joy <i>before God</i>, under a sense of His immediate presence. The
expression is borrowed from the sacrificial feasts in the courts before the sanctuary,
at which the partakers rejoiced <i>before the Lord</i>, Deut. xii. 7, 12, 18, xiv.
26. In Immanuel, God with his blessings and gifts has truly entered into the midst
of His people. With the joy at <i>the dividing of the spoil</i>, the joy is compared
only to show its greatness, just as with the joy <i>in the harvest</i>; and it is
in vain that Knobel tries here to bring in a dividing of spoil.</p>
<p class="normal">Vers. 3, (4). &quot;<i>For the yoke of his burden and the staff of
his neck, the rod of his driver thou hast broken as in the day of Midian.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">In this verse, the reason of the people&#39;s joy announced in the
preceding verse is stated: it is the deliverance from the world&#39;s power, under the
oppression of which they groaned, or, in point of fact, were to groan. He who imposes
the <i>yoke</i> and the <i>staff</i>, the <i>driver</i>, (an allusion to the Egyptian
taskmasters, masters, comp. Exod. iii. 7; v. 10), is Asshur, and the <i>whole</i>
world&#39;s power hostile to the Kingdom of God, which is represented by him, and which
by Christ was to receive, and has received, a mortal blow. A prelude to the fulfilment
took place by the defeat of Sennacherib under Hezekiah, comp. chap. x. 5, 24, 27;
xiv. 25. After him. Babel had to experience <span class="pagenum">[Pg 84]</span>
the destructive power of the Lord, the single phases of which, pervading, as they
do, all history, are here comprehended in one great act. Although the definitive
fulfilment begins first with the appearance of Christ in the flesh, who spoke to
His people: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#952;&#945;&#961;&#963;&#949;&#8150;&#964;&#949;, &#7952;&#947;&#8060; &#957;&#949;&#957;&#943;&#954;&#951;&#954;&#945; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#972;&#963;&#956;&#959;&#957;</span>,
yet after what we remarked on ver. 2, we are fully entitled to consider the former
catastrophes also of the kingdoms of the world as preludes to the real fulfilment.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1499;&#1501;</span>
&quot;shoulder&quot; does not suit as the <i>membrum cui verbera infliguntur</i>; it comes,
as is commonly the case, into consideration as that member with which burdens are
borne. The <i>staff</i> or tyranny is a heavy <i>burden</i>, comp. chap. x. 27:
&quot;His burden shall be taken away from off thy shoulder.&quot; &quot;<i>As in the day of Midian</i>&quot;
is equivalent to: as thou once didst break the yoke of Midian. This event was especially
fitted to serve as a type of the glorious future victory over the world&#39;s power,
partly because the oppression by Midian was very hard,--according to Judges vii.
12, Midian, Amalek, and the sons of the East broke in upon the land like grasshoppers
for multitude, and their camels were without number, as the sand by the seaside
for multitude--partly because the help of the Lord (<i>thou</i> hast broken) was
at that time specially visible. &quot;I will be with thee,&quot; says the Lord to Gideon in
Judges vi. 16, &quot;and thou shalt smite the Midianites as one man;&quot; and Judges vii.
2: &quot;The people that are with thee are too many, as that I could give the Midianites
into their hands, lest Israel vaunt themselves against me, saying: Mine own hand
hath saved me.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Vers. 4, (5). &quot;<i>For every war-shoe put on with noise, and the
garment rolled in blood: it is for burning, food of fire.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">We have here the reason why the tyranny is broken: <i>for</i>
the enemies of the Kingdom of God shall entirely and for ever be rendered incapable
of carrying on warfare. If the noisy war-shoes, and their blood-stained garments
are to be burned, they themselves must, of course, have been previously destroyed.
But, if that be the case, then all war and tyranny are come to an end, &quot;for the
dead do not live, and the shades do not rise,&quot; chap. xxvi. 14. The parallel passages,
Ps. xlvi. 10, and Ezek. xxxix. 9, 10, do not permit us to doubt that the burning
of the war-shoes and of the bloody garments come into consideration here as a consequence
of the destruction of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 85]</span> the conquerors. Nor can
we, according to these passages, entertain, for a moment, the idea of <i>Meier</i>,
that those bloody garments belong to <i>Israel</i>.</p>
<p class="normal">Vers. 5 (6). &quot;<i>For unto us a child is horn, unto us a son is
given, and the government is upon his shoulders, and his name shall be called Wonder-Counsellor,
God-Hero, Ever-Father, Prince of Peace.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The Prophet had hitherto spoken only of the salvation which is
to spread from Galilee over the rest of the country; it is first here that its author,
in all His sublime glory, comes before him; and, having come to him, the prophecy
rises to exalted feelings of joy. In chap. vii. 14, the Prophet beholds the Saviour
as being already born; hence the Preterites <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1500;&#1491;</span>
and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1514;&#1503;</span>. If any one should imagine that from
the use of these Preterites he were entitled to infer that the subject of the prophecy
must, at that time, already have been born, he must also, on account of the Preterites
in vers. 1 (2) suppose that the announced salvation had at that time been already
bestowed upon Israel,--which no interpreter does. <i>Hitzig</i> correctly remarks:
&quot;Because He is still <i>future</i>, the Prophet in His first appearance, beholds
Him as a child, and as the son of another.&quot; <i>Whose</i> son He is we are not told;
but it is supposed to be already known. Ever since the revelation in 2 Sam. vii.,
the Messiah could be conceived of as the Son of David only; compare the words: &quot;Upon
the throne of David&quot; in vers. 6 (7), and chap. xi. 1, lv. 3. As the Son of God the
Saviour appears as early as in Ps. ii.; and it is to that Psalm that the &quot;God-Hero&quot;
alludes, and connects itself. Alluding to the passage before us, we read in John
iii. 16: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#8021;&#964;&#969; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#7968;&#947;&#940;&#960;&#951;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#8001; &#952;&#949;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#972;&#963;&#956;&#959;&#957;</span>
<!--see 1856 ed.-->(&quot;The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this,&quot;) vers. 6
[7], <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8037;&#963;&#964;&#949; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#965;&#7985;&#8056;&#957; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#956;&#959;&#957;&#959;&#947;&#949;&#957;&#8134; &#7956;&#948;&#969;&#954;&#949;&#957;</span>.--When
grown up, the Son has the government upon His shoulder. The Prophet contrasts Christ
with the <i>world&#39;s power</i>, which threatened destruction to the people of God.
This, then, refers to the <i>Kingly office</i> of Christ, and the state of glory.
Parallel is the declaration of Christ in Matt. xxviii. 18,
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#948;&#972;&#952;&#951; &#956;&#959;&#953; &#960;&#8118;&#963;&#945; &#7952;&#958;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#943;&#945;</span>. The Lord has also,
in John xviii. 37, confirmed the truth that He is <i>King</i>; and it is upon the
ground of His own declaration that Pilate designates Him upon the cross as a King.
Although His Kingdom is not of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 86]</span> this world,
John xviii. 36, it is, just for that very reason, so much the more all-governing.
The <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#8166;&#952;&#949;&#957;</span> in that passage is contrasted
with the words &quot;from heaven&quot; in Dan. ii., by which, in that passage, its absolute
superiority over all the kingdoms of the world, and its crushing power are declared
to be indissolubly connected.--&quot;<i>The shoulder</i>&quot; comes, here also, as in vers.
3 (4), chap. x. 27, into consideration in so far as on it we <i>bear</i>; comp.
Gen. xlix. 15; Ps. lxxxi. 7. The bearer of an office has it, as it were, on his
shoulders.--The Jewish interpreters, despairing of being able, with any appearance
of truth, to apply the following attributes to Hezekiah, insist that, with the exception
of the last, they denote Him who calls, not Him who is called: the Wonderful, &amp;c.,
called him Prince of peace. Altogether apart from the consideration that this is
in opposition to the accents, the mentioning of so many names of Jehovah is here
quite unsuitable; and, in all other passages, the noun put after
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1502;&#1493; &#1511;&#1512;&#1488;</span><!--Biblos and 1856 ed have words in reverse of this-->
designates always him who is called. Modern Exegesis has tried everything with a
view to deprive the names of their deep meaning, in order to adapt them to a Messiah
in the ordinary Jewish sense, hence, to do that of which the Jews themselves had
already despaired. But, in doing so, they have considered the names too much by
themselves, overlooking the circumstance that the full and deeper meaning of the
individual attributes, as it at first sight presents itself, must, in the connection
in which they here occur, be so much the rather held fast. The names are completed
in the number <i>four</i>,--the mark of that which is complete and finished. <i>
They form two pairs, and every single name is again compounded of two names.</i>
The first name is <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1500;&#1488; &#1497;&#1493;&#1506;&#1509;</span>. That these two
words must be <i>connected</i> with one another (<i>Theodor.</i>--<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#952;&#945;&#965;&#956;&#945;&#963;&#964;&#8182;&#962;
&#946;&#959;&#965;&#955;&#949;&#8059;&#969;&#957;</span>) appears from the analogy of the other names, especially of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500; &#1490;&#1489;&#1468;&#1493;&#1512;</span> with whom
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1500;&#1488; &#1497;&#1493;&#1506;&#1509;</span> forms one pair; and then from the
circumstance that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1493;&#1506;&#1509;</span> alone would, in this
connection, be too indefinite. The words do not stand in the relation of the <i>
Status constructus</i>, but are connected in the same manner as
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1500;&#1488; &#1488;&#1491;&#1501;</span> in Gen. xvi. 12.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1493;&#1506;&#1509;</span> designates the attribute which is here
concerned, while <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1500;&#1488;</span> points out the supernatural,
superhuman degree in which the King possesses this attribute, and the infinite riches
of consolation and help which are to be found in such <span class="pagenum">[Pg
87]</span> a King. As a <i>Counsellor</i>, He is a <i>Wonder</i>, absolutely elevate
d above everything which the earth possesses in excellency of counselling. As
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1500;&#1488;</span> commonly denotes &quot;wonder&quot; in the strictest
sense (comp. chap. xxv. 1: &quot;I will exalt thee, I will praise thy name, for thou
hast done wonders,&quot; Ps. lxxvii. 15: &quot;Thou art the God that doest wonders;&quot; Exod.
xv. 11); as it here stands in parallelism with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;</span>
God; as the whole context demands that we should take the words in their full meaning;--we
can consider it only as an arbitrary weakening of the sense, that several interpreters
explain <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1500;&#1488; &#1497;&#1493;&#1506;&#1509;</span> &quot;extraordinary Counsellor.&quot;
Parallel is Judges xiii. 18 where the Angel of the Lord, after having announced
the birth of Samson, says: &quot;Why askest thou thus after my name?--it is wonderful,&quot;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1500;&#1488;&#1497;</span>, <i>i.e.</i>, my whole nature is wonderful,
of unfathomable depth, and cannot, therefore, be expressed by any human name. <i>
Farther</i>--Revel. xix. 12 is to be compared, where Christ has a name written that
no man knows but He himself, to intimate the immeasurable glory of His nature. That
which is here, in the first instance, said of a single attribute of the King, applies,
at the same time, to all others, holds true of His whole nature; the King is a Wonder
as a Counsellor, because His whole person is wonderful. A proof, both of the connection
of the two words, and against the weakening of the sense, is afforded by the parallel
passage, chap. xxviii. 29, where it is said of the Most High God
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1508;&#1500;&#1497;&#1488; &#1506;&#1510;&#1492;</span>, &quot;He shows himself wonderful in
His counsel.&quot;--The second name is <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500; &#1490;&#1489;&#1468;&#1493;&#1512;</span>
&quot;God-Hero.&quot; Besides the ability of giving good counsel, a good government requires
also <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1489;&#1493;&#1512;&#1492;</span> strength, heroic power: comp. chap.
xi. 2, according to which the spirit of counsel and strength rest upon the Messiah.
What may not be expected from a King who not only, like a David in a higher degree,
possesses the greatest <i>human measure</i> of heroic strength, but who is also
a <i>God-Hero</i>, and a <i>Hero-God</i>, so that with His appearance there <i>disappears</i>
completely the contrast of the invisible Head of the people of God, and of His visible
substitute,--a contrast which so often manifested itself, to the great grief of
the covenant-people? The God-Hero forms the contrast to a human hero whose heroic
might is, after all, always <i>limited</i>, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500; &#1490;&#1489;&#1493;&#1512;</span>
can signify God-Hero only, a Hero who is infinitely exalted above all human heroes
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 88]</span> by the circumstance that He is <i>God</i>.
To the attempts at weakening the import of the name, chap. x. 21, where
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500; &#1490;&#1489;&#1493;&#1512;</span> is said of the Most High, appears
a very inconvenient obstacle,--a parallel passage which does not occur by chance,
but where <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1488;&#1512; &#1497;&#1513;&#1493;&#1489;</span> stands with an intentional
reference to chap. vii.: &quot;The remnant shall return, the remnant of Jacob, unto the
Hero-God,&quot; who is furnished with invincible strength for His people; comp. Ps. xxiv.
8: &quot;The Lord strong and a hero, the Lord a hero of war.&quot; The older Rationalistic
exposition endeavoured to set aside the deity of the Messiah by the explanation:
&quot;strong hero.&quot; So also did <i>Gesenius</i>. This explanation, against which chap.
x. 21 should have warned, has been for ever set aside by the remark of <i>Hitzig</i>:
&quot;Commonly, in opposition to all the <i>usus loquendi</i>, the word is translated
by: <i>strong hero</i>. But <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;</span> is always,
even in passages such as Gen. xxxi. 29, &quot;God,&quot; and in all those passages which are
adduced to prove that it means &quot;<i>princeps</i>,&quot; &quot;<i>potens</i>,&quot; the forms are
to be derived not from <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;</span>, but from
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1497;&#1500;</span>, which properly means &#39;ram,&#39; then &#39;leader,&#39;
&#39;prince.&#39;&quot; By this explanation, especially the passage Ezek. xxxii. 21, which had
formerly been appealed to in support of the translation &quot;strong hero,&quot; is set aside;
for the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;&#1497; &#1490;&#1489;&#1468;&#1493;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501;</span> of that passage are &quot;rams
of heroes.&quot; Rationalistic interpreters now differ in their attempts at getting rid
of the troublesome fact. <i>Hitzig</i> says, &quot;Strong God&quot;--he erroneously views
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1489;&#1468;&#1493;&#1512;</span>, which always means &quot;hero,&quot; as an adjective--&quot;the
future deliverer is called by the oriental not strictly separating the Divine and
human, and He is called so by way of exaggeration, in so far as He possesses divine
qualities.&quot; A like opinion is expressed by <i>Knobel</i>: &quot;Strong God the Messiah
is called, because in the wars with the Gentiles He will prove himself as a hero
equipped with divine strength.&quot;<!--inserted uncertain quote--> The expression proves
a divine nature as little as when in Ps. lxxxii. 1-6, comp. John x. 34, 35, kings
are, in general, called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;&#1492;&#1497;&#1501;</span>, &quot;gods, <i>Like</i>
God, to be compared to Him, a worthy representative of Him, and hence, likewise,
called God.&quot; It is true that there is one <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500; &#1490;&#1489;&#1468;&#1493;&#1512;</span>
only, and that, according to chap. x. 21, the Messiah cannot be
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500; &#1490;&#1489;&#1468;&#1493;&#1512;</span> beside the Most High God, excepting
<i>by partaking in his nature</i>. Such a participation in the nature, not His being
merely filled with the power of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 89]</span> God, is absolutely
required to explain the expression. It is true that in the Law of Moses all those
who have to command or to judge, all those to whom, for some reason or other, respect
or reverence is due, are consecrated as the representatives of God on earth; <i>
e.g.</i>, a court of justice is of God, and he who appears before it appears before
God. But the name <i>Elohim</i> is there given <i>in general only to the judicial
court</i>, which represents God--to the <i>office</i>, not to the single individuals
who are invested with it. In Ps. lxxxii. 1, the name <i>Elohim</i> in the expression:
&quot;He judgeth among the gods&quot; is given to the single, judging individual; comp. also
ver. 6; but this passage forms an isolated exception. To explain, from it, the passage
before us is inadmissible, even from chap. x. 21, where
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500; &#1490;&#1489;&#1468;&#1493;&#1512;</span> stands in its fullest sense. It must
not be overlooked that that passage in Ps. lxxxii. belongs to higher poetry; that
the author himself there mitigates in ver. 6, in the parallel member, the strength
of the expression: &quot;I have said ye are <i>Elohim</i>, and sons of the Most High
ye all;&quot; and, finally, that there <i>Elohim</i> is used as the most vague and general
name of God, while here <i>El</i>, a personal name, is used. <i>Hendewerk</i>,
<i>Ewald</i>, and others, finally, explain &quot;<i>God&#39;s hero</i>,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, &quot;a
divine hero, who, like an invincible God, fights and conquers.&quot; But in opposition
to this view, it has been remarked by <i>Meier</i> that then necessarily the words
ought to run, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1489;&#1493;&#1512; &#1488;&#1500;</span>. It is farther obvious
that by this explanation the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1489;&#1493;&#1512; &#1488;&#1500;</span><!--Biblos has inverse word order-->
here is, in a manner not to be admitted, disconnected and severed from those passages
where it occurs as an attribute of the Most High God; comp. besides chap. x. 21;
Deut. x. 17; Jer. xxxii. 18.</p>
<p class="normal">The third name is <i>Father of eternity</i>. That admits of a
double explanation. Several interpreters refer to the Arabic <i>usus loquendi</i>,
according to which he is called the father of a thing who possesses it; <i>e.g.</i>,
Father of mercy, <i>i.e.</i>, the merciful one. This <i>usus loquendi</i>, according
to the supposition formerly very current, occurs in Hebrew very frequently, especially
in proper names, <i>e.g.</i>, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1496;&#1493;&#1489; &#1488;&#1489;&#1497;</span>. &quot;Father
of goodness,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, the good one. According to this view. Father of eternity
would be equivalent to Eternal one. According to the opinion of others. Father of
eternity is <i>he who will ever be a Father</i>, <i>an affectionate provider</i>,
comp. chap. xxii. 21, where Eliakim <span class="pagenum">[Pg 90]</span> is called
&quot;<i>Father</i> to the inhabitants of Jerusalem;&quot; Job xxix. 16; Ps. lxviii. 6. <i>
Luther</i>, too, thus explains: &quot;Who at all times feeds His Kingdom and Church,
in whom there is a fatherly love without end.&quot; The <i>latter</i> view is to be preferred
unconditionally. Against the former view is the circumstance that all the other
names stand in direct reference to the salvation of the covenant-people, while,
in the mere eternity, this reference would not distinctly enough appear. And it
has farther been rightly remarked by <i>Ewald</i>, that that <i>usus loquendi</i>
in Arabic always belongs to the artificial, often to jocular discourse. Whether
it occur in Hebrew at all is still a matter of controversy; <i>Ewald</i>, § 27,
denies that it occurs in proper names also. On the other hand, the paternal love,
the rich kindness and mercy, exceedingly well suit the first two names which indicate
unfathomable <i>wisdom</i>, and divine <i>heroic strength</i>. The rationalistic
interpreters labour very hard to <i>weaken</i> the idea of <i>eternity</i>. But
the &quot;Provider for life&quot;<!--inserted quote--> agrees very ill with the <i>Wonder-Counsellor</i>,
and the <i>God-hero</i>. The absolute eternity of the Messiah&#39;s dominion is, on
the foundation of 2 Sam. vii., most emphatically declared in other passages also
(comp. vol. i., p. 132, 133), and meets us here again immediately in the following
verse. The name Ever-Father, too, leads us to <i>divine Majesty</i>, comp. chap.
xlv. 17: &quot;Israel is saved by the Lord with an <i>everlasting</i> salvation; ye shall
not be ashamed nor confounded in all <i>eternity</i>&quot; chap. lvii. 15, where God
is called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1499;&#1503; &#1506;&#1491;</span> &quot;the ever dwelling;&quot; farther,
Ps. lxviii. 6: &quot;A <i>Father</i> of the fatherless, and a judge of the widows is
God in His holy habitation,&quot; where the providence of God for the <i>personae miserabiles</i>
is praised with a special reference to that which He does for His poor people.--<i>Hitzig&#39;s</i>
explanation: &quot;Father of prey,&quot; does not suit the prophetic style, and has, in general,
no analogy from Hebrew to adduce in its favour. The circumstance that, in the verse
immediately following, the eternity of the government is mentioned, shows that
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1491;</span> must be taken in its ordinary signification
&quot;eternity.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The fourth name, <i>Prince of peace</i>, stands purposely at the
end, and is to be considered as strongly emphatic. War, hostile oppression, the
distress of the servitude which threatens the people of God,--these are the things
which, in the first instance, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 91]</span> have directed
the Prophet&#39;s eye to the Messiah. The name points back to Solomon who typified Christ&#39;s
dominion of peace, and who himself, in the Song of Solomon, transfers his name to
Christ (comp. my Comment. S. 1 ff.); then to the Shiloh, Gen. xlix. 10 (comp. vol.
i, 84, 85). We should misunderstand the name were we to infer from it that, in the
Messianic time, all war should cease. Were such to be the case, why is it that,
immediately before, the Redeemer is designated as <i>God-Hero</i>? Peace is the
aim; it is offered to all the nations in Christ; but those who reject it, who rise
up against His Kingdom, He throws down, as the God-Hero, with a powerful hand, and
<i>obtains by force</i> peace for His people. But war, as far as it takes place,
is carried on in a form different from that which existed under the Old dispensation.
According to Micah v. 9 (10), ff., the Lord makes His people outwardly defenceless,
before they become in Christ world-conquering; comp. vol. i., p. 515. According
to chap. xi. 4, Christ smiteth the earth with the rod of His mouth, and with the
breath of His lips He slayeth the wicked.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 6 (7.) &quot;<i>To the increase of the government and to the peace,
there is no end, upon the throne of David and over his kingdom, so that he establisheth
it, and supporteth it by justice and righteousness, from henceforth even for ever.
The zeal of the Lord of Hosts shall perform this.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">There is no reason for connecting this verse with the preceding
one; in which case the sense would be: &quot;For the increase of government and for peace
without end.&quot; <i>For</i> chap. ii. 7; Nah. ii. 10; Job. xvi. 3--in which
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span> with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1509;</span>
occurs in the very same sense--clearly show that the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span> in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1513;&#1500;&#1493;&#1501;</span>
and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1502;&#1512;&#1489;&#1492;</span> may very well be understood as a
mere sign of the Dative. And the objection that the following
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1492;&#1499;&#1497;&#1503;</span>, &amp;c. would, in that case, be unsuitable,
is removed if it be explained: so that He establisheth, &amp;c., or: by His establishing,
&amp;c.; comp. <i>Ewald</i>, <i>Lehrbuch der Hebr. Sprache</i> § 280 d. The words designate
the basis on which the increase of government and the peace rest. The Kingdom of
God will, through the Redeemer, acquire an ever increasing <i>extent</i>, and, along
with it, perfect <i>peace</i> shall be enjoyed by the world. For it is not by rude
force that this kingdom is to be founded and established, as is the case with worldly
kingdoms, in which increase of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 92]</span> government and
peace, far from being always connected, are, on the contrary, irreconcilable opponents,
but by <i>justice</i> and <i>righteousness</i>. Parallel is Ps. lxvii. In vers.
11-15 of that Psalm, the Psalmist just points to that &quot;by which all nations and
kings are induced to do homage to that king; it is just that which, in the whole
Psalm, appears as the root of everything else, viz., the absolute justice of the
king.&quot; <i>Decrease</i> of government and <i>war</i> without end were, meanwhile,
in prospect, and they were so, because those who were sitting on the throne of David
did not support his kingdom by justice and righteousness. But the Psalmist intimates
to the trembling minds that such is not the end of the ways of God with His people;
that at last the idea of the Kingdom of God will be realized. From the fundamental
passage, Ps. lxxii. 8-11, and parallel passages, such as chap. ii. 2, 4; Mic. v.
3 (4); Zech. ix. 10, it is obvious that, as regards the endless increase of the
government, the Prophet thinks of all the nations of the earth. On the <i>peace</i>
without end, comp. Ps. lxxii. 7; chap. ii. 4; Mic. v. 4 (5), and the words: &quot;He
speaketh peace unto the heathen,&quot; Zech. ix. 10. The
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span> designates the substratum on which the increase
of dominion and the peace manifest themselves; the dominion of the Davidic family
and its kingdom gain infinitely in extent, and in the same degree peace also increases.
In these words the Prophet gives an intimation that the Messiah will proceed from
David&#39;s family, comp. chap. xi. 1 where he designates Him as the twig of Jesse.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1499;&#1497;&#1503;</span>
&quot;to confirm,&quot; &quot;to establish,&quot; used of throne and kingdom, 1 Sam. xiii. 13, comp.
14; 1 Kings ii. 12, comp. ver. 24, and farther, chap. xvi. 5.--The words: &quot;from
henceforth even for ever&quot; do not, as <i>Umbreit</i> supposes, refer to every thing
in this verse, but to the words immediately preceding. That the words must be understood
in their full sense, we have already proved in our remarks on the fundamental passage,
2 Sam. vii. 13: &quot;And I will establish the throne of His kingdom for ever;&quot; see Vol.
i. p. 131. <i>Michaelis</i> says: &quot;So that that promise to David shall never fail.&quot;
The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1514;&#1492;</span> does not refer to the <i>actual</i>,
but to the <i>ideal</i> present, to the first appearance of the Redeemer, to the
words: &quot;Unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given, and the government is upon
His shoulder.&quot;--This great change is brought about <span class="pagenum">[Pg 93]</span>
by the <i>zeal</i> of the Lord who raises this glorious King to His people; comp.
John iii. 16. The zeal in itself is only <i>energy</i>; the sphere of its exercise
is, in every instance, determined by the context. In Exod. xv. 5; Deut. iv. 24;
Nah. i. 2, the zeal is the energy of wrath. In the passage before us, as in the
Song of Solomon viii. 6, and in chap. xxxvii. 32: &quot;For out of Jerusalem shall go
forth a remnant, and escaped ones out of Mount Zion; the zeal of the Lord of hosts
shall do this,&quot; the zeal of God means the energetic character of His love to Zion.</p>
<p class="normal">We must, in conclusion, still make a few remarks, on the interpretation
of vers. 5 and 6. The older interpreters were unanimous in referring these verses
to the Messiah. Even by the Jews, this explanation was abandoned at a subsequent
period only. To the Messiah this passage is referred by the Chaldean Paraphrast,
by the Commentary on Genesis known by the name <i>Breshith Rabbah</i> in the exposition
of Genesis xli. 44 (see <i>Raim. Martini Pugio fidei</i>, Vol. iii. sec. 3, chap.
xiv. § 6), by Rabbi <i>Jose Galilaeus</i> in the book <i>Ekha Rabbati</i>, a Commentary
on Lamentations (see <i>Raim. Matt.</i> iii. 3 chap. 4, § 13). <i>Ben Sira</i> (fol.
40 ed., Amstel. 1679), mentions among the eight names of the Messiah, the following
from the passage before us: Wonderful, Counsellor, El Gibbor, Prince of Peace. But
the late Jewish interpreters found it objectionable that the Messiah, in opposition
to their doctrinal views, was here described as God; for doctrinal reasons, therefore,
they gave up the received interpretation, and sought to adapt the passage to Hezekiah.
Among these, however, <i>Rabbi Lipmann</i> allows the Messianic explanation to a
certain degree to remain. Acknowledging that the prophecy could not refer exclusively
to Hezekiah, he extends it to all the successors from the House of David, including
the Messiah, by whom it is to attain its most perfect fulfilment. Among Christian
interpreters, <i>Grotius</i> was the first to abandon the Messianic explanation.
Even <i>Clericus</i> acknowledges that the predicates are applicable to Hezekiah
&quot;<i>sensu admodum diluto</i>&quot; only. At the time when Rationalism had the ascendancy,
it became pretty current to explain them of Hezekiah. <i>Gesenius</i> modified this
view by supposing that the Prophet had connected his Messianic wishes and expectations
with Hezekiah, and <span class="pagenum">[Pg 94]</span> expected their realization
by him. At present this view is nearly abandoned; after <i>Gesenius</i>, <i>Hendewerk</i>
is the only one who still endeavours to defend it.</p>
<p class="normal">Against the application to Hezekiah even this single argument
is decisive, that a glory is here spoken of, which is to be bestowed especially
upon Galilee which belonged to the kingdom of the ten tribes. <i>Farther</i>--Although
the prophecy be considered as a human foreboding only, how could the Prophet, to
whom, everywhere else such a sharp eye is ascribed, that, from it, they endeavour
to explain his fulfilled prophecies,--how could the Prophet have expected that Hezekiah,
who was at that time a boy of about nine years of age, and who appeared under such
unfavourable circumstances, should realize the hopes which he here utters in reference
to the world&#39;s power, should conquer that power definitively and for ever, should
infinitely extend his kingdom, and establish an everlasting dominion? How could
he have ascribed divine attributes to Hezekiah who, in his human weakness, stood
before him? <i>Finally</i>--The undeniable agreement of the prophecy before us with
other Messianic passages, especially with Ps. lxxii. and Is. xi., where even <i>
Gesenius</i> did not venture to maintain the reference to Hezekiah, is decidedly
in opposition to the reference to Hezekiah.</p>
<h3><a name="div2_94" href="#div2Ref_94">THE TWIG OF JESSE.</a></h3>
<p class="center">(Chap. xi., xii.)</p>
<p class="normal">These chapters constitute part of a larger whole which begins
with chap. x. 5. With regard to the time of the composition of this discourse, it
appears, from chap. x. 9-11, that Samaria was already conquered. The prophecy, therefore,
cannot be prior to the sixth year of Hezekiah. On the other hand, the defeat of
the Assyrian host, which, under Sennacherib, invaded Judah, is announced as being
still future. The prophecy, accordingly, falls into the period between the 6th and
the 14th year of Hezekiah&#39;s reign. From the circumstance that in it
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 95]</span> the king of Asshur is represented as being
about to march against Jerusalem, it is commonly inferred that it was uttered shortly
before the destruction of the Assyrian host, and hence, belongs to the fourteenth
year of Hezekiah. But this ground is not very safe. It would certainly be overlooking
the liveliness with which the prophets beheld and represented future things as present;
it would be confounding the <i>ideal</i> Present with the <i>actual</i>, if we were
to infer from vers. 28-32 that the Assyrian army must already have reached the single
stations mentioned there. The utmost that we are entitled to infer from this liveliness
of description is, that the Assyrian army was already on its march; but not even
that can be inferred with certainty. In favour of the immediate nearness of the
danger, however, is the circumstance that, in the prophecy, the threatening is kept
so much in the background; that, from the outset, it is comforting and encouraging,
and begins at once with the announcement of Asshur&#39;s destruction, and Judah&#39;s deliverance.
This seems to suggest that the place which, everywhere else, is occupied by the
threatening, was here taken by the events themselves; so that of the two enemies
of salvation, proud security and despair, the latter only was here to be met. The
prophecy before us opens the whole series of the prophecies out of the 14th year
of Hezekiah, the most remarkable year of the Prophet&#39;s life, rich in the revelations
of divine glory, in which his prophecy flowed in full streams, and spread on all
sides.</p>
<p class="normal">The prophecy divides itself into two parts. The first, chap. x.
5-34, contains the threatening against Asshur, who was just preparing to inflict
the deadly blow upon the people of God. The fact that in chap. xi. we have not an
absolutely new beginning before us, sufficiently appears from the general analogy,
according to which, as a rule, the Messianic prophecy does not <i>begin</i> the
prophetical discourse; but still more clearly from the circumstance that chap. xi.
begins with &quot;and;&quot; to which argument may still be added the fact that the figure
in the first verse of this chapter evidently refers to the figure in the last verse
of the preceding chapter. Asshur had there been represented as a stately forest
which was to be cut down by the hand of the Lord; while here the house of David
appears as a stem cut down, from the roots of which a small twig shall
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 96]</span> come forth, which, although unassuming at first,
is to grow up into a fruit-bearing tree. The purpose of the whole discourse was
to strengthen and comfort believers on the occasion of Asshur&#39;s inroad into the
country; to bring it home to the convictions of those who were despairing of the
Kingdom of God, that He who is in the midst of them is greater than the world with
all its apparent power; and thereby to awaken and arouse them to resign themselves
entirely into the hands of their God. It is for this purpose that the Prophet first
describes the catastrophe of Asshur; that, then, in chap. xi., he points to the
highest glorification which in future is destined for the Church of God by the appearance
of Christ, in order that she may the more clearly perceive that every fear regarding
her existence is folly.</p>
<p class="normal">The connection of the two passages appears so much the more plainly
when we consider, that that which, in chap. x., was said of Asshur, and especially
the close in vers. 33 and 34: &quot;Behold Jehovah of hosts cuts down the branches with
power, and those of a high stature shall be hewn down, and the high ones shall be
made low. And He cuts down the thickets of the forest with the iron, and Lebanon
shall fall by the glorious one,&quot;<!--see 1856 ed.--> <i>refers to him as the representative
of the whole world&#39;s power</i>; that the defeat of Sennacherib before Jerusalem
is to be considered as the nearest fulfilment only, but not as the <i>full</i> and
<i>real</i> fulfilment.</p>
<p class="normal">From the family of David sunk into total obscurity--such is the
substance--there shall, at some future period, rise a Ruler who, at first low and
without appearance, shall attain to great glory and bestow rich blessings,--a Ruler
furnished with the fulness of the Spirit of God and of His gifts, filled with the
fear of God, looking sharply and deeply, and not blinded by any appearance, just
and an helper of the oppressed, an almighty avenger of wickedness, ver. 1-5. By
him all the consequences of the fall, even down to the irrational creation, in the
world of men and of nature, shall be removed, ver. 6-9. Around Him the Gentiles,
formerly addicted to idols, shall gather, ver. 10. In ver. 11-16 the Prophet describes
what he is to do for Israel, to whom the discourse was in the first instance addressed,
and upon whom it was to impress the word: &quot;Fear not.&quot; Under Him they obtain deliverance
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 97]</span> from the condition of being scattered and exiled
from the face of the Lord, the removal of pernicious dissensions, conquering power
in relation to the world which assails them, and the removal of all obstacles to
salvation by the powerful arm of the Lord.</p>
<p class="normal">The reference of the prophecy to the Messiah is, among all the
explanations, the most ancient. We find it in the Targum of Jonathan, who thus renders
the first verse: <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1497;&#1508;&#1511; &#1502;&#1500;&#1499;&#1488; &#1502;&#1489;&#1504;&#1493;&#1492;&#1497; &#1491;&#1497;&#1513;&#1497; &#1493;&#1502;&#1513;&#1497;&#1495;&#1488; &#1502;&#1489;&#1504;&#1497;
&#1489;&#1504;&#1493;&#1492;&#1497; &#1497;&#1514;&#1512;&#1489;&#1497;</span>. St. Paul quotes this prophecy in Rom. xv. 12, and proves from
it the calling of the Gentiles. In 2 Thes. ii. 8 he quotes the words of ver. 4,
and assigns to Christ what is said in it. In Rev. v. 5, xxii. 16, Christ, with reference
to ver. 1 and 10, is called the root of David. The Messianic explanation was defended
by most of the older Jewish interpreters, especially by <i>Jarchi</i>, <i>Abarbanel</i>,
and <i>Kimchi</i>.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_97a" href="#ftn_97a">[1]</a></sup>
It is professed even by most of the rationalistic interpreters, by the modern ones
especially, without any exception (<i>Eichhorn</i>, <i>De Wette</i>, <i>Gesenius</i>,
<i>Hitzig</i>, <i>Maurer</i>, <i>Ewald</i>), although, it is true, they distinguish
between Jesus Christ and the Messiah of the Old Testament,--as, <i>e.g.</i>, <i>
Gesenius</i> has said: &quot;Features such as those in ver. 4 and 5 exclude any other
than the political Messiah, and King of the Israelitish state,&quot; and <i>Hitzig</i>:
&quot;A political Messiah whose attributes, especially those assigned to him ver. 3 and
4, are not applicable to Jesus.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">But the non-Messianic interpretation, too, has found its defenders.
According to a statement of Theodoret, the passage was referred by the Jews to Zerubbabel.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_97b" href="#ftn_97b">[2]</a></sup>
Interpreters more numerous and distinguished have referred it to Hezekiah. This
interpretation is mentioned as early as by <i>Ephraem Syrus</i>; among the Rabbis
it was held by <i>Moses Hakkohen</i>, and <i>Abenezra</i>; among Christian interpreters,
<i>Grotius</i> was the first who professed it, but in such a manner that he assumed
a higher reference to Christ. (&quot;The Prophet returns to praise Hezekiah in words
under which the higher praises of Christ are concealed.&quot;) He was followed by <i>
Dathe</i>. The exclusive reference to Hezekiah was maintained by <i>Hermann v. d.</i>
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 98]</span> <i>Hardt</i>, in a treatise published in 1695,
which, however, was confiscated; then, by a number of interpreters at the commencement
of the age of Rationalism, at the head of whom was <i>Bahrdt</i>. Among the expositors
of the last decade, this interpretation is held by <i>Hendewerk</i> alone.</p>
<p class="normal">The reasons for the Messianic interpretation, and against making
Hezekiah the subject of the prophecy, are, among others, the following:--</p>
<p class="normal">1. <i>The comparison of the parallel passages.</i> The Messiah
is here represented under the figure of a shoot or sprout. This has become so common,
as a designation of the Messiah, that the name &quot;Sprout&quot; has almost become a proper
name of the Messiah; compare the remarks on chap. iv. 2. A striking resemblance
to ver. 1 is presented by chap. lviii. 2, where the Messiah, to express His lowliness
at the beginning of His course, is, in the same manner as here, compared to a feeble
and tender twig. Ps. lxxii. and the prophecies in chap. ii., iv., vii., ix., and
Mic. v., present so many agreements and coincidences with the prophecy under consideration,
that they must necessarily be referred to one and the same subject. The reception
of the Gentile nations into the Kingdom of God, the holiness of its members, the
cessation of all hostilities, are features which constantly recur in the Messianic
prophecies.</p>
<p class="normal">2. There are features interwoven with the prophecy which lead
to a more than human dignity of its subject. Even this circumstance is of importance
here, that the <i>whole earth</i> appears as the sphere of His dominion. Still more
distinctly is the human sphere overstepped by the announcement that, under His government,
<i>sin</i>, yea, even all destruction in the outward nature is to cease, and the
earth is to return to the happy condition in which it was before the fall. According
to ver. 4, He slays the wicked in the whole earth by His mere word,--a thing which
elsewhere is said of <i>God</i> only; and according to ver. 10, the heathen shall
render Him religious reverence.</p>
<p class="normal">3. A <i>future</i> scion of David is here promised. For
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1497;&#1510;&#1488;</span> in ver. 1 must be taken as a <i>praeteritum
propheticum</i>, as is evident from its being connected with the preceding chapter,
which has to do with future things, and in which the preterites have a prophetic
meaning; as also by the analogy of the following preterites from which this can
by no means be separated. But <span class="pagenum">[Pg 99]</span> at the time when
this prophecy was composed, Hezekiah had long ago entered upon the government.</p>
<p class="normal">4. The circumstances under which the Prophet makes the King appear
are altogether different from those at the time of Hezekiah. According to ver. 1
and 10, the royal house of David would have entirely declined, and sunk into the
obscurity of private life, at the time when the Promised One would appear. The Messiah
is there represented as a tender twig which springs forth from the roots of a tree
cut down. In the circumstance, too, that the stem is not called after David, but
after Jesse, it is intimated that the royal family is then to have sunk back into
the obscurity of private life. This does not apply to Hezekiah, under whom the Davidic
dynasty maintained its dignity, but to Christ only. <i>Farther</i>: In ver. 11 there
is an announcement of the return of not only the members of the kingdom of the ten
tribes, but also of the members of the kingdom of Judah from all the countries in
which they were dispersed. This must refer to a far later time than that of Hezekiah;
for at his time no carrying away of the inhabitants of Judah had taken place. This
argument is conclusive also against the false modified Messianic explanation as
it has been advanced by <i>Ewald</i>, according to which the Prophet is supposed
to have expected that the Messiah would appear immediately after the judgment upon
the Assyrians, and after the conversion and reform of those in the Church who had
been spared in the judgment. The facts mentioned show that between the appearance
of the Messiah, and the Present and immediate Future, there lay to the Prophet still
a wide interval in which an entire change of the present state of things was to
take place. Ver. 11 is here of special importance. For this verse opens up to us
the prospect of a whole series of catastrophes to be inflicted upon Israel by the
world&#39;s powers, all of which are already to have taken place at the time of the
King&#39;s appearance, and which lay beyond the historical horizon at the time of the
Prophet.</p>
<p class="normal">A certain amount of truth, indeed, lies at the foundation of the
explanation which refers the prophecy to Hezekiah. The fundamental thought of the
prophecy before us: &quot;The exaltation of the world&#39;s power, is a prophecy of its abasement;
the abasement of the Davidic Kingdom is a prophecy of its exaltation,&quot;
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 100]</span> was, in a prelude, to be realized even at
that time. But the Prophet does not limit himself to these feeble beginnings. He
points to the infinitely greater realization of this idea in the distant future,
where the abasement should be much deeper, but the exaltation also infinitely higher.
To him who had first, by a living faith, laid hold of Christ&#39;s appearance, it must
be easy, even in the present difficulty, to hope for the lower salvation.</p>
<p class="normal">The distinction between the &quot;political Messiah&quot; of the prophecy
before us, and &quot;Jesus of Nazareth&quot;--a distinction got up by Rationalism--rests chiefly
upon the fact that Rationalism knows Christ as the <i>Son of Man</i> only, and is
entirely ignorant of His true eternal Kingdom. Hence a prophecy which, except the
intimation, in ver. 1, of His lowliness at first, refers altogether to the glorified
Christ, could not but appear as inapplicable. But it is just by ver. 4, to which
they chiefly appeal, that a &quot;political Messiah&quot; is excluded; for to such an one
the words: &quot;He smiteth the earth with the rod of His mouth, and with the breath
of His lips He slayeth the wicked&quot; do not in the least apply. And so likewise vers.
6-9 altogether go beyond the sphere of a political Messiah, All that at first sight
seems to lead to such an one belongs to the imagery which was, and could not fail
to be, taken from the predecessors and types on the throne of David, since Christ
was to be represented as He in whom the Davidic Kingdom attains to its full truth
and glory.</p>
<p class="normal">In the whole section, the Redeemer appears as a <i>King</i>. This
is altogether a matter of course, for He forms the antithesis to the king of Asshur.
It is quite in vain that <i>Umbreit</i> has endeavoured to bring political elements
into the description. Thereby the sense is essentially altered. We must keep closely
in view the Prophet&#39;s starting-point. Before those who were filled with cares and
fears, lest the Davidic Kingdom should be overturned by the Assyrian kingdom, he
holds up the bright image of the Kingdom of David, in its last completion. When
they had received that into their hearts, the king of Asshur could not fail to appear
to them in a light altogether different, as a miserable wretch. The giant at once
dwindled down into a contemptible dwarf, and with tears still
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 101]</span> in their eyes they could not avoid laughing
at themselves for having stood so much in awe of him.</p>
<p class="normal">As is commonly the case in the Messianic prophecies, so here,
too, no attention is paid to the development of Christ&#39;s Kingdom in time. Everything,
therefore, is fulfilled only as to its beginning; and the complete fulfilment still
stands out for that future in which, after the fulness of the Gentiles has been
brought in, and apostate Israel has been converted, the consequences of the fall
shall, in the outward nature also, be removed.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 1. &quot;<i>And there cometh forth a twig from the stump of Jesse,
and a branch from his roots shall bear fruit.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The circumstance that the words in the first verse are completed
in the number seven, divided into three and four, intimates that the Prophet here
enters upon the territory of the revelation of a mystery of the Kingdom of God.
Totally different--so the Prophet begins--from the fate of Asshur, just now proclaimed,
shall that of the royal house of David be. Asshur shall be humbled at a time when
he is most elevated. Lebanon falls through the mighty One: but the house of David
shall be exalted at a time when he is most humbled. Who then would tremble and be
afraid, although it go downward? <i>Luther</i> says: &quot;This is a short summary of
the whole of theology and of the works of God, that Christ did not come till the
trunk had died, and was altogether in a hopeless condition; that hence, when all
hope is gone, we are to believe that it is the time of salvation, and that God is
then nearest when He seems to be farthest off!&quot; The same contrast appears in Ezek.
xvii. 24. The Lord brings down the high tree of the world&#39;s power, and exalts the
low tree of the Davidic house. The word <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span>
does not mean &quot;stem&quot; in general, as several rationalistic interpreters, and <i>Meier</i>
last, have asserted, but rather stump, <i>truncus</i>,
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#959;&#961;&#956;&#8057;&#962;</span>, as <i>Aquila</i>, <i>Symmachus</i>,
<i>Theodotion</i>, translate. This is proved from the following reasons: (1) the
derivation from <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span>, in Arabic <i>secuit</i>,
equivalent to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1491;&#1506;</span>, &quot;to cut off,&quot; chap. ix.
9; x. 33. The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1491;&#1506;&#1497;&#1501;</span> in latter passage clearly
refers to the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span> here. The proud trees of
Asshur shall be <i>cut down</i>; from the cut down trunk of David there shall grow
up a <i>new</i> tree overshadowing the earth, and offering glorious fruits to them
that dwell on it.--(2) The <i>usus loquendi</i>. The signification, &quot;stump,&quot; is,
by <span class="pagenum">[Pg 102]</span> the context, required in the two passages
in which the word <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span> still occurs. In Job
xiv. 8, it is obvious. The whole passage there from vers. 7-9 illustrates the figurative
representation in the verse under review. &quot;For there is hope of a tree; if it be
<i>cut down</i> it will sprout again, and its tender branch does not cease. Though
the root thereof wax old in the earth, and the <i>stump</i> thereof die in the dust,
through the scent of waters it buds, and brings forth boughs, like one newly planted.&quot;
We have here the figure of our verse carried out. That which water is to the natural
tree decaying, the Spirit and grace of God are to the dying tree, cut down to the
very roots, of the Davidic family. In the second passage. Is. xl. 23, 24, it is
only by a false interpretation that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span> has
been understood of the stem in general. &quot;He bringeth princes to nothing, He destroyeth
the kings of the earth. They are not planted; they are not sown; their <i>stump</i>
does not take root in the earth.&quot; The Prophet, having previously proved God&#39;s elevation
over the creature, from the creation and preservation of the world, now proves it
from the nothingness of all that which on earth has the greatest appearance of independent
power. It costs Him no effort to destroy all earthly greatness which places itself
in opposition to Him. He blows on them, and they have disappeared without leaving
any trace. If God&#39;s will be not with it, princes will not attain to any firm footing
and prosperity (they are not planted and sown); they are like a cut-down stem which
has no more power to take root in the earth. A tree not planted dries up; corn not
sown does not produce fruit; a cut down tree does not take root.--(3.) The connection.
In the second member of the verse we read: &quot;A branch from his roots shall bear fruit.&quot;
Unless we mean to adopt the altogether unsuitable expedient of explaining it of
a wild twig which shoots forth from the roots of a still standing tree, we cannot
but think of a stem cut down to the very root. Against the opinion of <i>Hendewerk</i>
who remarks: &quot;An indirect shoot from the root which comes forth from the root through
the stem;&quot; and against <i>Meier&#39;s</i> opinion: &quot;The root corresponds with the stem,
and both together form the living tree,&quot; it is decisive, that in ver. 10, the Messiah
is simply, and without any mention being made of the stem, designated as
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1512;&#1513;</span> &quot;a shoot from the root.&quot; Farther, chap.
liii. 2, where the Messiah is represented <span class="pagenum">[Pg 103]</span>
as a shoot from the root out of a dry ground.--(4.) It is only when
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span> has the meaning, &quot;stump,&quot; that it can
be accounted for why the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span> of Jesse, and
not of David, is spoken of--(5.) The supposition that the Messiah shall be born
at the time of the deepest humiliation of the Davidic family, after the entire loss
of the royal dignity, pervades all the other prophetical writings. That Micah views
the Davidic family as entirely sunk at the time of Christ&#39;s appearance, we showed
in vol. I. p. 508-9. Compare farther the remarks on Amos ix. 11, and those on Matth.
ii. 23 immediately following.--<i>Hitzig</i> is obliged to confess that
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span> can designate the cut-off stem only; but
maintains that Jesse, as an individual long ago dead, is designated as a cut-off
tree. But against this opinion is the relation which, as we proved, exists between
this verse and the last verses of the preceding chapter; the undeniable correspondence
of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span> with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1490;&#1491;&#1506;&#1497;&#1501;</span> in chap. x. 33. In that case the antithesis also, so evidently intended
by the Prophet, would be altogether lost. It is not by any means a thing so uncommon,
that a man who is already dead should have a glorious descendant. To this it may
further be added that, according to this supposition, the circumstance is not all
accounted for, that Jesse is mentioned, and not David, the royal ancestor, as is
done everywhere else. <i>Finally</i>--In this very forced explanation, the parallel
passages are altogether left out of view, in which likewise the doctrine is contained
that, at the time of Christ&#39;s appearance, the Davidic family should have altogether
sunk. The reason of all these futile attempts at explaining away the sense so evident
and obvious, is none other than the fear of acknowledging in the prophecy an element
which goes beyond the territory of patriotic fancy and human knowledge. But this
dark fear should here so much the more be set aside, that, according to other passages
also, the Prophet undeniably had the knowledge and conviction that Israel&#39;s course
would be more and more downward before it attained, in Christ, to the full height
of its destiny. We need remind only of the prophecies in chap. v. and vi.; and it
is so much the more natural here to compare the latter of them, that, in it, in
ver. 13, Israel, at the time of the appearing of the Messianic Kingdom, is represented
as a felled tree,--a fact which has for its ground the sinking of the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 104]</span> Davidic race which is here announced. We farther
direct attention to the circumstance that in our prophecy itself, Israel&#39;s being
carried away into all the countries of the earth is foreseen as future,--a circumstance
which is so much the more analogous, that there also, as here, the foreknowledge
clothes itself in the form of the <i>supposition</i> and not of express announcement.
With regard to the latter point, it may still be remarked that Amos also, in chap.
ix. 11, by speaking of the raising up of the tabernacle of David which is fallen,
anticipates its future lowliness.--The question still arises:--Why is it that the
Messiah is here designated as a rod of Jesse, while elsewhere, His origin is commonly
traced back to David? <i>Umbreit</i> is of opinion that the mention of Jesse may
be explained from the Prophet&#39;s desire to trace the pedigree as far back as possible;
in its apparent extinction, the family of the Messiah was to be pointed out as a
<i>very old</i> one. But if this had been his intention, he would have gone back
beyond Jesse to the older ancestors whom the Book of Ruth mentions; and if he had
been so anxious to honour the family of the Messiah, it would, at all events, have
been far more suitable to mention David than Jesse, who was only one degree removed
from him. The sound view has been long ago given by Calvin, who says: &quot;The Prophet
does not mention David; but rather Jesse. For so much was the dignity of that family
diminished, that it seemed to be a rustic, ignoble family rather than a royal one.&quot;
It was appropriate that that family, upon whom was a second time to be fulfilled
the declaration in Ps. cxiii. 7, 8: &quot;He raiseth up the poor out of the dust; He
lifteth up the needy out of the dunghill, that He may set him with princes, with
the princes of His people,&quot;--in which, the second time, the transition should take
place from the low condition to the royal dignity, should not be mentioned according
to its royal, but according to its rustic character. This explanation of the fact
is confirmed by the circumstance that it agrees exceedingly well with the right
interpretation of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span>: Jesse is mentioned
and not David, because the Davidic dignity had become a
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span>. The mention of Jesse&#39;s name thus explained,
agrees, then, with the birth of Christ at Bethlehem, announced by Isaiah&#39;s cotemporary,
Micah. Christ was to be born at Bethlehem, because that residence was peculiar to
the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 105]</span> family of David during its lowliness;
comp. vol. I., p. 508-9.--The second hemistich of the verse may either be explained:
&quot;a twig from his roots shall bear fruit,&quot; or, as agrees better with the accents:
&quot;a twig shall from his roots bear fruit.&quot; The sense, at all events, is: A shoot
proceeding from his roots (<i>i.e.</i>, the cut-off stem of Jesse) shall grow up
into a stately fruitful tree; or: As a tree cut down throws out from its roots a
young shoot which, at first inconsiderable, grows up into a stately fruit-bearing
tree, so from the family buried in contempt and lowliness, a <i>King</i> shall arise
who, at first humble and unheeded,<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_105a" href="#ftn_105a">[3]</a></sup>
shall afterwards attain to great glory. Parallel is Ezek. xvii. 22-24. The Messiah
is there compared to a tender twig which is planted by the Lord on a high hill,
and sends forth branches and bears fruit, so that all the birds dwell in the shadow
of its branches.--It has now become current to explain: &quot;A branch breaks forth or
sprouts;&quot; but that explanation is against the <i>usus loquendi</i>.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1512;&#1492;</span> is never equivalent to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1512;&#1495;</span> &quot;to break forth;&quot; it has only the signification
&quot;to bear,&quot; &quot;to bear fruit,&quot; &quot;to be fruitful.&quot; <i>Gesenius</i> who, in the later
editions of his translation, here explains <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1512;&#1492;</span>
by, &quot;to break forth,&quot; knows, in the <i>Thesaurus</i>, of no other signification.
In the passage of Ezekiel referred to, which may be considered as a commentary on
the verse before us, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1492; &#1508;&#1512;&#1497;</span> corresponds to
the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1508;&#1512;&#1492;</span> here. The change of the tense, too,
suggests that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1508;&#1512;&#1492;</span> does not contain a mere
repetition, but a progress. This progress is necessary for the sense of the whole
verse. For it cannot be the point in question that, in general, a shoot comes forth;
but the point is that this shoot shall attain to importance and glory.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1508;&#1512;&#1492;</span> comprehends and expresses in one word
that which, in the subsequent verses of the section, is carried out in detail. First,
there is the bestowal of the Spirit of the Lord whereby He is enabled to bear fruit;
then, the fruit-bearing itself.</p>
<p class="normal">We here subjoin the discussion of the New Testament passage which
refers to this verse.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_97a" href="#ftnRef_97a"><sup class="ftnRef">
	[1]</sup></a> Their testimony is collected by <i>Seb. Edzardi</i> in the treatise:
	<i>Cap. xi. Esaiae Christo vindicatum adversus Grotium et sectatores ejus, imprimos
	Herm. v. d. Hardt.</i> Hamburg 1696.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_97b" href="#ftnRef_97b"><sup class="ftnRef">
	[2]</sup></a> &quot;The madness of the Jews is indeed to be lamented who refer this
	prophecy to Zerubbabel.&quot;</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_105a" href="#ftnRef_105a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[3]</sup></a> Although <i>Umbreit</i> denies it, yet this
	is implied in the designation of the Messiah as a shoot from the roots. Moreover,
	the lowliness of the Messiah himself at His appearance is a necessary consequence
	of the lowliness of His family; and it is a bad middle course to acknowledge
	the latter and deny the former. To this may, moreover, be added the parallel
	passage Is. liii. 2.]</p>
</div>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 106]</span></p>
<h3><a name="div2_106" href="#div2Ref_106">ON MATTHEW II. 23.</a></h3>
<p class="normal"><span lang="el" class="Greek">&#922;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#955;&#952;&#8060;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#8180;&#954;&#951;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#960;&#972;&#955;&#953;&#957; &#955;&#949;&#947;&#959;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#951;&#957;
&#925;&#945;&#950;&#945;&#961;&#941;&#964;· &#8005;&#960;&#969;&#962; &#960;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#969;&#952;&#8135; &#964;&#8056; &#8165;&#951;&#952;&#8050;&#957; &#948;&#953;&#8048; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#966;&#951;&#964;&#8182;&#957;, &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#925;&#945;&#950;&#969;&#961;&#945;&#8150;&#959;&#962; &#954;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;.</span></p>
<p class="normal">We here premise an investigation as regards the name of the town
of Nazareth. Since that name occurs in the New Testament only, different views might
arise as to its orthography and etymology. One view is this: The name was properly
and originally <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span>. Being the name of a town,
it received, in Aramean, in addition, the feminine termination
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;</span>. And, finally, on account of the original
appellative signification of the word, a <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;</span>,
the designation of the <i>status emphaticus</i> of feminine nouns in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;</span>, was sometimes added. We have an analogous
case in the name <i>Dalmanutha</i>, the same place which, with the Talmudist, is
called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1463;&#1500;&#1456;&#1502;&#1493;&#1465;&#1503;</span>. Compare <i>Lightfoot decas
chorog. Marc. praem., opp.</i> II., p. 411 sqq. So it is likewise probably that
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#947;&#945;&#946;&#946;&#945;&#952;&#8048;</span>, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1463;&#1489;&#1456;&#1514;&#1464;&#1488;</span>
is formed from the masculine <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1463;&#1489;</span>, <i>dorsum</i>.
Our view is that the original name was <i>Nezer</i>, that this form of the name
was in use along with that which received a <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;</span>
added, and that this <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;</span> served for the designation
of the <i>status emphaticus</i> only; or also, if we wish to take our stand upon
the Hebrew form, was a mere hardening of the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;</span>
Femin. (either of which suppositions is equally suitable for our purpose); and this
our view we prove by the following arguments: 1. The testimonies of the Jews. <i>
David de Pomis</i> (in <i>De Dieu</i>, <i>critic. sacr.</i> on M. II. 23) says:
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;&#1497; &#1502;&#1497; &#1513;&#1504;&#1493;&#1500;&#1491; &#1489;&#1506;&#1497;&#1512; &#1504;&#1461;&#1510;&#1464;&#1512; &#1492;&#1490;&#1500;&#1497;&#1500; &#1512;&#1495;&#1493;&#1511; &#1502;&#1497;&#1512;&#1493;&#1513;&#1500;&#1497;&#1501; &#1491;&#1512;&#1498;
&#1513;&#1500;&#1513;&#1514; &#1497;&#1502;&#1497;&#1501;</span> &quot;A Nazarene is he who is born in the town of <i>Nezer</i>, in Galilee,
three days&#39; journey from Jerusalem.&quot; In the Talmud, in <i>Breshith Rabba</i>, and
in <i>Jalkut Shimeoni</i> on Daniel, the contemptuous name of <i>Ben Nezer</i>,
<i>i.e.</i>, the Nazarene, is given to Christ; compare the passages in <i>Buxtorf</i>,
<i>lex. c.</i> 1383; in <i>Lightfoot</i>, <i>disquis. chorog. Johan. praem. opp.</i>
II., 578 sqq.; <i>Eisenmenger</i>, I., p. 3139. It is true, <i>Gieseler</i> (on
Matth. ii. 23, and in the <i>Studien u. Kritiken</i>, 1831, III. S. 591) has tried
to give a different interpretation to this appellation. He is of opinion that this
appellation has reference to Is. xi. 1; that it had come to the Jews from the Christians,
who called <span class="pagenum">[Pg 107]</span> their Messiah
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1503; &#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span>, because He was He who had been promised
by Isaiah. But this supposition is correct thus far only, that, no doubt, this appellation
was chosen by the Jews with a reference to the circumstance that the Christians
maintained that Jesus was the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span> announced
by Isaiah, just as, for the very same reason, they also assign to Him the names
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512; &#1504;&#1488;&#1508;&#1493;&#1507;</span> &quot;adulterous branch,&quot; and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512; &#1504;&#1514;&#1506;&#1489;</span> &quot;abominable branch&quot; (from Is. xiv.
19); comp. <i>Eisenmenger</i> I. S. 137, 138. But <i>Gieseler</i> is wrong in deriving,
from this reference to Is. xi. 1, the origin of the appellation, be it properly
or mainly only. Against that even the very appellation is decisive, for in that
case it ought to have been <i>Nezer</i> only, and not <i>Ben-Nezer</i>. <i>Gieseler</i>,
it is true, asserts that he in whom a certain prophecy was fulfilled is called the
&quot;Son of the prophecy,&quot; and in confirmation of this <i>usus loquendi</i> he refers
to the circumstance that the pseudo-Messiah under Hadrian assumed, with a reference
to the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1493;&#1499;&#1489;</span> in Numb. xxiv. 17, the name
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1503; &#1499;&#1493;&#1499;&#1489;</span> or <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1489;&#1512; &#1499;&#1493;&#1499;&#1489;&#1488;</span>, in so far as the star there promised had appeared in him. But this
confirmation is only apparent; it can as little be proved from it, that Christ could
be called <i>Ben-Nezer</i> because He was He in whom the prophecy of the <i>Nezer</i>
was fulfilled, as it can be proved from the appellation <i>Ben Nezer</i> that that
pseudo-Messiah could be called <i>Bar Cochba</i>, only because it was believed that
in him the prophecy of the star was fulfilled. <i>Reland</i> has already proved
(Geogr. II. p. 727) that <i>Barcochba</i> probably had that name because he was
a native of Cocab, a town or district in the country beyond Jordan. And the reason
why he laid such special stress upon that descent was, that he sought a deeper meaning
in this agreement of the name of his birth-place with the designation of the subject
of the prophecy in Numb. xxiv. Moreover the supposition that, by the Jews, he in
whom some prophecy was fulfilled, was called the son of that prophecy; that, <i>
e.g.</i>, the Messiah, the Servant of God, the Prince of Peace were called the Son
of the Messiah, &amp;c., is not only destitute of all foundation, but is, even in itself,
most improbable. To this must still be added the consideration that this interpretation
of <i>Ben-Nezer</i> is opposed by the constant interpretation of the Jews. <i>Jarchi</i>,
in a gloss on that passage of the Talmud referred to, explains <i>Ben Nezer</i>
by: &quot;He who has come from the town of Nazareth.&quot; <i>Abarbanel</i>
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 108]</span> in his book <i>Majenehajeshua</i>, after having
quoted from <i>Jalkut Shimeoni</i> the passage in question, observes: &quot;Remark well
how they have explained the little horn in Daniel vii. 8, of the <i>Ben Nezer</i>
who is Jesus the <i>Nazarene</i>.&quot; From the Lexicon <i>Aruch</i> which forms a weighty
authority, Buxtorf quotes: &quot;<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512; &#1504;&#1510;&#1512;&#1497; &#1492;&#1502;&#1511;&#1500;&#1500;</span>
Nezer, (or Ben Nezer), is the accursed <i>Nazarene</i>.&quot; <i>Finally</i>--It could
not well be supposed that the Jews, in a contest where they heap the most obnoxious
blasphemies on Christ, should have given Him an honourable epithet which they had
simply received from the Christians.</p>
<p class="normal">2. The result which we have obtained is confirmed by the statements
of Christian writers. Even at the time of <i>Eusebius</i> (Hist. Eccles. i. 7),
and of <i>Jerome</i>, the place was called <i>Nazara</i>. The latter says: &quot;<i>Nazareth</i>:
there exists up to this day in Galilee a village opposite Legio, fifteen miles to
the east of it, near Mount Tabor, called <i>Nazara</i>&quot; (comp. <i>Reland</i> i.
S. 497). In <i>Epistol.</i> xvii. ad <i>Marcellum</i> he expressly identifies the
name with <i>Nezer</i>, by saying: &quot;Let us go to Nazareth, and according to a right
interpretation of that name, we shall see there the flower of Galilee.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">3. To this may be added, that the <i>Gentilitia</i> formed from
Nazareth can be explained only when the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;</span>
is not considered as belonging to the original form of the name. For, in that case,
it must necessarily be found again in the <i>Gentilitia</i>, just as, <i>e.g.</i>,
from <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1504;&#1514;&#1514;</span> we could not by any means form
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1504;&#1514;&#1497;</span>, but only
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1504;&#1514;&#1514;&#1497;</span>. In the New Testament the two forms
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#925;&#945;&#950;&#969;&#961;&#945;&#8150;&#959;&#962;</span> and <span lang="el" class="Greek">
&#925;&#945;&#950;&#945;&#961;&#951;&#957;&#8056;&#962;</span> only occur, never the form <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#925;&#945;&#950;&#945;&#961;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#8150;&#959;&#962;</span>.
<i>Gieseler</i> has felt the difficulty which these names present to the common
hypothesis, but has endeavoured (l. c. p. 592) to remove them by the conjecture
that this form, so very peculiar, had been coined by a consideration of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span> which the first Christians were accustomed
to bring into connection with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;&#1514;</span>. But this
conjecture would, at most, be admissible, only if, with the Jews too, the form
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;&#1497;</span> were not found throughout without a
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;</span>, and if the Arabic form also were not entirely
analogous.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_108a" href="#ftn_108a">[1]</a></sup></p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 109]</span></p>
<p class="normal">The question now is:--In what sense was
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span> assigned as a <i>nomen proprium</i> to
a place in Galilee? Certainly, we must at once reject the supposition of <i>Jerome</i>
that Nazareth was thus called, as being &quot;the flower of Galilee,&quot; partly because
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span> never occurs in this signification; partly
because it is not conceivable that the place received a name which is due to it
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#964;&#700; &#7936;&#957;&#964;&#8055; &#966;&#961;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#957;</span> only. It is much more probable
that the place received the name on account of its smallness: a weak twig in contrast
to a stately tree. In this signification <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span>
occurs in Is. xi. 1, xiv. 19, and in the Talmudical <i>usus loquendi</i> where
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501;</span> signifies &quot;<i>virgulta salicum decorticata,
vimina ex quibus corbes fiunt.</i>&quot; There was so much the greater reason for giving
the place this name that people had the symbol before their eyes in its environs;
for the chalk-hills around Nazareth are over-grown with low bushes (comp. Burkhardt
II. s. 583). That which these bushes were when compared with the stately trees which
adorned other parts of the country, Nazareth was when compared with other cities.</p>
<p class="normal">This <i>nomen</i> given to the place on account of its small beginnings,
resembling, in this respect, the name of Zoar, <i>i.e.</i>, a small town, was, at
the same time, an <i>omen</i> of its future condition. The weak twig never grew
up into a tree. Nowhere in the Old Testament is Nazareth mentioned, probably because
it was built only after the return from the captivity. Neither is it mentioned in
<i>Josephus</i>. It was not, like most of the other towns in Palestine, ennobled
by any recollection from the olden times. Yea, as it would appear, a special contempt
was resting upon it, besides the general contempt in which all Galilee was held;
just as every land has some place to which a disgrace attaches, which has often
been called forth by causes altogether trifling. This appears not only from the
question of Nathanael, in John i. 47: &quot;Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?&quot;
but also from the fact, that from the most ancient times the Jews thought to inflict
upon Christ the greatest disgrace, by calling Him the Nazarene, whilst, in later
times, the disgrace which rested on all Galilee <span class="pagenum">[Pg 110]</span>
was removed by the circumstance that the most celebrated Jewish academy, that of
Tiberias, belonged to it.</p>
<p class="normal">Let us now examine in how far Christ&#39;s abode at Nazareth served
the purpose of fulfilling the Old Testament prophecy. It is, throughout, the doctrine
of the prophets, that the Messiah, descending from the family of David, sunk into
utter lowliness, would at first appear without any outward rank and dignity. The
fundamental type for all other passages here concerned is contained in that passage
of Is. xi. 1, now under consideration: &quot;And there cometh forth a twig from the stump
of Jesse, and a branch from his roots shall bear fruit,&quot; which is strikingly illustrated
in the following words of <i>Quenstedt</i>, in his <i>Dissertatio de Germine Jehovae</i>,
in the <i>Thesaurus theol. philol.</i> I. p. 1015:
<!--inserted quote-->&quot;The stem of Jesse which, from low beginnings, was, in David,
raised to the glory of royal majesty, shall then not only be deprived of all royal
dignity, and all outward splendour which it received in David, but shall again have
been reduced to the private condition in which it was before David; so that it shall
present the appearance of a stem deprived of all boughs and foliage, and having
nothing left but the roots; nevertheless out of that stem thus reduced and cut off,
and, as it appeared, almost dry, shall come forth a royal rod, and out of its roots
shall grow the twig upon whom shall rest the Spirit of the Lord,&quot; &amp;c. Quite in harmony
with this, it is said in chap. liii. 2: &quot;He grew up before the Lord as a tender
twig, and as a root out of a dry ground.&quot; To <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span>,
in chap. xi., corresponds <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1493;&#1504;&#1511;</span> in chap. liii.;
to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1496;&#1512;</span> the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1513;&#1512;&#1513;</span>; to the cut-off stem the dry land, with this difference, however, that
by the latter designation, the low condition of the Servant of God, generally, is
indicated; but His descent from the family of David sunk in lowliness, is not specially
pointed at thereby, although it is necessarily implied in it. The same thought is
further carried out in Ezek. xvii. 22-24. As the descendant of the family of David
sank in lowliness, the Messiah appears in that passage as a small tender twig which
is taken by the Lord from a high cedar, and, being planted upon a high mountain,
growls up into a lofty tree, under which all the fowls dwell. In Jeremiah and Zechariah,
the Messiah, with reference to the image of a cut-off tree used by Isaiah, is called
the Sprout of David, or simply the Sprout; <span class="pagenum">[Pg 111]</span>
compare remarks on Zech. iii. 8, vi. 12. All that is here required is certainly
only to place beside one another, on the one hand, prophecy, and, on the other,
history, in order clearly and evidently to point out the fulfilment of the former
in the latter. It was not at Jerusalem, where there was the seat of His royal ancestor,
where there were the thrones of His house (comp. Ps. cxxii.), that the Messiah took
up his residence; but it was in the most despised place of the most despised province
that, by divine Providence, He received His residence, after the predictions of
the prophets had been fulfilled by His having been born at Bethlehem. The name of
that place by which His lowliness was designated was the same as that by which Isaiah
had designated the lowliness of the Messiah at His appearing.</p>
<p class="normal">We have hitherto considered prophecy and fulfilment independently
of the quotation by St. Matthew. Let us now add a few remarks upon the latter.</p>
<p class="normal">1. It seems not to have been without reason that the wider formula
of quotation: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#8056; &#8165;&#951;&#952;&#8050;&#957; &#948;&#953;&#8048; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#966;&#951;&#964;&#8182;&#957;</span> is
here chosen, although <i>Jerome</i> infers too much from it when he remarks: &quot;If
he had wished to refer to a distinct quotation from Scripture, he would never have
said: &#39;As was spoken by the prophets,&#39; but simply, &#39;as was said by the prophet.&#39;
By using prophets in the plural, he shows that it is the sense, and not the words
which he has taken from Scripture.&quot; No doubt St. Matthew has one passage chiefly
in view--that in Is. xi. 1, which, besides the general announcement of the Messiah&#39;s
lowliness, contains, in addition, a special designation of it which is found again
in the <i>nomen</i> and <i>omen</i> of his native place. This appears especially
from the circumstance that, if it were otherwise, the quotation: in
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8005;&#964;&#953; &#925;&#945;&#950;&#969;&#961;&#945;&#8150;&#959;&#962; &#954;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#8053;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span>, would be inexplicable,
since it is very forced to suppose that &quot;Nazarene&quot; here designates generally one
low and despised.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_111a" href="#ftn_111a">[2]</a></sup>
But he chose the general formula of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 112]</span> quotation
(comp. <i>Gersdorf</i>, <i>Beiträge zur Sprachcharacteristik</i> 1. S. 136), in
order thereby to intimate that in Christ&#39;s residence at Nazareth those prophecies,
too, were at the same time fulfilled, which, in the essential point--in the announcement
of Christ&#39;s lowliness--agree with that of Isaiah. But it is just this additional
reference which shows that, to Matthew, this was indeed the essential point, and
that the agreement of the name of the town with the name which Christ has in Isaiah,
appears to him only as a remarkable outward representation of the close connection
of prophecy and fulfilment; just as, indeed, every thing in the life of Christ appears
to be brought about by the special direction of Divine providence.</p>
<p class="normal">2. The phrase <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8005;&#964;&#953; &#954;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#8053;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span>
likewise is explained from the circumstance that Matthew does not restrict himself
to the passage Is. xi. 1, but takes in, at the same time, all those other passages
which have a similar meaning. From among them, it was from Zech. vi. 12: &quot;Behold
a man whose name is the Sprout,&quot;<!--inserted quote--> that the phrase
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8005;&#964;&#953; &#954;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#8053;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span> flowed. There is hence no necessity
for explaining this circumstance solely from the custom of the later Jews,<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_112a" href="#ftn_112a">[3]</a></sup>
of claiming as the names of the Messiah all those expressions by which, in the Old
Testament, His nature is designated, inasmuch as, in doing so, they followed the
custom of the prophets themselves, who frequently bring forward as the name of the
Messiah that which is merely one of His attributes. This hypothesis is inadmissible,
because otherwise it would be difficult to point out any case in which the Evangelists
had not admixed something of their own with a quotation which they announced as
a literal one.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 113]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 2. &quot;<i>And the Spirit of the Lord resteth 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.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The Spirit of the Lord is the general, the principle; and the
subsequent terms are the single forms in which he manifests himself, and works.
But, on the other hand, in a formal point of view, the Spirit of the Lord is just
co-ordinate with the Spirit of wisdom, &amp;c. Some, indeed, explain: the Spirit of
God, who is the Spirit of, &amp;c.; but that this is inadmissible appears with sufficient
evidence from the circumstance that, by such a view, the sacred number, seven, is
destroyed, which, with evident intention, is completed in the enumeration; compare
the <i>seven</i> spirits of God in Rev. i. 4. To have the Spirit is the necessary
condition of every important and effective ministry in the Kingdom of God, from
which salvation is to come forth; comp. Num. xxvii. 18. It is especially the blessed
administration of the regal office which depends upon the possession of the Spirit;
comp. 1 Sam. xvi. 13 ff. where it is said of David: &quot;And Samuel took the horn of
oil and anointed him: and the Spirit of the Lord came upon him from that day forward;&quot;
comp. 1 Sam. x. 6, 10. The circumstance that the Spirit of the Lord resteth upon
the Messiah does not form a contradiction to His <i>divine nature</i>, which is
intimated by his being born of the Virgin, chap. vii. 14, by the name
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500; &#1490;&#1489;&#1493;&#1512;</span> in chap. ix. 5, and elsewhere (comp.
Vol. I., p. 490, 491), and is witnessed even in this prophecy itself; but, on the
contrary, the pouring out of the Spirit fully and not by measure (John iii. 39)
which is here spoken of, <i>implies</i> the divine nature. In order to receive the
Spirit of God in such a measure that He could baptize with the Holy Spirit (John
i. 33), that out of His fulness all received (John i. 16), that, in consequence
of His fulness of the Spirit overflowing from Him to the Church, the earth could
be filled with the knowledge of the Lord as the waters covering the sea (ver. 9),
He could not but be highly exalted above human nature. It was just because they
remained limited to the insufficient substratum of human nature, that even the best
kings, that even David, the man after God&#39;s own heart, received the Spirit in a
scanty measure only, and were constantly in danger of <span class="pagenum">[Pg
114]</span> losing again that which they possessed, as is shown by David&#39;s pitiful
prayer: &quot;Take not thy Holy Spirit from me&quot; (Ps. li. 13). It was just for this reason,
therefore, that the theocracy possessed in the kings a very sufficient organ of
its realization, and that the stream of the divine blessings could not flow freely.
In Matt. iii. 16: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#949;&#7990;&#948;&#949; &#964;&#8056; &#960;&#957;&#949;&#8166;&#956;&#945; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#946;&#945;&#8150;&#957;&#959;&#957;
&#8033;&#963;&#949;&#8054; &#960;&#949;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#961;&#8048;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#961;&#967;&#972;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#957; &#7952;&#960;&#8217; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#972;&#957;</span>, it is not the passage before us
only which lies at the foundation, but also, and indeed pre-eminently, the parallel
passage, chap. xlii. 1: &quot;Behold my Servant whom I uphold, mine Elect in whom my
soul delighteth; I put my Spirit upon Him,&quot; as is apparent from the circumstance
that it is to this passage that the voice from heaven refers in Matt. iii. 17:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#8023;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#953;&#957; &#8001; &#965;&#7985;&#972;&#962; &#956;&#959;&#965; &#8001; &#7936;&#947;&#945;&#960;&#951;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#7952;&#957; &#8103; &#949;&#8016;&#948;&#972;&#954;&#951;&#963;&#945;</span>.
But a reference to the passage before us we meet most decidedly in John i. 32, 33:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#932;&#949;&#952;&#941;&#945;&#956;&#945;&#953; &#964;&#8056; &#960;&#957;&#949;&#8166;&#956;&#945; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#946;&#945;&#8150;&#957;&#959;&#957; &#8033;&#963;&#949;&#8054; &#960;&#949;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#961;&#8048;&#957; &#7952;&#958; &#959;&#8016;&#961;&#945;&#957;&#959;&#8166;,
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7956;&#956;&#949;&#953;&#957;&#949;&#957; &#7952;&#960;&#8217; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#972;&#957;&#903; &#922;&#8064;&#947;&#8060; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#8085;&#948;&#949;&#953;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#972;&#957;&#903; &#7936;&#955;&#955;&#8217; &#8001; &#960;&#941;&#956;&#968;&#945;&#962; &#956;&#949; &#946;&#945;&#960;&#964;&#943;&#950;&#949;&#953;&#957; &#7952;&#957; &#8021;&#948;&#945;&#964;&#953;,
&#7952;&#954;&#949;&#8150;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#956;&#959;&#953; &#949;&#7990;&#960;&#949;&#957;· &#7952;&#966;&#8217; &#8003;&#957; &#7938;&#957; &#7988;&#948;&#8131;&#962; &#964;&#8056; &#960;&#957;&#949;&#8166;&#956;&#945; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#946;&#945;&#8150;&#957;&#959;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#957; &#7952;&#960;&#8217; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#972;&#957;, &#959;&#8023;&#964;&#959;&#962;
&#7952;&#963;&#964;&#953;&#957; &#8001; &#946;&#945;&#960;&#964;&#943;&#950;&#969;&#957; &#7952;&#957; &#960;&#957;&#949;&#973;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#953; &#7937;&#947;&#943;&#8179;</span>. The word
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1493;&#1495;</span>, which in Numb. xi. 25 also is used of
the Spirit, combines in itself both the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#946;&#945;&#8055;&#957;&#949;&#953;&#957;</span>
and the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#8051;&#957;&#949;&#953;&#957;</span>; it is <i>requiescere</i>. As
the fulfilment of this prophecy, however, we must not look to that event only where
it received a symbolical representation, but also to Acts ii. 3:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#8036;&#966;&#952;&#951;&#963;&#945;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8150;&#962; &#948;&#953;&#945;&#956;&#949;&#961;&#953;&#950;&#972;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#945;&#953; &#947;&#955;&#8182;&#963;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#8033;&#963;&#949;&#8054; &#960;&#965;&#961;&#972;&#962;,
&#7952;&#954;&#940;&#952;&#953;&#963;&#941; &#964;&#949; &#7952;&#966;&#8217; &#7957;&#957;&#945; &#7957;&#954;&#945;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8182;&#957;</span>; comp. 1 Pet. iv. 14:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8005;&#964;&#949; &#964;&#8056; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#948;&#972;&#958;&#951;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#8056; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166; &#960;&#957;&#949;&#8166;&#956;&#945; &#7952;&#966;&#8217; &#8017;&#956;&#8118;&#962; &#7936;&#957;&#945;&#960;&#945;&#973;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span>
(this most exactly answers <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1493;&#1495;</span>). For it is
not merely for himself that Christ here receives the Spirit; but He receives Him
as the transforming principle for the human race; He is bestowed upon. Him as the
Head of the Church.--In the enumeration of the forms in which the Spirit manifests
himself, it was not the intention of the Prophet to set forth <i>all</i> the perfections
of the Messiah; he rather, by way of example, mentions some only after having comprehended
all of them in the general: The Spirit of the Lord. Thus, <i>e.g.</i>, <i>justice</i>,
which is mentioned immediately afterwards in ver. 5, is omitted here.--The first
pair are wisdom and understanding. <i>Wisdom</i> is that excellency of knowledge
which rests on moral perfection. It is opposed to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1504;&#1489;&#1500;&#1492;</span>, foolishness in a moral sense, which may easily be combined with the
greatest ingenuity and cleverness. The excellence of knowledge resting
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 115]</span> on a moral basis manifests itself in the first
instance, and preeminently, in the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1497;&#1504;&#1492;</span>, understanding,
the sharp and penetrating eye which beholds things as they are, and penetrates from
the surface to their hidden essence, undisturbed by the dense fogs of false notions
and illusions which, in the case of the fool, are formed by his lusts and passions.
Neither of these attributes can, in its absolute perfection, be the possession of
any mortal, because even in those who, morally, are most advanced, there ever remains
sin, and, therefore, a darkening of the knowledge.--The second pair, counsel and
might, are, just as in the passage before us, ascribed to the Messiah in chap. ix.
5 (6), by His receiving the names &quot;Wonder-Counsellor,&quot; &quot;God-Hero.&quot; From chap. xxxvi.
5 it is seen that, for the difficult circumstances of the struggle, <i>counsel</i>
is of no less consequence than <i>might</i>. The last pair, knowledge and fear of
the Lord, form the fundamental effect of the Spirit of the Lord; all the great qualities
of the soul, all the gifts which are beneficial for the Kingdom of God, rest on
the intimacy of the connection with God which manifests itself in living knowledge
and fear of the Lord; the latter not being the servile but the filial fear, not
opposed to love, but its constant companion. The Prophet has put this pair at the
close, only because he intends to connect with it that which immediately follows.
We have already remarked that the Spirit of the Lord, &amp;c., is bestowed upon the
Messiah not for himself alone, but as the renovating principle of the Church.--Old
Testament analogies and types are not wanting in this matter. Moses puts of his
spirit upon the seventy Elders, and the spirit of Elijah rests on Elisha, and likewise
on the whole crowd of disciples who gathered around him (2 Kings ii. 9).</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. &quot;<i>And He hath His delight in the fear of the Lord, and
not after the sight of His eyes doth He judge, nor after the hearing of His ears
doth He decide.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">We now learn how the glorious gifts of the Anointed, described
in ver. 2, are displayed in His government. All attempts to bring the second and
third clauses under the same point of view as the first, and to derive them from
the same source are in vain. That He has delight in the fear of the Lord, is the
consequence of the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord resting upon
Him,--He loves what is congenial <span class="pagenum">[Pg 116]</span> to His own
nature. That He does not judge after the sight of His eyes, &amp;c., is the consequence
of His having the Spirit of wisdom and understanding. It is thereby that He is freed
from the narrow superficiality which is natural to man, and raised to the sphere
of that divine clearness of vision which penetrates to the depths,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1512;&#1497;&#1495;</span> with the accusative is &quot;to smell something;&quot;
with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span>, to &quot;smell at something,&quot; &quot;to smell
with delight.&quot; The fear of the Lord appears as something of a sweet scent to the
Messiah. The other explanations of the first clause abandon the sure, ascertained
<i>usus loquendi</i> (comp. Exod. xxx. 38; Levit. xxvi. 31; Am. v. 21), and, therefore,
do not deserve any mention. On the second and third clauses 1 Sam. xvi. 7, is to
be compared: &quot;And the Lord said unto Samuel: Look not on his countenance, or on
the height of his stature, because I have refused him; for not that which man looks
at (do I look at); for man looketh on the eyes (and, in general, on the outward
appearance), and I look on the heart.&quot; It is especially John who repeatedly mentions
that Christ really possessed the gift here assigned to Him, of judging, not from
the first appearance, and according to untrustworthy information, but of penetrating
into the innermost ground of the facts and persons, comp. ii. 24, 25:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#948;&#8050; &#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166;&#962;, &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7952;&#960;&#943;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#965;&#949;&#957; &#7953;&#945;&#965;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8150;&#962;, &#948;&#953;&#8048;
&#964;&#8056; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#947;&#953;&#957;&#974;&#963;&#954;&#949;&#953;&#957; &#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#962;, &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#959;&#8016; &#967;&#961;&#949;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#949;&#7990;&#967;&#949;&#957; &#7989;&#957;&#945; &#964;&#8054;&#962; &#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#965;&#961;&#942;&#963;&#951; &#960;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7936;&#957;&#952;&#961;&#974;&#960;&#959;&#965;·
&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#7952;&#947;&#943;&#957;&#969;&#963;&#954;&#949;&#957; &#964;&#943; &#7974;&#957; &#7957;&#957; &#7936;&#957;&#952;&#961;&#8180;&#960;&#8179;</span>. Farther--chap. xxi. 17 where Peter
says to Christ: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#922;&#973;&#961;&#953;&#949; &#963;&#8058; &#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#945; &#959;&#7990;&#948;&#945;&#962;&#903; &#963;&#8058; &#947;&#953;&#957;&#974;&#963;&#954;&#949;&#953;&#962;
&#8005;&#964;&#953; &#966;&#953;&#955;&#8182; &#963;&#949;.</span> Farther, i. 48, 49; iv. 18, 19; vi. 64. In Revel. ii. 23, Christ
says: &quot;And all Churches shall know that I am He which searcheth the reins and hearts.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. &quot;<i>And He judgeth in righteousness the lowly, and doeth
justice in equity to the meek of the earth, and smiteth the earth with the rod of
His mouth, and with the breath of His lips He slayeth the wicked.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The King shall be adorned with perfect justice, and, in the exercise
of it, be supported by His omnipotence,--differently from what was the case with
David, who, for want of power, was obliged to allow heinous crimes to pass unpunished
(2 Sam. iii. 39). Just as by the excellency of His <i>will</i> He is infinitely
exalted above all former rulers, so is He also by the excellency of <i>might</i>.
Where, as in His case, the highest <span class="pagenum">[Pg 117]</span> might stands
in the service of the best will, the noblest results must come forth. The first
two clauses refer to Ps. lxxii., which was written by Solomon, and where, in ver.
2, it is said of Christ: &quot;He shall judge thy people in righteousness, and thy lowly
ones in judgment,&quot; and in ver. 4: &quot;He shall judge the lowly of thy people, He shall
save the children of the needy, and shall break in pieces the oppressors;&quot; compare
farther Prov. xxix. 14: &quot;A king that in truth judgeth the lowly, his throne shall
be established for ever.&quot; The earth forms the contrast to the limited territory
which was hitherto assigned to the theocratic kings.--In the second part of the
verse <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span> does not by any means stand in contrast
to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1500;&#1497;&#1501;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1506;&#1504;&#1493;&#1497;&#1501;</span>, and, in parallelism to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1513;&#1506;</span>,
designate the wicked ones; but <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span> &quot;earth&quot;
stands in antithesis to the narrow territory in which earthly kings are permitted
to dispense law and justice. It is a matter of course, and is, moreover, expressly
stated in the second clause, that the earth comes into consideration with a view
to those only who are objects of His judging activity. From that which follows,
where changes are spoken of which shall take place on the whole earth, it follows
that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span> must be taken in the signification
of &quot;earth.&quot; and not of &quot;land.&quot; Hand in hand with the infinite extent of the King&#39;s
exercise of justice goes also the manner of it. &quot;The whole earth,&quot; and the &quot;breath
of the mouth,&quot; correspond with one another.--In the words &quot;with the rod of His mouth,&quot;
a tacit antithesis lies at the foundation. As kings strike with the sceptre, so
He smiteth with His mouth.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1489;&#1496;</span>, the ensign
of royal dignity, is the symbol of the whole earthly power, which, being external
and exercised by external means, must needs be limited, and insufficient for the
perfect exercise of justice. The exercise of justice on the part of earthly kings
reaches so far only as their hand armed with the smiting sceptre. But that great
King is, in the exercise of justice, supported by His <i>Omnipotence</i>. He punishes
and destroys by His mere word. Several interpreters understand this as a mere designation
of His severity in punishing,--&quot;the rod of His mouth&quot; to be equivalent to &quot;severity
of punishment;&quot;--but that such is not the meaning appears from the following clause,
where likewise special weight is attached to the circumstance that the Messiah inflicts
punishment by His mere word; &quot;the breath of His lips&quot; is equivalent
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 118]</span> to &quot;mere words,&quot; &quot;mere command;&quot; compare &quot;breath
of His mouth,&quot; in Ps. xxxiii. 6. <i>Hitzig&#39;s</i> explanation, &quot;the angry breath
of His lips,&quot; does not interpret, but interpolate. In the future Son of David every
word is, at the same time, a deed; He speaks and it is done. The same which is here
said of the Messiah is, in other passages, attributed to <i>God</i>: compare Job
xv. 30, where it is said of the wicked: &quot;By the breath of His mouth he shall go
away;&quot; Hos. vi. 5: &quot;I have slain them by the word of my mouth.&quot; In general, according
to the precedent in Gen. i., doing by the mere word is, in Scripture, the characteristic
designation of Divine Omnipotence. Parallel is chap. xlix. 2, where Christ says:
&quot;And He hath made my mouth like a sharp sword,&quot; equivalent to: He has endowed me
with His Omnipotence, so that my word also exercises destructive effect, just as
His. In Rev. i. 16, it is said of Christ: &quot;And out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged
sword,&quot;--to designate the destructive power of His word borne by Omnipotence, the
omnipotent punitive power of Christ against enemies, both internal and external.
An instance of the manner in which Christ smites by the word of His mouth is offered
by Acts v. 3 (where, according to the analogy of the word spoken in the name of
God by Elijah, 2 Kings i. 10, 12, and by Elisha, 2 Kings ii. 24, v. 27, the Apostles
are to be considered only as His instruments): <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#954;&#959;&#973;&#969;&#957;
&#948;&#8050; &#7945;&#957;&#945;&#957;&#943;&#945;&#962; &#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#955;&#972;&#947;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#964;&#959;&#973;&#964;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#960;&#949;&#963;&#8060;&#957; &#7952;&#958;&#941;&#968;&#965;&#958;&#949;</span>, comp. ver. 10; xiii. 11. The
Chaldee translates: &quot;And by the word of His lips wicked Armillus shall die.&quot; He
refers <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1513;&#1506;</span> not to the ideal person of the
wicked, but to an individual, <i>Armillus</i>, (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#961;&#951;&#956;&#8057;&#955;&#945;&#959;&#962;</span>,
corresponding to the name of Balaam, compounded of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1500;&#1506;</span> &quot;devouring,&quot; &quot;destruction,&quot; and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;</span> &quot;people&quot;) the formidable, last enemy of
the Jews who shall carry on severe wars with them, slay the Messiah ben Joseph,
but at length be slain by the Messiah ben David with a mere word, compare <i>Buxtorf</i>,
<i>Lex. Chald.</i> cap. 221-224: <i>Eisenmenger</i>, <i>entdecktes Judenthum</i>
ii. S. 705 ff. In 2 Thess. ii. 8, in the description of Antichrist&#39;s destruction
by Christ: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8003;&#957; &#8001; &#922;&#973;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#962; &#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166;&#962; &#7936;&#957;&#945;&#955;&#974;&#963;&#949;&#953; &#964;&#8183; &#960;&#957;&#949;&#973;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#953;
&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#963;&#964;&#972;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166;</span>, there is an intentional and significant allusion to the
passage before us, Antichrist there being, like <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1513;&#1506;</span>
here, an ideal person; for the arguments in proof, see my Comment, on Revelation,
vol. ii.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 5. &quot;<i>And righteousness is the girdle of His loins, and
faithfulness the girdle of His reins.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 119]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Righteousness and faithfulness are in a similar manner connected
in 1 Sam. xxvi. 13 (? Prov. xii. 17). Faithfulness is trustworthiness. The point
of comparison with the girdle is the closeness of the union; comp. Ps. cix. 19;
Jer. xiii. 1, 2, 11.</p>
<p class="normal">In ver. 6, the Prophet passes from the <i>person</i> of the glorious
King to a description of His Kingdom. With regard to ver. 6-8, the question arises,
whether the description is to be understood figuratively or literally; whether the
Prophet intends to describe the cessation of all hostility among men, or whether
he expected that, in the Messianic time, even among the irrational creation, all
hostility and destruction, every thing pernicious was to cease. Most of the ancient
interpreters are attached to the former view. Thus <i>Theodoret</i> says: &quot;In a
figurative manner, under the image of domesticated and wild animals, the Prophet
taught the change of the habits of men.&quot; He refers every thing to the union, within
the Christian Church, of those who, in their natural condition, lived far separated
from one another, and in hostility the one to the other. <i>Jerome</i> considers
the opposite view as even a species of heresy. He says: &quot;The Jews and the Judaizers
among ourselves maintain that all this shall be fulfilled according to the letter;
that in the light of Christ who, they believe, shall come at the end of the days,
all beasts shall be reduced to tameness, so that the wolf, giving up its former
ferocity, shall dwell with the lamb, &amp;c.&quot; Upon the whole, he states the sense in
the same manner as <i>Theodoret</i>, from whom he sometimes differs in the allegorical
explanation of the details only. In a similar manner <i>Luther</i> also explains
it, who, <i>e.g.</i>, on ver. 6, &quot;the wolf shall dwell with the lambs, etc.&quot; remarks:
&quot;But these are allegories by which the Prophet intimates that the tyrants, the self-righteous
and powerful ones in the world, shall be converted, and be received into the Church.&quot;
<i>Calvin</i> says: &quot;By these images, the Prophet indicates that, among the people
of Christ there will be no disposition for injuring one another, nor any ferocity
or inhumanity.&quot; The circumstance that the use of animal symbolism is widely spread
throughout Scripture is in favour of this interpretation. One may, <i>e.g.</i> compare
Ps. xxii., where the enemies of the righteous are represented under the image of
dogs, lions, bulls, and unicorns; <span class="pagenum">[Pg 120]</span> Jer. v.
6, where, by lion, wolf, and leopard, the kingdoms of the world which are destructive
to the people of God are designated; the four beasts in Dan. vii.; but especially
Is. xxxv. 9: &quot;There (on the way of salvation which the Lord shall, in the future,
open up for His people) shall not be a lion, nor shall any ravenous beast go up
thereon,&quot;--where the ravenous beasts are the representatives of the world&#39;s power,
hostile to the Kingdom of God. Nevertheless, the literal interpretation, defended
by several Jewish expositors, maintains an undeniable preference. In favour of it
are the following arguments: 1. The circumstance that it is impossible to carry
through, in the details, the figurative interpretation; and it is by this that our
passage is distinguished from all the other passages in which the wild, cruel, and
destructive tendencies in the human sphere appear under the images of their representatives
in the animal world. The supposition that &quot;we have here before us only a poetical
enlargement of the thought that all evil shall cease&quot; (<i>Hendewerk</i>, <i>Knobel</i>),
removes the boundaries which separate prophecy from poetry. 2. The parallelism with
the condition of the creation before the fall, as it is described to us by Holy
Scripture. It is certainly not without reason that, in the account of the creation,
so much emphasis is laid on the circumstance that all which was created was <i>good</i>.
This implies a condition of the irrational creation different from what it is now;
for in its present state it gives us a faithful copy of the first fall, inasmuch
as every heinous vice has its symbols and representatives in the animal kingdom.
According to Gen. ii. 19, 20, the animals recognize in Adam their lord and king,
peaceably gather around him, and receive their names from him. According to Gen.
i. 30, grass only was assigned to animals for their food; the whole animal world
bore the image of the innocence and peace of the first man, and was not yet pervaded
by the law of mutual destruction. Where there was not a Cain, neither was there
a lion. The serpent has not yet its disgusting and horrible figure, and fearlessly
men have intercourse with it; comp. Vol. i. p. 15, 16. But the influence of sin
pervaded and penetrated the whole nature, and covered it with a curse (comp. Gen.
iii. 17-19); so that it not only bears evidence to the existence of God, but also
to the existence of sin. <span class="pagenum">[Pg 121]</span> Now, as it is by
sin that outward discord, and contention, and destruction <i>arose</i> in the irrational
creature, so we may also expect that, when the cause has been removed, the effect
too will disappear; that, with the cessation of the discord and enmity among men,
which, according to ver. 9, the Prophet expected of the Messianic time, discord
and enmity in the animal world will cease also. In the individual features, the
Prophet seems even distinctly to refer to the history of the creation; compare ver.
7: &quot;The lion shall eat straw like the ox,&quot; with Gen. i. 30; ver. 8: &quot;the sucking
child shall play on the hole of the asp,&quot; with Gen. iii. 15. 3. The comparison of
other passages of Scripture, according to which likewise the reflection of the evil
in the irrational creation shall cease, after the evil has been removed from the
rational creation; compare chap. lxv. 25, lxvi, 22; Matt. xix. 28, where the Lord
speaks of the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#945;&#955;&#953;&#947;&#947;&#949;&#957;&#949;&#963;&#943;&#945;</span>, the return of the
whole earthly creation to its original condition; but especially Rom. viii. 19 ff.--that
classical passage of the New Testament which is really parallel to the passage before
us. 4. A subordinate argument is still offered by the parallel descriptions of heathen
writers. From the passages collected by <i>Clericus</i>, <i>Lowth</i>, and <i>Gesenius</i>,
we quote a few only. In the description of the golden age, <i>Virgil</i> says,
<i>Ecl.</i> iv. 21 sqq.; v. 60: <i>Occidet et serpens et fallax herba veneni occidet.</i>--<i>Nec
magnos metuent armenta leones.</i>--<i>Nec lupus insidias pecori.</i> <i>Horat.
Epod.</i> xiv. 53: <i>Nec vespertinus circumgemit ursus ovile nec intumescit alta
viperis humus.</i>--<i>Theocrit. Idyll.</i> xxiv. 84. Utterances such as these show
how unnatural the present condition of the earth is. They are, however, not so much
to be regarded as the remains of some outward tradition (against such a supposition
it is decisive that they occur chiefly with <i>poets</i>), but rather as utterances
of an indestructible longing in man, which, being so deeply rooted in human nature,
contains in itself the guarantee of being gratified at some future period. But,
with all this, we must do justice to the objection drawn from the evident parallelism
of passages such as chap. xxxv. 9, and to another objection advanced by <i>Vitringa</i>,
that it is strange that there is so much spoken of animals, and so little of men.
This we shall do by remarking that, in the description of the glorious effects which
the government of Christ shall produce on the earth, the Prophet at once proceeds
to the utmost limit of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 122]</span> them; and that the
removal of hostility and destruction from the irrational creation implies that all
that will be removed which, in the rational creation, proceeds from the principle
of hatred, inasmuch as it is certain that the former is only a reflection of the
latter, and that the Prophet speaks with a distinct reference to this supposition
which he afterwards, in ver. 9, distinctly expresses. Hence, to a certain degree,
a double sense takes place; and, in the main, <i>J. H. Michaelis</i> has hit the
right by comparing, first, Gen. i. and Rom. viii., and then continuing: &quot;Parabolically,
however, by the wild beasts, wild and cruel nations are understood, which are to
be converted to Christ; or violent men who, by the Spirit of Christ, are rendered
meek and gentle, just as Paul, from a wolf, was changed into a lamb.&quot; We are the
less permitted to lose sight of the reference to the lions and bears on the spiritual
territory, that ver. 6 is, in the first instance, connected with vers. 4 and 5,
in which the all-powerful sway of Christ&#39;s justice on earth is described, of which
the consequences must, in the first instance, appear in the <i>human territory</i>;
and, farther, that the point from which the prophecy started, is the raging of the
wolf and bear of the world&#39;s power against the poor defenceless flock of the Lord.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 6. &quot;<i>And the wolf dwelleth with the lamb, and the leopard
shall lie down with the kid, the calf, and, the lion and the fatling together, and
a little child leads them.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 7. &quot;<i>The cow and bear go to the pasture; their young ones
lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.</i>&quot; (The going to
pasture of the bear corresponds with the lion&#39;s eating straw [comp. Gen. i. 30],
and we are not allowed to supply the &quot;together&quot; in the first clause.)</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 8. &quot;<i>And the sucking child playeth on the hole of the asp,
and the weaned child putteth his hand into the den of the basilisk.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The change in the irrational creation described in the preceding
verses is a consequence of the removal of sin in the rational creation; this removal
the Prophet now proceeds to describe.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 9. &quot;<i>They shall not do evil, and shall not sin in all my
holy mountain, for the earth is full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters
covering the sea.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 123]</span></p>
<p class="normal">The subject are the dwellers in the Holy Mountain. The Holy Mountain
can, according to the <i>usus loquendi</i>, be Mount Zion only, and not, as was
last maintained by <i>Hofmann</i>, the whole land of Canaan, which is never designated
in that manner; comp. chap. xxvii. 13, and my Commentary on Ps. lxxviii. 54. The
second part of the verse, connected with the first by means of <i>for</i>, agrees
with the first only in the event that Mount Zion is viewed as the spiritual dwelling
place of the inhabitants of the earth, just as, under the Old Testament dispensation,
it was the <i>ideal</i> dwelling place of all the Israelites, even of those who
outwardly had not their residence at Jerusalem; on the spiritual dwelling of the
servants of the Lord with Him in the temple, compare remarks on Ps. xxvii. 4, xxxvi.
9, lxv. 5, lxxxiv. 3, and other passages. In chap. ii. 2-4, lxvi. 23, the Holy Mountain,
too, appears as the centre of the whole earth in the Messianic time. From chap.
xix. 20, 21, where, in the midst of converted Egypt, an altar is built, and sacrifices
are offered up, it appears that it is this in an <i>ideal</i> sense only, that under
its image the <i>Church</i> is meant. The designation, &quot;my Holy Mountain,&quot; intimates
that the state of things hitherto, when unholiness prevailed in the Kingdom of the
Holy God, is an unnatural one; that at some future period the <i>idea</i> necessarily
must manifest its power and right in opposition to the <i>reality</i>.--In the second
clause, the ground and fountain of this sinlessness is stated. In Zion, in the Church
of God, there will then be no more any sins; for the earth is then full of the knowledge
of the Lord, by which the sins are done away with. The general outpouring of the
Holy Ghost forms one of the characteristics of the Messianic time; and the <i>consequence</i>
of this outpouring is, according to ver. 2, the knowledge of the Lord,--so that
the clause may be thus paraphrased: For, in consequence of the Spirit poured out,
in the first instance, upon Him, the earth is full of the knowledge of the Lord;
comp. chap. xxxii. 15: &quot;Until the Spirit be poured upon us from on high;&quot;<!--inserted quote-->
liv. 13; Joel iii. 1; ii. 28; Jer. xxxi. 34, That <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1492;&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span> is here not the &quot;land,&quot; or &quot;country,&quot; but the &quot;<i>earth</i>&quot; is sufficiently
evident from the antithesis of the <i>sea</i>: as the <i>sea</i> is full of water,
so the <i>earth</i> is full of the knowledge of the Lord. To this
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 124]</span> reason it may still be added that in vers.
6-8 changes are spoken of, which concern the whole territory of the earthly creation,
the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#945;&#955;&#953;&#947;&#947;&#949;&#957;&#949;&#963;&#943;&#945;</span> of the whole earth. As the
relation of these changes to that which is stated here is that of cause and effect,
here, too, the whole earth can only be thought of <i>Finally</i>,--The following
verse too supposes the spreading of salvation over the whole earth. The entire relation
of the first section to the second and third makes it obvious that by
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span> the whole earth is to be understood.
The passage under consideration is alluded to in Hab. ii. 14: &quot;For the earth shall
be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as the waters covering the
sea.&quot; In that passage, the enforced knowledge of the Divine glory which manifests
itself in punitive justice, forms the subject of discourse; but that enforced knowledge
forms the necessary condition of the knowledge which is voluntary and saving.</p>
<p class="normal"><i>Ver. 10. &quot;And it shall come to pass in that day, the root of
Jesse which standeth for an ensign to the people, it shall the Gentiles seek, and
His rest is glory.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The words, &quot;and it shall come to pass,&quot; introduce a new section;
so that the interval in the Hebrew manuscripts is here quite in its place. With
ver. 11 again, a new section begins. In ver. 1-9 we have the appearance of the Messiah
in relation to the whole earth; then, in the second section, the way in which he
becomes a centre to the whole <i>Gentile world</i>; and in ver. 11 ff., what He
grants to the <i>old covenant-people</i>, for whom the Prophet was, in the first
instance, prophesying, and whose future he therefore describes more in detail. Why
His relation to the Gentile world is <i>first spoken of</i> appears from ver. 12;
the Gentiles gathered to the Lord are the medium of His salvation to the old covenant-people.--The
<i>root</i> designates here (and likewise in chap. liii. 2), and in the passages
founded upon this, viz., in Rev. v. 5, xxii. 16, the <i>product</i> of the root,
that whereby the root manifests itself, the shoot from the root; just as &quot;seed&quot;
so very often occurs for &quot;product of the seed.&quot; This appears from a comparison with
ver. 1, where, more fully, the Messiah is called a twig from Jesse&#39;s roots. <i>Bengel</i>
has already directed attention to the antithesis of the root and ensign, in his
Commentary on Rom. xv. 12: &quot;A sweet antithesis: the root is undermost,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 125]</span> the ensign rises uppermost; so that even the
nations farthest off may behold it.&quot;--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1512;&#1513;</span>
with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span>, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;</span>,
and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514;</span>, has the signification &quot;to apply to
the true God, or some imaginary god, in order to seek protection, help, counsel,
advice, disclosures regarding the future;&quot; comp. Is. viii. 19; Deut. xii. 4, 5,
and other passages in <i>Gesenius&#39; Thesaurus</i>. The Gentiles feel that they cannot
do without the Redeemer; they see, at the same time, His riches and their poverty;
and this knowledge urges them on to <i>seek</i> Him, that from him they may obtain
<i>light</i> (chap. xlii. 6), that He may communicate to them His <i>law</i> (chap.
xlii. 4), that he may teach them of His ways, and that they may walk in His paths
(chap. ii. 3), &amp;c. St. Paul, in Rom. xv. 12, following the LXX., has
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#960; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#7956;&#952;&#957;&#951; &#7952;&#955;&#960;&#953;&#959;&#8166;&#963;&#953;</span>, which, as regards the
sense, fully agrees with the original. The beginning of the seeking took place when
the representatives of the Gentile world, the Maji from the East, came to Jerusalem,
saying: &quot;Where is He that is born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in
the East and are come to worship Him,&quot; Matt. ii. 2. The historical foundation and
the type are the homage which, from the Gentile world, was offered to Solomon, 1
Kings x.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1504;&#1493;&#1495;&#1492;</span> &quot;resting place,&quot; &quot;dwelling
place,&quot; &quot;habitation;&quot; comp. Ps. cxxxii. 13, 14: &quot;For the Lord hath chosen Zion;
He hath desired it for His <i>habitation</i>. This is my <i>rest</i> (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1504;&#1493;&#1495;&#1514;&#1497;</span>)
for ever; here will I <i>dwell</i>, for I have desired it.&quot; The glory of the King
passes over to His residence to which the Gentile world are flowing together, in
order to do homage to Him; Comp. Ps. lxxii. 10: &quot;The kings of Tarshish and of the
isles shall bring presents; the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts.&quot; The
comparison of this passage alone is sufficient to refute the absurd interpretation,
according to which <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1502;&#1497;&#1501;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1493;&#1497;&#1501;</span> are referred to the Israelitish tribes,--an
interpretation which has been tried with as little success in the fundamental passage
(Gen. xlix. 10), according to which the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1502;&#1497;&#1501;</span>
are to adhere to Shiloh; compare Vol. i. p. 62.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 11: &quot;<i>And it shall come to pass in that day, the Lord shall
continue a second time with His hand to ransom the remnant of His people which has
remained from Asshur and from Egypt, from Patros and from Cush, from Elam and from
Shinar, from Hamath and from the islands of the sea.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 126]</span></p>
<p class="normal">From the Gentiles, the Prophet now turns to Israel. The reception
of the Gentiles into the Messianic Kingdom is not by any means to take place at
the expense of the old covenant-people; even they shall be brought back again, and
shall be received into the Kingdom of God. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1493;&#1505;&#1497;&#1507;</span>
must be connected with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1511;&#1504;&#1493;&#1514;</span>, comp. 2 Sam.
xxiv. 1: &quot;And the Lord continued to kill,&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1492;&#1512;&#1490;</span>.
It is unnecessary and arbitrary to supply <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1513;&#1500;&#1495;</span>.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1491;&#1493;</span> is Accusative, &quot;as to His hand,&quot; equivalent
to &quot;with His hand;&quot; comp. Ps. iii. 5, xvii. 10, 11, 13, 14. Just the hand of God,
which here comes into consideration as the instrument of <i>doing</i>, is repeatedly
mentioned in the account of the deliverance from Egypt; comp. Exod. iii. 20, vii.
4, xiii. 9. The expression: &quot;<i>He shall continue</i>,&quot; in general, points out the
idea that it is not a new beginning which is here concerned, but the continuation
of former acting, by which believing was rendered so much the more easy. The expression,
&quot;a <i>second time</i>,&quot; points more distinctly to the type of the <i>deliverance
from Egypt</i> with which the redemption to be effected by Christ is frequently
paralleled; comp. vers. 15, 16; Vol. i. p. 218, 219. &quot;<i>From Asshur</i>,&quot; &amp;c.,
must not be connected with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1511;&#1504;&#1493;&#1514;</span>, but with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1513;&#1488;&#1512;</span>, comp. v. 16, those who have remained
from Asshur, &amp;c., <i>i.e.</i>, those whom Asshur and the other places of punishment,
with their hostile influences, have left, who have been preserved in them. The fact
that destructive influences may proceed from those nations also which do not properly
belong to the number of the kingdoms of the world, is plainly shown by the history
of the Jews after Christ. It would be against the accents, both here and in ver.
6, to connect it with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1511;&#1504;&#1493;&#1514;</span>; the words &quot;which
shall remain&quot; would, in that case, appear to be redundant; and, farther, it is opposed
by Exod. x. 3: &quot;And eats the residue of that which is escaped, which remaineth unto
you from the hail,&quot; equivalent to; which the hail has left to you. Similar to this
is 2 Chron. xxx. 6, where Hezekiah exhorts the children of Israel: &quot;Turn again unto
the Lord.... in order that He may again return to the remnant which has been left
to you from the hand of the kings of Asshur.&quot; A question here arises, viz., whether
the dispersion of Israel which is here described, had already taken place at the
time of the Prophet, or whether the Prophet, transferring himself in the Spirit
into <span class="pagenum">[Pg 127]</span> the distant future, describes the dispersion
which took place at a later period, after the carrying away of the ten tribes into
the Assyrian exile had preceded, viz., that which took place when Judah was carried
away into the Babylonish exile, and especially after the destruction of Jerusalem.
The latter view is the correct one. The whole tenor of the Prophet&#39;s words shows
that he supposes a <i>comprehensive</i> dispersion of the people. It is true that,
at the time when the prophecy was written, the ten tribes had already been carried
away into captivity; but the kingdom of Judah, the subjects of which, according
to ver. 12, likewise appear as being in the dispersion, had not yet suffered any
important desolation. The few inhabitants of Judah who, according to Joel iv. 6,
(iii. 6), and Amos i. 6, 9, had been sold as slaves by the Philistines and Ph&#339;nicians,
and others, who, it may be, in hard times had spontaneously fled from their native
country, cannot here come into consideration. Just as here, so by Hosea too, the
future carrying away of the inhabitants of Judah is anticipated; comp. vol. i.,
p. 219, 220. The fundamental passage is in Deut. xxx. 3, 4, where the gathering
of Israel is promised &quot;from all the nations whither the Lord thy God has scattered
thee. If any of thine be driven out into the utmost parts of heaven, from thence
will the Lord thy God gather thee, and from thence will He fetch thee.&quot; This passage
shows with what clearness the future scattering lay before the eyes of the holy
men, even at the first beginnings of the people of God. In vers. 11 and 12 we have
the summary of the whole of the second part of Isaiah, in which the announcement
of Israel&#39;s being gathered and brought back is constantly repeated; and it is quite
incomprehensible how some grant the genuineness of the prophecy before us, and yet
bring forward, against this second part of Isaiah, the argument that the Prophet
could not <i>supposee</i> the scattering, that it must really have taken place,
since he simply announces their being brought back.--As regards the redemption from
the scattering, all that which in history is realised in a series of events, is
here united in one view. There is no reason for excluding the deliverance under
Zerubbabel; for it, too, was already granted for the sake of Christ, whose incarnation
the Prophet anticipates in faith; comp. remarks on chaps. vii., ix. This redemption,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 128]</span> however, in which those who have been brought
back remain servants in the land of the Lord, can be considered as only a prelude
to the true one; comp. vol. i., p. 220 f. 448. The true fulfilment began with the
appearance of Christ, and is still going on towards its completion, which can take
place even without Israel&#39;s returning to Canaan, comp. vol. i., p. 222. Asshur opens
the list, and occupies the principal place, because it was through him who, under
the very eyes of the Prophet, had carried away the ten tribes, that the dispersion
began. But the Prophet does not limit himself to that which was obvious,--did not
expect, from the Messiah, only the healing of already existing hurts.--With Asshur,
<i>Egypt</i> is connected in one pair. Egypt is the <i>African</i> world&#39;s power
struggling for dominion with the <i>Asiatic</i>. Its land serves not only as a refuge
to those oppressed by the Asiatic world&#39;s power (comp. Jer. xlii. ff.), but, in
that struggle with the Asiatic power, itself invades and oppresses the land; comp.
chap. vii. 18; 2 Kings xxiii. 29 ff.: &quot;In his days Pharaoh Necho, king of Egypt,
went up against the king of Assyria.&quot; In a similar connection, Asshur and Egypt,
the kingdoms on the Euphrates and the Nile, appear in chap. xxvii. 13: &quot;And it shall
come to pass in that day, that a great trumpet is blown, and they come, the perishing
ones in the land of Asshur, and the outcasts in the land of Egypt, and worship the
Lord in the holy mount at Jerusalem;&quot; Micah vii. 12; Jer. ii. 18; Lam. v. 6. As
annexed to Egypt, the <i>second</i> pair presents itself, representing the uttermost
<i>South</i>; compare the expression, &quot;from the four comers of the earth,&quot; in ver.
12. Pathros, in Jer. xliv. 1, 15, also appears as a dependency of Egypt; and Cush,
Ethiopia, was, at the Prophet&#39;s time, the ally of Egypt, chap. xxxvii. 9, xviii.,
xx. 3-6. <i>Gesenius</i> remarks on chap. xx. 4: &quot;Egypt and Ethiopia are, in the
oracles of this time, always connected, just as the close political alliance of
these two countries requires.&quot;--From the uttermost South, the Prophet turns to the
uttermost East. &quot;Elam is,&quot; as <i>Gesenius</i> in his Commentary on chap. xxi. 2
remarks, &quot;in the pre-exilic writers, used for Persia in general, for which afterwards
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1512;&#1505;</span> becomes the ordinary name;&quot; and according
to Dan. viii. 2, the Persian Metropolis Shushan is situated in Elam. It appears
in chap. xxii. 6 as the representative of the world&#39;s power
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 129]</span> which in future will oppress Judah, and we
hence expect that it will appear in an Elamitic phase also.--Shinar, the ancient
name for Babylon, is that world&#39;s power which, according to chaps. xiii., xiv.,
xxxix., and other passages, is to follow after the Assyrian, and is to carry away
Judah into exile. Elam and Madai appear in chap. xxi. 2 as the destroyers of the
Babylonian world&#39;s power; hence the Elamitic phase of it can follow after the Babylonish
only. The geographical arrangement only can be the reason why it is here placed
first.--The last of the four pairs of countries is formed by Hamath, representing
Syria, (comp. 1 Maccab. xii. 25, according to which passage Jonathan the Maccabee
marches into the land of Hamath against the army of Demetrius,) and the islands
of the sea, the islands and the countries on the shores of the Mediterranean in
the uttermost West. As early as in the prophecy of Balaam, in Numb. xxiv. 24: &quot;And
ships come from the side of Chittim and afflict Asshur, and afflict Eber, and he
also perisheth,&quot; we find the announcement that, at some future time, the Asiatic
kingdoms shall be conquered by a power which comes from the West in ships, by European
nations--an announcement which was realised in history by the dominion of the Greeks
and Romans in Asia.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 12: &quot;<i>And He setteth up an ensign to the Gentiles and assembleth
the exiled of Israel, and gathereth together the dispersed of Judah from the four
corners of the earth.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The setting up of the ensign for the Gentiles, around which they
are to assemble for the purpose of restoring Israel, took place, in a prelude, under
Cyrus; comp. chap. xiv. 2, xlix. 22: &quot;Thus saith the Lord God: Behold I lift up
mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the nations, and they bring
thy sons on their bosom, and thy daughters are carried upon their shoulders;&quot; where
the sons and daughters correspond to the exiled men of Israel, and to the dispersed
women of Judah, equivalent to all the exiled and dispersed men and women. As early
as in the Song of Solomon, we are taught that in the Messianic time the Gentile
nations will take an active part in the restoration of Israel. According to the
first part of that Song, the appearance of the heavenly Solomon is connected with
the reception of the Gentiles into His Kingdom, and that, through the instrumentality
of the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 130]</span> old covenant people, as is intimated
by the name of the daughters of Jerusalem; comp. my Comment. on Song of Solomon,
iii. 9-11. In the second part of that Song we have a description of the reunion
of apostate Israel with Christ,--which reunion takes place by the co-operation of
the daughters of Jerusalem, the same whom they formerly brought to salvation. According
to Is. lxvi. 20, the Gentiles, converted to the Lord in the time of salvation, bring
the children of Israel for an offering unto the Lord,--A significant allusion to
the passage before us is found in John xi. 52: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054;
&#959;&#8016;&#967; &#8017;&#960;&#8050;&#961; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7956;&#952;&#957;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#956;&#972;&#957;&#959;&#957;, &#7936;&#955;&#955;&#8217; &#7989;&#957;&#945; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#8048; &#964;&#941;&#954;&#957;&#945; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#920;&#949;&#959;&#8166; &#964;&#8048; &#948;&#953;&#949;&#963;&#954;&#959;&#961;&#960;&#953;&#963;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#945; &#963;&#965;&#957;&#945;&#947;&#940;&#947;&#8131;
&#949;&#7984;&#962; &#7957;&#957;.</span> It is the same mercy seeking that which is lost that manifests itself
in the gathering of apostate Israel, and in the gathering of the Gentiles. What
is said of the one furnishes, at the same time, the guarantee for the other.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 13. &quot;<i>And the envy of Ephraim departeth, and the adversaries
of Judah are cut off; Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">According to the explanatory fourth clause, the &quot;adversaries of
Judah&quot; in the second clause, can only be those among Judah who vex Ephraim. At the
very beginning of the separation of the two kingdoms, their future reunion had been
announced by a prophet; and this must now take place as certainly as Jehovah is
God, who had promised to David and his house the eternal dominion over all Israel.
The separation had taken place because the house of David had become unfaithful
to its vocation. In the Messiah, the promise, to the Davidic race is to be completely
realized; <i>and this realization has</i>, for its necessary consequence, the <i>
removal for ever</i> of the separation; comp. Ezek. xxxvii. 22. It was a <i>prelude</i>
to the fulfilment, that a portion of the subjects of the kingdom of the ten tribes
united with Judah in all those times when, in the blessing accompanying the enterprises
of a pious son of David, the promise granted to David was, in some measure realized,--as
was the case under Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, and Josiah. Even before Christ appeared
in the flesh, the announcement here made was all but realized. The exile put an
end to the kingdom of the ten tribes, and hence also to the unnatural separation
which had been designated as the severest calamity of the past, chap. vii. 17. The
other tribes <span class="pagenum">[Pg 131]</span> joined Judah and the restored
sanctuary; comp. Acts xxvi. 7; Luke ii. 36. The name of &quot;<i>Jews</i>&quot; passed over
to the whole nation; the jealousy disappeared. This blessing was conferred upon
the people for Christ&#39;s sake, and with a view to His future appearance. In Christ,
the bond of union and communion is so firmly formed that no new discord can alienate
the hearts from one another.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 14. &quot;<i>And they fly upon the shoulder of the Philistines
toward the West, spoil together the children of the East; Edom and Moab shall be
their assault, the children of Ammon their obedience.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">As Israel is united internally, so it shall be externally powerful.
According to the Song of Solomon vi. 10, the congregation of Israel when, by her
renewed connection with the Lord and His heavenly Solomon, she has regained her
former strength, is &quot;terrible as an army with banners.&quot;--The nations mentioned are
those of the Davidic reign. Even before the time of the Prophet, they had been anew
conquered by Jehoshaphat, in whom the spirit of David had been revived anew; comp.
2 Chron. xx.; Ps. lxxxiii. A prelude to the fulfilment of the prophecy before us
took place at the time of the Maccabees, comp. Vol. i. p. 467, 468. But as regards
the fulfilment, we are not entitled to limit ourselves to the names here mentioned.
These names are the accidental element in the prophecy; the thought is this: As
soon as Israel realizes its destiny, it partakes of God&#39;s inviolability, of God&#39;s
victorious power. The Prophet&#39;s sole purpose is to point out the victorious power,
to give prominence to the thought that outward prosperity is the necessary consequence
of inward holiness.--In the first clause, the image is taken from birds of prey;
comp. Hab. i. 8: &quot;They fly as an eagle hastening to eat,&quot; which passage refers to
the enemies of Israel at the time of wrath. In the time of <i>grace</i>, the relation
will be just the reverse.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1500;&#1495; &#1497;&#1491;</span> occurs,
in a series of passages in Deuteronomy, of that which is taken in hand, undertaken.
Edom and Moab are no longer an object of <i>Noli me tangere</i> for them.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 15. &quot;<i>And the Lord destroys the tongue of the Sea of Egypt,
and waves His hand over the River with the violence of His wind, and smiteth it
into seven streams, that one may go through in shoes.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 132]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 16. &quot;<i>And there shall be a highway for the remnant of His
people which was left from Asshur; like as it was to Israel in the day that he came
up out of the land of Egypt.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The miraculous power of the Lord shall remove all obstacles to
deliverance. These obstacles are represented by the Euphrates and the Red Sea (the
tongue of the Sea of Egypt, equivalent to the point of it), with a reference to
the fact that, among the countries, in ver. 11, from which Israel is to be delivered,
there had been mentioned, <i>Egypt</i>, between which and the Holy Land was the
Red Sea, and Asshur, situated on the other side of Euphrates. To Euphrates, upon
which there will be repeated that which, in ancient times, was done in the case
of Jordan, the Prophet assigns, in ver. 15, the last place, on account of ver. 16.
The highway in that verse is prepared by the turning off of Euphrates, so that we
might put: &quot;And thus,&quot; at the beginning of the verse. As regards the destroying,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1495;&#1512;&#1493;&#1501;</span>, it is the forced devoting to God of
that which would not spontaneously serve Him; compare remarks on Mal. iii. 24. Objects
of such devoting can properly be <i>persons</i> only, because they only are capable
of spontaneous sanctification to God, as well as of wilful desecration. The fact
that it is here transferred to the sea may be accounted for by its being personified.
The destruction which is inflicted upon the sea is, in it, inflicted upon the enemies
of God thereby represented, inasmuch as it opposes the people of God, and thus,
as it were, strives against God.--<i>With the violence or terror of His wind</i>,
<i>i.e.</i>, with His violent, terrible wind. There is in this an allusion to Exod.
xiv. 21, according to which the Lord dried up the Red Sea by a violent wind. Against
<i>Drechsler</i>, who thinks of &quot;God&#39;s breathing of anger,&quot; first, this reference
to Exod. xiv. 21, and farther, the circumstance that the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1493;&#1495;</span> appears as something which the Lord has
in His hand, are decisive.--In ver. 16 we need not, after &quot;from Asshur,&quot; supply
the other nations mentioned in ver. 11, which would be unexampled; but Asshur appears
as the representative of all the enemies of God. Similarly in Micah also, Asshur
is, with evident intention, used typically; comp. Vol. i. p. 515, 516.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_108a" href="#ftnRef_108a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[1]</sup></a> Notwithstanding the arguments which we stated
	in favour of our proposition, that the original form of the name is
	<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span>. <i>Ebrard</i> without even attempting
	to refute them, assumes, in favour of a far-fetched conjecture, that the name
	of the place was written <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1494;&#1512;&#1514;</span> (<i>Kritik.
	d. Ev. Geschichte</i> S. 843, 1st Ed.), and has introduced this opinion even
	into the text of the new edition of <i>Olshausen&#39;s</i> Commentary, edited by
	him. The circumstance that elsewhere <i>commonly</i> the Hebrew
	<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1494;</span> is, in Greek, rendered by
	<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#950;</span>, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;</span>
	by <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#963;</span> is, in this case, where the special
	arguments in favour of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span> are so strong,
	of no consequence.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_111a" href="#ftnRef_111a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[2]</sup></a> <i>Hofmann</i> (<i>Weissagung und Erfüllung.</i>,
	II. S. 64) was the last who assumed that the Evangelist had generally in view
	those passages in which the lowliness, contempt, and rejection of Christ are
	spoken of, and that, in the Old Testament passages in question, the
	<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#925;&#945;&#950;&#969;&#961;&#945;&#8150;&#959;&#962;</span> was not contained according to
	the letter, but according to the spirit only. But this is opposed not only by
	the whole manner of quotation which is given as a literal one, but also by a
	whole series of analogies: Christ&#39;s birthplace in Bethlehem, His stay in Jerusalem,
	His ministry in Galilee, and especially in Capernaum, His entrance into Jerusalem,--all
	these are by Matthew traced back to prophetical declarations which have a special
	reference to these localities. Against the exposition given by us, <i>Hofmann</i>
	advances the assertion that neither <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span>
	nor <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1496;&#1512;</span> have ever attached to them the
	idea of lowliness, of unassuming appearance. But even if a twig were not of
	itself something lowly and unassuming in appearance, yet, in the passage before
	us, that idea is, at all events, implied in the connection with the <i>stump</i>
	and <i>roots</i>, as well as by the contrast to
	<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1508;&#1512;&#1492;</span>.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_112a" href="#ftnRef_112a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[3]</sup></a> The following passage, which we take from
	<i>Raim. Martini Pug. Fid.</i> III. 3, 19 p. 685, will fully illustrate that
	custom: R. <i>Abba</i> said: His name is <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span>
	Lord, according to the word in Jerem. xxiii. 6; R. <i>Josua ben Levy</i> said:
	&quot;His name is Sprout, according to what is said in Zech. vi. 12. Others say that
	His name will be Comforter, Son of the strength of God, as is declared in Lam.
	i. 16. Those from the School of R. <i>Siloh</i> said: His name will be <i>Shiloh</i>,
	as is written in Gen. xlix. 10: &#39;Until Shiloh come.&#39; Those from the School of
	R. <i>Chanina</i> said: His name will be the Gracious one, as Jerem. said in
	chap. xvi. 13. Those from the School of R. <i>Jannai</i> said: Jinnon shall
	be His name, according to Ps. lxxii. 17, &amp;c.&quot;</p>
</div>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 133]</span></p>
<h3><a name="div2_133" href="#div2Ref_133">CHAP. XII.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">This chapter contains Israel&#39;s hymn of thanks after having obtained
redemption and deliverance, and is connected with chap. ix. 2 (3), where the Prophet
had, in general, mentioned the joy of the elect in the Messianic time. Here he embodies
it in words. The hymn, which forms a kind of close, and, to a certain degree, belongs
to the whole cycle of the preceding Messianic prophecies, is based upon the hymn
of thanksgiving by Israel after having passed through the Red Sea,--that historical
fact which contained so strong a guarantee for the future redemption, and is in
harmony with chap. xi. 15, 16, where the Prophet had announced a renewal of those
wonderful leadings of the Lord. The hymn falls into three stanzas, each consisting
of two verses. In ver. 1 and 2, and in ver. 4 and 5, the redeemed ones are introduced
speaking; ver. 3 and 5, which likewise form a couple, contain an epilogue of the
Prophet on the double <i>jubilus</i> of the congregation.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 1. &quot;<i>And in that day thou sayest: I will praise thee, Lord,
for thou wast angry with me, and now thine anger is turned away, and thou comfortest
me.</i> Ver. 2. <i>Behold, God is my salvation; I trust, and am not afraid; for
my strength and song is the Lord, and He became my Saviour.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The words &quot;my strength and my song,&quot; are from Exod. xv. 2. The
two members of the verse enter into the right relation to one another, and the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span> becomes intelligible, only if we keep in
mind that the words at the beginning, &quot;The Lord is my salvation,&quot; are an expression
of the conviction of the speaker; hence are equivalent to: we acknowledge Him as
our God; so that the first part expresses the subjective disposition of the Church;
the second, the objective circumstance of the case--that on which that disposition
is founded, and from which it grew up.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. &quot;<i>And ye draw water in joy out of the wells of salvation.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">During the journey through the wilderness, the bestowal of salvation
had been represented under the form of granting <span class="pagenum">[Pg 134]</span>
water. It is to it that we have here an allusion. The spiritual water denotes salvation.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. &quot;<i>And in that day ye say: Praise the Lord, proclaim
His name, declare His doings among the nations, make mention that His name is exalted.</i>
Ver. 5.
<!--deleted quote--><i>Praise the Lord, for He hath done great things; this is known
in all the earth.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 6. &quot;<i>Cry out and shout thou inhabitant of Zion; for great
is the Holy One of Israel in thy midst.</i>&quot;</p>
<hr class="W20">
<p class="normal">There now follows a cycle of ten prophecies, which, in the inscriptions,
have the name <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1488;</span> &quot;burden,&quot; and in which the
Prophet exhibits the disclosures into the destinies of the nations which he had
received on the occasion of the threatening Assyrian invasion under Sennacherib.
For, from the prophecy against Asshur in chap. xiv. 24, 25, which is contained in
the very first burden, it clearly appears that the cycle which, by the equality
of the inscriptions, is connected into one well arranged and congenial whole, belongs
to this period. This prophecy against Asshur forms one whole with that against Babel,
and by it the latter was suggested and called forth. In that prophecy, the defeat
of Asshur, which took place in the 14th year of Hezekiah, is announced as future.
It is true that the second burden, directed against the Philistines, in chap. xiv.
28-32, seems to suggest another time. Of this burden it is said, in ver. 28, that
it was given in the year that king Ahaz died; not in the year in which his death
was impending, but in that in which he died, comp. chap. vi. 1. The distressed circumstances
of the new king raised the hopes of the Philistines, who, under Ahaz, had rebelled
against the Jewish dominion. But the Prophet beholds in the Spirit that, just under
this king, the heavenly King of Zion would destroy these hopes, and would thrust
down Philistia from its imaginary height. But from the time of the original composition
of the prophecy, that of its <i>repetition</i> must be distinguished. That took
place, as is just shewn by the prophecy&#39;s being received in the cycle of the <i>
burdens</i>, at the time when the invasion of Sennacherib was immediately impending.
The Assyrians were the power from the <i>North</i>, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 135]</span>
by whom the threatened destruction would break in upon the Philistines; and the
truth of the word should be verified upon them, that prosperity is only the forerunner
of the fall. In the view of the fulfilment, Isaiah repeated the prophecy.</p>
<p class="normal">From the series of these <i>burdens</i>, we shall very briefly
comment upon those which are of importance for our purpose. First,</p>
<h3><a name="div2_135" href="#div2Ref_135">CHAPTERS XIII. l.-XIV. 27.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">This prophecy does not contain any characteristically expressed
Messianic element; but it is of no small consequence for bringing out the whole
picture of the future, as it was before the mind of the Prophet. It is in it that
Babel meets us distinctly and definitely as the threatening world&#39;s power of the
future, by which Judah is to be carried away into captivity.</p>
<p class="normal">The genuineness is incontrovertibly testified by the close; and
it is only by a naturalistic tendency that it can be denied. With the announcement
of the deliverance from Babel is first, in chap. xiv. 24, 25, connected an announcement
of deliverance from Asshur; and then follows in ver. 26 and 27, the close of the
whole prophecy from chap. xiii. 1, onward. Vers. 26 and 27, which speak of the whole
earth and of all the nations, refer to chap. xiii., where the Prophet had spoken
of an universal judgment, comp. ver. 5, 9, 10, &amp;c.; while, in the verses immediately
preceding, one single people, the Assyrians only, were spoken of It is thereby rendered
impossible to separate chap. xiv. 24, 27 from the whole.</p>
<p class="normal">Behind the world&#39;s power of the present--the Assyrian--the Prophet
beholds a new one springing up--the Babylonish. Those who have asserted that the
prophecy against Babel is altogether without foundation as soon as Isaiah is supposed
to have composed it, are utterly mistaken. Although the prophecy was by no means
destined for the contemporaries only, as prophecy is generally destined for all
times of the Church, yet, even for the Prophet&#39;s contemporaries, every letter was
of consequence. If Israel&#39;s principal enemies belonged to the future, how very little
was to be feared from the present ones; and especially if Israel should and must
rise from even the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 136]</span> deepest abasement, how
should God not then deliver them from the lower distress and need? But just because
weak faith does not like to draw such <i>inferences</i>, the Prophet at the close
expressly adverts to the present affliction, and gives to the weak faith a distinct
and sure word of God, by which it may support itself, and take encouragement in
that affliction.</p>
<p class="normal">The points of connection must not be overlooked which the prophecy
in chap. xi. offers for the prophecy before us. We already met there the total decay
of the royal house of David, the carrying away of Judah into exile, and their dispersion
into all lands. It is on this foundation that the prophecy before us takes its stand:
it points to the power by which these conditions are to be brought about. Farther--There,
as well as here, the conditions of the future are not expressly <i>announced</i>
as such, but <i>supposed</i>: the Prophet takes his stand in the future. There,
as well as here, the Prophet draws consolation in the sufferings of the present
from a salvation to be bestowed in a far distant future only.</p>
<p class="normal">From the very outset, the Prophet announces an impending carrying
away of the people, and, at the same time, that, even in this distress, the Lord
would have compassion upon His people, comp. <i>e.g.</i> chaps. v., vi. From the
very outset, the Prophet clearly saw that it was not by the Assyrians that this
carrying away would be effected. This much we consider to be fully proved by history.
The progress which the prophecy before us offers, when compared with those former
ones, consists in this circumstance only, that the Prophet here expressly mentions
the names of the future destroyers. And in reference to this circumstance we may
remark, that, according to the testimony of history, as early as at that time, the
plan of the foundation of an independent power was strongly entertained and fostered
at Babylon, as is clearly enough evidenced by the embassy of the viceroy of Babylon
to Hezekiah.</p>
<p class="normal">In chap. xxiii. 13--the prophecy against Tyre, which is acknowledged
to be genuine by the greater number of rationalistic interpreters--the Prophet shows
the clearest insight into the future universal dominion of Chaldea, which forms
the point of issue for the prophecy before us. With perfect clearness this insight
meets us in chap. xxxix. also, on which even <i>Gesenius</i> cannot avoid remarking:
&quot;The prophetic eye of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 137]</span> Isaiah foresaw, even
at that time, that, in a political point of view, Babylon would, in a short time,
altogether enter into the track of Assyria.&quot;</p>
<h3><a name="div2_137" href="#div2Ref_137">CHAPTERS XVII., XVIII.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">These two chapters form one whole, as, generally, the series of
the ten <i>burdens</i> is nowhere interrupted by inserted, heterogeneous, independent
portions. Chapter xx. forms an appendix only to chapter xix. In the same manner,
the prophecy against Sebna in chap. xxii. 16-25, stands in an internal connection
with vers. 1-15; in that which befel him, the destinies of the people were to be
typified. That these two chapters belong to one another is clearly proved by the
parallelism of chap. xvii. 10, 11, and chap. xviii. 4-6.</p>
<p class="normal">The inscription runs: &quot;Burden of Damascus.&quot; It is at the commencement
of the prophecy that the Syrians of Damascus are spoken of; the threatening soon
after turns against Judah and Israel. This is easily accounted for by the consideration
that the prophecy refers to a relation where Judah and Israel appear in the retinue
of Damascus. It was from Damascus that, in the Syrico-Damascenic war, the whole
complication proceeded. Aram induced Israel to join him in the war against Judah,
and misled Judah to seek help from Asshur. In a general religious point of view,
also, all Israel, the kingdom of the ten tribes, as well as Judah, were at that
time, as it were, incorporated into Damascus; comp. ver. 10, according to which
Israel&#39;s guilt consisted in having planted strange vines in his vineyard, with 2
Kings xvi. 10, according to which Ahaz got an altar made at Jerusalem after the
pattern of that which he had seen at Damascus. The circumstance that Israel had
become like Damascus, was the reason why it was given up to the Gentiles for punishment.</p>
<p class="normal">From the comparison of chap. x. 28-34, it appears that chap. xvii.
12-14 belongs to the time of Hezekiah, when Israel was threatened by the invasion
of Sennacherib. In chap. xvii. 1-11, in which, at first, the overthrow of Damascus
and the kingdom of the ten tribes appears as still future, the Prophet
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 138]</span> thus transfers himself back to the stand-point
of an earlier time. To this result we are also led by the chronological arrangement
of the whole collection. The Prophet, stepping back in spirit to the beginning of
the complication, surveys the whole of the calamity and salvation which arise to
Israel from the relation to Asshur and the whole world&#39;s power represented by Asshur--a
relation into which it had been led by Damascus--and takes a view of the punishment
which it receives by its sins, by its having become worldly, and of the Divine mercy
which sends deliverance and salvation.</p>
<p class="normal">The threatening goes as far as chap. xvii 11. The rod of chastisement
is, in the first instance, in the hand of Asshur; but he, as has been already mentioned,
represents the world&#39;s power in general. With this, the promise connects itself.
The oppressors of the people of God are annihilated, chap. xvii. 12-14. All the
nations of the earth, especially Ethiopia, which was, no less than Israel, threatened
by Asshur (comp. chap. xxxvii. 9), and to which Egypt at that time occupied the
position of a subordinate ally, perceive with astonishment the catastrophe by which
God brings about the destruction of His enemies, chap. xviii. 1-3. Or, to state
it more exactly: Messengers who, from the scene of the great deeds of the Lord,
hasten in ships, first, over the Mediterranean, then, in boats up the Nile, bring
the intelligence of the catastrophe which has taken place to Cush, the land of the
rustling of the wings--thus named from the rustling of the wings of the royal eagle
of the world&#39;s power, which, being in birth equal to Asshur, has there its seat,
vers. 1 and 2; comp. chap. viii. 8. All the inhabitants of the earth shall look
with astonishment at the catastrophe which is taking place, ver. 3, where the Prophet
who, in vers. 1 and 2, had described the catastrophe as having already taken place,
steps back to the stand-point of reality. In vers. 4-6, we have the graphic description
of the catastrophe. At the close, we have, in ver. 7, the words which impart to
the prophecy importance for our purpose.</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;<i>In that time shall be brought, as a present unto the Lord
of hosts, the people far stretched and shorn, and from the people terrible since
it</i> (has been) <i>and onward, and from the people of law-law and trampling down,
whose land streams divide, to the place of the name of the Lord of hosts, the Mount
Zion.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 139]</span></p>
<p class="normal">The expression, &quot;shall be brought as a present,&quot; (the word
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1497;</span> occurs, besides in this passage, only in
Ps. lxviii. 30; lxxvi. 12) points back to the fundamental passage in Ps. lxviii.
30, where David says, &quot;Because of thy temple over Jerusalem shall kings bring presents
unto thee.&quot; As outwardly, so spiritually too, the sanctuary lies <i>over</i> Jerusalem.
The sanctuary of God over Jerusalem is the emblem of His protecting power, of His
saving mercy watching over Jerusalem; so that, &quot;because of thy temple over Jerusalem
they bring,&quot; &amp;c., is equivalent to: On account of thy glorious manifestation as
the God of Jerusalem. Cush is in that Psalm, immediately afterwards, expressly mentioned
by the side of Egypt, which, at the Prophet&#39;s time, was closely connected with it.
&quot;Princes shall come out of Egypt, Cush makes her hands to hasten towards God.&quot;--According
to <i>Gesenius</i>, and other interpreters, the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1503;</span>
from the second clause is to be supplied before <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;
&#1502;&#1502;&#1513;&#1498;</span>. But this is both hard and unnecessary. It is quite in order that, first,
the offering of persons, and, afterwards, the offering of their gifts should be
mentioned. Parallel is chap. xlv. 14: &quot;The labour of Egypt and the merchandize of
Ethiopia, and the Sabeans, men of stature, shall come over unto thee, and they shall
be thine;&quot; the difference is only this, that there first the goods are mentioned,
and then the men. In chap. lxvi. 20, we likewise meet men who are brought for an
offering. The designations of the people who here appear as the type of the whole
Gentile world to be converted at some future period, and who have been chosen for
this honour in consequence of the historical circumstances which existed at the
time of the Prophet, are taken from ver. 2. <i>Gesenius</i> is wrong in remarking
in reference to them: &quot;All these epithets have for their purpose to designate that
distant people as a powerful and terrible one.&quot; As <i>Gesenius</i> himself was obliged
to remark in reference to the last words, &quot;Whose land streams divide:&quot; &quot;This is
a designation of a striking peculiarity of the country, not of the people,&quot;--the
purpose of the epithets can generally be this only, to characterise the people according
to their different prominent peculiarities.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1502;&#1513;&#1498;</span>
properly &quot;<i>drawn out</i>,&quot; &quot;<i>stretched</i>,&quot; Prov. xiii. 12, corresponds to
the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1504;&#1513;&#1497; &#1502;&#1491;&#1492;</span> &quot;men of extension or stature,&quot;
in chap. xlv. 14. High stature appears, in classical writers also, as a characteristic
sign of the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 140]</span> Ethiopians.--On
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1493;&#1512;&#1496;</span> &quot;<i>closely shorn</i>,&quot; comp. chap. l.
6, where <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1512;&#1496;</span> is used of the plucking out of
the hair of the beard.---&quot;To the people fearful since it and onward,&quot; equivalent
to: which all along, and throughout its whole existence, has been terrible; compare
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1497;&#1502;&#1497; &#1492;&#1497;&#1488;</span> Nah. ii. 9, and the expression: &quot;from
this day and forward,&quot; 1 Sam. xviii. 9. For everywhere one people only is spoken
of, comp. ver. 1, according to which Egypt cannot be thought of--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1493;
&#1511;&#1493;</span> &quot;law-law&quot; is explained from chap. xxviii. 10, 13, where it stands beside
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1493; &#1510;&#1493;</span>, and designates the mass of rules, ordinances,
and statutes. This is characteristic of the Egyptians, and likewise of the Ethiopians,
who bear so close an intellectual resemblance to them. With regard to the connection
of the verse with what precedes, <i>Gesenius</i> remarks: &quot;The consequence of such
great deeds of Jehovah will be, that the distant, powerful people of the Ethiopians
shall present pious offerings to Jehovah,&quot;--more correctly, &quot;present themselves
and their possessions to Jehovah.&quot;--A prelude to the fulfilment Isaiah beheld with
his own eyes. It is said in 2 Chron. xxxii. 33: &quot;And many (in consequence of the
manifestation of the glory of God in the defeat of Asshur before Jerusalem) brought
gifts unto the Lord to Jerusalem.&quot; Yet, we must not limit ourselves to that. The
real fulfilment can be sought for only at a later time, as certainly as that which
the Prophet announces about the destruction of the world&#39;s power exceeds, by far,
that isolated defeat of Asshur, which can be regarded as a prelude only to the real
fulfilment; and as certainly as he announces the destruction of Asshur generally,
and, under his image, of the world&#39;s power. &quot;He who delights in having pointed out
the fulfilment of such prophecies in the later history&quot;--<i>Gesenius</i> remarks--&quot;may
find it in Acts viii. 26 ff., and still more, in the circumstance that Abyssinia
is, up to this day, the only larger Christian State of the East.&quot;--In consequence
of the glorious manifestation of the Lord in His kingdom, and of the conquering
power which, in Christ, He displayed in His relation to the world&#39;s power, there
once existed in Ethiopia a flourishing Christian Church; and on the ground of this
passage before us, we look at its ruins which have been left up to this day, with
the hope that the Lord will, at some future time, rebuild it.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 141]</span></p>
<h3><a name="div2_141" href="#div2Ref_141">CHAPTER XIX.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">The burden of Egypt begins with the words: &quot;Behold the Lord rideth
upon a swift cloud, and cometh into Egypt, and the idols of Egypt are moved at His
presence, and the heart of Egypt melteth in the midst of it.&quot; The clouds with which,
or accompanied by which, the Lord comes, are, in the Old and New Testament writings,
symbolical indications and representations of judgment; comp. my remarks on Rev.
i. 7; and besides the passages quoted there, compare in addition Jer. iv. 13; Rev.
xiv. 14. But what judgment is here spoken of? According to <i>Gesenius</i> and other
interpreters, the calamity is the victory of Psammeticus over the twelve princes,
with which physical calamities are to be joined. But against this view, ver. 11
alone is conclusive, inasmuch as, according to this verse, Pharaoh, at the time
when this calamity breaks in upon Egypt, is the ruler of the whole land: &quot;How say
ye unto Pharaoh: I am the Son of the wise a (spiritual) son of the kings of ancient
times,&quot; who are celebrated for their wisdom. In ver. 2, according to which, in Egypt,
kingdom fights against kingdom, we cannot, therefore, think of independent kingdom
s; but following the way of the LXX., <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#957;&#8057;&#956;&#959;&#962; &#7952;&#960;&#8054; &#957;&#8057;&#956;&#959;&#957;</span>,
of provinces only. Further,--According to <i>Gesenius</i>, the fierce lord and cruel
king in ver. 4 is assumed to be Psammeticus. But against this the plural alone is
decisive. Ezek. xxx. 12--according to which outward enemies, the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1494;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501;</span>, are the cause of the drying up of the
Nile, of the ceasing of wealth and prosperity--militates against the assumption
of a calamity independent of the political one. The circumstance, that the prophecy
under consideration belongs to the series of the <i>burdens</i>, and was written
in the view of Asshur&#39;s advance, leaves us no room to doubt that the Lord is coming
to judgment in the oppression by the Asiatic world&#39;s power. To this may be added
the analogy of the prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel against Egypt, which are evidently
to be considered as a resumption of the prophecy under consideration, and as an
announcement that its realization is constantly going on. They do not know any other
calamity than being given up to the Asiatic world&#39;s power. Compare <i>e.g.</i> Jer.
xlvi. 25, 26: &quot;And behold, I visit Pharaoh and Egypt, and their gods and their kings,
Pharaoh <span class="pagenum">[Pg 142]</span> and them that trust in him. And I
deliver them into the hand of those that seek their soul, and into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar,
king of Babylon.&quot; After what we have remarked, the discord among the Egyptians in
ver. 2, can be considered as the consequence and concomitant of the real and main
calamity only: Where God is not in the midst, there, commonly, internal discord
is wont to follow upon severe outward affliction, inasmuch as one always imputes
to the other the cause of matters going on so badly. And what is said of the drying
up of the Nile, we shall thus likewise be obliged to consider as a consequence of
the hostile oppression. Waters are, in Scripture, the ordinary image of prosperity;
compare remarks on Rev. xvii. 1, 8, 40; xvi. 4. Here the Nile specially is chosen
as the symbol of prosperity, inasmuch as upon it the woe and weal of Egypt chiefly
depended. In consequence of the hostile invasion which consumes all the strength
of the land, the Nile of its prosperity dries up; &quot;its very foundations are destroyed,
all who carry on craft are afflicted.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The scope of the prophecy is this: The Lord comes to judgment
upon Egypt (through Asshur and those who follow in his tracks), ver. 1. Instead
of uniting all the strength against the common enemy, there arises, by the curse
of God, discord and dissolution, ver. 2. Egypt falls into a helpless state of distress,
ver. 3. &quot;And I give over Egypt into the hand of hard rule, and a fierce king (<i>Jonathan</i>:
<i>potens</i>, sc. Nebuchadnezzar) shall rule over them, saith the Lord, Jehovah
of hosts,&quot; ver. 4. The fierce king is the king of Asshur, the Asiatic kingdom; compare
the mention of Asshur in ver. 23-25; LXX. <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#946;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#955;&#949;&#8150;&#962;
&#963;&#954;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#959;&#8055;</span>. For, the fact that the unity is merely an <i>ideal</i> one, is most
distinctly and intentionally pointed at by the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1491;&#1504;&#1497;&#1501;</span>
preceding. The prosperity of the land is destroyed, ver. 5-10. The much boasted
Egyptian wisdom can as little avert the ruin of the country as it did formerly,
in ancient times; its bearers stand confounded and ashamed; nothing will thrive
and prosper, vers. 11-15. But the misery produces salutary fruits; it brings about
the conversion of Egypt to the God of Israel, and, with this conversion, a full
participation in all the privileges and blessings of the Kingdom of God shall be
connected, ver. 16, and especially vers. 18-25. This close of the prophecy, which
for our purpose is of special consequence, we must still submit to a closer examination.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 143]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 18. &quot;<i>In that day shall be five cities in the land of Egypt
which speak the language of Canaan and swear to the Lord of hosts; city of destruction
the one shall be called.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal"><i>Five</i>, as usual, here comes into consideration as the half
of <i>ten</i>, which number represents the whole; &quot;<i>five</i> cities,&quot; therefore,
is equivalent to: a goodly number of cities. On the words: &quot;Who speak the language
of Canaan,&quot; <i>Gesenius</i> remarks: &quot;With the spreading of a certain religion resting
on certain documents of revelation, as <i>e.g.</i> the Jewish religion, the knowledge
of their language, too, must be connected.&quot; We must not, of course, limit the thought
to this, that Hebrew was learned wherever the religion of Jehovah spread. When viewed
more deeply, the language of Canaan is spoken by all those who are converted to
the true God. Upon the Greek language, <i>e.g.</i> the character of the language
of Canaan has been impressed in the New Testament. That language which, from primeval
times, has been developed in the service of the Spirit, imparts its character to
the languages of the world, and changes their character in their deepest foundation.--&quot;To
swear to the Lord&quot; is to do Him homage; Michaelis: <i>Juramento se Domino obstringent</i>;
comp. chap. xlv. 23: &quot;Unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.&quot; In
the words: &quot;City of destruction,&quot;<!--inserted quote-->
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1512;&#1505;</span>, one shall be called, there is contained
an allusion to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1497;&#1512; &#1492;&#1512;&#1505;</span>, &quot;<i>city of the Sun</i>&quot;
(Heliopolis) which was peculiar to one of the chief seats of Egyptian idolatry.
It is the celebrated <i>On</i> or <i>Bethshemish</i> of which Jeremiah prophesies
in chap. xliii. 13: &quot;And he (Nebuchadnezzar) breaketh the pillars in Beth-shemish,
that is in the land of Egypt, and the houses of the gods of Egypt he burneth with
fire.&quot; This allusion was perceived as early as by <i>Jonathan</i>, who thus paraphrases:
&quot;<i>Urbs domus solis quae destruetur.</i>&quot; By this allusion it is intimated that
salvation cannot be bestowed upon the Gentile world in the state in which it is;
that punitive justice must prepare the way for salvation: that everywhere the destructive
activity of God must precede that which builds up; that the way to the Kingdom of
God passes through the fire of tribulation which must consume every thing that is
opposed to God; compare that which Micah, even in reference to the covenant-people,
says regarding the necessity of taking, before giving can have place, vol. i., p.
517.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 144]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 19. &quot;<i>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.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">That the altar is to be considered as a &quot;monument&quot; only is a supposition
altogether far-fetched, and which can the less find any support in the isolated
case, Josh. xxii., that that account clearly enough intimates how decidedly the
existence of an altar furnishes a foundation for the supposition that sacrifices
are to be offered up there, a supposition intimated by the very name in Hebrew.
If it was meant to serve some other purpose, it would have been necessary expressly
to state it, or, at least, some other place of sacrifice ought to have been assigned
for the sacrifices mentioned in ver. 21. But as it stands, there cannot be any doubt
that the altar here and the sacrifices there belong to one another. This passage
under consideration is of no little consequence, inasmuch as it shows that, in other
passages where a going up of the Gentiles to Jerusalem in the Messianic time is
spoken of, as, <i>e.g.</i>, chap. lxvi. 23, we must distinguish between the thought
and the embodiment. The <i>pillar</i> at the border bears an inscription by which
the land is designated as the property of the Lord, just as it was the custom of
the old eastern conquerors, and especially of the Egyptians, to erect such pillars
in the conquered territories.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 20. &quot;<i>And it is for a sign and for a witness to the Lord
of hosts in the land of Egypt: When they cry unto the Lord because of the oppressors,
He shall send them a Saviour and a Deliverer; and he shall deliver them.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Altar and pillar, as a sign and witness of the confession to the
Lord, are, at the same time, a guarantee of the deliverance to be granted by Him.
According to <i>Gesenius</i>, the Prophet speaks &quot;without a definite historical
reference, of a saving or protecting angel.&quot; But we cannot think of an angel on
account of the plain reference to the common formula in the Book of Judges, by which
it is intimated that, as far as redemption is concerned, Egypt has been made a partaker
of the privileges of the covenant-people. It is just this reference which has given
rise to the general expression; but it is Christ who is meant; for the prophets,
and especially Isaiah, are not cognizant of any other Saviour for the Gentile world
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 145]</span> than of Him; and it is He who is suggested
by the Messianic character of the whole description.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 21. &quot;<i>And the Lord is known to the Egyptians, and the Egyptians
know the Lord in that day, and offer sacrifice and oblation, and vow vows unto the
Lord, and perform them.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 22. &quot;<i>And the Lord smiteth the Egyptians so that He healeth
them, and they are converted to the Lord, and He shall be entreated by them, and
shall heal them.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">We have here simply a recapitulation. The prophet describes anew
the transition from the state of wrath to that of grace--not, as <i>Drechsler</i>
thinks, what they experience in the latter. Upon Egypt is fulfilled what, in Deut.
xxxii. 39, has been said in reference to Israel.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 23. &quot;<i>In that day there shall be a highway out of Egypt
to Asshur, and Asshur cometh into Egypt, and Egypt into Asshur, and Egypt serveth
with Asshur.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal"><span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491;</span> with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514;</span> has commonly the signification &quot;to serve
some one;&quot; here, however, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514;</span> is used as a
preposition: Egypt serves God <i>with</i> Asshur. Yet there is an allusion to the
ordinary use of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491;</span> with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514;</span> in order to direct attention to the wonderful
change: First, Egypt serves Asshur, and the powers that follow its footsteps; then,
it serves <i>with</i> Asshur. Here also it becomes manifest that the deliverer in
ver. 20 is no ordinary human deliverer; for such an one could help his people only
by inflicting injury upon the hostile power.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 24. &quot;<i>In that day Israel shall be the third with Egypt
and with Asshur, a blessing in the midst of the earth.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The &quot;blessing&quot; is not &quot;that union of people formerly separated,&quot;
but it is <i>Israel</i> from which the blessing is poured out upon all the other
nations; compare the fundamental passage, Gen. xii. 1-3, and the word of the Lord:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7969; &#963;&#969;&#964;&#951;&#961;&#943;&#945; &#7952;&#954; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#7992;&#959;&#965;&#948;&#945;&#943;&#969;&#957; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#943;</span>, John iv. 22.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 25. &quot;<i>For the Lord of Hosts blesseth him, saying: Blessed
be Egypt my people, and Asshur the work of mine hands, and Israel mine inheritance.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The suffix in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1512;&#1502;</span> refers
to every thing mentioned in ver. 24. &quot;Assyria and Egypt are called by epithets which
elsewhere are wont to be bestowed upon Israel only.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">It is scarcely necessary to point out how gloriously this,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 146]</span> prophecy was fulfilled; how, at one time,
there existed a flourishing Church in Egypt. Although the candlestick of that Church
be now removed from its place (&quot;<i>Satanas in hac gente sevit zizania</i>&quot;--<i>Vitringa</i>),
yet we are confident of, and hope for, a future in which this prophecy shall anew
powerfully manifest itself The broken power of the Mahommedan delusion opens up
the prospect, that the time in which this hope is to be realized is drawing nigh.</p>
<h3><a name="div2_146" href="#div2Ref_146">CHAPTER XXIII.</a></h3>
<h4>THE BURDEN UPON TYRE.</h4>
<p class="normal">In the view of Sennacherib&#39;s invasion, the eyes of the Prophet
are opened, so that he beholds the future destinies of the nations within his horizon.
It is under these circumstances that it is revealed to him that Tyre also, which,
not long before, had successfully resisted the attack of Asshur, and had imagined
herself to be invincible, would not, for any length of time, be able to resist the
attack of the Asiatic world&#39;s power.</p>
<p class="normal">The threatening goes on to ver. 14; it is, in ver. 13, concentrated
in the words: &quot;Behold the land of the Chaldeans, this people which was not, which
Asshur assigns to the beasts of the wilderness,--they set up their watch-towers,
they arouse her palaces, they bring them to ruin.&quot; The correct explanation of this
verse has been given by <i>Delitzsch</i> in his Commentary on Habakkuk, S. xxi.
Before the capture of Tyre could be assigned to the Chaldeans, it was necessary
to point out that they should overthrow Asshur, the representative of the world&#39;s
power in the time of the Prophet. The Chaldeans, a people which, up to that time,
were not reckoned in the list of the kingdoms of the world, destroy, in some future
period, the Assyrian power, and shall then inflict upon Tyre that destruction which
Asshur intended in vain to bring upon it.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 147]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Upon the threatening there follows the promise. Ver. 15. &quot;<i>And
it shall come to pass in that day, and Tyre is forgotten seventy years like the
days of one king. After the end of seventy years, it shall be unto Tyre according
to the song of the harlot.</i> Ver. 16. <i>Take the harp, go about the city, forgotten
harlot, make sweet melody, sing many songs, that thou mayest be remembered.</i>
Ver. 17. <i>And it shall come to pass, after the end of seventy years, the Lord
will visit Tyre, and she returneth to her hire of whoredom, and whoreth with all
the kingdoms of the earth upon the surface of the earth.</i> Ver. 18. <i>And her
gain and hire of whoredom shall be holy unto the Lord; not is it treasured and laid
up, but to those who sit before the Lord its gain shall be, that they may eat and
be satisfied, and for durable clothing.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">On the &quot;70 years, like the days of one king,&quot; <i>Michaelis</i>
very pertinently remarks: &quot;Not of one individual, but of one reign or empire, <i>
i.e.</i> as long as the Babylonian empire shall last, which, after 70 years, was
destroyed by Cyrus.&quot; The necessary qualification follows from ver. 13. According
to that verse, the one king can be the king of the Chaldeans only. Parallel are
the 70 years which, in Jer. xxv. 11, 12, are assigned to the Chaldean empire: &quot;And
these nations serve the king of Babylon 70 years. And it shall come to pass, when
the 70 years are accomplished, I will visit upon the king of Babylon, and upon that
nation, saith the Lord, their iniquity.&quot; In the Commentary on Rev. ii. 1, p. 75,
200, it was proved that, in Scripture, kings are frequently <i>ideal</i> persons;
not individuals, but personifications of their kingdoms. <i>Gesenius&#39;</i> objection,
that the time of the Babylonish dynasty, from the pretended destruction of Tyre
to the destruction of Babylon, did not last 70 years, vanishes by the remark that
the Prophet says &quot;like the days;&quot; that, hence, it is expressly intimated that the
70 years here, differently from what is the case in Jeremiah, are to be considered
as a <i>round</i> designation of the time. From a comparison of Jeremiah we learn
that the Chaldean dominion will last 70 years <i>in all</i>. Into which point of
that period the destruction of Tyre is to fall, Isaiah does not disclose. It is
quite proper that in reference to Tyre the announcement should not be so definite,
in point of chronology, as in reference to Judah. That the capture of
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 148]</span> Tyre by the Chaldeans, which is here announced,
really took place, has been more thoroughly established in my book: <i>De rebus
Tyriorum</i>; and afterwards by <i>Drechsler</i> in his Commentary on Isaiah, and
by <i>Hävernick</i> in his Commentary on Ezekiel.</p>
<p class="normal">After the end of the 70 years. Tyre is to resume her trade of
whoring, and is to carry it on to a wide extent, and with great success. &quot;By the
image of whoredom&quot;--so we remarked in commenting upon Rev. xiv. 8--&quot;in some passages
of the Old Testament, that selfishness is designated which clothes itself in the
garb of love, and, under its appearance, seeks the gratification of its own desires.
In Is. xxiii. 15 ff., Tyre is, on account of her mercantile connections, called
a whore, and the profit from trade is designated as the reward of whoredom. The
point of comparison is the endeavour to please, to feign love for the sake of gain.&quot;
Under the dominion of the Persians, Tyre again began to flourish.</p>
<p class="normal">Tyre&#39;s reward of whoredom is consecrated to the Lord, and the
bodily wants of His servants are provided from it,--quite in agreement with the
words of the Apostle: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#949;&#7984; &#7969;&#956;&#949;&#8150;&#962; &#8017;&#956;&#8150;&#957; &#964;&#8048; &#960;&#957;&#949;&#965;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#953;&#954;&#8048;
&#7952;&#963;&#960;&#949;&#943;&#961;&#945;&#956;&#949;&#957;, &#956;&#941;&#947;&#945;, &#949;&#7984; &#7969;&#956;&#949;&#8150;&#962; &#8017;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#964;&#8048; &#963;&#945;&#961;&#954;&#953;&#954;&#8048; &#952;&#949;&#961;&#943;&#963;&#959;&#956;&#949;&#957;</span>; 1 Cor. ix. 11. Converted
Tyre offers, in these gifts, its thanks for the noble gift which it received from
the sanctuary.</p>
<p class="normal"><i>Vitringa</i>, who remarks that the Prophet was fully aware
of &quot;the great interval of time that would intervene betwixt the restoration of Tyre,
and her dedication of herself, with her gains, to the Lord,&quot; is right, while <i>
Drechsler</i>, who is of opinion that the doings of consecrated Tyre also are represented
under the image of whoring, is wrong. Whoring designates a sinful conversation which
is irreconcilable with conversion to the Lord. It does not designate trade, as such,
but trade as it is earned on by those who, with unrenewed hearts, serve the god
Mammon. We have here before us two stages, strictly separated. <i>First</i>, she
resumes her old whorings; <i>then</i>, she consecrates her gain to the Lord. The
severe catastrophe intervening, the new capture of Tyre, as it took place by Alexander,
is not yet beheld by Isaiah. The announcement of it was reserved for the post-exilic
Prophet Zechariah, chap. ix. 3.</p>
<p class="normal">The announcement of the future conversion of Tyre received,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 149]</span> in the time of Christ, a symbolical representation
as it were, in the Canaanitish woman. <i>Vitringa</i> says: &quot;The first fruits of
this grace were received by that wise Canaanitish woman, who had been taught, as
if she had been in the school of Christ, to ask for divine grace; whom Matth. xv.
22, calls a woman of Canaan, Mark vii. 26, a Syrophenician; but who was no doubt
a Tyrian, inasmuch as she obtained mercy from Christ the Lord himself, while He
sojourned in the territory of Tyre and Sidon. Paul found at Tyre a congregation
of disciples of Christ already in existence, Acts xxi. 3 ff.&quot;<!--inserted quote mark here;
see Thomas Newton, Dissertations on the Prophecies--> At a subsequent period, there
existed at Tyre a flourishing and wealthy church. <i>Eusebius</i> and <i>Jerome</i>
describe to us, from their own experience, the fulfilment of this prophecy.</p>
<h3><a name="div2_149" href="#div2Ref_149">CHAPTERS XXIV.-XXVII.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">Upon the ten single &quot;burdens&quot; as they were called forth by the
threatening Assyrian catastrophe, there follows here a comprehensive description
of the judgments of God upon His people, and upon the world&#39;s power hostile to His
Kingdom, The characteristic feature in it is, that the Prophet abstains from all
details.</p>
<p class="normal">The prophecy begins in chap. xxiv. 1-13, with the threatening
of the judgment upon Judah, The fact that Judah is here spoken of, not alone, it
is true, but together with his companions in suffering, with all the other nations
crushed like him by the world&#39;s power in its various phases (verse 4 most clearly
shows that it is not Judah alone which is spoken of; comp. the same comprehensive
mode of representation in Jer. xxv.; Hab. ii. 6), appears from ver. 5: &quot;For they
transgressed the <i>laws</i>, violated the <i>ordinances</i>, broke the everlasting
<i>covenant</i>,&quot; where there can exist only a collateral reference to the Gentile
world; from ver. 13, where the continuing gleaning is characteristic of the covenant-people
(comp. xvii. 6); but especially from ver. 23, where, after the time of punishment,
the Lord reigneth on Mount Zion.</p>
<p class="normal">The judgment upon Judah bears a comprehensive character.
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 150]</span> As the single phases of the world&#39;s power,
by which the sins of the people of God are visited, there had been mentioned in
the cycle of the <i>burdens</i>, Asshur in chap. xiv. 25; Babylon in chap. xiii.,
xiv., xxi., (the circumstance that the first <i>burden</i> of the first half of
the <i>burdens</i>, and likewise the first <i>burden</i> of the second half of the
<i>burdens</i>--the ten <i>burdens</i> being thus divided into twice five--is directed
against Babylon, shows that specially heavy judgments were to be inflicted by Babel);
Elam in chap. xxii. 6 (comp. remarks on chap. xi. 11). Here the idea of judgment
upon the covenant-people is viewed <i>per se</i>, and irrespective of the particular
forms of its realisation.</p>
<p class="normal">In vers. 14, 15, there is a sudden transition from the threatening
to the promise: &quot;They (the remnant left according to ver. 13) shall lift their voice,
they shall shout for the majesty of the Lord, they shall cry aloud from the sea,&quot;--from
the sea into which they were driven away by the storm of the judgments of the Lord.
To the &quot;sea&quot; here, correspond the &quot;islands of the sea,&quot; in ver. 15; compare the
mention of the islands in chap. xi. 11. Ver. 15. &quot;Therefore, in the light praise
ye the Lord, in the isles of the sea the name of the Lord God of Israel.&quot; The words
are addressed to the elect in the time of salvation. The Plural
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501;</span> denotes the <i>fulness</i> of light or
salvation, comp. chap. xxvi. 19; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span> is, in
both instances, used in a local sense. The light is the spiritual territory; the
isles of the sea, the natural.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 16 returns to the threatening: &quot;From the uttermost parts
of the earth we hear songs: Glory to the righteous! And I say: Misery to me, misery
to me, woe to me! the treacherous are treacherous, and very treacherous are the
treacherous.&quot; The song of praise of the redeemed, which is heard coming forth from
a far distant future, is suppressed by the same affliction which is immediately
impending, by the look to the rod of chastisement by the world&#39;s power with its
treachery, its policy feigning love and concealing hatred, with which the Lord is
to visit His people, and the floods of which, like a new flood, are, according to
ver. 15, to overflow the whole earth. Compare the very similar transition from triumphant
hope to lamentation over the misery of the future more immediately at hand, in Hab.
iii. 16.</p>
<p class="normal">In ver. 21, ff. the promise breaks forth anew. Ver. 21:
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 151]</span> &quot;<i>And it shall come to pass in that day:
the Lord shall visit the host of the height in the height, and the kings of the
earth upon the earth.</i> Ver. 22. <i>And they are all of them gathered together
as prisoners in the pit, and are shut up in the prison, and after many days they
are visited.</i> Ver. 23. <i>And the moon blusheth, and the sun is ashamed, for
the Lord of hosts reigneth on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, and before His ancients
is glory.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">In ver. 21 the destruction of the world&#39;s power is announced.
The &quot;kings of the earth&quot; form the explanation of the &quot;host of the height.&quot; It is
very common to represent rulers under the image of stars; compare Numb. xxiv. 17;
Rev. vi. 13, viii. 10; Is. xiv. 12, xxxiv. 4, 5, compared with ver. 12.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1512;&#1493;&#1501;</span> is used in reference to the great ones
of the earth in ver. 4, and in chap. xxvi. 5, also. The explanation by evil heavenly
powers has no Old Testament analogies in its favour.--In ver. 22, the words: &quot;And
after many days they are visited,&quot; intimates that the time will appear very long
to Zion, until the visitation takes place. &quot;Many days,&quot; or &quot;a long time,&quot; viz.,
after the beginning of their raging, which was to continue for a series of centuries,
until Christ at length spoke: &quot;Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world.&quot; The
visitation consists in their being gathered together.--In ver. 23, the words: &quot;The
Lord reigneth,&quot; contain an allusion to the formula used in proclaiming the accession
of earthly kings to the throne, and point to an impending new and glorious manifestation
of the government of the Lord,--as it were, a new accession to the throne; compare
remarks on Ps. xciii. 1; Rev. xix. 6. The &quot;ancients&quot; are the <i>ideal</i> representatives
of the Church; compare remarks on Rev. iv. 4. Before them is glory, inasmuch as
the Lord imparts to them of His glory.</p>
<p class="normal">In chap. xxv. 1-5, the Lord is praised on account of the glorious
redemption bestowed upon His people. &quot;For thou hast made&quot;--it is said in ver. 2--&quot;of
a city a heap, of a firm city a ruin, the palace of strangers to be no city; it
shall not be built in eternity.&quot; The city, palace (we must think of such an one
as comes up to a city, as is even now the case with the palaces of the princes in
India) bear an ideal character, and represent the whole fashion of the world, the
whole world&#39;s power; comp. ver. 12, chaps. xxvi. 5, xxvii. 10. <i>Gesenius</i>
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 152]</span> speaks of &quot;the strange conjectures of interpreters
who have guessed all possible cities.&quot; But he himself has lost himself in the sphere
of strange conjectures and guesses, by remarking: &quot;The city whose destruction is
here spoken of can be none other than Babylon.&quot; The circumstance that Babylon is
not mentioned at all in the whole prophecy in chaps. xxiv.-xxvii. shows plainly
enough that a special reference to Babylon cannot here be entertained; and the less
so, that it would be against the character of our prophecy, which abstains from
all details.</p>
<p class="normal">While in vers. 1-5 the discourse was laudatory and glorifying,
and addressed to the Lord, in vers. 6-8 the Lord is spoken of:</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 6. &quot;<i>And in this mountain the Lord of hosts maketh unto
all people a feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full
of marrow, of lees well-refined.</i> Ver 7. <i>And destroyeth in the mountain the
surface of the vail covering all the nations, and the covering cast upon all the
nations.</i> Ver. 8. <i>And destroyeth death for ever, and the Lord Jehovah wipeth
away the tears from off all faces, and the rebuke of His people shall He take away
from of all the earth; for the Lord hath spoken.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;In this mountain,&quot; ver. 6, where He enters upon His government
(chap. xxiv. 23), and dwells in the midst of His people in a manner formerly unheard
of.--&quot;Unto all people,&quot; comp. chap. ii. 2 ff. The verse under consideration forms
the foundation for the words of Christ in Matthew viii. 2:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#955;&#941;&#947;&#969; &#948;&#8050; &#8017;&#956;&#8150;&#957; &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#960;&#959;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#8054; &#7936;&#960;&#8056; &#7936;&#957;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#955;&#8182;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#948;&#965;&#963;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#7973;&#958;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#953;
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7936;&#957;&#945;&#954;&#955;&#953;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#956;&#949;&#964;&#8048; &#7944;&#946;&#961;&#945;&#8048;&#956; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7992;&#963;&#945;&#8048;&#954; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7992;&#945;&#954;&#969;&#946; &#7952;&#957; &#964;&#8135; &#946;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#955;&#949;&#943;&#8115; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#959;&#8016;&#961;&#945;&#957;&#8182;&#957;</span>;
comp. xxii. 1 ff.; Luke xxii. 30. In ver. 7, &quot;the surface of the vail&quot; is the vail
itself, inasmuch as it lies over it. The &quot;covering&quot; here comes into consideration
as a sign of mourning, comp. 2 Sam. xv. 30: &quot;And David went up by the ascent of
Mount Olivet, weeping, and his head covered, and so also all the people with him.&quot;
The explanation is given in ver. 8, where the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1500;&#1506;</span>
is intentionally resumed. We cannot, therefore, agree with <i>Drechsler</i> who
explains the being &quot;covered,&quot; by &quot;dullness and deadness in reference to spiritual
things.&quot;--The first part of ver. 8 is again resumed in Rev. vii. 17, xxi. 4. As
death entered into the world by sin (Gen. ii. 17; Rom. v. 12),
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 153]</span> so it ceases when sin is completely overcome;
compare 1 Cor. xv. 54, where our passage is expressly quoted. Besides death, <i>
tears</i> also are mentioned, inasmuch as they flow with special bitterness in the
case of bereavements by death.--The Lord removes the rebuke of His people when all
their hopes, which formerly were mocked and laughed at, are fulfilled, and when,
out of the midst of them, salvation for the whole world rises.</p>
<p class="normal">With the people of God in their exaltation, Moab is, in vers.
9-12, contrasted in its weakness and humiliation, and in its vain attempts to withdraw
from the supremacy of the God of Israel. Moab comes here into consideration, only
as the representative of all the kingdoms hostile to God, and obstinately persevering
in their opposition to His Kingdom; just as Edom in chap. xxxiv., lxiii. The representative
character of Moab was recognized by <i>Gesenius</i> also, who thus determines the
sense: &quot;Whilst Jehovah&#39;s protecting hand rests upon Zion, His enemies helplessly
perish.&quot; It is intentionally that Moab is mentioned, and not Asshur or Babel, because,
in its case, the representative character could not so easily be mistaken or overlooked.--Ver.
12 returns to the world&#39;s power in general.</p>
<p class="normal">In chap. xxvi., the rejoicing and shouting for the salvation are
continued. A characteristic Messianic feature is contained in ver. 19 only, in which,
as in chap. xxv. 8, the ceasing of death and the resurrection of the righteous appear
as taking place in the Messianic time.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 19. &quot;<i>Thy dead shall live, my dead bodies shall arise.
Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust! For a dew of light is thy dew, and thou makest
fall to the earth the giants.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The saints are raised from the earth; the giants are sunk into
the earth. The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1508;&#1488;&#1497;&#1501;</span> &quot;giants&quot; are identical
with the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1513;&#1489;&#1497; &#1514;&#1489;&#1500;</span> in ver. 18. There it was
said in reference to the time of wrath: &quot;We have not wrought any deliverance in
the land, neither have the inhabitants of the world fallen;&quot; compare vers. 9 and
21; Numb. xiv. 32. Parallel is the announcement of the defeat of the world&#39;s power
in ver. 14. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1508;&#1488;&#1497;&#1501;</span>, it is true, is there used
of the dead; but the signification of the word remains the same: The bodiless spirits
were called <i>giants</i>, because they were objects of terror to the living; comp.
remarks on Ps. lxxxviii. 11. The word is, in ver. 14, used <span class="pagenum">
[Pg 154]</span> with a certain irony.--&quot;Light&quot; is equivalent to &quot;salvation.&quot; The
Plural signifies the fulness of light or salvation. The complete fulfilment which
the words, &quot;Thy dead shall live,&quot; will find in the resurrection of the body, affords
a guarantee for the fulfilment of the previous stages.</p>
<p class="normal">In chap. xxvii., it is especially ver. 1 which attracts our attention:
&quot;<i>In that day the Lord with His sword, hard, great, and strong, shall visit the
leviathan, the tortuous serpent, and killeth the dragon that is in the sea.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">We have here three designations of one and the same monster.
<i>Gesenius</i>, on the other hand, rightly brings forward the accumulation of the
attributes of the sword: With the three epithets applied to the sword, the three
epithets of the monster to be killed by it pertinently correspond. The leviathan,
the dragon, is, as it were, the king of the sea-animals, compare remarks on Ps.
lxxiv. 13, 14. In the spiritual sea of the world, its natural antitype is the conquering
world&#39;s power; comp. remarks on Rev. xii. 3. But that which is meant is the whole
world&#39;s power, according to all its phases, which is here viewed as a whole; comp.
ver. 13, where it is designated by Asshur and Egypt. The special reference to Babylon
rests, here also, on a mere fancy.</p>
<hr class="W20">
<p class="normal">After the single discourses out of the Assyrian time, from chap.
vii.-xxvii., there follows in <a name="div2_154" href="#div2Ref_154">chap. xxviii.-xxxiii.</a>
the sum and substance of those not fully communicated. Even the uncommonly large
extent of the section suggests to us such a comprehensive character. And so likewise
does the fact that the same thoughts are constantly recurring, as is the case in
several of the minor prophets also, <i>e.g.</i> Hosea. But what is most decisive
is, that in chap. xxviii. 1-4 Samaria appears as not yet destroyed. Considering
that the chronological principle pervades the whole collection, this going back
can be accounted for only by the circumstance that we have here a comprehensive
representation. And we are the more led to this opinion that, in other passages
of the same section, Jerusalem is represented as being threatened immediately. In
this section, it is especially the passage in chap. xxviii. 16
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 155]</span> which attracts our attention; since, in the
New Testament, it is referred to Christ.</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;<i>Behold I have laid for a foundation in Zion a stone, a tried</i>
(stone), <i>a precious corner stone of perfect foundation; he that believeth need
not make haste</i>,&quot; viz., for an escape or refuge for himself, Ps. lv. 9. In opposition
to false hopes, this stone is pointed to as the only true foundation, and all are
threatened with unavoidable destruction who do not make it their foundation. The
stone is the Kingdom of God, the Church; compare Zech. iii. 9, where the Kingdom
of God likewise appears under the image of the stone. But since the Kingdom of God
(which, in chap. viii. 16, had been represented under the image of the quietly flowing
waters of Siloah) is, for all eternity, closely connected with the house of David
which centres in Christ, <i>that which, in the first instance, is said of the kingdom
of God refers, at the same time, to its head and centre</i>. Parallel is Is. xiv.
32; &quot;The Lord hath founded Zion, and the poor of His people trust in it.&quot; The
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1488;&#1502;&#1497;&#1503;</span> here corresponds with the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1505;&#1492;</span> with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span>
there. The difference is, that there Zion itself is the object of confidence, while
here it is the stone which is in Zion. <i>There</i>, Zion is the <i>spiritual</i>
Zion; not the mountain as an assemblage of stones, nor the outward temple as such,
but Zion in so far as it is a sanctuary, the seat of the presence of the Lord. The
Lord--such is the sense--has founded His Kingdom among us; and the circumstance
that we are citizens of the Kingdom gives us security, enables us to be calm even
in the midst of the greatest danger. <i>Here</i>, on the contrary, Zion is the outward
Zion, and the Kingdom of God is the Church as distinguished from it. The Zion here
corresponds to the holy mountains in Ps. lxxxvii. 1, where, in a similar manner,
a distinction is drawn between the material and spiritual Zion: &quot;His foundation
is in the holy mountains,&quot; on which I remarked in my Commentary: &quot;The foundation
of Zion took place spiritually by its being chosen to be the seat of the sanctuary.
It was then only that the place, already existing, received its spiritual foundation.&quot;
The stone laid by God as a foundation in Zion, in the passage under consideration,
is, in substance, identical with the &quot;tent that He placed among men,&quot; in Ps. lxxviii.
60. &quot;In substance the sanctuary was erected by God alone, who, by
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 156]</span> fulfilling His promise, &#39;I dwell in the midst
of them,&#39; breathed the living soul into the body, and caused His name to dwell there.&quot;
In Ezek. xi. the substance of the sanctuary, the Shechinah, withdraws into heaven.--Our
passage, farther, touches very closely upon chap. viii. 14: &quot;And He (the Lord) becomes
a sanctuary and a stone of offence, and a rock of stumbling to both the houses of
Israel, and a snare and a trap to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.&quot; The stone <i>here</i>
is the Church; <i>there</i> it is the Lord himself, according to His relation to
Israel, the Lord who has become manifest in His Church. Another point of contact
is offered by Ps. cxviii. 22: &quot;The stone which the builders rejected has become
the corner-stone.&quot; In that passage, too, the stone is the Kingdom and people of
God: &quot;The people of God whom the kingdoms of the world despised, have, by the working
of God, then been raised to the dignity of the world-ruling people.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">A simple quotation of the passage before us is found in Rom. x.
11: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#955;&#941;&#947;&#949;&#953; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#7969; &#947;&#961;&#945;&#966;&#942;· &#960;&#8118;&#962; &#8001; &#960;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#973;&#969;&#957; &#7952;&#960;&#8217; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#959;&#8016;
&#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#953;&#963;&#967;&#965;&#957;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;.</span> In chap. ix. ver. 3, we have chap. viii. 14, and the passage
under consideration blended in a remarkable manner:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7984;&#948;&#959;&#973; &#964;&#943;&#952;&#951;&#956;&#953; &#7952;&#957; &#931;&#953;&#8060;&#957; &#955;&#943;&#952;&#959;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#954;&#972;&#956;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#941;&#964;&#961;&#945;&#957; &#963;&#954;&#945;&#957;&#948;&#940;&#955;&#959;&#965;&#903;
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#8118;&#962; &#8001; &#960;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#973;&#969;&#957; &#7952;&#960;&#39; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#959;&#8016; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#953;&#963;&#967;&#965;&#957;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span>, and from the remarks already
offered, the right to this blending is evident. Peter, in 1 Pet. ii. 6, 7, adds
to these two passages, that in Ps. cxviii. 22: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#953;&#972;&#964;&#8055;
&#960;&#949;&#961;&#953;&#941;&#967;&#949;&#953; &#7952;&#957; &#964;&#8135; &#947;&#961;&#945;&#966;&#8135;: &#7984;&#948;&#959;&#8058; &#964;&#943;&#952;&#951;&#956;&#953; &#7952;&#957; &#931;&#953;&#8060;&#957; &#955;&#943;&#952;&#959;&#957; &#7936;&#954;&#961;&#959;&#947;&#969;&#957;&#953;&#945;&#8150;&#959;&#957;, &#7952;&#954;&#955;&#949;&#954;&#964;&#8056;&#957;, &#7956;&#957;&#964;&#953;&#956;&#959;&#957;,
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#8001; &#960;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#973;&#969;&#957; &#7952;&#960;&#8217; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#959;&#8016; &#956;&#8052; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#953;&#963;&#967;&#965;&#957;&#952;&#8135;. &#8017;&#956;&#8150;&#957; &#959;&#8022;&#957; &#7969; &#964;&#953;&#956;&#8052; &#964;&#959;&#8150;&#962; &#960;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#973;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#953;&#957;. &#7936;&#960;&#949;&#8150;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#8166;&#963;&#953;
&#948;&#8050; &#955;&#943;&#952;&#959;&#957; &#8003;&#957; &#7936;&#960;&#949;&#948;&#959;&#954;&#943;&#956;&#945;&#963;&#945;&#957; &#959;&#7985; &#959;&#7984;&#954;&#959;&#948;&#959;&#956;&#959;&#8166;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962;, &#959;&#8023;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#7952;&#947;&#949;&#957;&#942;&#952;&#951; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#954;&#949;&#966;&#945;&#955;&#8052;&#957; &#947;&#969;&#957;&#943;&#945;&#962;, &#954;&#945;&#8054;
&#955;&#943;&#952;&#959;&#962; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#963;&#954;&#972;&#956;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#941;&#964;&#961;&#945; &#963;&#954;&#945;&#957;&#948;&#940;&#955;&#959;&#965;</span>, on which <i>Bengel</i> remarks: &quot;Peter
quotes, in ver. 6 and 7, three passages, the first from Isaiah, the second from
the Psalms, the third again from Isaiah. To the third he alludes in ver. 8, but
to the second and first, in ver. 4, having, even then already both of them in his
mind.&quot; Matth. xxi. 42-44 refers only to Ps. cxviii. and to Is. viii. 14, 15. to
the latter passage in ver. 44; Acts iv. has Ps. cxviii. only in view.</p>
<p class="normal">The second Messianic passage of the section which is of importance
for our purpose, is chap. xxxiii. 17.</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;<i>Thine eyes shall see the King in His beauty; they shall see
the land that is far off.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 157]</span></p>
<p class="normal">The &quot;King&quot; is the Messiah. This appears from the reference to
the Song of Solomon i. 16, where the bride says to the bridegroom, the heavenly
Solomon, &quot;Behold thou art <i>fair</i>, my beloved&quot; (comp. Ps. xlv. 3;) and from
the words immediately following: &quot;they shall see the land that is far off.&quot; The
wide extension of the Kingdom of God is indissolubly connected with the appearance
of the Messiah. Those who refer the prophecy to Hezekiah refer &quot;the land that is
far off&quot; (literally: &quot;the land of distances&quot;) to &quot;a land stretching far out,&quot; in
antithesis to the siege when the people of Jerusalem were limited to its area, since
the whole country was occupied by the Assyrians. But the passage, chap. xxvi. 15:
&quot;Thou increasest the nation, O God, thou art glorified, thou removest all the boundaries
of the land,&quot; is conclusive against this explanation. Comparing this passage, as
also chap. lx. 4; Zech. x. 9, <i>Michaelis</i> correctly explains: &quot;The land of
distances is the Kingdom of Christ most widely propagated.&quot; In chap. viii. 9, likewise,
the Gentile countries are designated by the &quot;distances of the earth.&quot; <i>Farther</i>--Hezekiah
could not be designated simply by <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1500;&#1498;</span> without
the article. It is only by the utmost violence that the whole announcement can be
limited to the events under Hezekiah, which everywhere form the foreground only.
We might rather, with <i>Vitringa</i>, think of Jehovah, with a comparison of ver.
22: &quot;For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our King;
He will save us,&quot; and of Ps. xlviii. 3, where he is called
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1500;&#1498; &#1512;&#1489;</span>. To Jehovah, the passage, chap. xxx.
20, 21 also refers,--a passage which has been so often misunderstood: &quot;And the Lord
giveth you bread of adversity, and water of affliction, and not does thy teacher
conceal himself any more, and thine eyes see thy Teacher. And thine ears hear a
voice behind thee, saying, This is the way, walk ye in it; do not turn to the right
hand, nor to the left.&quot; The affliction prepares for the coming of the heavenly teacher;
by it the eyes of the people have been opened, so that they are able to behold His
glorious form. But although we should understand Jehovah by &quot;the King in His beauty,&quot;
we must, at all events, think of His glorious manifestation in Christ Jesus, who
said, He who sees me sees the Father, and in whom the fulness of the Godhead dwells
bodily; and it was indeed in Christ that God, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 158]</span>
in the truest manner, revealed and manifested himself as the Teacher of His people.</p>
<p class="normal">The close of the whole of the first part of Isaiah is, in chaps.
xxxiv., xxxv. formed by a comprehensive announcement, <i>on the one hand</i>, of
the judgments upon the God-hating world, here individualized by Edom, that hereditary
enemy of Israel, who was so much the more fitted for this representation that his
enmity was the most obstinate of all, and remained the same throughout all the phases
of Israel&#39;s oppression by the great kingdoms of the world (he always appears as
he who helped to bring misery upon his brethren); and, <i>on the other hand</i>,
of the mercy and salvation which should be bestowed upon the Church trampled upon
by the world.</p>
<p class="normal">On chap. xxxiv. 4;, 5, where the heaven is that of the princes,
the whole order of rulers and magistrates; the stars, the single princes and nobles,
compare my remarks on Rev. vi. 13.</p>
<p class="normal">The description of the salvation in store for the Church, in
<a name="div2_158" href="#div2Ref_158">chap. xxxv.</a>, is pre-eminently Messianic,
although the lower blessings also are included which preceded the appearance of
Christ. The description contains features so characteristic, that we must necessarily
submit it to a closer examination.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 1. &quot;<i>The wilderness and dry land shall be glad for it,
and the desert shall rejoice and sprout like the bulb.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The wilderness is Zion--the Church to be devastated by the world.--&quot;For
it,&quot;--<i>i.e.</i> for the judgment upon the world, as it was described in chap.
xxxiv. with which the changed fate of the Church is indissolubly connected.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 2. &quot;<i>It shall sprout, and rejoice with joy and shouting.
The glory of Lebanon is given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon. They
shall see the glory of the Lord, the excellency of our God.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;The glory of Lebanon,&quot; &amp;c. is a glory like unto that of Lebanon.
The real condition of the glory of Zion, or the Church, is brought before us in
the subsequent verses only; it consists in the Lords glory being manifested in it.
The majestic, wooded Lebanon, and fruitful Carmel, are contrasted with one another;
the latter is put together with the lovely fruitful plain of Sharon, rich in flowers;
compare remarks on Song of Sol. vii. 6. <i>Michaelis</i> says: &quot;The Lebanon excels
among the forests; the Carmel among the fruitful hills; the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 159]</span> Sharon among the lovely fields or valleys.&quot;--To
&quot;see the glory of the Lord, the excellency <i>of God</i>&quot; means to behold Him in
the revelation of the full glory of His nature. Prophecy would have fed the minds
of the people with vain hopes, if God had revealed himself in any other way than
in Christ, the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, in whom
dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily (Col. ii. 9), and who, along with
His own glory, revealed, at the same time, that of the Father; for it was the glory
as of the only-begotten of the Father, John i. 14; ii. 11.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. &quot;<i>Strengthen ye the slack hands, and confirm ye the
tottering knees.</i>&quot; The words are addressed to all the members of the people of
God; they are to strengthen and confirm <i>one another</i> by pointing to the future
revelation of the glory of the Lord.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. &quot;<i>Say to them that are of a fearful heart: Be strong,
fear not; behold, your God will come for vengeance, for a gift of God: He will come
and save you.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;To them that are of a fearful heart,&quot;--literally of a &quot;hasty
heart,&quot; who allow themselves to be carried away by the Present, and are unmindful
of the <i>respice finem</i>.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1511;&#1501;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1502;&#1493;&#1500;</span> are Accusatives, used in the same manner
as in verbs of motion, to designate the object of the motion.--On
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1502;&#1493;&#1500;</span>, &quot;gift,&quot; comp. remarks on Ps. vii. 5.
&quot;The gift of God&quot; forms a contrast to the poor gifts, such as men offer. He comes
for vengeance upon His enemies, and for bestowing the most glorious divine gifts
upon His people. The words: &quot;He will come and save you,&quot; are an explanation of &quot;the
gift of God.&quot; It is in Christ that the words: &quot;He will come and save you,&quot; found
their true fulfilment,--a fulfilment to which every lower blessing pointed, and
which is still going on, and constantly advancing.--That which, in the subsequent
verses, is said of the concomitant circumstances of this salvation, is by far too
high to admit of the fulfilment being sought in any other than Christ. All these
forced explanations, such as: &quot;In their joy they feel <i>as if</i> they were healed&quot;
(<i>Knobel</i>, after the example of <i>Gesenius</i>), only serve to show this more
clearly. They are overthrown even by the parallel announcement of the impending
resurrection of the dead in chap. xxv. 8; xxvi. 19.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 160]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 5. &quot;<i>Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the
ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The blind and deaf are the individualizing designations of the
wretched; in Luke xiv. 13-21, the blind are named along with the poor, lame, and
maimed as an individualizing designation of the whole genus of <i>personae miserabiles</i>;
comp. John v. 3. But this individualizing designation must be carefully distinguished
from the image. The blind and deaf are mentioned as the most perspicuous <i>species</i>
in the <i>genus</i>; but they themselves are, in the first instance, meant, and
that which has been said must, in the first instance, be fulfilled upon them. <i>
Farther</i>--as blind and deaf are, without farther remark and qualification, spoken
of, we shall, in the first instance, be obliged to think of the bodily blind and
deaf, inasmuch as they, according to the common <i>usus loquendi</i>, are thus designated.
But a collateral reference to the <i>spiritually</i> blind and deaf must so much
the rather be assumed, that they, too, form a portion of the genus here represented
by the blind and deaf; and the more so that it is just Isaiah who so frequently
speaks of spiritual blindness and deafness; comp. chap. xxix. 18: &quot;And in that day
(in the time of the future salvation, when the Lord of the Church shall have put
to shame the pusillanimity and timidity of His people), the deaf hear the words
of the book, and the eyes of the blind see out of obscurity and darkness;&quot; xlii.
18: &quot;Hear ye deaf, and look ye blind and see;&quot; xliii. 8: &quot;Bring forth the blind
people, that have eyes, and the deaf that have ears;&quot; lvi. 10; vi. 10; Matth. xv.
14; John ix. 39; Ephes. i. 18; 2 Pet. i. 9. Spiritual blindness and deafness are
specially seen in the relation of the people to the leadings of the Church, and
to the promises of Scripture. The blind cannot understand the complicated ways of
God; the deaf have, especially in the time of misery, no ear for His promises. Besides
the natural and spiritual blindness, Scripture knows of still a third; it designates
as blind those who cannot see the way of salvation, the helpless and drooping; compare
my Commentary on Ps. cxlvi. 8; Zeph. i. 17; Isa. xlii. 7. Now, it is blindness and
deafness of every kind which, along with all other misery, shall find a remedy at
the time of salvation.--If we ask for the fulfilment, our eye is, in the first instance,
attracted by Matt. <span class="pagenum">[Pg 161]</span> xi. 5, where, with an evident
reference to the passage before us, the Lord gives to the question of John: &quot;Art
thou he that should come, or do we look for another,&quot; the matter-of-fact answer,
that the blind receive their sight, the deaf hear, the lame walk: comp. Matth. xv.
31: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8037;&#963;&#964;&#949; &#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#8004;&#967;&#955;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#952;&#945;&#965;&#956;&#940;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#946;&#955;&#941;&#960;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#962; &#954;&#969;&#966;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#955;&#945;&#955;&#959;&#8166;&#964;&#945;&#962;,
&#954;&#965;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#8017;&#947;&#953;&#949;&#8150;&#962;, &#967;&#969;&#955;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#960;&#949;&#961;&#953;&#960;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#8166;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#965;&#966;&#955;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#946;&#955;&#941;&#960;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#962;</span>; xxi. 14;
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#963;&#8134;&#955;&#952;&#959;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#964;&#965;&#966;&#955;&#959;&#8054; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#967;&#969;&#955;&#959;&#8054; &#7952;&#957; &#964;&#8183; &#7985;&#949;&#961;&#8183; &#954;&#945;&#8054;
&#7952;&#952;&#949;&#961;&#940;&#960;&#949;&#965;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#973;&#962;</span>; Mark vii. 37, where after the healing of the deaf and
dumb, the people say: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#955;&#8182;&#962; &#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#945; &#960;&#949;&#960;&#959;&#943;&#951;&#954;&#949;· &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962;
&#954;&#969;&#966;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#960;&#959;&#953;&#949;&#8150; &#7936;&#954;&#959;&#973;&#949;&#953;&#957;, &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#7936;&#955;&#940;&#955;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#955;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#8150;&#957;.</span> Yet shall we not be able to
see, in these facts, the complete fulfilment of the prophecy, in so far as it refers
to the healing of the bodily blind and deaf--inasmuch as it promises the healing
of all, not of some only--but only a pledge of the complete fulfilment of it; just
as Christ&#39;s raising some from the dead only prefigures what He shall do in the end
of the days. The complete fulfilment belongs to the time of the resurrection of
the just, of which it is said: Whatever is here afflicted, groans, prays, shall
then go on brightly and gloriously. More comprehensive was the fulfilment which
the prophecy received, in reference to spiritual blindness and deafness, immediately
at the first appearance of Christ, who declared that He had come into the world,
that they which see not, might see (John ix. 39). But even here the completion as
certainly belongs to the future world, as <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#946;&#955;&#941;&#960;&#959;&#956;&#949;&#957;
&#7940;&#961;&#964;&#953; &#948;&#953;&#8217; &#7952;&#963;&#972;&#960;&#964;&#961;&#959;&#965; &#7952;&#957; &#945;&#7984;&#957;&#943;&#947;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#953;</span>.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 6. &quot;<i>Then shall the lame leap as an hart, and the tongue
of the dumb shall shout; for in the wilderness shall waters be opened, and streams
in the desert.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The <i>leaping and shouting</i> imply that they have obtained
deliverance from their bodily defects,--at this deliverance the preceding verse
stopped--and proceed from the natural delight at the appearance of this salvation,
personal as well as general, of which these are an emanation. On the first words
especially. Acts iii. 8 is to be compared, where it is said of the lame man to whom
Peter, in the name of Jesus spoke. Arise and walk: <span lang="el" class="Greek">
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#958;&#945;&#955;&#955;&#972;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#7956;&#963;&#964;&#951; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#949;&#961;&#953;&#949;&#960;&#940;&#964;&#949;&#953;, &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#949;&#7984;&#963;&#8134;&#955;&#952;&#949; &#963;&#8058;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8150;&#962; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#964;&#8056; &#7985;&#949;&#961;&#8056;&#957;, &#960;&#949;&#961;&#953;&#960;&#945;&#964;&#8182;&#957;
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7936;&#955;&#955;&#972;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#945;&#7984;&#957;&#8182;&#957; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#952;&#949;&#972;&#957;</span>; farther. Acts viii. 7:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#959;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#8054; &#948;&#8050; &#960;&#945;&#961;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#955;&#965;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#953; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#967;&#969;&#955;&#959;&#8054; &#7952;&#952;&#949;&#961;&#945;&#960;&#949;&#973;&#952;&#951;&#963;&#945;&#957;</span>;
xiv. 8; John v. 9. Of <i>spiritual</i> lameness, Heb. xii. 13 is spoken. It appears
especially in dark times of affliction, as <i>Vitringa</i> says: &quot;In the time of
wild persecution, and when the Church languishes, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 162]</span>
not a few men begin to halt, to vacillate in their views, to suspend their opinions,&quot;
&amp;c. On the words: &quot;the tongue of the dumb shall shout,&quot; compare Matt. xii. 22:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#972;&#964;&#949; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#963;&#951;&#957;&#941;&#967;&#952;&#951; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#948;&#945;&#953;&#956;&#959;&#957;&#950;&#972;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#962;, &#964;&#965;&#966;&#955;&#8056;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#954;&#969;&#966;&#972;&#962;&#903;
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#952;&#949;&#961;&#940;&#960;&#949;&#965;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#972;&#957;, &#8037;&#963;&#964;&#949; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#964;&#965;&#966;&#955;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#954;&#969;&#966;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#955;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#8150;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#946;&#955;&#941;&#960;&#949;&#953;&#957;.</span>
<i>Spiritual</i> dumbness is the incapacity for the praise of God which, in the
time when salvation is withheld, so easily creeps in, and which is removed by the
bestowal of salvation. The words: &quot;For in the wilderness,&quot; &amp;c., state the ground
of the leaping and shouting, point to the bestowal of salvation, which forms the
cause. The <i>waters</i> are the waters of salvation, compare remarks on chap. xii.
3. The words contain, moreover, an allusion to Exod. xvii. 3 ff.; Numb. xx. 11,
where, during the journey through the wilderness, salvation is represented by the
bestowal of water. The desert here is an image of misery.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 7. &quot;<i>And the scorching heat of the sun becomes a pool,
and the thirsty land, springs of water; in the habitation of dragons shall be their
couching place, grass where formerly reeds and rushes.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;The scorching heat of the sun,&quot; stands for &quot;places scorched by
the heat&quot; (&quot;parched ground,&quot; English version). The passage chap. xlix. 10, forbids
us to explain it by <i>mirage</i>, the appearance of water. The suffix in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1489;&#1510;&#1492;</span> refers to Zion. Dragons like to make
their abode especially in the waterless wilderness. The circumstance that Zion has
there her couching place, supposes that it has been changed into a garden of God;
while, on the contrary, in chap. xxxiv. 13, it is said of the world that &quot;it becomes
an habitation of dragons.&quot; Besides the dry land, the moor-land which bears nothing
but barren reeds, shall undergo a change; nourishing <i>grass</i> is to take its
place; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1510;&#1497;&#1512;</span> has no other signification than
this.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 8. &quot;<i>And a high-way shall be there, and a way, and it shall
be called the holy way; an unclean shall not pass over it; and it shall be for them,
that they may walk on it, that fools also may not err.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;The way&quot; is the way of salvation which God opens up to His people
in the wilderness of misery; comp. chap. xliii. 19: &quot;I will make a way in the wilderness,
rivers in the desert;&quot; Ps. cvii. 4: &quot;They wandered in the wilderness, in the desert
without ways,&quot; where the pathless wilderness is the image of misery;
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 163]</span> Ps. xxv. 4; xxvii. 11, where the ways of God
are the ways of salvation which He reveals to His people, that they may walk in
them. The way is <i>holy</i> (comp. remarks on chap. iv. 3), because inaccessible
to the profane world, to the <i>unclean</i>, who are not allowed to disturb the
righteous walking on it; comp. ver. 9, which shows how entirely out of place is
the remark that &quot;the author, in his national hatred, will not allow any Gentiles
to walk along with the covenant-people.&quot; It is only as converted, as fellows and
companions of the saints, that the Gentiles are allowed to enter on the way, and
not as unclean and their enemies. The circumstance that even the foolish cannot
miss the way, indicates the abundant fulness of the salvation, in consequence of
which it is so easily accessible; and no human effort, skill, or excellence, is
required to attain the possession of it.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 9. &quot;<i>No lion shall be there, nor any ravenous beast go
up thereon, it shall not be found there; and the redeemed walk on it.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">By the lion, the ravenous beast, heathenish wickedness and tyranny,
the world&#39;s power pernicious to the Kingdom of God, is designated; comp. remarks
on chap. xi. 7. The Lord declared that the fulfilment had taken place, when He said:
Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 10. &quot;<i>And the ransomed of the Lord shall return and come
to Zion, and everlasting joy shall be upon their heads. Joy and gladness they shall
obtain, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.</i>&quot;</p>
<h3><a name="div2_163" href="#div2Ref_163">GENERAL PRELIMINARY REMARKS ON CHAPTERS
XL.-LXVI.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">The historical section, chap. xxxvi.-xxxix., forms the transition
from the first to the second part of the prophecies of Isaiah. Its close is formed
by the announcement of Judah&#39;s being carried away to Babylon, an announcement which
Isaiah uttered to Hezekiah after the impending danger from the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 164]</span> Assyrians had been successfully warded off,
as had been mentioned in the preceding chapter. In chap. xxxix. 6, 7, it is said:
&quot;Behold days are coming, and all that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers
have laid up in store until this day, shall be carried to Babylon, and nothing shall
be left, saith the Lord. And of thy sons shall they take away, and they shall be
eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.&quot; In this announcement, we have at
the same time the concentration of the rebuking and threatening mission of the Prophet,
and the point from which proceeds the <i>comforting</i> mission which, in the second
part, is pre-eminently attended to. This second part at once begins with the words:
&quot;Comfort ye, comfort ye my people,&quot; which stand in closest connection with the preceding
announcement of a great calamity, yea, even necessarily demand this. It is just
for this reason that the historical chapters cannot be a later addition and interpolation,
but must be an original element of the collection written by the Prophet himself.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_164a" href="#ftn_164a">[1]</a></sup></p>
<p class="normal">The contents of the second part are stated at once, and generally,
in the introductory words, chap. xl. 1, 2: &quot;Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith
your God. Speak to the heart of Jerusalem, and cry unto her that her warfare is
accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned, that she receives of the Lord&#39;s hand
double for all her sins.&quot; The <i>comfort</i> must, accordingly, form the fundamental
character of the second part. But since, for the people of God, there does not exist
any purely external salvation; since, for them, salvation is indissolubly connected
with <i>repentance</i>,--<i>exhortation</i> must necessarily go hand ill hand with
the announcement of salvation. This second feature and element concealed behind
the first, is, moreover, expressly brought forward in what immediately follows,
inasmuch as by it the &quot;Comfort ye&quot; does not receive any addition,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 165]</span> but is only commented upon and enlarged. The
servants of the Lord (the whole chorus of the messengers of the divine salvation
is addressed in vers. 3, 5), complying with His command, announce the impending
salvation, designating it as a manifestation of the Lord&#39;s glory, and exhort to
a worthy preparation for it. Vers. 3 and 4 treat of preparing in the desert a high-way
for the Lord, who is to manifest himself gloriously. The way is prepared by repentance;
the desert symbolizes the condition of bodily and spiritual misery. It is from this
miserable condition that the Lord is to deliver and redeem His people; but in order
that He may perform His part, they must, previously, have performed theirs. In ver.
5, this manifestation itself is described, with which is connected the fulness of
salvation for the covenant-people. The servants of God are to announce the approach
of salvation to mourning Jerusalem, in which the covenant-people appears to the
Prophet as personified. (Jerusalem does not stand for &quot;the carried away Zionites;&quot;
it is an ideal person, the afflicted and bowed down widow sitting on the ground
in sackcloth; the distressed and mourning mother of the children partly carried
away, and partly killed,--compare chap. iii. 26, where Jerusalem, desolate and emptied,
sits upon the ground.) But this salvation can be granted to those only whose hearts
are prepared to receive it. Thus the announcement of salvation is preceded by the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#957;&#959;&#949;&#8150;&#964;&#949;</span>, by the call to remove all the obstacles
which render impassable the path through the desert into the land of promise; which
render impossible the transition from misery to salvation; which prevent the Lord
from coming to His people in their misery, and leading them out from it. Then, to
those who have complied with the exhortation, the manifestation of the glory of
the Lord is promised--He comes to them, in a glorious manifestation, in the way
which, in the power of His Spirit, they have prepared and opened up to Him--and
in, and with it, all the glorious things which, according to ver. 2, the servants
of the Lord were to promise regarding the Future.</p>
<p class="normal">The comfort oftentimes moves in general terms, and consists in
pointing to a Future full of salvation and grace. But, in other passages, the announcement
of salvation is more individualised, becomes more special. These special announcements
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 166]</span> refer to a twofold object, <i>First</i>--The
Prophet comforts his people by announcing the deliverance from the Babylonish captivity.
This deliverance he describes by the most lovely images, frequently taken from the
deliverance of the people from Egypt. But it is to be well observed that even those
prophecies which pre-eminently refer to the lower object, have something exuberant
and overflowing; so that, even after having been fulfilled, they cannot be looked
upon as antiquated. He states the name of the ruler, <i>Koresh</i>, the king from
the rising of the sun, who, sent by the Lord, shall punish the oppressors of Zion,
and bring back the people to their land. The <i>second</i> object is the deliverance
and salvation by the Servant of God, the Messiah, who, after having passed through
humiliation, suffering, and death, and having thereby effected redemption, will
remove from the glorified Kingdom of God all the evil occasioned by sin. Of this
higher salvation the soul of the Prophet is so full, that the references to it are
constantly pressing forward, even where, in the first instance, he has to do with
the lower salvation. In the description of the higher salvation, the relation of
time is not observed. Now, the Prophet beholds its Author in His humiliation and
suffering; then, the most distant Future of the Kingdom of Christ presents itself
to his enraptured eye,--the time in which the Gentile world, alienated from God,
shall have returned to Him; when all that is opposed to God shall have been destroyed;
when inward and outward peace shall prevail, and all the evil caused by sin shall
have been removed. Elevated above time and space, from the height in which the Holy
Spirit has placed him, he surveys the whole development of the Messianic Kingdom,
from its small beginnings to its glorious end.</p>
<p class="normal">While the first part, containing the predictions which the Prophet
uttered for the present generation during the time of his ministry, consists mainly
of single prophecies which, separated by time and occasion, were first made publicly
known singly, and afterwards united in a collected whole, having been marked out
as different prophecies, either by inscriptions, or in any other distinguishable
way,--the second part, destined as a legacy for posterity, forms a continuous, collected
whole. The fact, first observed by <i>Fr. Rückert</i>, that it is divided into
<i>three sections or books</i>, is, in the first instance, indicated by the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 167]</span> circumstance that, at the close of chap. xlviii.
and chap. lvii., the same thought recurs in the same words: &quot;There is no peace,
saith the Lord, unto the wicked;&quot; and that the same thought, viz. the exclusion
of the wicked from the promised salvation, is found also a third time at the close
of the whole, although there in another form. Yet, if nothing else could be advanced
in favour of this tri-partition, we might perhaps be permitted to speak of an accident
as <i>Knobel</i> indeed does. But a closer consideration shows that the three sections
are, inwardly and essentially, distinguished from one another. Beyond chap. xlviii.
22, there is no farther mention of <i>Babel</i>, which in the first book is mentioned
four times (chap. xliii. 14, xlvii. 1, xlviii. 14, 20); nor of the <i>Chaldeans</i>,
which occur there five times (chap. xliii. 14, xlvii. 1, 5, xlviii. 14, 20); nor
any farther mention of <i>Koresh</i>, neither of his name (chap. xliv. 28, xlv.
1), nor of his person, which in chap. xl.-xlviii. is so prominently brought before
us (chap. xli. 2, 25, xlvi. 11, xlviii. 14, 15, <i>i.e.</i> immediately at the
<i>beginning</i>, after the introduction contained in chap. xl., at the <i>close</i>,
and several times in the <i>middle</i>); nor of <i>Bel</i> and <i>Nebo</i>. <i>Farther</i>--The
whole first book is pervaded with the argumentation by which the God of Israel is
proved to be the true God, from His having foretold the deliverance to be effected
by <i>Koresh</i>. This argumentation we meet with in chap. xli., immediately after
the introductory chap. xl., and so still in the last chap. xlviii.; but never again
afterwards. With the end of the first book, this arguing and proving from prophecy,
that the Lord is the true God, as well as the reference to <i>Koresh</i>, the subject
of this prophecy, altogether disappear. But, in like manner, the announcement of
a personal Messiah is wanting in the first book, the sole exception being chap.
xlii. 1-9, where, after the first announcement of the author of the lower salvation,
the Author of the higher salvation is, by way of anticipation, <i>contrasted</i>
with him. To give a more minute and finished description of the Author of the higher
salvation is the object of the <i>second</i> book. In the <i>third</i> book, the
person of the Redeemer is spoken of briefly only, is, as it were, only hinted at,
in order to connect this book with the second; just as, by chap. xlii., the first
book is connected with the second. The third book in so far as it is <i>promising</i>,
is taken up with the description of the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 168]</span> <i>
glory of the Kingdom of God</i>, in that new stage upon which it enters by the Redeemer,--a
glory, the culminating point of which is the creation of the new heavens and the
new earth, chap. lxv. 17, lxvi. 22. A description of the glory of Zion, like that
in chap. lxii., is not found in the first and second book. In the third book, however,
<i>reproof and exhortation</i> prevail, in contradistinction to the first and second
book, in which the direct <i>promise</i> prevails. A transition from this, however,
to the reproof and exhortation, is made at the close of the second book. From chap.
lv. 1, the preaching of repentance appears first intermingled with the announcement
of salvation. Up to that the prevailing tendency of the Prophet had been, throughout,
to comfort the godly; but from chap. lv. 1, the other tendency shows itself by the
side of it, that of calling sinners to repentance, by which alone they can obtain
a participation in the promised salvation. In chap. lvi. 9, lvii. 21, the latter
tendency appears distinctly and exclusively. The second book had commenced with
the announcement of salvation, and thence to the close had advanced to reproof and
threatening. The third book takes the opposite course; and thus the two principal
portions of reproof and threatening border upon one another. Yet, the reproof and
threatening do not go on without interruption and distinction, so that no <i>boundary
line</i> could be recognized between the two books. At the close of the second book,
the Prophet has preeminently to do with <i>apostates</i>, while, at the beginning
of the third, he has to do with <i>hypocrites</i>; so that thus these two portions
of reproof supplement one another, and conjointly form a complete disclosure of
the prevailing corruption, according to its two principal tendencies. But the third
book is distinguished from the second by this circumstance, that in it reproof and
threatening are not limited to the beginning, which corresponds with the close of
the second book. At the close of chap. lix. the Prophet returns to the announcement
of salvation; but with chap. lxiii. 7, a new preaching of repentance commences,
which goes on to the end of chap. lxiv. The Prophet, in the Spirit, transposes himself
into the time when the visitation has already taken place, and puts into the mouth
of the people the words by which they are, at that time, to supplicate for the mercy
of the Lord. This discourse <span class="pagenum">[Pg 169]</span> implies what has
preceded. In the view of the glorious manifestation of the Lord&#39;s mercy and grace
which are there exhibited, the Prophet calls here upon the people to repent and
be converted, in order that they may become partakers of that mercy. If they, as
a people, are anxious to attain that object, they must repeat what the Prophet here
pronounces before them. But that up to this time has not been done, and hence that
has taken place which is spoken of by St Paul: &quot;The election have obtained it, but
the rest have been blinded.&quot; In chap. lxv., which contains the Lord&#39;s answer to
this repenting prayer of the people, and is nothing else than an indirect <i>paraenesis</i>,
reproof and threatening likewise prevail, and it is only at the close that the promise
appears. The last chapter, too, begins with reproof and threatening. Rightly have
the Church Fathers called Isaiah the Evangelist among the prophets. This appears
also from the circumstance that the reproof is so thoroughly an appendage of the
promise, that it is only at the <i>close</i>, after the whole riches of the promise
have been exhibited, that it expands itself It appears, farther, also from the circumstance
that, even in the last book, the threatening does not prevail <i>exclusively</i>,
but that, even there, it is still interwoven with the most glorious promises which
are so exceedingly fitted to allure sinners to repentance.</p>
<p class="normal">In the whole of the second part, the Prophet, <i>as a rule</i>,
takes his stand in the time which was announced and foretold in the former prophecies,
and especially, with the greatest clearness and distinctness, in chap. xxxix., on
the threshold of the second part,--the time when Jerusalem is captured by the Chaldeans,
the temple destroyed, the country desolated, and the people carried away. It is
in this time that he thinks, feels, and acts; it has become present to him; from
it he looks out into the Future, yet in such a manner that he does not everywhere
consistently maintain this ideal stand-point. He addresses his discourse to the
people pining away in captivity and misery. He comforts them by opening up a view
into a better Future, and exhorts them to remove by repentance the obstacles to
the coming salvation.</p>
<p class="normal">Rationalistic Exegesis, everywhere little able to sympathize with,
and enter into existing circumstances and conditions, and always ready to make its
own shadowy, coarse views the rule <span class="pagenum">[Pg 170]</span> and arbiter,
has been little able to enter into, and sympathize with this ideal stand-point occupied
by the Prophet; nor has it had the earnest will to do so. To its rationalistic tendencies,
which took offence at the clear knowledge of the Future, a welcome pretext was here
offered. Thus the opinion arose, that the second part was not written by Isaiah,
but was the work of some anonymous prophet, living about the end of the exile,--an
opinion which, at the time of the absolute dominion of Rationalism, has obtained
so firm a footing, that it has become all but an <i>axiom</i>, and, by the power
of tradition, carries away even such as would not think of entertaining it, if they
were to enter independently and without prejudice upon the investigation.</p>
<p class="normal">The fact which here meets us does not by any means stand isolated.
The prophets did not prophesy in the state of rational reflection, but in <i>exstasis</i>.
As even their ordinary name, &quot;seers,&quot; indicates, the objects were presented to them
in inward vision. They did not behold the Future from a distance, but they were
rapt into the future. This inward vision is frequently reflected in their representation.
Very frequently, that appears with them as present which, in reality, was still
future. They depict the Future before the eyes of their hearers and readers, and
thus, as it were, by force, drag them into it out of the Present, the coercing force
of which exerts so pernicious an influence upon them. Our Prophet expressly intimates
this peculiar manner of the prophetic announcement by making, in chap. xlix. 7,
the Lord say: &quot;First I said to Zion: <i>Behold there, behold there</i>,&quot; by which
the graphic character of prophecy is precisely expressed, and by which it is intimated
that hearers and readers were led <i>in rem praesentem</i> by the prophets. Even
grammar has long ago acknowledged this fact, inasmuch as it speaks of <i>Praeterita
prophetica</i>, <i>i.e.</i>, such as denote the <i>ideal</i> Past, in contrast to
those which denote the <i>real</i> Past. Unless we have attained to this view and
insight, it is only by inconsistency that we can escape from <i>Eichhorn&#39;s</i> view,
that the prophecies are, for the most part, disguised historical descriptions,--a
view into which even expositors, such as <i>Ewald</i> and <i>Hitzig</i>, frequently
relapse. Frequently, the whole of the Future appears with the prophets in the form
of the <i>Present</i>. At other times, they take their stand in the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 171]</span> more immediate Future; and this becomes to
them the <i>ideal</i> Present, from which they direct the eye to the distant Future.
From the rich store of proofs which we can adduce for our view, we shall here mention
only a few.</p>
<p class="normal">This mode of representation meets us frequently so early as in
the parting hymn of Moses, Deut. xxxii., which may be considered as the germ of
all prophetism; compare <i>e.g.</i> vers. 7 and 8. On the latter verse, <i>Clericus</i>
remarks: &quot;Moses mourns over this in his hymn, as if it were already past, because
he foresees that it will be so, and he, in the Spirit, transfers himself into those
future times, and says that which then only should be said.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">In Isaiah himself, the very first chapter presents a remarkable
proof The Present in chap. i. 5-9 is not a <i>real</i>, but an <i>ideal</i> Present.
In the Spirit, the Prophet transfers himself into the time of the calamity impending
upon the apostate people, and, stepping back upon the real Present, he, in the farther
course of the prophecy, predicts this calamity as future. The reasons for this view
have been thoroughly stated, even to exhaustion, by <i>Caspari</i>, in his <i>Beiträge
zur Einleitung in das Buch Jesaia</i>. In the second half of ver. 2, the kingdom
appears as flourishing and powerful. To the same result we are led also by the description
of the rich sacrificial worship in vers. 15-19. If, then, we view vers. 5-9 as a
description of the Present, we obtain an irreconcilable contradiction. <i>Farther</i>--Everywhere
else Isaiah always connects, with the description of the sin, that of the punishment
following upon it, but never that of the punishment which has followed it.--In chap.
v. 13, in a prophecy from the first time of his ministry, the <i>future carrying
away</i> of the people presents itself to the Prophet as present. Similarly, in
vers. 25, 26, the Praet. and Fut. with <i>Vav Conv.</i> must be understood prophetically;
for in chap. i.-v., the Prophet has, throughout, to do with future calamity. In
the Present, according to ver. 19, the people are yet in a condition of prosperity
and luxury,--as yet, it is the time of <i>mocking</i>; it is only of future calamity
that vers. 5 and 6 in the parable speak of, the threatenings of which are here detailed
and expanded.--In the prophecy against Tyre, chap. xxiii., the Prophet beholds as
present the siege by the Chaldeans impending over the city, and describes
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 172]</span> as an eye-witness the flight of the inhabitants,
and the impression which the intelligence of their calamity makes upon the nations
connected with them. From the more immediate Future, which to him has become present,
he then casts a glance to the more distant. He announces that after 70 years--counting
not from the <i>real</i>, but from the <i>ideal</i> Present--the city shall again
attain to its ancient greatness. His look then rises still higher, and he beholds
how at length, in the days of Messiah, the Tyrians shall be received into the communion
of the true God.--The future dispersion and carrying away of the people is anticipated
by the Prophet in the passage, chap. xi. 11, also, which may be considered as a
comprehensive view of the whole second part.--It is true that, in the second part,
as a rule, the misery, and not the salvation, appears as present; but, not unfrequently,
the latter, too, is viewed as present by the Prophet, and spoken of in Preterites,
comp. <i>e.g.</i>, chap. xl. 2, xlvi. 1, 2, li. 3, lii. 9, 10, lx. 1. If, then,
the Prophet is to be measured by the ordinary rule, these passages, too, must have
been written at a time when the salvation had already taken place.--In chap. xlv.
20, the escaped of the nations are those Gentiles who have been spared in the divine
judgments. They are to become wise by the sufferings of others. The Prophet takes
his stand in a time when these judgments, which were to be inflicted by Cyrus, had
already been completed. Even those who maintain the spuriousness of the second part
must here acknowledge that the Prophet takes his stand in an <i>ideal</i> Present.--In
chap. liii. the Prophet takes his stand between the sufferings and the glorification
of the Messiah. The sufferings appear to him as past; the glorification he represents
as future.</p>
<p class="normal">Hosea had, in chap. xiii., predicted to Israel great divine judgments,
the desolation of the country, and the carrying away of its inhabitants by powerful
enemies. This punishment and judgment appear in chap. xiv. 1 (xiii. 16) as still
future; but in ver. 2 (1 ff.) he transfers himself in spirit to the time when these
judgments had already been inflicted. He anticipates the Future as having already
taken place, and does not by any means exhort his <i>contemporaries</i> to a sincere
repentance, but those upon whom the calamity had already been inflicted: &quot;O Israel,
return unto the Lord thy God; for <span class="pagenum">[Pg 173]</span> thou hast
fallen by thine iniquity.&quot; This parallel passage shews especially, with what right
it has been asserted that the addresses to the people pining away in exile &quot;were
out of place in the mouth of Isaiah, who, as he lived 150 years before, could <i>
prophesy</i> only of the exiled&quot; (<i>Knobel</i>).--Micah says in chap. iv. 8 (compare
vol. i., p. 449 ff.): &quot;And thou tower of the flock, hill of the daughter of Zion,
unto thee it will come, and to thee cometh the former dominion.&quot; If the Prophet,
a cotemporary of Isaiah, speaks here of a <i>former dominion</i>, and announces
that it shall again come back to the house of David, he transfers himself from his
time, in which the royal family of David still existed and flourished, into that
period of which he had just before spoken, and during which the dominion of the
Davidic dynasty was to cease. In vers. 9, 10: &quot;Now why dost thou raise a cry! Is
there no king in thee, or is thy counsellor gone? For pangs have seized thee as
a woman in travail,&quot;<!--inserted quote--> &amp;c., mourning Zion, at the time of the
carrying away of her sons into captivity, stands before the eye of the Prophet,
and is addressed by him. (In commenting upon this passage, we pointed already to
Hosea xiii. 9-11 as an analogous instance of representing as present the time of
the calamity.) The moment of the carrying away into exile forms to him the Present;
the deliverance from it, the Future: &quot;There shalt thou be delivered, there the Lord
thy God shall redeem thee out of the hand of thine enemies.&quot; In chap. vii. 7, Micah
introduces, as speaking, the people already carried away into exile, and makes them
declare both the justice of the divine punishment, and their confidence in the divine
mercy. In the answer of the Lord also, ver. 11, the city is supposed to be destroyed;
for He promises that her walls shall be rebuilt.--The anticipation of the Future
prevails throughout the whole prophecy of Obadiah also. The song of Habakkuk in
chap. iii. takes its stand in the midst of the anticipated misery. In the announcement
of the invasion of the Chaldeans in chap. i. 6 ff., the Future presents itself in
the form of the Present. Here, as in the case of Obadiah, <i>Hitzig</i> and others,
overlooking and misunderstanding this prophetic peculiarity, and considering the
<i>ideal</i>, to be the <i>real</i> Present, have been led to fix the age of the
Prophet in a manner notoriously erroneous.--Jeremiah, in chap. iii. 22, 25,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 174]</span> introduces as speaking the Israel of the Future.
In chap. xxx. and xxxi., he anticipates the future carrying away of Judah. Even
in the Psalms we perceive a faint trace of this prophetic peculiarity. On Ps. xciii.
1: &quot;The Lord reigneth, He hath clothed himself with majesty,&quot; &amp;c., we remarked:
&quot;The Preterites are to be explained from the circumstance that the Singer as a
<i>seer</i> has the Future before his eyes. He <i>beholds</i> rejoicingly how the
Lord enters upon His Kingdom, puts on the garment of majesty, and girds himself
with the sword of strength in the face of the proud world.&quot; A similar anticipation
of redemption, even before the catastrophe has taken place, we meet with in Ps.
xciv. 1. The situation in the whole Psalm, yea in the whole cycle to which it belongs,
the lyrical echo of the second part of Isaiah, is not a <i>real</i>, but an <i>ideal</i>
one. This cycle bears witness that the singers and seers of Israel were living in
the Future, in a manner which it would be so much the greater folly to measure by
our rule as, for the people of the Old Covenant, the Future had a significance altogether
different from that which it has for the people of the New Covenant. That which
is common to all the Psalms, from xciii. onward, is the confident expectation of
a glorious manifestation of the Lord, which the Psalmist, following the example
of the prophets, beholds as present. A counterpart is the cycle Ps. cxxxviii.-cxlv.,
in which David, stirred up by the promise in 2 Sam. vii., accompanies his house
throughout history.</p>
<p class="normal">Several interpreters cannot altogether resist the force of these
facts. They grant &quot;that other prophets also sometimes, in the Spirit, transfer themselves
into later times, especially into the idealistic times of the Messiah,&quot; and draw
their arguments from the circumstance only, that the latter again came back to their
personal stand point, whilst our Prophet continues cleaving to the later time. Now
it is true, and must be conceded, that this mode of representation is here employed
to an extent greater than it is anywhere else in the Old Testament. But, in matters
of this kind, measuring by the ell is quite out of place. In other respects also,
the second part of Isaiah stands out as quite unique. There is, in the whole Old
Testament, no other continuous prophecy which has so absolutely and pre-eminently
proceeded from <i>cura posteritatis</i>. If <span class="pagenum">[Pg 175]</span>
it be acknowledged that the prophesying activity of Isaiah falls into two great
divisions,--the one--the results of which are contained in the first 39 chapters--chiefly,
pre-eminently indeed, destined for the Present; the other,--which lies before us
in the second part, belonging to the evening of the Prophet&#39;s life--forming a prophetical
legacy, and hence, therefore, never delivered in public, but only committed to writing;--then
we shall find it quite natural that the Prophet, writing, as he did, chiefly for
the Future, should here also take his stand in the Future, to a larger extent than
he has elsewhere done.</p>
<p class="normal">That it is in this manner only that this fact is to be accounted
for, appears from the circumstance that, although our Prophet so extensively and
frequently represents the Past as Present, yet he passes over, in numerous passages,
from the <i>ideal</i> into the <i>real</i> Present.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_175a" href="#ftn_175a">[2]</a></sup>
We find a number of references which do not at all suit the condition of things
after the exile, but necessarily require the age of Isaiah, or, at least, the time
before the exile. If Isaiah be the author, these passages are easily accounted for.
It is true that, in the Spirit, he had transferred himself into the time of the
Babylonish exile; and this time had become Present to him. But it would surely be
suspicious to us, if the real Present had not sometimes prevailed, and attracted
the eye of the Prophet. It is just thus, however, that we find it. The Prophet frequently
steps out of his ideal view and position, and refers to conditions and circumstances
of his time. <i>Now</i>, he has before his eyes the condition of the unhappy people
in the Babylonish exile; <i>then</i>, the State still existing at his time, but
internally deranged by idolatry and apostacy. This apparent contradiction cannot
be reconciled in any other way than by assuming that Isaiah is the author. As a
rule, the punishment appears as already inflicted; city and temple as destroyed;
the country as devastated; the people as carried away; compare <i>e.g.</i>, chap.
lxiv. 10, 11. But in a series of passages, in which the Prophet steps back from
the <i>ideal</i>, to the <i>real</i> stand-point, <i>the punishment appears as still
future</i>; <i>city and temple as still existing</i>. In chap. xliii.
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 176]</span> 22-28, the Prophet meets the delusion, as
if God had chosen Israel on account of their deserts. Far from having brought about
their deliverance by their own merits, they, on the contrary, sinned thus against
Him, that, to the inward apostacy, they added the outward also. The greater part
of Israel had left off the worship of the Lord by sacrifices. It is the mercy alone
of the Lord which will deliver them from the misery into which they have plunged
themselves by their sins. But how can the Lord charge the people in exile for the
omission of a service which, according to His own law, they could offer to Him in
their native country only, in the temple consecrated to Him, but then destroyed?
The words specially: &quot;Put me in remembrance,&quot; in ver. 26, &quot;of what I should have
forgotten,&quot; imply that there existed a possibility of acquiring apparent merits,
and that, hence, the view of our opponents who, in vers. 22-24, think of a compulsory,
and hence, guiltless omission of the sacrificial service during the exile, must
be rejected. Vers. 27, 28 also, which speak of the punishment which Israel deserves,
just on account of the omitted service of the Lord, and which it has found in the
way of its works, prove that this view must be rejected, and that vers. 22-24 contain
a reproof. The passage can, hence, have been written only at the time when the temple
was still standing. Of this there can so much the less be any doubt that, in vers.
27, 28, the exile is expressly designated as future: &quot;Thy first father (the high-priestly
office) hath sinned, and thy mediators have transgressed against me.&quot; (The sacrificial
service was by a disgraceful syncretism profaned even by those whose office it was
to attend to it). &quot;Therefore I <i>will</i> profane the princes of the sanctuary,
and <i>will</i> give Jacob to the curse, and Israel to reproaches.&quot; Even
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1488;&#1495;&#1500;&#1500;</span> is the common Future, and to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1488;&#1514;&#1504;&#1492;</span> the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;</span>
<i>optativum</i> is added; and hence, we cannot by any means translate and explain
it by: <i>I gave</i>.--In chap. lvi. 9, it is said: &quot;All ye beasts of the field
come ye to devour all the beasts in the forest.&quot; This utterance stands in connection
with the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1504;&#1511;&#1489;&#1510;&#1497;&#1493;</span>, at the close of the preceding
verse. The gathering of Israel by God the good Shepherd, promised there, must be
preceded by the scattering, by being given up to the world&#39;s power--mercy, by judgment.
By the wild beasts are to be understood the Gentiles who shall be sent by God upon
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 177]</span> His people for punishment. This mission they
must first fulfil before they can, according to ver. 8, be added to, and gathered
along with, the gathered ones of Israel. By the &quot;beasts in the forest,&quot; brutalized,
degraded, and secularized Israel is to be understood, comp. Jer. xii. 7-12; Ezek.
xxxiv. 5; and my Commentary on Rev. ii. 1.</p>
<p class="normal">The beasts have not yet come; they are yet to come. We can here
think of nothing else than the invasion of the Chaldeans, which the Prophet, stepping
back to the stand-point of his time, beholds here as future; whilst, in what precedes,
from his ideal stand-point, which he had taken in the Babylonish exile, he had,
for the most part, considered it as past.--In chap. lvi. 10-12, we meet with corrupted
rulers of the people, who are indolent, when everything depends upon warding off
the danger, greedy, luxurious, gormandizing upon what they have stolen. The people
are not under foreign dominion, but have rulers of their own, who tyrannize over,
and impoverish them; comp. Is. chap. v.; Micah, chap. iii.--In chap. lvii. 1, it
is said: &quot;The righteous perisheth and no man layeth it to heart, and the men of
kindness are taken away, no one considering that, on account of the evil, the righteous
is taken away.&quot; The Prophet mentions it as a sign of the people&#39;s hardening that,
in the death of the righteous men who were truly bearing on their hearts the welfare
of the whole, they did not recognize a harbinger of severe divine judgments, from
which, according to a divine merciful decree, these righteous were to be preserved
by an early death. &quot;On account of the evil,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, in order to withdraw them
from the judgments, which were to be inflicted upon the ungodly people, comp. Gen.
xv. 15; 2 Kings xxii. 20; Is. xxxix. 8. The evil, <i>i.e.</i> according to 2 Kings
xxii. 20, the Chaldean catastrophe, appears here as still future. In chap. lvii.
2: &quot;They enter in peace, they rest in their beds who have walked before themselves
in uprightness,&quot; the &quot;peace&quot; forms the contrast to the awful condition of suffering
which the survivors have to encounter.--In chap. lvii. 9, it is said: &quot;And thou
lookest on the king anointed with oil, and increasest thy perfumes, and sendest
thy messengers far off, sendest them down into hell.&quot; The apostacy from the Lord
their God is manifested not only in idolatry, but also in their not leaving untried
any means to <span class="pagenum">[Pg 178]</span> procure for themselves human
helpers, in their courting human aid. The personification of Israel as a woman,
which took place in the preceding verses, is here continued. She leaves no means
untried to heighten her charms; she makes every effort to please the mighty kings.
The king is an ideal person comprehending a real plurality within himself A parallel
passage, in which the seeking for help among foreign nations is represented under
the same image, is Ezek. xvi. 26 ff., comp. Hos. xii. 2 (1). It occurs also in immediate
connexion with seeking help from the idols, in chap. xxx. 1 ff. The verb
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1493;&#1512;</span> means always &quot;to see,&quot; &quot;to look at;&quot; and
this signification is, here too, quite appropriate: Israel is <i>coquetting</i>
with her lover, the king. The reproach which the Prophet here raises against the
people has no meaning at all in the time of the exile, when the national independence
was gone. We find ourselves all at once transferred to the time of Isaiah, who,
in chap. xxxi. 1, utters a woe upon them &quot;that go down to Egypt for help,&quot;--who,
in chap. xxx. 4, complains: &quot;His princes are at Zoar, and his ambassadors come to
Hanes,&quot;--who, in chap. vii., exhibits the dangerous consequences of seeking help
from Asshur. The historical point at issue is brought before us by passages such
as 2 Kings xvi. 7: &quot;And Ahaz sent messengers to Tiglathpileser, king of Assyria,
saying: I am thy servant and thy son; come up and save me out of the hand of the
king of Aram, and out of the hand of the king of Israel, who rise against me.&quot;--In
chap. lvii. 11-13, the thought is this: Israel is not becoming weary of seeking
help and salvation from others than God. But He will soon show that He alone is
to be feared, that He alone can help; that they are nothing against whom, and from
whom help is sought. The words in ver. 11: &quot;Am I not silent, even of old; therefore
thou fearest me not,&quot; state the cause of the foolish forgetfulness of God, and hence
form the transition to the subsequent announcement of judgment. The prophecy is
uttered at a time when Israel still enjoyed the sparing divine forbearance, inasmuch
as for time immemorial (since they were in Egypt), no destructive catastrophe had
fallen upon them. It was in the Babylonish catastrophe only that the Egyptian received
its counterpart. But how does this suit the time of the Babylonish exile, when the
people were groaning under the severe judgments of God, <span class="pagenum">[Pg
179]</span> and had not experienced His forbearance, but, on the contrary, for almost
70 years, the full energy of His punitive justice? In ver. 13, it is said: &quot;In thy
crying, let thy hosts (thy whole Pantheon so rich, and yet so miserable) help thee.&quot;
&quot;In thy crying,<!--deleted quote--> <i>i.e.</i>, when <i>thou</i>, in the judgment
to be inflicted upon thee in future, wilt cry for help.&quot; In chap. lxvi. the punishment
appears as future; temple and city as still existing; the Lord as yet enthroned
in Zion. So specially in ver. 6: &quot;A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the
temple, the voice of the Lord that rendereth recompence to His enemies,&quot; A controversy
with the hypocrites who presumed upon the temple and their sacrificial service,
in vers. 1, 3, has, at the time of the exile, no meaning at all, <i>Gesenius</i>,
indeed, was of opinion that the Prophet might judge of the worship of God in temples,
and of the value of sacrifices, although they were not offered at that time; but
it must be strongly denied that the Prophet could do so in such a context and connection.
For, the fact that the Prophet has in view a definite class of men of his time,
and that he does not bring forward at random a <i>locus communis</i> which, at his
time, was no longer applicable--a thing which, moreover, is not by any means his
habit--appears from the close of the verse, and from ver. 4, where divine judgment
is threatened to those men: &quot;Because they choose their own ways, and their soul
delighteth in their abominations: I also will choose their derision, and will bring
their fears upon them.&quot; Even in ver. 20: &quot;And they (the Gentiles who are to be converted
to the Lord), shall bring all your brethren out of all nations for a meat-offering
unto the Lord, upon horses, &amp;c., <i>just as the children of Israel are bringing</i>
(<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1489;&#1493;&#1488;&#1493;</span>, expresses an habitual offering),
<i>the meat-offering in a clean vessel into the house of the Lord</i>,&quot; the house
of God appears as still standing, the sacrificial service in full operation; the
future spiritual meat-offering of the Gentiles is compared to the bodily meat-offering
which the children of Israel are now offering in the temple.</p>
<p class="normal"><i>Throughout the whole second part we perceive the people under
the, as yet, unbroken power of idolatry.</i> It appears everywhere as the principal
tendency of the sinful apostacy among the people; to counteract it appears to be
the chief object of the Prophet. The controversy with idolatry pervades everything.
At the very commencement, in chap. xl. 18-26, we are met <span class="pagenum">[Pg
180]</span> with a description of the nothingness of idolatry, and an impressive
warning against it. In the whole series of passages, commencing with chap. xli.--of
which we shall afterwards speak more in detail--the sole Deity of the God of Israel,
and the vanity of the idols are proved from prophecy in connection with its fulfilment;
and this series has for its supposition the power which, at the time when the prophecy
was uttered, idolatry yet possessed over the minds of men. Chap. xlii. 17 announces
that the future historical development shall bring confusion upon those &quot;that trust
in graven images, that say to the molten images: Ye are our gods.&quot; In chap. xliv.
12-20, the absurdity of idolatry is illustrated in a brilliant description. We have
here before us the real <i>locus classicus</i> of the whole Scripture in this matter,
the main description of the nothingness of idolatry. The emotion and excitement
with which the Prophet speaks, shew that he has here to do with the principal enemy
to the salvation of his people. According to chap. xlvi. the idols of Babel shall
be overturned and carried away. From this, Israel may learn the nothingness of idolatry,
and the apostates may return to the Lord. In the hortatory and reproving section,
the punishment of idolatry forms the beginning; in chap. lvii. idolatry is described
as far-spread, manifold, advancing to the greatest horrors. The offering up of children
as sacrifices especially appears as being in vogue; and it can be proved that this
penetrated into Israel, from the neighbouring nations, at the time of the Prophet
(comp. 2 Chron. xxviii. 3; xxxiii. 6), while, at the time of the exile, there was
scarcely any cause for warning against it,--at least, existing information does
not mention any such sacrifices among the Babylonians (comp. <i>Münter</i>, <i>die
Religion der Babylonier</i>, S. 72). The people appear as standing under the dominion
of idolatry in chap. lxv. 3: &quot;The people that provoketh me to anger continually
to my face, that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon the bricks;&quot; comp.
ver. 7: &quot;Who have burned incense upon the mountains, and blasphemed me upon the
hills;&quot; chap. lxvi. 17: &quot;They that sanctify themselves and purify themselves in
the gardens behind one in the midst, who eat swine&#39;s flesh, and the abominations,
and mice, shall be consumed together, saith the Lord.&quot; Idolatry is the service of
nature, and was, therefore, chiefly practised <span class="pagenum">[Pg 181]</span>
in places where nature presents herself in all her splendour, as in gardens and
on the hills. The gardens are mentioned in a similar way in chap. i. 29: &quot;Ye shall
blush on account of the <i>gardens</i> that ye have chosen.&quot; (On the words which
precede in that verse: &quot;For they shall be ashamed of the <i>oaks</i> which ye have
desired,&quot; chap. lvii. 5 offers an exact parallel: &quot;Who inflame themselves among
the <i>oaks</i> under every green tree.&quot;) In chap. lxv. 11, they are denounced who
forsake the Lord, forget His holy mountain (on which, at the time when this was
written, the temple must still have stood), who prepare a table to <i>Fortune</i>,
and offer drink-offerings to <i>Fate</i>. The second main form of sinful apostacy--hypocrisy
and dead ceremonial service--is only rarely mentioned by the Prophet (in chap. lvii.,
lxvi.), while he always anew reverts to idolatry. Now <i>this absolutely prevailing
regard to idolatry can be accounted for, only if Isaiah be the author of the second
part.</i> From Solomon, down to the time of the exile, the disposition to idolatry
in Israel was never thoroughly broken. During Isaiah&#39;s ministry, it came to the
fullest display under Ahaz. Under Hezekiah it was kept down, indeed; but with great
difficulty only, as appears from the fact that, under the reign of Manasseh, who
was a king after the heart of the people, it again broke openly forth; comp. 2 Kings
xxi. 1-18; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 1-18; 2 Kings xxi. 6, according to which Manasseh made
his own son to pass through the fire. But it is a tact generally admitted, and proved
by all the books written during and after the exile, that, with the carrying away
into exile, the idolatrous disposition among the people was greatly shaken. This
fact has its cause not only in the deep impression which misery made upon their
minds, but still more in the circumstance that it was chiefly the godly part of
the nation that was carried away into captivity. The disproportionately large number
of <i>priests</i> among the exiled and those who returned--they constitute the tenth
part of the people--is to be accounted for only on the supposition, that the heathenish
conquerors saw that the real essence and basis of the people consisted in the faith
in the God of Israel, and were, therefore, above all, anxious to remove the priests
as the main representatives of this principle. If, for this reason, they carried
away the priests, we cannot think otherwise but that, in <span class="pagenum">[Pg
182]</span> the selection of the others also, they looked chiefly to the theocratic
disposition on which the nationality of Israel rested. To this we are led by Jer.
xxiv. also, where those carried away are designated as the flower of the nation,
as the nursery and hope of the Kingdom of God. Incomprehensible, for the time of
the exile, is also the <i>strict antithesis</i> between the servants of the Lord,
and the servants of the idols--the latter hating, assailing, and persecuting the
former--an antithesis which meets us especially in the last two chapters; comp.
especially chap. lxv. 5 ff. 13-15; lxvi. 16. That such a state of things existed
at the time of the Prophet is, among other passages, shown by 2 Kings xxi. 16, according
to which Manasseh shed much innocent blood at Jerusalem, and, according to ver.
10, 11, especially the blood of the prophets, who had borne a powerful testimony
against idolatry.</p>
<p class="normal"><i>If it be assumed that the second part was composed during the
exile, then those passages are incomprehensible, in which the Prophet proves that
the God of Israel is the true God, from His predicting the appearance of the conqueror
from the east, and the deliverance of the people to be wrought by Him in connection
with the fulfilment of these predictions.</i> The supernatural character of this
announcement which the Prophet asserts, and which forms the ground of its probative
power, took place, only if it proceeded from Isaiah, but not if it was uttered only
about the end of the exile, at a time when Cyrus had already entered upon the stage
of history. These passages, at all events, admit only the alternative,--either that
Isaiah was the real author, or that they were forged at a later period by some deceiver;
and this latter alternative is so decidedly opposed to the whole spirit of the second
part, that scarcely any one among the opponents will resolve to adopt it. Considering
the very great and decisive importance of these passages, we must still allow them
to pass in review one by one. In chap. xli. 1-7, the Lord addresses those who are
serving idols, summons them triumphantly to defend themselves against the mighty
attack which He was just executing against them, and describes the futility of their
attempts at so doing. The address to the Gentiles is a mere form; to work upon Israel
is the real purpose. To secure them from the allurements of the world&#39;s religion,
the Prophet points to <span class="pagenum">[Pg 183]</span> the great confusion
which the Future will bring upon it. This confusion consists in this:--that the
prophecy of the conqueror from the East, as the messenger and instrument of the
Lord--a prediction which the Prophet had uttered in the power of the Lord--is fulfilled
without the idolators being able to prevent it. The answer on the words in ver.
2: &quot;Who hath raised up from the East him whom righteousness calleth whither he goes,
giveth the nations before him, and maketh kings subject to him, maketh his sword
like dust, and his bow like driven stubble?&quot; is this: According to the agreement
of prophecy and fulfilment, it is none other than the Lord, who is, therefore, the
only true God, to whose glory and majesty every deed of His servant Koresh bears
witness. The argumentation is unintelligible, as soon as, assuming that it was Isaiah
who wrote down the prophecy, it is not admitted that he, losing sight of the <i>
real</i> Present, takes his stand-point in an <i>ideal</i> Present, viz., the time
of the appearance of the conqueror from the East, by which it becomes possible to
him to draw his arguments from the prophecy in connection with the fulfilment. It
is altogether absurd, when it is asserted that the second part is spurious, and
was composed at a time when Cyrus was already standing before Babylon. It would
indeed have required an immense amount of impudence on the part of the Prophet to
bring forward, as an unassailable proof of the omniscience and omnipotence of God,
an event which every one saw with his bodily eyes. By such argumentation, he would
have exposed himself to general <i>ridicule</i>.--In chap. xli. 21-29, the discourse
is formally addressed to the Gentiles; but in point of fact, the Prophet here, too,
has to do with Judah driven into exile, to whom he was called by God to offer the
means to remain stedfast under the temptations from the idolators by whom they were
surrounded. Before the eyes, and in the hearing of Israel, the Lord convinces the
Gentiles of the nothingness of their cause. They are to prove the divinity of their
idols by showing forth the announcements of the Future which proceeded from them.
But they are not able to comply with this demand. It is only the Lord, the living
God, who can do that. Long before the appearance of the conqueror from the North
and East, He caused it to be <i>foretold</i>, and comforted His Church with the
view of the Future. Hence, He alone is <span class="pagenum">[Pg 184]</span> God,
and vanity are all those who are put beside Him. It is said in ver. 22: &quot;Let them
bring forth and shew to us what shall happen; the former things, what they be, show
and we will consider them and know the latter end of them; or the coming (events
make us to hear).&quot; <i>The former things</i> are those which are prior on this territory;
hence the former prophecies, as the comparison of the parallel passage, chap. xlii
9, clearly shows. The <i>end</i> of prophecy is its fulfilment.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1489;&#1488;&#1493;&#1514;</span> &quot;the coming, or future,&quot; are the events
of the more distant Future. As the Prophet demands from the idols and their servants
that only which the true God has already performed by His servants, we have here,
on the one hand, a reference to the whole cycle of prophecies formerly fulfilled,
as <i>e.g.</i>, that of the overthrow of the kingdoms of Damascus and Ephraim, and
the defeat of Asshur,--and, on the other hand, to the prophecy of the conqueror
from the East, &amp;c., contained in the second part. The <i>former</i> prophecies,
however, are here mentioned altogether incidentally only; the real demand refers,
as is shown by the words: &quot;What shall happen,&quot; only to the prophecies in reference
to the Future, corresponding to those of our Prophet regarding the conqueror from
the East, whose appearance is here represented as belonging altogether to the <i>
Future</i>, and not to be known by any human ingenuity. In ver. 26: &quot;Who hath declared
(such things) from the beginning, that we may know, and long beforehand, that we
may say: he is righteous?&quot; the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1512;&#1488;&#1513;</span> &quot;from
the beginning&quot; puts insurmountable obstacles in the way of the opponents of the
genuineness. If the second part of Isaiah be <i>spurious</i>, then the idolaters
might put the same scornful question to the God of Israel. The
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1512;&#1488;&#1513;</span> denotes just the opposite of a <i>vaticinium
post eventum</i>.--In chap. xlii. 9: &quot;The former (things), behold, they are come
to pass, and new things do I declare; before they spring forth, I let you hear,&quot;
the Prophet proves the true divinity of the Lord, from the circumstance that, having
already proved himself by prophecies fulfilled, He declares here, in the second
part, the future events before they spring forth, before the facts begin to sprout
forth from the soil of the Present, and hence could have been known and predicted
by human combination. The words, &quot;before they spring forth,&quot; become completely enigmatical,
if it be denied that Isaiah <span class="pagenum">[Pg 185]</span> wrote the second
part; inasmuch as, in that case, it would have in a great part, to do with things
which did not belong to the territory of prophetic foresight, but of what was plainly
visible.--In chap. xliii. 8-13, the Prophet again proves the nothingness of idolatry,
and the sole divinity of the God of Israel, from the great work, declared beforehand
by the Lord, of the deliverance of Israel, and of the overthrow of their enemies.
He is so deeply convinced of the striking force of this argument, that he ever anew
reverts to it. After having called upon the Gentiles to prove the divinity of their
idols by true prophecies given by them, he says in ver. 9: &quot;Let them bring forth
their witnesses, that they may be justified.&quot; By the witnesses it is to be proved,
by whom, to whom, and at what time the prophecies were given, in order that the
Gentiles may not refer to deceitfully forged prophecies, to <i>vaticinia post eventum</i>.
According to the hypothesis of the spuriousness of the second part, the author pronounced
his own condemnation by thus calling for witnesses. &quot;Ye are my witnesses, saith
the Lord, and witness is my Servant whom I have chosen,&quot; is said in ver. 10. While
the Gentiles are in vain called upon to bring forward witnesses for the divinity
of their idols, the true God has, for His witnesses, just those whose services he
claimed. The prophecies which lie at the foundation of their testimony, which are
to be borne witness to, are those of the second part. The Prophet may safely appeal
to the testimony of the whole nation, that they were uttered at a time, when their
contents could not be derived from human combination. &quot;The great unknown&quot; (<i>Ewald</i>),
could not by any possibility have spoken thus.--In chap. xlv. 19-21, it is proved
from the prophecy, in connection with the fulfilment, that Jehovah alone is God,--the
like of which no Gentile nation can show of their idols. The argumentation is followed
by the call to all the Gentiles to be converted to this God, and thus to become
partakers of His salvation--a call resting on the striking force of this argumentation--and
with this call is, in ver. 23-25, connected the solemn declaration of God, that,
at some future time, this shall take place; that, at some future time, there shall
be one shepherd and one flock. How would these high, solemn, words have been spoken
in vain, if &quot;the great unknown&quot; had spoken them! In ver. 19
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 186]</span> it is said: &quot;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 rectitude.&quot; The Lord here says, first,
in reference to His prophecies, those namely which He gave through our Prophet,
that <i>they were made known publicly</i>, that, hence, there could not be any doubt
of their genuineness,--altogether different from what is the case with the prophecies
of idolatrous nations which make their appearance <i>post eventum</i> only, <i>no
one knowing whence</i>. Every one might convince himself of their truth and divinity.
This is expressed by the words: &quot;I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of
the earth.&quot; Then he says that the Lord had not deceived His people, like the idols
who leave their servants without disclosures regarding: the Future; but that, by
the prophecies granted to our Prophet, He had met the longings of his people for
revelations of the Future. While the gods of the world leave them in the lurch,
just when their help is required, and never answer when they are asked, the Lord,
in reference to prophecies, as well as in every other respect, has not spoken: &quot;Seek
ye me in vain,&quot; but rather: When ye seek, ye shall find me. And, finally, he says
that his prophecies are true and right; that the heathenish prophets commit an
<i>unrighteousness</i> by performing something else than that which they promised
to perform. To declare <i>righteousness</i> is to declare that which is righteous,
which does not conceal internal emptiness and rottenness under a fair outside. The
words: &quot;I the Lord speak righteousness, I declare rectitude,&quot; could not but have
died on the lips of the &quot;great unknown.&quot;--In chap. xlvi. 8-13 the apostates in Israel
are addressed. They are exhorted to return to the true God, and to be mindful, 1.
of the nothingness of idols, ver. 8; 2. of the proofs of His sole divinity which
the Lord had given throughout the whole of the past history; 3. of the new manifestation
of it in announcing and sending Koresh (Cyrus), ver. 10, 11; &quot;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. Calling from the East an
eagle, from a far country the man of His counsel; I have spoken it, and will also
bring it to pass; I have formed it, and will also do it.&quot; To the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1488;&#1513;&#1504;&#1493;&#1514;</span>, the former <span class="pagenum">[Pg
187]</span> events, the fulfilled prophecies from former times (comp. xlii. 9),
here the new proof of the sole divinity of the God of Israel is added, in that He
sends Koresh: God <i>now</i> declares. The Prophet, by designating the time in which
the announcement was issued as <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1488;&#1513;&#1497;&#1514;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1491;&#1501;</span>, as beginning and ancient times, and by
founding the proof of the divinity of the Lord just upon the high age of the announcement,
again puts an insurmountable obstacle in the way of the opponents of the genuineness.
The announcement and declaration prove any thing in connection with the execution
only; the bringing to pass, therefore, is connected with the declaring, the doing
with the speaking. These words are <i>now</i> spoken, since, from the ideal stand-point,
the carrying out is at hand; they form the antecedent to the <i>calling</i>, of
which ver. 11 treats. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1493;&#1501;</span> properly &quot;to rise,&quot;
opposed to the laying down, means &quot;to bring to stand,&quot; &quot;to bring about,&quot; &quot;to be
fulfilled.&quot; &quot;The counsel,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, the contents of the prediction which was
spoken of before; it is the divine counsel and decree to which Koresh served as
an instrument.--<i>Finally</i>--In chap. xlviii., the same subject is treated of;
the divinity of the Lord is proved from His prophecies, in three sections, ver.
1-11, ver. 12-16, ver. 22. Here, at the close of the first book of the second part,
the argumentation occurs once more in a very strong accumulation, because the Prophet
is now about to leave it, and, in general, the whole territory of the lower salvation.
First, in ver. 1-11: Israel should return to the Lord, who formerly had manifested
and proved His sole divinity by a series of prophecies and their fulfilments, and
<i>now</i> was granting new and remarkable disclosures regarding the Future. Ver.
6: &quot;New things I shew thee from this time, hidden things, and thou didst not know
them, ver. 7. Now they have been created and not of old, and before this day thou
heardest them not; lest thou shouldest say: Behold, I knew them.&quot; The deliverance
of Israel by Cyrus--an announcement uttered in the preceding, and to be repeated
immediately afterwards--is called <i>new</i> in contrast to the old prophecies of
the Lord already fulfilled; <i>hidden</i> in contrast to the facts which are already
subjects of history, or may be known beforehand by natural ingenuity. <i>To be created</i>
is equivalent to being made manifest, inasmuch as the hidden Divine counsel enters
into life, only by being manifested, and <span class="pagenum">[Pg 188]</span> the
prophesied events are created for Israel, only by the prophecy. Ver. 8: &quot;Thou didst
not hear it, nor didst thou know it, likewise thine ear was not opened beforehand;
for I knew that thou art faithless, and wast called a transgressor from the womb.&quot;
I have, says the Lord, communicated to thee the knowledge of events of the Future
which are altogether unheard of, of which, before, thou didst not know the least,
nor couldst know. The reason of this communication is stated in the words: &quot;for
I knew,&quot; &amp;c. It is the same reason which, according to vers. 4, 5, called forth
also the former definite prophecies regarding the Future, now already fulfilled,
viz., the unbelief of the people, which requires a <i>palpable</i> proof that the
Lord alone is God, because it is but too ingenious in finding out seeming reasons
for justifying its apostacy. All that is perfectly in keeping with, and suitable
to the stand-point of Isaiah, but not to that of &quot;the great unknown,&quot; at whose time
the conqueror from the East was already beheld with the bodily eye; and Habakkuk
had long ago prophesied the destruction of the Babylonish world&#39;s power, and Israel&#39;s
deliverance; and Jeremiah had announced the destruction of Babylon by the Modes
much more distinctly and definitely than is done here in the second part of Isaiah.
In ver. 16 it is said: &quot;Come ye near unto me, hear this: from the beginning I have
not spoken in secret; from the time that it was, I was there, and now the Lord God
hath sent me and His Spirit.&quot; The sense is: Ever since the foundation of the people,
I have given them the most distinct prophecies, and made them publicly known (referring
to the whole chain of events, from the calling of Abraham and onward, which had
been objects of prophecy); by mine omnipotence I have fulfilled them; and now I
have sent my servant Isaiah, and filled him with my Spirit, in order that, by a
new distinguished prophecy, he may bear witness to my sole divinity. It is only
the accompanying mission of the Spirit which gives its importance to that of the
Prophet. It is from God&#39;s Spirit searching the depths of the Godhead, and knowing
His most hidden counsels, that those prophecies of the second part, going beyond
the natural consciousness, have proceeded.</p>
<p class="normal">We believe we have incontrovertibly proved that we are not entitled
to draw any arguments against Isaiah&#39;s being the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 189]</span>
author of the second part, from the circumstance &quot;that the exile is not announced,
but that the author takes his stand in it, as well as in that of Isaiah&#39;s time,
inasmuch as this stand-point is an assumed and ideal one. But if the <i>form</i>,
can prove nothing, far less can the <i>prophetic contents</i>.&quot;<!--uncertain position for end quote-->
It is true that these contents cannot be explained from the natural consciousness
of Isaiah; but it is not to be overlooked, that the assailed prophecies of Isaiah
are even as directly as possible opposed to the rationalistic notion of prophetism,
which is arbitrary, and goes in the face of all facts, and from which the arguments
against their genuineness are drawn. In a whole series of passages of the second
part (the same which we have just been discussing), the Prophet intimates that he
gives disclosures which lie beyond the horizon of his time; and draws from this
circumstance the arguments for his own divine mission, and the divinity of the God
of Israel. He considers it as the disgrace of idolatry that it cannot give any definite
prophecies, and with a noble scorn, challenges it to vindicate itself by such prophecies.
That rationalistic notion of prophetism removes the boundaries which, according
to the express statements of our Prophet, separate the Kingdom of God from heathenism.
The rationalistic <i>notional</i> God, however, it is true, can as little prophesy
as the heathenish gods of stone and wood, of whom the Psalmist says: &quot;They have
ears, but they hear not, <i>neither speak they through their throat</i>.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">It is farther to be considered that the predictions of the Future,
in those portions of Isaiah which are assailed just on account of them, are not
so destitute of a foundation as is commonly assumed. There existed, in the present
time and circumstances of the Prophet, important actual points of connection for
them. They farther rest on the foundation of ideal views and conceptions of eternal
truths, which had been familiar to the Church of the Lord from its very beginnings.
They only enlarge what had already been prophesied by former prophets; and well
secured and ascertained parallels in the prophetic announcement are not wanting
for them.</p>
<p class="normal">The carrying away of the covenant-people into exile had been actually
prophesied by the fact, that the land had spued out its former inhabitants on account
of their sins. The threatening of the exile pervades the whole Pentateuch from
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 190]</span> beginning to end; compare <i>Genuineness of
the Pentateuch</i>, <i>p.</i> 270 <i>ff.</i> It is found in the Decalogue also:
&quot;That thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.&quot; David
shows a clear knowledge of the sufferings impending over his family, and hence also
over the people of God; comp. my Commentary on Song of Sol. S. 243. Solomon points
to the future carrying away in his prayer at the consecration of the temple. Amos,
the predecessor of Isaiah, foresees with absolute clearness, that, before the salvation
comes, all that is glorious, not only in Israel, but in Judah also, must be given
over to destruction, compare Vol. i. p. 357. In like manner, too, Hosea prophesies
not only the destruction of the kingdom of the ten tribes, but also that Judah shall
be carried away into exile, comp. Vol. i. p. 176. In Isaiah, the foreknowledge of
the entire devastation of the city and land, and the carrying away into captivity
of its inhabitants--a foreknowledge which stands in close connection with the energy
of the knowledge of sin with the Prophets--meets us from the very beginning of his
ministry, and also in those prophecies, the genuineness of which no one ventures
to assail, as, <i>e.g.</i>, in chap. i.-vi. After the severity of God had been manifested
before the bodily eyes of the Prophet in the carrying away of the ten tribes, it
could not, even from human considerations, be doubtful to him, what was the fate
in store for Judah.</p>
<p class="normal">The knowledge, that the impending carrying away of Judah would
take place by the Chaldeans, and that Babylon would be the place of their banishment,
was not destitute of a certain natural foundation. In the germ, the Chaldean power
actually existed even at that time. Decidedly erroneous is the view of <i>Hitzig</i>,
that a Chaldean power in Babylon could be spoken of only since the time of Nabopolassar.
This power, on the contrary, was very old; compare the proofs in <i>Delitzsch&#39;s</i>
Commentary on Habakkuk, S. 21. The Assyrian power, although, when outwardly considered,
at its height, when more closely examined, began, even at that time, already to
sink. A weakening of the Assyrian power is intimated also by the circumstance, that
Hezekiah ventured to rebel against the Assyrians, and the embassy of the Chaldean
Merodach Baladan to Hezekiah, implies that, even at that time, many things gave
a title to expect the speedy downfal of the Assyrian <span class="pagenum">[Pg 191]</span>
Empire. But the fact that Isaiah possessed the clear knowledge that, in some future
period, the dominion of the world would pass over to Babylon and the Chaldeans,--that
they would be the executors of the judgment upon Judah, we have already proved,
in our remarks on chaps. xiii., xiv., from the prophecies of the first part,--from
chap. xxiii. 13, where the Chaldeans are mentioned as the executors of the judgment
upon the neighbouring people, the Tyrians, and as the destroyers of the Assyrian
dominion,--and from chap. xxxix. The attempt of dispossessing him of this knowledge
is so much the more futile, that his contemporary Micah undeniably possesses it;
comp. Vol. i. p. 464. So also does Habakkuk, between whose time and that of Isaiah,
circumstances had not essentially changed, and who likewise still prophesied before
the Chaldean monarchy had been established.</p>
<p class="normal">While this foreknowledge of the future <i>elevation</i> of Babylon
had a <i>historical</i> foundation, the foreknowledge of its <i>humiliation and
fate</i>, following soon after, rested on a <i>theological</i> foundation. With
a heathenish people, elevation is always followed by haughtiness, with all its consequences;
and, according to the eternal laws of the divine government of the world, haughtiness
is a matter-of-fact prophecy of destruction. Proceeding from this view, the downfal
of the Chaldean monarchy was prophesied by Habakkuk also, at a time when it was
still developing, and was far from having attained to the zenith of its power. In
the same manner, the foreknowledge of the future <i>deliverance of Israel</i> rises
on a theological foundation, and is not at all to be considered in the same light
as if <i>e.g.</i>, the Prophet had foretold to Moab its deliverance. That which
the Prophet here predicts is only the individualization of a general truth which
meets us at the very beginnings of the covenant-people. The principle which St.
Paul advances in Rom. xi. 2: &quot;God hath not cast away His people whom He foreknew,&quot;
and ver. 29: &quot;For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance,&quot; meets us,
clearly and distinctly, as early as in the books of Moses. In Levit. xxvi. 42-45,
the deliverance from the land of captivity is announced on the ground of the election
of Israel, and of the covenant with the fathers, and as a fulfilment of the promise
of future election, which was given by the fact of Israel&#39;s being delivered from
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 192]</span> Egypt. And according to Deut. iv. 30, 31,
xxx. ff., and the close of chap. xxxii., the end of all the catastrophes which are
inflicted upon the covenant-people is always Israel&#39;s conversion and reception into
favour; behind the judgment, mercy is always concealed. In the prayer of Solomon,
the carrying away goes hand in hand with the reception into favour. But it will
be altogether fruitless to deny to Isaiah the knowledge of the future deliverance
of Israel from Babylon, since his contemporary Micah, in chap. iv. 10, briefly and
distinctly expresses the same: &quot;And thou comest to Babylon; there shalt thou be
delivered; there shall the Lord redeem thee from the hand of thine enemies.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The only point in the prophetic foreknowledge of the second part
which really seems to want, not only a historical or ideal foundation, but also
altogether corresponding analogies, is the mention of the name of Koresh. But this
difficulty disappears if, in strict opposition to the current notion, it is assumed
that Cyrus was induced, by our book only, to appropriate to himself that name. Recent
investigation has proved that this name is originally not a proper name, but an
honorary title,--that the Greek writers rightly explain it by <i>Sun</i>,--that
the name of the sun was, in the East generally, and especially with the Persians,
a common honorary title of rulers; comp. <i>Bürnouf</i> and others in <i>Hävernick&#39;s
Einleitung</i>, ii. 2, S. 165. This honorary title of the Persian kings, Isaiah
might very easily learn in a natural way. And the fact that this <i>Nomen dignitatis</i>
became, among several others, peculiar to Cyrus (the mention of the name of Koresh
by Isaiah does not originally go beyond the announcement of the conqueror from the
East) is explained by the circumstance that Cyrus assumed this name in honour of
our book, and as an acknowledgment of the mission assigned to him by it, although
the Prophet had not used this name in any other manner than Balaam had that of Agag,
perhaps with an allusion to its signification; compare the phrases &quot;from the East,&quot;
&quot;from the rising of the sun,&quot; in chap. xli. 2, 25. And it is historically settled
and certain, that Cyrus had originally another name, viz., <i>Agradates</i>, and
that he assumed this name only at the time of his ascending the throne, which falls
into the time when the prophecies of our book could already be known to him (comp.
the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 193]</span> proofs in <i>Hävernick&#39;s Einleit.</i>)
And as it is farther certain that the prophecies of our book made a deep impression
upon him, and, in important points, exercised an influence upon his actions (this
appears not only from the express statement of <i>Josephus</i>, [Arch. xi. c. 1.
§ 1, 2,] but still more from an authentic document, the Edict of Cyrus, in Ezra
i. 1 ff., which so plainly implies the fact reported by <i>Josephus</i>, that <i>
Jahn</i> rightly called <i>Josephus&#39;</i> statement a commentary on this Edict, which
refers, <i>partly</i> with literal accuracy, to a series of passages from the second
part of Isaiah, compare the particulars in <i>Kleinert</i>, <i>über die Echtheit
des Jesaias</i>, S. 142);--as the condition of the Persian religion likewise confirms
this result gained from the Edict of Cyrus (<i>Stuhr</i>, <i>die Religionssysteme
des alten Orients</i>, S. 373 ff., proves that in the time of Cyrus, and by him,
an Israelitish element had been introduced into it);--there will certainly not be
any reason to consider our supposition to be improbable, or the result of embarrassment.</p>
<p class="normal">But to this circumstance we must still direct attention, that
those prophetic announcements of the second part which have reference to that which,
even at the time of &quot;the great unknown,&quot; still belonged to the future, are far more
distinct, and can far less be accounted for from natural causes, than those from
which rationalistic criticism has drawn inferences as regards the spuriousness of
the second part. The personal Messianic prophecies of the second part are much more
characteristic than those concerning Cyrus. He who cannot, by the help of history,
supplement and illustrate the prophecy, receives only an incomplete and defective
image of the latter. And, indeed, a sufficiently long time elapsed before even Exegesis
recognised with certainty and unanimity that it was Cyrus who was meant. Doubts
and differences of opinion on this point meet us even down to last century. The
Medes and Persians are not at all mentioned as the conquerors of Babylon, and all
which refers to the person of Cyrus has an altogether ideal character; while the
Messiah is, especially in chap. liii., so distinctly drawn, that scarcely any essential
feature in His image is omitted. And it is altogether a matter of course that here,
in the antitypical deliverance, a much greater clearness and distinctness should
prevail; for it stands <span class="pagenum">[Pg 194]</span> in a far closer relation
to the idea, so that form and substance do far less disagree.</p>
<p class="normal">It would be inappropriate were we here to take up and refute all
the arguments against the genuineness of the second part, which rationalistic criticism
has brought together. Besides those which we have already refuted, we shall bring
into view only this argument, which, at first sight indeed, may dazzle and startle
even the well-disposed, viz., the difference between the first and second parts,
as regards language and mode of representation. The chief error of those who have
adduced this argument is, that they judge altogether without reference to person,--a
matter, however, quite legitimate in this case,--that they simply apply the same
rule to the productions of Isaiah which, in the productions of less richly endowed
persons, has indeed a <i>certain</i> right, <i>e.g.</i>, on the prophetical territory
of Jeremiah, who, notwithstanding the difference of subject, yet does not understand
so to change his voice, that it should not soon be recognized by the skilled More
than of all the prophets that holds true of Isaiah, which <i>Fichte</i>, in a letter
to a <i>Königsberg</i> friend, writes of himself (in his <i>Life</i>, by his son,
i. S. 196): &quot;I have properly no style at all, for I have them all.&quot; &quot;Just as the
subject demands,&quot; says <i>Ewald</i>, without assigning to the circumstance any weight
in judging of the second part, &quot;just as the subject demands, every kind of speech,
and every change of style are easily at his command; and it is just this in which
here his greatness, as, in general, one of his most prominent perfections, consists.&quot;
The chief peculiarities of style in the second part stand in close relation to the
subject, and the disposition of mind thereby called forth. The Prophet, as a rule,
does not address the mass of the people, but the election (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#954;&#955;&#959;&#947;&#8053;</span>);
nor the sinful congregation of the Lord in the present time, but that of the future,
purified by the judgments of the Lord, the seed and germ of which were the election
of the Present. It is to the congregation of brethren that he addresses <i>Comfort</i>.
The beginning: &quot;Comfort ye, Comfort ye, Zion,&quot; contains the keynote and principal
subject. It is from this that the gentle, tender, soft character of the style is
to be accounted for, as well as the frequent repetitions;--the comforting love follows,
step by step, the grief which is indefatigable in its repetitions.
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 195]</span> From this circumstance is to be explained
the habit of adding several epithets to the name of God; these are as many shields
which are held up against despair, as many bulwarks against the things in sight,
by which every thought of redemption was cut off Where God is the sole help, every
thing must be tried to make the Congregation feel what they have in Him. A series
of single phrases which several times recur <i>verbatim</i>, <i>e.g.</i>, &quot;I am
the Lord, and none else, I do not give mine honour to any other, I am the first
and the last,&quot; are easily accounted for by the Prophet&#39;s endeavour and anxiety to
impress upon the desponding minds truths, which they were only too apt to forget.
If other linguistic peculiarities occur, which cannot be explained from the subject,
it must be considered that the second part is not by any means a collection of single
prophecies, but a closely connected whole, which, as such, must necessarily have
its own peculiar <i>usus loquendi</i>, a number of constantly recurring characteristic
peculiarities. The character of unity must necessarily be expressed in language
and style also. The fact, however, that, notwithstanding the difference of style
betwixt the first and second parts, the second part has a great number of characteristic
peculiarities of language and style in common with the first part (a fact which
cannot be otherwise, if Isaiah was the author of both), was first very thoroughly
demonstrated by <i>Kleinert</i>, while <i>Küper</i> and <i>Caspari</i> have been
the first conclusively to prove, that the second part was known and made use of
by those prophets who prophesied between the time of Isaiah and that of &quot;the great
unknown.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The close connection of the second part with the first is, among
other things, proved also by the circumstance that both are equally strongly pervaded
with the Messianic announcement. Chap. i.-xii. especially have, in this respect,
a remarkable parallel in the second book of the second part. The fact, moreover,
that the single Messianic prophecies of the second part agree, in the finest and
most concealed features, with those of the first part, will be shown in the exposition.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_164a" href="#ftnRef_164a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[1]</sup></a> Chap. xxxvii. 38, (comp. 2 Kings xix. 37),
	describing apparently the murder of Sennacherib as belonging to the past, does
	not decide any thing as to the composition of this chapter by Isaiah, &quot;inasmuch
	as the year which is assigned for Sennacherib&#39;s death, B.C. 696, is not historically
	ascertained and certain. Nor can the supposition, that Isaiah lived until the
	time of Manasseh, and himself arranged and edited the collection of his prophecies
	on the eve of his life, be liable to any well-founded doubts&quot; (<i>Keil</i>,
	<i>Einleitung</i>, S. 271). The inscription in chap. i. 1, only indicates that
	the collection does not contain any prophecies which go beyond the time of Hezekiah.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_175a" href="#ftnRef_175a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[2]</sup></a> To a certain degree analogous are those other
	passages of the Old Testament, in which the Past presents itself in the form
	of the Present, as the deliverance from Egypt in Ps. lxvi. 6; lxxxi. 6. Faith,
	at the same time, makes all the old things new, fresh, and lively, and anticipates
	the Future.</p>
</div>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 196]</span></p>
<h3><a name="div2_196" href="#div2Ref_196">CHAP. XLII. 1-9.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">The 40th chapter has an introductory character. It comforts the
people of the Lord by pointing, in general, to a Future rich in salvation. In chap.
xli. the Prophet describes the appearance of the conqueror from the East for the
destruction of Babylon,--an event from which he derives, as from a rich source,
ample consolations for his poor wretched people, while, at the same time, he represents
idolatry as being thereby put to shame. It is on purpose that, immediately after
the first announcement of this conqueror from the East, his antitype is, in chap.
xlii. 1-9, contrasted with him. In the preceding chapter, the Prophet had shown
how, by the influence of the king from the East, the Lord would put idolatry to
shame, and work out deliverance for His Church. In the section now before us, he
describes how, by the mission of His servant, the Lord would effect, definitely
and absolutely, that which the former had done only in a preliminary, limited, and
imperfect manner. In the subsequent section, the Prophet then first farther carries
out the image of the conqueror from the East; and from chap. xlix. he turns to a
more minute representation of the image of the true Saviour. In chaps. xlii. 10,
to xliii. 7, the discourse turns, from a general description of God&#39;s instruments
of salvation, to a general description of the salvation in its whole extent; just
as it is the manner of the second part ever again to return from the particular
to the general.</p>
<p class="normal">Here, where the Servant of God is first to be introduced, He is
at first spoken <i>of</i>; it is in ver. 5 that the Lord first speaks <i>to</i>
His servant. In chap. xlix., on the contrary, the Servant of God, being already
known from chap. xlii., is, without farther remark, introduced as speaking.</p>
<p class="normal">In the whole section, the Lord is speaking. It falls into three
divisions--First, the Lord speaks <i>of</i> His servant, vers. 1-4; then He speaks
to His servant, ver. 5-7; finally. He addresses some closing words to the Church,
ver. 8, 9. The representation, in harmony with the nature of the prophetic vision,
bears a dramatic character.</p>
<p class="normal">In ver. 1-4, the Lord, as it were, points to His servant, introduces
Him to His Church, and commends Him to the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 197]</span>
world: &quot;Behold my Servant,&quot; &amp;c. He, the beloved and elect One, upheld by God, and
endowed with the fulness of the Spirit of God, shall establish righteousness upon
the whole earth, and bring into submission to himself the whole Gentile world, by
showing himself meek and lowly in heart, an helper of the poor and afflicted, and
combining with it never-failing power. The aim: He shall bring forth right to the
Gentiles. is at once expressed at the close of ver. 1. In ver. 2-4, the means by
which He attains this aim are then stated. The bringing forth, or the establishing
of right, recurs again in ver. 3 and 4, in order to point out this relation of ver.
2-4 to ver. 1.</p>
<p class="normal">In ver. 6 and 7, after having pointed to His Omnipotence as affording
a guarantee for the fulfilment of a prophecy so great that it might appear almost
incredible, the Lord turns to His Servant and addresses Him. He announces to Him
that it should be His glorious destination, partly to bring, in His person, the
covenant with Israel to its full truth, partly to be the light for the Gentile world,--to
be, in general, the Saviour of the whole human race.</p>
<p class="normal">In the closing verses, 8, 9, the Lord addresses the Church, and
directs its attention to the object which the announcement of the mission of His
Servant, declared in the preceding context, serves: God, because He is God, is anxious
for the promotion of His glory. In order, therefore, that it may be known that He
alone is God, He grants to His people disclosures as regards the distant Future,
as yet fully wrapped up in obscurity.</p>
<p class="normal">There is no doubt, and it is now generally admitted, that the
Servant of the Lord, here described, is the same as He who is brought before us
in chap. xlix. 4; liii., lxi. It is, hence, not sufficient to point out an individual
to whom, apparently, the attributes contained in this prophecy belong; but we must
add and combine all the signs and attributes which are contained in the parallel
passages.</p>
<p class="normal">The Chaldean Paraphrast who, in so many instances, has faithfully
preserved the exegetical tradition, understands the Messiah by the Servant of God;
and so, from among the later Jewish expositors, do <i>Dav. Kimchi</i> and <i>Abarbanel</i>,
the latter of whom says of the non-Messianic interpretation,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1499;&#1500; &#1488;&#1500;&#1492;</span> <span class="pagenum">[Pg 198]</span>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1495;&#1499;&#1502;&#1497;&#1501; &#1492;&#1499;&#1493; &#1489;&#1505;&#1504;&#1493;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501;</span> &quot;that all these expositors
were struck with blindness.&quot; That this exposition was the current one among the
Jews at the time of Christ, appears from Luke ii. 32, where Simeon designates the
Saviour as the light to be revealed to the Gentiles
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#966;&#8182;&#962; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#954;&#940;&#955;&#965;&#968;&#953;&#957; &#7952;&#952;&#957;&#8182;&#957;</span>, with a reference
to Is xlii. 6; xlix. 6. It is especially the latter passage which Simeon has in
view, as also St. Paul in Acts xiii. 46, 47, as appears from the words immediately
preceding <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8005;&#964;&#953; &#949;&#7990;&#948;&#959;&#957; &#959;&#7985; &#8000;&#966;&#952;&#945;&#955;&#956;&#959;&#943; &#956;&#959;&#965; &#964;&#8056; &#963;&#969;&#964;&#942;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#957; &#963;&#959;&#965;
&#8003; &#7969;&#964;&#959;&#943;&#956;&#945;&#963;&#945;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#8048; &#960;&#961;&#972;&#963;&#969;&#960;&#959;&#957; &#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#969;&#957; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#955;&#945;&#8182;&#957;</span>, which evidently refer to chap.
xlix. But chap. xlix. is, as regards the point which here comes into consideration,
a mere repetition and confirmation of chap. xlii.</p>
<p class="normal">By the New Testament, this exposition has been introduced and
established in the Church of Christ. The words which, at the baptism of Christ,
resounded from heaven: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#8023;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#953;&#957; &#8001; &#965;&#7985;&#972;&#962; &#956;&#959;&#965; &#8001; &#7936;&#947;&#945;&#960;&#951;&#964;&#972;&#962;,
&#7952;&#957; &#8103; &#949;&#8016;&#948;&#972;&#954;&#951;&#963;&#945;</span>, Matt. iii. 17 (comp. Mark i. 11) evidently refer to ver. 1
of the chapter before us, and point out that He who had now appeared was none other
than He who had, centuries ago, been predicted by the prophets. And so do likewise
the words which, according to Matt. xvii. 5 (compare Mark ix. 7; Luke ix. 35; 2
Pet. i. 17), at the transfiguration of Christ, towards the close of His ministry,
resounded from heaven in order to strengthen the Apostles:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#8023;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#953;&#957; &#8001; &#965;&#7985;&#972;&#962; &#956;&#959;&#965; &#8001; &#7936;&#947;&#945;&#960;&#951;&#964;&#972;&#962;, &#7952;&#957; &#8103; &#949;&#8016;&#948;&#972;&#954;&#951;&#963;&#945;&#903;
&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7936;&#954;&#959;&#973;&#949;&#964;&#949;</span> These voices at the beginning and the close of Christ&#39;s ministry
have not been sufficiently attended to by those who have raised doubts against the
Messianic interpretation; for a doubt in this must necessarily shake also the belief
in the reality of those voices. In both of the passages, the place of the Servant
of God in chap. xlii. 1 (which passage is indeed not so much quoted, as only, in
a free treatment, referred to) is taken by the Son of God, from Ps. ii. 7, just
as, at the transfiguration, the words <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7936;&#954;&#959;&#973;&#949;&#964;&#949;</span>
are at once added from Deut. xviii. 15. The name of the Servant of God was not high
enough fur the sublime moment; the <i>Son</i> formed, in the second passage, the
contrast to the <i>mere</i> servants of God, Moses and Elijah.--In Matt. xii. 17-21,
ver. 1-3 are quoted, and referred to Christ. The Messianic explanation of chap.
xlii., xlix. lies at the foundation of all the other passages also, where Christ
is spoken of as the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#945;&#8150;&#962; &#920;&#949;&#959;&#8166;</span>. In Acts iii.
13: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#948;&#972;&#958;&#945;&#963;&#949; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#960;&#945;&#8150;&#948;&#945;</span> <span class="pagenum">
[Pg 199]</span> <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166;&#957;</span>, we shall be obliged
to follow <i>Bengel</i> in explaining it by: <i>ministrum suum</i>, partly on account
of Matt. xii. 18, and because the LXX. often render
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491;</span> by <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#945;&#8150;&#962;</span>;
partly on account of the obvious reference to the Old Testament passages which treat
of the Servant of God, and on account of the special allusion to chap. xlix. 3 in
the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#948;&#972;&#958;&#945;&#963;&#949;</span> (LXX.
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#959;&#8166;&#955;&#972;&#962; &#956;&#959;&#965; &#949;&#7990; &#963;&#8058; [&#7992;&#963;&#961;&#945;&#8053;&#955;] &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#957; &#963;&#959;&#8054; &#949;&#8016;&#948;&#959;&#958;&#945;&#963;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#959;&#956;&#945;&#953;</span>).
And so likewise in Acts iii. 26; iv. 27: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#960;&#8054; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#7941;&#947;&#953;&#959;&#957;
&#960;&#945;&#8150;&#948;&#940; &#963;&#959;&#965; &#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166;&#957;, &#8003;&#957; &#7956;&#967;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#945;&#962;</span>, where the last words refer to chap. lxi. 1;
farther, in Acts iv. 30. In all these passages it is not the more obvious
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#959;&#8166;&#955;&#959;&#962;</span>, but <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#945;&#8150;&#962;</span>
which is put, in order to remove the low notions which, in Greek, attach to the
word <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#959;&#8166;&#955;&#959;&#962;</span>.</p>
<p class="normal">Taking her stand partly on these authorities, partly on the natural
sense of the passage, the Christian Church has all along referred the passage to
Christ; and even expositors such as <i>Clericus</i>, who, everywhere else, whensoever
it is possible, seek to set aside the Messianic interpretation, are here found among
its most decided defenders. In our century, with the awakening faith, this explanation
has again obtained general dominion; and wherever expositors of evangelical disposition
do not yet profess it, this is to be accounted for from the still continuing influence
of rationalistic tradition.</p>
<p class="normal">We are led to the Messianic interpretation by the circumstance
that the servant of God appears here as the antitype of Cyrus. A real person can
be contrasted with a real person only, but not with a personification, as is assumed
by the other explanations. We are compelled to explain it of Christ by this circumstance
also, that it is in Him only that the signs of the Servant of God are to be found,--that
in Him only the covenant of God with Israel has become a truth,--that He only is
the light of the Gentiles,--that He only, without external force, by His gentleness,
meekness, and love, has founded a Kingdom, the boundaries of which are conterminous
with those of the earth. The connection, also, with the other Messianic announcements,
especially those of the first part, compels us to refer it to Christ.</p>
<p class="normal">The reasons against the Messianic interpretation are of little
weight. The assertion that nowhere in the New Testament does Jesus appear as the
Servant of Jehovah (<i>Hendewerk</i>), is at once overthrown by Matt. xii. 18, as
well as by the other <span class="pagenum">[Pg 200]</span> passages already quoted,
in which Christ appears as <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#945;&#8150;&#962; &#920;&#949;&#959;&#8166;</span>. Phil.
ii. 7, <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#959;&#961;&#966;&#8052;&#957; &#948;&#959;&#973;&#955;&#959;&#965; &#955;&#945;&#946;&#974;&#957;</span> comes as near the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491; &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span>, as it was possible, considering
the low notion attached to the Greek <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#959;&#8166;&#955;&#959;&#962;</span>.
The passages which treat of the obedience of Christ, such as Rom, v. 19; Phil. ii.
8; Heb. v. 8; John xvii. 4: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#7956;&#961;&#947;&#959;&#957; &#7952;&#964;&#949;&#955;&#949;&#953;&#974;&#963;&#945;, &#8003;
&#948;&#941;&#948;&#969;&#954;&#940;&#962; &#956;&#959;&#953; &#7989;&#957;&#945; &#960;&#959;&#953;&#942;&#963;&#969;</span>, give only a paraphrase of the notion of the Servant
of the Lord. With perfect soundness <i>Dr Nitzsch</i> has remarked, that it was
required by the typical connection of the two Testaments, that Christ should somehow,
according to His <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8017;&#960;&#945;&#954;&#959;&#8052;</span>,
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8017;&#960;&#959;&#964;&#945;&#947;&#8053;</span>, be represented as the perfect manifestation
of the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491;</span>--The assertion: &quot;The Messiah is
excluded by the circumstance that the subject is not only to be a teacher of the
Gentiles, who is endowed with the Spirit of God, but is also to announce deliverance
to Israel&quot; (<i>Gesenius</i>), rests only on an erroneous, falsely literal interpretation
of ver. 7, which is not a whit better than if, in ver. 3, we were to think of a
natural bruised reed, a natural wick dimly burning.--The objection that this Servant
of the Lord is not foretold as a future person, but is spoken of as one present,
forgets that we are here on the territory of prophetic vision, that the prophets
had not in vain the name of <i>seers</i>, and puts the <i>real</i>, in place of
the <i>ideal</i> Present,--a mistake which is here the less pardonable that the
Prophet pre-eminently uses the Future, and, in this way, himself explains the ideal
character of the inserted Preterites.--In order to refute the assertion, that the
doctrine of the Messiah is foreign to the second part of Isaiah, that (as <i>Ewald</i>
held) in it the former Messianic hopes are connected with the person of a heathen
king, viz., Cyrus (how very little have they who advance such opinions any idea
of the nature of Holy Writ!), it is only necessary to refer to chap. lv. 3, 4, where
the second David, the Messiah, appears, at the same time, as Teacher, and as the
Prince and Lawgiver of the nations, who is to extend the Kingdom of God far over
all heathen nations. That which, in that passage, is declared of the Messiah, and
that which, in those passages which treat of the Servant of God, is declared of
Him, exclude one another, as soon as, by the Servant of God, any other subject than
the Messiah is understood.</p>
<p class="normal">Even this circumstance must raise an unfavourable prejudice against
the non-Messianic interpretation, that its defenders <span class="pagenum">[Pg 201]</span>
are at one in the negative only, but differ in the positive determination of the
subject, and that, hitherto, no one view has succeeded in overthrowing the other;
and farther, that ever anon new subtleties are advanced, by means of which it is
attempted to patch up and conceal the inadmissibilities of every individual exposition.</p>
<p class="normal">Passing over those expositions which have now become obsolete,--such
as of Cyrus, the Prophet Isaiah himself--we shall give attention to those expositions
only which even now have their representatives, and which have some foundation in
the matter itself.</p>
<p class="normal">The LXX. already understood Israel by the Servant of the Lord.
They translate in ver. 1: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7992;&#945;&#954;&#8060;&#946;, &#8001; &#960;&#945;&#8150;&#962; &#956;&#959;&#965;, &#7936;&#957;&#964;&#953;&#955;&#942;&#968;&#959;&#956;&#945;&#953;
&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166;, &#7992;&#963;&#961;&#945;&#8053;&#955;, &#8001;, &#7952;&#954;&#955;&#949;&#954;&#964;&#972;&#962; &#956;&#959;&#965;, &#960;&#961;&#959;&#963;&#949;&#948;&#941;&#958;&#945;&#964;&#959; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#7969; &#968;&#965;&#967;&#942; &#956;&#959;&#965;.</span> Among the Jewish
interpreters, <i>Jarchi</i> follows this explanation, but with this modification,
that, by the Servant of the Lord, he understands the collective body of the righteous
in Israel. In modern times, this view is defended by <i>Hitzig</i>. It appeals especially
to the circumstance that, in a series of other passages of the second part, Israel,
too, is designated by the Servant of God, viz. in chap. xli. 8: &quot;And thou Israel,
my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, seed of Abraham my friend,&quot; ver. 9: &quot;Thou
whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called thee from its sides, and
said unto thee: Thou art my servant, I have chosen thee, and not cast thee away,&quot;
chap. xlii. 19, xliii. 10, xliv. 1, 2: &quot;And now hear, O Jacob my servant, and Israel
whom I have chosen. Thus saith the Lord that made thee, formed thee from the womb
and helpeth thee: Fear not, O Jacob, my servant, and thou Jeshurun, whom I have
chosen;&quot; chap. xliv. 21, xlv. 4, xlviii. 20; &quot;Say ye, the Lord hath redeemed His
servant Jacob.&quot; In the face of this fact, we shall not be permitted to refer to
&quot;the general signification of the expression, and its manifold use.&quot; For, generally,
it is of very rare occurrence that Israel is personified as the Son of God (in Ps.
cv. 6, it is not Israel, as <i>Köster</i> supposes, but Abraham who is called Servant
of God; Jer. xxx. 10, xlvi. 27; Ezek. xxxvii. 25 are, in all probability, dependent
upon the second part of Isaiah, by which this designation first obtained a footing),
and never occurs in such accumulation as here. For this very reason, we cannot well
think <span class="pagenum">[Pg 202]</span> of an accident; and if there was an
intention, we can seek it only in the circumstance that there exists a close reference
to those prophecies which, <i>ex professo</i>, have to do with the Servant of God.
To this we are led by another circumstance, also. While those passages in which
Israel or Jacob is spoken of as the servant of God, occur in great numbers in the
first book of the second part of Isaiah, they <i>disappear</i> altogether in the
second book, which is the proper seat of the detail prophecies of the Servant of
God in question, who, in the first book was, by way of anticipation only, mentioned
in chap. xlii. After chap. xlviii. 20, where the words: &quot;The Lord hath redeemed
His servant Jacob,&quot; occur with evident intention, once more at the close of the
first book, Jacob, the servant of God, is, in general, no more spoken of, but the
Plural is used only of the Israelites as the servants of God in chap. lxiii. 17:
&quot;For thy servants&#39; sake, the tribes of thine inheritance;&quot; lxv. 8, 9-13, lxvi. 14,--passages
which make it only the more evident that the Prophet purposely avoids bringing forward
Jacob as the ideal person of the Servant of the Lord. <i>Finally</i>--The idea of
chance is entirely excluded by chap. xlix. 3, where the Messiah is called Israel.</p>
<p class="normal">From these facts, however, we are not entitled to infer that,
in the prophetic announcement, Israel is simply spoken of as the servant of God;
but on the contrary the context must be viewed in a different and <i>nicer</i> way.
This is evident from the circumstance that, while in the passages chaps. xli. 7,
xlviii. 20, Israel and Jacob are intentionally spoken of as the servant of God,
or, at least, Israel is so distinctly pointed out that it cannot be at all misunderstood,
such an express pointing to Israel is (with the sole exception of chap. xlix. 3),
as intentionally, avoided in the prophetic announcement of the Servant of God. The
phrase &quot;My servant Jacob,&quot; which, in the former passages is the rule, never occurs
in the latter. This circumstance clearly indicates that, besides the agreement,
there exists a difference. The facts, however, which point out the agreement, receive
ample justice by the supposition <i>that the Prophet considers Christ as the concentration
and essence of Israel</i>, that he expects from Him the realization of the task
which was given to Israel, but had not been fulfilled by them, and just thereby,
also, the realization of the promises given to <span class="pagenum">[Pg 203]</span>
Israel. But, besides other reasons, the fact that the whole description of the Servant
of God stands in direct contradiction to what the Prophet elsewhere says of Israel,
proves that Israel is not meant in <i>opposition</i> to the Messiah,--the body without
the head. It is especially chap. xlii. 19 which here comes into consideration: &quot;Who
is so blind as my servant, or so blind as my messenger whom I send?&quot; Israel is here
called servant of the Lord, because it had been called by Him to preserve the true
religion on earth. Parallel is the appellation: &quot;My messenger whom I send.&quot; Israel,
as the messenger of God, was to deliver His commands to the Gentiles. The Prophet
sharpens the reproof, in that he always contrasts what the people were, and what
they ought to have been, according to the destination given to them by the Lord.
The servant of the Lord, who, in order to execute His commissions, must have a sharp
eye, is blind; His messenger is deaf and cannot hear what He says to him. The immense
contrast between idea and reality which is here pointed out, implies, since the
idea must necessarily be realized, that it shall receive another bearer; that in
place of the messenger, who has become blind and deaf, there should come the true
Messenger who first opens the eyes of Israel, and then those of the Gentiles,--that
the destination of Israel, which the members are unfit to realize, should be realized
by the head. We are not at liberty to say that the servant who had become blind
and deaf shall be converted, shall put off the old man and put on the new man, and
shall then accomplish the great things which, in the prophecies of the Servant of
God, are assigned to him. For the conversion,--on which everything depends, and
apart from which the announcement of the Prophet would be an empty fancy--is, in
all these prophecies, not mentioned by a single word. On the contrary, the Servant
of God is everywhere, from His very origin, brought before us as the absolutely
just. No more glaring contrast can really be imagined than that which exists between
that which the Prophet says of the ordinary Israel (whose outward state, as it is
described in chap. xlii. 22: &quot;This is a people robbed and spoiled, they are all
of them snared in holes, and hid in prison-houses,&quot; is only a faithful image of
the internal condition), and the Son of God in whom His soul delighteth, who in
exuberant love seeks <span class="pagenum">[Pg 204]</span> that which is lost, whose
overflowing righteousness justifies many, and who, as a substitute, can suffer for
others. It is in Christ only, that Israel attains to its destination, both in a
moral point of view, and as regards the Divine preservation and glorification. To
this it may still be added, that neither here, nor in the parallel passages is
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491; &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span> ever connected with a Plural, but
always with the Singular only; while elsewhere, in the case of collective nouns
and ideal persons, the real plurality not uncommonly shines forth from behind the
unity; and in those passages, especially, where Israel appears personified as a
unity, the use of the Singular is interchanged with that of the Plural. Comp.,
<i>e.g.</i>, chap. xli. 8: &quot;And thou Israel, my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen,
seed (<i>posterity</i>) of Abraham, my friend,&quot; chap. xliii. 10: &quot;<i>Ye are my witnesses.</i>
saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen.&quot; But a circumstance, which alone
would be sufficient for the proof, is the fact, that in chap. xli. 6, (comp. chap.
xlix. 5, 6) the Servant of the Lord is plainly distinguished from the people. How
can the Lord say of the people, that He will give it for a covenant of the people,
that in it He will cause the covenant with the people to attain to its truth? The
fact, that this passage opposes an insurmountable barrier to the explanation which
makes the people the subject, sufficiently appears from the circumstance, that the
expositors saw themselves obliged to set aside its natural sense by a forced, unphilological
explanation. <i>Finally</i>,--In understanding the people by the Servant of God,
the prophecies of the Servant of God are brought into irreconcileable contradiction
with all other prophecies, with the first part of Isaiah, and even with the second
part, inasmuch as things would then be prophesied of the people which, everywhere
else, are constantly assigned to the Messiah. This is quite openly expressed by
<i>Köster</i>: &quot;The Servant of Jehovah is the Jewish people; viewed, however, by
the Prophet in such a manner as to combine in itself the attributes of both, the
prophets and the Messiah.&quot; Prophetism would have dug its own grave if its organs
had, in a manner so inconsiderate, contradicted each other as regards the highest
hopes of the people. The national conviction of the inspiration of the prophets,
which formed the foundation of their activity and efficiency, could, in that case,
not have arisen at <span class="pagenum">[Pg 205]</span> all. The same arguments
decide partly also against a modification of this explanation which evidently has
proceeded from embarrassment only,<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_205a" href="#ftn_205a">[1]</a></sup>
against those who, by the Servant of God, understand the better portion of Israel,--such
as <i>Maurer</i>, <i>Ewald</i>, <i>Oehler</i> (<i>Ueber den Knecht Gottes</i>,
<i>Tübinger Zeitschrift</i>, 1840. The latter differs from the other supporters
of this view in this, that, according to him, the notion of the ideal Israel which,
he thinks, prevails in chap. xlii. and xlix., is, in chap. liii., raised to the
view of an individual--the Messiah), <i>Knobel</i> (&quot;The theocratic substance of
the people, to which especially the prophets and priests belonged.&quot;) By this modification,
the explanation which makes the people the subject, loses its only apparent foundation,
inasmuch as it can no more appeal to those passages in which Israel is spoken of
as the Servant of the Lord; for it is obvious that, in these, not merely the pious
portion of the people is spoken of. At the very outset, in ver. 19, the whole of
the people are undeniably designated by the Servant of the Lord. It is they only
who are blind and deaf in a spiritual point of view. The whole people, and not a
portion of them, are in the condition of servitude, ver. 22. In ver. 24, Jacob and
Israel are expressly mentioned. The whole people, and not merely the pious portion,
are objects of the Lord&#39;s election (chap. xli. 8, xliv. 1, 2); the whole people
are to be redeemed from Babylon, chap. xlviii. 20. The hypothesis of the pious portion
of the people can as little account for the unexceptional use of the singular, as
the hypothesis of the whole people; like it, it isolates the prophecies of the Servant
of God, and brings them into contradiction with all the other prophecies, which
assign to Christ the same things that are here assigned to the Servant of God. But
what is especially in opposition to this hypothesis is ver. 3, where the Servant
of God is designated as the Saviour of the poor and afflicted, which, in the first
instance, are no other than the better portion of the people; as well as other reasons,
which we shall bring out in commenting upon chap. liii. by which section the hypothesis
is altogether overthrown.</p>
<p class="normal">According to <i>De Wette</i> (<i>de morte expiat.</i> p. 26) and
<i>Gesenius</i>, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 206]</span> the subject of the prophecy
is the collective body of the prophets. Substantially, <i>Umbreit</i> too (<i>Der
Knecht Gottes</i>, Hamburg 1840) adheres to this interpretation. He rejects the
explanation which refers it to Christ in the sense of the Christian Church, and
on p. 13 he completely assents to <i>Gesenius</i>, by remarking that he could not
find in the prophets any supernatural, distinct predictions of future events. The
Prophet, according to him, formed to himself, by his own authority, an &quot;ideal of
a Messiah,&quot; the abstraction of what he saw before his eyes in the people, especially
in the better portion of them, but chiefly in the order of the prophets, and then
persuaded himself that this self-invented image would, at some future period, come
into existence as a real person. &quot;The highest ideal of the prophetic order, viewed
as teaching, is represented in the unity of a person.&quot; &quot;We find the prophets as
a collective body in the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491;</span>, but chiefly,
the prophets who, in future only, on the regained paternal soil, are, in some person,
to reach the highest perfection.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">This hypothesis of the collective body of the prophets violently
severs the prophecy before us, and the parallel passages from those passages of
the second part in which Israel is spoken of as the Servant of God. It is quite
impossible to point out anywhere in the Old Testament, and especially in the second
part of Isaiah, an analogous personification of the order of the prophets as the
Servant of God. The reference to chap. xliv. 26: &quot;That establisheth the word of
His servant, and performeth the counsel of His messengers; that saith of Jerusalem:
She shall be inhabited, and of the cities of Judah: They shall be built, and I will
raise up the walls thereof,&quot; is, in this respect, altogether out of place, inasmuch
as the servant of the Lord, in that verse, is not the collective band of the prophets,
but Isaiah himself, just as in chap. xxiii. The parallelism between the servant
of the Lord and His messengers is not a <i>synonymous</i>, but a <i>synthetic</i>
one, just as, afterwards, Jerusalem and the cities of Judah are placed beside one
another. The parallel passages clearly intimate that, by the servant of the Lord,
Isaiah only is to be understood. Throughout, the Prophet refers exclusively to his
own prophecies, as regards the impending salvation of Israel (the prophecies of
others he mentions, everywhere else, always in reference to the past only);
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 207]</span> and it cannot be imagined that, in this single
passage only, he should have designated himself as one among the many. If we consider
those parallel passages, we must assume that the <i>messengers</i> also are represented
chiefly by our Prophet; that he is their mouth and organ, just as, in Rev. i. 1,
and xxii. 6, the servants of God and the prophets are represented by John.</p>
<p class="normal"><i>Farther</i>--It cannot be denied that a certain amount of truth
lies at the foundation of the explanation which makes the prophetic order the subject.
The Messiah appears in our prophecy pre-eminently as the Prophet, in harmony and
connection with Deut. xviii. (comp. Vol. i., p. 107); and the substratum of the
description forms chiefly the prophetic order, while, in the prophecies of the first
part, it is chiefly the regal office which appears, and, in chap. liii., the priestly.
But the mistake (as <i>Umbreit</i> himself partly saw) is, that this explanation
changes the person into a personification, instead of recognizing that the idea,
which hitherto was only imperfectly realised by the prophetic order, demands a future
perfect realisation in an individual, so that we could not but expect such an one
even if there did not exist any Messianic prophecy at all. Every prophet who, in
human weakness, performed his office, was a guarantee of the future appearance of
<i>the</i> Prophet, as surely as God never does by halves what, according to His
nature, and as proved by the existence of the imperfect, He must do. But the fact
that, here, we have not before us a mere personification of the prophetic order,
nor, as little, according to the opinion of <i>Umbreit</i>, a single individual
by whom, in future, the idea of the prophetic order was to be most perfectly realised,
is evident from the circumstance that the Servant of God does not, by any means,
represent himself as being <i>only</i> the Prophet. The contrast between Cyrus and
the Servant of God, which <i>G. Müller</i> advances: &quot;Evidently, the former is a
conqueror; the latter, a meek teacher,&quot; is one-sided; for the Servant of God appears,
at the same time, as a powerful <i>ruler</i>, just as Christ, in chap. lv. 4, is
at the same time designated as a <i>Witness</i>, and as Prince and Lawgiver of the
nations. To the mere teacher not even ver. 3 is applicable, if the parallel passages
are compared, but far less ver. 4: &quot;The isles shall wait for <i>His law</i>.&quot; Nor
does a mere teacher come up to the embodied covenant with Israel in ver. 6, nor
to <i>the</i> <span class="pagenum">[Pg 208]</span> <i>light</i>, <i>i.e.</i>, Salvation
and Saviour of the Gentiles. By mere teaching, salvation cannot be wrought out.
Ver. 7 also does not apply to the mere <i>teacher</i>.</p>
<p class="normal">The collective body of the prophets, or the ideal prophet, is
altogether out of place in chap. liii.; for there the Servant of God does not appear
as a Prophet, but as a High Priest and Redeemer. This hypothesis meets with farther
difficulties by the mention of Israel in chap. xlix. 3. <i>Farther</i>--It cannot
well be conceived how the Prophet who, according to these expositors, lived about
the end of the exile, could expect such glorious things of the prophetic order,
as that from it even a preliminary and partial realization of his hopes should proceed.
At that time the prophetic order was already dying out; and a prophetic order among
the exiled cannot well be spoken of <i>Finally</i>--That which is here ascribed
to the Servant of God--the grand influence upon the heathen world--is not of such
a character, as that the prophets could be considered as even the precursors and
companions in the work of <i>the Prophet</i>. Neither prophecy nor history assigns
to the prophets any share in this work. This hypothesis severe the second part from
its connection with the whole remaining Old Testament, according to which it is
by Christ alone that the reception of the Gentiles into the Kingdom of God shall
be effected. And in this second part itself, it stands likewise in contradiction
to chap. lv. 3, 4.</p>
<hr class="W20">
<p class="normal">Ver. 1. &quot;<i>Behold my Servant whom I uphold, mine elect, in whom
my soul delighteth; I have put my Spirit upon Him, He shall bring forth right</i><sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_208a" href="#ftn_208a">[2]</a></sup>
<i>to the Gentiles.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Every pious man is called, in general, &quot;servant of the Lord,&quot;
comp. Job i. 8; Ps. xix. 12, 14; but ordinarily, the designation is, in a special
sense, applied to those whom God makes use of for the execution of His purposes,
to whom He entrusts the administration of His affaire, and whom He equips for the
promotion of His glory. David, who, according to Acts xiii. 36, had in his generation
served the counsel of God, calls himself <span class="pagenum">[Pg 209]</span> in
his prayer in 2 Sam. vii., not fewer than ten times, the servant of God, (Vol. i,
p. 135, 136); and the same designation he gives to himself in the inscriptions of
Ps. xviii. and xxxvi. The <i>Prophets</i> are called servants of God in 2 Kings
xiii. 3; Jer. xxvi. 5. In the highest and most perfect degree, that designation
belongs to Christ, who, in the most perfect manner, carried out the decrees of God,
and to whom all former servants and instruments of the Lord in His kingdom, pointed
as types. But the designation has not merely a reference to the subjective element
of obedience, but points, at the same time, to the <i>dignity</i> of him who is
thus designated. It is a high honour to be received by God among the number of His
servants, who enjoy the providence and protection of their mighty and rich Lord.
That this aspect--the dignity--comes here chiefly into consideration, in the case
of Him who is the Servant of God <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#964;&#8125; &#7952;&#950;&#959;&#967;&#8053;&#957;</span>,
and in whom, therefore, this dignity must reach its highest degree, so that the
designation, <i>My Servant</i>, borders very closely upon that of <i>My Son</i>,
(comp. Matth. iii. 17, xvii. 5);--that this aspect comes here chiefly into consideration
is probable even from the circumstance that, in those passages of the second part
which treat of <i>Israel</i> as the servant of God, it is just this aspect which
is pre-eminently regarded. Thus it is in chap. xli. 8: &quot;And thou Israel, my servant,
Jacob, whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham, my friend.&quot; To be the servant of
God appears here as an honour, as the privilege which was bestowed upon Israel in
preference to the Gentiles. On ver. 9: &quot;Thou, whom I have taken from the ends of
the earth, and from her borders called thee, and said unto thee: Thou art my servant,
I have chosen thee and not cast thee away,&quot; Luther remarks: &quot;The name, &#39;my servant,&#39;
contains the highest <i>consolation</i>, both when we look to Him who speaks, viz..
He who has created everything, and also to him who is addressed, viz., afflicted
and forsaken man.&quot; In chap. xliv. 1, 2: &quot;And now hear, O Jacob, my servant, and
Israel whom I have chosen; thus saith the Lord that made thee, and formed thee from
the womb, who will help thee: Fear not, O Jacob, my servant, and Jeshurun, whom
I have chosen,&quot; all the designations of God and Israel serve only for an introduction
to the exhortation: &quot;Fear not,&quot; by laying open the necessity which exists for the
promise in <span class="pagenum">[Pg 210]</span> ver. 3, which, without such ca
foundation, would be baseless. The context and the parallelism with &quot;whom I have
chosen&quot; show that the designation, &quot;servant of God&quot; in these verses has no reference
to a duty imposed, but to a privilege, a relation which is the pledge of divine
aid to Israel. Jeshurun stands as a kind of <i>nomen proprium</i>, and is not parallel
to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491;&#1497;</span>, but to Jacob. In chap. xliv. 21:
&quot;Remember this, O Jacob, and Israel, for thou art my servant, I have formed thee
for a servant to me, Israel, thou shalt not be forgotten of me,&quot; the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;&#1492;</span> &quot;this&quot; refers to the folly of idolatry
exhibited in the preceding verses. The duty that Israel should remember this, is
founded upon the fact, that he is the servant of the Lord, called by Him to a glorious
dignity, to high prerogatives, of which he must not rob himself by apostatizing
from Him. It is He who has bestowed upon him this dignity, and He will soon show
by deeds, that He cannot forget him, if only his heart does not forget his God.
In a similar manner, in chap. xlv. 4, the protecting providence and love of God
are looked to. The aspect of the duty and of the service which Israel has to perform
to his Lord, is specially pointed out in a single passage only, in chap. xlii. 19;
all the other passages place the dignity in the foreground. That, in the designation.
Servant of God, in the passage before us, prominence is also given to the dignity,
is confirmed by the addition of &quot;whom I uphold,&quot; which presents itself as an immediate
consequence of the relation of a servant of God, and by the parallel: &quot;mine elect
in whom my soul delighteth.&quot;--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1502;&#1498;</span> &quot;to take,&quot;
&quot;to seize,&quot; &quot;to hold,&quot; when followed by <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span>,
always signifies <i>to lay hold of</i>, <i>to hold fast</i>, <i>to support</i>.
With the words: &quot;Behold my servant whom I uphold,&quot; corresponds what the Lord says
in John viii. 29: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001; &#960;&#941;&#956;&#968;&#945;&#962; &#956;&#949; &#956;&#949;&#964;&#8217; &#7952;&#956;&#959;&#8166; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#953;&#957;· &#959;&#8016;&#954;
&#7936;&#966;&#8134;&#954;&#941; &#956;&#949; &#956;&#972;&#957;&#959;&#957; &#8001; &#928;&#945;&#964;&#8052;&#961;, &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#7952;&#947;&#8060; &#964;&#8048; &#7936;&#961;&#949;&#963;&#964;&#8048; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#960;&#959;&#953;&#8182; &#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#959;&#964;&#949;</span>; comp. John iii.
2; Acts x. 38. The Preterite <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1514;&#1514;&#1497;</span> is employed,
because the communication of the Spirit is the condition of his bringing forth right,
just as, in ver. 6, the <i>calling</i> is the ground of the preservation. In the
whole of the description of the Servant of God, the Future prevails throughout;
the <i>Praeteritum propheticum</i> is employed only, where something is to be designated,
which, relatively, is antecedent; compare the words: &quot;And the Spirit of the Lord
rests upon <span class="pagenum">[Pg 211]</span> Him,&quot; in chap. xi. 2; lxi. 1; Matt.
iii. 16; John iii. 34. The three passages in Isaiah which speak of the communication
of the Spirit to Christ are inseparably connected with one another, and, on the
whole Old Testament territory, there is no passage exactly parallel to them. The
Hiphel of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1510;&#1488;</span> must not be explained by &quot;to
announce,&quot; as some interpreters do; for in this signification it nowhere occurs;
and according to what follows, and the parallel passages, the Servant of God does
not by any means establish right by the mere announcement, but by His holy disposition.
But as little can we explain <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1493;&#1510;&#1497;&#1488;</span> by &quot;to
lead out,&quot; in contrast to the circumstance that, under the Old Testament, right
was limited to a single nation. For in the parallel passage, chap. li. 4: &quot;Hearken
unto me, my people, and give ear unto me, O my congregation, for law shalt proceed
from me, and I will set my right for the light of the nations,&quot;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1510;&#1488;</span> does not mean to go <i>out</i>, but to
go <i>forth</i>, <i>i.e.</i>, to proceed. In the same way, in Hab. i. 4: &quot;And not
does right go forth for ever,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, it never comes forth, is never established,
comp. Vol. i., p. 442, 443. Hence <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1493;&#1510;&#1497;&#1488;</span> here
can mean only &quot;to bring to light,&quot; &quot;to bring forth.&quot;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1508;&#1496;</span> is, by several interpreters, taken in
the signification, &quot;religion;&quot; but it is just ver. 4, by which they support their
view, which shows that the ordinary signification &quot;right,&quot; must be retained here.
For in that verse, <i>right</i> stands in parallelism with <i>law</i>, by which
right is established; comp. chap. li. 4. Before God&#39;s Kingdom was, by the Servant
of God, extended to the Gentile nations, there existed among them, notwithstanding
all the excellence of outward legal arrangements, a condition without right in the
higher sense. Right, in its essence, has its root in God, as may be seen from the
Ten Commandments, which everywhere go back to God, and in all of which Luther, in
his exposition of the ten commandments, rightly repeats: &quot;We shall fear and love
God.&quot; Where, therefore, the living God is not known, there can be no right. The
commandment: &quot;Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,&quot; <i>e.g.</i>, has any meaning
only where the eye is open for the divine image which the neighbour bears, and for
the redemption of which he is a fellow-partaker. The commandment: &quot;Honour thy father
and thy mother&quot; will go to the heart only where the divine paternity is known, of
which all earthly paternity is only an image. <span class="pagenum">[Pg 212]</span>
In Deut. iv. 5-8, Israel&#39;s happiness is praised, in that they alone, among all the
nations, are in possession of God&#39;s laws and commandments. Those privileges of Israel
are, by the Servant of God, to be extended to the Gentiles who, because they are
destitute of right, are, in Deut. xxxii. 21, called a foolish nation. In Ps. cxlvii.
19, 20, it is said: &quot;He showeth His word unto Jacob, His statutes and laws unto
Israel. He has not dealt so with any nation, and law they do not know.&quot; This passage
touches very closely upon that before us; like it, it denies right to the Gentiles
in general. &quot;The Gentiles, being without God in the world, do not know any right
at all. For that which they call so, is only the shadow of that which really deserves
this name, is only a dark mixture of right and wrong.&quot; As regards the first table
of the Ten Commandments, they grope entirely in the dark; and with respect to the
second table, it is only here and there that they see a faint glimpse of light.--A
consequence of the bringing forth of right to the Gentiles is the ceasing of war,
as it is described in chap. ii. 4. When right has obtained dominion, it cannot tolerate
war beside it; where there is true right, there is also peace. The benefit which,
in the first instance, is conferred upon the Gentiles, is enjoyed by Israel also:
The intention of comforting and encouraging Israel clearly appears in the parallel
passage, chap. li. 4. For the right which obtains dominion among the Gentiles, is
Israel&#39;s pride and ornament, so that, along with their God and His right, they obtain
also the dominion over the Gentile world, by which they were hitherto kept in bondage;
and whensoever and wheresoever the divine right obtains dominion, the violent oppression
must cease, under which the people of God had been groaning up to that time. The
Servant of God, however, who brings forth right to the Gentiles, forms the contrast
to the worldly conqueror, of whom it was said in chap. xli. 25: &quot;He cometh upon
princes as mortar, and, just as the potter treadeth the clay.&quot;--The words: &quot;He shall
bring forth right,&quot; purposely return again in ver. 3; and equally intentionally,
the words: &quot;He shall found right on the earth,&quot; in ver. 4, refer to them. &quot;We have
thus&quot;--<i>Stier</i> pertinently remarks--&quot;in ver. 1, the sum and substance, even
to its aim. But it is immediately brought more distinctly to view, what
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 213]</span> will be the spirit and character, the mode
of operation, by which this aim is to be brought about.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 2; &quot;<i>He shall not cry nor lift up, nor cause His voice
to be heard in the street.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">After <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1513;&#1488;</span> &quot;he shall lift
up,&quot; &quot;His voice&quot; must be supplied from the context. The words must not be understood
in such a manner, as if they stood in opposition to chap. lviii. 1: &quot;Cry with thy
throat, do not refrain, lift up thy voice like the trumpet, and show my people their
transgression, and to the house of Jacob their sins.&quot; The Prophet, in that passage,
encourages himself; and he cannot mean to represent that as objectionable, by the
circumstance that, in the case of the Servant of God, the very ideal of all the
servants of God, he points out and praises the very opposite. And, in like manner,
every interpretation is to be avoided according to which &quot;dumb dogs which cannot
bark&quot; find a pretext in this passage. According to Prov. i. 20: &quot;Wisdom crieth aloud
without, she uttereth her voice in the streets.&quot;<!--inserted quote--> Just as the
prohibition of swearing in Matt. v. 34 is qualified by the opposition to Pharisaic
levity in cursing and swearing, so here, also, the antithesis to the loud manner
of the worldly conqueror must be kept in view,--the contrast to his violence which
stakes every thing upon carrying his own will, which cries and rages when it meets
with opposition and resistance, (Matt. renders <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1510;&#1506;&#1511;</span>
by <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#961;&#943;&#963;&#949;&#953;</span>, &quot;He shall contend&quot;), to the earnestly
sought publicity, to the intention of causing sensation, as it proceeds from vanity
or pride. The <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#961;&#945;&#965;&#947;&#940;&#963;&#949;&#953;</span>, by which Matthew renders
the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1513;&#1488;</span>, has nothing in common with the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7956;&#954;&#961;&#945;&#958;&#949;</span> which, in John vii. 28, 37, is said
of Christ. With the passionate restlessness, with which the conqueror from the East
seeks to carry through his human plans, and to place himself in the centre of the
world&#39;s history, is here contrasted the inward composure and deportment of the Servant
of God, His equanimity, His freedom from excitement,--all of which are based upon
the clear consciousness of His dignity and mission, upon the conviction of the power
of the truth which is of God, of the power of the Spirit which opens up the minds
and hearts for it, and which has its source in the declaration: &quot;I put my Spirit
upon Him,&quot; by which the great wall of separation between Him and the conqueror from
the East is set up. It is just <span class="pagenum">[Pg 214]</span> because of
His not being beat upon carrying through any thing, because of His great confidence,
that the Servant of God <i>gains</i> everything, and obtains His object of bringing
right to the nations.--Matt., in chap. xii. 15-21, finds the confirmation of the
character here assigned to Christ in two circumstances:--<i>first</i>, in His not
entering into a violent dispute with the Pharisees opposing Him (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#7985;
&#948;&#8050; &#966;&#945;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#945;&#8150;&#959;&#953; &#963;&#965;&#956;&#946;&#959;&#973;&#955;&#953;&#959;&#957; &#7956;&#955;&#945;&#946;&#959;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#39; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7952;&#958;&#949;&#955;&#952;&#972;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962;, &#8005;&#960;&#969;&#962; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#955;&#941;&#963;&#969;&#963;&#953;&#957;</span>),
in His not exciting against them the masses who were devoted to Him, but in withdrawing
from them (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001; &#948;&#8050; &#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166;&#962; &#947;&#957;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#7936;&#957;&#949;&#967;&#974;&#961;&#951;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#7952;&#954;&#949;&#8150;&#952;&#949;&#957;</span>,
ver. 15), being convinced that the cause was not His but God&#39;s, and that there was
no reason for getting angry with those who were contending against God; just as
David said of Shimei: &quot;Let him curse, because the Lord has said unto him, Curse
David.&quot;--<i>Secondly</i>, in the circumstance that instead of availing himself of
the excitement of the aroused masses, He charged them that they should not make
known His miraculous deeds (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#960;&#949;&#964;&#943;&#956;&#951;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8150;&#962;
&#7989;&#957;&#945; &#956;&#8052; &#966;&#945;&#957;&#949;&#961;&#8056;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#960;&#959;&#953;&#942;&#963;&#969;&#963;&#953;&#957;</span>, ver. 16), being convinced that He did not
need to seek to draw attention to himself, but that, by the secret and hidden power
of God, His work would be accomplished.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. &quot;<i>The bent reed shall He not break, and the dimly burning
wick shall He not quench; in truth shall He bring forth right.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Here, too, the antithesis to the worldly conqueror who, without
mercy, &quot;Cometh upon princes as mortar, and as a potter treadeth the clay&quot; (chap.
xli. 25), whose mind is bent only upon destroying and cutting off nations not a
few (chap. x. 7), who does not give rest until he has fully cast down to the ground
the broken power. The Servant of God, far from breaking the bent reed, shall, on
the contrary--this is the positive opposed to the negative--care for, and assist
the wretched with tender love. Just thereby does He accomplish the object of His
efforts. The confirmation of the character here assigned to Christ is, by Matthew,
found in His healing the sick (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#952;&#949;&#961;&#940;&#960;&#949;&#965;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962;
&#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#962;</span>, ver. 15), as prefiguring all that which He, who has declared the
object of His coming to be to seek all that which was lost, did and accomplished,
in general, for the misery of the human race. There cannot be any doubt that the
bent reed and the dimly burning wick are figurative designations
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 215]</span> of those who, beaten down by sufferings, feel
themselves to be poor and miserable. These the weary and heavy laden, the Servant
of God will not drive to despair by severity, but comfort and refresh by tender
love. His conduct towards them is that of a Saviour. As a bent reed,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1504;&#1492; &#1512;&#1510;&#1493;&#1509;</span>, Pharaoh appears on account of his
broken power, in chap. xxxvi. 6, and in chap. lviii. 6, the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1510;&#1493;&#1510;&#1497;&#1501;</span> are the oppressed. The fact, that the
<i>wick</i> dimly burning and near to being extinguished is an image of exhausted
strength, is shown by chap. xliii. 17, where, in reference to the Egyptians carried
away by the judgment, it is said: &quot;They are extinct, they are quenched like a wick.&quot;
In the parallel passages which treat of the Servant of God, the <i>weary</i> in
chap. l. 4, and the <i>broken-hearted</i> in chap. lxi. 1, correspond to it. Elsewhere,
too, the wretched appear as objects of the loving providence of the Saviour. Thus,
in chap. xi. 4: &quot;And He judges in righteousness the low;&quot; in Ps. lxxii. 4: &quot;He shall
judge the poor of the people; He shall save the children of the needy, and shall
break in pieces the oppressor;&quot; and in vers. 12-14: &quot;For He delivereth the needy
when he crieth, and the miserable, and him that hath no deliverer. From oppression
and violence He delivereth their soul, and precious is their blood in His sight.&quot;
Just as, in the passage before us, the bringing forth of right appears as a consequence
of the loving providence for the bent reed, and the dimly burning wick, so in that
Psalm, the great fact: &quot;And all the kings worship Him, and all the nations serve
Him,&quot; is traced back to the tender love with which He cares for and helps the poor
and needy. In the Sermon on the Mount, the beatitude of the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#964;&#969;&#967;&#959;&#8055;</span>, Matt. v. 3, of the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#949;&#957;&#952;&#959;&#8166;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962;</span>, ver. 4, and in Matt. xi. 28, the
invitation of the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#959;&#960;&#953;&#8182;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#949;&#966;&#959;&#961;&#964;&#953;&#963;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#953;</span>,
exactly correspond. The wicked and ungodly, upon whom the judgments of God have
been inflicted, are not included, because they are not wretched in the full sense;
for they harden themselves against the suffering, or seek to divert themselves in
it; they do not take it fully to heart. The <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#8183; &#960;&#957;&#949;&#973;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#953;</span>,
&quot;in their consciousness,&quot; which in Matthew is added to the simple
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#964;&#969;&#967;&#959;&#8055;</span>, which alone we find in Luke, must be
understood as a matter of course. He only is poor in the full sense, who feels and
takes to heart his poverty. According to an interpretation widely spread, repenting
sinners are designated <span class="pagenum">[Pg 216]</span> by the bent reed, and
dimly burning wick. Thus Luther writes: &quot;That means that the wounded conscience,
those who are terrified at the sight of their sins, the weak in life and faith are
not cast away by Him, are not oppressed and condemned, but that He cares for them,
tends and nurses them, makes them whole and embraces them with love.&quot; But repenting
sinners do not here come into consideration <i>per se</i>, but only as one species
of the wretched, inasmuch as, according to Luther&#39;s expression, truly to feel sin
is a torment beyond all torments.--The last words: &quot;In truth shall He bring forth
right&quot; again take up the close of ver. 1, after the means have been stated, in the
intervening words, by which He is to bring about the result. The
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488;&#1502;&#1514;</span> must not be translated: &quot;For truth&quot;
(LXX: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#949;&#7984;&#962; &#7936;&#955;&#942;&#952;&#949;&#953;&#945;&#957;</span>); for there is a thorough
difference between <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;</span>; the former does not, like the latter,
designate the motion towards some object, but is rather, here also, a preposition
signifying &quot;belonging to;&quot; hence <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488;&#1502;&#1514;</span> means
&quot;belonging to truth,&quot; &quot;in a true manner,&quot; &quot;in truth.&quot; By every other mode of dealing,
right would be established <i>in appearance</i> and <i>outwardly</i> only. Matthew
renders it: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7957;&#969;&#962; &#7938;&#957; &#7952;&#954;&#946;&#940;&#955;&#8131; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#957;&#8150;&#954;&#959;&#962; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#954;&#961;&#943;&#963;&#953;&#957;</span>,
&quot;until He has led right to victory.&quot; By the addition of
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7957;&#969;&#962;</span> he intimates, that the last words state
the result which is brought about by the conduct of the Servant of God described
in the preceding words. <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#917;&#7984;&#962; &#957;&#8150;&#954;&#959;&#962;</span> is a free
translation of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488;&#1502;&#1514;</span>;
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#961;&#943;&#963;&#953;&#962;</span> is &quot;right,&quot; as in chap. xxiii. 23.--How
objectionable and untenable all the non-Messianic explanations are, appears very
clearly in this verse. If Israel were the Servant of God, then the <i>Gentile world</i>
must be represented by the bent reed and dimly burning wick. But in that case, we
must have recourse to such arbitrary interpretations as, <i>e.g.</i>, that given
by <i>Köster</i>: &quot;The weak faith and imperfect knowledge of the Gentiles.&quot; No weak
faith, no imperfect knowledge, however, is spoken of; but the Servant of God appears
as a Saviour of the poor and afflicted, of those broken by sufferings. Those who,
by the Servant of God, understand the better portion of the people, or the prophetic
order, speak of &quot;the meek spirit of the mode of teaching, which does not by any
means altogether crush the sinner already brought low, but, in a gentle, affectionate
manner, raises him up,&quot; (<i>Umbreit</i>); or say with <i>Knobel</i>: &quot;These poor
and afflicted He does not <span class="pagenum">[Pg 217]</span> humble still more
by hard, depressing <i>words</i>, but <i>speaks</i> to them in a comforting and
encouraging way, raising them up and strengthening them.&quot; But in this explanation
everything is, without reason, drawn into the territory of speech, while Matthew
rightly sees, in the healing of the sick by Christ, a confirmation by deeds of the
prophecy before us. In chap. lxi., also, the Servant of God does not only bring
glad tidings, but <i>creates</i>, at the same time, the blessings announced. According
to chap. lxi. 3, He gives to them that mourn in Zion beauty for ashes, joy for mourning,
garment of praise for a weak (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1492;&#1492;</span>) spirit.
Verse 6 of the chapter before us most clearly indicates how little we are allowed
to limit ourselves to mere speaking; for, according to that verse, the Servant of
God is himself the covenant of the people, and the light of the Gentiles, and according
to ver. 7, He opens the eyes of the blind, &amp;c.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. &quot;<i>He shall not fail nor run away until He shall have
founded right in the earth, and for His law the isles shall wait.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">On: &quot;He shall not fail,&quot; properly, &quot;He shall not become dim,&quot;
comp. Deut. xxxiv. 7, where it is said of Moses, the servant of God: &quot;His eye had
not become dim, nor had his strength fled.&quot; The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488;
&#1497;&#1512;&#1493;&#1509;</span> &quot;He shall not run away&quot; (properly, &quot;He shall not <i>run</i>&quot;) is qualified
and fixed by the parallelism with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488; &#1497;&#1499;&#1492;&#1492;</span>
&quot;He shall not fail.&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1493;&#1509;</span> in other passages
also, several times receives, by the context, the qualified signification &quot;to run
away,&quot; &quot;to take to flight,&quot; &quot;to flee;&quot; comp. Judges viii. 21; Jer. xlix. 19. The
words: &quot;He shall not fail nor run away&quot; imply that, in the carrying out of His vocation,
the Servant of God shall meet with powerful <i>obstacles</i>, with obstinate <i>
enemies</i>, and shall have to endure severe sufferings. That which is here merely
hinted at, is carried out and detailed in chap. xlix., l., liii. How near He was
to failing and running away (David, too, was obliged to say: &quot;Oh! that I had wings
like a dove, then would I fly away and be at rest&quot;) is seen from His utterance in
Matt. xvii. 17: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8038; &#947;&#949;&#957;&#949;&#8048; &#7940;&#960;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#948;&#953;&#949;&#963;&#964;&#961;&#945;&#956;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#951;,
&#7957;&#969;&#962; &#960;&#972;&#964;&#949; &#7956;&#963;&#959;&#956;&#945;&#953; &#956;&#949;&#952;&#8217; &#8017;&#956;&#8182;&#957;; &#7957;&#969;&#962; &#960;&#972;&#964;&#949; &#7936;&#957;&#941;&#958;&#959;&#956;&#945;&#953; &#8017;&#956;&#8182;&#957;.</span>--According to the current
opinion, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1512;&#1493;&#1509;</span> is here assumed to be the Future
of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1510;&#1509;</span>, for <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1497;&#1464;&#1512;&#1465;&#1509;</span>, and that in the appropriate signification: &quot;He shall not be broken.&quot;
(Thus it was probably <span class="pagenum">[Pg 218]</span> viewed by the Chaldean
Paraphrast who renders <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488; &#1497;&#1500;&#1488;&#1497;</span> <i>non laborabit</i>;
by the LXX., who translate <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#8016; &#952;&#961;&#945;&#965;&#952;&#963;&#951;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span>,
while <i>Aquila</i> and <i>Symmachus</i>, according to the account of <i>Jerome</i>,
render, <i>non curret</i>, thus following the derivation from
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1493;&#1509;</span>). As <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1499;&#1492;&#1492;</span>
points back to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1492;&#1492;</span> in the preceding verse,
so, in that case <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1512;&#1493;&#1509;</span> would point back to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1510;&#1493;&#1509;</span> &quot;He shall not break that which is bent,
nor quench that which is dimly burning; but neither shall He himself be broken or
quenched.&quot; But this explanation is opposed by the circumstance, that we must make
up our minds to admit a double anomaly. The territories of the two verbs
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1510;&#1509;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1493;&#1509;</span>
are everywhere else kept distinct, and the former everywhere else means &quot;to break,&quot;
and not &quot;to be broken.&quot; In the only passage, Eccl. xii. 6, brought forward in support
of this irregularity, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1493;&#1509;</span> &quot;to run,&quot; &quot;to flee
away,&quot; being in parallelism with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1512;&#1495;&#1511;</span> &quot;to
be removed,&quot; is quite appropriate; just as in the second clause of that verse
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1493;&#1509;</span> &quot;to be crushed,&quot; is in parallelism with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1513;&#1489;&#1512;</span>] &quot;to be broken.&quot;--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1497;&#1497;&#1501;</span>
are, in the <i>usus loquendi</i> of Isaiah, not so much the real islands, as rather
the islands in the sea of the world, the countries and kingdoms; compare remarks
on Rev. vi. 14, and Ps. xcvii. 1 (second Edition). The <i>law</i> for which the
islands wait is not so much a ready-made code of laws, as the single decisions of
the living Lawgiver, which the Gentiles, with anxious desire, shall receive as their
rule in all circumstances, after they have spontaneously submitted to the dominion
of the Servant of God, having been attracted by His loving dispensations. Several
unphilologically translate: &quot;for His <i>doctrine</i>,&quot; which does not even give
a good sense, for it is not the doctrine which is waited for; its value is known
only after it has been preached. The Servant of God appears here as the spiritual
Ruler of the nations; and this He becomes by being, in the fullest sense, the Servant
of God, so that His will is not different from the will of God, nor
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1493;&#1512;&#1492;</span> from that of God, just as, in a lower
territory, even Asaph speaks the bold word: &quot;Hear, my people, my law.&quot; &quot;The singer
comes forth as one who has full authority, the &#39;Seer&#39; and &#39;Prophet&#39; utter <i>laws</i>
which leave no alternative between Salvation and destruction.&quot; Parallel is chap.
ii. 3, 4, where the nations go up to Zion, in order there to seek laws for the regulation
of their practical conduct, and according to which the Lord <i>judges</i> among
the nations, and the law goes forth <span class="pagenum">[Pg 219]</span> out of
Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. The difference is this only,--that,
in that passage, the matter is traced back immediately to God, while here, the Servant
of God is mentioned as the Mediator between Him and the Gentiles. But we must keep
in mind that, for chap. ii. also, the parallel passages in chap. iv., ix., xi.,
furnish the supplement. We must, farther, compare also chap. li. 5: &quot;My righteousness
is near, my salvation goes forth, <i>mine arms shall judge the nations</i>, the
isles shall wait for me, and on mine arm shall they hope.&quot; The <i>judging</i> in
that passage does not mean divine punitive judgments; but it is rather thereby intimated
that all the nations shall recognise the Lord as their King, to whose government
they willingly submit, and with whom they seek the decision of their disputes. Matthew
purposely changes it into: &quot;And in <i>His name</i> shall the Gentiles trust.&quot; The
desire for the commands of the Lord is an effect of the love of His <i>name</i>,
<i>i.e.</i>, of Him who is glorified by His deeds. For the name is the product of
deeds,--here especially of those designated in ver. 2 and 3. The commands are desired
and longed for, only because the person is beloved on account of His deeds. Matthew
has only distinctly brought out that which, in the original text, is intimated by
the connection with the preceding verses. In consequence of this, His quiet, just,
and merciful dispensation, the isles shall wait for His law.</p>
<p class="normal">In ver. 5-7 the Lord addresses His Servant, and promises Him that,
by His omnipotence, the great work for which He has called Him, shall be carried
out and accomplished, viz., that the covenant relation to Israel shall be fully
realized, and the darkness of the Gentile world shall be changed into light.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 5. &quot;<i>Thus saith God the Lord, who createth the heavens
and stretcheth them out; who spreadeth forth the earth and that which cometh out
of it; who giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk thereon.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The Prophet directs attention to the omnipotence of God, in order
to give a firm support to faith in the promise which exceeds all human conception.
It is by this that the accumulation of the predicates is to be accounted for. He
who fully realizes what a great thing it is to bring an apostate world back to God,
to that God who has become a stranger to it, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 220]</span>
will surely not explain this accumulation by a &quot;disposition, on the part of the
Prophet, to diffuseness.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 6. &quot;<i>I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and
I will seize thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for the covenant of the
people and, for the Light of the Gentiles.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">It is so obvious that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1510;&#1491;&#1511;</span>
must be translated by &quot;in righteousness,&quot; that the explanations which disagree with
it do not deserve to be even mentioned. The mission of the Servant of God has its
root in the divine <i>righteousness</i>, which gives to every one his due,--to the
covenant-people, salvation. Even apart from the promise, the appearance of Christ
rests on the righteousness of God. For it is in opposition to the nature and character
of a people of God to be, for any length of time, in misery, and shut up to one
corner of the earth. That which is to be accomplished for Israel by the Servant
of God, forms, in the sequel, the first subject of discourse. But even that which
He affords to the <i>Gentiles</i> is, at the same time, given to Israel, inasmuch
as it is one of their prerogatives that salvation for the Gentiles should go forth
from them. As, here, the mission of the Servant of God, so, in chap. xlv. 13, the
appearance of the lower deliverer appears as the work of divine righteousness: &quot;I
have raised him up in righteousness, and all his ways I will make straight.&quot; Similarly
also in chap. xli. 2: &quot;Who raised up from the East him whom righteousness calls
wherever he goes,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, him, all whose steps are determined by God&#39;s righteousness,
who, in all his undertakings, is guided by it.--The seizing by the hand, the keeping,
&amp;c., are the consequence of His being called, and are equivalent to: just because
I have called him, therefore will I, &amp;c. Luther remarks: &quot;Namely, for this reason,
that Satan and the world, with all their might and wisdom, will <i>resist</i> thy
work.&quot; In the words: &quot;For the Covenant of the people, and for the Light of the Gentiles,&quot;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1493;&#1497;&#1501;</span>
form an antithesis. The absence of the article shows that we ought properly to translate:
&quot;For a Covenant of a people, for a Light of Gentiles.&quot; It is thus, in the first
instance, only said that the Servant of God should be the personal covenant for
a people; but <i>what</i> people that should be, cannot admit of a moment&#39;s doubt.
To Israel, as such, the name of the <i>people</i> pre-eminently belongs. Israel,
in preference to all others, is called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;</span>
(compare <i>Gesenius&#39;</i> <span class="pagenum">[Pg 221]</span> Thesaurus <i>s.v.</i>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1493;&#1497;</span>), because it is only the people of God
that is a people in the full sense, connected by an internal unity; the Gentiles
are <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488; &#1506;&#1501;</span>, <i>non-people</i>, according to
Deut. xxxii. 21, because they lack the only real tie of unity. But what is still
more decisive is the mention of the <i>Covenant</i>. The covenant can belong to
the covenant-people only, <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8039;&#957; &#945;&#7985; &#948;&#953;&#945;&#952;&#8134;&#954;&#945;&#953;</span>, Rom.
ix. 4,--the old, no less than the new one. The covenant with Abraham is an everlasting
covenant of absolute exclusiveness, Gen. xvii. 7. The Servant of God is called the
personal and embodied Covenant, because in His appearance the covenant made with
Israel is to find its full truth; and every thing implied in the very idea of a
covenant, all the promises flowing from this idea, are to be in Him, Yea and Amen.
The Servant of God is here called the Covenant of Israel, just in the same manner
as in Mic. v. 4 (comp. Ephes. ii. 14), it is said of Him: &quot;This (man) is Peace,&quot;
because in Him, peace, as it were, represents itself personally;--just as in chap.
xlix. 6, He is called the <i>Salvation</i> of God, because this salvation becomes
personal in Him, the Saviour,--just as in Gen. xvii. 10, 13, circumcision is called
a covenant, as being the embodied covenant,--just as in Luke xxii. 20, the cup,
the blood of Christ, is called the New Covenant, because in it it has its root.
The explanation: Mediator of the covenant, <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#953;&#945;&#952;&#942;&#954;&#951;&#962;
&#7956;&#947;&#947;&#965;&#959;&#962;</span>, is meagre, and weakens the meaning. The circumstance that the Servant
of God is, without farther qualification, called the Covenant of the people, shows
that He stands in a different relation to the covenant from that of Moses, to whom
the name of the <i>Mediator</i> of the covenant does not the less belong than to
Him. From Jer. xxxi. 31, we learn which are the blessings and gifts which the Servant
of God is to bestow, and by which He represents himself as the personal Covenant.
They are concentrated in the closest connection to be established by Him between
God and His people: &quot;I will be their God, and they shall be my people.&quot; It is only
in the New Covenant, described in that passage of Jeremiah, that the Old Covenant
attains to its truth. The second destination of the Servant of God, which, according
to the context, here comes into special consideration, is, to be <i>the Light of
the Gentiles</i>. By the realization of this destination, an important feature in
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 222]</span> the former was, at the same time, realized.
For it formed part of the promises of the covenant with Israel that, from the midst
of them, salvation for all the families of the earth should go forth, as our Saviour
says: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7969; &#963;&#969;&#964;&#951;&#961;&#943;&#945; &#7952;&#954; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#7992;&#959;&#965;&#948;&#945;&#943;&#969;&#957; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#943;&#957;</span> Light
is here, according to the common <i>usus loquendi</i> of Scripture, a figurative
designation of <i>salvation</i>. In the parallel passage, chap. xlix. 6, light is
at once explained by salvation. The designation proceeds upon the supposition that
the Gentiles, not less than Israel, (comp. chap. ix. 1 [2]) shall, until the appearance
of the Servant of God, sit in darkness and in the shadow of death,--that they are
in misery, although, in some instances, it may be a <i>brilliant</i> misery. The
following verse farther carries out and declares what is implied in the promise:
&quot;Light of the Gentiles.&quot; Parallel is chap. lx. 3: &quot;And the heathen walk in thy (Zion&#39;s)
light&quot;--they become partakers of the salvation which shines for Zion--&quot;and kings
in the brightness which riseth to thee.&quot;--The supporters of that opinion, which
understands Israel by the Servant of God, are in no small difficulty regarding this
verse, and cannot even agree as to the means of escape from that difficulty. Several
assume that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;</span> is used collectively, and refer
it to the Gentile nations. But opposed to this explanation is the evident antithesis
of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1493;&#1497;&#1501;</span>;
and it is entirely overthrown by the parallel passage in chap. xlix. Scripture knows
nothing of a covenant with the Gentiles. According to the view of the Old, as well
as of the New Testament, the Gentiles are received into the communion of the covenant
with Israel. Others (<i>Hitzig</i>, <i>Ewald</i>) explain: &quot;covenant-people, <i>
i.e.</i>, a mediatorial, connecting people, a bond of union between God and the
nations.&quot; But the passage, chap. xlix. 8, is most decidedly opposed to this. <i>
Farther</i>--The parallelism with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1493;&#1512; &#1490;&#1493;&#1497;&#1501;</span>
shows that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514; &#1506;&#1501;</span> is the <i>status constructus</i>.
But <i>f&#339;dus alicujus</i>, is, according to the remark of <i>Gesenius</i>, <i>f&#339;dus
cum aliquo sancitum</i>. Thus in Lev. xxvi. 45, the covenant of the ancestors is
the covenant entered into with the ancestors; Deut. iv. 31; Lev. xxvi. 42 (the covenant
of Jacob, the covenant of Isaac, &amp;c.) According to <i>Knobel</i>: &quot;the true theocrats
are to become a covenant of the people, the restorers of the Israelitish Theocracy,
they themselves having connection and unity by faithfully holding fast by Jehovah,
and by representing His cause.&quot; This explanation, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 223]</span>
also, is opposed to the <i>usus loquendi</i>, according to which &quot;covenant of the
people&quot; can have the sense only of &quot;covenant with the people,&quot; not a covenant among
the people. And, <i>farther</i>, the parallel passage in chap. xlix. 8 is opposed
to this interpretation also, inasmuch as, in that passage, the Servant of the Lord
is called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514; &#1506;&#1501;</span>, not on account of what
He is in himself, but on account of the influence which He exercises upon others,
upon the whole of the people: &quot;That thou mayest raise up the land, distribute desolate
heritages, that thou mayest say to the prisoners: Go forth,&quot; &amp;c. In that passage
the land, the desolate heritages, the prisoners, &amp;c., evidently correspond to the
people. <i>Finally</i>--A covenant is a relation between two parties standing opposite
one another. &quot;The word is used,&quot;<!--inserted quote--> says <i>Gesenius</i>, &quot;of
a covenant formed between nations, between private persons, <i>e.g.</i>, David and
Jonathan, between Jehovah and the people of Israel.&quot; But here no parties are mentioned
to be united by the covenant.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 7. &quot;<i>That thou mayest open blind eyes, bring out them that
are bound from the prison, and from the house of confinement them that sit in darkness.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">On account of the connection with the &quot;for the Light of the Gentiles,&quot;
which would stand too much isolated, if, in the words immediately following, Israel
alone were again the subject of discourse, the activity of God here mentioned refers,
in the first instance, to the <i>Gentiles</i>; and the words: &quot;them that sit in
darkness,&quot; moreover, evidently point back to &quot;for the Light of the Gentiles.&quot; But
from chap. xlix. 9, and also from ver. 16 of the chapter before us, where the blindness
of Israel is mentioned, it appears that Israel too must not be excluded. Hence,
we shall say: It is here more particularly described how the Servant of God <i>proves</i>
himself as the Covenant of the people and the Light of the Gentiles, how He puts
an end to the misery under which both equally groan. It will be better to understand
<i>blindness</i>, in connection with imprisonment, sitting in darkness, as a designation
of the need of salvation, than as a designation of spiritual blindness, of the want
of the light of knowledge. That is also suggested by the preceding: &quot;for the Light
of the Gentiles,&quot; which, according to the common <i>usus loquendi</i>, and according
to chap. ix. 1 (2) is not to be referred to the spiritual illumination especially,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 224]</span> but to the bestowal of salvation. To this
view we are likewise led by a comparison of ver. 16: &quot;And I will lead the blind
by a way that they knew not, I will lead them in paths that they have not known,
I will change the darkness before them into light, the crooked things into straightness.&quot;
The <i>blind</i> in this verse are those who do not know what to do, and how to
help themselves, those who cannot find the way of salvation, the miserable; they
are to be led by the Lord on the ways of salvation, which are unknown to them. In
a similar sense and connection, the blind are, elsewhere also, spoken of, comp.
Remarks on Ps. cxlv. 8.--On the words: &quot;Bring out them that are bound from the prison,&quot;
<i>Knobel</i> remarks: &quot;The citizens of Judah were, to a great extent, imprisoned;
the Prophet hopes for their deliverance by the theocratic portion of the people.&quot;
A strange hope! By this coarsely literal interpretation, the connection with &quot;for
the Light of the Gentiles&quot; is broken up; and this is the less admissible that the
words at the close of the verse: &quot;those that sit in darkness,&quot; so clearly refer
to it. <i>Imprisonment</i> is a figurative designation of the <i>miserable condition</i>,
not less than, the <i>darkness</i>, which, on account of the light contrasted with
it, and on account of chap. ix. 1 (2), cannot be understood otherwise than figuratively.
Under the image of men bound in dark prisons, the miserable and afflicted appear
also in Ps. cvii. 10-16; Job xxxvi. 8, where the words, &quot;bound in fetters,&quot; are
explained by the parallel &quot;holden in the cords of misery.&quot; When David, in Ps. cxlii.
8, prays: &quot;Bring my soul out of the prison,&quot; he himself explains this in Ps. cxliii.
11 by the parallel: &quot;Thou wilt bring my soul out of <i>trouble</i>;&quot; comp. also
Ps. xxv. 17: &quot;O bring thou me out of my <i>distresses</i>.&quot; If we here understand
the prison literally, we might, with the same propriety in other passages, also,
<i>e.g.</i>, in Ps. lxvi. 11, understand <i>literally</i> the net, the snare, the
trap.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 8: &quot;<i>I the Lord, that is my name, and my honour I will
not give to another, nor my glory to idols.</i> Ver. 9. <i>The former</i> (things),
<i>behold, they came to pass, and new</i> (things) <i>do I declare; before they
spring forth, I cause you to hear.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">We have here the solemn close and exhortation. At the close of
chap. xli. it had been pointed out, how the prediction of the <i>Conqueror from
the East</i> serves for the glory of Jehovah, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 225]</span>
who thereby proves himself to be the only true God. Here the zeal of God for His
glory is indicated as the reason which has brought forth the prediction of the
<i>Servant of God</i> and His glorious work,--a prediction which cannot be accounted
for from natural causes. It is thus the object of the prophecy which is here, in
the first instance, stated. It is intended to manifest the true God as such, as
a God who is zealously bent on His glory. But the same attribute of God which called
forth the prophecy, calls forth also the events prophesied, viz., the appearance
of the Servant of God, and the victory over the idols accomplished thereby, the
bringing forth of the law of God over the whole earth through Him, and the full
realization of the covenant with Israel. The thought is this:--that a God who does
not manifest and prove himself as such, who is contented with the honour granted
to Him without His interference, cannot be a God; that the true God must of necessity
be filled with the desire of absolute, exclusive dominion, and cannot but manifest
and prove this desire. From this thought, the prophecy and that which it promises
flow with a like necessity.--According to <i>Stier</i>,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1488;&#1513;&#1504;&#1493;&#1514;</span>, &quot;the former (things)&quot; means &quot;the redemption
of the exiled by Cyrus,&quot; which in chaps. xli. xlviii. forms the historico-typical
foreground, whose coming is here anticipated by the Prophet. But the parallel passages,
chaps. xli. 22, xliii. 9, xlviii. 3, are conclusive against this view; for, according
to these passages, it is only the former already fulfilled predictions of the Prophet
and his colleagues, from the beginnings of the people, which can be designated by
&quot;the former (things).&quot; By &quot;the new (things)&quot; therefore, is to be understood the
aggregate of the events which are predicted in the second part, to which belongs
the prophecy of the Servant of God which immediately precedes, and which the Prophet
has here as pre-eminently in view (<i>Michaelis</i>: <i>et nova, imprimis de Messia</i>),
as, in the parallel passage chap. xli. 22, the announcement of the conqueror from
the East. Both of these verses seem to round off our prophecy, by indicating that
such disclosures regarding the Future are not by any means intended to serve for
the gratification of idle curiosity, but to advance the same object to which the
events prophesied are also subservient, viz., the promotion of God&#39;s glory. The
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 226]</span> modern view of Prophetism is irreconcileable
with the verses under consideration, which evidently shew, that the prophets themselves
were filled with a different consciousness of their mission and position And in
like manner it follows from them, that there is no reason to put, by means of a
forced interpretation, the prophecy within the horizon of the Prophet&#39;s time, seeing
that the Prophet himself shows himself to be thoroughly penetrated by its altogether
supernatural character.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_205a" href="#ftnRef_205a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[1]</sup></a> This embarrassment becomes still more obvious
	in the explanation of <i>Vatke</i>, who understands by the Servant of God, &quot;the
	harmless ideal abstract of the people;&quot; and that of <i>Beck</i>, who understands
	thereby &quot;the notion of the people.&quot;</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_208a" href="#ftnRef_208a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[2]</sup></a> The Hebrew word is
	<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1508;&#1496;</span>, which means &quot;judgment,&quot; &quot;right,&quot;
	&quot;law.&quot; Dr. <i>Hengstenberg</i> has translated it by <i>Recht</i>, which is,
	as nearly as possible, expressed by the English word &quot;right,&quot; (<i>jus</i>,)
	as including &quot;law&quot; and &quot;statutes.&quot;--<i>Tr.</i></p>
</div>
<h3><a name="div2_226" href="#div2Ref_226">CHAPTER XLIX. 1-9.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">The Servant of God, with whose person the Prophet had. by way
of preparation, already made us acquainted in the first book of the second part,
in chap. xlii., is here, at the beginning of the second book, at once introduced
as speaking, surprising, as it were, the readers. In ver. 1-3, we have the destination
and high calling which the Lord assigned to His Servant; in ver. 4, the contrast
and contradiction of the result of this mission; the covenant-people, to whom it
is, in the first instance, directed, reward with ingratitude His faithful work.
In ver. 5 and 6, we are told what God does in order to maintain the dignity of His
Servant; as a compensation for obstinate, rebellious Israel, He gives Him the <i>
Gentiles</i> for an inheritance. From ver. 7 the Prophet takes the word. In ver.
7 the original contempt which, according to the preceding verses, the Servant of
God meets with, especially in <i>Israel</i>, is contrasted with the respectful worship
of nations and kings which is to follow after it. Ver. 8 and 9 describe how the
Servant of God proves himself to be the embodied covenant of the people, and form
the transition to a general description of the enjoyment of salvation, which, in
the Messianic times, shall be bestowed upon the Congregation of the Lord. This description
goes on to chap. l. 3, and then, in chap. l. 4 ff., the person of the Servant of
the Lord is anew brought before us.</p>
<p class="normal">The Messianic explanation of our passage is already met with in
the New Testament. It is with reference to it that <span class="pagenum">[Pg 227]</span>
Simeon, in Luke ii. 30, 31, designates the Saviour as the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#963;&#969;&#964;&#942;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#957;</span> of God, which He had prepared before
the face of all people (comp. ver. 6 of our passage: &quot;That thou mayest be my salvation
unto the end of the earth&quot;), as the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#966;&#8182;&#962; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#954;&#940;&#955;&#965;&#968;&#953;&#957;
&#7952;&#952;&#957;&#8182;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#948;&#972;&#958;&#945;&#957; &#955;&#945;&#959;&#8166; &#963;&#959;&#965; &#7992;&#963;&#961;&#945;&#942;&#955;</span>; comp. again ver. 6, according to which the
Servant of God is to be at the same time, the light of the Gentiles, to raise up
the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel. Ver. 1: &quot;The Lord hath
called me from the womb, from the bowels of my mother hath He made mention of my
name,&quot; is alluded to in Luke ii. 21: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#922;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#954;&#955;&#942;&#952;&#951; &#964;&#8056;
&#8004;&#957;&#959;&#956;&#945; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166;&#962;, &#964;&#8056; &#954;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#8050;&#957; &#8017;&#960;&#8056; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7936;&#947;&#947;&#941;&#955;&#959;&#965; &#960;&#961;&#8056; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#963;&#965;&#955;&#955;&#951;&#966;&#952;&#8134;&#957;&#945;&#953; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#7952;&#957; &#964;&#8135; &#954;&#959;&#953;&#955;&#943;&#8115;</span>
(comp. i. 31: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#963;&#965;&#955;&#955;&#942;&#968;&#8131; &#7952;&#957; &#947;&#945;&#963;&#964;&#961;&#8054; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#941;&#958;&#8131; &#965;&#7985;&#972;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054;
&#954;&#945;&#955;&#941;&#963;&#949;&#953;&#962; &#964;&#8056; &#8004;&#957;&#959;&#956;&#945; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166;&#957;</span>) as is sufficiently evident from
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#957; &#964;&#8135; &#954;&#959;&#953;&#955;&#943;&#8115;</span> <i>sc. matris</i>, which exactly
answers to the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1489;&#1496;&#1503;</span> in the passage before
us. In Acts xiii. 46, 47, Paul and Barnabas prove, from the passage under review,
the destination of Christ to be the Saviour of the Gentiles, and their right to
offer to them the salvation despised and rejected by the Jews:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7984;&#948;&#959;&#8058; &#963;&#964;&#961;&#949;&#966;&#972;&#956;&#949;&#952;&#945; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#964;&#8048; &#7956;&#952;&#957;&#951;&#903; &#959;&#8021;&#964;&#969; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#7952;&#957;&#964;&#941;&#964;&#945;&#955;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#7969;&#956;&#8150;&#957;
&#8001; &#922;&#973;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#962;· &#964;&#941;&#952;&#949;&#953;&#954;&#940; &#963;&#949; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#966;&#8182;&#962; &#7952;&#952;&#957;&#8182;&#957; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#949;&#7990;&#957;&#945;&#943; &#963;&#949; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#963;&#969;&#964;&#951;&#961;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#7957;&#969;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#967;&#940;&#964;&#959;&#965; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#947;&#8134;&#962;</span>
In the destination which, in Isaiah, the Lord assigns to Christ, Paul and Barnabas
recognize an indirect command for his disciples, a rule for their conduct. In 2
Cor. vi. 1, 2, ver. 8 is quoted, and referred to the Messianic time.</p>
<p class="normal">It is obvious that the Jews could not be favourable to the Messianic
interpretation; but the Christian Church has held fast by it for nearly 1800 years.
Even such interpreters as <i>Theodoret</i> and <i>Clericus</i>, who are everywhere
rather disposed to explain away real Messianic references, than to find the Messiah
where He is not presented, consider the Messianic interpretation to be, in this
place, beyond all doubt. The former says: &quot;This was said with a view to the Lord
Christ, who is the seed of Abraham, through whom the nations received the promise.&quot;
And when, in our century, men returned to the faith, the Messianic interpretation
also returned. If the Church has Christ at all, it is impossible that she should
fail to find Him here.</p>
<p class="normal" dir="ltr"><i>Gesenius</i>, and those who have followed him, appeal
to the circumstance, that the Messiah could not well be introduced as speaking,
and, least of all, in such a manner, without any introduction
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 228]</span> and preparation. But it is difficult to see
how this argument can be advanced by those who themselves assume that a mere personification,
the collective body of the prophets, or, as <i>Beck</i> expresses it, the Prophet
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#964;&#8217; &#7952;&#958;&#959;&#967;&#8053;&#957;</span> as a general substantial individual,
or even the people, can be introduced as speaking. The introduction of persons is
a necessary result of the dramatic character of prophetic Speech, comp., <i>e.g.</i>,
chap. xiv., where now the king of Babylon, then the inhabitants of the Sheol, and
again Jehovah, are introduced as speaking. The person who is here introduced as
speaking is already known from chap. xlii., where <i>he is spoken of</i>. The prophecy
before us stands to that prophecy in the very same relation as does Ps. ii. 7-9,
where the Anointed One suddenly appears as speaking, to the preceding verses, where
He was spoken of The Messiah is here so distinctly described, as to His nature and
character, that it is impossible not to recognise Him. Who but He should be the
Covenant of the people, the Light of the Gentiles, the Saviour for all the ends
of the earth? The point which was here concerned was not, first to introduce Him
to the knowledge of the people. His image existed there already in sharp outlines,
even from and since Gen. xlix. 10, where the Peaceful One meets us, in whom Judah
attains to the full height of his destination, and to whom the people adhere. The
circumstance that it is just here that the Messiah appears as speaking, forms the
most appropriate introduction to the second book, in which He is the principal figure.--It
is by a false literal interpretation only that ver. 8, 9 have been advanced in opposition
to the Messianic interpretation.</p>
<p class="normal">The arbitrariness of the non-Messianic interpretation manifests
itself in this also, that its supporters can, up to this day, not agree as to the
subject of the prophecy. 1. According to several interpreters--<i>Hitzig</i>, last
of all--the Servant of God is to be <i>Israel</i>, and the idea this, that Israel
would, at some future period, be the teacher of the Gentiles, and would spread the
true religion on earth. It is apparently only that this interpretation receives
some countenance from ver. 3, where the Servant of the Lord is called Israel. For
this name does not there stand as an ordinary <i>nomen proprium</i>, but as an honorary
name, to designate the high dignity and destination of the Servant of God. As this
name had passed over from <span class="pagenum">[Pg 229]</span> an individual to
a people, so it may again be transferred from the people to that person in whom
the people attain their destination, in which, up to that time, they had failed
But decisive against this explanation, which makes the whole people the subject,
is ver. 5, according to which the Servant of God is destined to lead back to the
Lord, Jacob and Israel (in the ordinary sense), who then must be different from
Him; ver. 6, according to which He is to raise up the tribes of Jacob; ver. 8, 9,
according to which He is to be the Covenant of the people, to deliver the prisoners,
&amp;c. (<i>Knobel</i> remarks on this verse: &quot;Nothing is clearer than that the Servant
of God is not identical with the mass of the people, but is something different.&quot;)
Supposing even that the people, destined to be the teachers of the Gentiles, appear
here as speaking, it is difficult to see how, in ver. 4, they could say that hitherto
they had laboured in vain in their vocation, and seen no fruits, since hitherto
the people had made no attempt at all at the conversion of the Gentiles. 2. <i>Maurer</i>,
<i>Knobel</i>, and others, endeavour to explain it of <i>the better portion of the
people</i>. But conclusive against this interpretation is ver. 6, according to which
the Servant of God has the destination of restoring the preserved of Israel, and
hence must be distinct from the better portion; ver. 8, according to which He is
given for a Covenant of the people, from which, according to ver. 4 and 6, the ungodly
are excluded; so that the idea of the people is identical with that of the better
portion. In general, the contrasting of the better portion of the people with the
whole people, Jacob and Israel, the centre and substance of which was formed just
by the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#954;&#955;&#959;&#947;&#8053;</span>, can scarcely be thought of,
and is without any analogy. Nor is the mention of the <i>womb</i>. and <i>bowels
of the mother</i>, in ver. 1, reconcileable with a merely imaginary person, and
that, moreover, a person of a character so indistinct and indefinite,--a character
which has no definite and palpable historical beginnings. The parallel passages,
in which the calling from the womb is mentioned, treat of real persons, of individuals.--3.
According to several interpreters (<i>Jarchi</i>, <i>Kimchi</i>, <i>Abenezra</i>,
<i>Grotius</i>, <i>Steudel</i>, <i>Umbreit</i>, <i>Hofmann</i>), the Servant of
the Lord is to be none other than <i>the Prophet himself</i>. No argument has been
adduced in favour of this view, except the use of the first person, (&quot;If here, without
introduction and preparation, a discourse begins with the first
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 230]</span> person, it refers most naturally to the Prophet,
who is the author of the Book&quot;),--an argument of very subordinate significance,
and the more so that the person of the Prophet, everywhere else in the second part
of Isaiah, steps so entirely into the background behind the great objects with which
he is engaged. To follow thus the first appearance may, indeed, be becoming to a
eunuch from Ethiopia, but not a Christian expounder of Scripture. The contents of
the prophecy are decidedly in opposition to this opinion. Even the circumstance
that a single prophet should assume the name of Israel, ver. 3, appears an intolerable
usurpation. <i>Farther</i>--Like all the other prophets, Isaiah was sent to the
Jews, and not to the Gentiles; but at the very outset, <i>the most distant lands
and all the distant nations</i> are here called upon to hearken. The Lord says to
His Servant that the restoration of Israel was too little for Him, that He should
be a light and salvation for all the heathen nations from one end of the earth to
the other; kings and Princes shall fall down before Him, adoring and worshipping.
The Prophet would thus simply have raised himself to be the Saviour. <i>Umbreit</i>
expressly acknowledges this: &quot;He is to be the holy pillar of clouds and fire which
leads the people back to their native land, after the time of their punishment has
expired. But a still more glorious vocation and destination is in store for the
prophets; they receive the highest, the Messianic destination.&quot; The usurpation of
which the Servant of God would have made himself guilty, appears so much the more
clearly, when it is known, that the work of the Servant of God comprehends even
all that also, which is described in ver. 10-23, viz., the blossoming of the Church
of God, her enlargement by the Gentiles, &amp;c. <i>It is obvious that, if the interpretation
which refers this prediction to the prophets were the correct one, the authority
of the Old Testament prophecy would be gone; the authority of the Lord himself would
be endangered, inasmuch as He always recognizes, in these prophets, organs of divine
inspiration and power.</i> A vain attempt is made at mitigating this usurpation,
by imperceptibly substituting the collective body of the prophets for the single
prophet. This view thus leads to, and interferes with another which we shall immediately
examine. But if we would not give up the sole argument by which this
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 231]</span> exposition is supported, viz., the use of
the first person, everything must, in the first instance, apply to and be fulfilled
in Isaiah; and the other prophets can come into consideration only as continuators
of his work and ministry. He is entitled to use the first person in that case only,
when he is a perfect manifestation of prophetism.--4. According to <i>Gesenius</i>,
the Servant of the Lord is to be <i>the collective body of the prophets</i>, the
prophetic order. In opposition to this view, <i>Stier</i> remarks: &quot;We maintain
that, according to history, there did not at that time (the time of the exile, in
which <i>Gesenius</i> places this prophecy) exist any prophetic order, or any distinguished
blossom of it; that hence it was impossible for any reasonable man to entertain
this hope, when viewed in this way, without looking farther and higher.&quot; Ver. 1
is decisive against a mere personification. The name of Israel, too, in ver. 3,
is very little applicable to the whole prophetic order. This is sufficiently evident
from the fact that <i>Gesenius</i>, in his Commentary, declared this word to be
spurious; and it was at a later period only, when he had become bolder, that he
endeavoured to adapt it to his self-chosen subject. Nowhere in the Old Testament
do the prophets appear like the Servant of God here--as the Covenant of the people,
ver. 8, as the Light of the Gentiles, ver. 6.</p>
<hr class="W20">
<p class="normal">Ver. 1. &quot;<i>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.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">As the stand-point which the Messiah occupies in the vision of
the Prophet, we have to conceive of the time, at which He had already entered upon
His office, and had already experienced many proofs of the Jews&#39; unbelief and hardness
of heart,--an event of the Future, the foresight of which was, even in a human point
of view, very readily suggested to the Prophet after the painful experience acquired
during his own long ministry; comp. chap. vi. For the fruitlessness of His ministry
among the mass of the covenant-people, ver. 4, as well as the great contempt which
the Servant of God found among them, ver. 7, are represented as having already taken
place; <span class="pagenum">[Pg 232]</span> while the enlightenment of the Gentiles,
the worship of the kings, &amp;c., which are to be expected by Him, are represented
as being still future. In the same manner, in chap. liii., the humiliation of the
Servant of God appears as past; the glorification, as future, the reason why the
<i>isles</i> are addressed (comp. remarks on chap. xlii. 4) appears in ver. 6 only,
at the close of the discourse of the Servant of God, for all that precedes serves
as a preparation. In that verse, the Servant of the Lord announces that the Lord
had appointed Him to be the Light of the Gentiles; that He should be His salvation
unto the ends of the earth. It is very significant that the second book at once
begins with an address to the Gentiles, inasmuch us, thus, we are here introduced
into the sphere of a redemption which does not refer to a single nation, like that
with which the <i>first</i> book is engaged, but to the ends of the earth. At the
close of the first book, in chap. xlviii. 20, it was said: &quot;Declare ye, tell this,
utter it even to the end of the earth, say ye: The Lord hath redeemed his servant
Jacob.&quot; The fact that the redemption, in the first instance peculiar to Jacob, is
to be proclaimed to all the nations of the earth, leads us to expect that these
nations, too, have their portion in the Lord; that at some future period they are
to hear a message which concerns them still <i>more particularly</i>. This expectation
is realized here, at the opening of the second book. The fact that the Gentiles
are to listen here, as those who have a personal interest in the message, is proved
by the circumstance, that the words: &quot;Unto the ends of the earth,&quot; in ver. 6 of
the chapter before us, point back to the same words in chap. xlviii. 20.--<i>The
Lord had called me from the womb.</i> It is sufficient to go thus far back in order
to repress or refute the idea of His having himself usurped His office, and to furnish
a foundation for the expectation that God would powerfully uphold and protect His
Servant in the office which He himself had assigned to Him. Calvin remarks on these
words: &quot;They do not indicate the commencement of the time of His vocation, as if
God had, only from the womb, called Him; but it is just as if it were said: Before
I came forth from the womb, God had decreed that I was to undertake this office.
In the same manner Paul also says that he had been separated from his mother&#39;s womb,
although he was chosen before <span class="pagenum">[Pg 233]</span> the foundation
of the world.&quot; To be called from the womb is, in itself, nothing extraordinary;
it is common to all the servants of the Lord. Jeremiah ascribes it to himself in
chap. i. 5: &quot;Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee; and before thou camest
forth out of the womb I sanctified thee;&quot; and in harmony with this passage in Jeremiah--not
with that before us--Paul says in Gal. i. 15: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001; &#952;&#949;&#8056;&#962;
&#8001; &#7936;&#966;&#959;&#961;&#943;&#963;&#945;&#962;</span> (corresponding to: I have <i>sanctified</i> thee)
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#949; &#7952;&#954; &#954;&#959;&#953;&#955;&#943;&#945;&#962; &#956;&#951;&#964;&#961;&#972;&#962; &#956;&#959;&#965;</span>. But we have here
merely the <i>introduction to what follows</i>, where the calling, to which the
Servant of God had been destined from the womb appears as quite unique.--<i>From
the bowels of my mother hath He made mention of my name.</i> The name is here not
an ordinary proper name, but <i>a name descriptive of the nature</i>,--one by which
His office and vocation are designated. This making mention was, in the case of
Christ, not a thing concealed; the prophecy before us received its palpable confirmation
and fulfilment; inasmuch as, in reference to it, Joseph received, even before His
birth, the command to call Him Jesus, Saviour: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#941;&#958;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;
&#948;&#8050; &#965;&#7985;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#954;&#945;&#955;&#941;&#963;&#949;&#953;&#962; &#964;&#8056; &#8004;&#957;&#959;&#956;&#945; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166;&#957;&#903; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#963;&#974;&#963;&#949;&#953; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#955;&#945;&#8056;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7936;&#960;&#8056; &#964;&#8182;&#957;
&#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#953;&#8182;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8182;&#957;</span>, Matth. i. 21, after the same command had previously come
to Mary, Luke i. 31; comp. ii. 21, where, as we have already remarked, there is
a distinct reference to the passage before us.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 2. &quot;<i>And He hath made my mouth like a sharp sword, in the
shadow of His hand hath He hid me, and He hath made me a sharpened arrow, in His
quiver hath He hid me.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">According to the common interpretation, the words: &quot;He hath made
my mouth like a sharp sword. He hath made me a sharpened arrow,&quot; are to express
only such a gift of powerful, impressive speech as is common to all the servants
of God, to all the prophets. But the two subjoined clauses are opposed to that interpretation.
The second and fourth clauses state the reason of the first and third, and point
to the source from which that emanates which is stated in them. There cannot be
any doubt but that in the second and fourth clauses, the Servant of God indicates
that He stands under the protection of divine omnipotence, so that the expression:
&quot;Whom I uphold,&quot; in chap. xlii. 1, is parallel. The <i>shadow</i> is the ordinary
figure of protection. The figure of the sword is dropped in the second clause, and
hence the objection, that a drawn sword does not require any protection, is out
of place. This will <span class="pagenum">[Pg 234]</span> appear from a comparison
of chap. li. 16: &quot;And I put my words in thy mouth, and I cover thee with the shadow
of mine hand,&quot; where the sword is not mentioned at all, and the shadow belongs simply
to the person. The quiver which keeps the arrow is likewise a natural image of divine
protection. The two accessory clauses do not suit, if the first and third clauses
are referred to the <i>rhetorical endowment</i> of the Servant of God; <i>that does
not flow from the source of the protecting omnipotence of God</i>. These accessory
clauses rather suggest the idea that, by the comparison of the <i>mouth</i> with
the sharp sword, of the <i>whole person</i> with the sharpened arrow, there is indicated
<i>the absolutely conquering power which, under the protection of omnipotence, adheres
to the word and person of the Servant of God</i>, so that He will easily put down
everything which opposes,--equivalent to: <i>He has endowed me with His omnipotence,
so that my word produces destructive effects, and puts down all opposition, just
as does His word</i>; so that there would be a parallel in chap. xi. 4, where the
word of the Servant of God likewise appears as being borne by omnipotence: &quot;He smiteth
the earth with the rod of His mouth, and with the breath of His lips He slayeth
the wicked.&quot; To the same result we are led also by a comparison of chap. li. 16,
where the word of the Lord, which is put into the mouth of the Servant of God, is
so living and powerful, so borne by omnipotence, that thereby the heavens are planted,
and the foundations of the earth are laid. But of special importance are those passages
of Revelation which refer to the verse under consideration. In chap. i. 16, the
sharp two-edged sword does not by any means represent the power of the discourse
piercing the heart for salvation; but rather the destructive power of the word which
is borne by omnipotence. It designates the almighty punitive power of Christ directed
against his enemies. &quot;By the circumstance, that the sword goes out of the mouth
of Christ, that destructive power is attributed to His mere word, He appears as
partaking of divine omnipotence. For it belongs to God to slay by the words of His
mouth, Hos. vi. 5.&quot; The same applies to chap. ii. 16. On Rev. xix. 15: &quot;And out
of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it He should smite the nations,&quot; we
remarked: &quot;the sharp sword is not that of a teaching king, <span class="pagenum">
[Pg 235]</span> but that of omnipotence which speaks and it is done, and slayeth
by the breath of the lips. How Christ casts down His enemies by the word of His
mouth is seen, in a prophetical instance, John xviii. 6; Acts ix. 4, 5.&quot; With the
sword, Christ appears even where He does not mean to destroy, but to bring salvation;
for, even in those who are to be blessed, hostile powers are to be overcome. The
image, however, is here, in the fundamental passage, occasioned by the comparison
of the Servant of God with the conqueror from the East, whose sword, according to
chap. xli. 2, the Lord makes as dust, and his bow as the driven stubble. Where the
mere <i>word</i> serves as a sword, the effect must be much more powerful. The conquering
power throwing down every opposing power, which, in the first clause, is assigned
to the mouth, is, in the third clause (&quot;And He hath made <i>me</i> a sharpened arrow&quot;),
attributed to the whole person. He, of whom it was already said in Ps. xlv. 6: &quot;Thine
arrows are sharp, people fall under thee, they enter into the heart of the king&#39;s
enemies,&quot; is himself to be esteemed as a sharp arrow.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. &quot;<i>And He said unto me: Thou art my Servant, O Israel,
in whom I glorify myself.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;My Servant&quot; stands here as an honorary <i>designation</i>; to
be the Servant of God appears here as the highest privilege, as is evident not only
from the analogy of the parallel passages, which treat of the Servant of God (comp.
remarks on chap. xlii. 1), but also from the parallel second clause. In it, the
Servant of God is called <i>Israel</i> as the concentration and consummation of
the covenant-people, as He in whom it is to attain to its destination, in whom its
idea is to be realized. (It is evident from ver. 5, and from those passages in the
second part in which the people of Israel is spoken of as the Servant of God [comp.
remarks on chap. xlii.], that Israel must here be understood as the name of the
people, not as the name of the ancestor only.) <i>Hävernick</i> rightly remarks
that the Messiah is here called Israel, &quot;in contrast to the people to whom this
name does not properly belong.&quot; Analogous is Matt. ii. 15, where that which, in
the Old Testament, is written of Israel, is referred to Christ. As the true Israel,
Christ himself also represents himself in John i. 52; with a reference to that which
in Gen. xxviii. 12 is written, not of Jacob as <span class="pagenum">[Pg 236]</span>
an individual, but as the representative of the whole race, it is said there:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#960;&#8125; &#7940;&#961;&#964;&#953; &#8004;&#968;&#949;&#963;&#952;&#949; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#959;&#8016;&#961;&#945;&#957;&#8056;&#957; &#7936;&#957;&#949;&#8179;&#947;&#972;&#964;&#945;, &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#7936;&#947;&#947;&#941;&#955;&#959;&#965;&#962;
&#964;&#959;&#965;&#770; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#965;&#770; &#7936;&#957;&#945;&#946;&#945;&#943;&#957;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#946;&#945;&#943;&#957;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#962; &#7952;&#960;&#8054; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#965;&#7985;&#8056;&#957; &#964;&#959;&#965;&#770; &#7936;&#957;&#952;&#961;&#974;&#960;&#959;&#965;</span> All
those declarations of the Old Testament, in which the name of Jacob or Israel is
used to designate the <i>election</i>, to the exclusion of the false seed, the true
Israelites in whom there is no guile,--all those passages prepare the way for, and
come near to the one before us. Thus Ps. lxiii. 1: &quot;Truly good is God to Israel,
to such as are of a clean heart;&quot; and then Ps. xxiv. 6: &quot;They that seek thy face
are Jacob,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, those only who, with zeal and energy in sanctification,
seek for the favour of God. In the passage before us, the same principle is farther
carried out. The true Israel is designated as he in whom God glorifies, or will
glorify himself, inasmuch as his glorification will bear testimony to God&#39;s mercy
and faithfulness; comp. John xii. 23: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#955;&#942;&#955;&#965;&#952;&#949;&#957; &#7969; &#8037;&#961;&#945;
&#7989;&#957;&#945; &#948;&#959;&#958;&#945;&#963;&#952;&#8135; &#8001; &#965;&#7985;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7936;&#957;&#952;&#961;&#974;&#960;&#959;&#965; </span>; xvii. 5: <span lang="el" class="Greek">
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#957;&#8166;&#957; &#948;&#959;&#958;&#945;&#963;&#972;&#957; &#956;&#949; &#963;&#973; &#960;&#940;&#964;&#949;&#961;</span>. The verb <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1488;&#1512;</span>
means in <i>Piel</i>, &quot;to adorn,&quot; in <i>Hithp.</i> &quot;to adorn one&#39;s self,&quot; &quot;to glorify
one&#39;s self.&quot; Thus it occurs in Judg. vii. 2; Is. x. 15; lx. 21: &quot;Work of my hands
for glorifying,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, in which I glorify myself; lxi. 3: &quot;Planting of the
Lord for glorifying.&quot; There is no reason for abandoning this well-supported signification
either here or in chap. xliv. 23: &quot;The Lord hath redeemed Israel and glorified himself
in Israel.&quot; If God glorifies himself in His Servant, He just thereby gets occasion
to glory in Him as a monument of His goodness and faithfulness. Our Saviour prays
in John xii. 28: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#928;&#940;&#964;&#949;&#961; &#948;&#972;&#958;&#945;&#963;&#972;&#957; &#963;&#959;&#965; &#964;&#8056; &#8004;&#957;&#959;&#956;&#945;.</span>
The Father, by glorifying the Son, glorifies at the same time His name. Those who
explain <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514;&#1508;&#1488;&#1512;</span> by: <i>per quem ornabor</i>,
overlook the circumstance that, also in the phrase: &quot;Thou art my Servant,&quot; the main
stress does not, according to the parallel passages, lie in that which the Servant
has to perform, but in His being the protected and preserved by God.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. &quot;<i>And I said: I have laboured in vain, I have spent
my strength for emptiness and vanity; but my right is with the Lord, and my reward
with my God.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The Servant of God, after having spoken of His sublime dignity
and mission, here prepares the transition for proclaiming His destination to be
a Saviour of the Gentiles, to whom His whole discourse is addressed. He complains
of the small <span class="pagenum">[Pg 237]</span> fruits of His ministry among
Israel; but comforts himself by the confidence placed upon the righteousness of
God, that the faithful discharge of the duty committed to Him cannot remain without
reward. The speaking on the part of the Servant of God in this verse refers to the
speaking of God in verse 3. <i>Jerome</i>, who remarks on this point: &quot;But when
the Father told me that which I have repeated, I answered Him: How wilt thou be
glorified in me, seeing that I have laboured in vain?&quot; recognised this reference,
but erroneously viewed the words as being addressed to the Lord. It is a soliloquy
which we have here before us. Instead of &quot;I said,&quot; we are not at liberty to put:
&quot;I imagined;&quot; the Servant of God had in reality expended His strength for nothing
and vanity. As the <i>scene</i> of the vain labour of the Servant of God, the <i>
heathen world</i> cannot be thought of; inasmuch as this is, first in ver. 6, assigned
to Him as an indemnification for that which, according to the verse before us, He
had lost elsewhere. It is <i>Israel</i> only which can be the object of the vain
labour of the Servant of God; for it was to them that, according to ver. 5, the
mission of the Servant of God in the first instance referred: The Lord had formed
Him to be His Servant, to bring back to Him Jacob and Israel that were not gathered.
Since, then, the mission is directed to <i>apostate</i> Israel, it can the less
be strange that the labour was in vain. To the same result we are led also by the
circumstance that, in ver. 6, the saving activity of the Servant of God appears
as limited to <i>the preserved</i> of Israel, while the original mission had been
directed to the <i>whole</i>. And this portion to which His activity is limited,
is comparatively a <i>small</i> portion. For that is suggested by the circumstance
that to have the preserved of Israel for His portion is represented as a light thing--not
at all corresponding to the dignity of the Servant of God. As, in that verse, the
preserved of Israel form the contrast to the mass of the people <i>given up</i>
by the Lord, so in the verse under consideration, the opposition which the Servant
of God finds, is represented as so great, that His ministry was, in the main, in
vain; so that accordingly the great mass of the people must have been unsusceptible
of it.--In the view that a great portion of the people would reject the salvation
offered in Christ, and thereby become liable to judgment, the Song of Solomon
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 238]</span> had already preceded our Prophet. As regards
the natural grounds of this foresight, we remarked in the Commentary on the Song
of Solomon, S. 245: &quot;With a knowledge of human nature, and especially of the nature
of Israel, as it was peculiar to the people from the beginning, and was firmly and
deeply impressed upon them by the Mosaic laws,--after the experience which the journey
through the wilderness, the time of the Judges, the reign of David and of Solomon
also offered, it was absolutely impossible for the enlightened to entertain the
hope that, at the appearance of the Messiah, the whole people would do homage to
Him with sincere and cordial devotion.&quot; How very much this was the case, the very
first chapter of Isaiah can prove. It is impossible that one who has so deeply recognized
the corrupted nature of his people, should give himself up to vain patriotic fancies;
to such an one, the time of the highest manifestation of salvation must necessarily
be, at the same time, a period of the highest realization of judgment. The same
view which is given here, we meet with also in chap. liii. 1-3. In harmony with
Isaiah, Zechariah, too, prophesies, in chaps. xi., xiii. 8, that the greater portion
of the Jews will not believe in Christ. Malachi iii. 1-6, 19, 24, contrasts with
the longed-for judgment upon the heathen, the judgment which, in the Messianic time,
is to be executed upon the people itself.--On the words: &quot;My right is with the Lord,
and my reward with my God,&quot; compare Lev. xix, 13: &quot;The reward of him that is hired
shall not abide with thee all night until the morning.&quot; The God who watches that
among men the well-earned wages of faithful labour shall not be withheld, will surely
himself not withhold them from His Servant. The right, the well-deserved reward
of His Servant is <i>with Him</i>; it is there safely kept, in order that it may
be delivered up to Him in due time. That which the Servant of the Lord here, in
the highest sense, says of himself, holds true of His inferior servants also. Their
labour in the Lord is, in truth, never in vain. Their right and their reward can
never fail them.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 5. &quot;<i>And now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb
to be a Servant to himself, to bring Jacob again to Him, and Israel which is not
gathered, and I am honoured in the eyes of the Lord, and my God was my strength.</i>
Ver. <span class="pagenum">[Pg 239]</span>6. <i>And He saith: It is too light a
thing that thou shouldest be my Servant only to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and
to restore the preserved of Israel, and I give thee for a light to the Gentiles,
that thou mayest be my Salvation unto the ends of the earth.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The confidence which the Servant of the Lord has placed in Him
has not been put to shame by the result, but rather has been gloriously justified
by Him. He who was, in the first instance, sent to Israel, is appointed to be the
Saviour of the Gentiles, in order to compensate Him for the unbelief of those to
whom His mission was in the first instance directed. <i>And now</i>, <i>i.e.</i>,
since the matter stands thus (Gen. xlv. 8),--since Israel, to whom my mission is,
in the first instance, directed, reject me. <i>Saith the Lord</i>--That which the
Lord spoke follows in ver. 6 only, which, on account of the long interruption, again
begins with: &quot;And He saith,&quot; equivalent to: I say. He hath spoken. The declaration
of the Lord has reference to the destination of His Servant to be the Saviour of
the Gentiles. This declaration is, in ver. 5, based upon two reasons:--<i>first</i>,
the frustration of the original mission of the Servant of the Lord to the Jews;
and <i>secondly</i>, on the intimate relation in which He stands to the Lord, who
cannot withhold from Him the reward which He deserves for His work. In the New Testament,
also, the mission of Christ appears as being at first directed to the Jews only.
The Lord says, in Matt. xv. 24: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7936;&#960;&#949;&#963;&#964;&#940;&#955;&#951;&#957; &#949;&#7984; &#956;&#8052;
&#949;&#7984;&#962; &#964;&#8048; &#960;&#961;&#972;&#946;&#945;&#964;&#945; &#964;&#8048; &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#955;&#969;&#955;&#972;&#964;&#945; &#959;&#7988;&#954;&#959;&#965; &#7992;&#963;&#961;&#945;&#942;&#955;</span>. He says, in Matt. x. 6, to the
Apostles, after having forbidden them to go to the heathens, and to the Samaritans,
who were nothing but disguised heathens: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#959;&#961;&#949;&#973;&#949;&#963;&#952;&#949;
&#948;&#8050; &#956;&#8118;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#8048; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#946;&#945;&#964;&#945; &#964;&#8048; &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#955;&#969;&#955;&#972;&#964;&#945; &#959;&#7988;&#954;&#959;&#965; &#7992;&#963;&#961;&#945;&#942;&#955;.</span> Paul and Barnabas say,
in Acts xiii. 46: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8017;&#956;&#8150;&#957; &#7974;&#957; &#7936;&#957;&#945;&#947;&#954;&#945;&#8150;&#959;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#8182;&#964;&#959;&#957; &#955;&#945;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#8134;&#957;&#945;&#953;
&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#955;&#972;&#947;&#959;&#957; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166;· &#7952;&#960;&#949;&#953;&#948;&#8052; &#948;&#949; &#7936;&#960;&#969;&#952;&#949;&#8150;&#963;&#952;&#949; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7936;&#958;&#943;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#954;&#961;&#943;&#957;&#949;&#964;&#949; &#7953;&#945;&#965;&#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#964;&#8134;&#962;
&#945;&#7984;&#969;&#957;&#943;&#959;&#965; &#950;&#969;&#8134;&#962;, &#7984;&#948;&#959;&#8058; &#963;&#964;&#961;&#949;&#966;&#972;&#956;&#949;&#952;&#945; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#964;&#8048; &#7956;&#952;&#957;&#951;.</span> It is rather an idle question
to ask what would have happened, if the Jews as a nation had accepted the offered
salvation. But so much is certain that here, in the prediction, as well as in history,
the rejection of Christ, on the part of the Jews, appears to have been a necessary
condition of His entering upon His vocation as the Saviour of the Gentiles. Those
who understood the people by the Servant of the Lord refer
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1513;&#1497;&#1489;&#1489;</span> to Jehovah, and consider it as a Gerund.
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 240]</span> <i>reducendo</i>, or <i>qui reducit ad se
Jacobum</i>. In the same way they explain also the Infinit. with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span> in the following verse, as also in chap.
li. 16. But although the Infinit. with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span> is
sometimes, indeed, used for the Gerund., yet this is neither the original nor the
ordinary use; and nowhere does it occur in such accumulation. Moreover, by this
explanation, this verse, as well as the following ones, are altogether broken up,
and the words <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1513;&#1493;&#1489;&#1489; &#1497;&#1506;&#1511;&#1489; &#1488;&#1500;&#1497;&#1493;</span> must indicate
the destination for which He was formed. And it is not possible that Jehovah&#39;s bringing
Jacob back to himself should be a display of Israel&#39;s being formed from the womb
to be the Servant, inasmuch as the bringing back would not, like the formation,
belong to the first stage of the existence of the people.--&quot;<i>And Israel, which
is not gathered.</i>&quot; Before <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1513;&#1512;</span>,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488;</span> must be supplied. According to the parallel
words: &quot;To bring Jacob again to Him,&quot; the not gathering of Israel is to be referred
to its having wandered away from the Lord. It was appropriate that this should be
expressly mentioned, and not merely supposed, as is the case in: &quot;To bring Jacob
again to Him.&quot; The image which lies at the foundation, is that of a scattered flock;
comp. Mic. ii. 12. Parallel is Isaiah liii. 6: &quot;All we <i>like sheep</i> have gone
astray, we have turned every one to his own way.&quot;--To the words under consideration
the Lord alludes in Matt. xxiii. 37: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7992;&#949;&#961;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#945;&#955;&#8053;&#956; ...
&#960;&#959;&#963;&#940;&#954;&#953;&#962; &#7968;&#952;&#941;&#955;&#951;&#963;&#945; &#7952;&#960;&#953; &#963;&#965;&#957;&#945;&#947;&#945;&#947;&#949;&#8150;&#957; &#964;&#8048; &#964;&#941;&#954;&#957;&#945; &#963;&#959;&#965; &#8003;&#957; &#964;&#961;&#972;&#960;&#959;&#957; &#7952;&#960;&#953;&#963;&#965;&#957;&#945;&#947;&#949;&#953; &#8004;&#961;&#957;&#953;&#962; &#964;&#8048; &#957;&#959;&#963;&#963;&#943;&#945;
&#7952;&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8134;&#962; &#8017;&#960;&#8056; &#964;&#8048;&#962; &#960;&#964;&#941;&#961;&#965;&#947;&#945;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7968;&#952;&#949;&#955;&#942;&#963;&#945;&#964;&#949;.</span>; comp. also Matt. ix. 36:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7984;&#948;&#8060;&#957; &#948;&#8050; &#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#8004;&#967;&#955;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#960;&#955;&#945;&#947;&#967;&#957;&#943;&#963;&#952;&#951; &#960;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8182;&#957; &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#7974;&#963;&#945;&#957;
&#7952;&#963;&#954;&#965;&#955;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#953; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#961;&#961;&#953;&#956;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#953; &#8033;&#963;&#949;&#8054; &#960;&#961;&#972;&#946;&#945;&#964;&#945; &#956;&#8052; &#7956;&#967;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945; &#960;&#959;&#953;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#945;.</span> On account of chap.
xi. 12, it will not do to take <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1505;&#1507;</span> in the
signification of &quot;to snatch away,&quot; &quot;to carry off,&quot; as is done by <i>Hitzig</i>.
Moreover <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1488;&#1505;&#1507;</span> means, indeed, &quot;to be gathered,&quot;
but never &quot;to be carried off&quot; The Mazoreths would read
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488;</span> for <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1493;</span>:
&quot;And that Israel might be gathered to <i>Him</i>.&quot; Thus it is rendered, among the
ancient translators, by <i>Aquila</i> and the Chaldee; while <i>Symmachus</i>,
<i>Theodoret</i>, and the Vulgate express the negation. Most of the modern interpreters
have followed the Mazoreths. But the assumption of several of these, that
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488;</span> is only a different writing for
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1493;</span>, is altogether without foundation, compare
the remarks on chap. ix. 2; and the reading of the Mazoreths is just like all the
<i>Kris</i>, a mere conjecture, owing its origin, as has already been
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 241]</span> remarked by <i>Jerome</i>, only to a bad Jewish
patriotism. The circumstance that, with the sole exception, of 2 Chron. xxx. 3,--an
exception which, from the character of the language of that book, is of no importance--the
verb <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1505;&#1507;</span> in the signification &quot;to gather&quot;
has the person to whom it is gathered never joined to it by means of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span>, but commonly by means of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;</span>, is of so much the greater importance,
that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span> has nothing to do with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;</span>. When <i>Stier</i> remarks that ver. 6,
where Jacob and Israel were again beside each other in a completely parallel clause,
proves that Israel&#39;s gathering can be spoken of positively only, he has overlooked
the essential difference of ver. 5, which refers to the position of the Servant
of God towards the whole people and ver. 6, which refers to His destination for
the <i>election</i>.--The words: &quot;And I am honoured in the eyes of the Lord, and
my God is my strength,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, my protection and helper, recapitulate what,
in ver. 2 and 3, was said about the high dignity of the Servant of God, of which
the effect appears, in ver. 6, in His appointment to be the Saviour of the Gentiles,
after the mission to Israel has been fruitless. In ver. 6, it is not the decree
of the salvation of the Gentiles through Christ which forms the subject (that decree
is an eternal one), but rather that this decree should be carried out. It is for
this that Israel&#39;s unbelief offers an occasion &quot;As the salvation of the elect among
Israel (in reference to the great mass, the Servant of God had laboured in vain,
ver. 4) would be too small a reward for thee, I assign to thee in addition to them,
an infinitely larger inheritance, viz., the whole heathen world.&quot;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1493;&#1489;</span> in <i>Hiphil</i> frequently means &quot;to
lead back,&quot; in the ordinary sense, but sometimes also &quot;to lead back into the former,
or <i>normal</i> condition,&quot; &quot;to restore,&quot; compare remarks on Dan. ix. 25; Ps. lxxx.
4. The parallel, &quot;to raise up,&quot; which is opposed to the <i>lying down</i> (Ps. xli.
9), shows that here it stands in the sense of &quot;to restore.&quot; The local leading back
belongs to the sphere of Koresh, to whom the first book is dedicated; but, with
that, the abnormal condition of misery and abasement, which is so much opposed to
the idea of the people of God, is not completely and truly removed. That which the
Servant of God bestows upon the elect of Israel, viz., <i>raising up and restoration</i>,
is, in substance, the same which, according to what follows, He becomes to the
<i>Gentiles</i>, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 242]</span> viz., <i>light and salvation</i>.
By becoming light and salvation to the elect of Israel, He raises them up and leads
them back, inasmuch as this was the normal, natural condition of the covenant-people,
from which they had only fallen by their sins. It is to that, that the election
is restored by the Servant of God. By the <i>tribes of Jacob</i>, the better part
only of the people is to be understood, to the exclusion of those souls who are
cut off from their people, because they have broken the covenant of the Lord, comp.
ver. 4. This appears from the addition: &quot;And the preserved of Israel&quot; (the <i>Kethibh</i>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1506;&#1497;&#1512;&#1497;</span> is an adjective form with a passive
signification; the marginal reading <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1493;&#1512;&#1497;</span>
is the Part. Pass.); just as, similarly in Ps. lxxiii. 1, Israel is limited to the
true Israel by the explanatory clause: &quot;Such as are of a clean heart.&quot; The verb
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1510;&#1512;</span>, &quot;to watch,&quot; is, according to <i>Gesenius</i>,
especially used <i>de Jehova homines custodiente et tuente.</i> Hence, the preserved
of Israel are those whom God keeps under His gracious protection and care, in contrast
to the great mass of the covenant-breakers whom He <i>gives up</i>. Chap. lxv. 13,
14: &quot;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; behold my servants shall sing for joy of heart, but ye shall cry for sorrow
of heart, and shall howl for vexation of spirit,&quot; likewise points to a great separation
which shall take place in the Messianic time. <i>Light</i> (compare remarks on chap.
xlii. 6), and <i>salvation</i> are related to one another, as the image to the thing
itself From the circumstance that the point here in question is the reward for the
Servant of God, who is to be indemnified for the loss which He suffered by Israel
(comp. ver. 4), it is obvious that we must not explain: &quot;that my salvation be,&quot;
but: &quot;that thou mayest be my salvation;&quot; for it is only when He is the salvation
that such an indemnification is spoken of Moreover, the Infinitive with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span> can here not well be understood otherwise
than in the preceding clause. The servant of God is the personal salvation of the
Lord for the heathen world; comp. chap. xlii. 6, and, in the chapter under consideration,
ver. 8, where He is called the <i>covenant</i> of the people, because this covenant
finds in Him its truth; compare also the expression: &quot;This man is <i>peace</i>,&quot;
in Mic. v. 4 (5). <i>Gesenius</i> rightly remarks, that <span class="pagenum">[Pg
243]</span> there is here an allusion to the promises given to the Patriarchs, Gen.
xii. 3, &amp;c. In Christ, the Shiloh to whom the people adhere, the old promise of
the future extension of salvation to all the Gentiles is to be fulfilled.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 7. &quot;<i>Thus saith the Lord, the Redeemer of Israel, his Holy
One, to Him that is despised by every one, to the abhorrence of the people, to the
servant of rulers: Kings shall see and rise up, princes, and prostrate themselves
because of the Lord that is faithful, the Holy One of Israel that hath chosen thee.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Hitherto, the Servant of the Lord has spoken: here, the Prophet
speaks of Him. He gives a short and comprehensive summary of the contents of ver.
1-6, the rejection of the Servant of God by the people to whom His mission was,
in the first instance, directed, and His appointment to be the Saviour of the Gentiles.
The matter is traced back to the Redeemer of Israel and their Holy One, <i>i.e.</i>,
the high and glorious God, because the Servant of God is, in the first instance,
sent to Israel as <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#953;&#940;&#954;&#959;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#960;&#949;&#961;&#953;&#964;&#959;&#956;&#8134;&#962; &#8017;&#960;&#8050;&#961; &#7936;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#949;&#943;&#945;&#962;
&#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#964;&#8056; &#946;&#949;&#946;&#945;&#953;&#8182;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#964;&#8048;&#962; &#7952;&#960;&#945;&#947;&#947;&#949;&#955;&#943;&#945;&#962; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#960;&#945;&#964;&#941;&#961;&#969;&#957;</span>, Rom. xv. 8; but still more,
because He himself is the concentration of Israel (ver. 3), the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#949;&#966;&#945;&#955;&#8052; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#963;&#974;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#7952;&#954;&#954;&#955;&#951;&#963;&#943;&#945;&#962;</span>, Col. i. 18,--He
in whose glorification the true Israel, as opposed to the darkened refuse, attain
to their right. According to the context, the contempt, &amp;c., must proceed chiefly
<i>from the apostate portion of the covenant-people</i>: The <i>princes and kings</i>
must, according to ver. 6 (comp. chap. lii. 15), be conceived of as heathenish ones.
The verse under consideration merely exhibits, in short outlines, the contrast already
alluded to in the preceding context. It cannot appear at all strange that the Prophet
foresees the reproach of Christ, and His sufferings from the ungodly world. In those
Psalms which refer to the suffering righteous one, righteousness and the hostility
of the wicked world are represented as being inseparably connected with each other.
Hence it cannot be conceived of otherwise, but that the Servant of God, who, in<!--deleted dupl. 'in'-->
His person, represented the <i>ideal</i> of righteousness, should, in a very special
manner, have been liable to this hostility. Moreover, it can be proved that, in
some Psalms which refer to the suffering righteous one, David has, besides the individual
and the whole people, in view, at the same time, his own <span class="pagenum">[Pg
244]</span> family, and Him in whom it was to centre; comp. my commentary on Ps.
Vol. iii. p. lxxx. ff. There seems here to be a special reference to Ps. xxii. 7,
8: &quot;And I am a worm and no man, a reproach of man and despised of the people. All
they that see me laugh me to scorn, open their lips, shake their heads;&quot; and it
is the more natural to assume this reference that, in chap. lii. 14; liii. 3, this
passage also is referred to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1468;&#1456;&#1494;&#1465;&#1492;</span> is, after
the example of <i>Kimchi</i>, viewed by several interpreters as an infinitive form
standing in place of a Noun, &quot;despising or contemning,&quot; instead of &quot;contempt,&quot; and
this again instead of &quot;object of contempt.&quot; Others view it as the <i>Stat. construct.</i>
of an adjective <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1468;&#1464;&#1494;&#1465;&#1492;</span> with a passive signification.
This latter view is more natural; and the reason which <i>Stier</i> adduces against
it, viz., that of verbs <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1492;</span> no such forms are
found, cannot be considered as conclusive. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1494;&#1492;&#1470;&#1504;&#1508;&#1513;</span>,
literally the &quot;despised one of the <i>soul</i>&quot; might, according to Ezek. xxxvi.
5: &quot;Against Edom who have taken my land into their possession with the joy of all
their heart, with the contempt of their soul,&quot; mean, &quot;who is inwardly and deeply
despised,&quot; the soul being viewed as the seat of the affections. But we are led to
another explanation by the fundamental passage, Ps. xxii. 7, and by the circumstance
that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1508;&#1513;</span> is <i>here</i> parallel to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1493;&#1497;</span>, and that the latter corresponds to the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;</span> in Ps. xxii. &quot;The despised one of the soul&quot;
must, accordingly, be he who is despised of every one. The soul corresponding to
<i>man</i> in Ps. xxii. is, as it were, conceived of as a great concrete body. In
a similar manner, &quot;soul&quot; is used for all that has a soul, in Gen. xiv. 21, where
the king of Sodom says to Abraham: &quot;Give me the <i>soul</i>, and take the goods
to thyself.&quot;--&quot;<i>To the abhorrence of the people.</i>&quot;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1506;&#1489;</span> in <i>Piel</i> never has another signification
than &quot;to abhor.&quot; Such is the signification in Job ix. 31 also, where the clothes
abhor Job plunged in the dirt, resist being put on by him; likewise in Ezek. xv.
25, where Judah abhors his beauty, disgracefully tramples under feet his glory,
as if he hated it. In favour of the signification: &quot;To cause to abhor&quot; (<i>Rödiger</i>:
<i>horrorem incutiens populo, qui abominationi est populo</i>), interpreters cannot
adduce even one apparent passage, except that before us. We are, therefore, only
at liberty to explain, after the example of <i>Kimchi</i>: &quot;to the ... people abhorring,&quot;
<i>i.e.</i>, to him against whom the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 245]</span> people
feel an abhorrence. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1493;&#1497;</span><!--see 1856 ed, p 244-->
is used of the Jewish people in Is. i. 4 also. <i>Hofmann</i> is of opinion that
it ought to have the article, if it were to refer to the Jewish people. But no one
asserts a direct reference to them; it designates, in itself, the mass only, in
contrast to single individuals, just as <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;</span>
in Ps. xxii. The abhorrence is felt by the masses--is popular. The fact that it
is among Israel that the Servant of God meets this general abhorrence, is not implied
in the word itself, but is suggested by the whole context. While
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1508;&#1513;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1493;&#1497;</span>
designate the generality of this hatred, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1500;&#1497;&#1501;</span>
points to the highest places of it. Of heathen rulers this word occurs in chap.
xiv. 5; of native rulers, in chap. lii. 5; xxviii. 14. The heathen rulers can here
come into consideration, in so far only as they are the instruments of the native
ones; comp. John xix. 10: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#955;&#941;&#947;&#949;&#953; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#8001; &#928;&#953;&#955;&#8118;&#964;&#959;&#962;· &#7952;&#956;&#959;&#8054;
&#959;&#8016; &#955;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#8150;&#962;; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#959;&#7990;&#948;&#945;&#962; &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#7952;&#958;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#7956;&#967;&#969; &#963;&#964;&#945;&#965;&#961;&#8182;&#963;&#945;&#943; &#963;&#949; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#958;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#7956;&#967;&#969; &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#955;&#8166;&#963;&#945;&#943; &#963;&#949;</span>
The <i>servant of rulers</i> forms the contrast to the servant of the Lord. But
in the words: &quot;Kings shall see,&quot; &amp;c., it is described how the original dignity finally
breaks forth powerfully, and reacts against the momentary humiliation. It was especially
at the crucifixion that Christ presented himself as &quot;He that was despised by every
one, as the abhorrence of the people, as the servant of rulers.&quot; The historical
commentary on these words we have in Matt. xxii. 39 ff.:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#7985; &#948;&#949; &#960;&#945;&#961;&#945;&#960;&#959;&#961;&#949;&#965;&#8057;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#953; &#7956;&#946;&#955;&#945;&#963;&#966;&#8053;&#956;&#959;&#965;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#954;.&#964;.&#955;. &#8001;&#956;&#959;&#943;&#969;&#962;
&#948;&#8051; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#959;&#7985; &#7936;&#961;&#967;&#953;&#949;&#961;&#949;&#8150;&#962; &#7952;&#956;&#960;&#945;&#943;&#950;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#956;&#949;&#964;&#8048; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#947;&#961;&#945;&#956;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#941;&#969;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#961;&#949;&#963;&#946;&#965;&#964;&#941;&#961;&#969;&#957; &#7956;&#955;&#949;&#947;&#959;&#957;· &#7940;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#965;&#962;
&#7956;&#963;&#969;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#954;.&#964;.&#955;. &#964;&#8056; &#948;&#8125; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#959;&#7985; &#955;&#8131;&#963;&#964;&#945;&#8054; &#959;&#7985; &#963;&#965;&#963;&#964;&#945;&#965;&#961;&#969;&#952;&#941;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#8032;&#957;&#949;&#943;&#948;&#953;&#950;&#959;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#972;&#957;.</span>--After
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1512;&#1488;&#1493;</span> &quot;they shall see,&quot; the object must be
supplied from ver. 6, viz., the brilliant turn which, under the Lord&#39;s direction.
His destiny shall take,--His being constituted the light and salvation of the Gentiles.
The kings who sit on their thrones rise up; the nobles who stand around the throne
prostrate themselves. The Servant of God is the concentration of Israel, ver. 3.
Hence His glorification is, at the close, once more traced back to the <i>Holy One
of Israel</i>; and that so much the rather, because the glorification which is bestowed
upon Him is bestowed upon Him for the benefit of the Congregation, whom He elevates
along with himself out of the condition of deep abasement; comp. vers. 8 and 9.
The verse before us forms the germ of that which, in chap. lii. 13, is carried out
and expanded.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 246]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 8. &quot;<i>Thus saith the Lord: In the time of favour have I
heard thee, and in the day of salvation have I helped thee; and I will preserve
thee, and give thee for the Covenant of the people, that thou mayest raise up the
land, divide desolate heritages.</i> Ver. 9. <i>That thou mayest say to the prisoners:
Go forth; to them that are in darkness: Come to light; they shall feed in the ways,
and on all bare hills shall be their pasture.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal"><i>The time of favour</i> may be either the time when God shows
His delight in, and favour to His Servant, and, in Him, to the Church, <i>q. d.</i>,
of delight in thee, mercy for thee,--in which case chap. lx. 10 would be parallel:
&quot;In my <i>wrath</i> I smote thee, and in my favour have I had mercy on thee;&quot; or,
&quot;in the time of favour,&quot; may be equivalent to: &quot;at the agreeable, acceptable time&quot;
(LXX., which Paul follows in 2 Cor. vi. 1, 2, <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#953;&#961;&#8183;
&#948;&#949;&#954;&#964;&#8183;</span>, Vulg. <i>tempore placito</i>); in contrast to a preceding unacceptable
time, in which the Lord seemed to have forsaken His Servant, in which it appeared
as if He had laboured in vain, and spent His strength for nought and vanity. Acceptable
is the time to all parties, not only to the Servant of God, but also to those who
are to be redeemed through Him; and not less to God, to whom it is a joy to pour
out upon His Servant the rivers of His salvation. The Preterites in ver. 8 must
be viewed as prophetic Preterites. Concerning &quot;Covenant of the people,&quot; compare
remarks on chap. xlii. 6. The idea of the people is more closely defined and qualified
by ver. 6 and 7. The souls who have been cut off from their people, because they
have broken the covenant of the Lord, and despised His Servant, are justly passed
by. But since <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;</span> can here be understood of
the better portion of the people only, of the invisible Church in the midst of the
visible, the Servant of God cannot be the better portion of the people.--In the
words: &quot;That thou mayest raise up the land, divide desolate heritages,&quot; the bestowal
of salvation is described under the image of the restoration of a devastated country.
In ver. 9, the misery of the Congregation of God is described under the image of
pining away in a dark prison; comp. remarks on chap. xlii. 7. With the second half
of the verse, there begins a more general description of the glorious salvation
which the Lord will giant to His people; and the person of the Mediator
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 247]</span> steps into the back-ground, in order afterwards
to come forth more prominently. The <i>ways</i> and <i>bare hills</i> have come
into consideration as places which, in themselves, are completely barren, and which
the wonderful grace of God can alone cause to bud and flourish.</p>
<br>
<br>
<h2><a name="div2_247" href="#div2Ref_247">CHAPTER L. 4-11.</a></h2>
<p class="normal">The Servant of God here also appears as speaking. In ver. 4, He
intimates His vocation: God has bestowed upon Him the gift of comforting those who
are weary and heavy laden. He then at once turns to His real subject,--the sufferings
which, in fulfilment of this vocation he has to endure. The Lord has inwardly manifested
to Him that, in the exercise of His office. He shall experience severe trials; and
willingly has He borne all these sufferings, all the ignominy and shame, ver. 5,
6. With this willingness and fortitude He is inspired by His firm confidence in
the Lord, who, he certainly knows, will help Him and destroy His enemies, ver. 7-9.
The conclusion, in ver. 10 and 11, forms the prophetic announcement of the different
fates of the two opposing parties among the people. At the foundation of this lies
the foresight of heavy afflictions which, after the appearance of the Servant of
God, will be laid upon the covenant-people. That portion of the people who are devoted
to the Servant of God, are told to hope in the midst of the misery, and may hope;
their sorrows shall be turned into joy. But the ungodly who, without regarding the
Lord, and without hearkening to His Servant, would help themselves, will bring destruction
upon themselves by their self-willed doings, and shall be visited by the avenging
hand of the Servant of God.</p>
<p class="normal">An intimation of the lowliness of Christ at His first appearance
occurs as early as in chap. xi. 1. In chap. xlii. 4, the words: &quot;He shall not fail
nor run away,&quot; intimate that the Servant of God has to struggle with great obstacles
and difficulties in the exercise of His calling. According to chap. xlix. 4, He
will labour in vain among the great mass of the covenant-people,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 248]</span> and spend his strength for nought and vanity.
In ver. 7, it is expressly intimated that severe sufferings shall be inflicted upon
Him by the people. That which was there alluded to, is here <i>carried out and expanded</i>.
But the suffering of the Servant of God is here described from that aspect only
which is common to Christ with His members. It is first in chap. liii. that its
vicarious power is pointed out. The Servant of God comes here before us in His deepest
humiliation. Even in the description of His vocation in ver. 4, the most unassuming
aspect, the prophetic office only, is brought forward. It is only quite at the close
that a gentle intimation is given of the glory concealed behind the lowliness: He
there appears as the judge of those who have rejected Him.</p>
<p class="normal">In the Messianic explanation of this Section, the Lord himself
has gone before His Church. We read in Luke xviii. 31, 32,
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#945;&#961;&#945;&#955;&#945;&#946;&#8060;&#957; &#948;&#8050; &#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#948;&#974;&#948;&#949;&#954;&#945; &#949;&#7990;&#960;&#949; &#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#973;&#962;· &#7984;&#948;&#959;&#8058; &#7936;&#957;&#945;&#946;&#945;&#943;&#957;&#959;&#956;&#949;&#957;
&#949;&#7984;&#962; &#7992;&#949;&#961;&#959;&#963;&#8057;&#955;&#965;&#956;&#945; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#949;&#955;&#949;&#963;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#945; &#964;&#8048; &#947;&#949;&#947;&#961;&#945;&#956;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#945; &#948;&#953;&#8048; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#966;&#951;&#964;&#8182;&#957; &#964;&#8183; &#965;&#7985;&#8183; &#964;&#959;&#8166;
&#7936;&#957;&#952;&#961;&#974;&#960;&#959;&#965;· &#960;&#945;&#961;&#945;&#948;&#959;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#964;&#959;&#8150;&#962; &#7956;&#952;&#957;&#949;&#963;&#953; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#956;&#960;&#945;&#953;&#967;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#8017;&#946;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#956;&#960;&#964;&#965;&#963;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#956;&#945;&#963;&#964;&#953;&#947;&#974;&#963;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#954;&#964;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#8166;&#963;&#953;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#972;&#957;.</span> There cannot be any doubt that the
Lord here distinctly refers to ver. 6 of the prophecy under consideration. There
is, at all events, no other passage in the whole of the Old Testament, except that
before us, in which there is any mention made of being spat upon. But in other respects,
too, the reference is visible: &quot;I gave my back to the smiters (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#945;&#963;&#964;&#953;&#947;&#974;&#963;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962;</span>,
LXX. <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#949;&#7984;&#962; &#956;&#945;&#963;&#964;&#953;&#947;&#945;&#962;</span>), and my cheeks to those
plucking (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#956;&#960;&#945;&#953;&#967;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span>--the plucking of the
beard, an act of degrading wantonness), my face I hid not from shame (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8017;&#946;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#952;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span>)
and spitting.&quot; <i>Bengel</i> draws attention to the fact of how highly Christ, in
the passage quoted, placed the prophecy of the Old Testament: &quot;Jesus most highly
valued that which was written. The word of God which is contained in Scripture is
the rule for all which is to happen, even for that which is to happen in eternal
life.&quot; If, in respect of the high estimation of prophecy, our age were to follow
in the steps of Jesus, it would also most readily agree with Him as regards the
subject of the prophecy before us. This alone is the cause of the aberration from
Him, that people confined and shut up the prophet within the horizon of his time,
and then imagined that he could not know anything of the suffering of Christ. It
was altogether different in the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 249]</span> ancient Christian
Church. In it, the Messianic interpretation prevailed throughout; and <i>Grotius</i>,
who in a lower sense would refer the prophecy to Isaiah, and, in a higher sense
only, to Christ, met with general opposition, even on the part of <i>Clericus</i>.</p>
<p class="normal">In favour of the Messianic explanation there is the remarkable
agreement existing between prophecy and fulfilment, comp. Matt. xxvi. 67, 68:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#932;&#972;&#964;&#949; &#7952;&#957;&#941;&#960;&#964;&#965;&#963;&#945;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#964;&#8056; &#960;&#961;&#972;&#963;&#969;&#960;&#959;&#957; &#8049;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166;<!--see 1856 ed; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166;-->
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#954;&#959;&#955;&#940;&#966;&#953;&#963;&#945;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#972;&#957;, &#927;&#7985; &#948;&#8050; &#7952;&#8164;&#8165;&#940;&#960;&#953;&#963;&#945;&#957; &#955;&#941;&#947;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962;· &#960;&#961;&#959;&#966;&#942;&#964;&#949;&#965;&#963;&#959;&#957; &#7969;&#956;&#8150;&#957;, &#967;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#941;, &#964;&#943;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#953;&#957;
&#8001; &#960;&#945;&#943;&#963;&#945;&#962; &#963;&#949;</span>; xxvii. 30: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#956;&#960;&#964;&#973;&#963;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#949;&#7984;&#962;
&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#7956;&#955;&#945;&#946;&#959;&#957; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#940;&#955;&#945;&#956;&#959;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7956;&#964;&#965;&#960;&#964;&#959;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#954;&#949;&#966;&#945;&#955;&#8052;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166;</span>,--an agreement,
the significance and importance of which are only enhanced by the circumstance that
one of the most individualizing features of the prophecy, viz., the plucking off
of the beard, is not met with in the history of Christ; for it is just thereby that
this agreement is proved to be a free and spontaneous one. <i>Farther</i>--The exactness
with which, in ver. 10 and 11, the destinies of Israel, after the rejection of Christ,
are drawn; and the destruction which the mass of the people, who did not believe
in the Servant of God, prepared for themselves, by their attempts to help themselves
by their own strength, by enkindling the flame of war, whilst those who fear the
Lord and listen to the voice of Hs Servant, obtain salvation. <i>Farther</i>--Ver.
11, where the Servant of God ascribes to himself the judgment upon the unbelieving
mass of the people: &quot;From <i>my</i> hand is this to you,&quot; in harmony with Matt.
xxvi. 64 and other passages, where the Son of Man appears as executing judgment
upon Jerusalem. <i>Finally</i>--The parallel passages.</p>
<p class="normal">Most of the modern interpreters assume that the Prophet himself,
Isaiah, or Pseudo-Isaiah, is the subject of the prophecy. <i>Jerome</i> mentions
that this explanation was the prevailing one among the Jews of his time. The explanation
which refers it to the better portion of the people, found only one defender, viz.,
<i>Paulus</i>. The explanation which refers it to the <i>whole</i> of the Jewish
people, or to the collective body of the prophets, has been entirely abandoned,
although it is maintained in reference to the parallel passages.</p>
<p class="normal">Since it is undeniable that this Section is related to the other
prophecies which treat of the Servant of God,--and hence an identity of subject
is necessarily required--those who, in the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 250]</span>
Section under consideration, are compelled to give up their former hypothesis, themselves
bear witness against the correctness of it, at the same time, also against the soundness
of their explanation of the passage before us. For an explanation which compels
to the severance of what is necessarily connected, cannot be right and true. It
is only then that Exegesis has attained its object, when it has arrived at a subject
in whom all those features, which occur in the single prophecies which are connected
with each other, are found at the same time. <i>Knobel</i>, in saying: &quot;This small
unconnected Section, is the only one in the whole collection, in which the Prophet
speaks of himself only, and represents his suffering&#39;s and hopes,&quot; has thereby himself
pronounced judgment upon his own interpretation of this Section, and at the same
time, of the other prophecies of the Servant of God.</p>
<p class="normal">Moreover, the Prophet would here form rather a strange figure;
he would appear as it were, as if he had been blown in by a snow-storm. According
to <i>Hofmann</i>, he describes how he is rewarded for his activity and zeal in
his vocation. But how does this suit the contents of the second part, which evidently
is a whole, the single parts of which must stand in a close relation to its fundamental
idea! <i>It is only a person of central importance that is suitable to this context.</i>
It is only when we refer it to Christ, that the expectations are satisfied which
were called forth by the words: Comfort ye, comfort ye my people. This call is answered
only by pointing to the future Saviour of the world.</p>
<p class="normal">One element of truth, indeed, there is in the explanation which
makes the Prophet the subject. It is revealed to him, indeed, that the Servant of
God shall undergo persecution, shame, and ignominy; but he has the natural substratum
for this knowledge in the experience of himself and his colleagues, comp. Matt.
xxiii. 29-37; Heb. xi. 36, 37. The divine, wherever it enters into the world of
sin, as well as the servant of truth who upholds it in the face of prevailing falsehood,
must undergo struggles, shame, and ignominy. This truth was confirmed in the case
of the prophets as types, in the case of Christ as the antitype. All that which
the prophets had to experience in their own cases was a prophecy by deeds of the
sufferings of Christ; and we should the less have any difficulty
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 251]</span> in admitting their knowledge of this, that
it would be rather strange if they were destitute of such knowledge.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. &quot;<i>The Lord Jehovah hath given me a disciples tongue,
that I should know to help the weary with a word: He awakeneth morning by morning,
wakeneth mine ear, that I may hear as the disciples.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The greater number of expositors explain a disciple&#39;s tongue by:
&quot;A tongue such as instructed people or scholars possess,--an eloquent tongue.&quot; But
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1502;&#1491;</span>, everywhere else in Isaiah, means &quot;pupil,&quot;
&quot;disciple,&quot; and is used especially of the disciples of the Lord, those who go to
His school, are instructed by Him; comp. chaps. viii. 16; liv. 13. A disciple&#39;s
tongue is such as the disciples of the Lord possess. Its foundation is formed by
the disciple&#39;s <i>ear</i> mentioned at the close of the verse. He who hears the
Lord&#39;s words, speaks also the Lord&#39;s words. The signification, &quot;learned,&quot; is not
suitable in the last clause of the verse, and its reference to the first does not
permit of our assuming a different signification in either clause. Just as here
the Servant of God traces back to God that which He speaks, so Jesus says, in John
viii. 26: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#8064;&#947;&#8060; &#7939; &#7972;&#954;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#945; &#960;&#945;&#961;&#700; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#964;&#945;&#8166;&#964;&#945; &#955;&#945;&#955;&#8182; &#949;&#7984;&#962;
&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#972;&#963;&#956;&#959;&#957;</span>, comp. iii. 34: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8003;&#957; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#7936;&#960;&#941;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#953;&#955;&#949;&#957;
&#8001; &#952;&#949;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#8048; &#8165;&#942;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#945; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166; &#955;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#8150;</span>. The verb <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1505;&#1502;&#1498;</span>, which occurs only here, means, according to the Arabic, &quot;to help,&quot; &quot;to
support;&quot; <i>Aquila</i>: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8017;&#960;&#959;&#963;&#964;&#951;&#961;&#8055;&#963;&#945;&#953;</span>, Vulg.
<i>sustentare</i>. Like other similar verbs, <i>e.g.</i>,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1505;&#1502;&#1498;</span>, in Gen. xxvii. 37, it is construed with
a double accusative: &quot;that I may help the weary, word,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, may support
him by comforting words. The weary or fatigued are, like the bent reed, the faintly
burning wick, in chap. xlii. 3; the blind, the prisoners sitting in darkness, <i>
ibid.</i>, ver. 7; the broken-hearted, chap. lxi. 1; them that mourn, <i>ibid.</i>,
ver. 2. Just as here the Servant of God represents the suffering and afflicted ones
as the main objects of His mission, so Christ announces, that His mission is specially
directed to these, comp. <i>e.g.</i>, Matt. v. 4; xi. 28. In order to be able to
fulfil this mission. He must be able to draw from the fulness of God, who looketh
to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, chap. lxvi. 2, and who alone understands
to heal the broken in heart, and to bind up their wounds, Ps. cxlvii. 3.--In the
words: &quot;He wakeneth, &amp;c.&quot; we are told in what manner the Lord gives to His Servant
the disciple&#39;s tongue. <i>To waken</i> <span class="pagenum">[Pg 252]</span> <i>
the ear</i> is equivalent to: to make attentive, to make ready for the reception
of the divine communications. The expression &quot;morning by morning&quot; indicates that
the divine wakening is going on uninterruptedly, and that the Servant of God unreservedly
surrenders himself to the influences which come from above, in which He has become
an example to us.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 5. &quot;<i>The Lord Jehovah hath opened mine ear, and I was not
rebellious, and have not turned back.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The phrases &quot;to open or uncover the ear&quot; have always the signification,
&quot;to make known something to some one,&quot; &quot;to reveal to him something.&quot; &quot;to inform
him,&quot; both in ordinary circumstances (comp. 1 Sam. xx. 12; Ruth iv. 4), and on the
religious territory, comp. 2 Sam. vii. 27: &quot;For thou, Lord of Hosts, God of Israel,
hast opened the ear of thy servant, saying: I will build thee an house;&quot; Isa. xlviii.
8: &quot;Thou heardest not, thou knewest not, nor was formerly thine ear opened;&quot; chap.
xlii. 20: &quot;The ear was opened to him.&quot; According to this well established <i>usus
loquendi</i>, &quot;The Lord hath opened mine ear,&quot; can only mean: The Lord hath revealed
to me, hath informed me inwardly; <i>Abenezra</i>:
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1500;&#1492; &#1505;&#1493;&#1491;&#1493; &#1500;&#1497;</span> &quot;He has made known to me His secret.&quot;
What the Lord has made known to His Servant, we are not here expressly told; but
it may be inferred from ver. 6, where the Servant declares that which, in consequence
of the divine manifestation, He did, viz., that He should give His back to the smiters,
&amp;c. The words: &quot;The Lord hath opened mine ear&quot; here are connected with: &quot;The Lord
wakeneth mine ear, that I may hear,&quot; in the preceding verse: The Lord has specially
made known to me that, in carrying out my vocation, I shall have to endure severe
sufferings. <i>To this subject the Servant of God quickly passes over, after having,
in the introduction, described, by a few features, the vocation, in the carrying
out of which these sufferings should befal Him.</i> As the authors of these sufferings,
we must conceive of the party opposed to the weary, viz., the proud, secure, unbroken
sinners. On &quot;I was not rebellious,&quot; compare what, in Deut. xxi. 20, is written of
the stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father; and farther,
the words: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#955;&#8052;&#957; &#959;&#8016;&#967; &#8033;&#962; &#7952;&#947;&#8060; &#952;&#941;&#955;&#969; &#7936;&#955;&#955;&#700; &#8033;&#962; &#963;&#973;</span>,
Matt. xxvi. 39.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 253]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 6. &quot;<i>I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to the
pluckers, I hid not my face from shame and spitting.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The words express in an individualizing manner the thought, that
the Servant of God, in His vocation as the Saviour of the <i>personae miserabiles</i>,
would experience the most shameful and ignominious treatment, and would patiently
bear it. In God&#39;s providence, part of the contents was literally fulfilled upon
Christ. But the fact that this literal agreement is not the main point, but that
it serves as a hint and indication only of the far more important <i>substantial</i>
conformity which would take place, although the hatred of the world against the
Saviour of the poor and afflicted should have manifested itself in forms altogether
different,--this fact is evident from the circumstance that regarding the fulfilment
of the words: &quot;and my cheeks to the pluckers&quot;--plucking the cheeks, or plucking
off of the beard being the greatest insult and disgrace in the East, comp. 2 Sam.
x. 4--there is no mention in the New Testament history.</p>
<p class="normal">In vers. 7-9 we have the future glory, which makes it easy for
the Servant of God to bear the sufferings of the Present. If God be for Him, who
may be against Him?</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 7. &quot;<i>But the Lord Jehovah helpeth me, therefore I am not
confounded, therefore I make my face like a flint, and I know that I am not put
to shame.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal"><span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1499;&#1500;&#1502;&#1514;&#1497;</span> refers to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1500;&#1502;&#1493;&#1514;</span> in the preceding verse. He whom the
Lord helps is not confounded or put to shame by all the ignominy which the world
heaps upon him. The expression: &quot;I make my face like a flint&quot; denotes the &quot;holy
hardness of perseverance&quot; (<i>Stier</i>); comp. Ezek. iii. 8. In that passage it
is especially the assailing hardness which comes into consideration; here, on the
contrary, it is the suffering one. There is an allusion to the passage before us,
in Luke ix. 51: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#947;&#941;&#957;&#949;&#964;&#959; &#948;&#8050; &#964;&#8183; &#963;&#965;&#956;&#960;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#959;&#8166;&#963;&#952;&#945;&#953; &#964;&#8048;&#962; &#7969;&#956;&#941;&#961;&#945;&#962;
&#964;&#8134;&#962; &#7936;&#957;&#945;&#955;&#942;&#968;&#949;&#969;&#962; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166;, &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#8056; &#960;&#961;&#972;&#963;&#969;&#960;&#959;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#942;&#961;&#953;&#958;&#949; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#960;&#959;&#961;&#949;&#973;&#949;&#963;&#952;&#945;&#953; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#7993;&#949;&#961;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#945;&#955;&#942;&#956;.</span></p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 8. &quot;<i>He is near that justifieth me; who will contend with
one? Let us stand together; who has a right upon me, let him come near me.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">In the confidence and assurance of Christ, His redeemed ones,
too, partake,--those that hear the voice of the Servant of God, ver. 10, comp. Rom.
viii. 33, 34, where this and the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 254]</span> following
verse are intentionally alluded to. The justification is one by <i>deeds</i>. It
took place and was fulfilled, in the first instance, in the resurrection and glorification
of Christ, and, then, in the destruction of Jerusalem.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;
&#1502;&#1513;&#1508;&#1496;&#1497;</span> literally, &quot;the master of my right,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, he who according
to his opinion or assertion which, by the issue is proved to be false, has a right
over me, comp. the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#957; &#7952;&#956;&#959;&#8054; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7956;&#967;&#949;&#953; &#959;&#8020;&#948;&#941;&#957;</span> which,
in John xiv. 30, the Lord says in reference to the chief of His enemies.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 9. &quot;<i>Behold the Lord Jehovah will help me; who is he that
shall condemn me? Lo, they shall wax old as a garment, the moth shall eat them.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">That which is said herein reference to the enemies of Christ is,
in chap. li. 8, with a reference to our passage, said of the opponents of those
who know righteousness, and in whose heart is the law: &quot;The moth shall eat them
up like a garment.&quot; Enmity to Christ and His Church is, to those who entertain it,
a prophecy of sure destruction. The words: &quot;The moth shall eat them,&quot; are farther
expanded in ver. 11, where it is described how the people who ventured to <i>condemn</i>
the Servant of God, become a prey to destruction.</p>
<p class="normal">The Servant of God closes with a double address; first, to the
godly; and then, to the ungodly.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 10. &quot;<i>Who is among you that feareth the Lord, that obeyeth
the word of His Servant? When he walketh in darkness, in which there is no light
to him, let him trust in the name of the Lord, and stay upon his God.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">From the words: &quot;Of mine hand,&quot; in ver. 11, it appears that the
Servant of God is continuing the discourse. Hence &quot;the voice of His Servant,&quot; <i>
q.d.</i>, the voice of me who am His Servant. By the words: &quot;Among you,&quot; the address
is directed to the whole of the people. In this two parties are distinguished. The
first is formed by those who fear the Lord, and obey the voice of His Servant. Both
of these things appear as indissolubly connected. The fear of God must necessarily
prove itself in this, that He whom He has sent is obeyed. It is a mere imagination
on the part of the people to think that they can fear God without obeying the voice
of His Servant; comp. John v. 23. There is in this an allusion to the emphatic &quot;Unto
him ye shall hearken,&quot; which, in Deut. xviii. 15, had been said in reference to
<i>the</i> Prophet. <span class="pagenum">[Pg 255]</span> From ver. 11 it appears
that the darkness in which those walk who fear the Lord, is not to be understood
of personal individual calamity which befals this or that godly one, nor of the
sufferings which happen to the pious godly <i>party</i>, in contrast to the ungodly
wicked, but rather that we have before us the foresight of a dark period of sufferings
which, after the appearance of the Servant of God, shall be inflicted upon the whole
people; so that both of the parties,--that devoted to the Servant of God, and that
opposed to Him,--are thereby affected, but with a different issue. For in ver. 11,
it is described how the ungodly, who likewise walk in darkness, endeavour to light
up their darkness by a fire which they have kindled, but do so to their own destruction.
Behind the exhortation: &quot;Let him trust in the name of the Lord, and stay upon his
God,&quot; there is concealed the promise: he <i>may</i> trust, his darkness shall be
changed into light, his sorrow into joy. When the destruction of Jerusalem approached,
the cry came to believing Israel: &quot;Lift up your heads, for your redemption draweth
nigh,&quot; Luke xxi. 28. In the destruction of apostate Israel, not obeying the Servant
of God, but persecuting His faithful ones, they beheld the beginning of the victory
of the true people of God over the world.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 11. &quot;<i>Behold all ye that kindle a fire, that gird sparks,--walk
in the light of your fire, and in the sparks that ye have kindled. From mine hand
is this to you; ye shall lie down in pain.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The image begun in the preceding verse is continued. The pious
walk in confidence and patience through the lightless darkness, until the Lord kindles
a light to them. Those who do not hear the Lord, who do <i>not</i> obey the voice
of His Servant, kindle a fire which is to light up their darkness; but instead of
that, they are consumed by the fire. Thus the Servant of God, who brings this destruction
upon them, obtains His right upon them.--The <i>fire</i> is often in Scripture the
fire of war, chap. ix. 18; Jer. li. 5; Rev. viii. 7-10. According to several interpreters
(<i>Hitzig</i>, <i>Ewald</i>, <i>Knobel</i>), it is assumed that the discourse is
here not of &quot;self-assistance by rebellion,&quot; but &quot;of the attacks of the wicked upon
the godly, and of the destruction, into which these attacks turn out for their authors.&quot;
But this view is opposed by the circumstance that the darkness
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 256]</span> is common to both parties; hence, it must
come from some other quarter. The fire which the wicked kindle is destined to enlighten
the darkness in which they also are, which is especially evident from the words:
&quot;Walk in the <i>light</i> of your fire.&quot; They now have a light which enlightens
their darkness; but this self-created light consumes them.--To <i>gird</i> stands
for, &quot;to surround one&#39;s self with a girdle,&quot; &quot;to put on a girdle.&quot; In substance
it is equivalent &quot;to provide one&#39;s self with it.&quot;--The
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7941;&#960;&#945;&#958; &#955;&#949;&#947;&#8057;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#957;</span>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1494;&#1497;&#1511;&#1493;&#1514;</span> cannot with certainty be explained from
the dialects. The connection and parallelism are in favour of the signification
&quot;sparks,&quot; &quot;flames,&quot; which is found as early as in the Septuagint (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#966;&#955;&#8057;&#947;&#945;</span>),
and Vulg. (<i>flammas</i>). In Syriac <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1494;&#1497;&#1511;&#1488;</span>
has the signification &quot;lightning.&quot; Those who explain it by &quot;fiery darts&quot; are not
at liberty to refer it to the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1494;&#1511;&#1497;&#1501;</span> in Prov.
xxvi. 18. The signification &quot;flames&quot; (not &quot;sparks,&quot; as <i>Stier</i> holds), is,
in that passage, quite suitable; simple arrows could there not be mentioned after
the fiery darts without making the discourse feeble.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1499;&#1493;</span>
&quot;walk ye,&quot; is equivalent to: &quot;ye shall walk,&quot; yet with an intimation of the fact
that this result, as we are immediately afterwards expressly told, proceeds from
the speaker: <i>sic volo, sic jubeo.</i> The words: &quot;From mine hand is this to you,&quot;
are, by those who make the Prophet the subject of this prediction, supposed to be
spoken by Jehovah. But throughout the whole section, the Lord is always only spoken
of, and never appears as speaking. The words are in harmony with the exalted dignity
which, elsewhere also, is attributed by the Prophet to the Servant of God who plants
the heavens, and lays the foundation of the earth, chap. li. 16; whose mouth the
Lord makes like a sharp sword, chap. xlix. 2; who is the personal salvation, the
Saviour for the whole earth, chap. xlix. 6; and the embodied Covenant for the covenant-people,
chaps. xlii. 6; xlix. 8. The last passages, especially, are of no small importance.
The saving and judging activity go hand in hand, and cannot be separated. We have
here thus the Old Testament beginnings and preparation for the doctrine of the New
Testament, that the Father has given all judgment to the Son, The Servant of God,
in the highest sense, is Lord and judge of the fellow servants.--The
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span> in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1502;&#1506;&#1510;&#1489;&#1492;</span>
serves for designating the condition: so that you belong to pain,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1499;&#1489;</span> occurs in <span class="pagenum">[Pg 257]</span>
chap. xliii. 17 of the Egyptians lying down; comp. Ps. xli. 9: &quot;He that <i>lieth</i>
shall rise up no more.&quot; In the announcement that Israel&#39;s attempt to help themselves
would turn out to their destruction, the Song of Solomon, in chap. iii. 1-3; v.
7, has preceded our Prophet: &quot;The daughter of Zion, in her restlessness, endeavours
to bring about, by worldly, rebellious doings, the Messianic salvation. It is in
vain; what she is seeking she does not find, but the heavenly watchmen find her.&quot;</p>
<h3><a name="div2_257" href="#div2Ref_257">CHAPTER LI. 1-16.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">Ver. 1. &quot;<i>And I put my words in thy mouth, and cover thee in
the shadow of mine hand, that thou mayest plant the heaven and lay the foundation
of the earth, and say unto Zion: Thou art my people.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The discourse in chap. li. to lii. 12 is not addressed to the
whole of Israel, but to the <i>election</i>. They are, in chap. li. 1, called those
that follow after righteousness, that seek the Lord; in ver. 7, those who know righteousness,
in whose heart is the law of the Lord. These the Prophet seeks to comfort and strengthen
by pointing to the future glorious mercies of the Lord.</p>
<p class="normal">The Section chap. li. 4-8 comforts the elect by the coming of
the salvation, by the dominion of the people of God over the whole world; points
to the foundation of these successes, viz., the eternity of the salvation and righteousness
for the Church; and exhorts them that, having this eternal salvation before them,
they might patiently bear the temporal reproach of the world given over to destruction.</p>
<p class="normal">In vers. 9-11, the Church calls upon the Lord to do as He had
promised; and this prayer, founded upon His almighty love, which in times past had
so gloriously manifested itself, passes over, at the close, into hope and confidence.</p>
<p class="normal">In vers. 12-16 follows the answer of the Lord, who exhorts the
Church to be stedfast, by reminding her that her opponents are weak mortals, while
the omnipotent God is her protector; and announces that, with the same omnipotence
which He manifests in nature, He would soon bring about her deliverance,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 258]</span> and that Ho would do so by His Servant, in
whom all His promises should be Yea and Amen, and whom at the close Ho addresses,
committing to Him the work of redemption. According to the current opinion, the
discourse in ver. 16 is addressed to the people. But, in that case, we must also
make up our minds to view the Infinitive with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span>
a Gerund, &quot;planting,&quot; or &quot;by planting,&quot;--a supposition which is beset with great
difficulties. It was only by an inconsistency that <i>Stier</i>, who, in chap. xlix.
rejects this view, could here agree to it. And, farther, it is obvious that the
words at the close: &quot;Thou art my people,&quot; are the <i>words</i> which, according
to the commencement of the verse, are put into the mouth of the speaker, and that
hence, the planting of heaven and earth, which prepares for this speaking, belongs
to Him. If this be not supposed, one does not at all see to what the: &quot;I put my
words in thy mouth,&quot; is to refer. What farther militates against this explanation
is the unmistakable relation of the passage before us to chaps. xlix., l., which
it is impossible to refer to the people. The same reason is also against the supposition
of <i>Gesenius</i> and <i>Umbreit</i>, that the discourse is addressed to the prophetical
order. Nor is it defensible to explain: &quot;to plant the heaven and lay the foundation
of the earth,&quot; by: to establish the new state of Israel. To these arguments it may
be added that, according to this explanation, the words: &quot;Thou art my people,&quot; are
unsuitable; for Israel was not the people of the Prophet, but the people of God
and of His Servant. The discourse is addressed rather to the Messiah, compare the
parallel passages, chap. xlix., especially ver. 2, and chap. l., especially vers.
4 and 5. Considering the dramatic character of the whole section, the change of
the person addressed is a circumstance of very little importance; and chap. lix.
21, where the word of God is put into the mouth of Jacob, is parallel in appearance
only. Even <i>a priori</i> we could not expect that, in this context, treating,
as it does, of the personal Messiah, the whole section, chap. li. 1 to lii. 12,
should lack all reference to the Messiah. By the words: &quot;I put my word in thy mouth,&quot;
the Messiah is appointed to be, in the highest sense, the speaker of God; the realization
of the divine counsels is committed to Him. For the fact that it is not mere words
which are here treated of, but such as are living <span class="pagenum">[Pg 259]</span>
and powerful, like those which God spoke at the creation, becomes evident by the
circumstance that the planting of heaven and earth is attributed to the Servant
of God as bearer of His words,--a thing which cannot be done by the ordinary word;
comp. Isa. xl. 4, according to which the Messiah smites the earth with the rod of
His mouth, and slays the wicked with the breath of His lips.--<i>I cover thee in
the shadow of mine hand</i>, designates the divine protection and providence which
are indispensable in order that the Servant of God may fulfil His vocation to be
God&#39;s speaker. The words form an accessory thought only: I appoint thee my speaker
whom, as such, I will keep and protect in order that thou, etc.;--for that which
follows is that which the Servant of God is to <i>perform</i> as His Speaker. By
the word of Omnipotence committed to Him, He plants a new heaven, and lays the foundation
of a new earth, and invests Zion with the dignity of the people of God.--To plant
the heaven and lay the foundation of the earth, is equivalent to founding a <i>new</i>
heaven, a <i>new</i> earth; comp. chaps. lxv. 17, lxvi. 22; Rev. xxii. For, as long
as the old heaven and the old earth exist, a planting and founding activity cannot
take place in reference to heaven and earth. All that is created, in so far as it
opposes the Kingdom of God, is unfit for being an abode of the glorified Kingdom
of God, and must be shaken and broken to pieces, in order that this Kingdom may
enter into its natural conditions, and find a worthy abode. The activity of God
and His Servant, necessary for this purpose, will most completely take place at
the end of days, at the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#945;&#955;&#953;&#947;&#947;&#949;&#957;&#949;&#963;&#943;&#945;</span> announced
by the Lord, Matt. xix. 28; compare what is said in chap. xi., in reference to the
entire change of the conditions of the earth. But in a preparatory manner, this
activity pervades all history. The heaven, according to the <i>usus loquendi</i>
of Scripture, and also of Isaiah, is not only the natural heaven, but also the heaven
of princes, the whole order of rulers and magistrates, (comp. my remarks on Rev.
vi. 13), whose form and relation to the Kingdom of God underwent a great change,
even at the first appearance of Christ.--The <i>saying</i>, according to the preceding:
That thou mayest plant, &amp;c., is not to be referred to the mere announcing; but,
according to the frequent <i>usus loquendi</i>, it includes the performing also,
just as <i>e.g.</i>, in ver. 12, the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 260]</span> comforting
is effected by a discourse <i>in deeds</i>. The distinction between, and separation
of word and deed belongs to human weakness. God speaks and it is done; and what
holds true of His word, applies also to the word of His Servant, which he has put
into His mouth.</p>
<h3><a name="div2_260" href="#div2Ref_260">CHAPTERS LII. 13-LIII. 12.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">This section forms the climax of the prophecies of Isaiah, of
prophetism in general, of the whole Old Testament, as appears even from the circumstance
that the Lord and His Apostles refer to no part of the Old Testament so frequently
and so emphatically as to this,--a section which, according to <i>Luther&#39;s</i> demand,
every Christian should have committed <i>verbatim</i>. Christ is here, with wonderful
clearness, described to us in His highest work--His atoning suffering.</p>
<p class="normal">In vers. 13-15 of chap. lii. Jehovah speaks. These verses contain
a short summary of what is enlarged upon in chap. liii. The very deepest humiliation
of the Servant of God shall be followed by His highest glorification. In consequence
of the salvation wrought out and accomplished by Him, the nations of the earth and
their kings shall reverently submit to Him. In chap. liii. 1-10, the Prophet utters
the sentiments of the <i>elect</i> in Israel. At first, in His humiliation, they
had not recognized the Redeemer; but now they acknowledged Him as their Redeemer
and Saviour, and saw that He had taken upon Him His sufferings for our salvation,
and that they had a vicarious character. The commencement forms, in ver. 1, the
lamentation that so many do not believe in the report of the Servant of God, that
so many do not behold the glory of God manifested in Him. In vers. 2 and 3, we have
the cause of this fact, viz., the appearance of the Divine, in the form of a Servant--the
offence of the cross. In lowliness, without any outward splendour, the Servant of
God shall go about. Sufferings, heavier than ever befel any man, shall be inflicted
upon Him. In vers. 4-6, the vicarious import of these sufferings is pointed out.
The people, seeing his sufferings, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 261]</span> and not
knowing the cause of them, imagined that they were the well-merited punishment of
His own transgressions and iniquities. But the Church, now brought to believe in
Him, see that they were wrong in imagining thus. It was not His own transgressions
and iniquities which were punished in Him, but ours. His sufferings were voluntarily
undergone by Him, and for the salvation of mankind, which else would have been given
up to destruction. God himself was anxious to re-unite to himself those who were
separated from Him, and who walked in their own ways. To the vicarious import of
the sufferings of the Servant of God corresponds, according to ver. 7, His conduct:
He suffers quietly and patiently. In vers. 8-10 we have the reward which the Servant
of God receives for His passive obedience. God takes Him to himself, and He receives
an unspeakably great generation, ver. 8, the ominous burial with the rich, ver.
9, numerous seed and long life, and that the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper
in His hand; ver. 10. In vers. 11 and 12, the Lord again appears as speaking, and
confirms that which has been declared by the faithful Church.</p>
<p class="normal">The two verses of the close, together with the exordium, chap.
lii. 13-15, occupy five verses--five being the signature of the half and incomplete.
The main body, ten verses, is divided into seven referring to the humiliation and
suffering, and three referring to the exaltation of the Servant of God. The seven
are, as usual, divided into three and four. In the three verses, the suffering of
the Servant of God is exhibited; in the four, its cause and vicarious import.</p>
<p class="normal">By the &quot;<i>Behold</i>,&quot; with which the prophecy opens, the Prophet
intimates that we have here before us a vision beheld by him in the spirit. As the
period in which the Prophet beholds the vision, we have to suppose the time between
the suffering and the glorification of the Servant of God. The glorification is
described chiefly by Futures, the suffering by Preterites; but, from the fact that
this stand-point is not strictly adhered to, it is evident that we have to do with
a stand-point which is purely ideal.</p>
<p class="normal">The section forms, in a formal and material point of view, a whole
by itself; but, notwithstanding its absolute independence, it must stand in a certain
connection with what precedes and what follows. Let us, therefore, now consider
the relation <span class="pagenum">[Pg 262]</span> in which it stands to the portions
surrounding it. Its relation to what goes before is thus strikingly designated by
<i>Calvin</i>: &quot;After Isaiah had spoken of the restoration of the Church, he passes
over to Christ, in whom all things are gathered together. He speaks of the prosperous
success of the Church, at a time when it was least to be expected, which calls them
back to their King, by whom all things are to be restored, and exhorts them to expect
Him.&quot; The preceding section begins with chap. li. 1. We have already stated the
contents up to li. 16. Vers. 17-23 are closely connected with the preceding, in
which salvation and mercy were announced to the Church of God. This announcement
is here continued in new forms. Chap. lii. 1-6: As the Lord had formerly delivered
His people out of the hand of Egypt and Asshur, so, now too, He will deliver them.
Zion appears under the image of a woman imprisoned, fettered, lying powerlessly
in a miserable garment, on a dirty floor, and is called upon to arise, to strengthen
herself, to throw off her bands, to put on festive garments, inasmuch as the time
of her deliverance from the misery is at hand. Vers. 7-10: In the last words of
ver. 6, the Lord had announced that He was already at hand for the redemption of
His Church. This salvation now presents itself vividly to the spiritual eye of the
Prophet, and is graphically described by him. He beholds a messenger hastening with
the glad tidings to Jerusalem; <i>watchmen</i>, who are standing on the ruins of
Jerusalem in longing expectation, discover him at a distance, and exultingly call
upon the ruins to shout aloud for joy.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_262a" href="#ftn_262a">[1]</a></sup>
&quot;How beautiful&quot;--so verse 7 runs--&quot;upon the mountains the feet of the Messenger
of joy, that announceth peace, that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth salvation,
that saith unto Zion: Thy God reigneth.&quot; In Rom. x. 15, the Apostle refers this
passage to the preaching of the Gospel. That is more than mere application; it is
real explanation. The deliverance from Babylon is only the first faint beginning
of the salvation, which the Prophet has before his eye in its
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 263]</span> whole extent. As the substance of the salvation,
the circumstance that Zion&#39;s God reigneth, is intimated. There is, in this, an allusion
to the formula which was used in proclaiming the ascension of earthly kings to the
throne. Even this allusion shows that the point here in question is not the continuous
government of the Lord, but a new, glorious manifestation of His government, as
it were a new ascension to the throne. This &quot;the Lord reigneth,&quot; found a faint beginning
only of its confirmation and fulfilment in the destruction of Babylon, and the deliverance
of Israel; but as to its full import, it is Messianic. In Christ, the Lord has truly
assumed the government, and will still more gloriously reign in future.--Ver. 8:
&quot;The <i>voice</i> of thy watchmen! they lift up the voice, they shout together;
for they see eye to eye that the Lord returneth to Zion.&quot; The watchmen are ideal
persons, representatives of the truth that the Lord is around His people, and that
the circumstances of His Church are to Him a constant call to help; or they may
be viewed as the holy angels who, as the servants of the watchmen of Israel, form
the protecting power for the Church. These watchmen continue to stand even on the
destroyed walls; for, even in her misery, the Lord is Zion&#39;s God. The anxious waiting
eye of the watchmen, and the mercy-beaming eye of God returning to Zion meet one
another. The returning here is opposed to the forsaking, over which Zion had lamented
in chap. xlix. 14. Instead of the concealed presence of the Lord during the misery,
which, to the feeling, so easily appears as entire absence, there comes the presence
of God manifested in the salvation. This return of the Lord to Zion truly took place
in Christ only, Luke i. 68.--Ver. 9: &quot;Break forth into joy, shout together, ye ruins
of Jerusalem, for the Lord comforteth Jerusalem, redeemeth His people.&quot; This call
goes far beyond the time of the restoration of Jerusalem after the exile; for, even
at that time, the spiritual eye still beheld ruins, where the bodily eye saw firm,
walled buildings. The condition of the Kingdom of God was still miserable, the eye
of the faithful remained still fixed, with hopes and longings, upon the Future which
was to bring, and has brought, <i>true</i> comfort and consolation.--Ver. 10: &quot;The
Lord maketh bare His Holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of
the earth see the salvation of our God.&quot; The making bare of the arm of the Lord
designates the manifestation, by deeds, of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 264]</span>
the divine power and glory, such as took place by the sending of Christ, and by
the wonderful elevation of the Church over the world,--an elevation which has it
roots in Him; comp. chap. liii. 1. In vers. 11 and 12 there is still the exhortation
to the Church of the Lord that, by true repentance, she should worthily prepare
for the impending salvation.</p>
<p class="normal">After the Prophet has, in chap. li. 1 to lii. 12, described the
transition of the Church of God from humiliation and sorrow to glorification, it
is quite natural that he should now turn from the members to the Head, through whose
mediation this transition was to be accomplished, after the same contrast had been
exhibited in Himself There is the most intimate connection between the Church of
God and His Servant; for, all that He does and suffers. He does and suffers for
her; and all that befals her is prefigured by the way in which He has been led by
the Lord.</p>
<p class="normal">With what follows, too, the section before us stands in a close
relation. The glorification of the Servant of God described at the close of chap.
liii., is, in Him, bestowed at the same time, upon the Church. Thus chap. liv.,
in which the Church is comforted by pointing to her future glorification, is connected
with the preceding. The Church of the Lord appears here as a woman who, after having
been put away by her husband, and after having, for a long time, lived in a childless,
sorrowful solitude, is again received by him, and sees herself surrounded by numerous
children. The time of punishment is now at an end, and the time of mercy is breaking.</p>
<p class="normal">Chap. lii. 13. &quot;<i>Behold, my Servant shall act wisely, He shall
be exalted and extolled, and be very high.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal"><span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1513;&#1499;&#1497;&#1500;</span> always means &quot;to act
wisely&quot; (LXX. <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#963;&#965;&#957;&#8053;&#963;&#949;&#953;</span>; <i>Aquil. Sym.</i>:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#960;&#953;&#963;&#952;&#951;&#956;&#959;&#957;&#953;&#963;&#952;&#8053;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span>), never &quot;to be successful&quot;
(the Chaldean, whom most of the modern interpreters follow, renders it by
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1510;&#1500;&#1495;</span>), and this ascertained sense (comp. Remarks
on Jer. iii. 15; xxiii. 5, where the verb is used of the Messiah, just as it is
here), must here be maintained so much the more, that our passage evidently refers
to David, the former servant of God. Of him it is said in 1 Sam. xviii. 14, 15:
&quot;And David was acting wisely in all his ways, and the Lord was with him. And Saul
saw that he was acting very wisely, and was afraid of him;&quot; comp. 1 Kings ii. 3,
where David says to Solomon: &quot;And keep the charge of the Lord thy God ... in order
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 265]</span> that thou mayest act wisely in all that thou
doest, and whithersoever thou turnest thyself;&quot; Ps. ci. 2, where David, speaking
in the name of his family, says: &quot;I will behave myself wisely in a perfect way;&quot;
and 2 Kings xviii. 7, where it is said of Hezekiah: &quot;And the Lord was with him,
and whithersoever he went forth, he acted wisely.&quot; According to these fundamental
and parallel passages, the expression, &quot;He shall act wisely&quot; refers to the administration
of government, and is equivalent to: He shall rule wisely like his ancestor David.
<i>Stier</i> is wrong in opposing the view, that the Messiah here presents himself
as King. He says: &quot;The King has here stepped behind the Prophet, Witness, Martyr,
Saviour;&quot; but in chap. liii. 12, the royal office surely comes out with sufficient
distinctness. We must never forget that the different offices of Christ are intimately
connected with one another by the unity of the person. The <i>prosperity and success</i>
which the Servant of God enjoys, are first brought before us and detailed in what
follows; and appear, just as in the fundamental passages quoted, as the consequence
of acting wisely: &quot;My Servant shall, after having, through the deepest humiliation,
attained to dominion, administer it well, and thereby attain to the highest glory.&quot;
To the words: &quot;He shall act wisely&quot; correspond, afterwards, the words: &quot;The pleasure
of the Lord shall prosper by His hand,&quot; chap. liii. 10. The fact that a person acts
wisely is, in a twofold aspect, a fruit of his connection with God: <i>first</i>,
because God is the source and fountain of all wisdom, and, <i>secondly</i>, because
from God the blessing proceeds which always accompanies his doings. The ungodly
is by God involved in circumstances which, notwithstanding all his wisdom, make
him appear as a fool. Compare only chap. xix. 11: &quot;The princes of Zoan become fools,
the counsel of the wise counsellors of Pharaoh is become brutish; how can ye say
unto Pharaoh: a son of the wise am I, a (spiritual) son of the (wise) kings of ancient
times?&quot; comp. ver. 13; Job xii. 17, 20; Eccles. ix. 11. In the second clause the
Prophet puts together the verbs which denote elevation, and still adds
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1488;&#1491;</span> &quot;very&quot; in order most emphatically to point
out the glory of the exaltation of the Servant of God.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 14. &quot;<i>As many were shocked at thee--so marred from man
was His look, and His form from the sons of man</i>--Ver. 15. <i>So shall He sprinkle
many nations; kings shall shut their</i> <span class="pagenum">[Pg 266]</span>
<i>mouths on account of Him, for they who had not been told, they see, and they
who did not hear, they perceive.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 14 contains the <i>protasis</i>, ver. 15 the <i>apodosis</i>.
The former describes the deep humiliation, the latter the highest glorification
of the Servant of God. The <i>so</i> in ver. 14 begins a parenthesis, in which the
reason why many were shocked is stated, and which goes on to the end of the verse.
In keeping with the dramatic character of the prophetic discourse, the Lord addresses
His Servant in ver. 14: &quot;At thee;&quot; while, in ver. 15, He speaks of Him in the third
person: &quot;He shall sprinkle;&quot; &quot;on account of <i>Him</i>&quot; This change has been occasioned
by the parenthetical clause which contains a remark of the Prophet, and in which,
therefore, the Servant of God could not but be spoken of in the third person. <i>
Hävernick</i> and <i>Stier</i> refuse to admit the existence of a parenthesis. Their
reasons: &quot;Parentheses are commonly an ill-invented expedient only,&quot; and: &quot;It is
not likely that the same particle should have a different signification in these
two clauses following immediately the one upon the other,&quot; are not entirely destitute
of force, but are far-outweighed by counter-arguments. They say that the <i>apodosis</i>
begins with the first <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1503;</span>, and that in ver.
15 a second <i>apodosis</i> follows. But no tolerable thought comes out in this
way;--it is hard to co-ordinate two <i>apodoses</i>,--and the transition from the
2d to the 3d person remains unaccounted for. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1502;&#1501;</span>
&quot;to be desolated&quot; is then transferred to the spiritual desolation and devastation,
and receives the signification &quot;to be horrified,&quot; &quot;to be shocked.&quot;--Who the many
are that are shocked and offended at the miserable appearance of the Servant of
God, appears from chap. xlix. 4, according to which the opposition to the Servant
of God has its seat among the covenant people; farther, from the contrast in ver.
15 of the chapter before us, according to which the respectful surrender belongs
to the <i>Gentiles</i>; and farther, from chap. liii. 1, where the unbelief of the
former covenant-people is complained of; from vers. 2-4, where even the believers
from among Israel complain that they had had difficulty in surmounting the offence
of the Cross. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1495;&#1514;</span>, properly &quot;corruption,&quot;
stands here as <i>abstractum pro concreto</i>, in the signification, &quot;corrupted,&quot;
&quot;marred.&quot; As to its form, it is in the <i>status constructus</i> which, in close
connections, can stand even <span class="pagenum">[Pg 267]</span> before Prepositions.
From the corresponding <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1491;&#1500; &#1488;&#1497;&#1513;&#1497;&#1501;</span> in chap.
liii. 3, it appears that the Preposition stands here only for the sake of distinctness,
and might as well have been omitted. The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1503;</span>
serves for designating the distance, &quot;from man,&quot; &quot;from the sons of men,&quot; so that
He is no more a man, does no more belong to the number of the sons of men. The correctness
of this explanation appears from chap. liii. 3, and Ps. xxii. 7: &quot;I am a worm and
no man.&quot; As regards the sense of the whole parenthesis, many interpreters remark,
that we must not stop at the bodily disfiguration of the Servant of God, but that
the expression must, at the same time, be understood figuratively. Thus, Luther
says: &quot;The Prophet does not speak of the form of Christ as to His person, but of
the political and royal form of a Ruler, who is to become an earthly King, and does
not appear in royal form, but as the meanest of all servants; so that no more despised
man than He has been seen in the world.&quot; But the Prophet evidently speaks, in the
first instance, of the bodily appearance only; and we can the less think of a figurative
sense, that bodily disfiguration forms the climax of misery, and that, in this
<i>part</i>, the <i>whole</i> of the miserable condition is delineated. Even the
severe inward sufferings are a matter of course, if the outward ones have risen
to such a pitch. How both of these go hand in hand is seen from Ps. xxii. These
interpreters are, farther, wrong in this respect, that they refer the pretended
figurative expression solely to the lowliness and humility of the Messiah, and not,
at the same time, to His <i>sufferings</i> also. Thus, among the ancient interpreters,
it was viewed by <i>Jerome</i>: &quot;The horrid appearance of His form is not thereby
indicated, but that He came in humility and poverty;&quot; and among recent interpreters
by <i>Martini</i>: &quot;The sense of the passage does not properly refer to the deformity
of the face, but to the whole external weak, poor, and humble condition.&quot; But, for
that, the expression is by far too strong. Mere lowliness is no object of horror
(comp. 1 Cor. i. 23, according to which it is the <i>Cross</i> which offends the
Jews); it does not produce a deformity of the countenance; it cannot produce the
effect that the Servant of God should, as it were, cease to be a man. All this suggests
an unspeakable <i>suffering</i> of the Servant of God, and that, moreover, a suffering
which, in the first instance, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 268]</span> manifested itself
upon His own holy body. <i>Farther</i>--We must also take into consideration that
the <i>sprinkling</i>, in ver. 15, has for its background the shedding of blood,
and is the fruit of it, at first concealed. If any doubt should yet remain, it would
be removed by the subsequent detailed representation of that which is here given
in outline merely. The sole reason of that narrow view is, that interpreters did
not understand the fundamental relation of the section under consideration to the
subsequent section; that they did not perceive that, here, we have in a complete
sketch what there is given in detail and expansion.--Ver. 15. The verb
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1494;&#1492;</span> occurs in very many passages, and signifies
in <i>Hiphil</i>, everywhere, &quot;to sprinkle.&quot; It is especially set apart and used
for the sprinkling with the blood of atonement, and the water of purification. When
&quot;the anointed priest&quot; had sinned, he took of the blood of the <i>sacrifice</i>,
and <i>sprinkled</i> it before the vail of the sanctuary, Lev. iv. 6; comp. v. 16,
17. The high priest had, every year, on the great day of atonement, to sprinkle
the <i>blood</i> before the Ark of the Covenant, in order to obtain forgiveness
for the people. Lev. xvi. 14, comp. also vers. 18, 19: &quot;And he shall sprinkle of
the blood upon it (the altar) with his finger seven times, and cleanse it, and hallow
it from the uncleanness of the children of Israel.&quot; In the same manner the verb
is used of the sprinkling of blood upon the healed leper, Lev. xiv. 7, and frequently.
According to Numb. xix. 19, the <i>clean</i> person shall <i>sprinkle</i> upon the
unclean, on the third day, and on the seventh day, &quot;with the water in which are
the ashes of the red heifer&quot; when any one has become unclean by touching a dead
body. The outward material purification frequently serves in the Old Testament to
denote the spiritual purification. Thus, <i>e.g.</i>, in Ps. i. 9: &quot;Purge me with
hyssop, and I shall be clean;&quot; Ezek. xxxvi. 25: &quot;And I sprinkle clean water upon
you, and you shall be clean from all your filthiness.&quot; In all those passages there
lies, everywhere, at the foundation an allusion to the Levitical purifications (the
two last quoted especially refer to Numb. xix.); and this allusion is by no means
so to be understood, as if he who makes the allusion were drawing the material into
the spiritual sphere. On the contrary, he uses as a figure that which is, in the
law, used symbolically. All the laws of purification in the Pentateuch
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 269]</span> have a symbolical and typical character. That
which was done to the outward impurity was, in point of fact, done to the <i>sin</i>
which the people of the Old Testament, well versed in the symbolical language, beheld
under its image. Hence, here also, the <i>sprinkling</i> has the signification of
<i>cleansing</i> from sin. The expression indicates that Christ is the true High
Priest, to whom the ordinary priesthood with its sprinklings typically pointed.
The expression is a summary of that which, in the following chapter, we are told
regarding the expiation through the suffering and death of the Servant of God. The
words: &quot;When His soul maketh a sin-offering,&quot; in ver. 10, and: &quot;He shall justify,&quot;
in ver. 11, correspond. Among the ancient expositors, this translation is followed
by the Syriac and Vulgate, the <i>asperget</i> of which <i>Jerome</i> thus explains:
&quot;He shall sprinkle many nations, cleansing them by His blood, and in baptism consecrating
them to the service of God.&quot; In the New Testament, it is alluded to in several passages.
Thus, in 1 Pet. i. 2, where the Apostle speaks of the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8165;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#953;&#963;&#956;&#8056;&#962; &#945;&#7989;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166; &#935;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#8166;</span>.<!--see 1856 ed, p. 268, &#8165;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#953;&#963;&#956;&#8056;&#957;-->
Farther, in Heb. x. 22: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#8164;&#8165;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#953;&#963;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#953; &#964;&#8048;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#961;&#948;&#943;&#945;&#962;
&#7936;&#960;&#8056; &#963;&#965;&#957;&#949;&#953;&#948;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#969;&#962; &#960;&#959;&#957;&#951;&#961;&#8118;&#962;</span>; xii. 24: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#945;&#7989;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#953;
&#8165;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#953;&#963;&#956;&#959;&#8166; &#954;&#961;&#949;&#8150;&#964;&#964;&#959;&#957; &#955;&#945;&#955;&#959;&#8166;&#957;&#964;&#953; &#960;&#945;&#961;&#8048; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#7949;&#946;&#949;&#955;</span>, and also in chap. ix. 13, 14.
Among Christian interpreters, this view was always the prevailing one, was indeed
the view held by the Church. <i>Schröder observ. ad origin. Hebr.</i> c. viii. §
10, raised some objections which were eagerly laid hold of, and increased by the
rationalistic interpreters. Even some sound orthodox expositors allowed themselves
to be thereby dazzled. <i>Stier</i> declares &quot;that, for this time, he must take
the part of modern Exegesis against the prevailing tradition of the Church.&quot; Yet
his disrelish for the doctrine of the atonement held by the Church has no doubt
exercised a considerable influence in this matter; and <i>Hofmann</i>, too, in so
decidedly rejecting this explanation, which rests on such strong arguments, and
is not touched by any weighty counter-arguments, seems not to have been guided by
exegetical reasons only. But let us submit these objections to a closer examination.
1. &quot;The verb ought not to be construed with the Accusative of the thing to be sprinkled,
but with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;</span>.&quot; <i>Reinke</i> (in his Monograph
on Is. liii.) brings forward, against this objection, the passage Lev. iv. 16, 17;
but he is wrong in this, inasmuch as <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514;</span> is
there not the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 270]</span> sign of the Accusative, but
a Preposition. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514; &#1507;&#1504;&#1497;</span> in the signification
&quot;before,&quot; is, elsewhere also, very frequently used. But even <i>Gesenius</i> is
compelled to agree with <i>Simonis</i>.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_270a" href="#ftn_270a">[2]</a></sup>
and to acknowledge that, in the proper name <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1494;&#1497;&#1492;</span>
the verb is connected with an Accusative. The deviation is there still greater,
inasmuch as the <i>Kal</i> is, at the same time, used transitively. But even apart
from that, such a deviation cannot appear strange. It has an analogy in chap. liii.
11, where <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1510;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span>, which everywhere else is
construed with the Accusative, is followed by <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span>;
and likewise in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1508;&#1488;</span>, followed by
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span> in chap. liii. 5. The signification of the
verb, in such cases, undergoes a slight modification.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1494;&#1492;</span> with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;</span>
means &quot;to sprinkle;&quot; with the Accusative, &quot;to sprinkle upon.&quot; This modification
of the meaning has the analogy of other languages in its favour. In the Ethiopic,
the verb <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1494;&#1495;</span>, which corresponds to the Hebrew
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1494;&#1492;</span>, is used of the sprinkling of both persons
and things; Heb. ix. 19, xi. 28; Ps. li. 9. In Latin, we may say: <i>spargere aquam</i>,
but also <i>spargere corpus aqua</i>; <i>aspergere quid alicui</i>, but also <i>
re aliquem</i>, <i>conspergere</i>, <i>perspergere</i>, <i>respergere quem</i>.
&quot;Why should not this be allowed to the Jews also,&quot;--remarks <i>Köcher</i>--&quot;who
have to make up for the defect of compound verbs by the varied use of simple verbs?&quot;
But the Prophet had a special reason, in the liberty specially afforded by the higher
style, for deviating from the ordinary connection. The
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;</span> had to be avoided, because, had it been
put, the perception of the correspondence of the subsequent
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1497;&#1493;</span> with the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1497;&#1498;</span>, in ver. 14, would have become more difficult.--2.
It is asserted that it is against the connection; that the contrast to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1501;</span><!--see 1856 ed, p. 270; Isa 52:14--> induces
us to expect something corresponding. <i>Beck</i> says: &quot;A change in those who formerly
abhorred the Servant is to be expressed here, not <i>a deed by the Servant himself</i>.&quot;
If there were here, indeed, a contrast intended to the many who formerly were shocked,
we might answer that, indirectly, the words: &quot;He shall sprinkle,&quot; suggest, indeed,
an opposite conduct of the &quot;many Gentiles.&quot; No one is cleansed by the Servant of
God, who does not allow himself to be cleansed by <span class="pagenum">[Pg 271]</span>
Him. But no one will desire to be cleansed by Him, who does not put his whole trust
in Him, who does not recognize Him as his King and Lord. To the contempt and horror
with which the Jews shrink back from the Messiah in His humiliation, would thus
be opposed the faithful, humble confidence, with which the heathens draw near to
the glorified Messiah. But the fact that the real contrast to the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1502;&#1502;&#1493;</span> is not <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1497;&#1494;&#1492;</span>, but rather <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1511;&#1508;&#1510;&#1493;</span>, is clearly shown
by <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1497;&#1493;</span>, which corresponds with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1497;&#1498;</span>. The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1494;&#1492;</span>
corresponds rather to: &quot;He was disfigured.&quot; Just as this states the cause of their
being shocked, so in: &quot;He shall sprinkle,&quot; the cause of the shutting of the mouth
is stated. This is also seen from a comparison of chap. liii. 3, 4. His sufferings
appeared formerly as the proof that He was hated by God. Now that the vicarious
value of His suffering manifests itself, it becomes the reason of humble, respectful
submission. Just as, formerly, many were shocked at Him, because he was so disfigured,
so, now, even kings shall shut their mouth at Him on account of His atonement. Moreover,
one does not exactly see how this reason could be brought forward, as, in a formal
point of view, there is, at all events, &quot;a deed by the Servant himself&quot; before us,
in whatever way we may view the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1494;&#1492;</span>.--3. &quot;If
<i>sprinkling</i> were meant to be equivalent to cleansing by blood, the matter
of purification could not be omitted. If it were objected to this, that the noun
&#39;blood&#39; might easily be supplied from the verb&#39;s being ordinarily used of cleansing
with blood, the objection would be of no weight, inasmuch as sprinkling was done
not only with blood, but also with water and oil.&quot; But the sprinkling with <i>oil</i>,
denoting sanctification, appears only quite isolated, and has for its foundation
the sprinkling with blood, comp. Exod. xxix. 21: &quot;And thou shalt take of the blood
which is upon the altar, and of the anointing oil, and sprinkle it upon Aaron, and
he shall be hallowed.&quot; The sprinkling with <i>water</i> has likewise the shedding
of blood for its foundation. It was done with such water only, as had in it the
ashes of the sin-offering of the red heifer. But the Prophet has certainly on purpose
made no express mention of the blood, because that water, too, should be included.
This fact, that the sprinkling here comprehends both, was perceived by the author
of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in chap. ix. 13, 14:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#949;&#7984; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#964;&#8056; &#945;&#7991;&#956;&#945;</span> <span class="pagenum">[Pg 272]</span>
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#945;&#8059;&#961;&#969;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#961;&#8049;&#947;&#969;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#963;&#960;&#959;&#948;&#8056;&#962; &#948;&#945;&#956;&#940;&#955;&#949;&#969;&#962; &#8165;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#943;&#950;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#945; &#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962;
&#954;&#949;&#954;&#959;&#953;&#957;&#969;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#7937;&#947;&#953;&#940;&#950;&#949;&#953; &#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#963;&#945;&#961;&#954;&#8056;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#952;&#945;&#961;&#972;&#964;&#951;&#964;&#945;&#903; &#956;&#8118;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#957; &#964;&#8056; &#945;&#7991;&#956;&#945; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#935;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#8166;
... &#954;&#945;&#952;&#945;&#961;&#953;&#949;&#8150; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#963;&#965;&#957;&#949;&#943;&#948;&#951;&#963;&#953;&#957; &#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#7936;&#960;&#8056; &#957;&#949;&#954;&#961;&#8182;&#957; &#7956;&#961;&#947;&#969;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#964;&#8056; &#955;&#945;&#964;&#961;&#949;&#973;&#949;&#953;&#957; &#952;&#949;&#8183; &#950;&#8182;&#957;&#964;&#953;.</span>
The defilement by dead bodies, against which the water of purification was specially
used, is the most significant symbol of sinners and sins.--4. &quot;It is, in general,
not probable that the Servant of God, who farther down is described as a sacrificial
beast (!),--who, by taking upon Himself the sins of His people, dies for them, should
here appear as the High Priest justifying them.&quot; Thus <i>Umbreit</i> argues. But
in opposition to this view, it is sufficient to refer to: &quot;He shall justify,&quot; in
chap. liii. 11, which is parallel to &quot;He shall sprinkle.&quot; That which, in the typical
sacrifices, is separated, is, in the antitypical, most closely connected. Even at
the very first beginnings of sacred history, it was established for all times, that
the difference between him who offers up, and that which is offered up, should not
go beyond the territory of animal sacrifice. But there is the less ground for setting
aside the reference to the priestly office of the Messiah, that, even before Isaiah,
David, in Ps. cx. 4, designates Christ as the true High Priest on account of the
atonement to be made by Him; and, after Isaiah, Zechariah says in chap. vi. 13:
&quot;And He sitteth and ruleth upon the throne, and He is a Priest upon His throne.&quot;--It
has now become current to derive <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1494;&#1492;</span> from
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1494;&#1492;</span> in the signification &quot;to leap&quot;--&quot;He shall
cause to leap. This explanation made its appearance at first in a very cautious
way.&quot; <i>Martini</i> says: &quot;I myself feel how very far from a right and sure interpretation
that is, which I am now, but very timidly, to advance, regarding the sense of the
received reading <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1494;&#1492;</span>.&quot; By and by, however,
expositors hardened themselves against the decisive objections which stand in the
way of it. These objections are the following. 1. The Hebrew <i>usus loquendi</i>
is in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1494;&#1492;</span> so sure, that we are not entitled
to take the explanation from the Arabic. The verb is, in Hebrew, never used except
of <i>fluids</i>. In <i>Kal</i>, it does not mean &quot;to leap,&quot; but &quot;to spatter,&quot; Lev.
vi. 20 (27): &quot;And upon whose garment is <i>spattered</i> of the blood;&quot; 2 Kings
ix. 33; Is. lxiii. 5. In <i>Hiphil</i>, it is set apart and used exclusively for
the holy sprinklings; and the more frequently it occurs in this signification, the
less are we at liberty to deviate from it. 2. &quot;He shall make to leap&quot; would be far
too indefinite,--a circumstance <span class="pagenum">[Pg 273]</span> which appears
from the vague and arbitrary conjectures of the supporters of this view. <i>Gesenius</i>,
in his Commentary, <i>Stier</i>, and others, think of a leaping for joy, in support
of which they have quoted the <i>Kamus</i>, according to which the verb is used
of wanton asses! According to <i>Gesenius</i> in the <i>Thesaurus</i>, <i>Hofmann</i>,
and others, the Gentiles are to leap up, in order to show their <i>reverence</i>
for the Servant of God. According to <i>Hitzig</i> and others, it is to leap for
<i>astonishment</i>, while, according to <i>Umbreit</i> and others, it is for <i>
joyful admiration</i>. One sees that the mere &quot;He shall make to leap&quot; is in itself
too meaningless; and interpreters are obliged to make the best addition which they
can.--3. According to this explanation, no cause is assigned by which the homage
of the Gentiles is called forth; and that cause can the less be omitted, that the
horror of the Jews is traced back to its cause. The parenthesis in ver. 14 lacks
its antithesis; and that this antithesis must lie in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1494;&#1492;</span>, is rendered probable even by the circumstance,
that this word signifies, in a formal point of view, something which the Servant
of God does, and not something which the Gentiles do, while we should, by the antithesis
to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1502;&#1502;&#1493;</span>, be led to expect just this.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_273a" href="#ftn_273a">[3]</a></sup>--In
the <i>protasis</i>, the discourse is only of many; here, it is of many nations
(<i>Gousset</i>: &quot;It is emphatic, so that it comprehends all, and denotes, at the
same time, that they are numerous&quot;), and of kings. This is quite natural; for it
was only members of the covenant-people who felt shocked, while the reverence is
felt by the whole Gentile world.--The <i>shutting of the mouth</i> occurs elsewhere,
too, repeatedly, as a sign of reverence and humble submission. The reference of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1497;&#1493;</span> to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1497;&#1498;</span>,
shows that <i>Ewald</i> is wrong in explaining it by &quot;besides Him.&quot; Since the preceding
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;</span> designated the object of the horror,--the
substratum of it--it must here, too, designate the substratum of the shutting of
the mouth, and &quot;over Him,&quot; be equivalent to: &quot;on account of Him,&quot; &quot;out of reverence
for Him.&quot;--In the exposition of the last words, the old translations differ. We
may explain them either: &quot;They to whom it had not been <span class="pagenum">[Pg
274]</span> told, see;&quot; thus the LXX.: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#7991;&#962; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7936;&#957;&#951;&#947;&#947;&#941;&#955;&#951;
&#960;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166;, &#8004;&#968;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#953;, &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#959;&#7985; &#959;&#8020;&#954; &#7936;&#954;&#951;&#954;&#972;&#945;&#963;&#953;, &#963;&#965;&#957;&#942;&#963;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#953;</span>, whom Paul follows in
Rom. xv. 21. (In that context, however, the difference of the two explanations is
of no consequence; the passage would be equally suitable, even according to the
other interpretation.) Or, we may explain them: &quot;That which had not been told them,
they see,&quot; &amp;c. Thus the other ancient translations explain. According to the first
view, the connection would be this: For, in order that ye may not wonder at my speaking
to you of nations and kings, they who, &amp;c. According to the second view, the ground
of the reverence of the heathen kings and their people is stated. That which formerly
had not been told to them, had not been heard by them, is the expiation by the Servant
of God. By Him they receive a blessing not formerly hoped for or expected, and are
thereby filled with silent reverence towards the Author of the gift. We decide in
favour of the former view, according to which chap. lxvi. 19: &quot;That have not heard
my fame, neither have seen my glory,&quot; is parallel. The contrast, in our verse, to
those who did not hear and who now perceive, is, in the subsequent verse, formed
by those who do hear, and do not believe. The words: &quot;Who had not been told, who
did not hear,&quot; refer to the Messianic announcement which was given to Israel only,
and from which the Gentiles were excluded.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_274a" href="#ftn_274a">[4]</a></sup></p>
<p class="normal">Upon this sketch, there follows in chap. liii. 1-10, the enlargement.
First, in vers. 1-3 that is expounded which, in ver. 14 had been said of the many
being <i>shocked</i>, and of the <i>cause</i>. The commentary upon
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1502;&#1502;&#1493;</span> &quot;they were shocked,&quot; is given in ver.
1: a great portion of the Jews do not believe in the salvation which had appeared.
The enlargement of: &quot;so marred,&quot; &amp;c., is given in vers. 2, 3. The cause of the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 275]</span> unbelief is, that the glory of the Servant
of God is concealed behind humiliation, misery, and shame.</p>
<p class="normal">Chap. liii. 1: &quot;<i>Who believes that which we hear, and the arm
of the Lord, to whom it is revealed?</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The Prophet, whose spiritual eye is just falling upon the large,
the enormously large number of unbelievers, overlooks, at the moment, the other
aspect, and, in his grief, expresses that which took place in a large <i>portion</i>
only, in such a manner as if it were general. Similar representations we elsewhere
frequently meet with, <i>e.g.</i>, Ps. xiv. 3 (compare my Commentary); Jer. v. 1--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1502;&#1493;&#1506;&#1492;</span>
is commonly understood in the signification, &quot;message&quot; or &quot;discourse.&quot; But in favour
of the explanation: &quot;That which is heard by us,&quot; <i>q.d.</i>, &quot;that which we hear,&quot;
there is, in the first instance, the <i>usus loquendi</i>. The word never occurs
in any other than its original signification, &quot;that which is heard,&quot; and in the
signification, &quot;rumour,&quot; which is closely connected with the former. In Isa. xxviii.
9, a passage which is most confidently referred to in proof of the signification,
<i>institutio</i>, <i>doctrina</i>, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1502;&#1493;&#1506;&#1492;</span>
is that which the Prophet hears from God. The mockers who exclaim: &quot;Whom will he
make to understand <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1502;&#1493;&#1506;&#1492;</span>?&quot; take, with a sneer,
out of his mouth the word upon which chap. xxi. 10: &quot;That which I have heard of
the Lord of Hosts, I declare unto you,&quot; forms a commentary,
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7944;&#954;&#959;&#8053;</span> too, by which, in the New Testament,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1502;&#1493;&#1506;&#1492;</span> is rendered, has not at all the signification,
&quot;discourse,&quot; &quot;preaching.&quot; <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7944;&#954;&#959;&#8053;</span> in Rom. x. 16,
17, is not the preaching, but the hearing, as is shown by the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#8052; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7972;&#954;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#945;&#957;</span> in ver. 18. The
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#954;&#959;&#8053;</span>, according to ver. 17:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7969; &#948;&#8050; &#7936;&#954;&#959;&#8052; &#948;&#953;&#8048; &#8165;&#942;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#920;&#949;&#959;&#8166;</span>, is the passive
to the active to the word of God. &quot;Who believes our
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#954;&#959;&#8053;</span>, our hearing,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, that which
we hear, which is made known to us by the Word of God. In a passive sense,
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#954;&#959;&#8053;</span> stands likewise in the passages Matt.
iv. 24, xiv. 1, xxiv. 6, which <i>Stier</i> cites in support of the signification
&quot;discourse,&quot; &quot;preaching;&quot; it is that which has been heard by some one, &quot;rumour,&quot;
&quot;report.&quot; In Heb. iv. 2 (as also in 1 Thess. ii. 13)
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#955;&#972;&#947;&#959;&#962; &#7936;&#954;&#959;&#8134;&#962;</span>, is the word which they heard.
That passage: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#8016;&#954; &#8032;&#966;&#941;&#955;&#951;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#8001; &#955;&#972;&#947;&#959;&#962; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#7936;&#954;&#959;&#8134;&#962; &#7952;&#954;&#949;&#943;&#957;&#959;&#965;&#962;,
&#956;&#8052; &#963;&#965;&#947;&#954;&#949;&#954;&#949;&#961;&#945;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#964;&#8135; &#960;&#943;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#953; &#964;&#959;&#8150;&#962; &#7936;&#954;&#959;&#973;&#963;&#945;&#963;&#953;</span>, may simply be considered as a
paraphrase of our: Who believes that which we hear. A second argument in favour
of our explanation: &quot;That which we hear&quot; lies in the relation
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 276]</span> to the preceding, which, only when thus explained,
arranges itself suitably: &quot;Those understand what they formerly did not hear; Israel,
on the contrary, does not believe that which they have heard.&quot; Of great importance,
<i>finally</i>, is the circumstance, that it is only with this interpretation that
the unity of the speaker in vers. 1-10 can be maintained. In the sequel, the <i>
we</i> everywhere refers to the <i>believing Church</i>. But, for this reason, it
is difficult to think here of the order of the teachers, which must be the case
when we translate: &quot;Who believes our preaching.&quot; It has been objected that, even
in this case, no real change of subject takes place, but that, in both cases, the
Prophet is speaking, with this difference only, that, in ver. 1, he numbers himself
among the proclaimers of the message, while, in ver. 2 ff., he reckons himself among
the believing Congregation. But we shall be obliged not to bring in the Prophet
at all. In ver. 2 ff., the speaker is the believing Church of the <i>Future</i>,
in the time after the appearance of the Saviour, and just so, in ver. 1, the preaching,
if it should be spoken of at all, cannot belong to the Prophet and his contemporaries,
but to those only who came forward with the message of the manifested Saviour; just
as in John xii. 38; Rom. x. 16, our verse is referred to the unbelief of the Jews
in the manifested Saviour. The cause of the unbelief over which ver. 1 laments is
indeed, according to vers. 2 and 3, the appearance of the Saviour in the form of
a Servant, and His bitter suffering. That, then, must first have taken place, before
the unbelief manifested itself.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_276a" href="#ftn_276a">[5]</a></sup>
<i>Stier</i> rightly remarks: &quot;Between &#39;the arm of God,&#39; and ourselves, a
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1502;&#1493;&#1506;&#1492;</span>] is placed as the medium, and the point
is to believe in it.&quot; It is the gospel, the tidings of the manifested Saviour. By
the side of the joy over the many Gentiles who with delight hear and understand
the message of the Servant of God, there is the sorrow over the many in Israel who
do not believe this message.--The <i>arm of the Lord</i> comes into consideration
as the seat of His divine power; comp. chap. xl. 10, li. 5-9, lii. 10.
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 277]</span> According to the context, the manifestation
of this power in Christ is here spoken of <i>Stier</i> says: &quot;In this Servant, the
redeeming arm manifests itself, personifies itself Christ himself is, as it were,
the outstretched arm of the Lord.&quot; In Rom. i. 16, the Gospel is designated as
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#973;&#957;&#945;&#956;&#953;&#962; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#963;&#969;&#964;&#951;&#961;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#960;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#8054; &#964;&#8183; &#960;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#973;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#953;.</span>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1500;&#1492;</span> is elsewhere commonly construed with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;</span> or <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span>,
here with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;</span>. This indicates that the revealing
of the arm of the Lord is of a <i>supernatural</i> kind, such an one as conies down
from above. The Lord has revealed His arm, His power and glory, as He has manifested
them in the mission of His servant, <i>in the eyes of all</i> (comp. chap. lii.
10: &quot;The Lord hath made bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all
the ends of the earth see the salvation of our God&quot;); but it is really seen by those
only whose eyes God opens. The deeds of God, even the most manifest, always retain
the nature of a mystery which remains concealed to the worldly disposition. God
can be recognised only by God. Of the ungodly it holds true: &quot;With seeing eyes they
do not see, and with hearing ears they do not hear.&quot; What was the <i>cause</i> of
this unbelief in the Son of God, we are told in the sequel. It is the appearance
of the Divine in the form of a servant, which the gross carnal disposition cannot
understand, and by which it is offended. This offence which, according to the sequel,
even the God-fearing had to overcome, is, for the ungodly, a lasting one.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 2. &quot;<i>And He grew up as the sprout before Him, and as the
root from a dry ground. He had no form nor comeliness: and we see Him, but there
is no appearance that we should desire Him.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The relation of this verse to the preceding one was correctly
seen by <i>Michaelis</i>: &quot;The cause of the offence is this, that He does not rise
or stand out like the cedar, but He grows up gradually,&quot; &amp;c. The subject, the Servant
of God, is easily inferred from <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1497;&#1493;</span> in ver.
15. This is the more admissible that ver. 1, too, indirectly refers to Him. He is
the subject of the report in whose appearance the arm of the Lord has been revealed.
The <i>sprout</i>, the twig, designates, even in itself, the poor condition; and,
notwithstanding <i>Stier&#39;s</i> counter-remarks, it is the pointing to such a poor
condition alone which suits the connection, and there is no reason why we should
here already <span class="pagenum">[Pg 278]</span> supply &quot;from a dry ground.&quot; A
member of the royal house before its fall resembled, at his very origin, a proud
tree, or, at least, a proud branch of such a tree. The sprout, here, supposes the
stump, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1494;&#1506;</span>. in chap. xi. 8.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1493;&#1504;&#1511;</span> elsewhere always signifies &quot;suckling;&quot;
comp. here chap. xi. 8. Of the sprout, elsewhere, the feminine
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1493;&#1504;&#1511;&#1514;</span> is used. According to <i>Stier</i>,
this deviation from the common use is here not a matter of accident. Supposing a
double sense, he finds it an indication of the helpless infancy of the Redeemer,
and in this a representation of His lowliness. The LXX.:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8033;&#962; &#960;&#945;&#953;&#948;&#8055;&#959;&#957;</span>. The suffix in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1508;&#1504;&#1497;&#1493;</span> &quot;before Him&quot; refers to the immediately
preceding <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span>, not to the people. <i>Before
Him</i>, the Lord--known to Him, watched by Him, standing under His protection,
comp. Gen. xvii. 18; Job viii. 16. The lowliness here, and the contempt of men in
ver. 3, form the contrast; He is low, but He will not remain so; for the eye of
the Most High is directed towards Him. Before the eyes of men who are not able to
penetrate to the substance through the appearance, He is concealed; but God beholds
Him, beholds His concealed glory, beholds His high destination; and because He beholds,
He also takes care, and prepares His transition from lowliness to glory. But the
&quot;before Him&quot; does not by any means here form the main thought; it only gives a gentle
and incidental hint.--The <i>root</i> denotes here, as in chap. xi. 1, 10, the product
of the root, that whereby it becomes visible, the sprout from the root. In reference
to this parallel passage, <i>Stier</i> strikingly remarks: &quot;It is, by our modern
interpreters, put aside as quietly as possible; for, with a powerful voice, it proclaims
to us two truths: that the same Isaiah refers to his former prophecy,--and that
this Servant of the Lord here is none other than the Messiah there.&quot; A twig which
grows up from a dry place is insignificant and poor. Just as the Messiah is here,
in respect to His state of humiliation, and specially in reference to His origin
from the house of David, sunk into complete obscurity, compared to a weak, insignificant
twig, so He is, in Ezek. xvii. 23, in reference to His state of glorification, compared
to a lofty, splendid cedar tree, under which all the fowls of heaven dwell. The
Jews, in opposition even to ver. 22 of Ezekiel, expected that He should appear so
from the very beginning; and since He did not appear so, they
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 279]</span> despised Him. The
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1504;&#1512;&#1488;&#1492;&#1493;</span> is, by most of the modern interpreters,
in opposition to the accents, connected with the first member: &quot;He had no form nor
comeliness that <i>we should have seen Him</i>.&quot; But from internal reasons, this
explanation must be rejected. &quot;To see,&quot; in the sense of &quot;to perceive,&quot; would not
be suitable. For, how could they have such views of the condition of the Servant
of God, if they overlooked Him? But it is not possible to adduce any real demonstrative
parallel passage in support of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1488;&#1492;</span> with the
Accusat., without <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span>, ever having the signification,
&quot;to look at,&quot; &quot;to consider with delight.&quot; The circumstance that the Future is used
in the sense of the Present: &quot;and we see Him,&quot; is explained from the Prophet&#39;s viewing
it as present.--The statement that the Servant of God had no form, nor comeliness,
nor appearance, must not be referred to His lowliness before His sufferings only;
we must, on the contrary, perceive, in His sufferings and death, the completion
of this condition; in the <i>Ecce Homo</i>, the full historical realization of it.
<i>Calvin</i> rightly points out that that which here, in the first instance, is
said of the Head, is repeated upon the Church; He says: &quot;This must not be understood
of Christ&#39;s person only, who was despised by the world, and was at last given up
to an ignominious death, but of His whole Kingdom which, in the eyes of men, had
no form, nor comeliness, nor splendour.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. &quot;<i>Despised and most unworthy among men, a man of pains
and an acquaintance of disease, and like one hiding His face from us, despised,
and we esteemed Him not.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">In the preceding verse, we are told what the Servant of God had
<i>not</i>, viz., anything which could have attracted the natural man who had no
conception of the inward glory, and as little of the cause why the Divine appears
in the form of a Servant and a sufferer. Here we are told what He had, viz.: everything
to <i>offend</i> and <i>repulse</i> him to whom the arm of the Lord had not been
revealed,--the full measure of misery and the cross. Instead of &quot;the most unworthy
among men,&quot; the text literally translated has: &quot;one ceasing from among men&quot; (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1491;&#1500;</span>
in the signification &quot;ceasing&quot; in Ps. xxxix. 5), <i>i.e.</i>, one who ceases to
belong to men, to be a man, exactly corresponding to &quot;from man,&quot; and &quot;from the sons
of men,&quot; in the sketch, ver. 14, and to: &quot;I am a worm and no man,&quot; in Ps. xxii.
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 280]</span> The explanation: &quot;Forsaken by men, rejected
of men,&quot; is opposed by the <i>usus loquendi</i>, and by these parallel passages.--&quot;A
man of pains&quot;--one who, as it were, possesses pains as his property. There is a
similar expression in Prov. xxix. 1: &quot;A man of chastenings&quot;--one who is often chastened.
&quot;An acquaintance of disease,&quot;--one who is intimately acquainted with it, who has,
as it were, entered into a covenant of friendship with it. The passive Participle
has no other signification than this, Deut. i. 13, 15, and does not occur in the
signification of the active Participle &quot;knowing.&quot;--There is no reason for supposing
that disease stands here <i>figuratively</i>. It comprehends also the pain arising
from wounds, 1 Kings xxii. 34; Jer. vi. 7, x. 19; and there is so much the greater
reason for thinking of it here, that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1495;&#1500;&#1497;</span>
in ver. 10, evidently refers to the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1500;&#1497;</span> in
this place. As an acquaintance of disease, the Lord especially showed himself in
His <i>passion</i>. And then <i>every sorrow</i> may be viewed as a disease; every
sorrow has, to a certain degree, disease in its train. On Ps. vi., where sickness
is represented as the consequence of hostile persecution, Luther remarks: &quot;Where
the heart is afflicted, the whole body is weary and bruised; while, on the other
hand, where there is a joyful heart, the body is also so much the more active and
strong.&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1505;&#1514;&#1497;&#1512;</span> always means &quot;to hide;&quot; the
whole phrase occurs in chap. l. 6, in the signification &quot;to hide the face.&quot;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1505;&#1514;&#1512;</span> is the Participle in <i>Hiphil</i>. In
the singular, it is true, such a form is not found any where else; but, in the Plural,
it is, Jer. xxix. 8. In favour of the interpretation: &quot;Like one hiding His face
from us,&quot; is the evident reference to the law in Lev. xiii. 45: &quot;The leper in whom
the plague is, his clothes shall be rent and his head bare, <i>and the beard he
shall have covered over</i>, and shall cry: Unclean, unclean,&quot;--where that which
the leper crieth forms the commentary upon the symbolical act of the covering. They
covered themselves, as a sign of shame, as far as possible, in order to allow of
breathing, up to the nose; hence the mention of the beard. In my Commentary on the
Song of Solomon i. 7, it was proved that covering has every where the meaning of
being put to shame--of being in a shameful condition. The leper was by the law condemned
to be a living representation of <i>sin</i>. No horror was like that which was felt
in his presence. <i>Hence</i> <span class="pagenum">[Pg 281]</span> <i>it is the
highest degree of humiliation and abasement which is expressed by the comparison
with the leper, who must hide his face, whom God has marked.</i> It is the more
natural to suppose this reference to the leper, that probably, the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1491;&#1500; &#1488;&#1497;&#1513;&#1497;&#1501;</span> likewise pointed to the leper. The
leper was &quot;one ceasing from men.&quot; In 2 Kings xv. 5; 2 Chron. xxvi. 21, a house in
which lepers dwell is called a &quot;house of liberty,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, of separation from
all human society; compare the expression &quot;free among the dead,&quot; in Ps. lxxxviii.
6. Lepers were considered as dead persons. Uzziah, while in his leprosy, was, according
to the passage in Chronicles already cited, cut off from the house of the Lord,
and forfeited his place there, where all the servants of the Lord dwell with Him.
To leprosy, the term <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1493;&#1506;</span> in ver. 4 likewise
points. <i>Beck&#39;s</i> objection: &quot;The point in question here is not that which the
unfortunate man does but that which others do in reference to him,&quot; is based upon
a misconception. Neither the one nor the other is spoken of The comparative
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;</span> must not be overlooked. The comparison with
the leper, the culminating point of all contempt, is highly suitable to the parallelism
with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1489;&#1494;&#1492;</span>. Ordinarily
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1505;&#1514;&#1512;</span> is now understood as a <i>substantivum
verbale</i>: &quot;He was like hiding of the face before Him,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, like a thing
or person before which or whom we hide our face, because we cannot bear its horrible
and disgusting appearance. But with one before whom we hide our face, the Servant
of God could not be compared; the comparison would, in that case, be weak.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1489;&#1494;&#1492;</span>
is not the 1st pers. Fut. but Partic. Niph., &quot;despised.&quot;--The close of the verse
returns to its beginning, after having been, in the middle, established and made
good.</p>
<p class="normal">The second subdivision from ver. 4 to ver. 7 furnishes us with
the key to the sufferings of the Servant of God described in what precedes, by pointing
to their <i>vicarious character</i>, to which (ver. 7) the conduct of the Servant
of God under His sufferings corresponds.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. &quot;<i>But our diseases He bore, and our pains He took upon
Him: and we esteemed Him plagued, smitten of God, and afflicted.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The words <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1500;&#1497;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1499;&#1488;&#1489;</span> of the preceding verse here appear again.
He was laden with disease and pains; but these sufferings, the wages of sin, were
not inflicted upon Him on account <span class="pagenum">[Pg 282]</span> of His own
sins, but on account of our sins, so that the horror falls back upon ourselves,
and is changed into loving admiration of Him. <i>Beck</i> remarks: &quot;Properly speaking,
they had not become sick or unfortunate at all; this had <i>a priori</i> been rendered
impossible by the vicarious suffering of the Son of God; but since they deserved
the sickness and calamity, the averting of it might be considered as a healing.&quot;
But this view is altogether the result of embarrassment. Disease is the inseparable
companion of sin. If the persons speaking are subject to the latter, the disease
cannot be considered as an evil merely threatening them. If they speak of their
diseases, we think, in the first instance, of sickness by which they have already
been seized; and the less obvious sense ought to have been expressly indicated.
In the same manner, the healing also suggests hurts already existing. But quite
decisive is ver. 6, where the miserable condition clearly appears to have already
taken place.--According to the opinion of several interpreters, by diseases, all
inward and outward sufferings are figuratively designated; according to the opinion
of others, <i>spiritual</i> diseases, sins. But even from the relation of this verse
to the preceding, it appears that here, in the first instance, diseases and pains,
in the ordinary sense, are spoken of; just as the blind and deaf in chap. xxxv.
are, in the first instance, they who are naturally blind and deaf.--Disease and
pain here cannot be spoken of in a sense different from that in which it is spoken
of there. Diseases, in the sense of <i>sins</i>, do not occur at all in the Old
Testament. The circumstance that in the parallel passage, vers. 11 and 12, the bearing
of the <i>transgressions</i> and <i>sins</i> is spoken of, does not prove anything.
The Servant of God bears them also in their consequences, in their punishments,
among which sickness and pains occupy a prominent place. Of the bearing of outward
sufferings, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1513;&#1488; &#1495;&#1500;&#1497;</span> occurs in Jer. x. 19 also.
If the words are rightly understood, then at once, light falls upon the apostolic
quotation in Matt. viii. 16, 17: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#962; &#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#954;&#8182;&#962;
&#7956;&#967;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#962; &#7952;&#952;&#949;&#961;&#940;&#960;&#949;&#965;&#963;&#949;&#957;, &#8005;&#960;&#969;&#962; &#960;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#969;&#952;&#8135; &#964;&#8056; &#8165;&#951;&#952;&#8050;&#957; &#948;&#953;&#8048; &#7976;&#963;&#945;&#912;&#959;&#965; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#966;&#942;&#964;&#959;&#965; &#955;&#941;&#947;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#959;&#962;· &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#962;
&#964;&#8048;&#962; &#7936;&#963;&#952;&#949;&#957;&#949;&#943;&#945;&#962; &#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#7956;&#955;&#945;&#946;&#949; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#8048;&#962; &#957;&#972;&#963;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#7952;&#946;&#940;&#963;&#964;&#945;&#963;&#949;</span>; and this deserves a consideration
so much the more careful, that the Evangelist here intentionally deviates from the
Alexandrine version (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#8023;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#964;&#8048;&#962; &#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#8055;&#945;&#962; &#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#966;&#8051;&#961;&#949;&#953;
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#8000;&#948;&#965;&#957;&#8118;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span>). In doing so, &quot;we <span class="pagenum">[Pg 283]</span>
do not give an external meaning to that which is to be understood spiritually;&quot;
but when the Saviour healed the sick, He fulfilled the prophecy before us in its
most proper and obvious sense. And this fulfilment is even now going on. For him
who stands in a living faith in Christ, sickness, pain, and, in general all sorrow,
have lost their sting. But it has not yet appeared what we shall be, and we have
still to expect the complete fulfilment. In the Kingdom of glory, sickness and pain
shall have altogether disappeared.--Some interpreters would translate
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1513;&#1488;</span> by &quot;to take away;&quot; but even the parallel
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1505;&#1489;&#1500;</span> is conclusive against such a view; and,
farther, the ordinary use of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1513;&#1488;</span> of the bearing
of the punishment of sin, <i>e.g.</i>, Ezek. xviii. 19; Num. xiv. 33; Lev. v. 1,
xx. 17. But of conclusive weight is the connection with the preceding verse, where
the Servant of God appears as the intimate acquaintance of sickness, as the man
of pains. He has, accordingly, not only <i>put away</i> our sicknesses and pains,
but He has, as our substitute, <i>taken them upon Him</i>; He has healed us by His
having himself become sick in our stead. This could be done only by His having,
in the first instance, as a substitute, appropriated our <i>sins</i>, of which the
sufferings are the consequence; compare 1 Peter ii. 24:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8003;&#962; &#964;&#8048;&#962; &#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#943;&#945;&#962; &#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#7936;&#957;&#942;&#957;&#949;&#947;&#954;&#949;&#957; &#7952;&#957; &#964;&#8183; &#963;&#974;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#953;
&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7952;&#960;&#8054; &#964;&#8056; &#958;&#973;&#955;&#959;&#957;</span>.--<i>Plagued</i>, <i>smitten of God</i>, <i>afflicted</i>,
are expressions which were commonly used in reference to the visitation of sinful
men. It is especially in the word <i>plagued</i>, which is intentionally placed
first, that the reference to a self-deserved suffering is strongly expressed, compare
Ps. lxxiii. 14: &quot;For all the day long am I <i>plagued</i>, and my chastisement is
new every morning.&quot; Of Uzziah, visited on account of his sin, it is said in 2 Kings
xv. 5: &quot;And the Lord inflicted a <i>plague</i> upon the king, and he was a leper
unto the day of his death.&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1506;</span> &quot;plague&quot; is
in Lev. xiii., as it were, <i>nomen proprium</i> for the leprosy, which in the law
is so distinctly designated as a punishment of sin.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1499;&#1492;</span>
too, is frequently used of the infliction of divine punishments and judgments. Num.
xiv. 12; Deut. xxviii. 22. The people did not err in considering the suffering as
a punishment of sin, but only in considering it as a punishment for the sins committed
by the Servant of God himself. According to the view of both the Old and New Testament,
every suffering is <span class="pagenum">[Pg 284]</span> punishment. The suffering
of a perfect saint, however, involves a contradiction, unless it be vicarious. By
his completely stepping out of the territory of sin, he must also step out of the
territory of evil, which, according to the doctrine established at the very threshold
of revelation, is the wages of sin, for otherwise God would not be holy and just.
Hence, as regards the Servant of God, we have only the alternatives: either His
sinlessness must be doubted, or the vicarious nature of His sufferings must be acknowledged.
The persons speaking took up, at first, the former position; after their eyes had
been opened, they chose the latter.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 5, &quot;<i>And He was pierced for our transgressions, crushed
for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon Him, and by His wounds
we are healed.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal"><span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1493;&#1488;</span> &quot;He&quot; stands in front,
in order emphatically to point out Him who suffered as a substitute, in contrast
to those who had really deserved the punishment: &quot;He, on account of our transgressions.&quot;
There is no reason for deviating:, in the case of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1495;&#1500;&#1500;</span>, from the original signification &quot;to pierce,&quot; and adopting the general
signification &quot;to wound;&quot; the LXX. <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#964;&#961;&#945;&#965;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#8055;&#963;&#952;&#951;</span>.
<i>The chastisement of our peace</i> is the chastisement whereby peace is acquired
for us. Peace stands as an individualizing designation of salvation; in the world
of contentions, peace is one of the highest blessings. Natural man is on all sides
surrounded by enemies; <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#953;&#954;&#945;&#953;&#969;&#952;&#941;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#7952;&#954; &#960;&#943;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#969;&#962; &#949;&#7984;&#961;&#942;&#957;&#951;&#957;
&#7956;&#967;&#959;&#956;&#949;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#952;&#949;&#8056;&#957; &#948;&#953;&#8048; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#954;&#965;&#961;&#943;&#959;&#965; &#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166; &#935;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#8166;</span>, Rom. v. 1, and peace
with God renders all other enemies innocuous, and at last removes them altogether.
The peace is inseparable from the substitution. If the Servant of God has borne
our sins, He has thereby, at the same time, acquired peace; for, just as He enters
into our guilt, so we now enter into His reward. The justice of God has been satisfied
through Him; and thus an open way has been prepared for His bestowing peace and
salvation. The <i>chastisement</i> can, according to the context, be only an actual
one, only such as consists in the infliction of some <i>evil</i>. It is in misconception
and narrowness of view that the explanation of the followers of <i>Menke</i> originated:
&quot;The instruction for our peace is with Him.&quot; This explanation militates against
the whole context, in which not the <i>doctrine</i> but the <i>suffering</i> of
the Servant of God is spoken of; against the parallelism <span class="pagenum">[Pg
285]</span> with: &quot;By His wounds we are healed;&quot; against the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1497;&#1493;</span>, &quot;upon Him,&quot; which, according to a comparison
with: &quot;He bore our disease, and took upon Him our pains,&quot; must indicate that the
punishment lay upon the sufferer like a pressing <i>burden</i>. It is only from
aversion to the doctrine of the vicarious satisfaction of Christ, that we can account
for the fact, that that doctrine could be so generally received by that theological
school. More candid are the rationalistic interpreters. Thus <i>Hitzig</i> remarks:
&quot;<i>The chastisement of our peace</i> is not a chastisement which would have been
salutary for our morality, nor such as might serve for our salvation, but according
to the parallelism, such as has served for our salvation, and has allowed us to
come off safe and unhurt.&quot; <i>Stier</i>, too, endeavours to explain the &quot;chastisement
of our peace,&quot; in an artificial way. According to him, there is always implied in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1493;&#1505;&#1512;</span> the tendency towards setting right and
healing the chastised one himself; but wherever this word occurs, a retributive
pain and destruction are never spoken of But, in opposition to this view, there
is the fact that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1493;&#1505;&#1512;</span> does not by any means
rarely occur as signifying the punishments which are inflicted upon stiff-necked
obduracy, and which bear a destructive character, and which, therefore, cannot be
derived from the principle of correction, but from that of retribution only. Thus,
<i>e.g.</i>, in Prov. xv. 10: &quot;Bad <i>chastisement</i> shall be to those that forsake
the way, and he that hateth chastisement shall die,&quot; on which <i>Michaelis</i> remarks:
&quot;<i>In antanaclasi ad correptionem amicam et paternum, mortem et mala quaelibet
inferens, in ira</i>,&quot; Ps. vi. 2. Of destructive punishment, too, the verb is used
in Jer. ii. 19. But one does not at all see how the idea of &quot;setting right&quot; should
be suitable here; for surely, as regards the Servant of God himself, the absolutely
Righteous, the suffering here has the character of chastisement. It is not the mere
suffering, but the chastisement, which is upon Him; but that necessarily requires
that the punishment should proceed from the principle of <i>retribution</i>, and
that the Servant of God stands forth as our Substitute.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1512;&#1508;&#1488;</span>,
Preter. Niph., hence &quot;healing has been bestowed upon us;&quot;--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1508;&#1488;</span>
with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span>, in the signification &quot;to bring healing,&quot;
occurs also in chap. vi. 10, but nowhere else. The healing is an individualising
designation of deliverance from the punishments of sin, called forth by the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 286]</span> circumstance that disease occupied so prominent
a place among them, and had therefore been so prominently brought forward in what
precedes. In harmony with the Apostolic quotation, the expression clearly shows
that the punitive sufferings were already lying upon the persons speaking; that
by the Substitute they were not by any means delivered from the future evils, but
that the punishment, the inseparable companion of sin, already existed, and was
taken away by Him.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 6. &quot;<i>All we like sheep have gone astray, we have turned
every one to his own way, and the Lord hath made the iniquities of us all to fall
upon Him.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal"><i>Calvin</i> remarks: &quot;In order the more strongly to impress
upon the hearts of men the benefits of Christ&#39;s death, the Prophet shews how necessary
is that healing which was mentioned before. There is herd an elegant antithesis;
for, in ourselves we are scattered, but, in Christ collected; by nature we go astray
and are carried headlong to destruction,--in Christ we find the way in which we
are led to the gate of salvation; our iniquities cover and oppress us,--but they
are transferred to Christ by whom we are unburdened.&quot;--<i>All we</i>--in the first
instance, members of the covenant-people,--not, however, as contrasted with the
rest of mankind, but as partaking in the general human destiny.--<i>We have turned
every one to his own way</i>; we walked through life solitary, forsaken, miserable,
separated from God and the good Shepherd, and deprived of His pastoral care. According
to <i>Hofmann</i>, the going astray designates the <i>liability</i> to punishment,
but not the misery of the speakers; and the words also: &quot;We have turned,&quot; &amp;c., mean,
according to him, that they chose their own ways, but not that they walked sorrowful
or miserable. But the ordinary use of the image militates against that view. In
Ps. cxix. 176: &quot;I go astray like a lost sheep, seek thy servant,&quot; the going astray
is a figurative designation of being destitute of salvation. The misery of the condition
is indicated by the image of the scattered flock, also in 1 Kings xxii. 17: &quot;I saw
all Israel scattered upon the hills as sheep that have not a shepherd.&quot; <i>Michaelis</i>
pertinently remarks: &quot;Nothing is so miserable as sheep without a shepherd,--a thing
which Scripture so often repeats, Num. xxvii. 17,&quot; &amp;c. As a commentary upon our
passage, Ezek. xxxiv. 4-6 may serve; <span class="pagenum">[Pg 287]</span> and according
to that passage we shall be compelled to think of their being destitute of the care
of a shepherd: &quot;And they are scattered, because there is no Shepherd; and they become
meat to all the beasts of the field. My sheep wander on all the mountains, and on
every high hill, and over the whole land my sheep are scattered, and there is none
that careth for them, or seeketh them.&quot; The point of comparison is very distinctly
stated in Matt. ix. 36 also: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7984;&#948;&#8060;&#957; &#948;&#8050; &#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#8004;&#967;&#955;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#960;&#955;&#945;&#947;&#967;&#957;&#943;&#963;&#952;&#951;
&#960;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8182;&#957;, &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#7974;&#963;&#945;&#957; &#7952;&#963;&#954;&#965;&#955;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#953; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#8164;&#8165;&#953;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#953; &#8033;&#963;&#949;&#8054; &#960;&#961;&#972;&#946;&#945;&#964;&#945; &#956;&#8052; &#7956;&#967;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945; &#960;&#959;&#953;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#945;.</span>
Without doubt, turning to one&#39;s own ways is sinful, comp. chap. lvi. 11; but here
it is not so much the aspect of sin, as that of misery, which is noticed. As the
chief reason of the sheep&#39;s wandering and going astray, the bad condition of the
shepherd must be considered, comp. Jer. l. 6: &quot;Perishing sheep were my people; their
shepherds led them astray,&quot; John x. 8: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#8005;&#963;&#959;&#953;
&#960;&#961;&#8056; &#7952;&#956;&#959;&#8166; &#7974;&#955;&#952;&#959;&#957;, &#954;&#955;&#941;&#960;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#949;&#7984;&#963;&#8054; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#955;&#8131;&#963;&#964;&#945;&#943;</span>--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1490;&#1506;</span>
with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span> signifies &quot;to hit;&quot; hence <i>Hiphil</i>,
&quot;to cause to hit.&quot; The iniquities of the whole community <i>hit</i> the Servant
of God in their punishments; but according to the biblical view, their punishments
can come upon Him only as such, only by His coming forward as a substitute for sinners,
and not because He suffers for the guilt of others to which He remained a stranger.
By this throwing the guilt upon the Servant of God, the condition of being without
a shepherd is <i>done</i> away with, the flock is gathered from its scattered condition.
The wall of separation which was raised by its guilt, and which separated it from
God, the fountain of salvation, is now removed by His substitution, and the words:
&quot;The Lord is my Shepherd,&quot; now become a truth, comp. John x. 4.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 7. &quot;<i>He was oppressed, and when He was plagued, He does
not open His mouth, like a lamb which is brought to the slaughter, and as a sheep
which is dumb before her shearers, and He does not open his mouth.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">In these words, we have a description of the manner in which the
Servant of God <i>bore</i> such sufferings. It flows necessarily from the circumstance,
that it was a vicarious suffering. The substitution implies that He took them upon
Him spontaneously; and this has patience for its companion. First, the contents
of ver. 6 are once more summed up in the word <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1513;</span>,
&quot;He was oppressed:&quot; then, this condition of the Servant <span class="pagenum">[Pg
288]</span> of God is brought into connection with His <i>conduct</i>, which, only
in this connection, appears in its full majesty.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1513;</span>
is the Preterite in <i>Niphal</i>, and not, as <i>Beck</i> thinks, 1st pers. Fut.
<i>Kal</i>. For the Future would be here unusual; the verb has elsewhere the Future
in <i>o</i>; the suffix is wanting, and the sense which then arises suits only the
untenable supposition that, in vers. 1-10, the <i>Gentiles</i> are speaking. The
<i>Niphal</i> occurs in 1 Sam. xiii. 6, of Israel oppressed by the Philistines;
and in 1 Sam. xiv. 24, of those borne down by heavy toil and fatigue.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1513;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1506;&#1504;&#1492;</span>
&quot;to be humbled, oppressed, abused,&quot; do not, in themselves essentially differ; it
is only on account of the context, and the contrast implied in it, that the same
condition is once more designated by a word which is nearly synonymous. The words
&quot;and He&quot; separate <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1506;&#1504;&#1492;</span> from what precedes,
and connect it with what follows. The explanation: &quot;He was oppressed, but He suffered
patiently,&quot; has this opposed to it, that the two <i>Niphals</i>, following immediately
upon one another, cannot here stand in a different meaning. The idea of patience
would here not be a collateral, but the main idea, and hence, could not stand without
a stronger designation.--In <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1508;&#1514;&#1495;</span>, the real
Future has taken the place of the ideal Past; it shows that the preceding Preterites
are to be considered as prophetical, and that, in point of fact, the suffering of
the Servant of God is no less future than His glorification. The <i>lamb</i> points
back to Exod. xii. 3, and designates Christ as the true paschal lamb. With a reference
to the verse under consideration, John the Baptist calls Christ the Lamb of God,
John i. 29; comp. 1 Pet. i. 18, 19; Acts viii. 32-35. But since it is not the vicarious
character of Christ&#39;s sufferings which here, in the first instance, comes into consideration,
but His patience under them, the lamb is associated with the female sheep, and that
not in relation to her slayers, but to her shearers. The last words: &quot;And He does
not open His mouth,&quot; are not to be referred to the lamb, as some think, (even the
circumstance that the preceding <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1495;&#1500;</span> is a feminine
noun militates against this view), but, like the first: &quot;He does not open His mouth,&quot;
to the Servant of God. It is an expressive repetition, and one which is intended
to direct attention to this feature; comp. the close of ver. 3; Gen. xlix. 4: Judges
v. 16. The fulfilment is shown by 1 Pet. ii. 23: <span class="pagenum">[Pg 289]</span>
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8003;&#962; &#955;&#959;&#953;&#948;&#959;&#961;&#959;&#973;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7936;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#955;&#959;&#953;&#948;&#972;&#961;&#949;&#953;, &#960;&#940;&#963;&#967;&#969;&#957; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7968;&#960;&#949;&#943;&#955;&#949;&#953;,
&#960;&#945;&#961;&#949;&#948;&#943;&#948;&#959;&#965; &#948;&#8050; &#964;&#8183; &#954;&#961;&#943;&#957;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#953; &#948;&#953;&#954;&#945;&#943;&#969;&#962;</span>; and likewise Matt. xxvii. 12-14:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#957; &#964;&#8183; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#951;&#947;&#959;&#961;&#949;&#8150;&#963;&#952;&#945;&#953; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#8017;&#960;&#8056; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#7936;&#961;&#967;&#953;&#949;&#961;&#941;&#969;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054;
&#960;&#961;&#949;&#963;&#946;&#965;&#964;&#941;&#961;&#969;&#957; &#959;&#8016;&#8050;&#957; &#7936;&#960;&#949;&#954;&#961;&#943;&#957;&#945;&#964;&#959;. &#932;&#972;&#964;&#949; &#955;&#941;&#947;&#949;&#953; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#8001; &#928;&#953;&#955;&#8118;&#964;&#959;&#962;· &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7936;&#954;&#959;&#973;&#949;&#953;&#962; &#960;&#972;&#963;&#945;&#963;&#959;&#965; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#965;&#961;&#959;&#8166;&#963;&#953;&#957;;
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7936;&#960;&#949;&#954;&#961;&#943;&#952;&#951; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#959;&#8016;&#948;&#8050;&#957; &#7955;&#957; &#8165;&#8134;&#956;&#945;, &#8037;&#963;&#964;&#949; &#952;&#945;&#965;&#956;&#940;&#950;&#949;&#953;&#957; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#7969;&#947;&#949;&#956;&#972;&#957;&#945; &#955;&#943;&#945;&#957;.</span>
Comp. xxvi. 62; Mark xv. 5; Luke xxiii. 9; John xix. 9.</p>
<p class="normal">The third subdivision of the principal portion, vers. 8-10, describes
<i>the reward of the Servant of God</i>, by expanding the words: &quot;Kings shall shut
their mouths on account of Him,&quot; in chap. lii. 15, and &quot;He shall be exalted,&quot; in
ver. 13.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 8. &quot;<i>From oppression and from judgment He was taken, and
His generation who can think it out; for He was cut of out of the land of the living
for the transgression of my people, whose the punishment.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">God--such is the sense--takes Him to himself from heavy oppression,
and He who apparently was destroyed without leaving a trace, receives an infinitely
numerous generation (compare John xii. 32: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#8064;&#947;&#8060; &#7953;&#8048;&#957;
&#8017;&#968;&#969;&#952;&#8182; &#7952;&#954; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#947;&#8134;&#962; &#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#962; &#7953;&#955;&#954;&#973;&#963;&#969; &#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#7952;&#956;&#945;&#965;&#964;&#972;&#957;</span>), as a deserved reward for having,
by His violent death, atoned for the sins of His people, delivered them from destruction,
and acquired them for His property.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1510;&#1512;</span> &quot;oppression,&quot;
as Ps. cvii. 39, properly, according to the signification of the verb: &quot;Shutting
up,&quot; &quot;restraining,&quot; &quot;hindering.&quot; From what goes before, where the evils from which
the Servant of God is here delivered are described more in detail, it appears that
here we have not to think of a prison properly so called; for there, it is not a
prison, but abuse and oppression which are spoken of.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1508;&#1496;</span>
is commonly referred to the judgment which the enemies of the Servant of God passed
upon Him, The premised <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1510;&#1512;</span> then furnishes
the distinct qualification of the judgment, shows that that which, in a formal point
of view, presents itself as a judicial proceeding, is, in point of fact, heavy oppression.
But, at the same time, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1508;&#1496;</span> serves as a limitation
for <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1510;&#1512;</span>. We learn from it that the hatred
of the enemies moved within the limits of judicial proceedings,--just as it happened
in the history of Christ. But behind the human judgment, the <i>divine</i> is concealed,
Jer. i. 16; Ezek. v. 8; Ps. cxliii. 2. This is shown by what precedes, where the
suffering of the Servant of God is so emphatically and repeatedly designated as
the punishment of sin inflicted upon <span class="pagenum">[Pg 290]</span> Him by
God.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1511;&#1495;</span> with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1503;</span> &quot;to be taken away from;&quot; according to
<i>Stier</i>: &quot;taken away from suffering, being delivered from it by God&#39;s having
taken Him to himself, to the land of eternal bliss.&quot; This view, according to which
the words refer to the glorification of the Servant of God, has been adopted by
the Church. It is adopted by the Vulgate: &quot;<i>De angustia et judicio sublatus est</i>;&quot;
by <i>Jerome</i>, who says on this passage: &quot;From tribulation and judgment He ascended,
as a conqueror, to the Father;&quot; and by <i>Michaelis</i> who thus interprets it:
&quot;He was taken away, and received at the right hand of the Majesty.&quot; By several interpretations,
the words are still referred to the state of humiliation of the Servant of God:
&quot;<i>Through</i> oppression and judgment He was <i>dragged to execution</i>.&quot; But
the Prophet has already, in ver. 3, finished the description of the mere sufferings
of the Servant of God--vers. 4-7 exhibit the cause of His sufferings and His conduct
under them; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1511;&#1495;</span> cannot, by itself, signify
&quot;to be dragged to execution&quot;--in that case, as in Prov. xxiv. 11, &quot;to death&quot; would
have been added; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1503;</span> must be taken in the signification,
&quot;from,&quot; &quot;out of,&quot; as in the subsequent <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1488;&#1512;&#1509;</span>,
compare 2 Kings iii. 9, where <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1511;&#1495;</span> with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1503;</span> signifies &quot;to take from.&quot; In the passage
under consideration, as well as in those two passages which refer to the ascension
of Elijah, there is a distinct allusion to Gen. v. 24, where it is said of Enoch:
&quot;And he was no more, for God had <i>taken</i> him.&quot;--<i>And His generation who can
think it out?</i> <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1493;&#1512;</span>, properly &quot;circle,&quot;
is not only the communion of those who are connected by co-existence, but also of
those who are connected by disposition, be it good or bad.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_290a" href="#ftn_290a">[6]</a></sup>
Thus, the generation of the children of God in Ps. lxxiii. 15; the generation of
the righteous, Ps. xiv. 5; the generation of the upright, in Ps. cxii. 2. Here,
the generation of the Servant of God is the communion of those who are animated
by His Spirit, filled with His life. This company will, after His death, increase
to an infinite greatness. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1493;&#1495;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1497;&#1495;</span> &quot;to meditate,&quot; is commonly connected with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span> of the object, but occurs also with
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 291]</span> the simple Accusative, in the signification
&quot;to meditate upon something,&quot; in Ps. cxlv. 5. There is, as it appears, an allusion
to the promise to Abraham, Gen. xiii. 16: &quot;And I make thy seed as the dust of the
earth, so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also
be numbered,&quot;--a promise which received its complete fulfilment just by the Servant
of God. The explanation which we have given was adopted by the LXX.:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#8052;&#957; &#947;&#949;&#957;&#8051;&#945;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#964;&#8055;&#962; &#948;&#953;&#951;&#947;&#8053;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;.</span> Next to it,
comes the explanation: &quot;Who can think out His <i>posterity</i>;&quot; but against this,
it is conclusive that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1493;&#1512;</span> never occurs in
the signification &quot;posterity.&quot; The parallel passage in ver. 10: &quot;He shall see seed,&quot;
or &quot;posterity,&quot; holds good even for our view; for since the posterity is a <i>spiritual</i>
one, it is substantially identical with <i>generation</i> here. But it may, <i>a
priori</i>, be expected that the same thing shall be designated from various aspects.
If &quot;generation&quot; be taken in the signification &quot;posterity,&quot; then the words: &quot;He shall
see seed&quot; would be a mere repetition. The appropriateness of the sense which, according
to our explanation, comes out, will become especially evident, if we consider that,
in vers. 8-10, we have the carrying out of that which, in the sketch, was said of
the respectful homage of the many nations and kings. A whole host of explanations
assigns to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1493;&#1512;</span> significations which cannot
be vindicated. Thus, the translation of <i>Luther</i>: &quot;Who shall disclose the length
of His life?&quot; that of <i>Hitzig</i>: His destiny; that of <i>Beck</i>: His importance
and influence in the history of the world; that of <i>Knobel</i>: His dwelling place,
<i>i.e.</i>, His grave, who considered? The signification, &quot;dwelling place,&quot; does
not at all belong to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1493;&#1512;</span>. In Isaiah xxxviii.
12, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1493;&#1512;</span> are the cotemporaries from whom the
dying man is taken away, and who are withdrawn from him: &quot;My <i>generation</i> is
taken away, and removed from me like a shepherd&#39;s tent&quot;--dying Hezekiah there laments.
Inadmissible, likewise, is the explanation: &quot;Who of His cotemporaries will consider,
or considered, it&quot; for <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514;</span>, the sign of the
Accusative, cannot stand before the <i>Nomin. Absol.</i> In Nehem. ix. 34, this
use is by no means certain, and, at all events, we cannot draw any inference from
the language of Nehemiah as to that of Isaiah. The Ellipses: &quot;the true cause of
His death,&quot; &quot;the importance and fruit of His death,&quot; &quot;the salvation lying behind
it&quot; (<i>Stier</i>), are very <span class="pagenum">[Pg 292]</span> hard, and the
sense which is purchased by such sacrifices is rather a common-place one, little
suitable to this context, and to the relation to chap. lii. 15.--&quot;<i>For He was
cut off from the land of the living, for the transgression of my people, whose the
punishment.</i>&quot; The reason is here stated why the Servant of God receives so glorious
a reward; why, after He has been removed to God, a generation so infinitely great
is granted to Him. <i>He has deserved this reward by His having suffered for the
sins of His people, as their substitute.</i> The first clause must not be separated
from the second: &quot;for the transgression,&quot; &amp;c. For it is not the circumstance, that
the Servant of God suffered a violent death at all, but that for the sin of His
people He took it upon Him, which is the ground of His glorification.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1494;&#1512;</span> &quot;to be cut off&quot; never occurs of a quiet,
natural death; not even in the passage, quoted in support of this use of the word,
viz., Psa. lxxxviii. 6; Lam. iii. 54, but always of a violent, premature death.
The cognate <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1512;&#1494;</span> also has, in Psa. xxxi. 23,
the signification of extermination. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1502;&#1493;</span>, poetical
form for <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1492;&#1501;</span>, refers to the collective
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;</span>. Before it, the relative pronoun is to
be understood: for the sin of my people, whose the punishment, <i>q.d.</i>, whose
property the punishment was, to whom it belonged. <i>Stier</i> prefers to adopt
the most violent interpretation rather than to conform and yield to this so simple
sense, which, as he says, could be entertained only by that obsolete theory of substitution
where one saves the other from suffering. Several interpreters take the suffix in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1502;&#1493;</span> as a Singular: &quot;on account of the transgression
of my people, punishment was to Him.&quot; And passages, indeed, are not wanting where
the supposition that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1493;</span> designates the Singular,
has some appearance of probability; but, upon a closer examination, this appearance
everywhere vanishes.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_292a" href="#ftn_292a">[7]</a></sup>
Moreover, as we have already remarked, it is, on account of the sense, inadmissible
to separate the two clauses.--By <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1502;&#1497;</span> &quot;my people,&quot;
the hypothesis of the non-Messianic interpreters is set aside, that in
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 293]</span> vers. 1-10 the <i>Gentiles</i> are speaking.
It is a single people to which the speakers belong, the covenant-people, for whose
benefit the atonement and substitution of the Servant of God were, <i>in the first
instance</i>, intended (comp. <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#963;&#974;&#963;&#949;&#953; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#955;&#945;&#8056;&#957; &#945;&#8017;&#964;&#959;&#8166;
&#7936;&#960;&#8056; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#953;&#8182;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8182;&#957;</span>, Matth. i. 21) yea, were, to a certain degree, exclusively
intended, inasmuch as the believing Gentiles were received into it as adopted children.
It is a forced expedient to say: every single individual of the Gentiles, or of
their princes, says that the Servant of God has suffered for the sin of His people,
hence also for His own. And just as inadmissible is the supposition that a representative
of the heathen world is speaking; the whole heathen world cannot be designated as
a people.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 9. &quot;<i>And they gave Him His grave with the wicked, and with
a rich in His death, because He had done no violence, neither was any deceit in
His mouth.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal"><span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1497;&#1514;&#1503;</span> is intentionally without
a definite Subject, <i>q.d.</i>: it was given to Him, <i>Ewald</i> § 273a. The acting
subject could not be at all more distinctly marked out, because there was a <i>double</i>
subject. Men fixed for Him the ignominious grave with criminals; by the providence
of God, He received the honourable grave with a rich, and that for the sake of His
innocent sufferings, as a prelude to the greater glorification which, as a reward,
was to be bestowed upon Him, as an example of what is said in ver. 12: &quot;He shall
divide spoil with the strong.&quot; The <i>wicked</i> who are buried apart from others,
can be the real criminals only, the transgressors in ver. 12. Criminals received,
among the Jews, an ignominious burial. Thus <i>Josephus</i>, Arch. iv. 8, § 6, says:
&quot;He who has blasphemed God shall, after having been stoned, be hung up for a day,
and be buried quietly and without honour.&quot; <i>Maimonides</i> (see <i>Iken</i> on
this passage in the Biblia Hagana ii. 2) says: &quot;Those who have been executed by
the court of justice are not by any means buried in the graves of their ancestors;
but there are two graves appointed for them by the court of justice,--one for the
stoned and burnt; the other for the decapitated and strangled.&quot; Just as the Prophet
had, in the preceding verse, said that the Servant of God would die a violent death
like a criminal, so he says here, that they had also fixed for Him a grave in common
with executed criminals. <i>And with a rich</i> <span class="pagenum">[Pg 294]</span>
(they gave Him His grave) <i>in His death</i>: they gave Him His grave, first with
the wicked; but, indeed, He received it with a rich, since God&#39;s providence was
watching over the dead body of His Servant. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1497;&#1514;&#1503;</span>,
in so far as it refers to the first clause, receives its limitation by the second.
Before their fulfilment, the words had the character of a holy riddle; but the fulfilment
has solved this riddle. The designation of Joseph of Arimathea as
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7940;&#957;&#952;&#961;&#969;&#960;&#959;&#962; &#960;&#955;&#959;&#8059;&#963;&#953;&#959;&#962;</span> in Matt. xxvi. 57, is equivalent
to an express quotation. Although it was by a special divine providence that the
Singular was chosen, yet we may suppose that, in the first instance, the rich man
here is contrasted with the wicked men, and is an ideal person, the personified
idea of the species. <i>In His death</i> is, in point of fact, equivalent to: &quot;after
He had died;&quot; but, notwithstanding, there is no necessity for giving to the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span> the signification &quot;after.&quot; Death rather
denotes the <i>condition of death</i>; <i>in death</i> is contrasted with: <i>in
life</i>. Altogether in the same manner we find in Lev. xi. 31: &quot;Whosoever doth
touch them in their death,&quot; for, &quot;after they have died.&quot; <i>Farther</i>--1 Kings
xiii. 31: &quot;In my death you shall bury me in the sepulchre.&quot; The Plural
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1493;&#1514;&#1497;&#1501;</span> &quot;the deaths,&quot; &quot;conditions of death,&quot;
cannot be adduced as a proof that the subject of the prophecy must be a collective
person; for, in that case, rather the Plural of the suffix would be required (Ps.
lxxviii. 64 is a rare exception); and in Ezek. xxviii. 8, 10, death is likewise
spoken of in the Plural. The Plural is formed after the analogy of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1497;&#1497;&#1501;</span>, for which reason it commends itself
to explain <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1512;&#1509; &#1495;&#1497;&#1497;&#1501;</span> in the preceding verse,
&quot;land of life,&quot; instead of &quot;land of the living.&quot; But the Plural can here the less
occasion any difficulty, that it is not dying which is spoken of, but the continuing
condition of death.--<i>Because He had done no violence</i>, &amp;c.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;</span> very frequently denotes the cause upon
which the effect depends, <i>e.g.</i>, in 1 Kings xvi. 7; Ps. xliv. 23, lxix. 8;
Jer. xv. 15; Job xxxiv. 6. The whole following clause is treated as a noun. Ordinarily,
it is explained: Although, &amp;c. But this use of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;</span>
is quite isolated; it occurs only in two passages of the Book of Job, in x. 7 and
xxxiv. 6. The former explanation is found in the Alexand. version:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8005;&#964;&#953; &#7936;&#957;&#959;&#956;&#8055;&#945;&#957; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7952;&#960;&#959;&#8055;&#951;&#963;&#949;</span>. The innocence is designated
negatively, and in an external manner (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1502;&#1505;</span>
and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1512;&#1502;&#1492;</span> are gross sins). The reason of this
is <span class="pagenum">[Pg 295]</span> in the intention of His enemies, which
is expressed in the preceding words, to give Him His grave with the wicked. Since
He had not acted like them, God took care that He did not receive their ignominious
burial, but an honourable one. In reference to the passage under consideration,
it is said in 1 Pet. ii. 22: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8003;&#962; &#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7952;&#960;&#959;&#943;&#951;&#963;&#949;
&#959;&#8016;&#948;&#8050; &#949;&#8017;&#961;&#941;&#952;&#949; &#948;&#972;&#955;&#959;&#962; &#7952;&#957; &#964;&#8183; &#963;&#964;&#972;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#953; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166;</span>. Instead of &quot;violence,&quot; Peter intentionally
employs &quot;sin.&quot;--<i>Hofmann</i> has advanced the following arguments against the
explanation which we have given. 1. &quot;By what is this contrast (which, according
to our explanation, is contained in the words: They gave Him His grave with the
wicked, and with a rich man in His death) to be recognized in the text? There remains
no trace of a contrast, unless it be contained in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1512;&#1513;&#1506;&#1497;&#1501;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1497;&#1512;</span>. Are these really two
ideas so contradictory, that they alone are sufficient to bring into contrariety
two clauses which have altogether the appearance of being intended for the same
purpose?&quot; But in this argument, <i>Hofmann</i> overlooks the circumstance, that
the wicked are specially <i>criminals</i>--for they alone had a peculiar grave--and
that it is not the general relation of the wicked and rich to one another which
comes into consideration, but especially the relation in which they stand to one
another as regards the <i>burial</i>. If this be kept in view, it is at once evident
that the contrariety is expressed with sufficient clearness. From Isa. xxii. 16;
Job xxi. 32; Matt. xxvii. 57, it appears that the rich man, and the honourable grave,
are closely connected with each other. Hence, it must have been by an opposite activity
that to the Servant of God a grave was assigned with the wicked, and with a rich.
2. &quot;To be rich is not in itself a sin which deserved an ignominious burial, far
less received it, but on the other hand, to find his grave with a rich man is not
an indemnification to the just for the disgrace of having died the death of a criminal.&quot;
But the fact that the first Evangelist reports it so minutely (Matt. xxvii. 57-61)
clearly enough shows the importance of the circumstance; comp. also how John, in
chap. xix. 33 ff., points out the circumstance that Christ&#39;s legs were not broken,
as were those of the malefactors. In the little, the great is prepared and prefigured.
And although the burial with a rich man is, in itself, of no small importance when
viewed as the first point where the exaltation <span class="pagenum">[Pg 296]</span>
began--in the connection with the preceding and following verses, we cannot but
look upon it as being symbolically significant and important. And how could it be
otherwise, since the burial of the Servant of God with a rich man implies that the
rich man himself has been gained for Him? It has, farther, been objected that Christ
was not buried <i>with</i> Joseph, but in his grave only, but in an ideal point
of view <i>with</i> has its full right. Comp. chap. xiv. 19, where it is said to
the king of Babylon: &quot;But thou art cast out of thy grave,&quot; although, bodily, he
had not yet been in the grave; but he had a right to come like his ancestors; he
had, in an ideal point of view, taken his place there.--<i>Beck</i> says: &quot;The orthodox
expositors are strongly embarrassed with these words.&quot; That is indeed a remarkable
interchange of positions. Embarrassment!--that is the sign of everything which unscriptural
exegesis advances on this verse. It is concentrated in the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1497;&#1512;</span>. The most varied conjectures and freaks
are here so many symptoms of helpless embarrassment. According to the opinion of
several interpreters, the rich man here stands in the sense of the ungodly. In this,
even <i>Luther</i> (marginal note: &quot;rich man, one who in his doings founds himself
on riches,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, an ungodly man), and <i>Calvin</i> had preceded them. The
assertion that the rich, can simply stand for the wicked, can neither be proved
from Job xxvii. 19 (for there, according to the context, the rich is equivalent
to &quot;he who is wicked, notwithstanding his riches&quot;), nor from the word of the Lord
in Matt. xix. 23: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#965;&#963;&#954;&#972;&#955;&#969;&#962; &#960;&#955;&#959;&#973;&#963;&#953;&#959;&#962; &#949;&#7984;&#963;&#949;&#955;&#949;&#973;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#949;&#7984;&#962;
&#964;&#8052;&#957; &#946;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#955;&#949;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#959;&#8016;&#961;&#945;&#957;&#8182;&#957;.</span> For that which, on a special occasion, the Lord
here says of the rich, applies to the poor also. Poverty, not less than wealth,
is encompassed with obstacles to conversion, which can be removed only by the omnipotence
of divine grace. According to Matt. xiii. 22, the word is not only choked by the
deceitfulness of riches, but is as much so by care also, the dangers of which are
particularly set forth by our Lord in Matt. vi. 25 ff. In Prov. xxx. 8, 9 it is
said: &quot;Give me neither poverty nor riches, lest I be full and deny thee, and say:
Where is the Lord? or lest I be poor and steal, and take the name of my God in vain.&quot;
The dangers of riches are more frequently pointed out in Scripture than those of
poverty; but this fact is accounted for by the circumstance, that riches are surrounded
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 297]</span> with a glittering appearance, and that it
is therefore necessary to warn those who are apt to choose them for their highest
good. <i>Stier</i> rightly calls to mind the promise of earthly blessings to those
who fear God. But the circumstance must not be overlooked that the rich comes here
into consideration, chiefly as to his <i>burial</i>. The Prophet would then not
only proceed from the idea that all rich people are wicked, but also would simply
suppose that all the rich receive an ignominious burial. But of that, the parable
of the rich man in Luke xvi. 22, knows nothing: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#960;&#941;&#952;&#945;&#957;&#949;
&#948;&#8050; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#8001; &#960;&#955;&#959;&#973;&#963;&#953;&#959;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#964;&#940;&#966;&#951;</span>, according to his riches; it is in hell only
that he receives his reward. In opposition to <i>Gesenius</i>, <i>Hitzig</i> remarks:
&quot;That transition of the signification is a fable.&quot; Following the example of <i>Martini</i>
he derives <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1497;&#1512;</span> from the Arabic. But in opposition
to that, <i>Gesenius</i> again remarks in the <i>Thesaurus</i>: &quot;<i>Sed haud minoribus
difficultatibus laborat ea ratio, qua improbitatis significatum voluerunt Martinius
et Hitzigius, collata nimirum radice</i> <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1512;</span>
&quot;<i>caespitavit</i>.&quot; <i>Tum enim haec radix nullam prorsum cum verbo</i>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1512;</span> <i>necessitudinem habet, ita ut</i>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1497;&#1512;</span> <i>h. l.</i>
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#945;&#960;. &#955;&#949;&#947;.</span> <i>esset; tum caespitandi vis nusquam
ad peccatum, licet ad fortunam adversam, translata est.</i>&quot; If, with words of such
frequent occurrence, it were allowable to search in the dialects, the business of
the expounder would be a very ungrateful one. Nor does the form, which is commonly
passive, favour this interpretation. According to <i>Beck</i>,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1497;&#1512;</span> is another form for
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1512;&#1497;&#1509;</span>. Others would change the reading. <i>
Ewald</i> proposes <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1497;&#1511;</span>; Böttcher,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1497; &#1512;&#1506;</span>. Against all those conjectures, moreover,
the circumstance militates, that, according to them, the verse would still belong
to the humiliation of the Servant of God; whereas the description of the glorification
had already begun in the preceding verse. For <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1456;&#1502;&#1493;&#1514;&#1497;&#1493;</span>
&quot;in His death,&quot; <i>Gesenius</i> and others propose to read
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1464;&#1502;&#1493;&#1514;&#1497;&#1493;</span>, to which they assign the signification
&quot;His tomb-hill.&quot; But, altogether apart from this arbitrary change of the vowels,
there is opposed to this conjecture the circumstance, that
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1502;&#1492;</span> never occurs of the grave. According to
<i>Gesenius</i>, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1502;&#1493;&#1514;</span>, in Ezek. xliii. means
&quot;tombs;&quot; but the common signification &quot;high places,&quot; must be retained there also.
In a spiritual point of view the sanctuaries of the Lord had become &quot;high places.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 10. &quot;<i>And the Lord was pleased painfully to crush</i>
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 298]</span> <i>Him: when His soul hath given restitution,
He shall see seed, He shall prolong His days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall
prosper through His hand.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal"><i>And the Lord was pleased</i>--This pleasure of the Lord is
not such an one as proceeds from caprice. The ground on which it rests has already
been minutely exhibited in what precedes. By the vicarious influence of this suffering,
peace is to be acquired for mankind; and since this object is based upon the divine
nature, upon God&#39;s mercy, the choice of the means also, by which alone it could
be attained (for, without a violation of the divine character, sin could not remain
unpunished), must be traced to the divine character. <i>Here</i> the ground on which
the pleasure rests is stated in the words immediately following,--a connection which
is clearly indicated by the obvious relation in which the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1508;&#1509; &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span> of the close stands to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492; &#1495;&#1508;&#1509;</span> of the beginning; so that the sense
is: It was the pleasure, &amp;c., and this for the purpose that, after having made an
offering for sin, He should see seed, &amp;c. Hence the pleasure of the Lord has this
in view:--that the will of the Lord should be realized, His Servant glorified, and
the salvation of mankind promoted. <i>Painfully to crush Him.</i>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1500;&#1492;</span> &quot;to be sick,&quot; &quot;to suffer pains.&quot; In this
sense the <i>Niphal</i> occurs in Amos vi. 6, and the participle
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1495;&#1500;&#1492;</span> in the signification &quot;painful,&quot; &quot;grievous,&quot;
in Nah. iii. 19; Jer. xiv. 17, and other passages, In <i>Hiphil</i> it means: &quot;to
make painful,&quot; Mic. vi. 13. The common explanation, &quot;The Lord was pleased to crush
Him, He has made Him sick,&quot; has this against it, that Copula and Suffix are wanting
in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1495;&#1500;&#1497;</span>, and that the word would come in unconnected,
and in a very disagreeable manner. And then the passage in Micah, which we have
quoted, decides against it.--<i>When His soul hath given restitution.</i> There
cannot be any doubt that, in a formal point of view, it is the soul which gives
restitution. <i>Knobel&#39;s</i> explanation: &quot;His soul gives itself,&quot; is not countenanced
by the <i>usus loquendi</i>; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1497;&#1501;</span> is not a
reflective verb. As little can we suppose with <i>Hofmann</i> that
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1513;&#1497;&#1501;</span> is the second person, and an address
to Jehovah. In opposition to this view, there is not only the circumstance that
Jehovah is spoken <i>of</i> before and afterwards, but, in a material point of view,
the circumstance also, that offerings for sin, and, generally, all sacrifices, were
never offered up <i>by</i> God, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 299]</span> but always
<i>to</i> God. The fact also, that according to the sequel, the Servant of God receives
the reward for His meritorious work, proves that it is He who offers up the sacrifice.
But, on the other hand, it is, in point of fact, the soul only which can be the
<i>offering</i>, the <i>restitution</i>; for it could scarcely be imagined that,
just here, that should be omitted on which everything mainly depends. It is sufficiently
evident, from what precedes, <i>who</i> it is that offers the restitution; what
the restitution was, it was necessary distinctly to point out. <i>Farther</i>--In
the case of sacrifices, it is just the soul upon which every thing depends; so that
if the soul be mentioned in a context which treats of sacrifices, it is, <i>a priori</i>,
probable that it will be the object offered up. In Lev. xvii. 11, it is said: &quot;For
the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I give it to you upon the altar, to atone
for your souls, for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul,&quot; viz.,
by the soul &quot;<i>per animam, vi animae in eo sanguine constantis</i>&quot; (<i>Gussetius</i>).<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_299a" href="#ftn_299a">[8]</a></sup>
The soul, when thus considered as the passive object, is here therefore in a high
degree in its proper place; and there can the less be any doubt of its occurring
here in this sense, that it occurs twice more in vers. 11 and 12, of the natural
psychical life of the Servant of God, which was given up to suffering and death.
But, on the other hand, if the soul be considered as the active object, it stands
here at all events rather idle,--a circumstance which is sufficiently apparent from
the supposition of several interpreters, that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1508;&#1513;</span>
&quot;soul,&quot; stands here simply for the personal pronoun,--&quot;His soul,&quot; for &quot;He,&quot; a <i>
usus loquendi</i> which occurs in Arabic, but not in Hebrew. And, strictly speaking,
the offering of the sacrifice does not belong to the soul, but to the spirit of
the Servant of God, compare Heb. ix. 14, according to which passage, Christ
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#953;&#8048; &#960;&#957;&#949;&#973;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#945;&#7984;&#969;&#957;&#943;&#959;&#965; &#7953;&#945;&#965;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#963;&#942;&#957;&#949;&#947;&#954;&#949;&#957; &#7940;&#956;&#969;&#956;&#959;&#957; &#964;&#8183;
&#952;&#949;&#8183;</span>; and on the subject of the difference between soul and spirit, compare
my Commentary on Ps. iv. p. lxxxvii. But how will it now be possible to reconcile
and harmonize <span class="pagenum">[Pg 300]</span> our two results, that, in a
formal point of view, the soul is that which offers up, and, in a material point
of view, that which is offered up? By the hypothesis that, <i>in a rhetorical way
of speaking, that is here assigned to the soul as an action which, in point of fact,
is done upon it.</i> All that is necessary is to translate: &quot;If His soul puts or
gives a trespass-offering;&quot; for, &quot;to put,&quot; stands here, as it does so frequently,
in the sense of &quot;to give,&quot; compare Ezek. xx. 28, where it is used in this sense
in reference to sacrifice. But, in point of fact, this is equivalent to: &quot;If it
is made a trespass-offering,&quot; or, &quot;If He, the Servant of God, offers it as a trespass-offering.&quot;
It is analogous to this when, in Job xiv. 22, the soul of the deceased laments;
and a cognate mode of representation prevails in Rev. vi. 9, where, to the souls
of the slain, life is assigned for the sole purpose of their giving utterance to
that which was the result of the thought regarding them, in combination with the
circumstances of the time. To a certain degree analogous is also chap. lx. 7, where
it is said of the sacrificial animals: &quot;They ascend, for my pleasure, mine altar.&quot;
The fact that it is in reality the soul which is offered up, is confirmed also by
the remarkable reference to the passage before us in the discourses of our Lord.
Our Lord says in John x. 12: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#947;&#974; &#949;&#7984;&#956;&#953; &#8001; &#960;&#959;&#953;&#956;&#8052;&#957; &#8001; &#954;&#945;&#955;&#972;&#962;&#903;
&#8001; &#960;&#959;&#953;&#956;&#8052;&#957; &#8001; &#954;&#945;&#955;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#967;&#965;&#967;&#8052;&#957; &#945;&#8017;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#964;&#943;&#952;&#951;&#963;&#953;&#957; &#8017;&#960;&#8050;&#961; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#946;&#940;&#964;&#969;&#957;.</span> Ver. 15:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#967;&#965;&#967;&#942;&#957; &#956;&#959;&#965; &#964;&#943;&#952;&#951;&#956;&#953; &#8017;&#960;&#8050;&#961; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#946;&#940;&#964;&#969;&#957;.</span>
Vers. 17, 18: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#953;&#8048; &#964;&#959;&#8166;&#964;&#959; &#8001; &#960;&#945;&#964;&#8052;&#961; &#956;&#949; &#7936;&#947;&#945;&#960;&#8119;, &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#7952;&#947;&#8060;
&#964;&#943;&#952;&#951;&#956;&#953; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#968;&#965;&#967;&#942;&#957; &#956;&#959;&#965; &#7989;&#957;&#945; &#960;&#940;&#955;&#953;&#957; &#955;&#940;&#946;&#969; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#942;&#957;. &#927;&#8016;&#948;&#949;&#8054;&#962; &#945;&#7988;&#961;&#949;&#953; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8052;&#957; &#7936;&#960;&#700; &#7952;&#956;&#959;&#8166;, &#7936;&#955;&#955;&#700; &#7952;&#947;&#8060;
&#964;&#943;&#952;&#951;&#956;&#953; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8052;&#957; &#7936;&#960;&#700; &#7952;&#956;&#945;&#965;&#964;&#959;&#8166;&#903; &#7952;&#958;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#7956;&#967;&#969; &#952;&#949;&#8150;&#957;&#945;&#953; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#942;&#957;, &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#958;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#7956;&#967;&#969; &#960;&#940;&#955;&#953;&#957; &#955;&#945;&#946;&#949;&#8150;&#957;
&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#942;&#957;.</span> In John xv. 13: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#949;&#943;&#950;&#959;&#957;&#945; &#964;&#945;&#973;&#964;&#951;&#962; &#7936;&#947;&#940;&#960;&#951;&#957;
&#959;&#8016;&#948;&#949;&#8054;&#962; &#7956;&#967;&#949;&#953; &#7989;&#957;&#945; &#964;&#8054;&#962; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#968;&#965;&#967;&#8052;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#952;&#8135; &#8017;&#960;&#8050;&#961; &#966;&#943;&#955;&#969;&#957; &#945;&#8017;&#964;&#959;&#8166;.</span> The expression:
&quot;To put one&#39;s soul for some one,&quot; does not, independently and by itself, occur anywhere
else in the New Testament; in John xiii. 37, 38, Peter takes the word out of the
mouth of the Saviour, and in 1 John iii. 16, it is used in reference to those declarations
of our Lord. The expression is nowhere met with in any profane writers, nor in the
Hellenistic <i>usus loquendi</i>. The following reasons prove that it refers to
the Old Testament, and especially to the passage under consideration. 1. Its Hebraizing
character. <i>De Wette</i> and <i>Lücke</i> erroneously take
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#952;&#949;&#8150;&#957;&#945;&#953;</span> in the sense of laying down; but that
is too negative. It is evident that the Hebraism &quot;to put,&quot; instead of &quot;to give,&quot;
has been <span class="pagenum">[Pg 301]</span> transferred into Greek, as is proved
by the synonymous <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#959;&#8166;&#957;&#945;&#953; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#968;&#965;&#967;&#8052;&#957; &#945;&#8017;&#964;&#959;&#8166;</span> in
Mark x. 45; Matt. xx. 28.--2. The fact that the same uncommon expression occurs
not fewer than five times in the same discourse of Christ, and that so intentionally
and emphatically, is explicable only when it was thereby intended to point to an
important fundamental passage of the Old Testament.--3. In the discourses of our
Lord, the expression is, no less than in the passage before us, used of His sacrificial
death.--If, then, it be established that those passages in which our Lord speaks
of a <i>putting</i> of His soul, refer to the passage under consideration, this
must be acknowledged of those also in which He speaks of a <i>giving</i> of His
soul, as in Matt. xx. 28: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#959;&#8166;&#957;&#945;&#953; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#968;&#965;&#967;&#8052;&#957; &#945;&#8017;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#955;&#973;&#964;&#961;&#959;&#957;
&#7936;&#957;&#964;&#8054; &#960;&#959;&#955;&#955;&#8182;&#957;</span>, where the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#955;&#973;&#964;&#961;&#959;&#957;</span> clearly
points to the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1513;&#1501;</span> here. In all those utterances,
the Saviour simply has reduced the words to what they signify, just as, in quoting
the passage Zech. xiii. 7, in Matt. xxvi. 31, He likewise drops the rhetorical figure,
the address to the sword. He himself appears simply as He who offers up; the soul
is that which is offered up.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1513;&#1501;</span> is, in Numb.
v. 5, called that of which some one has unjustly robbed another, and which he is
bound to <i>repay</i> to him. An essential feature of sin is the <i>robbing of God</i>
which is thereby committed, the debt thereby incurred, which implies the necessity
of <i>recompence</i>. All sin-offerings are, in the Mosaic economy, at the same
time debt-offerings; and this feature is very intentionally and emphatically pointed
out in them. If, besides the sin-offerings, there is still established a kind of
trespass-offerings, the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1513;&#1501;</span>, for sins in which
the idea of incurring a debt comes out with special prominence, this is done only
with the view, that this feature, thus brought forward by itself and independently,
may be so much the more deeply impressed, in order that, in the other sin-offerings
too, it may be the more clearly perceived. Compare the investigation on the sin-offerings
and trespass-offerings in my work on the <i>Genuineness of the Pentateuch</i>, ii.
p. 174 ff. But the sin- and trespass-offerings of the Old Testament typically point
to a true spiritual sin- and trespass-offering; and their chief object was to awaken
in the people of God the consciousness of the necessity of substitution (compare
my Book: <i>Die Opfer der Heil. Schrift</i>, Berlin 1852). This antetypical sacrifice
will be offered up by the true High-Priest. For the sins of the human race which
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 302]</span> without compensation, cannot be forgiven,
He furnishes the restitution which could not be paid by the sinners, and thereby
works out the justification of the sinner before God.--To the trespass-offering
here, all those passages of the New Testament point, in which Christ is spoken of
as the sacrifice for our sins, especially 2 Cor. v. 21, where the apostle says that
God made Christ to be <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#961;&#8055;&#945;</span> for us, that
in Him we might be made righteous before God; Rom. viii. 3, according to which God
sent Christ <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#961;&#8055;&#945;&#962;</span>, as a sin-offering;
Rom. iii. 25, where Christ is called <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7985;&#955;&#945;&#963;&#964;&#8053;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#957;</span>,
propitiation; 1 John ii. 2: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#7985;&#955;&#945;&#963;&#956;&#972;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#953;
&#960;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#953;&#8182;&#957; &#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957;</span>, iv. 10; Heb. ix. 14.--The
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1460;&#1501;</span> at the beginning must not be explained
by &quot;<i>as</i>&quot; a signification, which it never has; it has its ordinary signification
&quot;when,&quot; and the Future is to be understood as a real Future: the offering of the
trespass-offering is the <i>condition</i> of His seeing, &amp;c., and, according to
the context, indeed, the absolutely <i>necessary</i> condition. The translation:
&quot;Even if&quot; could proceed from one only who had not understood this context. It is
not death in general, but sacrificial death, which is specially spoken of; and to
such a death, which is a necessary foundation of the glorification, and especially
the foundation of &quot;He shall see seed,&quot; &quot;when&quot; only is suitable, and not &quot;even if.&quot;--In
the words: &quot;He shall see seed, prolong His days,&quot; that is, in a higher sense, promised
to this Servant of God, which, under the Old Testament, was considered as a distinguished
divine blessing. The spiritual interpretation has the less difficulty, that it must
necessarily be granted in the case of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1513;&#1501;</span>,
immediately preceding. Just in the same relation in which the sin-offering of the
Servant of God stands to the sin-offering of the bullocks and goats, does His posterity,
the length of His days, stand to the ordinary posterity and length of days. The
<i>seed</i> of the Servant of God, identical with His generation, in ver. 8, are
just those for whom, according to the words immediately preceding, He offers His
soul as a trespass-offering--the many who, according to ver. 12, are assigned to
Him as His portion; who, according to chap. lii. 15, are to be sprinkled by Him;
who, according to ver. 11, are to be justified by Him; they whose sins He has taken
upon Him (ver. 5), and for whom He intercedes before God, ver. 12. Even in the Old
Testament, the word &quot;children&quot; is frequently used in a spiritual
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 303]</span> sense. In Gen. vi. 2, believers appear as
the children of God. The Israelites are not unfrequently designated as sons of Jehovah.
Those prophets who were endowed with specially rich gifts, were surrounded by a
crowd of <i>sons</i> of the prophets. The wise man, too, looks upon his disciples
as his spiritual sons, Prov. iv. 20, xix. 27; Eccles. xii. 12. In the New Testament,
the Lord addresses the man sick of the palsy by <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#941;&#954;&#957;&#959;&#957;</span>.
Matt. ix. 2; and with special emphasis. His apostles as <i>little children</i>,
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#949;&#954;&#957;&#943;&#945; &#7956;&#964;&#953; &#956;&#953;&#954;&#961;&#8056;&#957; &#956;&#949;&#952;&#700; &#8017;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#956;&#953;</span>, John xiii.
33; and the Apostles, too, consider those who have been awakened by their ministry
as their spiritual children, 1 Cor. iv. 17; 1 Tim. i. 2; 1 Pet. v. 13. <i>The thought
is this--that in the sacrificial death of the Servant of God there will be an animating
power; that, just thereby, He will found His Church.</i> The words: &quot;He shall prolong
His days,&quot; allude, as it appears, to the promise which was given to David and his
seed, comp. Ps. xxi 5: &quot;He asked life of thee, and thou gavest it to him, even length
of days for ever and ever;&quot; 1 Sam. vii. 13: &quot;I will establish the throne of His
kingdom for ever,&quot; comp. ver. 16; Ps. lxxxix. 5, cxxxii. 12,--a promise which found
its final fulfilment in Christ. But the long life here must not be viewed as <i>
isolated</i>, but must be understood in close connection both with what precedes
and what follows. It is the life of the Servant of God in communion with His seed,
in carrying out the will of God. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1508;&#1509;</span> never
means &quot;business,&quot; but always &quot;pleasure;&quot; and this signification, which occurs in
chap. xliv. 28 also, is here the less to be given up, that the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1508;&#1509;</span> here, at the close, evidently refers to
the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1508;&#1509;</span> at the beginning. By this reference,
the reason is stated why it was the <i>pleasure</i> of the Lord to crush Him. According
to vers. 11 and 12, it is the pleasure of God that sinners should be justified through
Him, on the foundation of His vicarious suffering; according to chap. xlii. and
xlix., that Israel should be redeemed, and the Gentiles saved. While the pleasure
of the Lord is prospering through His hand, he, at the same time, sees seed.</p>
<p class="normal">In vers. 11 and 12, we have the closing words of the Lord.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 11. &quot;<i>On account of the sufferings of His soul He seeth,
He is satisfied; by His knowledge He, the Righteous One, my Servant, shall justify
the many, and He shall bear their iniquities.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 304]</span></p>
<p class="normal">The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1503;</span> in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1506;&#1502;&#1500;</span> is &quot;on account of.&quot; In ver. 10, to which
the discourse of the Lord is, in the first instance, connected, the suffering likewise
appears as the cause of the glorification. The Vulgate translates: &quot;<i>Pro eo quod
laboravit anima ejus</i>;&quot; the LXX. rather feebly: <span lang="el" class="Greek">
&#65279; &#7936;&#960;&#8056; &#964;&#959;&#965;&#770; &#960;&#972;&#957;&#959;&#965; &#964;&#951;&#770;&#962; &#968;&#965;&#967;&#951;&#770;&#962; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#965;&#770;</span>. With <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1497;&#1512;&#1488;&#1492;</span> the object is omitted, and that purposely, in order that the words of
God may be immediately connected with ver. 10. We must supply: the fruits and rewards
of His sufferings announced there (just as, in a manner quite similar, in chap.
xlix. 7, &quot;they shall see,&quot; refers to the preceding verse), specially that the pleasure
of the Lord shall prosper through His hand,--which, in the sequel, is enlarged upon.
The words: &quot;He is satisfied,&quot; point out that the blissful consequences of the atoning
suffering will take place in the highest fulness. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1489;&#1491;&#1506;&#1514;&#1493;</span> must, according to the accents, be connected with the subsequent words.
The knowledge does not belong to the Servant of God, in so far as it dwells in Him,
but as it concerns Him; just as the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#947;&#940;&#960;&#951; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166;</span>
in Luke xi. 42, and in other passages does not mean the love which dwells in God,
but the love which has God for its object. &quot;By His knowledge&quot; is thus equivalent
to: by their knowing Him, getting acquainted with Him, This knowledge of the Servant
of God according to His principal work, as it was described in what precedes, viz.,
mediatorial office, or <i>faith</i>, is the subjective condition of justification.
As the efficient cause of it, the vicarious suffering of the Servant of God was
represented in the preceding context. It is just this, which is subjectively appropriated
by the knowledge of the Servant of God, and which must be conceived of as essential
and living. Thus <i>J. H. Michaelis</i> says: <i>Per scientiam sui</i> (<i>Clericus</i>:
<i>Cognitione sui</i>), <i>non qua ipse cognoscit, sed qua vera fide et fiducia
ipse tanquam propitiator cognoscitur.</i> The explanation: &quot;By His knowledge (in
the sense of understanding) or wisdom,&quot; gives a sense unsuitable to the context.
In the whole prophecy, the Servant of God does not appear as a Teacher, but as a
Redeemer; and the relation of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span> to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1510;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span> shows that here, too, He is considered
as such. To supply, as is done by some interpreters: &quot;in which (knowledge) He perceived
the only possible means of redemption and reconciliation, and gave practical effect
to this knowledge,&quot; is, after all, too unnatural; the <span class="pagenum">[Pg
305]</span> discourse would in that case be so incomplete that we should have been
shut up to conjectures. Others translate: &quot;By His doctrine;&quot; but
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1506;&#1514;</span> never means &quot;doctrine.&quot; The explanation:
&quot;By His full, absolute knowledge of the divine counsel&quot; (<i>Hävernick</i>), or,
&quot;by the absolute knowledge of God&quot; (<i>Umbreit</i>), puts into the simple word,
which only means &quot;knowledge,&quot; more than is implied in it. According to the parallelism
with the subsequent words: &quot;He shall bear their iniquities.&quot; and according to the
context (for, in the whole section, the Servant of God is not described as a <i>
Teacher</i>, but as a <i>Priest</i>, as He who, in order to expiate our sin, has
offered himself up as a sacrifice), <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1510;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span>
must not be translated &quot;to convert,&quot; but to &quot;justify.&quot; In favour of this translation
is also the construction with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span>, which is
to be accounted for from a modification of the signification: &quot;to bring righteousness.&quot;
But it is specially the position of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span> which
is decisive in favour of it. It is for the justification only that the personal
righteousness of the Servant of God has that significant meaning which is, in this
manner, assigned to it. Moreover, in the <i>usus loquendi</i>, the meaning <i>to
justify</i> only occurs. In it, the verb is used, chap. v. 23, l. 8; and there is
no reason for deviating from it in the only passage which can be adduced in favour
of the signification &quot;to convert,&quot; viz., Dan. xii. 3: &quot;And the wise,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1499;&#1497;&#1500;&#1497;&#1501;</span>, shall shine as the brightness of
the firmament, and <i>justify</i> many as the stars, for ever and ever.&quot; In this
passage, that is applied to believers which, in chap. liii., was ascribed to Christ.
Even a certain strangeness in the style makes us suppose such a transference; and
the fact, that Daniel had our passage specially in view, cannot be doubted, if we
compare the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1499;&#1497;&#1500;&#1497;&#1501;</span> of Daniel with the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1513;&#1499;&#1497;&#1500;</span> with which the prophecy under consideration
opens (chap, lii, 13), and Daniel&#39;s: &quot;justify many,&quot; with the passage before us.
The justification, which in its full sense belongs to Christ the Head only, is by
Daniel ascribed to the &quot;wise,&quot; because they are the instruments through whom many
attain justification; <i>Calvin</i>: <i>Quia causa sunt ministerialis justitiae
et salutis multorum.</i> <i>Hävernick</i> refers, for a comparison, to 1 Tim. iv.
16: &quot;For, in doing this, thou shalt save both thyself and them that hear thee.&quot;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span> must not be immediately connected with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491;&#1497;</span>; for, in that case, it ought to have
stood after it, and been qualified <span class="pagenum">[Pg 306]</span> by the
article. On the contrary, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span> stands first,
because it stands by itself and substantively: &quot;The righteous One, My Servant.&quot;
A similar construction occurs, Jer. iii., vii. 10: &quot;And she does not turn unto me,
the treacherous one, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1490;&#1497;&#1512;&#1492;</span>, her sister Judah.&quot;
By thus making <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span> prominent, and connecting
it immediately with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1510;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span>, it is intended
to point out the close connection in which the righteousness of the Servant of God,
who, although altogether innocent and sinless, ver. 9, yet suffered the punishment
of sin, stands with the justification to be bestowed by Him. <i>Maurer</i> thus
pertinently expresses this: &quot;To many, for righteous is my Servant, shall He procure
righteousness.&quot; By these words thus the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1494;&#1492;</span>,
in chap. lii. 15, is explained; and the seal of the divine confirmation is impressed
upon that which, in vers. 4-6, the believing Church had said, especially upon the
words: &quot;By His wounds we are healed,&quot; ver. 5. The &quot;many&quot; points back to chap. liii.
15, and forms the contrast not to <i>all</i> (<i>Stier</i>: &quot;Because He cannot,
overturning all laws, save all by coercion, or arbitrary will,&quot;--a limitation which
would in this context be out of place), but to <i>few</i>: The one, the many, Rom.
v. 15.--&quot;And He shall bear their iniquities;&quot; the iniquities and their punishment,
as a heavy burden which the Servant of God lifts off from those who are groaning
under their weight, and takes upon himself <i>Jerome</i> says: &quot;And He himself shall
bear the iniquities which they could not bear, and by the weight of which they were
borne down.&quot; <i>Calvin</i> expresses himself thus: &quot;A wonderful change indeed! Christ
justifies men by giving them His righteousness, and in exchange. He takes upon Him
their sins, that He may expiate them.&quot; In opposition to those who translate: &quot;He
<i>bore</i> their iniquities,&quot; (the Future might, in that case, he accounted for
from the Prophet&#39;s viewing the whole transaction as present), even <i>Gesenius</i>
has remarked that the preceding and subsequent Futures all refer to the state of
glorification. Even the parallelism with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1510;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span>
shows that we must translate as the LXX. do: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#8048;&#962;
&#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#943;&#945;&#962; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#969;&#770;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#7936;&#957;&#959;&#943;&#963;&#949;&#953;</span>. Moreover, the subject of discourse in the
whole verse is not the <i>acquiring</i> of the righteousness, which was done in
the state of humiliation, but the <i>communication</i> of it, as the subjective
condition of which the knowledge of the Servant of God was mentioned in the preceding
clause. <span class="pagenum">[Pg 307]</span> In the case of every one who, after
the exaltation of the Servant of God, fulfils this condition, He takes upon Himself
their sins, <i>i.e.</i>, He causes His vicarious suffering to be imputed to them,
and grants them pardon. The expression: &quot;He shall bear their iniquities&quot; is, in
point of fact, identical with: &quot;He shall <i>justify</i> them.&quot; The Servant of God
has borne the sin once for all; by the power of His substitution, effected by the
shedding of His blood, He takes upon himself the sins of every individual who <i>
knows</i> Him. The &quot;taking away&quot; is implied in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1505;&#1489;&#1500;</span>
in so far only, as it is done by <i>bearing</i>. It was only because he was misled
by his rationalistic tendencies, that <i>Gesenius</i> explains: &quot;And He lightens
the burden of their sins, <i>i.e.</i>, by His doctrine He shall correct them, and
thereby procure to them pardon.&quot; By such an explanation he contradicts himself,
inasmuch as, in ver. 4, he referred the bearing of the diseases and pains to the
vicarious satisfaction. It cannot, in any way, be said of the Teacher, that he takes
upon himself iniquities.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 12. &quot;<i>Therefore will I give Him a portion in the many,
and He shall divide the spoil with the strong, because He hath poured out His soul
unto death and was numbered with the transgressors, and He beareth the sin of many,
and for the transgressors He shall make intercession.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The first words are thus explained by many interpreters: &quot;Therefore
I will give Him mighty ones for His portion, and strong ones He shall divide as
a spoil.&quot; But <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1500;&#1511;</span> with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span> cannot mean simply &quot;to allot,&quot; (although,
indeed, this explanation is given by the LXX.; <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#65279; &#948;&#953;&#8048;
&#964;&#959;&#965;&#770;&#964;&#959; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#962; &#954;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#959;&#957;&#959;&#956;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#953; &#960;&#959;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#8058;&#962;</span>; Vulg.: <i>ideo dispertiam ei plurimos</i>);
it only signifies &quot;to give a portion in,&quot; Job xxxix. 17. From the comparison with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1489;&#1497;&#1501;</span> in ver. 11 and at the close of this verse,
as well as from the reference to the <i>many nations</i> in the sketch, ver. 15,
it is evident that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1489;&#1497;&#1501;</span> here, too, cannot
mean &quot;mighty ones,&quot; but &quot;many.&quot; Even elsewhere, the signification &quot;great ones,&quot;
&quot;mighty ones,&quot; appears oftentimes to be only forced upon
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1489;&#1497;&#1501;</span>. In Job xxxv. 9, the &quot;many&quot; are the many
evil-doers; and in Job xxxii. 9, the utterance: &quot;Not the <i>many</i> are wise,&quot;
is explained from the circumstance, that the view given by Job&#39;s friends was that
of the great mass. The fact that the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514;</span> in
the second clause is not the sign of the Accusative, but a Preposition,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 308]</span> is probable even from the circumstance, that
the former <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514;</span> commonly stands before qualified
nouns only; and, farther from the corresponding; &quot;with the transgressors.&quot; But what
is conclusive is, that the phrase <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1500;&#1511; &#1513;&#1500;&#1500;</span>
always means &quot;to divide spoil,&quot; never &quot;to distribute as spoil,&quot; and that the phrase
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1500;&#1511; &#1513;&#1500;&#1500; &#1488;&#1514; &#1490;&#1488;&#1497;&#1501;</span> &quot;to divide spoil with the
proud&quot; occurs in Prov. xvi. 19. The reason of the use of this expression lies in
the reference to ordinary victors and conquerors of the world, especially to Cyrus.
By His sufferings and death, the Servant of God shall secure to himself the same
successes as they do by sword and bow. Although participating in the government
of the world, and dividing spoil are here ascribed to the Servant of God, yet the
participation in worldly triumphs is not spoken of On the contrary, behind the
<i>equality</i> which has given rise to the secular-looking expression (the thought
is merely this, that through Christ and His sacrificial death, the Kingdom of God
enters into the rank of world-conquering powers), a contrast lies concealed,--as
appears, 1. From what is stated, in the preceding verses, about the manner in which
the Servant of God has attained to this glory. Worldly triumphs are not acquired
by the deepest <i>humiliation</i>, by sufferings and death voluntarily undergone
for the salvation of mankind. 2. From that which the Servant of God, in the state
of glory, is to do to those who turn to Him. According to chap. lii. 15, He is to
sprinkle them with His blood; and this sprinkling is there expressly stated as the
reason of the reverential homage of the Gentile world. He is to justify them and
to bear their sins, ver. 11, and to make intercession for them, ver. 12. All that
does not apply to a worldly conqueror and ruler.--The merits of the Servant of God
are then once more pointed out,--the merits by which He has acquired so exalted
and all-important a position to himself, and, at the same time, to the Kingdom of
God, of which He is the Head. &quot;Because He hath poured out His soul unto death,&quot;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1512;&#1492;</span> in the <i>Niphal</i>, &quot;to be poured out,&quot;
means in <i>Piel</i> &quot;to pour out,&quot; Gen. xxiv. 20, and Ps. cxli. 8, where it is
said of the soul: &quot;Do not pour out my soul,&quot; just as here the <i>Hiphil</i> is used.
The term has been transferred to the <i>soul</i> from the <i>blood</i>, in which
is the soul. Gen. ix. 4: &quot;Flesh with its soul (namely with its blood) you shall
not eat.&quot; Ver. 5: &quot;Your blood in <span class="pagenum">[Pg 309]</span> which your
souls.&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1502;&#1504;&#1492;</span>, &quot;He was numbered,&quot; is here,
according to the context, equivalent to: He caused himself to be numbered; for it
is only that which was undergone voluntarily which can be stated as the reason of
the <i>reward</i>. This voluntary undergoing, however, is not implied in the word
itself, but only in the connection with: &quot;He hath poured out His soul;&quot; for that
signifies a voluntary act. The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1513;&#1506;&#1497;&#1501;</span> here,
just as the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1513;&#1506;&#1497;&#1501;</span> in ver. 9, are not sinners,
but criminals. This appears from the connection in which the being &quot;numbered with
the transgressors&quot; stands with the &quot;pouring out of the soul unto death.&quot; We can
hence think of executed criminals only. The pure, innocent One was not only numbered
with sinners, such as all men are, but He was numbered with <i>criminals</i>. It
is in this sense also that our Lord understands the words, in His quotation of them
in Luke xxii. 37: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#955;&#941;&#947;&#969; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#8017;&#956;&#8150;&#957;, &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#7957;&#964;&#953; &#964;&#959;&#8166;&#964;&#959; &#964;&#8056;
&#947;&#949;&#947;&#961;&#945;&#956;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#957; &#948;&#949;&#8150; &#964;&#949;&#955;&#949;&#963;&#952;&#8134;&#957;&#945;&#953; &#7952;&#957; &#7952;&#956;&#959;&#943;, &#964;&#972;· &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#956;&#949;&#964;&#8048; &#7936;&#957;&#972;&#956;&#969;&#957; &#7952;&#955;&#959;&#947;&#943;&#963;&#952;&#951;, &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#964;&#8056; &#960;&#949;&#961;&#8054;
&#7952;&#956;&#959;&#8166; &#964;&#941;&#955;&#959;&#962; &#7956;&#967;&#949;&#953;</span>; Compare Matt. xxvi. 54, where the Lord strengthens His disciples
against the offence of His being taken a prisoner, by saying, with a view to the
passage before us: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#8182;&#962; &#959;&#8022;&#957; &#960;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#969;&#952;&#8182;&#963;&#953;&#957; &#945;&#7985; &#947;&#961;&#945;&#966;&#945;&#8054;, &#8005;&#964;&#953;
&#959;&#8021;&#964;&#969; &#948;&#949;&#8150; &#947;&#949;&#957;&#941;&#963;&#952;&#945;&#953;</span>; ver. 56, where, after having reproached the guards for
having numbered Him with criminals: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8033;&#962; &#7952;&#960;&#8054; &#955;&#8131;&#963;&#964;&#8052;&#957;
&#7952;&#958;&#942;&#955;&#952;&#949;&#964;&#949; &#956;&#949;&#964;&#8048; &#956;&#945;&#967;&#945;&#953;&#961;&#8182;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#958;&#973;&#955;&#969;&#957; &#963;&#965;&#955;&#955;&#945;&#946;&#949;&#8150;&#957; &#956;&#949;</span>, He says to them:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#959;&#8166;&#964;&#959; &#948;&#8050; &#8005;&#955;&#959;&#957; &#947;&#941;&#947;&#959;&#957;&#949;&#957; &#7989;&#957;&#945; &#960;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#969;&#952;&#8182;&#963;&#953;&#957; &#945;&#7985; &#947;&#961;&#945;&#966;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#8182;&#957;
&#960;&#961;&#959;&#966;&#951;&#964;&#8182;&#957;.</span>. Mark, in chap. xv. 28, designates the fact that two robbers were
crucified with Christ, as the most perfect fulfilment of our prophecy. It was in
this fact that it came out most palpably, that Christ had been made like criminals.
The rulers of the people caused two common criminals to be crucified with Him, just
that they might declare that they put Him altogether among their number.--&quot;And He
beareth the sin of many, and for the transgressors He shall make intercession.&quot;
By <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1492;&#1493;&#1488;</span>, it is indicated that the subsequent
words are no more to be viewed as depending on <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1495;&#1514;
&#1488;&#1513;&#1512;</span>.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1508;&#1490;&#1497;&#1506;</span> must not, as is done by
the LXX., be referred to the state of humiliation; for the Future in the preceding
verses has reference to the exaltation. The parallel
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1513;&#1488;</span> must therefore be viewed as a <i>Praeteritum
propheticum</i>. It corresponds with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1505;&#1489;&#1500;</span>
in ver. 11, and, like it, does not designate something done but once by the Servant
of God, but something which He does constantly. The intercession is
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 310]</span> here brought into close connection with the
bearing of the sin, by which Christ represents himself as being the true <i>sin-offering</i>
(comp. ver. 10, where He was designated as the true <i>trespass-offering</i>), and
hence it is equivalent to: He will make intercession for sinners, by taking upon
himself their sin,--of which the thief on the cross was the first instance. This
close connection, and the deep meaning suggested by it, are overlooked and lost
by those expositors who, in the intercession, think of prayer only. <i>The servant
of God, on the contrary, makes intercession, by pleading before God His merit, as
the ground of the acceptance of the transgressors, and of the pardon of their sins.</i>
This is evident from the connection also in which: &quot;For the transgressors He shall
make intercession,&quot; stands with: &quot;He was numbered with the transgressors.&quot; The vicarious
suffering is thereby pointed out as the ground of the intercession. <i>Calvin</i>
says: &quot;Under the Old Testament dispensation, the High-priest, who never went in
without blood, made intercession for the people. What was there foreshadowed has
been fulfilled in Christ. For, in the first place. He offered up the sacrifice of
His body, and shed His blood, and thus suffered the punishment due to us. And, in
the second place, in order that the expiation might profit us. He undertakes the
office of an advocate, and makes intercession for all who, by faith, lay hold of
this sacrifice.&quot; Comp. Rom. viii. 34: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8003;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#957;&#964;&#965;&#947;&#967;&#940;&#957;&#949;&#953;
&#8017;&#960;&#8050;&#961; &#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957;</span>; Hebr. ix. 24, according to which passage Christ is entered into
the holy places <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#957;&#8166;&#957; &#7952;&#956;&#966;&#945;&#957;&#953;&#963;&#952;&#8134;&#957;&#945;&#953; &#964;&#8183; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#963;&#974;&#960;&#8179; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166;
&#8017;&#960;&#8050;&#961; &#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957;</span>; 1 John ii. 1: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#945;&#961;&#940;&#954;&#955;&#951;&#964;&#959;&#957; &#7956;&#967;&#959;&#956;&#949;&#957;
&#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#960;&#945;&#964;&#941;&#961;&#945; &#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166;&#957; &#935;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#948;&#943;&#954;&#945;&#953;&#959;&#957;</span>.</p>
<hr class="W20">
<p class="normal">We have hitherto expounded the passage before us without any regard
to the difference of the interpretation as to the whole, and have supposed the reference
to Christ to be the correct one. But it is still incumbent upon us: I. to give the
history of the interpretation; II. to refute the arguments against the Messianic
interpretation; III. to state the arguments in favour of it; and IV. to show that
the non-Messianic interpretation is untenable.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_262a" href="#ftnRef_262a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[1]</sup></a> One needs only to consider passages such as
	this, to be enabled to distinguish between the ideal and real Present, and to
	be convinced of the utter futility of the chief argument against the genuineness
	of the second part, viz., that the Babylonish exile appears as present. &quot;Proceeding
	from the certainty of deliverance&quot;--so <i>Hitzig</i> remarks--&quot;the Prophet here
	<i>beholds</i> in spirit that going on, to which, in chap. xl. 9, he exhorts.&quot;
	If the Prophet beholds at all in the spirit, why should he not see in spirit
	the misery also?</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_270a" href="#ftnRef_270a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[2]</sup></a> <i>Simonis. Onom.</i>:
	<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1494;&#1497;&#1492;</span>, <i>quem aspergat</i>, <i>i.e.</i>,
	<i>purificet et expiet Domimus</i>; <i>Gesenius</i>: <i>quod vix aliter explicari
	potest quam</i>: <i>quem consperget</i>, <i>i.e.</i>, <i>expiabit Jehova.</i>
	<i>Fürst</i> gives a different derivation; but it at once shows itself to be
	untenable.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_273a" href="#ftnRef_273a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[3]</sup></a> In order to defend this explanation, interpreters
	have referred to the LXX: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#8021;&#964;&#969; &#952;&#945;&#965;&#956;&#940;&#963;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#7956;&#952;&#957;&#951;
	&#960;&#959;&#955;&#955;&#8048; &#7952;&#960;&#700; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8179;&#770;</span>; but even <i>Martini</i> remarks: &quot;From a dark passage,
	they have tried, by ingenious conjecturing, to bring out any sense whatsoever.&quot;</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_274a" href="#ftnRef_274a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[4]</sup></a> Thus <i>Theodoret</i> says: &quot;For they who
	did not receive the prophetic promises and announcements, but served idols,
	shall, through the messengers of the truth, see the power of the promised One,
	and perceive His greatness.&quot; <i>Jerome</i>: &quot;The rulers of the world, who had
	not the Law and the Prophets, and to whom no prophecies concerning Him were
	given, even they shall see and perceive. By the comparison with them, the hardness
	of the Jews is reproved, who, although they saw and heard, yet verified Isaiah&#39;s
	prophecy against them.&quot; <i>Calvin</i>: &quot;The Jews had, through the Law and the
	Prophets, heard something of Christ, but to the Gentiles He was altogether unknown.
	Hence it follows that these words properly refer to the Gentiles.&quot;</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_276a" href="#ftnRef_276a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[5]</sup></a> According to <i>Knobel</i>, the author is
	supposed to speak, in chap. liii. 1, in his own name and that of the other prophets;
	in vers. 2-6, in the name of the whole people; in vers. 7-10, in his own name.
	An explanation which is compelled to resort to such changes, without their being
	in any way clearly and distinctly intimated, pronounces its own condemnation.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_290a" href="#ftnRef_290a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[6]</sup></a> <i>Gesenius</i>: <i>Neglecta actatis notione
	saepe est genus hominum, in bonam partem--in malam partem</i>;--and in reference
	to the passage under consideration: <i>Genus ejus, Servi Jehovae, sunt homines
	qui iisdem cum illo studiis tenentur.</i> In the same manner it is explained
	by <i>Maurer</i>, who refers to Ps. xiv. 5, xxiv. 6.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_292a" href="#ftnRef_292a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[7]</sup></a> The double <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
	&#1500;&#1502;&#1493;</span> in Deut. xxxiii. 2 refers to Israel, not to God. In reference to
	the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1502;&#1493;</span> in Is. xliv. 15, <i>J. H. Michaelis</i>
	remarks: <i>iis talibus diis.</i> ver. 7. But the suffix rather refers to the
	trees, ver. 14; comp. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1492;&#1501;</span> in ver. 15.
	If construed thus, the sense is much more expressive. In Job xxii. 2,
	<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1499;&#1497;&#1500;</span> is used collectively. In Ps. xi.
	7, the plural suffix is to be explained from the richness and fulness of the
	Divine Being. These are all the passages which <i>Ewald</i> quotes in § 247
	d.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_299a" href="#ftnRef_299a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[8]</sup></a> Thus <i>Bähr</i>, <i>Symbolik</i>, ii. S.
	207, says: It is not the material elements of the blood which make it a means
	of expiation, but it is the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1508;&#1513;</span> which
	is connected with it, which is in it, whose instrument and bearer it is, which
	gives to it atoning power. The <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1508;&#1513;</span> is
	thus the centre around which, in the last instance, everything moves. This is
	especially confirmed by the circumstance, that the object of the expiation to
	be effected by the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1508;&#1513;</span> in the sacrificial
	blood, is, according to this passage, the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1508;&#1513;</span>
	of him who offers up the sacrifice.</p>
</div>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 311]</span></p>
<h3><a name="div2_311" href="#div2Ref_311">I. HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION.</a></h3>
<h4><a name="div3_311" href="#div3Ref_311">A. WITH THE JEWS.</a></h4>
<p class="normal">1. There cannot be any doubt that, in those earlier times, when
the Jews were still more firmly attached to the tradition of their Fathers,--when
the carnal disposition had not yet become so entirely prevalent among them,--and
when controversy with the Christians had not made them so narrow-minded in their
Exegesis, the Messianic explanation was pretty generally received, at least by the
better portion of the people. This is admitted even by those later interpreters
who pervert the prophecy, <i>e.g.</i>, <i>Abenezra</i>, <i>Jarchi</i>, <i>Abarbanel</i>,
<i>Moses Nachmanides</i>. <i>Gesenius</i> also says: &quot;It was only the later Jews
who abandoned this interpretation,--no doubt, in consequence of their controversies
with the Christians.&quot; We shall here collect, from the existing Jewish writings,
the principal passages in which this interpretation occurs. The whole translation
of the Chaldee Paraphrast, <i>Jonathan</i>, notwithstanding the many perversions
in which he indulges, refers the prophecy to Christ. He paraphrases the very first
clause: <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1488; &#1497;&#1510;&#1500;&#1495; &#1506;&#1489;&#1491;&#1497; &#1502;&#1513;&#1497;&#1492;&#1488;</span><!--See 1856 ed and following quote for word sequence-->
&quot;behold my Servant Messiah shall prosper.&quot; The <i>Medrash Tanchuma</i>, an old commentary
on the Pentateuch (ed. Cracov. f. 53, c. 3, l. 7), remarks on the words:
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1461;&#1504;&#1468;&#1460;&#1492; &#1497;&#1463;&#1513;&#1465;&#1456;&#1499;&#1468;&#1460;&#1497;&#1500; &#1506;&#1463;&#1489;&#1456;&#1491;&#1468;&#1460;&#1497;</span><!--See 1856 ed and following quote for word sequence-->
(ed. Cracov. f. 53, c. 3, l. 7): <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1502;&#1513;&#1497;&#1495; &#1497;&#1512;&#1493;&#1501; &#1493;&#1490;&#1489;&#1492;
&#1493;&#1504;&#1513;&#1488; &#1502;&#1488;&#1493;&#1491; &#1493;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501; &#1502;&#1503; &#1488;&#1489;&#1512;&#1492;&#1501; &#1493;&#1504;&#1513;&#1488; &#1502;&#1502;&#1513;&#1492; &#1493;&#1490;&#1491;&#1492; &#1502;&#1503; &#1502;&#1500;&#1488;&#1499;&#1497; &#1492;&#1513;&#1512;&#1514; &#1494;&#1492; &#1502;&#1500;&#1498;</span> (&quot;this is the
King Messiah who is high and lifted up, and very exalted, more exalted than Abraham,
elevated above Moses, higher than the ministering angels&quot;). This passage is remarkable
for this reason also, that it contains the doctrine of the exaltation of the Messiah
above all created beings, and even above the angels themselves, and, hence, the
doctrine of His divinity,--a doctrine contested by the later Jews. Still more remarkable
is a passage from the very old book <i>Pesikta</i>, cited in the treatise <i>Abkath
Rokhel</i> (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1489;&#1511;&#1514; &#1512;&#1493;&#1499;&#1500;</span>, printed separately
at Venice in 1597, and reprinted in <i>Hulsii Theologia Judaica</i>, where
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 312]</span> this passage occurs p. 309): &quot;When God created
His world He stretched out His hand under the throne of His glory, and brought forth
the soul of the Messiah. He said to Him: &#39;Wilt thou heal and redeem my sons after
6000 years?&#39; He answered Him: &#39;I will.&#39; Then God said to Him: &#39;Wilt thou then also
bear the punishment in order to blot out their sins, as it is written: &#39;<i>But he
bore our diseases</i>&#39; (chap. liii. 4)? And He answered Him: I will joyfully bear
them.&quot; In this passage, as well as in several others which will be afterwards cited,
the doctrine of the vicarious sufferings of the Messiah is contained, and derived
from Is. liii., although the later Jews rejected this doctrine. In a similar manner,
Rabbi <i>Moses Haddarshan</i> expresses himself on Gen. i. 3 (Latin in <i>Galatinus</i>,
<i>De Arcanis Cath. ver.</i> p. 329; in the original in <i>Raimund Martini Pug.
Fid.</i> fol. 333; comp. <i>Wolf</i>, <i>Bibl. Hebr.</i> i. p. 818): &quot;Jehovah said:
Messiah, thou my righteous One, those who are concealed with thee will be such that
their sins will bring a heavy yoke upon thee.--The Messiah answered: Lord of the
universe, I cheerfully take upon myself all those plagues and sufferings; and immediately
the Messiah, out of love, took upon himself all those plagues and sufferings, as
is written in Is. liii.: He was abused and oppressed.&quot; Compare another passage,
in which ver. 5 is referred to the Messiah, in <i>Raim. Martin</i>, fol. iv. 30.
In the Talmud (<i>Gemara</i>, <i>tract. Sanhedrim</i>, chap. xi.), it is said of
the Messiah: &quot;He sits before the gates of the city of Rome among the sick and the
leprous&quot; (according to ver. 3). To the question: What is the name of the Messiah,
it is answered: He is called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1497;&#1493;&#1493;&#1512;&#1488;</span> &quot;<i>the
leper</i>,&quot; and, in proof, ver. 4 is quoted according to the erroneous interpretation
of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1493;&#1506;</span> by <i>leprosus</i>,--an interpretation
which is met with in <i>Jerome</i> also.--In the work <i>Rabboth</i> (a commentary
on the Pentateuch and the five <i>Megilloth</i>, which, as to its principal portions,
is very old, although much interpolated at later periods, and which, according to
the statements of the Jews, was composed about the year of our Lord 300, comp.
<i>Wolf</i>, I. c. II., p. 1423, sqq. in commentary on Ruth ii. 14 [p. 46, <i>ed.
Cracov.</i>]), the fifth verse is quoted, and referred to the sufferings of the
Messiah.--In the <i>Medrash Tillim</i> (an allegorical commentary on the Psalms,
printed at Venice in 1546), it is said in Ps. ii. 7, (fol. 4): &quot;The things of King
Messiah and His mysteries are announced <span class="pagenum">[Pg 313]</span> in
the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa. In the Prophets, <i>e.g.</i>, in the
passage Is. lii. 13, and xlii. 1; in the Hagiographa, <i>e.g.</i>, Ps. cx. and Dan.
vii. 13.&quot; In the book <i>Chasidim</i> (a collection of moral tales, printed at Venice
and Basle in 1581) p. 60, the following story is to be found: &quot;There was, among
the Jews, a pious man, who in summer made his bed among fleas, and in winter put
his feet into cold water; and when it froze, his feet froze at the same time. When
asked why he did so, he answered, that he too must make some little expiation, since
the Messiah bears the sin of Israel (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1497;&#1495; &#1505;&#1493;&#1489;&#1500; &#1506;&#1493;&#1504;&#1493;&#1514;
&#1497;&#1513;&#1512;&#1488;&#1500;</span>).&quot; The ancient explanation is, from among the later interpreters, assented
to by <i>Rabbi Alschech</i> (his commentary on Is. liii. is given entire in <i>Hulsii
Theologia Judaica</i>, p. 321 sqq.). He says: &quot;Upon the testimony of tradition,
our old Rabbins have unanimously admitted that King Messiah is here the subject
of discourse. For the same reason, we, in harmony with them, conclude that King
David, <i>i.e.</i>, the Messiah, must be considered as the subject of this prophecy,--a
view which is indeed quite obvious.&quot; We shall see, however, subsequently, that he
adheres to the right explanation only in the first three verses, and afterwards
abandons it. But passages especially remarkable are found in the cabbalistic book
<i>Sohar</i>. It is true that the age of the book is very uncertain; but it cannot
be proved to have been composed under Christian influence. We shall here quote only
some of the principal passages. (<i>Sohar</i>, ed. Amstelod. p. ii. fol. 212; ed.
<i>Solisbac.</i> p. ii. f. 85; <i>Sommeri</i> theol. <i>Sohar</i> p. 94.) &quot;When
the Messiah is told of the misery of Israel in their captivity, and that they are
themselves the cause of it, because they had not cared for, nor sought after the
knowledge of their Lord, He weeps aloud over their sins; and for this reason it
is written in Scripture (Isa. liii. 5): He was wounded for our transgressions, He
was smitten for our iniquities.&quot;--&quot;In the garden of Eden there is an apartment which
is called the sick chamber. The Messiah goes into this apartment, and summons all
the diseases, all the pains, and all the chastisements of Israel to come upon Him,
and they all come upon Him. And unless He would take them away from Israel, and
lay them upon himself, no man would be able to bear the chastisements of Israel,
which are inflicted upon them on account of the Law, as it is
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 314]</span> written: But He took upon himself our sicknesses,&quot;
&amp;c. In another passage (<i>Sohar</i>, <i>ed. Amstelod</i> p. iii. f. 218; <i>Solisbac.</i>
iii. f. 88; <i>Sommeri theol. Sohar</i> p. 89; <i>Auszüge aus dem Buche Sohar, mit
Deutscher Uebersetzung</i>, Berlin 52, S. 32), it is said: &quot;When God wishes to give
to the world a means of healing. He smites one of the pious among them, and for
his sake He gives healing to the whole world. Where, in Scripture, do we find this
confirmed? In Isa. liii. 5, where it is said: He was wounded for our transgressions.
He was crushed for our sins.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">What has been said will be a sufficient proof that the ancient
Jews, following tradition, referred the passage to the Messiah; and, as it appears
from the majority of the passages quoted, referred it indeed to the suffering Messiah.
But it would really have been a strange phenomenon, if this interpretation had remained
the prevailing one among the Jews. According to the declaration of the Apostle,
the Cross of Christ is to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the Greeks foolishness.
The idea of a suffering and expiating Messiah was repugnant to the carnally minded
Jews. And the reason why it was repugnant to them is, that they did not possess
that which alone makes that doctrine acceptable, viz., the knowledge of sin, and
the consciousness of the need of salvation,--because, not knowing the holiness of
God, and being ignorant of the import of the Law, they imagined that through their
own strength, by the works of the Law, they could be justified before God. What
they wished for was only an outward deliverance from their misery and their oppressors,
not an internal deliverance from sin. For this reason, they looked exclusively to
those passages of the Old Testament in which the Messiah in glory is announced;
and those passages they interpreted in a carnal manner. In addition to this, there
were other reasons which could not fail to render them averse to refer this passage
to the suffering Messiah. As they could not compare the prophecy with the fulfilment,--the
deep abasement of the Messiah which is here announced, the contempt which He endures,
His violent death, appeared to them irreconcileable with those passages in which
nothing of the kind is mentioned, but, on the contrary, the glorified Messiah only
is foretold. They had too little knowledge of the nature <span class="pagenum">[Pg
315]</span> of prophetic vision to enable them to perceive that the prophecies are
connected with the circumstances of the time, and, therefore, exhibit a one-sided
character,--that they consist of separate fragments which must be put together in
order that a complete representation of the subject may be obtained. They imagined
that because, in some passages, the Messiah is at once brought before us in glory,
just because He, in this way, represented Himself to the prophets. He must also
appear at once in glory. And, lastly, by their controversy with Christians, they
were led to seek for other explanations. As long as they understood the passage
as referring to a suffering Messiah, they could not deny that there existed the
closest agreement between the prophecy and the history of Christ. Now since the
Christians, in their controversies with the Jews, always proceeded from the passages,
which by <i>Hulsius</i> is pertinently called a <i>carnificina Judaeorum</i>, and
always returned to it,--since they saw what impression was, in numerous cases, produced
by the controversy of the Christians founded upon this passage, nothing was more
natural, than that they should endeavour to discover an expedient for remedying
this evil. And the discovery of such an expedient was the more easy to them, the
more that, in general, they were destitute of a sense of truth, and especially of
exegetical skill, so that they could not see any reason for rejecting an interpretation
on the ground of its being forced and unnatural.</p>
<p class="normal">In proof of what we have said, we here briefly present the arguments
with which <i>Abarbanel</i> opposes the explanation of a suffering and expiating
divine Messiah. In the first place, by the absurd remark that the ancient teachers
did not intend to give a literal, but an allegorical explanation, he seeks to invalidate
the authority of the tradition on which the later Jewish interpreters laid so great
a stress, whensoever and wheresoever it agrees with their own inclination; and,
at the same time, he advances the assertion that they referred the first four verses
only to the Messiah,--an assertion which the passages quoted by us show to be utterly
erroneous. Then, after having combatted the doctrine of original sin, he continues:
&quot;Suppose even that there exists such a thing as original sin,--when God, whose power
is infinite, was willing to pardon, was His hand too short to redeem (Isa. l. 2),
so <span class="pagenum">[Pg 316]</span> that, on this account, He was obliged to
take flesh, and to impose chastisements upon himself? And even although I were to
grant that it was necessary that a single individual of the human race should bear
this punishment, in order to make satisfaction for all, it would, at all events,
have been at least more appropriate that some one from among ourselves, some wise
man or prophet, had taken upon him the punishment, than that God himself should
have done so. For, supposing even that He became incarnate, He would not be like
one of us.--It is altogether impossible and self-contradictory that God should assume
a body; for God is the first cause, infinite, and omnipotent. He cannot, therefore,
assume flesh, and subsist as a finite being, and take upon himself man&#39;s punishment,
of which nothing whatsoever is written in Scripture.--If the prophecy referred to
the Messiah, it must refer either to the Messiah ben Joseph, or the Messiah ben
David (compare the Treatises at the close of this work). The former will perish
in the beginning of his wars; neither that which is said of the exaltation, nor
that which is said of the humiliation of the Servant of God applies to him; much
less can the latter be intended.&quot; (There then follows a quotation of several passages
treating of the exalted Messiah.)</p>
<p class="normal">That it was nevertheless difficult for the carnally-minded among
the Jews to reject the tradition, is seen from the paraphrase of <i>Jonathan</i>.
This forms a middle link between the ancient interpretation--which was retained,
even at a later period, by the better portion of the nation--and the recent interpretation.
<i>Jonathan</i> (see his paraphrase, among others, in <i>Lowth&#39;s</i> comment, edited
by <i>Koppe</i>, on the passage; and in <i>Hulsii Theol. Judaica</i>) acknowledges
the tradition, in so far, that he refers the whole prophecy to the Messiah. On the
other hand, he endeavours to satisfy his repugnance to the doctrine of a suffering
and expiating Messiah, by referring, through the most violent perversions and most
arbitrary interpolations, to the state of glory, every thing which is here said
of the state of humiliation. A trace of the right interpretation may yet perhaps
be found in ver. 12, where <i>Jonathan</i> says that the Messiah will give <i>His</i>
soul unto death; but it may be that thereby he understands merely the intrepid courage
with which the Messiah will expose himself to all <span class="pagenum">[Pg 317]</span>
dangers, in the conflict with the enemies of the covenant-people.</p>
<p class="normal">This mode of dealing with the text, however, could satisfy only
a few. They, therefore, went farther, and sought for an entirely different subject
of the prophecy. How very little they were themselves convinced of the soundness
of their interpretation, and satisfied with its results, may be seen from the example
of <i>Abarbanel</i>, who advances two explanations which differ totally, viz., one
referring it to the Jewish people, and the other to king Josiah, and then allows
his readers to make their choice betwixt the two. It is in truth only, that there
is unanimity and certainty; error is always accompanied by disagreement and uncertainty.
This will appear from the following enumeration of the various interpretations of
this passage, which, at a subsequent period, were current among the Jews. (The principal
non-Messianic interpretations of this passage are found in the Rabbinical Bibles,
and also in <i>Hulsius</i>, <i>l.c.</i>, p. 339, both in the original and translation.)
The interpreters may be divided into two main classes: 1. Those who by
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491; &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span> understand some collective body;
and, 2. Those who refer the prophecy to a single individual. The first class again
falls into two subdivisions, (<i>a</i>), those who make the whole Jewish people
the subject, in contrast to the Gentiles; and (<i>b</i>) those who make the better
portion of the Jewish people the subject, in contrast to the ungodly portion. These
views, and their supporters, we shall now proceed to submit to a closer examination.</p>
<p class="normal">1. (<i>a.</i>) Among the non-Messianic interpreters, the most
prevalent opinion is, that the Jewish people are the subject of the prophecy. This
opinion is found at an early period. At this we need not be surprised, as the cause
which produced the deviation from the Messianic interpretation existed at a period
equally early. When <i>Origen</i> was making use of this passage against some learned
Jews, they answered: that &quot;that which here was prophesied of one, referred to the
whole people, and was fulfilled by their dispersion.&quot; This explanation is followed
by <i>R. Salomo Jarchi</i>, <i>Abenezra</i>, <i>Kimchi</i>, <i>Abarbanel</i>, <i>
Lipmann</i> (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1505;&#1508;&#1512; &#1504;&#1510;&#1495;&#1493;&#1503;</span>, fol. 131). The main
features of this view are the following: The prophecy is supposed to describe the
misery of the people in their present exile, the firmness with
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 318]</span> which they bear it for the glory of God, and
resist every temptation to forsake His law and worship; and the prosperity, power,
and glory which shall be bestowed upon them at the time of the redemption. In vers.
1-10, the Gentiles are supposed to be introduced as speaking, and making a humble
and penitent confession that hitherto they had adopted an erroneous opinion of the
people of God, and had unjustly despised them on account of their sufferings, inasmuch
as their glory now shows, that it was not for the punishment of their sins that
these sufferings were inflicted upon them. Some of these interpreters, <i>e.g.</i>,
<i>Abenezra</i> and <i>Rabbi Lipmann</i>, understand, indeed, by the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491; &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span>, the pious portion only of the people
who remained faithful to Jehovah; but this makes no material difference, inasmuch
as they, too, contrast the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491; &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span> with the
heathen nations, and not with the ungodly, or less righteous portion of the nation,
as is done by the interpreters of the following class.</p>
<p class="normal">(<i>b</i>). Others consider the appellation
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;&#1491; &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span> as a collective designation of the
pious, and find in this section the idea of a kind of vicarious satisfaction made
by them for the ungodly. Those interpreters come nearer the true explanation, in
so far as they do not, like those of the preceding class, set aside the doctrine
of vicarious satisfaction, either by a figurative explanation, or, like <i>Kimchi</i>,
by the absurd remark, that this doctrine is an error put into the mouth of the Gentiles.
On the other hand, they depart from the true explanation, in so far that they generalize
that which belongs to a definite subject, and that, flattering the pride of the
natural man, they ascribe to mere man what belongs only to the God-man. Most distinctly
was this view expressed by the Commentator on the book
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1497;&#1503; &#1497;&#1506;&#1511;&#1489;</span> or <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1506;&#1497;&#1503; &#1497;&#1513;&#1512;&#1488;&#1500;</span>, which has been very frequently printed, and which contains all
sorts of tales from the Talmud. He says: &quot;It is right to suppose that the whole
section contains a prophecy regarding the righteous ones who are visited by sufferings.&quot;
He then makes two classes of righteous men:--those who in general must endure many
sufferings and much misery: and those who are publicly executed, as <i>Rabbi Akiba</i>
and others. He supposes that the Prophet shows the dignity of both of these classes
of righteous men, to both of which the name of a Servant of God is justly due. A
similar opinion is held by <i>Rabbi</i> <span class="pagenum">[Pg 319]</span> <i>
Alshech</i>. As we have already seen, he refers only chap. lii. 13&#8211;15 to the Messiah,
and to His great glory acquired by His great sufferings. Then the Prophet speaks,
as he supposes, in the name of all Israel, approves of what God had said, and confesses
that, by this declaration of God regarding the sufferings of the Messiah, they have
received light regarding the sufferings of the godly in general. They perceive it
to be erroneous and rash to infer guilt from suffering; and, henceforth, when they
see a righteous man suffering, they will think of no other reason, than that he
bears their diseases, and that his chastisements are for their salvation. The Servant
of God is thus supposed to be as it were, a personification of the righteous ones.--A
similar view probably lies at the foundation of those passages of the Talmud, where
some portions of the prophecy under consideration are referred to Moses, and others
to <i>Rabbi Akiba</i>, who is revered as a martyr by the Jews. It does not appear
that the prophecy was confined to Moses or Akiba; but it was referred to them, only
in so far as they belonged to the collective body which is supposed to be the subject
of it.</p>
<p class="normal">2. That view which makes a single individual other than the Messiah
the subject of the prophecy, has found, with the Jews, comparatively the fewest
defenders. We have already seen, that, besides the explanation which makes the Jewish
people the subject, <i>Abarbanel</i> advances still another, which refers it to
king Josiah. <i>Rabbi Saadias Haggaon</i> explained the whole section of Jeremiah.</p>
<p class="normal">Notwithstanding all these efforts, however, the Rabbins have not
succeeded in entirely supplanting the right explanation, and in thus divesting the
passage of all that is dangerous to their system. Among the Cabbalistical Jews,
it is even still the prevailing one. In numerous cases, it was just this chapter
which formed, to proselytes from Judaism, the first foundation of their conviction
of the truth of Christianity.</p>
<h3><a name="div3_319" href="#div3Ref_319">B. HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION WITH
THE CHRISTIANS.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">Among Christians, the interpretation has taken nearly the same
course as among the Jews. Similar causes have produced <span class="pagenum">[Pg
320]</span> similar effects in both cases. By both, the true explanation was relinquished,
when the prevailing tendencies had become opposed to its results. And if we descend
to particulars, we shall find a great resemblance even between the modes of interpretation
proposed by both.</p>
<p class="normal">1. Even, <i>a priori</i>, we could not but suppose otherwise than
that the Christian Church, as long as she possessed Christ, found Him here also,
where He is so clearly and distinctly set before our eyes,--that as long as she
in general still acknowledged the authority of Christ, and of the Apostles, she
could not but, here too, follow their distinct, often-repeated testimony. And so,
indeed, do we find it to be. With the exception of a certain Silesian, called <i>
Seidel</i>--who, given up to total unbelief, asserted that the Messiah had never
yet come, nor would ever come, (comp. <i>Jac. Martini l.</i> 3, <i>de tribus Elohim</i>,
p. 592)--and of <i>Grotius</i>, both of whom supposed Jeremiah to be the subject,
no one in the Christian Church has, for seventeen centuries, ventured to call in
question the Messianic interpretation. On the contrary, this passage was always
considered to be the most distinct and glorious of all the Messianic prophecies.
Out of the great mass of testimonies, we shall quote a few. <i>Augustine</i>, <i>
De Civitate Dei</i>, i. 18, c. 29, says: &quot;Isaiah has not only reproved the people
for their iniquity, and instructed them in righteousness, and foretold to the people
calamities impending over them in the Future; but he has also a greater number of
predictions, than the other prophets, concerning Christ and the Church, <i>i.e.</i>,
concerning the King, and the Kingdom established by Him; so that some interpreters
would rather call him an Evangelist than a Prophet.&quot; In proof of this assertion,
he then quotes the passage under consideration, and closes with the words: &quot;Surely
that may suffice! There are in those words some things too which require explanation;
but I think that things which are so clear should compel even enemies, against their
will, to understand them.&quot; In a similar manner he expresses himself in: <i>De consensu
Evangelistarum</i> l. i. c. 31. <i>Theodoret</i> remarks on this passage (<i>opp.
ed. Hal.</i> t. ii. p. 358): &quot;The Prophet represents to us, in this passage, the
whole course of His (Christ&#39;s) humiliation unto death. Most wonderful is the power
of the Holy Spirit. For that which was to take place after many generations. He
showed <span class="pagenum">[Pg 321]</span> to the holy prophets in such a manner
that they did not merely hear Him declare these things, but saw them.&quot; In a similar
manner, <i>Justin</i>, <i>Irenaeus</i>, <i>Cyril</i> of Alexandria, and <i>Jerome</i>,
express themselves. From the Churches of the Reformation, we shall here quote the
testimonies of two of their founders only. <i>Zwingle</i>, in <i>Annot. ad h. l.</i>
(opp. t. iii. Tur. 1544, fol. 292) says: &quot;That which now follows is so clear a testimony
of Christ, that I do not know whether, anywhere in Scripture, there could be found
anything more consistent, or that anything could be more distinctly said. For it
is quite in vain that the obstinacy and perversity of the Jews have tried it from
all sides.&quot; <i>Luther</i> remarks on the passage: &quot;And, no doubt, there is not,
in all the Old Testament Scriptures, a clearer text or prophecy, both of the suffering
and the resurrection of Christ, than in this chapter. Wherefore it is but right
that it should be well known to all Christians, yea should be committed to memory,
that thereby we may strengthen our faith, and defend it, chiefly against the stiff-necked
Jews who deny their only promised Christ, solely on account of the offence of His
cross.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">It was reserved to the last quarter of the last century to be
the first to reject the Messianic interpretation. <i>At a time when Naturalism exercised
its sway, it could no longer be retained.</i><sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_321a" href="#ftn_321a">[1]</a></sup>
For, if this passage contains a Messianic prophecy at all, its contents offer so
striking an agreement with the history of Christ, that its origin cannot at all
be accounted for in the natural way. Expedients were, therefore, sought for; and
these were so much the more easily found, that the Jews had, in this matter, already
opened up the way. All that was necessary, was only to appropriate their arguments
and counter-arguments, and to invest them with the semblance of solidity by means
of a learned apparatus.</p>
<p class="normal">The non-Messianic interpretation among Christians, like those
among the Jews, may be divided into two main classes: 1. Those which are founded
upon the supposition that a collective <span class="pagenum">[Pg 322]</span> body
is the subject of the prophecy; and 2, those which, by the Servant of God, understand
any other single individual except the Messiah. The first class, again, falls into
several sub-divisions: (<i>a.</i>), those interpretations which refer the prophecy
to the whole Jewish people; (<i>b.</i>), those which refer it to the Jewish people
in the abstract; (<i>c.</i>), those which refer it to the pious portion of the Jewish
people; (<i>d.</i>), those which refer it to the order of the priests; (<i>e.</i>),
those which refer it to the order of the prophets.</p>
<p class="normal">1. (<i>a.</i>) Comparatively the greatest number of non-Messianic
interpreters make the whole Jewish people the subject of the prophecy. This hypothesis
is adopted, among others, by <i>Doederlein</i>, (in the preface and annotations,
in the third edition of Isaiah, but in such a manner that he still wavers betwixt
this and the Messianic interpretation, which formerly he had defended with great
zeal); by <i>Schuster</i> (in a special treatise, Göttingen 1794); by <i>Stephani</i>
(<i>Gedanken über die Entstehung u. Ausbildung der Idee von inem Messias</i>, <i>
Nürnberg</i> 1787); by the author of the letters on Isaiah liii., in the 6th vol.
of <i>Eichhorn&#39;s Bibliothek</i>; by <i>Eichhorn</i> (in his exposition of the Prophets);
by <i>Rosenmüller</i> (in the second edition of his Commentary, leaving to others
the interpretation which referred the prophecy to the prophetic order, although
he himself had first recommended it), and many others. The last who defend it are
<i>Hitzig</i>, <i>Hendewerk</i>, and <i>Köster</i> (<i>de Serv. Jeh.</i> Kiel, 38).
Substantially, it has remained the same as we have seen it among the Jews. The only
difference is, that these expositors understand, by the sufferings of the Servant
of God, the sufferings of the Jewish people in the Babylonish captivity; while the
Jewish interpreters understand thereby the sufferings of the Jewish people in their
present exile. They, too, suppose that, from vers. 1 to 10, the Gentile nations
are introduced as speaking, and make the penitent confession that they have formed
an erroneous opinion of Israel, and now see that its suffering&#39;s are not the punishment
of its own sins, but that it had suffered as a substitute for their sins.</p>
<p class="normal">(<i>b.</i>) The hypothesis which makes the Jewish people in the
abstract--in antithesis to its single members--the subject of this prophecy, was
discovered by <i>Eckermann</i>, <i>theol. Beiträge</i>, <span class="pagenum">[Pg
323]</span> Bd. i. H. i. S. 192 ff. According to <i>Ewald</i>, the prophecy refers
to &quot;Israel according to its true idea.&quot; According to <i>Bleek</i>, the Servant of
God is a &quot;designation of the whole people, but not of the people in its actual reality,
but as it existed in the imagination of the author,--the ideal of the people.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">(<i>c.</i>) The hypothesis, that the pious portion of the Jewish
people--in contrast to the ungodly--are the subject, has been defended especially
by <i>Paulus</i> (<i>Memorabilien</i>, Bd. 3, S. 175-192, and <i>Clavis</i> on Isaiah).
His view was adopted by <i>Ammon</i> (<i>Christologie</i>, S. 108 ff.). The principal
features of this view are the following:--It was not on account of their own sins
that the godly portion of the nation were punished and carried into captivity along
with the ungodly, but on account of the ungodly who, however, by apostatising from
the religion of Jehovah, knew how to obtain a better fate. The ungodly drew from
it the inference that the hope of the godly, that Jehovah would come to their help,
had been in vain. But when the captivity came to an end, and the godly returned,
they saw that they had been mistaken, and that the hope of the godly was well founded.
They, therefore, full of repentance, deeply lament that they had not long ago repented
of their sins. This view is adopted also by <i>Von Cölln</i> in his <i>Biblische
Theologie</i>; by <i>Thenius</i> in <i>Wiener&#39;s Zeitschrift</i>, ii. 1; by <i>Maurer</i>
and <i>Knobel</i>. The latter says: &quot;Those who were zealous adherents of the Theocracy
had a difficult position among their own people, and had to suffer most from foreign
tyrants.&quot; The true worshippers of Jehovah were given up to mockery and scorn, to
persecution and the grossest abuse, and were in a miserable and horrible condition,
unworthy of men and almost inhuman. The punishments for sin had to be endured chiefly
by those who did not deserve them. Thus the view easily arose that the godly suffered
in substitution for the whole people.</p>
<p class="normal">(<i>d.</i>) The hypothesis which makes the priestly order the
subject, has been defended by the author of: <i>Ausführliche Erklärung der sämmtlichen
Weissagungen des A. T.</i> 1801.</p>
<p class="normal">(<i>e.</i>) The hypothesis which makes the collective body of
the prophets the subject, was first advanced by <i>Rosenmüller</i> in the treatise:
<i>Leiden und Hoffnungen der Propheten Jehovas</i>, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 324]</span>
in <i>Gablers Neuestes theol. Journal</i>, vol. ii. S. 4, p. 333 ff. From him it
came as a legacy to <i>De Wette</i> (<i>de morte Jes. Chr. expiatoria</i>, p. 28
sqq.), and to <i>Gesenius</i>. According to <i>Schenkel</i> (<i>Studien und Kritiken</i>
36) &quot;the prophetic order was the quiet, hidden blossom, which early storms broke.&quot;
According to <i>Umbreit</i> the Servant of God is the collective body of the prophets,
or the prophetic order, which is here plainly represented as the sacrificial beast
(!) taking upon itself the sins of the people. He finds it &quot;rather strange that
the Prophet who, in chap. lxvi. 3 (of course according to a false interpretation),
plainly rejects sacrifice altogether, should speak of the shedding of the blood
of a man, and, moreover, of a pure, sinless man, in the room of the guilty.&quot; The
manner in which <i>Umbreit</i> seeks to gain a transition to the Messianic interpretation,
although not in the sense held by the Christian Church, has been pointed out by
us on a former occasion, in the remarks on chap. xlii. <i>Hofmann</i> (<i>Schriftbeweis</i>,
ii. 1 S. 89 ff.) has got up a mixture composed of these explanations which refer
the prophecy to the people, to the godly, to the prophetic order, and, if one will,
of that also which refers it to the Messiah. He says: &quot;The people as a people are
called to be the servant of God; but they do not fulfil their vocation as a congregation
of the faithful; and it is, therefore, the work of the prophets to restore that
congregation, and hence also the fulfilment of its vocation.--Prophetism itself
is represented not in its present condition only, when it exists in a number of
messengers and witnesses of Jehovah, in the first instance in Isaiah himself, but
also in the final result, into which the fulfilment of its vocation will lead, when
the Servant of Jehovah unites in His person the offices of a proclaimer of the impending
work of salvation, and of its Mediator, and, from the shame and suffering attached
to His vocation as a witness, passes over into the glory of the salvation realised
in Him.&quot; In order to render such a mixture possible, everything is tried in order
to remove the vicarious character of the sufferings of the Servant of God, since
that character is peculiar to Christ, and excludes every comparison. &quot;Of a priestly
self-sacrifice of the Servant of God&quot;--says <i>Hofmann</i>, S. 101, 2--&quot;I cannot
find anything. The assertion that the words <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1494;&#1492; &#1490;&#1493;&#1497;&#1501;</span>,<!--see 1856 ed. for comma-->
denote a priestly work, no longer requires a refutation. His
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 325]</span> vocation is to be the mediator of a revelation
of God in words; and although the fulfilment of this vocation brings death upon
Him, without His endeavouring to escape, this is not a proof nor a part of His priestly
vocation. In just the same case is the assertion that the Messiah appears here as
a King also.&quot; As long as we proceed from the supposition that the Prophet predicts
truth, we are, by that very supposition, forbidden to distribute the property of
the one among the many; but that is thus violently set aside. The Rationalistic
interpreters have in this respect an easier task. They allow the substitution to
stand; but they consider it as a vain fancy. The fact that <i>Hofmann</i> does not
recoil from even the most violent interpretations, in order to remove the exclusive
reference to Christ, appears, <i>e.g.</i>, from his remark, S. 132, that &quot;the chastisement
of our peace&quot; designates an actual chastisement, which convinces them of their sin,
and of the earnestness of divine holiness, and thus serves for their salvation.
Surely <i>Gesenius</i> and <i>Hitzig&#39;s</i> explanations are far more unbiassed.</p>
<p class="normal">2. Among the interpretations which refer the prophecy to a single
individual other than the Messiah, scarcely any one has found another defender than
its own author. They are of importance only in so far, as they show that most decidedly
does the prophecy make the impression, that its subject is a real person, not a
personification; and, farther, that it could not by any means be an exegetical interest
which induced rationalism to reject the interpretation which referred it to Christ.
The persons that have been guessed at are the following: King Uzziah, (<i>Augusti</i>),
King Hezekiah, (<i>Konynenburg</i> and <i>Bahrdt</i>), the Prophet Isaiah himself,
(<i>Stäudlin</i>), an unknown prophet supposed to have been killed by the Jews in
the captivity (an anonymous author in <i>Henke&#39;s Magazin</i>, Bd. i. H. 2), the
royal house of David, which suffered innocently when the children of the unhappy
king Zedekiah were killed at the command of Nebuchadnezzar (<i>Bolten</i> on Acts
viii. 33), the Maccabees (an anonymous writer in the <i>Theologische Nachrichten</i>,
1821, S. 79 ff.) Even at this present time, this kind of explanation is not altogether
obsolete. <i>Schenkel</i> thinks that &quot;the chapter under consideration may, perhaps,
belong to the period of the real Isaiah, whose language equals that of the description
of the Servant of God now <span class="pagenum">[Pg 326]</span> under consideration,
in conciseness and harshness, and may have been originally a Psalm of consolation
in sufferings, which was composed with a view to the hopeful progeny of some pious
man or prophet innocently killed, and which was rewritten and interpreted by the
author of the book, and embodied in it.&quot; <i>Ewald</i> (Proph. ii. S. 407) says:
&quot;Farther, the description of the Servant of God is here altogether very strange,
especially v. 8 f., inasmuch as, notwithstanding all the liveliness with which the
author of the book conceives of Him, He is nowhere else so much and so obviously
viewed as an historical person, as a single individual of the Past. How little soever
the author may have intended it, it was very obvious that the later generations
imagined that they would here find the historical Messiah. We are therefore of opinion,
that the author here inserted a passage, which appeared to him to be suitable, from
an older book where really a single martyr was spoken of.--It is not likely that
the modern controversy on chap. liii. will ever cease as long as this truth is not
acknowledged;--a truth which quite spontaneously suggested itself, and impressed
itself more and more strongly upon my mind.&quot; These are, no doubt, assertions which
cannot be maintained, and are yet of interest, in so far as they show, how much
even those who refuse to acknowledge it are annoyed by a two-fold truth, viz., that
Isaiah is the author of the prophecy, and that it refers to a personal Messiah.</p>
<p class="normal">At all times, however, that explanation which refers the prophecy
to Christ has found able defenders; and at no period has the anti-Messianic explanation
obtained absolute sway. Among the authors of complete Commentaries on Isaiah, the
Messianic explanation was defended by <i>Dathe</i>, <i>Doederlein</i> (who, however,
wavers in the last edition of his translation), <i>Hensler</i>, <i>Lowth</i>, <i>
Kocher</i>, <i>Koppe</i>, <i>J. D. Michaelis</i>, <i>v. d. Palm</i>, <i>Schmieder</i>.
In addition to these we may mention: <i>Storr</i>, <i>dissertatio qua Jes. liii.
illustratur</i>, Tübingen, 1790; <i>Hansi Comment. in Jes. liii.</i>, Rostock 1791
(this work has considerably promoted the interpretation, although its author often
shows himself to be biassed by the views of the time, and especially, in the interest
of Neology, seeks to do away with the doctrine of satisfaction); <i>Krüger</i>,
<i>Comment. de Jes. liii., interpret</i>; <i>Jahn</i>, <i>Append. ad Hermen. fasc
ii.</i>; <i>Steudel</i>, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 327]</span> <i>Observ. ad Jes.
liii.</i>, <i>Tübingen</i> 1825, 26; <i>Sack</i>, in the <i>Apologetik</i>; <i>Reinke</i>,
<i>exegesis in Jes. liii.</i>, Münster 1836; <i>Tholuck</i>, in his work: <i>Das
A. T. in N. T.</i>; <i>Hävernick</i>, in the lectures on the Theology of the Old
Testament; <i>Stier</i>, in the Comment. on the second part of Isaiah.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_321a" href="#ftnRef_321a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[1]</sup></a> The author of the article: <i>Ueber die Mess.
	Zeiten</i> in <i>Eichhorn&#39;s Bibliothek d. bibl. Literatur</i>, Bd. 6, p. 655,
	confesses quite candidly, that the Messianic interpretation would soon find
	general approbation among Bible expositors, had they not, in recent times, obtained
	the conviction, &quot;that the prophets do not foretel any thing of future things,
	except what they know and anticipate without special divine inspiration.&quot;</p>
</div>
<hr class="W20">
<h3><a name="div2_327" href="#div2Ref_327">II. THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE MESSIANIC
INTERPRETATION.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">The arguments against the Messianic interpretation cannot be designated
in any other way than as <i>insignificant</i>. There is not one among them which
could be of any weight to him who is able to judge. It is asserted that the Messiah
is nowhere else designated as the Servant of God. Even if this were the fact, it
would not prove anything. But this name is assigned to the Messiah in Zech. iii.
8--a passage which interpreters are unanimous in referring to the Messiah--where
the Lord calls the Messiah His Servant <i>Zemach</i>, and which the Chaldee Paraphrast
explains by <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1497;&#1495;&#1488; &#1493;&#1497;&#1514;&#1490;&#1500;&#1497;</span> &quot;<i>Messiam et revelabitur</i>;&quot;
farther, in Ezek. xxxiv. 23, 24, not to mention Is. xlii. 1, xlix. 3, 6, l. 10.--It
is farther asserted that in the Messianic interpretation everything is viewed as
<i>future</i>; but that this is inadmissible for grammatical and philological reasons.
The suffering, contempt, and death of the Servant of God are here, throughout, represented
as past, since in chap. liii. 1&#8211;10, all the verbs are in the Preterite. It is the
glorification only which appears as future, and is expressed in the Future tense.
The writer, therefore, occupies a position between the sufferings and the glorification,
and the latter is still impending. But the stand-point of the Prophet is not an
actual, but a supposed one,--not a real, but an ideal one. In order to distinguish
between condition and consequence,--in order to put sufferings and glorification
in the proper relation, he takes his stand between the sufferings and the glorification
of the Servant of God, and from that position, that appears to him as being already
past which, in reality, was <span class="pagenum">[Pg 328]</span> still future.
It is only an interpreter so thoroughly prosaic as <i>Knobel</i> who can advance
the assertion: &quot;No prophet occupies, in prophecy, another stand-point than that
which in reality be occupies.&quot; In this, <i>e.g.</i>, <i>Hitzig</i> does not by any
means assent to him; for be (<i>Hitzig</i>) remarks on chap. lii. 7: &quot;Proceeding
from the certainty of the salvation, the Prophet sees, in the Spirit, that already
coming to pass which, in chap. xl. 9, he called upon them to do.&quot; And the same expositor
farther remarks on Jer. vi. 24-26: &quot;This is a statement of how people would then
speak, and, thereby, a description of the circumstances of that time.&quot; But in our
remarks on chap. xi. and in the introduction to the second part, we have already
proved that the prophets very frequently occupy an ideal stand-point, and that such
is the case here, the Prophet has himself expressly intimated. In some places, he
has passed from the prophetical stand-point to the historical, and uses the Future
even when he speaks of the sufferings,--a thing which appears to have been done
involuntarily, but which, in reality, is done intentionally. Thus there occurs
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1508;&#1514;&#1495;</span> in ver. 7,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1513;&#1497;&#1501;</span> in ver. 10, and, according to the explanations
of <i>Gesenius</i> and others, also <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1508;&#1490;&#1497;&#1506;</span>
in ver. 12 while, on the other hand, he sometimes speaks of the glorification in
the Preterite.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_328a" href="#ftn_328a">[1]</a></sup>
Compare <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1511;&#1495;</span> in ver. 8,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1513;&#1488;</span> in ver. 12. This affords a sure proof
that we are here altogether on an ideal territory. The ancient translators too have
not understood the Preterites as a designation of the real Past, and frequently
render them by Futures. Thus the LXX. ver. 14: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#954;&#963;&#964;&#8053;&#963;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#953;--&#7936;&#948;&#959;&#958;&#8053;&#963;&#949;&#953;</span>;
<i>Aqui.</i> and <i>Theod.</i>, ver. 2, <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#957;&#945;&#946;&#8053;&#963;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span>.--It
is farther asserted, that the idea of a suffering and expiating Messiah is foreign
to the Old Testament, and stands in contradiction even to its prevailing views of
the Messiah. But this objection cannot be of any weight; nor can it prove anything,
as long as, in the Church of Christ, the authority of Christ is still acknowledged,
who Himself declares that His whole suffering had been foretold in the books of
the Old Testament, and explained to His disciples the prophecies concerning it.
Even the fact, that at <span class="pagenum">[Pg 329]</span> the time when Christ
appeared the knowledge of a suffering Messiah was undeniably possessed by the more
enlightened, proves that the matter stands differently. This knowledge is shown
not only by the Baptist, but also by Simeon, Luke ii. 34, 35. An assertion to the
contrary can proceed only from the erroneous opinion, that every single Messianic
prophecy exhibits the whole view of the Messiah, whereas, indeed, the Messianic
announcements bear throughout a fragmentary, incidental character,--a mode of representation
which is generally prevalent in Scripture, and by which Scripture is distinguished
from a system of doctrines. But even if there had existed an appearance of such
a contradiction, it would long ago have been removed by the fulfilment. But even
the appearance of a contradiction is here inadmissible, inasmuch as the Servant
of God is here not only represented as suffering and expiating, but, at the same
time, as an object of reverence to the whole Gentile world; and the <i>ground</i>
of this reverence is His suffering and expiation. As regards the other passages
of the Old Testament where a suffering Messiah is mentioned, we must distinguish
between the Messiah simply suffering, and the Messiah suffering as a substitute.
The latter, indeed, we meet with in this passage only. But to make up for this isolated
mention, the representation here is so full and exhaustive, so entirely excludes
all misunderstanding, except that which is bent upon misunderstanding, or which
is the result of evil disposition, is so affecting and so indelibly impressive,
is indeed so exactly in the tone of doctrinal theology, and therefore different
from the ordinary treatment, which is always incidental, and requires to be supplemented
from other passages, that this single isolated representation, which sounds through
the whole of the New Testament, is quite sufficient for the Church. The suffering
and dying Messiah, on the other hand, we meet with frequently in other passages
of the Old Testament also, although, indeed, not so frequently as the Messiah in
glory. In this light He is brought before us, <i>e.g.</i>, in chap. xlix. 50; in
Dan. ix.; in Zech. ix. 9, 10, xi. 12, 13. The fact that the humiliation of Christ
would precede His exaltation is distinctly pointed out in the first part of Isaiah
also, in chap. xi. 1,--a passage which contains, in a germ, all that, in the second
part, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 330]</span> is more fully stated regarding the suffering
Messiah, and which has many striking points of contact specially with chap. liii.
And just so it is with Isaiah&#39;s contemporary, Micah, who, in chap. v. 1 (2), makes
the Messiah proceed, not from Jerusalem, the seat of the Davidic family after it
was raised to the royal dignity, but from Bethlehem, where Jesse, the ancestor,
lived as a peasant,--as a proof that the Messiah would proceed from the family of
David sank back into the obscurity of private life. This knowledge, that the Messiah
should proceed from the altogether abased house of David,--a knowledge which appears
as early as in Amos, and which pervades the whole of prophecy--touches very closely
upon the knowledge of His sufferings. Lowliness of origin, and exaltation of destination,
can hardly be reconciled without severe conflicts. But it is <i>a priori</i> impossible,
that the idea of the suffering Messiah should be wanting in the Old Testament. Since,
in the Old Testament, throughout, righteousness and suffering in this world of sin
are represented as being indissolubly connected, the Messiah, being
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#964;&#700; &#7952;&#958;&#959;&#967;&#8053;&#957;</span> the Righteous One, must necessarily
appear also as He who suffers in the highest degree. If that were not the case,
the Messiah would be totally disconnected from all His types, especially from David,
who, through the severest sufferings, attained to glory, and who in his Psalms,
everywhere considers this course as the normal one, both in the Psalms which refer
to the suffering righteous in general, and in those which especially refer to his
family reaching their highest elevation in the Messiah; compare my Commentary on
the Psalms, Vol. iv., p. lxxx. ff. </p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_328a" href="#ftnRef_328a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[1]</sup></a> The same thing occurs also in the parallel
	passages, chap. xlix. 9, on which <i>Gesenius</i> was constrained to remark:
	&quot;As the deliverance was still impending, the Preterites cannot well be understood
	in any other way than as Futures.&quot;</p>
</div>
<hr class="W20">
<h3><a name="div2_330" href="#div2Ref_330">III. THE ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF THE MESSIANIC
INTERPRETATION.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">Even the fact that this is among the Jews the original interpretation,
which was given up from their evil disposition only, makes us favourably inclined
towards it. The authority of tradition is here of so much the greater consequence,
the more that the Messianic interpretation was opposed to the disposition
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 331]</span> of the people. How deeply rooted was this
interpretation, appears even from the declaration of John the Baptist, John i. 29:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7988;&#948;&#949; &#8001; &#7936;&#956;&#957;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166; &#8001; &#945;&#7988;&#961;&#969;&#957; &#964;&#8134;&#957; &#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#954;&#972;&#963;&#956;&#959;&#965;</span>.
There cannot be any doubt that, in this declaration, he points to the prophecy under
consideration, inasmuch as this passage is the first in Holy Scripture in which
the sin-bearing lamb is spoken of in a spiritual sense. <i>Bengel</i>, following
the example of <i>Erasmus</i>, remarks, in reference to the article before
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#956;&#957;&#8056;&#962;</span>: &quot;The article looks back to the prophecy
which was given concerning Him under this figure, in Is. liii. 7.&quot; As regards
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166;</span>, compare ver. 10: &quot;It pleased the Lord
painfully to crush Him,&quot; and ver. 2: &quot;Before Him;&quot; as regards
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001; &#945;&#7988;&#961;&#969;&#957;</span>, &amp;c. comp. ver. 4, rendered by the
LXX.: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#959;&#8023;&#770;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#964;&#8048;&#962; &#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#943;&#945;&#962; &#7969;&#956;&#969;&#770;&#957; &#966;&#941;&#961;&#949;&#953;</span>; comp.
ver. 11.</p>
<p class="normal">An external argument of still greater weight is the testimony
of the New Testament. Above all, it is the declarations of our Lord himself which
here come into consideration. In Luke xxii. 37, He says that the prophecies concerning
Him were drawing near their perfect fulfilment (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#8048;
&#960;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#7952;&#956;&#959;&#8166; &#964;&#941;&#955;&#959;&#962; &#7956;&#967;&#949;&#953;</span>), comp. Matt. xxvi. 51, and that therefore the declaration:
&quot;And He was reckoned among the transgressors&quot; must be fulfilled in Him. In Mark
ix. 12, the Lord asks: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#8182;&#962; &#947;&#941;&#947;&#961;&#945;&#960;&#964;&#945;&#953; &#7952;&#960;&#8054; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#965;&#7985;&#8056;&#957;
&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7936;&#957;&#952;&#961;&#974;&#960;&#959;&#965;, &#7989;&#957;&#945; &#960;&#959;&#955;&#955;&#8048; &#960;&#940;&#952;&#8131; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#958;&#959;&#965;&#948;&#949;&#957;&#951;&#952;&#8135;</span>, with a reference to &quot;from man,&quot;
and &quot;from the sons of man&quot; in lii. 14,--to &quot;He had no form nor comeliness&quot; in ver.
2,--to &quot;despised,&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1489;&#1494;&#1492;</span>, which, by <i>Symmachus</i>
and <i>Theodotian</i> is rendered by <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#958;&#959;&#965;&#948;&#949;&#957;&#969;&#956;&#8051;&#957;&#959;&#962;</span>,
in ver. 3. In the Gospel of John, the Lord emphatically and repeatedly points out,
that the words: &quot;When His soul hath given restitution,&quot; are written concerning Him;
compare remarks on ver. 10. After these distinct quotations and references, we shall
be obliged to think chiefly of our passage, in Luke xxiv. 25-27, 44-46 also. The
opponents themselves grant that, if in any passage of the Old Testament the doctrine
of a suffering and atoning Messiah is contained, it is in the passage under review.
The circumstance also, that the disciples of the Lord refer, on every occasion,
and with such confidence, the passage to the Lord, likewise proves that Christ especially
interpreted it of His sufferings and exaltation. Of Matt. viii. 17, and Mark xv.
28, we have already spoken. John, in chap. xii. 37, 38, and Paul in Rom. x. 16,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 332]</span> find a fulfilment of chap. liii. 1 in the
unbelief of the Jews. In Acts viii. 28-35, Philip, on the question of the eunuch
from Ethiopia, as to whom the prophecy referred, explained it of Christ. After the
example of <i>De Wette</i>, <i>Gesenius</i> lays special stress on the circumstance,
that the passage was never quoted in reference to the atoning death of Christ. But
Peter, when speaking of the vicarious satisfaction of Christ, makes a literal use
of the principal passages of the prophecy under consideration, 1 Pet. ii. 21-25;
and it is, in general, quite the usual way of the New Testament to support its statements
by our passage, whensoever the discourse falls upon this subject; comp. <i>e.g.</i>,
besides the texts quoted at ver. 10, Mark ix. 12; Rom. iv. 25; 1 Cor. xv. 3; 2 Cor.
v. 21; 1 John iii. 5; Pet. i. 19; Rev. v. 6, xiii. 8. Even <i>Gesenius</i> himself
acknowledges elsewhere, that we have here the text for the whole Apostolic preaching
on the atoning death of Jesus. &quot;Most Hebrew readers&quot;--so he says, Th. iii. S. 191--&quot;who
were so familiar with the ideas of sacrifice and substitution, could not by any
means understand the passage in any other way; and there is no doubt that the whole
apostolic notion of the atoning death of Christ is chiefly based upon this passage.&quot;
The circumstance, that the reference to this passage appears commonly only in the
form of an allusion, and not of express quotation, proves only so much the more
clearly, that its reference to the atoning death of Christ was a point absolutely
settled in the ancient Church.</p>
<p class="normal">In favour of the Messianic interpretation are not only the passages
from the second part, chap. xlii., &amp;c., but also, from the first part, the passage
chap. xi. 1, which so remarkably agrees with chap. liii. 2, that both must be referred
to the same subject.</p>
<p class="normal">To these external reasons, the internal must be added. The Christian
Church--the best judge--has at all times recognised in this prophecy the faithful
and wonderfully accurate image of her Lord and Saviour in His atoning sufferings
and the glory following upon them, in His innocence and righteousness, in His meekness
and silent patience (the New Testament, in speaking of them, frequently points back
to our passage), and in the burial with a rich man, ver. 9. The most characteristic
feature is the atoning character of the suffering of the <span class="pagenum">[Pg
333]</span> Servant of God, and of the shedding of His blood. Several interpreters
have endeavoured to explain away this feature which they dislike. <i>Kimchi</i>
says: &quot;One must not imagine that the case really stands thus, that in Israel the
captivity actually bears the sins and diseases of the heathens (for that would be
opposed to the justice of God), but that the Gentiles at that time, when seeing
the glorious deliverance of Israel, would thus judge concerning it.&quot; A futile evasion!
It is not the Gentiles who speak in chap. liii. 1&#8211;10, but the believing Church.
Every sincere reader will at once feel, that it is not the foolish fancies of others
which the Prophet communicates in these verses, but the divine truth made known
to him. The doctrine of the substitution, the Prophet, moreover, states in his own
name, by saying, &quot;He shall sprinkle many nations;&quot; and so likewise in the name of
God, in chap. liii. 11, 12. According to <i>Martini</i>, <i>De Wette</i>, and others,
the expressions are to be understood figuratively, and the contents and substance
to be this only, that those severe calamities which that divine minister would have
to sustain would be useful and salutary to His compatriots. But the fact that the
same doctrine constantly returns under the most varied expressions, is decidedly
in favour of the literal interpretation. Thus, it is said in chap. lii. 15, that
the Servant of God should sprinkle many nations; in liii. 4, that He bore our diseases
and took upon Him our pains; in ver. 5, that He was pierced for our transgressions;
in ver. 8, that He bore the punishment which the people ought to have borne; in
ver. 10, that He offered his soul as a sin-offering; in ver. 11, that by His righteousness
many should be justified; in ver. 12, that He bore the sins of many, and poured
out His soul unto death, and that He could make intercession for transgressors,
because He was numbered with them. To this it may still be added that in chap. lii.
15 (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1494;&#1492;</span>), liii. 10 (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1513;&#1501;</span>),
and ver. 12: &quot;He bears the sins of many,&quot; (compare Levit. xvi. 21, 22; <i>Michaelis</i>:
&quot;<i>Ut typice hircus pro Israëlitis</i>&quot;) the Servant of God appears as the antitype
of the Old Testament sin-offerings in which, as has been proved (compare my pamphlet:
<i>Die Opfer der heil. Schrift</i>, S. 12 ff.), the idea of substitution in the
doctrine of the Old Testament finds its foundation. There cannot be the least doubt,
that the Prophet could not express himself more clearly, strongly,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 334]</span> and distinctly, if his intention was to state
the doctrine of substitution; and those who undertake to explain it away, would
not, by so doing, leave any thing firm and certain in Scripture. <i>Rosenmüller</i>
(<i>Gabler&#39;s</i> Journal, ii. S. 365), <i>Gesenius</i>, <i>Hitzig</i> have indeed
candidly confessed that the passage contained the doctrine of vicarious satisfaction,
after <i>Alshech</i> had, among the Jews, given the honour to truth.</p>
<hr class="W20">
<h3><a name="div2_334" href="#div2Ref_334">IV. EXAMINATION OF THE NON-MESSIANIC
INTERPRETATIONS.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">Passing over mere whims, three explanations present themselves
which require a closer examination, viz.--(1), that which makes the whole Jewish
people the subject; (2), that which refers it to the godly portion of the Jewish
people; and (3), that which refers it to the collective body of the Prophets. The
following reasons militate against all the three interpretations simultaneously.</p>
<p class="normal">1. According to them, the contents of the section in question
present themselves as a mere <i>fancy</i>; and its principal thought, the vicarious
suffering of the Servant of God is an absurdity. According to them, the prophets
can no longer be considered as godly men who spake as they were moved by the Holy
Spirit; and their name <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1489;&#1497;&#1488;</span>, by which they
claimed divine inspiration, is a mere pretence. And this reflection is, at the same
time, cast upon the Lord, who, throughout, treats these visionaries as organs of
immediate divine communications.</p>
<p class="normal">2. According to all the three explanations, the subject is not
a real person, but an ideal one, a personified collective. But not one sure analogous
instance can be quoted in favour of a personification carried on through a whole
section, without the slightest intimation, that it is not a single individual who
is spoken of. In ver. 3, the subject is called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1497;&#1513;</span>;
in vers. 10 and 12 a soul is ascribed to Him; grave and death are used so as to
imply a subject in the Singular. Scripture never leaves any thing to be guessed.
If we had an allegory before us, distinct hints as to the interpretation would certainly
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 335]</span> not be wanting. It is, <i>e.g.</i>, quite
different in those passages where the Prophet designates Israel by the name of the
Servant of the Lord. In them, all uncertainty is prevented by the addition of the
names of Jacob and Israel, xli. 8, 9; xliv. 1, 2, 21; xlv. 4; xlviii. 20; and in
them, moreover, the Prophet uses the Plural by the side of the Singular, to intimate
that the Servant of the Lord is an ideal person, a collective, <i>e.g.</i>, xlii.
24, 25; xlviii. 20, 21; xliii. 10&#8211;14.</p>
<p class="normal">3. The first condition of the vicarious satisfaction which, according
to our prophecy, is to be performed by the Servant of God, is, according to ver.
9 (&quot;Because He had done no violence, neither was any deceit in His mouth&quot;), but
more especially still, according to ver. 11 (&quot;He, the righteous one, my Servant,
shall justify the many&quot;) the absolute righteousness of the suffering subject. He
who is himself sinful cannot undergo punishment for the sins of others. He is, on
the contrary, visited for his own sins, both as a righteous retribution, and for
sanctification. Of such an one that would indeed be true which, according to the
second clause of ver. 4, was only erroneously supposed in reference to the Servant
of God. All the three interpretations, however, are unable to prove that this condition
existed. All the three interpretations move on the purely human territory; but on
that, absolute righteousness is not to be found. At the very threshold of Holy Writ,
in Gen. ii. and 3, compare v. 3, the doctrine of the universal sinfulness of mankind
meets us; and how deep a knowledge of sin pervades the Old Testament, is proved
by passages such as Gen. vi. 5, viii. 21; Job xiv. 4, xv. 14&#8211;16; Ps. xiv., li. 7;
Prov. xx. 9. That is not a soil on which ideas of substitution could thrive.--The
doctrine of a substitution by men is indeed nowhere else found in the Old Testament;
and <i>Gesenius</i>, who (l. c., S. 189) endeavoured to prove that &quot;it is very general&quot;
has not adduced any arguments which are tenable or even plausible. The guilt of
the fathers is visited upon the children, only when the latter walk in the steps
of their fathers, and the latter are first punished; comp. <i>Genuineness and Authenticity
of the Pentateuch</i>, Vol. ii. p. 446 ff. The same holds true in reference to 2
Sam. xxi. 1&#8211;14, The evil spirit which filled Saul, pervaded his family, at the same
time, as we here see in the instance of Michal. It was probably in the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 336]</span> interest of his family, and with their concurrence,
that the wicked deed had been perpetrated. (<i>Michaelis</i> says: &quot;In order that
he might appropriate their goods to himself and to <i>his family</i>, under the
pretext of a pious zeal for Judah and Israel.&quot;) As Saul himself was already overtaken
by the divine judgment, the crime was punished in the family who were accomplices.
In 2 Sam. xxiv. the people do not suffer as substitutes for the sin, which David
had committed in numbering the people; but the spirit of pride which had incited
the king to number the people, was widely spread among them. But the fact, that
the king himself was punished in his subjects, is brought out by his beseeching
the Lord, in 2 Sam. xxiv. 17, that He might rather visit the sin directly upon himself
The sin of David and Bathsheba is not atoned for by the death of the child (2 Sam.
xii. 15&#8211;18), for David had already obtained pardon, ver. 13. It is not the child
which suffers, but David, whose repentance was to be deepened by this visitation.
In the fact, that the whole army must suffer for what Achan has committed (Josh.
vii. 1), a distinct intimation is implied, that the criminal does not stand alone,
but that, to a certain degree, the whole community was implicated in his guilt.
Substitution is quite out of the question, inasmuch as Achan himself, with his whole
family and posterity, was burnt. Least of all, finally, can Dan. xi. 35 come into
consideration. According to <i>Gesenius</i>, it is there said: &quot;And they of understanding
shall fall, in order to purge, purify, and make white those (the others).&quot; But
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1492;&#1501;</span> refers rather to the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1499;&#1497;&#1500;&#1497;&#1501;</span> themselves. Thus, nowhere in the Old
Testament, is even the slightest trace found of a satisfaction to be accomplished
by man for man; nor can it be found there, because, from its very commencement.
Scripture most emphatically declares: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#945;&#962; &#8017;&#966;&#700; &#7937;&#956;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#943;&#945;&#957;
&#949;&#7990;&#957;&#945;&#953;</span>, Rom. iii. 9.</p>
<p class="normal">The explanation, which makes the <i>Jewish people</i> the subject,
has already been overthrown by the parallel passages, before arriving: at the section
under consideration. &quot;Even so far back as chap. xlii. 1, difficulties are met with,&quot;
remarks <i>Beck</i>. &quot;How is it possible that the people who, in ver. 19 of that
chapter, are described as blind and deaf, should here appear as being altogether
penetrated by the Spirit, so as to become the teachers of the Gentiles?&quot; &quot;Chap.
xlix. is a true <span class="pagenum">[Pg 337]</span> cross for the interpreters.&quot;
&quot;Finally, the section, chap. l., <i>Hitzig</i> himself is obliged to explain as
referring to the Prophet; and thus this interpretation forfeits the boast of most
strictly holding fast the unity of this notion.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">But still more decisively is the interpretation overthrown by
the contents of the section under discussion. The Servant of God has, according
to it, voluntarily taken upon Himself His sufferings (according to ver. 10, He offers
himself as a sacrifice for sin; according to ver. 12, He is crowned with glory because
He has poured out His soul unto death). Himself sinless, He bears the sins of others,
vers. 4-6, 9. His sufferings are the means by which the justification of many is
effected. He suffers quietly and patiently, ver. 7. Not one of these four signs
can be vindicated for the people of Israel. (a). The Jews did not go voluntarily
into the Babylonish exile, but were dragged into it by force. (b). The Jewish people
were not without sin in suffering; but they suffered, in the captivity, the punishment
of their own sins. Their being carried away had been foretold by Moses as a punitive
judgment. Lev. xxvi. 14 ff.; Deut. xxviii. 15 ff. xxix. 19 ff., and as such it is
announced by all the prophets also. In the second part, Isaiah frequently reminds
Judah that they shall be cast into captivity by divine justice, and be delivered
from it by divine mercy only; comp. chaps. lvi.-lix., especially chap. lix. 2: &quot;Your
iniquities separate between you and your God, and your sins hide His face from you
that He doth not hear. For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with
iniquity, your lips speak lies, and your tongue meditates perverseness. 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. The way of peace they know
not, and there is no right in their paths; they pervert their paths; whosoever goeth
therein doth not know peace. Apostacy and denying the Lord, and departing away from
our God, speaking oppression and revolt, conceiving and uttering from the heart
words of falsehood.&quot; Comp. chap. xlii. 24: &quot;Who gave Jacob for a spoil, and Israel
to the robbers? Did not the Lord, He against whom we have sinned, and in whose ways
they would not walk, neither were they obedient unto His law.&quot; Farther,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 338]</span> chap. xliii. 26, 27, where the detailed proof
that Israel&#39;s merits could not be the cause of their deliverance, inasmuch as they
did not exist at all, is, by the Prophet, wound up by the words: &quot;Put me in remembrance,
let us plead together, declare then that thou mayest be justified. Thy first father
hath sinned, and thy mediators have transgressed against me. Therefore I profane
the princes of the sanctuary, and give Jacob to the destruction, and Israel to reproaches.&quot;
It is solely to the mercy of God that, according to chap. xlviii. 11, Israel owes
deliverance from the severe suffering into which they fell in the way of their sins.
One may confidently assert there is not a single page in the whole book, which does
not offer a striking refutation of this view. And most miserable are the expedients
to which, in the face of such facts, the defenders of this view betake themselves.
<i>Rosenmüller</i> was of opinion, that the Prophet introduced those Gentiles only
as speaking, who, by this flattery, wished to gain the favour of the Jews,--without
considering that it is just in the words of the Lord, in ver. 11, that the absolute
righteousness of the Servant of God is most strongly expressed. <i>Hitzig</i> is
of opinion, that the people had indeed suffered for their sins; but that the punishment
had been greater than their sins, and that by this surplus the Gentiles were benefited.
But the Prophet expressly contradicts such a gross view. He repeatedly declares
that the punishment was still mitigated by mercy; that, in the way of their works,
Israel would have found total destruction. Thus, <i>e.g.</i>, chap. xlviii. 9: &quot;For
my name&#39;s sake will I be long-suffering, and for my praise will I moderate mine
anger unto thee, that I cut thee not off;&quot; chap. i. 9: &quot;Except the Lord of Hosts
had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom; we should have
been like unto Gomorrah.&quot; In order to be fully convinced how much this view of Israel,
enforced upon the godly men of the Old Testament, is in contradiction to their own
view, the prayer of Ezra may still be compared in Neh. ix., especially ver. 20 ff.--(c.)
The sufferings of the Jewish people cannot be vicarious, because they are destitute
of the very first condition of substitution, viz., sinlessness and righteousness.
That even <i>Hitzig</i> does not venture to claim for them. But how can an ungodly
man, even supposing that his punishment is too severe, justify others
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 339]</span> by a righteousness of his which does not exist?
<i>Finally</i>--The fourth sign, patience, so little belongs to the Jewish people,
that it is one of the main tasks of our Prophet himself to oppose their murmuring
impatience; comp. <i>e.g.</i>, chap. xlv. 9 ff.</p>
<p class="normal">Against the hypothesis that the people are the subject of the
prophecy, there is the circumstance that it carries along with it the unnatural
supposition that, in chap. liii. 1&#8211;10, the heathens are introduced as speaking.
Decisive against this supposition are specially the designation
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1502;&#1497;</span> in ver. 8, and the most forced explanation
to which it compels us, in some verses, especially ver. 2.</p>
<p class="normal">The interpretation which considers the godly portion of the people
to be the subject of the prophecy, is overthrown by the fact that, according to
the view of Scripture, even those who, in the ordinary sense, are righteous, are
unable to render a vicarious satisfaction for others. For such, absolute righteousness
is required. But the &quot;righteous ones&quot; are begotten by sinful seed (Ps. li.), and
they have need daily to pray that God would pardon their secret sins, Ps. xix. 13;
they themselves live only by the pardoning mercy of God, and cannot think of atoning
for others, Ps. xxxii. Even for believers, the captivity is, according to chap.
xlii., the merited punishment of their sins. In that passage, the greatness of the
mercy of God is pointed out, who grants a twofold salvation for sins, while infinite
punishment should be their natural consequence. It is not to a single portion of
the people, but to the whole, that, in the passages formerly quoted, every share
in effecting deliverance and salvation is denied. How little an absolute righteousness
existed in the elect, sufficiently appears from the fact, that, in the second part,
it forms a main object of the Prophet to oppose their want of courage, their despair
and distrust of God. <i>Farther</i>--The ungodly could not by any means consider
the sufferings of the righteous ones as vicarious, because they themselves suffered
as much; and as little could they despise the godly on account of their sufferings.
It is a mere invention, destitute of every historical foundation, to assert that
it was especially the God-fearing who had to suffer so grievously in the captivity.
On the contrary, their fear of God gained for them the respect of the Gentiles;
and among <span class="pagenum">[Pg 340]</span> their own people also, whose sinful
disposition was broken by the punishment, they occupied an honourable position.
Ezekiel we commonly find surrounded by the elders of the people, listening to his
words; and Daniel, Esther, and Mordecai, Ezra, and Nehemiah, richly furnished with
the goods of this world, enjoyed high esteem in the Gentile world. The fact that
the supporters of this hypothesis are compelled to have recourse to such an unhistorical
fiction, which has been carried to the extreme, especially by <i>Knobel</i>, sufficiently
proves it to be untenable.</p>
<p class="normal">In opposition to the interpretation which refers the prophecy
to the collective body of the Prophets, <i>Hitzig</i> very justly remarks: &quot;The
supposition that, by the Servant of God, the prophetic order is to be understood,
is destitute of all foundation and probability.&quot; In commenting on chap. xlii. we
remarked, that there are no analogous cases at all in favour of such a personification
of the prophetic order. Moreover, the defenders of this view commonly deny, at the
same time, the genuineness of the second part. From this stand-point it becomes
still more evident, how untenable this hypothesis is. A prophetic order can, least
of all, be spoken of during the time of the Babylonish captivity. With the captivity,
Prophetism began to die out. Jeremiah in Jerusalem, and Ezekiel among the exiled,
already stood very much isolated. Jeremiah, during the last days of the Jewish state,
stands out everywhere as a single individual, opposed to the whole mass of the false
prophets. &quot;There is no more any prophet,&quot; is, at the time of the destruction by
the Chaldeans, the lamentation of the author of Ps. lxxiv. in ver. 9. According
to an unanimous tradition (comp. 1 Maccab. ix. 27, iv. 46, xiv. 41, and the passages
from the Talmud and other Jewish writings in <i>Knibbe&#39;s</i> history of the Prophets,
S. 347 ff., and in <i>Joh. Smithi Dissert. de Prophetis</i>, in the Appendix to
<i>Clericus&#39;</i> Commentary on the Prophets, chap. xii.), Haggai, Zechariah, and
Malachi were the last of the prophets, and according to the historical books and
their own prophecies, the only prophets of their time. How, now, were it possible
that the Prophet should speak of a great corporation of the prophets, who become
not only the founders and rulers of the new state, but who are to enlighten all
the other nations of the earth with the light of the time religion,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 341]</span> and incorporate them into the church of God?
Of all that is characteristic of the vocation of the prophets, nothing is found
here; while, on the other hand, almost everything which is said of the Servant of
God is in opposition to the vocation and destination of the prophets. That which
here, above everything, comes into consideration is the <i>vicarious satisfaction</i>.
Chap. vi., where the Prophet when, after having administered the prophetic office
for several years, he beheld the Lord, exclaims: &quot;Woe is unto me for I am undone,
because I am a man of unclean lips, and dwell in the midst of a people of unclean
lips,&quot; is sufficient to show how far the thoughts of such a vicarious satisfaction
were from the prophets. Such is surely not the ground from which the delusion of
being substitutes for others can grow up. All those who entertained such a delusion,
such as <i>Gichtel</i>, <i>Bourignon</i>, <i>Guyon</i>, were misled into it by proudly
shutting their eyes to their own sinfulness. It would surely be abasing the prophets
without any cause, if we were to assign to them that delusion. Moreover, the hopes
which here, according to these interpreters, are uttered in reference to the prophetic
order, contradict its idea, and institution. A prophetic pride would here come out,
such as is not equalled by priestly pride in all history. <i>Schenkel</i>, no doubt,
is right in remarking against the interpretation which makes the Jewish people the
subject of the prophecy,--an interpretation of which <i>Hitzig</i> is the representative:
&quot;Is it to believed that the prophets, whose object all along it was to suppress
the moral pride of the people, should wantonly have awakened it by such a thought?&quot;
But <i>Hitzig</i> is equally in the right when, in opposition to <i>Schenkel</i>
and others who refer this prediction to the prophetic order, he remarks: &quot;It is
quite obvious, how very unsuitable it would be to limit the hitherto wretched condition
and the future glory of the people to the prophets, as if they alone, as true
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#954;&#965;&#961;&#953;&#949;&#8059;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#954;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#969;&#957;</span>, constituted the
people.&quot; According to this hypothesis, the prophets are supposed to flatter themselves
with the hope that they would be the rulers of the state again flourishing, and
would celebrate worldly triumphs. Altogether apart from the folly of this hope,
it was entirely opposed to the destiny of the prophetic order. By divine institution,
the dominion in the Kingdom of God had for ever been given over to David
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 342]</span> and his family. By usurping it, the prophets
would have rebelled against God, whose lights they were called to uphold.--<i>Farther</i>,
As the principal sphere of the ministry of the Servant of God, the heathen world
here appears. But with it, the prophets have, nowhere else, any thing to do; their
mission is everywhere to Israel only.--The sufferings which the prophets had to
endure during the captivity, were not different from those of the people. Every
proof, yea, even every probability, is wanting that, during the time of the captivity,
the prophets--and history mentions and knows only Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel--were
pre-eminently afflicted. On the contrary, they occupy an honourable position. Jeremiah
receives, after the capture of Jerusalem, proofs of esteem from Nebuchadnezzar.
Daniel is entrusted with the highest public offices. Ezekiel is held in honour by
his compatriots. How then could the people despise the prophets on account of their
sufferings? How could they imagine that they had been smitten by God? How could
they afterwards conceive the idea that the sufferings of the prophets had a vicarious
character?--To what quarter soever we look, impossibilities present themselves;
and if, moreover, we also look at the parallel passages, we must indeed wonder,
that a hypothesis altogether so untenable should ever have been listened to.</p>
<hr class="W20">
<h3><a name="div2_342" href="#div2Ref_342">CHAPTER LV. 1-5.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">The Lord exhorts those who are anxious to be saved, to appropriate
the blessings of salvation which are so liberally offered, and which, although bestowed
without money and price, can alone truly satisfy the soul, vers. 1 and 2. For He
is to make with them a covenant of everlasting duration, in which the eternal mercy
promised to the family of David is to be realized, ver. 3. David--such is the salvation
in store for the Church--is to be a witness, prince, and lawgiver of all the Gentiles
who, with joyful readiness, shall unite themselves to Israel.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 343]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 1. &quot;<i>Ho, all ye that thirst, come ye to the water, and
ye that have no silver, come ye, buy and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without
silver and without price.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The discourse is addressed to the members of the Church pining
away in misery. By the water, salvation is denoted, as is not unfrequently the case,
comp. chap. xii. 3: &quot;And with joy ye shall draw water out of the wells of salvation,&quot;
xliv. 3; Ps. lxxxvii. 7, lxxxiv. 7, cvii. 35. The thirsty one is he who stands in
need of salvation. To the words: &quot;Ho, all ye that thirst, come ye to the water,&quot;
the Lord refers in John vii. 37: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#940;&#957; &#964;&#953;&#962; &#948;&#953;&#968;&#8119; &#7952;&#961;&#967;&#941;&#963;&#952;&#969;
&#960;&#961;&#972;&#962; &#956;&#949; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#953;&#957;&#941;&#964;&#969;</span>, where the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#961;&#972;&#962; &#956;&#949;</span>
had been added from ver. 3. It is to be observed that Christ there appropriates
to himself what Jehovah is here speaking. <i>Michaelis</i> says: &quot;Christ, in consequence
of the highest identity, makes the words of the Father His own.&quot; There is an evident
reference to the same words in Rev. xxi. 6 also: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#947;&#8060;
&#964;&#8183; &#948;&#953;&#968;&#8182;&#957;&#964;&#953; &#948;&#974;&#963;&#969; &#7952;&#954; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#960;&#951;&#947;&#8134;&#962; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#8021;&#948;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#950;&#969;&#8134;&#962; &#948;&#969;&#961;&#949;&#940;&#957;</span>. Similarly in Rev.
xxii. 17: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#8001; &#948;&#953;&#968;&#8182;&#957; &#7952;&#961;&#967;&#941;&#963;&#952;&#969;, &#8001; &#952;&#941;&#955;&#969;&#957; &#955;&#945;&#946;&#941;&#964;&#969; &#8021;&#948;&#969;&#961;
&#950;&#969;&#8134;&#962; &#948;&#969;&#961;&#949;&#940;&#957;</span>. In a somewhat more distant relation to the words before us,
but yet undeniably depending upon them, is John iv. 10:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#963;&#8058; &#7938;&#957; &#8084;&#964;&#951;&#963;&#945;&#962; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7956;&#948;&#969;&#954;&#949;&#957; &#7940;&#957; &#963;&#959;&#953; &#8021;&#948;&#969;&#961; &#950;&#8182;&#957;</span>.
Vers. 13, 14: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#8118;&#962; &#8001; &#960;&#943;&#957;&#969;&#957; &#7952;&#954; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#8021;&#948;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#964;&#959;&#973;&#964;&#959;&#965; &#948;&#953;&#968;&#942;&#963;&#949;&#953;
&#960;&#940;&#955;&#953;&#957;· &#8003;&#962; &#948;&#700; &#7938;&#957; &#960;&#943;&#8131; &#7952;&#954; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#8021;&#948;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962;, &#959;&#8023; &#7952;&#947;&#8060; &#948;&#974;&#963;&#969; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8183; &#959;&#8016; &#956;&#8052; &#948;&#953;&#968;&#942;&#963;&#8131; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#945;&#7984;&#8182;&#957;&#945;</span>.
And so does, in another aspect. Matt. xi. 28: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#949;&#8166;&#964;&#949;
&#960;&#961;&#972;&#962; &#956;&#949; &#959;&#7985; &#954;&#959;&#960;&#953;&#8182;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#949;&#966;&#959;&#961;&#964;&#953;&#963;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#953; &#954;&#8064;&#947;&#8060; &#7936;&#957;&#945;&#960;&#945;&#973;&#963;&#969; &#8017;&#956;&#8118;&#962;</span>, which, however,
has still nearer points of resemblance to ver. 3; for
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#949;&#8166;&#964;&#949; &#960;&#961;&#972;&#962; &#956;&#949;</span> corresponds to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1499;&#1493; &#1488;&#1500;&#1497;</span> in that verse; the words
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#8064;&#947;&#8060; &#7936;&#957;&#945;&#960;&#945;&#973;&#963;&#969; &#8017;&#956;&#8118;&#962;</span>, to: &quot;Your soul shall live&quot;
there, but yet in such a way that there is, at the same time, a reference to Jer.
vi. 16; the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#959;&#960;&#953;&#8182;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#949;&#966;&#959;&#961;&#964;&#953;&#963;&#956;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#953;</span> are
the thirsty ones in the verse before us. It is remarkable to see how important this
unassuming declaration was to our Lord, and how much He had it at heart. We are
thereby urgently called upon, by means of deep and earnest study and meditation,
to arrive at the full meaning of the Old Testament, which is everywhere connected
with the New Testament, not only by the strong and firm ties of express quotations,
but also by the nicest and most tender threads of gentle allusions. Even Matt. v.
6: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#945;&#954;&#940;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#953; &#959;&#7985; &#960;&#949;&#953;&#957;&#8182;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#948;&#953;&#968;&#8182;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#948;&#953;&#954;&#945;&#953;&#959;&#963;&#973;&#957;&#951;&#957;</span>
comes into a close relation to our passage, as soon as it is recognized that
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#953;&#954;&#945;&#953;&#959;&#963;&#973;&#957;&#951;&#957;</span> is not the subjective righteousness
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 344]</span> which is excluded from that context, but rather
righteousness as a gift of God, the actual justification, such as takes place in
the bestowal of salvation; so that, hence, the righteousness there corresponds with
the <i>water</i> here. The subsequent &quot;eat&quot; furnishes the foundation for the fact,
that the need of and desire for salvation, is designated by <i>hunger</i> also,--&quot;<i>Come
ye, buy and eat.</i>&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1489;&#1512;</span> &quot;to break,&quot; is used
of the appeasing of thirst (comp. Ps. civ. 11), and hunger (comp. Gen. xlii. 19);
and corn is called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1462;&#1473;&#1489;&#1462;&#1512;</span> for this reason
that it breaks the hunger. The verb never means &quot;to buy&quot; in general, but only such
a buying as affords the means of appeasing hunger and thirst. Nor does it, in itself,
stand in any relation to corn, except in so far only as the latter is a chief moans
of appeasing hunger. This we see not only from Ps. civ. 11, but also from that which
here immediately follows, where it is used of the buying of wine and milk. The buying
of necessary provisions is commonly designated by the <i>Kal</i>; the selling by
the <i>Hiphil</i>. In Gen. xli. 26, the selling too is designated by the <i>Kal</i>.
He who causes that one can break or appease, may himself also be designated as he
who breaks or appeases. This verb, so very peculiar, and the noun
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1462;&#1473;&#1489;&#1462;&#1512;</span>, occur in a certain accumulation, in
the history of Joseph only; elsewhere, their occurrence is sporadic only. It is
then to the hunger of Israel in ancient times, and to its being appeased by Joseph,
that the double <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1489;&#1512;&#1493;</span> alludes; and from this
circumstance also the fact is to be explained, that it is first used in reference
to food; comp. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1489;&#1512;&#1493; &#1493;&#1488;&#1499;&#1500;&#1493;</span> in our verse, with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1489;&#1512; &#1488;&#1499;&#1500;</span> in Gen. xlii. 7-10. Christ is the
true Joseph, who puts an end to the hunger and thirst of the people of God, by offering
true food and true drink.--The word &quot;eat&quot; suggests substantial food, bread in contrast
to the drink by which it is surrounded on both sides; compare John vi. 35:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#947;&#974; &#949;&#7984;&#956;&#953; &#8001; &#7940;&#961;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#950;&#969;&#8134;&#962;· &#8001; &#7952;&#961;&#967;&#972;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#956;&#949; &#959;&#8016;
&#956;&#8052; &#960;&#949;&#953;&#957;&#940;&#963;&#8131;</span> (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1489;&#1512;&#1493;</span>)
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#8001; &#960;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#973;&#969;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#7952;&#956;&#8050; &#959;&#8016; &#956;&#8052; &#948;&#953;&#968;&#942;&#963;&#8131; &#960;&#974;&#960;&#959;&#964;&#949;</span>.
Ver. 55: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7969; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#963;&#940;&#961;&#958; &#956;&#959;&#965; &#7936;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#8182;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#953; &#946;&#961;&#8182;&#963;&#953;&#962;, &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#8056;
&#945;&#7991;&#956;&#940; &#956;&#959;&#965; &#7936;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#8182;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#953; &#960;&#972;&#963;&#953;&#962;</span>. From the sequel (comp. vers. 6, 7), it appears
that the thrice repeated <i>coming</i> and the <i>buying</i> are accomplished by
true repentance, the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#949;&#964;&#8049;&#957;&#959;&#953;&#945;</span>, which is the
indispensable condition of the participation in the salvation. In John vi. 35, the
words: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001; &#7952;&#961;&#967;&#972;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#956;&#949;</span> are explained by:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001; &#960;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#973;&#969;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#7952;&#956;&#8050;</span>. Faith is the soul of repentance.--The
circumstance that the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 345]</span> buying is done without
money, intimates that the blessings of salvation are a pure gift of divine grace.
These blessings of salvation are first designated by water; afterwards, by <i>wine</i>
and <i>milk</i>,--thus approximating to those passages in which the blessings of
the Kingdom of Christ appear under the image of a rich repast, to which the members
of the Kingdom are invited as guests, Ps. xxii. 26-30; Matt. viii. 11, xxii. 2;
Luke xiv. 16; Rev. xix. 9.--Some Rationalistic interpreters understand, by the offered
blessings, the salutary admonitions of the Prophet; but decisive against these are
vers. 3 and 11, according to which it is not present, but future blessings, not
words, but real things which are spoken of, viz., the salvation which is to be brought
through Christ. What that is which constitutes the substance of this salvation,
we learn from chap. liii. It is the redemption and reconciliation by the Servant
of God. Yet we must not, after the manner of several ancient interpreters, limit
ourselves to the &quot;evangelical righteousness.&quot; On the contrary, the whole fulness
of the salvation in Christ is comprehended in it; and according to vers. 4 and 5,
this includes the dominion over the world by the Kingdom of God,--its dominion over
the Gentile world, and the investiture of its members with the full liberty and
glory of the children of God.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 2. &quot;<i>Wherefore do ye weigh money for that which is not
bread, and your labour for that which satisfieth not? Hearken, hearken unto me,
and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">From ver. 3, we see that it is not the Prophet, but the Lord who
speaks. &quot;That which is not bread,&quot; and &quot;that which satisfieth not,&quot; is something
which outwardly has the appearance of good and nutritious food, and to obtain which
the hungry ones therefore strive, and exert themselves with all their might, but
which afterwards shows itself to be food in appearance only, and which has not the
power of satisfying. &quot;That which is not bread,&quot; is, in the first instance, the imagined
salvation which they sought to obtain from idols for much money. This appears from
the intentional literal reference to chap. xlvi. 6, where the Prophet reproves the
folly of those who, in the face of the living God, &quot;lavish gold out of the bag,
and <i>weigh silver</i> in the balance, and hire a goldsmith,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 346]</span> that he make it a god, work also and fall
down.&quot; With perfect justice <i>Stier</i> remarks: &quot;Notwithstanding the connection
with, and allusion to, the circumstances of that time, the word of the Prophet is
to be understood in a general, spiritual way, as a melancholy, bitter lamentation
over the general misery, and man&#39;s deep-rooted perverseness in running with effort
and exertion, after that which is pernicious to the soul, and in serving some Baal
better than Jehovah.&quot;<!--inserted quote--> &quot;Fatness&quot; occurs as a figurative designation
of the glorious gifts of God, in Ps. xxxvi. 9 also.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. &quot;<i>Incline your ears and come unto me, hear and your
soul shall live, and I will grant to you an everlasting covenant, the constant mercies
of David.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The introductory words allude, in a graceful manner, to two Messianic
psalms, and remind us of the fact, that the prophecy before us moves on the same
ground as these psalms. On &quot;incline your ear, and come unto me, hear,&quot; comp. Ps.
xlv. 11: &quot;Hear, O daughter, and see, and <i>incline thine ear</i> (from the fundamental
passage, the Singular is here retained), and forget thy people and thy father&#39;s
house.&quot; On &quot;your soul shall live,&quot; comp. Ps. xxii. 27: &quot;The meek shall eat and be
satisfied, they shall praise the Lord that seek Him, <i>your heart shall live for
ever</i>.&quot; Analogous are the references to Ps. lxxii. in chap. xi. The soul <i>dies</i>
in care and grief In the words: &quot;I will grant to you,&quot; &amp;c., there follow the glad
tidings which are to heal the dying hearts. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1512;&#1514; &#1489;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514;</span>
is used of God, even where no reciprocal agreement takes place, but where He simply
confers grace; because every grace which He bestows imposes, at the same time, an
obligation, and may hence be considered as a covenant. The onesidedness is, in such
a case, indicated by the construction with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;</span>,
comp. chap. lxi. 8: &quot;And I give them their reward in truth, and I make (grant) to
them an everlasting covenant,&quot; Jer. xxxii. 40; Ezek. xxxiv. 25; Ps. lxxxix. 4. Since
<i>to make a covenant</i> is here identical with <i>granting mercy</i>,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1499;&#1512;&#1514;&#1492;</span> may also be connected with the subsequent
&quot;the constant mercies of David,&quot; and there is no necessity for supposing a Zeugma.
The everlasting covenant here, is the new covenant in Jer. xxxi. 31-34; for the
words &quot;I <i>will</i> make&quot; show that, here too, a new covenant is spoken of. The
substance of the covenant to be made is expressed in the words:
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 347]</span> &quot;The constant mercies of David,&quot; &amp;c. By &quot;David,&quot;
many interpreters here understand the descendant of David, the Messiah, who, in
other passages also, <i>e.g.</i>, Jer. xxx. 9, bears the name of His type. Even
<i>Abenezra</i> refers to the fact that, in ver. 4, the Messiah is necessarily required
as the subject. The <i>constant</i> mercies of David are, according to this view--in
parallelism with the &quot;everlasting covenant&quot;--the mercies constantly continuing,
in contrast to the merely transitory mercies, such as had been those of the first
David. According to the opinion of other interpreters, David designates here, as
in Hos. iii. 5, the family of David who, in Ps. xviii., and in a series of other
psalms, speaks in the name of his whole family. As regards the sense, this explanation
arrives at the same result. For, according to it, the Messiah is He in whom the
Davidic house attains to its fall destiny, the channel through which the mercies
of David flow in upon the Church. For the latter interpretation, however, is decisive
the evident reference to the divine promise to David, in 2 Sam. vii., especially
vers. 15, 16: &quot;And my mercy shall not depart from him (thy race) ... and constant
(<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1488;&#1502;&#1503;</span>) is thine house, and thy kingdom for
ever before thee, thy throne shall be firm for ever;&quot;<!--inserted quote--> compare
Ps. lxxxix. 29: &quot;My mercy will I keep for him for evermore, and my covenant is constant
in him.&quot; Ps. lxxxix. 2, 50: &quot;Lord, where are thy former mercies which thou swarest
unto David in thy truth?&quot; likewise suggest that, by David, not simply Christ is
to be understood, but the Davidic family. The constant mercies of David are, accordingly,
the mercies which have been sworn to the Davidic house as <i>constant</i>, which,
therefore, can never rest until Christ has appeared with His everlasting Kingdom,
in which they find their true and full realization. In the expectation of the Messiah
from the house of David, the prophecy under consideration goes hand in hand with
chap. xi. 1, where the Messiah appears as a twig which proceeds from the cut-down
tree of Jesse; and with chap. ix. 6, according to which He sits on the throne of
David. This passage alone is fully sufficient against those (<i>Ewald</i>, <i>Umbreit</i>,
and others) who advance the strange assertion, that the Prophet had altogether given
up the idea of a Messiah from the house of David, and had distributed His property
between Cyrus and the prophetic order, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 348]</span> or
the pious portion of the people. It is of the greatest importance for the explanation
of those passages which treat of the Servant of God, and forms a point of union
for the Messianic passages of the first and second part. The passage before us is
quoted in Acts xiii. 34: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8005;&#964;&#953; &#948;&#8050; &#7936;&#957;&#941;&#963;&#964;&#951;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#7952;&#954;
&#957;&#949;&#954;&#961;&#8182;&#957;, &#956;&#951;&#954;&#941;&#964;&#953; &#956;&#941;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945; &#8017;&#960;&#959;&#963;&#964;&#961;&#941;&#966;&#949;&#953;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#948;&#953;&#945;&#966;&#952;&#959;&#961;&#940;&#957; &#959;&#8021;&#964;&#969;&#962;, &#949;&#7988;&#961;&#951;&#954;&#949;&#957; &#903; &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#948;&#974;&#963;&#969; &#8017;&#956;&#8150;&#957;
&#964;&#8048; &#8005;&#963;&#953;&#945; &#916;&#945;&#965;&#8054;&#948; &#964;&#8048; &#960;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#940;</span>. <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8013;&#963;&#953;&#945; &#916;&#945;&#965;&#8054;&#948;</span>,
<i>sancta Davidis</i>, are the sacred, inviolable, inalienably guaranteed mercies
and blessings which have been promised to the house of David. As certainly as these
must be granted, so certainly Christ, who was to bring them, could not remain in
the power of death.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. &quot;<i>Behold, I give him for a witness to the people, for
a prince and lawgiver of the people.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Here, and in ver. 5, we have the expansion of the mercies of David.
Their greatness and glory appear from the circumstance that, around his scion, the
whole heathen world, which hitherto was hostile and pernicious to the Church of
God, will gather. The Suffix in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1514;&#1514;&#1497;&#1493;</span> can
refer only to David, or the family of David. From the connection with chap. liii.,
it appears that it is in his descendant, the righteous One, to whom the heathen
and their kings do homage, that David will attain to the dignity here announced.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1491;</span> has no other signification than &quot;witness.&quot;
Every true doctrine bears the character of a witness. The teacher sent by God does
not teach on his own authority, <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#945; &#956;&#8052; &#7953;&#8061;&#961;&#945;&#954;&#949;&#957; &#7952;&#956;&#946;&#945;&#964;&#949;&#8059;&#969;&#957;</span>,
but only witnesses what he has seen and heard. With a reference to, and in explanation
of the passage before us, Christ says to Pilate, in John xviii. 37: &quot;For this end
was I born, and for this cause I came into the world, that I should bear <i>witness</i>
unto the truth.&quot; And the passages, Rev. i. 5: &quot;And from Jesus Christ who is the
faithful witness,&quot; and Rev. iii. 14: &quot;These things says the Amen, the faithful and
true witness,&quot; likewise point back to the passage before us; compare farther, John
iii. 11, 32, 33. In John xviii. 37, Rev. i. 5, His being a witness is, just as in
the passage before us, connected with His being a King; so that the reference to
this passage cannot be at all doubtful. It is intentionally that
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1491;</span> is put at the head. It is intended to intimate
that the future dominion of the Davidic dynasty over the heathen world shall be
essentially different from that which, in former times, it exercised
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 349]</span> over some neighbouring people. It is not based
upon the power of arms, but upon the power of truth. He in whom the Davidic dynasty
is to centre shall connect the prophetic with the regal office; just as already,
in the prophecy of the Shiloh, in Gen. xlix. 10, the prophetic office is concealed
behind the royal. The contrast to the first David can the less be doubtful, that,
while <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1491;</span> is never applied to him, it is just
the subsequent <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1497;&#1491;</span> which, in a series of
passages, is ascribed to him. In 2 Sam. vi. 21, David himself says that the Lord
appointed him to be <i>ruler</i> over the people of the Lord, over Israel; in 2
Sam. vii. 8, Nathan says: &quot;I took thee from the sheep-cot to be <i>ruler</i> over
my people, over Israel;&quot; comp. 1 Sam. xxv. 30; 2 Sam. v. 5. In those passages, however,
David is always spoken of as a ruler over Israel; so that even as regards the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1497;&#1491;</span>, the second David, the prince of the
<i>people</i>, is not only placed on a level with the first David, but is elevate
d above him. For the dominion by force which David exercised over some heathen nations,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1497;&#1491;</span> was the less appropriate designation,
inasmuch as it designates the ruler as the chief of his people.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 5. &quot;<i>Behold, thou shall call a nation that thou knowest
not, and nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee, because of the Lord thy
God, and of the Holy One of Israel, for He adorneth thee.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The words here are addressed to the true Israel, to the exclusion
of those souls who are cut off from among their people, compare Ps. lxxiii. 1, where
Israel and those that are of a clean heart go hand in hand,--and, in substance,
they also were addressed in vers. 1 and 2. For the thirsty ones, who are there called
upon to partake of the blessings so liberally offered by the Lord, are just the
members of the Church. In connection with that glorification of David, the Church
shall invite nations from a great distance, who were hitherto unknown to it, to
its communion; and those nations who hitherto scarcely knew by name the Church of
God shall joyfully and willingly comply with the invitation; comp. chap. ii. 2.
This great change proceeds from the Lord, the Almighty and Holy One, who, as the
protector and Covenant-God of His Church, has resolved to glorify it; for <i>He
adorneth thee</i>. This glorification consists, according to chap. iv. 2, in the
appearance of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 350]</span> Christ, the immediate consequence
of which is the conversion of the heathen world.</p>
<p class="normal">We must now review that exposition by which Rationalism has endeavoured
to deprive our passage of its Messianic import,--an attempt in which <i>Grotius</i>
led the way. <i>Gesenius</i>, whom <i>Hitzig</i>, <i>Maurer</i>, <i>Ewald</i>, and
<i>Knobel</i> follow, translates in vers. 3 and 4: &quot;That I may make with you an
everlasting covenant, may show to you constant mercies, as once to David. Behold,
I have made him a ruler of the nations, a prince and lawgiver of the nations,&quot; and
refers both of the verses to the first David. In ver. 5, then, the mercy is to follow
which, in some future time, God will bestow upon the whole people, as gloriously
as once upon the single David. But this explanation proves itself to be, in every
aspect, untenable.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_350a" href="#ftn_350a">[1]</a></sup></p>
<p class="normal">We are the less entitled to put &quot;mercies <i>like</i> David&#39;s&quot;
instead of &quot;the mercies of David,&quot; that these mercies are, elsewhere also, mentioned
in reference to the eternal dominion promised to David for his family; comp. Ps.
lxxxix. 2, 50. With the epithet, &quot;constant,&quot; these interpreters do not know what
to do. Apart from the promise of the eternal dominion of his house, no constant
mercies can, in the case of David, be pointed out which would be equally bestowed
upon the people, and upon him. Moreover, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1488;&#1502;&#1504;&#1497;&#1501;</span>
distinctly points back to 2 Sam. vii. Ver. 4 forms, according to this explanation,
&quot;a historical reminiscence, most unsuitable in the flow of a prophetic discourse&quot;
(<i>Umbreit</i>). But what in itself is quite conclusive is the circumstance, that
the first David could not by any possibility be designated as the <i>witness</i>
of the Gentile nations. It indeed sounds rather <i>naïve</i> that <i>Knobel</i>,
after having endeavoured to explain <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1489;</span> of
the &quot;opening up of the law,&quot; feels himself obliged to add: &quot;The word does not, however,
occur anywhere else in this signification.&quot; Nor could David, without farther limitation,
be designated as &quot;the prince and lawgiver of the <i>peoples</i>;&quot; and that so much
the more <span class="pagenum">[Pg 351]</span> that, in ver. 5, there is an invitation
to the Gentile world, and that, in ver. 4, too, the Gentile world, in the widest
sense, is to be thought of.</p>
<p class="normal">After the promise, there follows, in vers. 6&#8211;13, the admonition
to repentance based upon it. Repent ye, for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand, vers.
6, 7. Do not doubt that the Kingdom of heaven is at hand, because it does not seem
probable to you. For the counsels of God go beyond all the thoughts of men; and,
therefore. He and His work must not be judged by a human measure, vers. 8, 9. With
Him, word and deed are inseparably connected, vers. 10, 11. This will be manifested
in your redemption and glorification, vers. 12, 13.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_350a" href="#ftnRef_350a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[1]</sup></a> <i>Vitringa</i> already remarked in opposition
	to it: &quot;This exposition is rather far fetched, and is the weakest of all that
	can be advanced. I add, that the constancy of the promises given to David does
	not appear, if we exclude the Kingdom of the Messiah. But are any other promises
	of constant and eternal blessings, such as are here promised, to be thought
	of?&quot;</p>
</div>
<hr class="W20">
<h3><a name="div2_351" href="#div2Ref_351">THE PROPHECY--CHAP. LXI. 1&#8211;3.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">As in chaps. xlix. and l., so here, the Servant of God is introduced
as speaking, and announces to the Church what a glorious office the Lord had bestowed
upon Him, namely, to deliver them from the misery in which they had hitherto been
lying, and to work a wonderful change in their condition. In vers. 4&#8211;9, the Prophet
takes the word, and describes the salvation to be bestowed by the Servant of God.
In vers. 10 and 11, the Church appears, and expresses her joy and gratitude.</p>
<p class="normal">According to the Jewish and Rationalistic interpreters, the Prophet
himself is supposed to be speaking in vers. 1&#8211;3. That opinion was last expressed
by <i>Knobel</i>: &quot;The author places before his promises a remembrance of his vocation
as a preacher of consolation.&quot; In favour of the Messianic interpretation, in which
our Lord himself preceded His Church (Luke iv. 17&#8211;19), are conclusive, not only
the parallel passages, but also the contents of the prophecy itself, which go far
beyond the prophetic territory, and the human territory generally. The speaker designates
himself as He who is called, not merely to announce the highest blessings to the
Church, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 352]</span> but actually to grant them. He does
not represent himself as a mere Evangelist, but rather as a Saviour.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 1. &quot;<i>The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is upon me, because
the Lord hath anointed me to preach glad tidings unto the meek; He hath sent me
to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and opening
to them that are bound.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">On the words: &quot;The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is upon me,&quot; compare
chap. xi. 2, xlii. 1. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1506;&#1503;</span> always means &quot;because
of&quot; The whole succeeding clause stands instead of a noun, so that, in substance,
&quot;because of&quot; is equivalent to &quot;because;&quot; but it never can mean &quot;therefore.&quot; Nor
would the latter signification afford a good sense. The verb
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1495;</span> must, in that case, be subjected to arbitrary
explanations. The anointing, whether it occurs as a symbolical action really carried
out, or as a mere figure, is always a designation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit;
compare 1 Sam. x. 1, xvi. 13, 14, and remarks on Dan. ix. 24. Since, then, the anointing
is identical with the bestowal of the Spirit, the words: &quot;because the Lord hath
anointed me&quot; must not be isolated, but must be understood in close connection with
the subsequent words; so that the sense is: And He hath, for this reason, endowed
me with His Spirit, in order that I may preach good tidings, &amp;c. The
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1504;&#1493;&#1497;&#1501;</span> are the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#961;&#8115;&#949;&#8150;&#962;</span> in Matt. v. 5;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1504;&#1497;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1504;&#1493;</span>
are never confounded with one another. The LXX., whom Luke follows, have
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#964;&#969;&#967;&#959;&#8150;&#962;</span>. This rendering does not differ so
much from the original text as to make it appear expedient to give up the version
at that time received. In the world of sin, the meek are, at the same time, those
who are suffering; and the glad tidings which imply a contrast to their misery,
show that, here especially, the meek are to be conceived of as sufferers. The
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1504;&#1493;&#1497;&#1501;</span>, in contrast to the wicked, appear,
in chap. xi. also, as the people of the Messiah.--&quot;The binding up&quot;--<i>Stier</i>
remarks--&quot;already passes over into the actual bestowal of that which is announced.&quot;
The term <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1512;&#1488; &#1491;&#1512;&#1493;&#1512;</span> is taken from the Jubilee
year, which was a year of general deliverance for all those who, on account of debts,
had become slaves; compare Lev. xxv. 10: &quot;And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year,
and proclaim liberty throughout the land for all the inhabitants thereof; it shall
be a jubilee year unto you, and ye <span class="pagenum">[pg 353]</span> shall return
every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.&quot; Such
a great year of liberty is both to be proclaimed and to be brought about by the
Servant of God. For He does not announce any thing which He does not, at the same
time, grant, as is clearly shown by ver. 3. His saying is based upon His being and
nature; He delivers from the service of the world, and brings into the glorious
liberty of the children of God.--Most of the modern interpreters agree with the
ancient versions in declaring it to be wrong to divide the word
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1511;&#1495;&#1511;&#1493;&#1495;</span>, although this writing is found in
most of the manuscripts. The word is, &quot;by its form of reduplication, the most emphatic
term for the most complete opening,&quot; and designates, &quot;opening, unclosing of every
kind, of the eyes, ears, and heart, of every barrier and tie from within, or from
without.&quot; The LXX., proceeding upon the fact that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1508;&#1511;&#1495;</span> occurs, with especial frequency, of the opening of the eyes, translate:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#965;&#966;&#955;&#959;&#953;&#770;&#962; &#7936;&#957;&#940;&#946;&#955;&#949;&#968;&#953;&#957;</span>. Luke does not wish
to set aside this version, because it gives one feature of the sense; and partly
also because of the close resemblance to the parallel passage, chap. xlii. 7, which,
in this way, was brought in and connected with the passage under consideration.
But since outward deliverance and redemption are, in the first instance, to be thought
of, when opening to the captives is spoken of, be, in order to complete the sense,
adds: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#960;&#959;&#963;&#964;&#949;&#8150;&#955;&#945;&#953; &#964;&#949;&#952;&#961;&#945;&#965;&#963;&#956;&#8051;&#957;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#7952;&#957; &#7936;&#966;&#8051;&#963;&#949;&#953;</span>, borrowing
the expression from the Alexand. Vers. itself in chap. lviii. 6.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 2. &quot;<i>To proclaim a year of acceptance to the Lord, and
a day of vengeance to our God, to comfort all that mourn.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;A year ... to the Lord&quot; is a year when the Lord shows himself
gracious and merciful to His people; compare chap. xlix. 8. The words farther still
allude to the Jubilee year; and it is in consequence of this allusion, that we can
account for its being a <i>year</i> instead of a <i>time</i>, indefinitely. In that
year, a complete <i>restitutio in integrum</i> took place. It was, for all in misery,
a year of mercy, a type of the times of refreshing (Acts iii. 19) which the Lord
grants to His Church, after it has been exercised by the Cross. Hand in hand with
the year of mercy goes the day of vengeance. When the Lord shows mercy to the meek,
and to them that mourn, this shall, at the same time, be accompanied by a manifestation
of anger <span class="pagenum">[Pg 354]</span> against the enemies of God, and of
His Church. The one cannot be thought of without the other. The mercy of the Lord
towards His people is, among other things also, manifested in His sitting in judgment
upon His and their enemies, upon the proud world which afflicts and oppresses them.
It is only in this respect that the vengeance here comes into consideration; and
it is for this reason also, that the first feature at once reappears in the third
verse. The Lord, in quoting the verse, limits himself to the first clause, &quot;His
first coming into the world was in the form of meekness,&quot; and, therefore, in the
meantime, the bright side only is brought out.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. &quot;<i>To put upon them that mourn in Zion,--to give them
a crown for ashes, oil of joy for mourning, garment of praise for a spirit of heaviness;
and they shall be called terebinths of righteousness, planting of the Lord for glorifying.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">It is in this verse that it comes clearly out, that the speaker
is not merely to announce the mercy of God, but, at the same time, to bestow it;
that the announcement is not an empty one, but one which brings along with it that
which is promised; that it is not a Prophet or Evangelist who speaks, but the Saviour.
Such a change cannot be effected by merely <i>announcing</i> it. Everywhere, in
the second part, it is brought about, not by words, but by deeds. How were it possible
that by mere words, as long as the reality stood in glaring contrast to them, the
believers could become terebinths of righteousness, a glorious planting of the Lord?--The
connection of the two verbs <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1493;&#1501;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1514;&#1503;</span> is to be accounted for from the circumstance,
that the pronoun suited the first noun only--the ornament for the head. It is only
when <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1493;&#1501;</span> is understood in the sense, &quot;to put
upon,&quot; or, &quot;to put on,&quot; that there is a sufficient reason for adding
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1514;&#1503;</span>; but that is not the case when it is taken
in the signification &quot;to grant,&quot; &quot;to appoint.&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1488;&#1512;</span>
&quot;crown,&quot; and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1508;&#1512;</span> &quot;ashes,&quot; are connected with
one another, because mourners were accustomed to strew ashes on their heads. The
expression &quot;oil of joy,&quot; which is to be explained from the custom of people anointing
themselves with oil in cases of joy, is taken from Ps. xlv. 8. As the Messiah there
appears as the possessor of the oil of joy, so, here, He appears as the bestower.
In chap. lv. 3, there is <span class="pagenum">[Pg 355]</span> likewise an allusion
to Ps. xlv., and along with it, to Ps. xxii. The &quot;spirit of heaviness&quot; refers to
chap. xlii. 3. The fact that, instead of it, they receive &quot;garments of praise,&quot;
intimates that they shall be altogether clothed with praise, songs of praise for
the divine goodness which manifested itself in them; on the garments as symbols
of the condition, compare remarks on Rev. vii. 14. The &quot;righteousness&quot; which is
appropriate to the spiritual terebinths, is the actual justification, which the
Lord grants to His people at the appearance of the Messiah. There is in it an allusion
to the planting of paradise; God now prepares for himself a new paradisaical plantation,
consisting of living trees.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 356]</span></p>
<h2><a name="div1_356" href="#div1Ref_356">THE PROPHET ZEPHANIAH.</a></h2>
<hr class="W20">

<p class="normal">By the inscription, the Prophet&#39;s origin is, in a way rather uncommon,
traced back to his fourth ancestor, Hezekiah,--no doubt the king. He appeared as
a prophet under the reign of Josiah--before the time, however, at which the reforms
of that king had attained their completion, which took place in the 18th year of
his reign--and, hence, prophesied, like his predecessor Habakkuk, in the view of
the Chaldean catastrophe. The prophecy begins with threatening judgment upon the
sinners, and closes with announcing salvation to the believers,--a circumstance
which proves that it forms one whole. The threatening is distinguished from that
of Habakkuk by the circumstance, that it has more of a general comprehensive character,
and does not, as is done in Habakkuk, view the Chaldean catastrophe as a particular
historical event. It is not an incidental circumstance, that the Chaldeans are not
expressly mentioned by Zephaniah, as is done by Habakkuk, and was done by Isaiah.
The Prophet can, therefore, have had them in view as being, <i>in the first instance</i>
only, the instruments of Divine punishment.</p>
<p class="normal">The prophecy begins, in chap. i. 2, 3, with announcing the judgment
impending over the whole world. Then, the Prophet shows how it manifests itself
in Judah; first, in general outlines, vers. 4&#8211;7; then, in detail, vers. 8&#8211;18. In
close connection, this is followed by a call to repent, in chap. ii. 1&#8211;3. This call
is founded on the fearful character of the impending judgment which, according to
vers. 4&#8211;15, will be inflicted not only upon Judah, but also upon the world, and
will especially bring destruction upon all the neighbouring nations: in the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 357]</span> West, upon the Philistines; in the East, upon
Ammon and Moab; in the South, on Cush; in the North, upon Nineveh, upon whose destruction
the Prophet especially dwells, since, up to that time, it had been the bearer of
the world&#39;s power.</p>
<p class="normal">In chap. iii., in the first instance, the threatening against
Judah is resumed. Apostate Jerusalem, corrupt in its head and members, irresistibly
hastens on towards judgment. But, notwithstanding, &quot;the afflicted and poor people
of the land&quot; shall not despair. On the contrary, as salvation cannot proceed from
the midst of the people, they are to put their trust in the Lord. By His judgments
(viz., those declared in chap. ii., which at last shall bring forth the peaceable
fruits of righteousness, compare Isa. xxvi. 9: &quot;For when thy judgments are in the
earth, the inhabitants of the world learn righteousness&quot;) will He break the pride
of the Gentile world, and bring about their conversion,--and the converted Gentile
world will bring back to Jerusalem the scattered Congregation. Being purified and
justified, it will then enjoy the full mercy of the Lord.</p>
<p class="normal">The principal passage is chap. iii. 8&#8211;13.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 8. &quot;<i>Therefore wait ye upon me, saith the Lord, until the
day that I rise up to the prey; for my right is</i> (<i>i.e.</i>, the exercise of
my right consists in this) <i>to gather the nations, and to assemble the kingdoms,
to pour out upon them mine indignation, all the heat of mine anger; for all the
earth shall be devoured by the fire of my jealousy.</i> Ver. 9. <i>For then will
I turn unto the nations a clean lip, that they may all call upon the name of the
Lord, to serve Him with one shoulder.</i> Ver. 10. <i>From beyond the rivers of
Ethiopia shall they bring my suppliants, the daughter of my dispersed for a meat-offering
to me.</i> Ver. 11. <i>In that day shall thou not be ashamed for all thy doings
wherein thou hast transgressed against me; for then will I take away out of the
midst of thee them that proudly rejoice in thee, and thou shall no more be haughty
on mine holy mountain.</i> Ver. 12. <i>And I leave in the midst of thee an afflicted
and poor people, and they trust in the name of the Lord.</i> Ver. 13. <i>The remnant
of Israel shall not do iniquity nor speak lies; neither shall a deceitful tongue
be found in their mouth; for they shall feed and lie down, and none shall make them
afraid.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 358]</span></p>
<p class="normal">Zephaniah, who opens the series of the prophets who are preeminently
dependent upon other prophets, just as Habakkuk closes the series of those pre-eminently
independent, leans, in this section, chiefly upon Isaiah; and it is from this circumstance
that it appears, that the person of the Messiah, although not appearing here, stands
in the background and forms the invisible centre.</p>
<p class="normal">&quot;<i>Therefore</i>&quot; ver. 8: Since the salvation cannot proceed
from the midst of the people, inasmuch as, in the way of their works, they receive
nothing but destructive punishment. On the words: &quot;Wait ye upon me,&quot; compare Hab.
ii. 3. &quot;The day that the Lord rises up to the prey&quot; is the time when He will begin
His great triumphal march against the Gentile world. With the words: &quot;For my right,&quot;
&amp;c., a new argument for the call &quot;Wait ye upon me,&quot; commences. But this does not
by any means close with the 8th verse, but goes on to the end of ver. 10. First:
Wait, for I will judge the nations. It is not without meaning that, as regards your
hope, I refer you to the judgment upon the Gentiles; for, in consequence of this
judgment, their conversion will take place, and a consequence of their conversion
is, that they bring back to Zion her scattered members. In the thought, that the
judgments upon the Gentile world will break their hardness of heart, and prepare
them for their conversion, Zephaniah follows Isaiah, who, <i>e.g.</i> in chap. xix.,
exemplifies it in the case of Egypt, and in chap. xxiii. in that of Tyre. The bruised
reed and the faintly burning wick is not merely a designation of the single individuals
who have been endowed with the right disposition for the kingdom of God, but of
whole nations. &quot;The clean lip&quot; in ver. 9 forms the contrast to the unclean lips
in Is. vi. With unclean lips they had, in the time of the long-suffering of God,
invoked their idols, Ps. xvi. 4. On the words: &quot;To serve Him with one shoulder,&quot;
comp. Is. xix. 23: &quot;And Egypt serves with Asshur.&quot; The words: &quot;From beyond the rivers
of Ethiopia,&quot; in ver. 10, rest on Is. xviii. 1. In both of the passages, Ethiopia
is the type of the whole Gentile world to be converted in future. In Is. xviii.
Ethiopia offers itself and all which it has to the Lord; here it brings the scattered
members of the community of the Israelitish people to the Kingdom of God.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1514;&#1512;</span> always means &quot;to supplicate,&quot;
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 359]</span> never &quot;to burn incense.&quot; Ezek. viii. 11 must
thus be translated: &quot;Every man, his censer in his hand, and the <i>supplication</i>
of the cloud of incense went up;&quot;<!--inserted quote--> compare remarks on Rev. v.
8. The dispersed members of the Church <i>supplicate</i> that the Lord would again
receive them into His communion (compare Hos. xiv. 3; Jer. xxxi. 9, 18; Zech. xii.
10); and these supplications cannot remain without an answer, since they from whom
they proceed stand in a close relation to the Lord. &quot;The daughter of my dispersed&quot;
is the daughter or communion, consisting of the dispersed of the Lord, just as in
the phrase &quot;the daughter of the Chaldeans,&quot; the Chaldeans themselves are the daughter
or virgin. The designation, in itself, plainly suggests the dispersed members of
the old Congregation, inasmuch as they only can be designated as the dispersed of
the Lord. To this, moreover, must be added the reference to Deut. iv. 27: &quot;And the
Lord <i>disperses</i> you among the nations;&quot; xxviii. 64: &quot;And the Lord <i>disperses</i>
thee among all the nations from the one end of the earth even unto the other,&quot;--an
announcement which, at the time of Zephaniah, had already been fulfilled upon the
ten tribes, and the fulfilment of which was soon to commence upon Judah. It is only
when the members of the old Congregation are understood by the suppliants and dispersed,
that the call, &quot;Wait ye upon me&quot; is here established and confirmed. The offering
of the meat-offering signifies, in the symbolism of the Mosaic law, diligence in
good works, such as is to be peculiar to the redeemed. A single manifestation of
it is the missionary zeal which is here shown by the converted Gentiles.</p>
<p class="normal">In harmony with the Song of Solomon, Isaiah announces in several
passages, that the converted Gentiles shall, at some future period, labour for the
restoration of Israel; compare the remarks on Is. xi. 12. Zephaniah here specially
refers to the remarkable passage, Is. lxvi. 18&#8211;21, which we must here subject to
a somewhat closer examination: Ver. 18. &quot;And I ... their works and their thoughts;
<i>the time cometh to gather</i> all Gentiles and tongues, and they come and <i>
see</i> my glory.&quot; The first hemistich still belongs to the threatening. The holy
God and unholy men, the unholy members of the Church to which the Lord spake: &quot;Ye
shall be holy, for I am holy,&quot; and their sinful thoughts and words are simply placed
beside one another, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 360]</span> other, and it is left
to every one to draw from it the inference as to the fate awaiting them. &quot;I and
their works&quot;--what an immense contrast, a contrast which must be adjusted by the
judgment! With the threatening, the Prophet then connects, by a suitable contrast
to the rejection of a great part of the covenant-people, the calling of the Gentiles.
The glory of the Lord, which the Gentiles see, is His glory which, up to that time,
was concealed, but is now manifested; compare Is. xl. 5, lx. 2, lii. 10, liii. 1.
Ver. 19. &quot;And I set a sign among them, and send from among them escaped ones unto
the nations, to Tarshish, &amp;c., to the isles afar off that have not heard my fame,
neither have seen my glory, and they declare my glory among the Gentiles,&quot;--The
suffix in <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1492;&#1501;</span> can refer to those only from
among the nations and tongues who have come and seen the glory of God. They are
sent out to bring the message of the living God, the message of salvation to those
also who hitherto have not come. By the demonstration of the Spirit and power, they
are marked out as blessed of the Lord, as His servants, separated from the world
given up to destruction. Just as the wicked, the servants of the prince of this
world, have their <i>mark</i>, Gen. iv. 50, so have the servants of God theirs also,
which may be recognised by all who are well disposed. It is only by one&#39;s own fault,
and at one&#39;s own risk, that the sign is not understood. The fact that &quot;unto the
nations&quot; forms the beginning, and the &quot;isles afar off&quot;--isles in the sea of the
world, kingdoms--the close, shows that the single names, Tarshish, &amp;c., are only
individualizations. In the following verse, too, all the heathens are spoken of
Ver. 20: &quot;And they bring, out of all nations, your brethren for a meat-offering
unto the Lord, upon horses, &amp;c., to my holy mountain to Jerusalem, as the children
of Israel bring the meat-offering in a clean vessel unto the house of the Lord.&quot;
It is in this verse that it clearly appears, that Zephaniah depends upon it; and
it is by the offering of the spiritual meat-offering that his dependence is recognized.
The subject in &quot;they bring&quot; is the Gentiles, to whom the message of salvation has
been brought. They, having themselves attained salvation, offer to the Lord, as
a meat-offering, the former members of His Kingdom who were separated from it. It
is they, not the Gentiles who have become believers, who in the second
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 361]</span> part of Isaiah, are throughout designated
as the <i>brethren</i>. Salvation is first to pass from Israel to the Gentiles,
and shall then, from them, return to Israel. The two verses before us thus contain
a sanction for the mission among the heathens and among Israel. Vers. 18 and 19
divide the conversion of the Gentiles into two main stations; it is only when the
Church has arrived at the second, that the missionary work among Israel will fully
thrive and prosper. To the <i>clean vessel</i> in which the outward sacrifice was
offered, correspond the faith and love with which they, who were formerly heathens,
offer the spiritual meat-offering. Ver. 21: &quot;And of them also will I take for Levitical
priests, saith the Lord.&quot; Of them, <i>i.e.</i>, of those who formerly were heathens;
for it is to them that, in the words preceding, a priestly function, viz., the offering
of the meat-offering, is assigned. Of them <i>also</i>; not merely from among the
old covenant-people, to whom, under the former dispensation, the priestly office
was limited. The fact that the priests are designated as Levitical priests, is intended
to keep out the thought that the point in question related only to priests in a
lower sense, beside whom the Levitical priesthood, attached to natural descent,
would continue to exist in full vigour. Priests with full dignities and rights are
here so much the more required, that, according to what precedes, the point in question
does not refer merely to a personal relation to the Lord, to immediate access to
the throne of grace, but to the priestly office proper.</p>
<p class="normal">Vers. 11&#8211;13 describe the internal condition of the redeemed Church
of the future,--a condition so different from the present one. The expression, &quot;they
that proudly rejoice in them,&quot; is from Is. xiii. 3.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span> in ver. 13 is to be accounted for from
the fact, that wherever there exists the blessing promised by the Law of God (Lev.
xxvi. 6) to faithfulness, faithfulness itself must exist.</p>
<p class="normal">In ver. 14 ff., the Jerusalem of the future is addressed; compare
the expression, &quot;at that time,&quot; ver. 20.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 362]</span></p>
<h3><a name="div1_362" href="#div1Ref_362">THE PROPHET JEREMIAH.</a></h3>
<h4><a name="div2_362" href="#div2Ref_362">GENERAL PRELIMINARY REMARKS.</a></h4>
<p class="normal">In Malachi iii. 1, the Lord promises that He would send His messenger
who should prepare the way before <i>Him</i>, who was to come to His temple, judging
and punishing; vers. 23, 24 (iv. 5, 6): that before the coming of His great and
dreadful day, before He smites the land with a curse, He would send another Elijah,
who should bring back the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of
the children to their fathers. Even before this prophecy was expressed in words,
it had <i>actually</i> been given in the existence of Jeremiah, who, during the
whole long period of forty-one years, before the destruction, announced the judgments
of the Lord,--who, with burning zeal and ardent love to the people, preached repentance,--and
who, even after the destruction, sought the small remnant that had been left, and
was anxious to secure it against the new day of the Lord, which, by its obstinate
impenitence, it was drawing down upon itself. It is this typical relation of Jeremiah
to John the Baptist and Christ, of which the Jewish tradition had an anticipation,
although it misunderstood and expressed it in a gross, outward manner, by teaching
that, at the end of days, Jeremiah would again appear on earth,--it is this, which
invests with a peculiar charm the contemplation of his ministry, and the study of
his prophecies.</p>
<p class="normal">The name of the Prophet is to be explained from Exod. xv. 1, from
which it is probably taken. It signifies &quot;The Lord throws.&quot; He who bore it was consecrated
to that God who with an almighty hand throws to the ground all His enemies. From
chap. i. 10: &quot;See, I set thee to-day over the nations <span class="pagenum">[Pg
363]</span> and over the kingdoms, to root out and to pull down, to destroy and
to throw down, to build and to plant,&quot; it appears that it was by a dispensation
of divine providence, that the Prophet bore this name with full right, and that
the character of his mission is thereby designated. The judging and destructive
activity which the Prophet, as an instrument of God, is to exercise, is here not
only placed at the commencement, but four appellations are also devoted to it, whilst
only two are devoted to his healing and planting activity. As the object of the
<i>throwing</i>, we have to conceive, not of the unfaithful covenant-people only.
This appears from the mention of the <i>nations and kingdoms</i> here, and farther,
from ver. 14, where the Lord says to the Prophet: &quot;Out of the North the evil breaks
forth upon all the inhabitants of the earth.&quot; To be the herald of the judgment to
be executed upon the whole world by the Chaldeans, was so much the destiny of the
Prophet, that, in chap. i. 3, the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in which this judgment
was brought to a close, as far as Judah was concerned, is mentioned as the closing
point of his ministry. The Prophet, as is reported by the book itself, still continued
his ministry even among the remnant of the people; but that is lost sight of The
&quot;carrying away of Jerusalem&quot; is treated as the great closing point; just as, in
a manner altogether similar, it is, in the case of Daniel, in chap. i. 21, the year
of Israel&#39;s deliverance, although, according to chap. x. 1, his prophetic ministry
extended beyond that period.</p>
<p class="normal">Jeremiah was called to his office when still a youth, in the 13th
year of king Josiah, and hence one year after the first reformation of this king,
who, as early as in the 16th year of his life, and the 8th of his reign, which lasted
31 years, began to seek the Lord. A king such as he, unto whom no king before him
was like, who turned to the Lord with all his heart, and with all his soul, and
with all his might, (2 Kings xxiii. 25), in the midst of an evil and adulterous
generation, is a remarkable phenomenon, as little conceivable from natural causes
as the existence of Melchizedec without father, without descent--isolated from all
natural development--in the midst of the Canaanites who, with rapid strides and
irresistibly, hastened on to the completion of their sin. His existence has the
same root as that of Jeremiah,--a fact which becomes the <span class="pagenum">[Pg
364]</span> more evident when we take into consideration the connection of the Regal
and Prophetical offices in Christ for the salvation of the people hastening anew
to its destruction, and the faithfulness of the Covenant-God, and His long-suffering
which makes every effort to lead the apostate children to repentance. The zeal of
both, of Josiah and Jeremiah,--although supported by manifold assistance from other
quarters, as <i>e.g.</i> by the prophetess Huldah and the prophet Zephaniah--was
unable to stem the tide of prevailing corruption, and, hence, to stop the tide of
the divine judgments. The corruption was so deeply rooted, that only single individuals
could be saved, like brands from the burning. It had made fearful progress under
the protracted reign of Manasseh, whose disposition must be regarded as a product
of the spirit of the time then prevailing, of which he must not be considered as
the creator, but as the representative only, 2 Kings xxiii. 26, 27, xxiv. 3, 4.
The scanty fruits of his late conversion had been again entirely consumed under
the short reign of his wicked son Amon; it had indeed so little of a comprehensive
or lasting influence, that the author of the Book of Kings thought himself entitled
altogether to pass it over. It was even difficult to put limits to outward idolatry;
and how imperfectly he succeeded in this, is seen from the prophecies of Jeremiah
uttered after the reformation. And even where he was successful in his efforts;
even where an emotion was manifested, a wish to return to the living fountain which
they had forsaken, even there, the corruption soon broke forth again, only in a
different form. With deep grief, Jeremiah reprovingly reminds the people of this,
whose righteousness was like the morning dew, in chap. iii. 4, 5: &quot;Hast thou not
but lately called me: My Father, friend of my youth, thou? Will He reserve His anger
for ever, will He keep it to the end? Behold, thus thou spakest, and soon thou didst
the evil, didst accomplish&quot;--an <i>accomplishment</i> quite different from that
of the ancestor. Gen. xxxii. 29. Since the disease had not been healed, but had
only been driven out from one part of the diseased organism, the foolish inclination
to idolatry was followed by as foolish a confidence in the miserable righteousness
by works, in the divine election,--the offering up of sacrifices, &amp;c., being considered
as the sole condition of its validity. &quot;Trust ye not in lying words&quot;--so
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 365]</span> the Prophet is obliged to admonish them in
chap. vii. 4--&quot;saying, The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple
of the Lord are they&quot; (the people imagined that they could not be destroyed, because
the Lord had, according to their opinion, for ever established His residence among
them; compare 1 Cor. iii. 17; 1 Tim. iii. 15). &quot;Thou sayest, I am innocent; His
anger hath entirely turned from me; behold I plead with thee, because thou sayest:
I have not sinned,&quot; chap. ii. 35. &quot;To what purpose shall there come for me incense
from Sheba, and sweet cane, the goodly, from a far country? Your burnt-offerings
are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices pleasant unto me,&quot; chap. vi. 20. Towards
the end of Josiah&#39;s reign, the approaching judgment of God upon Judah became more
perceptible. The former Asiatic dominion of the Assyrians passed over entirely to
the Chaldeans, whose fresh and youthful strength so much the more threatened Judah
with destruction, that from the Assyrians they had inherited the enmity to Egypt,
on account of which Judah obtained great importance in their eyes. According to
the announcement of the prophets generally, and of Jeremiah especially, who, at
his very vocation, had it assigned to him as his main task to announce the calamity
from the North, it was by the Chaldeans that the deadly stroke should be inflicted
upon the people implicated in the conflicts of these hostile powers; but it was
the Egyptians who inflicted upon them the first severe wound. Josiah fell in the
battle with Pharaoh Necho. The people, conscious of guilt, were, by his death, filled
with a fearful expectation of the things that were to come. They had forebodings
that they were now standing at the boundary line where grace and anger separate
(compare remarks on Zech. xii. 11); and these forebodings were soon converted into
bitter certainty by experience. Jehoiakim ascended the throne, after Jehoahaz or
Shall um, had, after a short reign, been carried away by the Egyptians. He stood
to his father Josiah in just the same relation as did the people to God, in reference
to the mercy which He had offered to them in Josiah. A more glaring contrast (see
its exhibition in chap. xxii.) can hardly be imagined. Throughout, Jehoiakim shows
himself to be entirely destitute not only of love to God, but also of the fear of
God; he furnishes the complete image of a king whom God had given in anger. He
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 366]</span> is a blood-thirsty tyrant, an exasperated
enemy to truth. At the beginning of his reign, some influence of Josiah&#39;s spirit
is still seen. The priests and false prophets, rightly understanding the signs of
the time, came forward with the manifestation of their long restrained hatred against
Jeremiah, in whom they hate their own conscience. They bring against him a charge
of life and death, because he had prophesied destruction to the city and temple;
but the rulers of the people acquit him, chap. xxvi. This influence, however, soon
ceased. The king became the centre around whom gathered all that was ungodly, which,
under Josiah, had timorously withdrawn into concealment. Soon it became a power,
a torrent overflowing the whole country; and that the more easily, the weaker were
the dams which still existed from the time of Josiah. One of the first victims for
truth who fell, was the prophet Urijah. The king, imagining that he was able to
kill truth itself in those who proclaimed it, could not bear the thought that he
was still living, although it was in distant Egypt, and caused him to be brought
thence (see l. c). The fact that Jeremiah escaped every danger of death during the
eleven years of this king&#39;s reign, although he ever anew threatened death to the
king and destruction to the people, was a constant miracle, a glorious fulfilment
of the divine promise given to him when he was called (i. 19): &quot;They shall fight
against thee, and they shall not prevail against thee; for I am with thee, saith
<i>the Lord</i>, to deliver thee.&quot; The threatened divine punishment advanced, under
Jehoiakim, several steps towards its completion. In the fourth year of his reign,
Jerusalem was, for the first time, taken by the Chaldeans (compare &quot;<i>Dissertations
on the Genuineness of Daniel</i>,&quot; p. 45 ff.), after the power of the Egyptian Empire
had been for ever broken by the battle at Carchemish on the Euphrates. The victor
this time acted with tolerable mildness; the sin of the people was to appear in
its full light by the circumstance, that God gave them time for repentance, and
did not at once proceed to the utmost rigour, but advanced, step by step, in His
judgments. But here too it was seen that crime, in its highest degree, becomes madness;
the more nearly that people and king approached the abyss, the greater became the
speed with which they hastened towards it. It is true that they
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 367]</span> did not remain altogether insensible when
the threatenings of the Prophet began to be fulfilled. This is seen from the day
of fasting and repentance which was appointed in remembrance of the first capture
by the Chaldeans (compare &quot;<i>Dissertations on the Genuineness of Daniel</i>,&quot; p.
49); but fleeting emotions cannot stop the course of sin. Soon it became worse than
it had been before; and therefore the divine judgments also reached a new station.
Even political wisdom advised the king quietly to submit to dependence on the Chaldeans,
which was, comparatively, little oppressive. It was obvious that, unsupported, he
could effect nothing against the Chaldean power; and, to the <i>unprejudiced</i>
eye, it was as obvious that the Egyptians could not help him; and even had it been
possible, he would only have changed masters. But, according to the counsel of God,
who takes away the understanding of the wise, these political reasons, obvious though
they were, should not exercise any influence upon him, because his obdurate heart
prevented him from listening to the religious arguments which Jeremiah brought before
him. <i>Melancthon</i> (opp. ii., p. 407 ff.) points it out as a remarkable circumstance
that, while other prophets, <i>e.g.</i>, Samuel, Elisha, Isaiah, exhort to a vigorous
opposition to the enemies, and, in that case, promise divine assistance, yea that,
to some extent, they even took an active part in the deliverance, Jeremiah, on the
other hand, always preaches unconditional submission. The issue, which is as different
as the advice, shows that this difference has not, by any means, its foundation
in the persons, but in the state of things. The seventy years of Chaldean servitude
were irrevocably decreed upon Judah; even the exact statement of years, which else
is so uncommon in reference to the fate of the covenant-people, shows how firm and
determined was that decree. They had altogether, and more fully than at any other
time, given themselves over to the internal power of heathenism; according to a
divine necessity, they must therefore also be given over to the external power of
the heathen, both for punishment and reform. God himself could not change that decree,
for it rested on His nature. Hence, it would be in vain though even the greatest
intercessors, Moses and Samuel, should stand before Him, Jer. xv. 1 ff. Intercessory
prayer can be effectual, only if it be offered in <span class="pagenum">[Pg 368]</span>
the name of God. But if such were the case, how foolish was it to rebel against
the Chaldean power; to attempt to remove the effect, while they allowed the cause
to remain; to stop the brook, while the source still continued to send forth its
waters. It would have been foolish, even if the relative power of the Jews and Chaldeans
had been altogether reversed. For when the Lord sells a people, one can chase a
thousand, and two can put ten thousand to flight (Deut. xxxii. 30). But the shepherd
of the people had become a fool, and did not enquire after the Lord. He could not,
therefore, act wisely; and the whole flock was scattered, Jer. x. 21. Jehoiakim
rebelled against the Chaldeans, and for some years he was allowed to continue in
the delusion of having acted very wisely, for Nebuchadnezzar had more important
things to mind and to settle. But then he went up against Jerusalem, and put an
end to his reign and life, Jer. xxii. 1&#8211;12; 2 Kings xxiv. 2; &quot;<i>Dissertations on
the Genuineness of Daniel</i>,&quot; p. 49. As yet, the long-suffering of God, and, hence,
the patience of the Chaldeans, were not at an end. Jehoiachin or Jeconiah was raised
to the throne of his father. Even the short reign of three months gave to the youth
sufficient occasion to manifest the wickedness of his heart, and his enmity to God.
Suspicions against his fidelity arose; a Chaldean army anew entered the city, and
carried away the king, and, along with him, the great mass of the people. This was
the first great deportation. In the providence of God it was so arranged that, among
those who were carried away, there was the very flower of the nation. The apparent
suffering was to them a blessing. They were, for their good, sent away from the
place over which the storms of God&#39;s anger were soon to discharge themselves, into
the land of the Chaldeans, and formed there the nucleus for the Kingdom of God,
in its impending new form, Jer. xxiv. Nothing now seemed to stand in the way of
the divine judgment upon the wicked mass that had been left behind, like bad figs
that no one can eat for badness,--they whom the Lord had threatened that He would
give them over to hurt and calamity in all the kingdoms of the earth, to reproach,
and a proverb, and a taunt, and a curse, in all places whither He would drive them,
Jer. xxiv. 9. And still the Lord was waiting before He carried out this
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 369]</span> threatening, and smote the land to cursing.
Mattaniah or Zedekiah, the son of Josiah, the uncle of Jehoiachin, who was given
to them for a king, might, at least partially, have averted the evil. But he too
had to learn that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. From various
quarters, attempts have been made to exculpate him, on the plea that his fault was
only weakness, which made him the tool of a corrupt party; but Scripture forms a
different estimate of him, and he who looks deeper will find its judgment to be
correct,--will be able to grant to him that preference only over Jehoiakim which
<i>C. B. Michaelis</i> assigned to him in the words: &quot;Jehoiakim was of an obdurate
and wild disposition; Zedekiah had some fear of God, although it was a servile,
hypocritical fear, but Jehoiakim had none at all.&quot; And even this preference, when
more narrowly examined, amounts to nothing, for it belongs to nature, and not to
grace. Whether corruption manifests itself as weakness, or as a carnal, powerful
opposition to divine truth, is accidental, and depends upon the diversity of mental
and bodily organization. The fact that Zedekiah did not altogether put away from
himself the truth and its messengers (<i>Dahler</i> remarks: &quot;He respected the Prophet,
without having the power of following his advice; he even protected his life against
his persecutors, but he did not venture to secure him against their vexation&quot;) cannot
be put down to his credit; <i>he was, against his will, forced to do so</i>; and
indeed he could not resist a powerful impression of any kind. In a man of Jehoiakim&#39;s
character, the same measure of the fear of God would induce us to mitigate our opinion;
for in such a one it could not exist without some support from within. Confiding
in the help of the neighbouring nations, especially the Egyptians; persuaded by
the false prophets and the nobles; himself seized by that spirit of giddiness and
intoxication which, with irresistible power, carried away the people to the abyss,
Zedekiah broke the holy oath which he had sworn to the Chaldeans, and, after an
obstinate resistance, Jerusalem was taken and destroyed. As yet, the long suffering
of God, and, hence, also that of man, was not <i>altogether</i> at an end. The conquerors
left a comparatively small portion of the inhabitants in the land. The grace of
God gave them Gedaliah, an excellent man, for their civil superior, and Jeremiah
for their ecclesiastical <span class="pagenum">[Pg 370]</span> superior. The latter
preferred to remain in the smoking ruins, rather than follow the brilliant promises
of the Chaldeans, and was willing to persevere to the last in the discharge of his
duty, although he was by this time far advanced in life, and oppressed with deep
grief But it appears as if the people had been bent upon emptying, to the last drop,
the cup of divine wrath. Gedaliah is assassinated. Even those who did not partake
in the crime fled to Egypt, disregarding the word of the Lord through the Prophet,
who announced a curse upon them if they fled, but a blessing if they remained.</p>
<p class="normal">What the Prophet had to suffer under such circumstances, one may
easily imagine even without consulting history. Even although he had remained free
from all personal vexations and attacks, it could not but be an immeasurable grief
to him to dwell in the midst of such a generation, to see their corruption increasing
more and more, to see the abyss coming nearer and nearer, to find all his faithful
warnings unheeded, and his whole ministry in vain, at least as far as the mass of
the people were concerned. &quot;O that they would give me in the wilderness a lodging-place
for wayfaring men&quot;--so he speaks as early as under Josiah, chap. ix. 1 (2)--&quot;and
I would leave my people and go from them; for they are all adulterer, an assembly
of treacherous men.&quot; But from these personal vexations and attacks, he neither was,
nor could be exempted. Mockery, hatred, calumny, ignominy, curses, imprisonment,
bonds were his portion. To bear such a burden would have been difficult to any man,
but most of all to a man of his disposition. &quot;The more tender the heart, the deeper
the smart.&quot; He was not a second Elijah; he had a soft disposition, a lively sensibility;
his eyes were easily filled with tears. And he who would have liked so much to live
in peace and love with all, having entered into the service of truth, was obliged
to become a second Ishmael, his hand against every man, and every man&#39;s hand against
him. He who so ardently loved his people, must see this love misconstrued and rejected;
must see himself branded as a traitor to the people, by those men who were themselves
traitors. All these things were to him the cause of violent struggles and conflicts,
which he candidly lays before us in various passages, especially in chap. xii. and
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 371]</span> xx., because, by the victory, the Lord, who
alone could give it, was glorified.</p>
<p class="normal">He was sustained by inward consolations, by wonderful deliverances,
by the remarkable fulfilment of his prophecies which he himself lived to witness;
but especially by the circumstance that the Lord caused him to behold His future
salvation with the same clearness as His judgments; so that he could consider the
latter only as transient, and, even by the most glaring contrast between the appearance
and the idea, never lost the firm hope of the final victory of the former. This
hope formed the centre of his whole life. For a long series of years, he is somewhat
cautious in giving utterance to it; for, just as Hosea in the kingdom of the ten
tribes, so he too has to do with secure and gross sinners, who must be terrified
by the preaching of the Law, and the message of wrath. But, even here, single sunbeams
everywhere constantly break through the dark clouds. But towards the close, when
the total destruction is already at hand, and his commission to root out and destroy
draws to an end, because now the Lord himself is to speak by deeds, he can, to the
full desire of his heart, carry out the second part of his calling, viz., to plant
and to build (compare chap. i.); and it is now, that his mouth is overflowing, that
it is seen how full of it his heart had always been. The whole vocation of the Prophet,
<i>Calvin</i> strikingly expresses in these words: &quot;I say simply that Jeremias was
sent by God to announce to the people the last defeat, and, farther, to proclaim
the future redemption, but in such a manner, that he always puts in the seventy
years&#39; exile.&quot; That, according to him, this redemption is not destined for Israel
only, but that the Gentiles also partake in it, appears not incidentally only in
the prophecies to his own people; but it is also prominently brought out in the
prophecies against the foreign nations themselves, <i>e.g.</i>, in the prophecy
against Egypt, chap. xlvi. 26; against Moab, chap. xlviii. 47; against Ammon, xlix.
6.</p>
<p class="normal">In announcing the Messiah from the house of David (chap, xxii.
5, xxx. 9, xxxiii. 15), Jeremiah agrees with the former prophets. The Messianic
features peculiar to him are the following:--The announcement of a revelation of
God, which by far outshines the former one from above the Ark of the Covenant, and
by which the Ark of the Covenant, with every <span class="pagenum">[Pg 372]</span>
thing attached to it, shall become antiquated, chap. iii. 14&#8211;17; the announcement
of a new covenant, distinguished from the former by greater richness in the forgiveness
of sins, and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit: &quot;I give my law in their inward parts,
and I will write it in their hearts,&quot; chap. xxxi. 31&#8211;34; the intimation of the impending
realization of the promise of Moses: &quot;Ye shall be to me a kingdom of priests,&quot; with
which the abolition of the poor form of the priesthood hitherto is connected, chap.
xxxiii. 14&#8211;26.</p>
<p class="normal">As regards the style of Jeremiah, <i>Cunaeus</i> (<i>de repub.
Hebr.</i> i. 3, c. 7) pertinently remarks: &quot;The whole majesty of Jeremiah lies in
his negligent language; that rough diction becomes him exceedingly well.&quot; It is
certainly very superficial in <i>Jerome</i> to seek the cause of that <i>humilitas
dictionis</i> of the Prophet, whom he, at the same time, calls <i>in majestate sensuum
profundissimum</i>, in his origin from the <i>viculus Anathoth</i>. It would be
unnatural if it were otherwise. The style of Jeremiah stands on the same ground
as the hairy garment and leather girdle of Elijah. He who is sorrowful and afflicted
in his heart, whose eyes fail with tears (Lament. ii. 11), cannot adorn and decorate
himself in his dress or speech.</p>
<p class="normal">From chap. xi. 21, xii. 5, 6, several interpreters have inferred,
that the Prophet first came forward in his native place Anathoth, and that, because
they there said to him: &quot;Thou shalt not prophecy in the name of the Lord, else thou
shalt die by our hand,&quot; he then went to Jerusalem. But those passages rather refer
to an experience which the Prophet made at an incidental visit in his native place,
quite similar to what our Saviour experienced at Nazareth, according to Luke iv.
24. For in chap. xxv. 3, Jeremiah says to &quot;all the inhabitants of Jerusalem,&quot; that
he had spoken to <i>them</i> since the thirteenth year of Josiah. As early as in
chap. ii. 2, at the beginning of a discourse which bears a general introductory
character, and which immediately follows, and is connected with his vocation in
chap. i., he receives the command: &quot;Go, and cry into the ears of Jerusalem.&quot; The
opening speech itself cannot, according to its contents, have been spoken in some
corner of the country, but in the metropolis only, in the temple more specially,
the centre of the nation and its spiritual dwelling place. It was there that that
must be delivered which was to be told to the whole people as such.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 373]</span></p>
<h3><a name="div2_373" href="#div2Ref_373">THE SECTION, CHAP. III, 14-l7.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">The whole Section, from chap. iii. 6, to the end of chap. vi.,
forms one connected discourse, separated from the preceding context by the inscription
in chap. iii. 6, and from the subsequent context, by the inscription in chap. vii.
1. This separation, however, is more external than internal. The contents and tone
remain the same through the whole series of chapters which open the collection of
the prophecies of Jeremiah, and that to such a degree, that we are compelled to
doubt the correctness of the proceeding of those interpreters, who would determine
the chronological order of the single portions, and fix the exact period in the
reign of Josiah to which every single portion belongs. If such a proceeding were
admissible, why should the Prophet have expressed himself, in the inscription of
the Section before us, in terms so general as: &quot;And the Lord said unto me in the
days of Josiah the king?&quot; Every thing on which these interpreters endeavour to found
more accurate determinations in regard to the single Sections, disappears upon a
closer consideration. Thus, <i>e.g.</i>, the twofold reference to the seeking of
help from Egypt, in chap. ii. 16 ff., xxxvi., xxxvii., on which <i>Eichhorn</i>
and <i>Dahler</i> lay so much stress. We are not entitled here to suppose a reference
to a definite historical event, which, moreover, cannot be historically pointed
out in the whole time of Josiah, but can only be supposed on unsafe and unfounded
conjectures. In both of the passages something future is spoken of, as is evident
from vers. 16 and 19. The thought is this:--that Asshur, <i>i.e.</i>, the power
on the Euphrates (compare 2 Kings xxiii. 29), which had. for a long time opened
its mouth to swallow up Judah, just as it had already swallowed up the kingdom of
the ten tribes, would not be conciliated, and that Egypt could not grant help against
him. This thought refers to historical circumstances which had already existed,
and continued to exist for some centuries, and which, in reference to Israel, is
given utterance to as early as by Hosea, compare Vol. i. p. 164, f. Our view is
this: We have here before us, not so much a series of prophecies, each of which
had literally been so uttered at some particular <span class="pagenum">[Pg 374]</span>
period in the reign of Josiah, as rather a <i>resumé</i> of the whole prophetic
ministry of Jeremiah under Josiah; a collection of all which, being independent
of particular circumstances of that time, had, in general, the destiny to give an
inward support to the outward reforming activity of Josiah, a specimen of the manner
in which the Prophet discharged the divine commission which he had received a year
after the first reformation of Josiah. Even the manner in which chap ii. is connected
with chap. i. places this relation to his call beyond any doubt. We have thus before
us here the same phenomenon which we have already perceived in several of the minor
prophets; comp. <i>e.g.</i>, the introduction to Micah.</p>
<p class="normal">In the section before us, the Prophet is engaged with a two-fold
object,--first, with the proclamation of salvation for Israel, chap. iii. 6&#8211;iv.
2; secondly, with the threatening for Judah, chap. iv. 3, to the end of chap. vi.
It is only incidentally, in chap. iii. 18, that it is intimated that Judah also,
after the threatening has been fulfilled upon them, shall partake in the salvation.
It is self-evident that these two objects must not be considered as lying beside
one another. According to the whole context, the announcement of salvation for Israel
cannot have any other object than that of wounding Judah. This object even comes
out distinctly in ver. 6&#8211;11, and the import of the discourse may, therefore, be
thus stated: Israel does not continue to be rejected as pharisaical Judah imagined;
Judah does not continue to be spared.--When the Prophet entered upon his ministry,
ninety-four years had already elapsed since the divine judgment had broken in upon
Israel; every hope of restoration seemed to have vanished. Judah, instead of being
thereby warned; instead of beholding, in the sin of others, the image of its own;
instead of perceiving, in the destruction of the kingdom of its brethren, a prophecy
of its own destruction, was, on the contrary, strengthened in its obduracy. The
fact that it still existed, after Israel had, long ago, hopelessly perished, as
they imagined, appeared to them as a seal which God impressed upon their ways. They
rejoiced at Israel&#39;s calamity, because, in it, they thought that they saw a proof
of their own excellency, just as, at the time of Christ, the blindness of the Jews
was increased by the circumstance that they still considered themselves as the sole
members of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 375]</span> the Kingdom of God, and imagined
the Gentiles to be excluded from it. The Saviour&#39;s announcement of the calling of
the Gentiles stands in the same relation as the Prophet&#39;s announcement of the restoration
of Israel.</p>
<hr class="W20">
<p class="normal">Ver. 14. &quot;<i>Turn, O apostate children, saith the Lord, for I
marry myself unto you, and I take one of a city, and two of a family, and bring
you to Zion.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The question here is:--To whom is the discourse here addressed,--to
the members of Israel, <i>i.e.</i>, the kingdom of the ten tribes, as most of the
interpreters suppose (<i>Abarbanel</i>, <i>Calvin</i>, <i>Schmid</i>, and others),
or, as others assume, to the inhabitants of Judea? The decision has considerable
influence upon the exposition of the whole passage; but it must unhesitatingly and
unconditionally be given in favour of the first view. There is not one word to indicate
a transition; the very same phrase, &quot;turn, O apostate children,&quot; occurs, in ver.
22, of Israel. Apostate Israel is, in the preceding verses (6, 8, 11,) the standing
expression, while Judah is designated as treacherous, ver. 8&#8211;11. The measure of
guilt is determined by the measure of grace. The relation of the Lord to Judah was
closer, and hence, her apostacy was so much the more culpable. <i>Farther</i>--A
detailed announcement of salvation for Judah would here not be suitable, inasmuch
as no threatening preceded; and ver. 18 (&quot;In those days, the house of Judah shall
come by the side of [literally, &#39;over&#39;] the house of Israel,&quot; according to which
the return of Judah is, in the meantime, a subordinate point which has here been
mentioned incidentally) clearly shows that that announcement of salvation, contained
in vers. 14&#8211;17, refers to Israel. To Israel the Prophet immediately returns in ver.
19; for, from the contrast to the house of Judah in ver. 18, and to Judah and Jerusalem
in chap. iv. 3, it is evident that by the house of Israel in ver. 20, and by the
sons of Israel in ver. 21, Israel, in the stricter sense, is to be understood.
<i>Finally</i>--It will be seen from the exposition, that it is only on the supposition
that Israel is addressed, that the contents of ver. 16, 17, become intelligible.--In
our explanation of the words <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497; &#1488;&#1504;&#1499;&#1497; &#1489;&#1506;&#1500;&#1514;&#1497; &#1488;&#1514;&#1499;&#1501;</span>,
we follow the precedent of the Vulgate (<i>quia ego vir vester</i>), of <i>Luther</i>
(&quot;I will <span class="pagenum">[Pg 376]</span> marry you to me&quot;), of <i>Calvin</i>,
<i>Schimd</i>, and others. On the other hand, others, especially <i>Pococke</i>,
<i>ad P.M.</i> p. 2, <i>Schultens</i> on Prov. xxx. 22, <i>Venema</i>, <i>Schnurrer</i>,
<i>Gesenius</i>, <i>Winer</i>, <i>Bleek</i>, have made every endeavour to prove
that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span> is used <i>sensu malo</i> here, as
well as in chap. xxxi. 32, where it occurs in a connection altogether similar; so
that the decision must be valid for both of the passages at the same time. This
signification they seek to make out in a twofold way. Some altogether give up the
derivation from the Hebrew <i>usus loquendi</i>, and refer solely to the Arabic,
where <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span> means <i>fastidire</i>. Others derive
from the Hebrew signification, &quot;to rule,&quot; that of a tyrannical dominion, and support
their right in so doing, by referring, with <i>Gesenius</i>, to other verbs in which
the signification, <i>to subdue</i>, <i>to be distinguished</i>, <i>to rule</i>,
has been changed into that of <i>looking down</i>, <i>despising</i>, and <i>contemning</i>.
As regards the <i>first</i> derivation, even if the Arabic <i>usus loquendi</i>
were proved, we could not from it make any certain inference as regards the Hebrew
<i>usus loquendi</i>. But with respect to this Arabic <i>usus loquendi</i>, it is
far from being proved and established. It is true that such would not be the case
if there indeed occurred in Arabic the expression
<img border="0" src="images/376a.png" alt="Arabic"> <i>fastidivit vir mulierem eamque
expulit, s. repudiavit</i>; but it is only by a strange <i>quid pro quo</i> that
interpreters, even <i>Schultens</i> among them, following the example of <i>Kimchi</i>,
have saddled this expression upon the Arabic. The error lies in a hasty view of
<i>Adul Walid</i>, who, instead of it, has
<img border="0" src="images/376b.png" alt="Arabic"> <i>any one is embarrassed in
his affair</i>. The signification <i>fastidire</i>, <i>rejicere</i>, is, in general,
quite foreign to the Arabic. The verb
<img border="0" src="images/376c.png" width="36" height="24" alt="Arabic"> denotes
only: <i>mente turbatus</i>, <i>attonitus fuit</i>, <i>i.e.</i>, <i>to be possessed</i>,
<i>deprived of the use of one&#39;s strength</i>, <i>to be embarrassed</i>, <i>not to
know how to help one&#39;s self</i>: compare the <i>Camus</i> in <i>Schultens</i> and
<i>Freytag</i>. As soon as the plain connection of this signification with the ordinary
one is perceived, it is seen at once, that it is here out of the question. As regards
the second derivation, we must bring this objection against it, that the fundamental
signification of <i>ruling</i>, from which that of <i>ruling tyrannically</i> is
said to have arisen, is entirely foreign to the Hebrew. More clearly than by modern
Lexicographers it was seen by <i>Cocceius</i>, that the fundamental, yea the only
signification of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span>, is that of <i>possessing</i>,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 377]</span> <i>occupying</i>. It may, indeed, be used
also of rulers, as, <i>e.g.</i> Isa. xxvi. 13, and 1 Chron. iv. 22; but not in so
far as they rule, but in so far as they possess. On the former passage: &quot;Jehovah
our God, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;&#1493;&#1504;&#1493; &#1488;&#1491;&#1493;&#1504;&#1497;&#1501; &#1494;&#1493;&#1500;&#1514;&#1497;&#1498;</span>, Lords beside
thee have dominion over us,&quot; <i>Schultens</i>, it is true, remarks: &quot;Every one here
easily recognizes a severe and tyrannical dominion;&quot; but it is rather the circumstance
that the land of the Lord has at all foreign possessors, which is the real sting
of the grief of those lamenting, and which so much occupies them, that they scarcely
think of the way and manner of the possessing.--Passages such as Is. liv. 1,<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_377a" href="#ftn_377a">[1]</a></sup>
lxii. 4, compare Job i. 8, where a relation is spoken of, founded on most cordial
love, show that the signification &quot;<i>to marry</i>,&quot; does not by any means proceed
from that of ruling, and is not to be explained from the absolute, slavish dependence
of the wife in the East, but rather from the signification &quot;to possess.&quot; And this
is farther proved by passages such as Deut. xxi. 10&#8211;13, xxvi. 1, where the <i>copula
carnalis</i> is pointed out as that by which the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span> is completed. And, finally, it is seen from the Arabic, where the wife
is also called, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;&#1492;</span>,
<img border="0" src="images/377a.png" width="39" height="25" alt="Arabic">, just
as the husband is called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span>,
<img border="0" src="images/377b.png" width="33" height="23" alt="Arabic">.---It
is farther obvious that, in the frequent compositions of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1468;&#1463;&#1506;&#1463;&#1500;</span> with other nouns, in order, by way
of paraphrasis, to form adjectives, the signification &quot;lord&quot; is far less suitable
than that of &quot;possessor,&quot; <i>e.g.</i>, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500; &#1495;&#1500;&#1502;&#1493;&#1514;</span>,
<i>the dreamer</i>, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500; &#1488;&#1507;</span>, <i>the angry one</i>,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500; &#1504;&#1508;&#1513;</span>, <i>the covetous one</i>,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500; &#1502;&#1494;&#1502;&#1494;&#1514;</span>, <i>the deceitful one</i>,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;&#1497; &#1506;&#1497;&#1512;</span> <i>oppidani</i>,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;&#1497; &#1489;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514;</span>, <i>the members of the covenant</i>,
etc. We arrive at the same conclusion, if we look to the dialects. Here, too, the
signification &quot;to possess&quot; appears as the proper and original signification. In
the Ethiopic, the verb signifies <i>multum possedit, dives fuit.</i> In Arabic,
the significations are more varied; but they may all be traced back to one root.
Thus, <i>e.g.</i> <img border="0" src="images/377c.png" alt="Arabic">,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span>, according to the <i>Camus</i>, &quot;a high
and elevated land which requires only one annual rain; farther, a palm-tree, or
any other tree or plant which is not watered, or which the sky alone irrigates;&quot;
<i>i.e.</i>, a land, a tree, a plant which themselves <i>possess</i>, which do not
require to <i>borrow</i> from others. This reason of the appellation clearly appears
in <i>Dsheuhari</i> (compare <span class="pagenum">[Pg 378]</span> <i>Schultens</i>
l. c.): &quot;It is used of the palm-tree, which, by its roots, provides for itself drink
and sap, so that there is no need for watering it.&quot;<!--inserted quote--> In favour
of the signification &quot;to rule&quot; in this verb, the following gloss from the <i>Camus</i>
only can be quoted: &quot;Both (the 1st and 10th conjugations) when construed with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1497;&#1492;</span> <i>super illum</i>, denote: he has taken
possession of a thing, and behaved himself proudly towards it.&quot; But the latter clause
must be struck out; for it has flowed only from the false reading
<img border="0" src="images/378a.png" width="32" height="27.5" alt="Arabic"> in
<i>Schultens</i>, for which (compare <i>Freytag</i>)
<img border="0" src="images/378b.png" width="34" height="28" alt="Arabic"> <i>noluit</i>
must be read, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span> with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;</span> accordingly signifies &quot;to be the possessor
of a thing, and, as such, not to be willing to give it up to another.&quot; And thus
every ground has been taken from those who, from the Hebrew <i>usus loquendi</i>,
would interpret <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span> in a bad sense,--The same
result, however, which we have reached upon philological grounds, we shall obtain
also, when we look to the context. From it, they are most easily refuted, who, like
<i>Schultens</i>, understand the whole verse as a threatening. That which precedes,
as well as that which follows, breathes nothing but pure love to poor Israel. She
is not terrified by threatenings, like Judah who has not yet drunk of the cup of
God&#39;s wrath, but allured by the call: &quot;Come unto me all ye that are weary and heavy
laden, <i>for</i> I will give you rest.&quot; But they also labour under great difficulties
who, after the example of <i>Kimchi</i> (&quot;<i>ego fastidivi vos, eo scil. quod praeteriit
tempore, ac jam colligam vos</i>&quot;), refer the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span>
not so much to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;&#1514;&#1497;</span>, as rather to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1511;&#1492;&#1514;&#1497;</span>: &quot;For I have, it is true, rejected you
formerly, but now I take,&quot; &amp;c. This is the only shape in which this interpretation
can still appear; for it is altogether arbitrary to explain
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span> by &quot;although,&quot; an interpretation still
found in <i>De Wette</i>. If it had been the intention of the Prophet to express
this sense, nothing surely was less admissible, than to omit just those words, upon
which everything depended--the words <i>formerly</i> and <i>now</i>.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1511;&#1495;&#1514;&#1497;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;&#1514;&#1497;</span>
evidently stand here in the same relation; both together form the ground for the
return to the Lord. To these reasons we may still add the circumstance that, according
to our explanation, we obtain the beautiful parallelism with ver. 12: &quot;Return thou,
apostate Israel, saith the Lord; I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you;
<i>for</i> I am merciful; I do not keep anger for ever,&quot;--a circumstance which has
already been <span class="pagenum">[Pg 379]</span> pointed out by <i>Calvin</i>.
Israel&#39;s haughtiness is broken; but despondency now keeps them from returning to
the Lord. He, therefore, ever anew repeats His invitation, ever anew founds it upon
the fact, that He delights in showing mercy and love to those who have forsaken
Him. The rejection of Israel had, in ver. 8, been represented under the image of
divorce: &quot;Because apostate Israel had committed adultery, I had put her away, and
given her the bill of divorce.&quot; What, therefore, is more natural, than that her
being received again, which was offered to her out of pure mercy, should appear
under the image of a new marriage; and that so much the more, that the apostacy
had, even in the preceding verse, been represented as adultery and whoredom? (&quot;<i>Thou
hast scattered thy ways</i>,<!--deleted quote--> <i>i.e.</i>, thou hast been running
about to various places after the manner of an impudent whore seeking lovers&quot;--<i>Schmid</i>;
compare ver. 6.) Farther to be compared is ver. 22: &quot;Return ye apostate children,
(for) I will heal your apostacy. Behold we come unto thee, <i>for</i> thou art the
Lord our God.&quot; The objection that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span>, in
the signification &quot;to take in marriage&quot; is construed with the Accusative only, is
of no weight. In a manner altogether similar, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1494;&#1499;&#1512;</span>,
which else is connected with the simple Accusative, is, in ver. 16, followed by
the Preposition <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span>.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span> with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span>
altogether corresponds to our &quot;to join onesself in marriage;&quot; and the construction
has perhaps a certain emphasis, and indicates the close and indissoluble connection.
Of still less weight is another objection, viz., that, in that case, the <i>Suffix
Plur.</i> is inadmissible. It is just the Israelites who are the wife; and this
is so much the more evident that, in the preceding verses, and even still in ver.
13, they had been treated as such. Hence nothing remains but to determine the sense
of our passage, as was done by <i>Calvin</i>: &quot;Because despair might take hold of
them, in such a manner that they might be afraid of approaching Him.... He saith
that He would marry himself to them, and that He had not yet forgotten that union
which He once had bestowed upon them.&quot; This is the only correct view; and by thus
determining the sense, we at the same time obtain the sure foundation for the exposition
of chap. xxxi. 32; just as, <i>vice versa</i>, the sense which will result from
an independent consideration of that passage, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 380]</span>
will serve to confirm that which was here established.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_380a" href="#ftn_380a">[2]</a></sup>
In the right determination of the sense of the subsequent words, too, <i>Calvin</i>
distinguishes himself advantageously from the earlier, and most of the later interpreters:
&quot;God shows that there was no reason why some should wait for others; and farther,
although the very body of the people might be utterly corrupted in their sins, yet,
if even a few were to return. He would show himself merciful to them. The covenant
had been entered into with the <i>whole</i> people. The single individual might,
therefore, have been disposed to imagine that his repentance was in vain. But in
opposition to such fears, the Prophet says: &#39;Although only one of a town should
come to me, he shall find an open door; although only two of one tribe come to me,
I will admit even them.&#39;&quot; After him <i>Loscanus</i> too (in his Dissertation on
this passage, Frankf. 1720) has thus correctly stated the sense: &quot;The small number
shall not prevent God from carrying out His counsel.&quot; Thus it is seen--and this
is alone suitable in this context--that the apparent limitation of the promise is,
in truth, an extension of it. How great must God&#39;s love and mercy be to Israel,
in how wide an extent must the declaration be true:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#956;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#956;&#941;&#955;&#951;&#964;&#945; &#964;&#8048; &#967;&#945;&#961;&#943;&#963;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#945; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7969; &#954;&#955;&#8134;&#963;&#953;&#962; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166;</span>,
Rom. xi. 29, if even a single righteous Lot is by God delivered from the Sodom of
Israel; if Joshua and Caleb, untouched by the punishment of the sins of the thousands,
reach the Holy Land; if every penitent heart at once finds a gracious God! Thus
it appears that this passage is not by any means in contradiction to other passages
by which a complete restoration of Israel is promised. On the contrary, the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#960;&#953;&#964;&#965;&#947;&#967;&#8049;&#957;&#949;&#953;&#957;</span> of the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#954;&#955;&#959;&#947;&#8053;</span> (Rom. xi. 7) announced here, is a pledge
and guarantee for the more comprehensive and general mercy.--Expositors are at variance
as to the historical reference of the prophecy. Some, <i>e.g.</i> <i>Theodoret</i>,
<i>Grotius</i>, think exclusively of the return from the Babylonish captivity. Others
(after the example of <i>Jerome</i> and the Jewish interpreters) think of the Messianic
time. It need <span class="pagenum">[Pg 381]</span> scarcely be remarked, that here,
as in so many other passages, this alternative is out of place. The prophecy has
just the very same extent as the matter itself, and, hence, refers to all eternity.
It was a commencement, that, at the time of Cyrus, many from among the ten tribes,
induced by true love to the God of Israel, joined themselves to the returning Judeans,
and were hence again engrafted by God into the olive-tree. It was a continuation
of the fulfilment that, in later times, especially those of the Maccabees, this
took place more and more frequently. It was a preparation and prelude of the complete
fulfilment, although not the complete fulfilment itself, that, at the time of Christ,
the blessings of God were poured upon the whole <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#969;&#948;&#949;&#954;&#940;&#966;&#965;&#955;&#959;&#957;</span>,
Acts xxvi. 7. The words: &quot;I bring you to Zion,&quot; in the verse under consideration,
and: &quot;They shall come out of the land of the North to the land that I have given
for an inheritance unto their fathers,&quot; in ver. 18, do not at all oblige us to limit
ourselves to those feeble beginnings; the idea appears here only in that form, in
which it must be realised, in so far as its realisation belonged to the time of
the Old Testament. Zion and the Holy Land were, at that time, the seat of the Kingdom
of God; so that the return to the latter was inseparable from the return to the
former. Those from among Israel who were converted to the true God, either returned
altogether to Judea, or, at least, there offered up their sacrifices. But Zion and
the Holy Land likewise come into consideration, as the seat of the Kingdom of God
<i>only</i>; and, for that very reason, the course of the fulfilment goes on incessantly,
even in those times when even the North has become Zion and Holy Land.--The circumstance
that two are assigned to a family, while only one is assigned to a town, shows that
we must here think of a larger family which occupied several towns; and the circumstance
that the town is put together with the family, shows that it is cities of the land
of Israel which are here spoken of, and not those which the exiled ones inhabited.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 15.
<!--inserted quote-->&quot;<i>And I give you shepherds according to mine heart, and they
feed you with knowledge and understanding.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The question is:--Who are here to be understood by the shepherds?
<i>Calvin</i> thinks that it is especially the prophets and priests, inasmuch as
it was just the bad condition of these <span class="pagenum">[Pg 382]</span> which
had been the principal cause of the ruin of the people; and that it is the greatest
blessing for the Church, when God raises up true and sincere teachers. Similar is
the opinion of <i>Vitringa</i> (<i>obs.</i> lib. vi., p. 417), who, in a lower sense,
refers it to Ezra and the learned men of that time, and, in a higher sense, to Christ.
Among the Fathers of the Church, <i>Jerome</i> remarked: &quot;These are the apostolical
men who did not feed the multitude of the believers with Jewish ceremonies, but
with knowledge and doctrine.&quot; Others refer it to leaders of every kind; thus <i>
Venema</i>: <i>Pastores sunt rectores, ductores.</i> Others, finally, limit themselves
to rulers; thus <i>Kimchi</i> (<i>gubernatores Israelis cum rege Messia</i>), <i>
Grotius</i>, and <i>Clericus</i>. The latter interpretation is, for the following
reasons, to be unconditionally preferred. 1. The image of the shepherd and of feeding
occurs sometimes, indeed, in a wider sense, but ordinarily of the ruler specially.
Thus, in the fundamental passage, 2 Sam. v. 2, it occurs of David, compare Micah
v. 3. Thus also in Jeremiah ii. 8: &quot;The <i>priests</i> said not. Where is the Lord,
and they that handle the law knew me not, and the shepherds transgressed against
me, and the prophets prophesied in the name of Baal;&quot; comp. ver. 26: &quot;They, their
kings, their princes, and their priests, and their prophets.&quot; 2. The word
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1500;&#1489;&#1497;</span> contains an evident allusion to 1 Sam.
xiii. 14, where it is said of David: &quot;The Lord hath sought him, a man after His
own heart, and the Lord hath appointed him to be a prince over His people.&quot; 3. All
doubt is removed by the parallel passage, chap. xxiii. 4: &quot;And I raise shepherds
over them, and they feed them, and they fear no more, nor are dismayed.&quot; That, by
the shepherds, in this verse, only the rulers can be understood, is evident from
the contrast to the bad rulers of the present, who were spoken of in chap. xxii.,
no less than from the connection with ver. 5, where that which, in ver. 4, was expressed
in general, is circumscribed within narrow limits, and the concentration of the
fulfilment of the preceding promise is placed in the Messiah: &quot;Behold, days come,
saith the Lord, and I raise unto David a righteous <i>Branch</i>, and He reigneth
as a king and acteth wisely, and setteth up judgment and justice in the land.&quot; This
parallel passage is, in so far also, of importance, as it shews that the prophecy
under consideration likewise had its final reference to the
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 383]</span> Messiah. The kingdom of the ten tribes was
punished by bad kings for its apostacy from the Lord, and from His visible representative.
In the whole long series of Israelitish kings, we do not find any one like Jehoshaphat,
or Hezekiah, or Josiah. And that is very natural, for the foundation of the Israelitish
throne was rebellion. But, with the cessation of sin, punishment too shall cease.
Israel again turns to that family which is the medium and channel through which
all the divine mercies flow upon the Church of the Lord; and so they receive again
a share in them, and particularly in their richest fulness in the exalted scion
of David, the Messiah. The passage under consideration is thus completely parallel
to Hosea iii. 5: &quot;And they seek Jehovah their God, and David their king;&quot; and that
which we remarked on that passage is here more particularly applicable; compare
also Ezek. xxxiv. 23: &quot;And I raise over them one Shepherd, and He feedeth them,
my servant David, he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.&quot; The antithesis
to the words: &quot;According to mine heart,&quot; is formed by the words in Hos. viii. 4:
&quot;They have set up kings not by me, princes whom I knew not,&quot;--words which refer
to the past history of Israel. Formerly, the rebellious chose for themselves kings
according to the desires of their own hearts. Now, they choose Him whom God hath
chosen, and who, according to the same necessity, must be an instrument of blessing,
as the former were of cursing.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1461;&#1468;&#1506;&#1464;&#1492;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1463;&#1513;&#1456;&#1474;&#1499;&#1461;&#1468;&#1497;&#1500;</span> stand adverbially.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1460;&#1513;&#1456;&#1499;&#1468;&#1460;&#1497;&#1500;</span> &quot;to act wisely&quot; is, in appearance
only, intransitive in <i>Hiphil</i>. The foundation of wisdom and knowledge is the
living communion with the Lord, being according to His heart, walking after Him.
The foolish counsels of the former rulers of Israel, by which they brought ruin
upon their people, were a consequence of their apostacy from the Lord. The two fundamental
passages are, Deut. iv. 6: &quot;And ye shall keep and do (the law); for this is your
wisdom and understanding;&quot;<!--inserted quote--> xxix. 8 (9): &quot;Ye shall keep the
words of this covenant and do them, that ye may act wisely.&quot; Besides the passage
under consideration, the passages Josh. i. 7; 1 Sam. xviii. 14, 15; 1 Kings ii.
3; Is. lii. 13; Jer. x. 21, xxiii. 5, are founded upon these two passages. If all
these passages are compared with one another, and with the fundamental passages,
one cannot but wonder at the arbitrariness <span class="pagenum">[Pg 384]</span>
of interpreters and lexicographers who, severing several of these passages from
the others, have forced upon the verb <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1513;&#1499;&#1497;&#1500;</span>
the signification &quot;to prosper,&quot;--a signification altogether fanciful <i>God&#39;s</i>
servants act wisely, because they look up to God; and he who acts wisely finds prosperity
for himself and his people. Hence, it is a proof of the greatest mercy of God towards
His people, when He gives them His <i>servants</i> for kings.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 16. &quot;<i>And it cometh to pass, when ye be multiplied and
fruitful in the land, in those days, saith the Lord, they shall say no more: The
Ark of the Covenant of the Lord! And it will not come into the heart, neither shall
they remember it, nor miss it, nor shall it be made again.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">First, we shall explain some particulars. The words: &quot;When ye
be,&quot; &amp;c. refer to Gen. i. 28, As it is God&#39;s general providence which brings about
the fruitfulness of all creatures, so it is His special providence which brings
about the increase of His Church whose ranks have been thinned by His judgments;
and it is thus that His promise to the patriarchs is carried on towards its fulfilment;
compare remarks on Hos, ii. 1. God&#39;s future activity in this respect, has an analogy
in His former activity in Egypt, Exod. i. 12. The words: &quot;The Ark of the Covenant&quot;
must be viewed as an exclamation, in which an ellipsis, in consequence of the emotion,
must be supposed, <i>q.d.</i> it is the aim of all our desires, the object of all
our longings. The mere mention of the object with which the whole heart is filled,
is sufficient for the lively emotion. <i>Venema&#39;s</i> exposition; <i>Arca f&#339;deris
Jehovae</i> sc. <i>est</i>, and that of <i>De Wette</i>: &quot;They shall no more speak
of the Ark of the Covenant of Jehovah,&quot; are both feeble and un philological. How
were it possible that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1502;&#1512;</span> with the Accusative
should mean &quot;to speak of something?&quot;--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;&#1492; &#1506;&#1500;&#1470;&#1500;&#1489;</span>
is, in a similar context, just as it is here, connected with
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1494;&#1499;&#1512;</span> in Is. lxv. 17: &quot;For behold I create a
new heaven and a new earth, and the former shall not be remembered nor come into
the heart,&quot; comp. also Jer. li. 50, vii. 31; 1 Cor. ii. 9.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1494;&#1499;&#1512;</span> with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span>
does not simply stand instead of the usual connection with the Accusative; it signifies
a remembering connected with affection, a recollection joined with ardent longings.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1511;&#1491;</span> is, by many interpreters, understood in
the sense of &quot;to visit,&quot; but the signification &quot;to miss&quot; (Is. xxxiv. 16; 1 Sam.
xx. 6-18, xxv. 15; 1 Kings <span class="pagenum">[Pg 385]</span> xx. 39) is recommended
by the connection with the following clause: &quot;Nor shall it be made again.&quot; This
supposes that there shall come a time when the Ark of the Covenant shall no more
exist, the time of the destruction of the temple, which was so frequently and emphatically
announced by the prophets.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_385a" href="#ftn_385a">[3]</a></sup>
God, however, will grant so rich a compensation for that which is lost, that men
will neither long for it, nor, urged on by this longing, make any attempt at again
procuring it for themselves by their own efforts. The main question now arises:--In
what respect does the Ark of the Covenant here come into consideration? The answer
is suggested by ver. 17. The Ark of the Covenant is no more remembered, because
Jerusalem has now, in a perfect sense, become the throne of God. The Ark of the
Covenant comes into consideration, therefore, as the throne of God, in an imperfect
sense. It can easily be proved that it was so, although there have been disputes
as to the manner in which it was so. The current view was this, that God, as the
Covenant God, had <i>constantly</i> manifested himself above the Cherubim on the
Ark of the Covenant, in a visible symbol, in a cloud. The first important opposition
to this view proceeded from <i>Vitringa</i> who, in the <i>Obs. sac.</i> t. i. p.
169, advances, among other arguments, the following: &quot;It is not by any means necessary
to maintain that, in the holy of holies, in the tabernacle or the temple of Solomon,
there was constantly a cloud over the Ark; but it may be sufficient to say, that
the Ark was the symbol of the divine habitation, and it was for this reason said
that God was present in the place between the Cherubim, because from thence proceeded
the revelation of His will, and He thus proved to the Jews that He was present.&quot;
But this view of <i>Vitringa</i>, that it was <span class="pagenum">[Pg 386]</span>
merely in an invisible manner that God was present over the Ark of the Covenant,
met with strong opposition; and a note to the second edition shows, that he himself
afterwards entertained doubts regarding it. By <i>Thalemann</i>, a pupil of <i>Ernesti</i>,
it was afterwards advanced far more decidedly, and evidently with the intention
of carrying it through, whether it was true or not, in the <i>Dissertatio de nube
super arcam foederis</i> (Leipzig, 1756). He, too, declared, however, that he did
not deny the matter, but only disputed the sign. He found a learned opponent in
<i>John Eberhard Rau</i>, Professor at Herborn (<i>Ravius</i>, <i>de nube super
arcam foederis</i>, Utrecht, 1760; it is a whole book, in which <i>Thalemann&#39;s</i>
Treatise is reprinted). The matter is, indeed, very simple; both parties are right
and wrong, and the truth lies between the two. From the principal passage, in Lev.
xvi. 2, it is evident that, at the annual entry of the High Priest into the holy
of holies, the invisible presence of God embodied itself in a cloud, as formerly
it also did, on extraordinary occasions, during the journey through the wilderness,
and at the dedication of the tabernacle and temple. In that passage, Aaron is exhorted
not to enter the holy of holies at all times, for that would prove a want of reverence,
but only once a year, &quot;for in the cloud I shall appear over the lid of expiation,&quot;
(this is the right explanation of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1463;&#1468;&#1508;&#1468;&#1512;&#1462;&#1514;</span>
compare <i>Genuineness of the Pentateuch</i>, p. 525 f.) The place where God manifests
himself in so visible a manner when the High Priest enters into it, cannot fail
to be a most holy place to him. It is true that <i>Vitringa</i> (S. 171), and still
more <i>Thalemann</i> (S. 39 in <i>Rau</i>), have endeavoured to remove this objection
by their interpretation; but with so plain a violation of all the laws of interpretation,
that it is scarcely worth while to enter farther upon this exposition, (compare
the refutation in <i>Rau</i>, S. 40 ff.), although <i>J. D. Michaelis</i>, <i>Vater</i>,
<i>Rosenmüller</i>, and <i>Bähr</i>, (<i>Symbol. des Mos. Cultus</i>, i. S. 395),
have approved of it.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_386a" href="#ftn_386a">[4]</a></sup>
On the other hand, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 387]</span> there is nothing to favour
the supposition of an ordinary and constant presence of the cloud in the holy of
holies. With such a view, questions at once arise, such as: Whether it came also
to the Philistines? All that <i>Rau</i> advances in favour of it, merely proves
the invisible presence of God, which surely cannot be considered and called a merely
imaginary thing, as is done by him, p. 35. For what, in that case, would be the
Lord&#39;s presence in the hearts of believers, and in the Lord&#39;s supper? It is true
that Ezekiel, in chap. xi. 22, beholds the glory of the Lord over the cherubim as
being lifted up, and forsaking the temple before its destruction; but how can we
draw any reference, as to the actual state of things, from visions which, according
to their nature, surround with a body all that is invisible? Still, as we already
remarked, this whole controversy has reference to the <i>manner</i> only, and not
to the <i>fact</i> of God&#39;s presence over the Ark of the Covenant; and the Ark of
the Covenant stands here in a wider sense, and comprehends the cherubim, and &quot;the
glory of the Lord dwelling over them.&quot; From a vast number of passages, it can be
proved that this glory of the Lord was constantly and really present over the Ark
of the Covenant, although it was in extraordinary cases only that it manifested
itself in an outward, visible form; compare, besides Lev. xvi. 2, Lev. ix. 24, where,
after Aaron&#39;s consecration to the priesthood, the glory of the Lord appeared to
the whole people in confirmation of his office. To these passages belong all those
in which God is designated as dwelling over the cherubim, such as 1 Chron. xiii.
6; Ps. lxxx. 2; 1 Sam. iv. 4. To it refers the designation of the ark of the covenant,
in a narrower sense, as the footstool of God; comp. 1 Chron. xxviii. 2, where David
says: &quot;I had in mine heart to build an house of rest for the Ark of the Covenant
of the Lord, and for the footstool of our God;&quot; Ps. xcix. 5, cxxxii. 7; Lam. ii.
1. From this circumstance the fact is explained, that the prayer in distress, as
well as the thanks for deliverance, were offered up before, or towards
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 388]</span> the Ark of the Covenant. After the defeat
before Ai (Josh. vii. 5 ff.), Joshua &quot;rent his clothes, and fell to the earth upon
his face, before the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, until the eventide, he and
the elders of Israel, and put dust upon their heads, and Joshua said: Alas, O Lord
God, wherefore hast thou at all brought this people over Jordan?&quot; After the Lord
had appeared to Solomon at Gibeah, and had given him the promise, he went before
the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, and offered burnt-offerings, and thank-offerings,
1 Kings iii. 15. In 2 Sam. xv. 32, we are told that David went up the Mount of Olives
very sorrowfully, and when he was come to the place, <i>where people were accustomed
to worship God</i>, Hushai met him. According to that passage, it was the custom
of the people, when on the top of the Mount of Olives, they gained, for the first
or last time, a view of the sanctuary, to prostrate themselves before the God of
Israel who dwelt there. To the Ark of the Covenant, all those passages refer in
which it is said that God dwelleth in the midst of Israel; that He dwelleth in the
temple; that He dwelleth at Zion or Jerusalem, compare <i>e.g.</i>, the promise
in Exodus xxix. 45: &quot;I dwell in the midst of the children of Israel,&quot;<!--inserted quote-->
and farther, Ps. ix. 12, cxxxii. 13, 14; 1 Kings vi. 12, 13, where God promises
to Solomon that if he should only walk in His commandments, and execute His judgments,
then would He dwell among the children of Israel; and afterwards fulfils this promise
by solemnly entering into his temple. Indissolubly connected with this, was the
deep reverence in which the Ark of the Covenant was held in Israel. It was considered
as the most precious jewel of the people, as the centre of their whole existence.
Being the place where the glory of God dwelt (Ps. xxvi. 8), where He manifested
himself in His most glorious revelation, it was called <i>the glory of Israel</i>,
compare 1 Sam. iv. 21, 22; Ps. lxxviii. 61. The High Priest Eli patiently and quietly
heard all the other melancholy tidings--the defeat of Israel, and the death of his
sons. But when he who had escaped added: &quot;And the Ark of God is taken,&quot; he fell
from off the seat backward by the side of the gate; and his neck brake, and he died.
When his daughter-in-law heard the tidings that the Ark of the Covenant was taken,
she bowed herself and travailed; for her pains came upon her. And about the time
of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 389]</span> her death, the women that stood by her
said unto her: Fear not, for thou hast borne a son. But she answered not, neither
did she take it to heart, and she named the child Ichabod, and said. The glory is
departed from Israel, because the Ark of the Covenant was taken, and said again:
&quot;The glory is departed from Israel, for the Ark of God is taken.&quot; But in what manner
may this dwelling of God over the Ark of the Covenant be conceived of? Should the
Most High God, whom all the heavens, and the heaven of heavens cannot contain (1
Kings viii. 27), whose throne is the heaven, and whose footstool is the earth (Is.
lxvi. 1), dwell in a temple made by the hands of men? (Acts vii. 48, ff.) Evidently
not in the manner in which men dwell in a place, who are <i>in</i> it only, not
<i>out</i> of it. Nor in such a manner as the carnally minded suppose, who, to the
warnings of the prophets, opposed their word: &quot;Is not the Lord among us? none evil
can come upon us&quot; (Micah iii. 11), or: &quot;Here is the temple of the Lord, here is
the temple of the Lord, here is the temple of the Lord&quot; (Jer. vii. 4), imagining
that God could not forsake the place which he had chosen, could not take away the
free gift of His grace. The matter rather stands thus: That which constitutes the
substance and centre of the whole relation of Israel to God, is, that the God of
the heavens and the earth became the God of Israel; that the Creator of heaven and
earth became the Covenant-God, that His general providence in blessing and punishing
became a special one. In order to make the relation familiar to the people, and
thus to make it the object of their love and fear, God gave them a <i>praesens numen</i>
in His sanctuary, as a prefiguration, and, at the same time, a prelude of the condescension
with which He whom the whole universe cannot contain, rested in the womb of Mary.
And in so doing, He gave them not a symbolical representation merely, but an embodiment
of the idea, so that they who wished to seek Him as the God of Israel, could find
Him in the temple, and over the Ark of the Covenant only. The circumstance that
it was just there that He took His seat, shows the difference between this truly
<i>praesens numen</i>, and that merely imaginery one of the Gentiles. There was
in this no partial favour for Israel, nothing from which careless sinners could
derive any comfort, God&#39;s dwelling among Israel rested on <span class="pagenum">
[Pg 390]</span> His holy Law. According as the Covenant is kept or not, and the
Law is observed or not, it manifests itself by increased blessing, or by severer
punishment. If the Covenant be entirely broken, the consequence is that God leaves
His dwelling, and it is only the curse which remains, and which is greater than
the curse inflicted upon those among whom He never dwelt, and which, by its greatness,
indicates the greatness of the former grace.--Now, if this be the case with the
Ark of the Covenant; if it be the substance and centre of the whole former dispensation,
what, and how much would not fall along with it, if it fell; and how infinitely
great must the compensation be which was to be granted for it, if, in consequence
of it, no desire and longing after it was to rise at all, if it was to be regarded
as belonging to the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#964;&#969;&#967;&#8048; &#963;&#964;&#959;&#953;&#967;&#949;&#8150;&#945;</span>, and was
to be forgotten as a mere image and shadow! The fact that the Ark of the Covenant
was made before any thing else, sufficiently shows that every thing sacred under
the Old Testament dispensation depended upon it. <i>Witsius Misc. t.</i> i. p. 439,
very pertinently remarks: &quot;The Ark of the Covenant being, as it were, the heart
of the whole Israelitish religion, was made first of all.&quot; Without Ark of the Covenant--no
temple; for it became a sanctuary by the Ark of the Covenant only; for holy, so
Solomon says in 2 Chron. viii. 11, is the place whereunto the Ark of the Covenant
hath come. Without Ark of the Covenant, no priesthood; for what is the use of servants
when there is no Lord present? Without temple and priesthood, no sacrifice. We have
thus before us the announcement of the entire destruction of the previous form of
the Kingdom of God, but such a destruction of the form as brings about, at the same
time, the highest completion of the substance,--a perishing like that of the seed-corn,
which dies only, in order to bring forth much fruit; like that of the body, which
is sown in corruption, in order to be raised in incorruption. <i>Dahler</i> remarks:
&quot;Because a more sublime religion, a more glorious state of things will take the
place of the Mosaic dispensation, there will be no cause for regretting the loss
of the symbol of the preceding dispensation, and people will no more remember it.&quot;--It
is quite natural that the prophecy should give great offence, and prove a stumbling-block
to Jewish interpreters. Its subject, its high dignity, just
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 391]</span> consists in the announcement that, at some
future period, the shadow should give way to the substance; but it is just the confounding
of the shadow with the substance, the rigid adherence to the former, which characterises
Judaism, which considers even the Messiah as a minister of the old dispensation
only, and views the great changes to be effected by Him, mainly as external ones.
The embarrassment arising from this, is very clearly expressed in the following
words of <i>Abarbanel</i>: &quot;This promise is, then, bad, and uproots the whole Law.
How is it then that Scripture mentions it as good?&quot; Rabbi <i>Arama</i>, in his commentary
on the Pentateuch, fol. 101, says, in reference to this prophecy,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1489;&#1493;&#1499;&#1493; &#1499;&#1500; &#1492;&#1502;&#1508;&#1512;&#1513;&#1497;&#1501;</span> &quot;all interpreters have been
perplexed by it.&quot; The interpretations by means of which they endeavour to rid themselves
of this embarrassment (see the collection of them in <i>Frischmuth&#39;s</i> dissertation
on this passage, Jena; reprinted in the <i>Thes. Ant.</i>) are only calculated plainly
to manifest it. <i>Kimchi</i> gives this explanation: &quot;Although ye shall increase
and be multiplied on the earth, yet the nations shall not envy you, nor wage war
against you; and it shall no more be necessary for you to go to war with the Ark
of the Covenant, as was usual in former times, when they took the Ark of the Covenant
out to war. In that time, there will be no necessity for so doing, as they shall
not have any war.&quot; The weak points of this explanation are at once obvious. That
which, in the verse under consideration, is, in a general way, said of the Ark of
the Covenant, is, by it, referred to an altogether special use of it, a regard to
which is excluded by the evident antithesis in ver. 17. <i>Abarbanel</i> rejects
this explanation. He says: &quot;For there is, in the text, no mention at all of war;
and therefore I cannot approve of this exposition, although <i>Jonathan</i>, too,
inclines towards it.&quot; He himself brings out this sense: The Ark of the Covenant
would then, indeed, still continue to exist, and be the seat of the Lord; but no
more the exclusive one, no longer the sole sanctuary. &quot;The whole of Jerusalem shall,
as regards holiness and glory, equal the Ark of the Covenant. For there shall cease
with them every evil thing, and every evil imagination; and there shall be such
holiness in the land, that in the same manner as formerly the Ark was the holiest
of all things, so at that time, Jerusalem shall be <span class="pagenum">[Pg 392]</span>
the throne of the Lord.&quot; But, by this explanation, justice is not done to the text.
For it is an entire doing away with the Ark of the Covenant which is spoken of in
it, not a mere diminution of its dignity, produced by the circumstance, that that
which formerly was low shall be exalted. This is particularly evident from the words:
&quot;They will not miss it, neither shall it be made again.&quot; To this argument we may
still add that, by this exposition, not even the object is gained for the sake of
which it was advanced. The nature and substance of the Ark of the Covenant is destroyed,
as soon as it is put on a level with anything else. It is then no more <i>the</i>
throne of the Lord; and for this reason, the previous form can no longer continue
to exist, and, along with it, the temple and priesthood too must fall. If every
place in Jerusalem, if every inhabitant of it, be equally holy, how then can institutions
still continue, which are based on the difference between holy and unholy?--Here
a question still arises. There was no Ark of the Covenant in the second temple.
In what relation to the prophecy under consideration stands this absence of the
Ark of the Covenant, the restoration of which the Jews expect at the end of the
days? There cannot be any doubt that it was really wanting. Every proof of its existence
is wanting. <i>Josephus</i>, in enumerating the catalogue of the <i>spolia Judaica</i>,
borne before in the triumph, does not mention it. He says expressly (de Bell. Jud.
v. 5, § 5), that the holy of holies had been altogether empty. Some of the Jewish
writers assert that it had been carried away to Babylon; while most of them, following
the account given in 2 Maccabees, tell us that Josiah or Jeremiah had concealed
it; compare the Treatise by <i>Calmet</i>, Th. 6, S. 224-258, <i>Mosh.</i> In asking
<i>why</i> such was the case, other analogous phenomena, the absence of the <i>Urim
and Thummim</i>, the cessation of prophetism soon after the return from the captivity,
must not be lost sight of. Every thing was intended to impress upon the people the
conviction that their condition was provisional only. It was necessary that the
Theocracy should sink beneath its former glory, in order that the future glory,
which was far to outshine it, should so much the more be longed for. After having
thus determined <i>why</i> it was that the Ark of the Covenant was wanting, at the
second temple, it is easy to <span class="pagenum">[Pg 393]</span> determine the
relation of this absence to the prophecy under consideration. It was the beginning
of its fulfilment. In the Kingdom of God, nothing perishes, without something new
arising out of this decay. The extinction of the old was the guarantee, that something
new was approaching. On the other hand, the absence of the Ark of the Covenant was,
it is true, at the same time, a matter-of-fact prophecy of a sad character. To those
who clung to the form, without having in a living manner laid hold of the substance,
and who, therefore, were not able to partake in the more glorious display of the
substance,--to these it announced that the time was approaching when the form, to
which they had attached themselves with their whole existence, was to be broken.
Since already one of the great privileges of the covenant-people, the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#8057;&#958;&#945;</span> (Rom. ix. 4), had disappeared, surely
all that might and would soon share the same fate, which existed only for the sake
of it, and in it only had its significance. In this respect, the non-restoration
of the Ark of the Covenant showed that the Chaldean destruction and that by the
Romans were connected as commencement and completion; while, in the other aspect,
it declared that, with the return from the captivity, the realization of God&#39;s great
plan of salvation was being prepared. Inasmuch as the most complete <i>fuga vacui</i>
is peculiar to the Covenant-God, the emptiness in that place where formerly the
glory of God dwelt, proclaimed aloud the future fulness.--<i>Finally</i>, we have
still to determine the special reference of our verse to Israel, <i>i.e.</i>, the
former kingdom of the ten tribes. This reference is, by most interpreters, entirely
lost sight of, and is very superficially and erroneously determined by those who,
like <i>Calvin</i>, pay attention to it. In the preceding verse, it had been promised
to Israel, that those blessings should again be bestowed upon them, which they had
forfeited by their rebellion against the Davidic house, and that they should be
restored to them with abundant interest. For David&#39;s house is to attain to its completion
in its righteous Sprout. This Shepherd, who is, in the fullest sense, what His ancestor
had only imperfectly been--a man according to the heart of God--shall feed them
with knowledge and understanding. <i>Here</i>, a compensation is promised for the
second, infinitely greater loss, which <span class="pagenum">[Pg 394]</span> had,
at all times, been acknowledged as such by the faithful in the kingdom of the ten
tribes. The revelation of the Lord over the Ark of the Covenant was the magnet which
constantly drew them to Jerusalem. Many sacrificed all their earthly possessions,
and took up their abode in Judea. Others went on a pilgrimage from their natural
to their spiritual home, to the &quot;throne of the glory exalted from the beginning,&quot;
Jer. xvii. 12. In vain was every thing which the kings of Israel did in order to
stifle their indestructible longing. Every new event by which &quot;the glory of Israel&quot;
manifested itself as such, kindled their ardour anew. But here also the great blessing
and privilege, which the believers missed with sorrow, the unbelievers without it,
is to the returning ones given back, not in its previous form, but in a glorious
completion. The whole people have now received eyes to recognise the value of the
matter in its previous form; and yet this previous form is now looked upon by them
as nothing, because the new, infinitely more glorious form of the same matter occupied
their attention.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 17. &quot;<i>At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne
of the Lord; and all the nations shall be gathered into it, because the name of
the Lord is at Jerusalem; neither shall they walk any more after the wickedness
of their evil heart.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Many interpreters, proceeding upon the supposition that the emphasis
rests upon Jerusalem, have been led to give an altogether erroneous explanation.
It is no more the Ark of the Covenant which will then be the throne of the Lord,
but <i>all</i> Jerusalem. Thus, <i>e.g.</i>, after the example of <i>Jarchi</i>
and <i>Abarbanel</i>, <i>Manasseh ben Israel</i>, <i>Conciliator</i>, p. 196: &quot;If
we keep in mind that, in the tabernacle or temple, the Ark was the place where the
Lord dwelt (hence Ex. xxv. 22: &#39;I will speak with thee from above the mercy-seat,
from between the two cherubim&#39;), we shall find that the Lord here says, that the
Ark indeed had formerly been the dwelling-place of the Godhead, but that, at the
time of Messiah, not some one part of the temple only would be filled with the Godhead,
but that this glory should be given to all Jerusalem; so that whosoever would be
in her would have the prophetic spirit.&quot; If it had been the intention of the Prophet
to convey this meaning, the word <i>all</i> could not have been omitted. The throne
of the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 395]</span> Lord, Jerusalem had been even formerly,
in so far as she possessed in her midst the Ark of the Covenant, and hence was the
residence of Jehovah, the city of the great King, Ps. xlviii. 3. The words in the
parallel member: &quot;Because the name of the Lord is at Jerusalem,&quot; show that Jerusalem
is called the throne of the Lord, because there is now in her the true throne of
the Lord, just as, formerly, the Ark of the Covenant. The antithesis to what precedes
leads us to expect a gradation, not in point of quantity, but of quality. The emphasis
rests rather on: &quot;The throne of the Lord;&quot; and these words receive from the antithesis
the more definite qualification: the true throne of the Lord. Quite similarly, those
who boasted that over the Cherubim was the throne of God, and that the Ark of the
Covenant was His footstool, are told in Is. lxvi. 1: &quot;The heaven is my (true) throne,
and the earth my (true) footstool;&quot; comp. the passages according to which the Ark
of the Covenant is designated as the footstool of God, and, hence, the place over
the Cherubim of the Ark of the Covenant as the throne of the Lord, p. 387; and farther,
Is. lx. 13; Ezra i. 26.--The highest prerogative of the covenant-people, their highest
privilege over the world, is to have God in the midst of them; and this prerogative,
this privilege, is now to be bestowed upon them in the most perfect manner; so that
idea and reality shall coincide. Perfectly parallel in substance are such passages
as Ezek. xliii., in which the Shechinah which, at the destruction of the temple
had withdrawn, returns to the new temple, the Kingdom of God in its new and more
glorious form. Ver. 2. &quot;And behold the glory of the God of Israel came from the
way of the East; and its voice was like the voice of great waters, and the earth
shone with its splendour.&quot; Ver. 7. &quot;And He said unto me, son of man, behold the
place of <i>my throne</i>, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell
in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and the house of Israel shall no
more defile my holy place.&quot; Zech. ii. 14 (10): &quot;Sing and rejoice, O daughter of
Zion; for, lo, I come and dwell in the midst of thee,&quot; with an allusion to Exod.
xxix. 45: &quot;And I dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God.&quot; The
Prophet declares that the full realization of this promise is reserved for the future;
but it could not be so, unless it had already been realised, throughout all past
history, in God&#39;s <span class="pagenum">[Pg 396]</span> dwelling over the Ark of
the Covenant; compare Zech. viii. 3: &quot;Thus saith the Lord, I return unto Zion, and
dwell in the midst of Jerusalem.&quot;--If we enquire after the fulfilment, we are at
once met by the words in John i. 14: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#8001; &#955;&#972;&#947;&#959;&#962; &#963;&#8048;&#961;&#958;
&#7952;&#947;&#941;&#957;&#949;&#964;&#959; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#963;&#954;&#942;&#957;&#969;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#7952;&#957; &#7969;&#956;&#8150;&#957;, &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#952;&#949;&#945;&#963;&#940;&#956;&#949;&#952;&#945; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#948;&#972;&#958;&#945;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166;, &#948;&#972;&#958;&#945;&#957; &#8033;&#962; &#956;&#959;&#957;&#959;&#947;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#8166;&#962;
&#960;&#945;&#961;&#8048; &#960;&#945;&#964;&#961;&#972;&#962;</span>; and that so much the more that these words contain an evident
allusion to the former dwelling of God in the temple, of which the incarnation of
the Logos is looked upon as the highest consummation. It is true that the dwelling
of God among His people by means of the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#957;&#949;&#8166;&#956;&#945; &#935;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#8166;</span>
must not be separated from the personal manifestation of God in Christ, in whom
dwelt the fulness of the Godhead bodily, <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#963;&#969;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#953;&#954;&#8182;&#962;</span>.
The former stands to the latter in the same relation, as does the river to the fountain;
it is the river of living water flowing forth from the body of Christ. Both together
form the true tabernacle of God among men, the new true Ark of the Covenant; for
the old things are the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#963;&#954;&#953;&#8048; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#956;&#949;&#955;&#955;&#972;&#957;&#964;&#969;&#957;, &#964;&#8056; &#948;&#8050; &#963;&#8182;&#956;&#945;
&#935;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#8166;</span>, Col. ii. 17; comp. Rev. xxi. 22: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054;
&#957;&#945;&#8056;&#957; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#949;&#7990;&#948;&#959;&#957; &#7952;&#957; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8135;&#903; &#8001; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#922;&#973;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#962;, &#8001; &#920;&#949;&#8056;&#962; &#8001; &#960;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#959;&#954;&#961;&#940;&#964;&#969;&#961; &#957;&#945;&#8056;&#962; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8134;&#962; &#7952;&#963;&#964;&#953;, &#954;&#945;&#8054;
&#964;&#8056; &#7936;&#961;&#957;&#943;&#959;&#957;</span>. The typical import of the Ark of the Covenant is expressly declared
in Heb. ix. 4, 5, and that which was typified thereby is intimated in chap. iv.
16: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#961;&#959;&#963;&#949;&#961;&#967;&#974;&#956;&#949;&#952;&#945; &#948;&#8050; &#956;&#949;&#964;&#8048; &#960;&#945;&#8164;&#8165;&#951;&#963;&#943;&#945;&#962; &#964;&#8183; &#952;&#961;&#972;&#957;&#8179; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#967;&#940;&#961;&#953;&#964;&#959;&#962;</span>,
where Christ is designated as the true mercy-seat, as the true Ark of the Covenant.
Just as, formerly, God could be found over the Ark of the Covenant only, by those
from among his people who sought Him; so we have now, through Christ, boldness and
access with confidence in God (Eph. iii. 12); and it is only when offered in His
name, in living union with Him, that our prayers are acceptable, John xvi. 23. A
consequence of that highest realization of the idea of the kingdom of God, and,
at the same time, a sign that it has taken place, and a measure of the blessings
which Israel has to expect from its re-union with the Church of God, is the gathering
of the Gentiles into it, such as, by way of type and prelude, took place even at
the lower manifestations of the presence of God among the people; compare, <i>e.g.</i>,
Josh. ix. 9: &quot;And they (the Gibeonites) said unto him: From a very far country thy
servants are come, because of the name (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1513;&#1501;</span>)
of Jehovah thy God, for we have heard the fame of Him, and all that He did in Egypt,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 397]</span> and all that He did to the two kings of the
Amorites,&quot; &amp;c. In a manner quite similar it is, in Zech. ii. 15 (11) also, connected
with the Lord&#39;s dwelling in Jerusalem: &quot;And many nations shall be joined to the
Lord in that day; and they shall be my people; and I dwell in the midst of thee.&quot;--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1513;&#1501;
&#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492; &#1500;&#1497;&#1512;&#1493;&#1513;&#1500;&#1497;&#1501;</span> must be literally translated: &quot;On account of the name of the
Lord (belonging) to Jerusalem,&quot; for: because the name of the Lord belongs to Jerusalem--is
there at home The name of the Lord is the Lord himself, in so far as He reveals
His invisible nature, manifests himself In the name, His deeds are comprehended;
and hence it forms a bridge betwixt existing and knowing. A God without a name is
a <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#952;&#949;&#8056;&#962; &#7940;&#947;&#957;&#969;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#962;</span>, Acts xviii. 23. There is an
allusion to Deut. xii. 5: &quot;But unto the place which the Lord your God shall choose
out of all your tribes <i>to put His name there</i>, to dwell in it, unto it ye
shall seek, and thither ye shall come.&quot; Formerly, when God put His name in an imperfect
manner only, Israel only assembled themselves; but now, all the Gentiles.--The last
words: &quot;Neither shall they walk any more,&quot; &amp;c., are not by any means to refer to
the Gentiles, but to the members of the kingdom of Israel, or also to the whole
of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to all the members of the Kingdom of God, including
the subjects of the kingdom of Israel. This appears from a comparison of the fundamental
passage of the Pentateuch, as well as of the parallel passages in Jeremiah. Wherever
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1512;&#1497;&#1512;&#1493;&#1514;</span> occurs, the covenant-people are spoken
of; everywhere the walking after <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1512;&#1497;&#1512;&#1493;&#1514;</span> of
the heart is opposed to the walking after the revealed law of Jehovah, which Israel
alone possessed. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1512;&#1497;&#1512;&#1493;&#1514;</span>, which properly means
&quot;firmness,&quot; is then used of hardness in sin, of wickedness.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_397a" href="#ftn_397a">[5]</a></sup></p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_377a" href="#ftnRef_377a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[1]</sup></a> <i>Vitringa</i> very correctly remarks on
	this passage: &quot;<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span>, properly
	<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001; &#7956;&#967;&#969;&#957;</span>, he who has any thing in his possession
	is, by an ellipsis, applied to the husband who, in Exod. xxi. 3, is rightly
	called <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500; &#1488;&#1513;&#1492;</span> <i>one who has a wife</i>.&quot;</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_380a" href="#ftnRef_380a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[2]</sup></a> Against the explanation of <i>Maurer</i>:
	&quot;For I am your Lord;&quot; and that of <i>Ewald</i>: &quot;I take you under my protection,&quot;
	it is decisive that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span> never means &quot;to
	be Lord,&quot; far less &quot;to take under protection.&quot;
	<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span>, which properly means &quot;to possess,&quot;
	is very commonly used of marriage;--as early as in the Decalogue, the wife appears
	as the noblest <i>possession</i> of the husband--so that <i>a priori</i> this
	signification is suggested and demanded.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_385a" href="#ftnRef_385a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[3]</sup></a> It is from the circumstance that modern Exegesis
	is unable to comprehend the prophetic anticipation of the Future, that the assertion
	has proceeded (<i>Movers</i>, <i>Hitzig</i>) that, even before the Chaldean
	destruction, the Ark &quot;must have disappeared in a mysterious manner.&quot; In the
	view of the Chaldean destruction the Lord is, in Ps. xcix. 1 (comp. Ps. lxxx.
	2), designated as He who sitteth over the Cherubim. In 2 Chron. xxxv. 3, we
	have a distinct historical witness for the existence of the Ark, so late as
	the 18th year of Josiah. The fable in 2 Maccab. ii. 4, ff., supposes that the
	Ark was at its ordinary place, down to the time of the breaking in of the Chaldean
	catastrophe. One might as well infer from chap. iii. 18, that, at the time when
	these words were spoken, Judah must already, &quot;in a mysterious manner,&quot; have
	come into the land of the North.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_386a" href="#ftnRef_386a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[4]</sup></a> <i>Bähr</i> advances the assertion, &quot;In a
	(the) cloud&quot; is equivalent to: &quot;in darkness.&quot; But the parallel passages, Exod.
	xl. 34 ff., Numb. ix. 15, 16, quoted by <i>J. H. Michaelis</i>, are quite sufficient
	to overthrow this assertion. And these parallel passages are so much the more
	to the point, that by the article the cloud is designated as being already known;
	compare <i>Hofmann</i>, <i>Schriftbeweis</i> ii. 1, S. 36. The cloud in ver.
	13 is not identical with that in ver. 2, but is its necessary parallel. The
	cloud in ver. 2 symbolises the truth that the Lord is a consuming fire (compare
	my remarks on Rev. i. 7); that in ver. 13 is an embodied <i>Kyrie eleison</i>,
	compare remarks on Rev. v. 8. Cloud with cloud,--that is a noble advice for
	the Church when she is threatened by the judgments of God. A thorough refutation
	of <i>Bähr</i> has been given by <i>W. Neumann</i>: <i>Beiträge zur Symbolik
	des Mos. Cultus</i>, <i>Zeitschr. f. Luth. Theol.</i>, 1851, i.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_397a" href="#ftnRef_397a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[5]</sup></a> In a certain sense, one may say that
	<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1512;&#1497;&#1512;&#1493;&#1514; &#1500;&#1489;</span> is a
	<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7941;&#960;&#945;&#958; &#955;&#949;&#947;&#8057;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#957;</span>. It occurs independently
	in one single passage only, in Deut. xxix. 18; in the other passages (eight
	times in Jeremiah, and besides, in Ps. lxxxi. 13), it was evidently not taken
	from the living <i>usus loquendi</i> from which it had disappeared, but from
	the fundamental passage in the written code of law. This fact will, <i>a priori</i>,
	appear probable, when we keep in mind that, among all the books of the Pentateuch,
	Jeremiah has chiefly Deuteronomy before his eyes; and among all the chapters
	of Deuteronomy, none more than the 29th; and that Ps. lxxxi. is pervaded by
	literal allusions to the Pentateuch. But it is put beyond all doubt, when we
	enter upon a comparison of the passage in Deuteronomy with the parallel passages.
	Here we must begin with Jer. xxiii. 17, where the verbal agreement comes out
	most strongly, and then we shall, in the other passages also (vii. 24, ix. 13,
	xi. 8, xvi. 12, xviii. 12, and the passage under consideration), easily perceive
	that the word has been borrowed. From a comparison with the fundamental passage,
	it appears that it is the intention of the Prophet to convey here the promise
	of an eternal duration of the regained blessing, and to keep off the thought
	that possibly the people might again, as formerly, fall from grace. Of him who
	walks after the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1512;&#1497;&#1512;&#1493;&#1514;</span> of his heart, it
	is said in Deut. xxix. 19 (20): &quot;The Lord will not be willing to forgive him;
	for then the anger of the Lord and His jealousy shall smoke against that man,
	and all the curses that are written in this book shall lie upon him, and the
	Lord blots out his name from under heaven.&quot;</p>
</div>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 398]</span></p>
<h3><a name="div2_398" href="#div2Ref_398">CHAPTER XXIII. 1-8.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">These verses form a portion only of a greater whole, to which,
besides the whole of chap. xxii., chap. xxiii. 9-40 also belongs. For these verses
contain a prophecy against the false prophets, and by the way also, against the
degenerated priesthood (comp. ver. 11); and this prophecy easily unites itself with
the preceding prophecy against the kings, so as to form one prophecy against the
corrupt leaders of the people of God. But, for the exposition of the verses before
us, it is only the connection with chap. xxii. which is of importance, and that
so much so that, without carefully attending to it, they cannot at all be thoroughly
understood. For this reason, we shall confine ourselves to bring it out more clearly.</p>
<p class="normal">The Prophet reproves and warns the kings of Judah, first, in general,
announcing to them the judgments of the Lord upon them and their people,--the fulfilment
of the threatenings, Deut. xxix. 22 ff.--if they are to continue in their hitherto
ungodly course, chap. xxii. 1&#8211;9. In order to make a stronger impression, he then
particularizes the general threatening, showing how God&#39;s recompensing justice manifests
itself in the fate of the individual apostate kings. First, Jehoahaz is brought
forward, the son and the immediate successor of Josiah, whom Pharaoh-Necho dethroned
and carried with him to Egypt, vers. 10-12. The declaration concerning him forms
a commentary on the name Shallum, <i>i.e.</i>, the recompensed one, he whom the
Lord recompenses according to his deeds,--which name the Prophet gives to him instead
of the meaningless name Jehoahaz, <i>i.e.</i>, God holds. His father, who met his
death in the battle against the Egyptians, may be called happy when compared with
him; for he never returns to his native <span class="pagenum">[Pg 399]</span> land;
he lives and dies in a foreign land. The next whom he brings forward is Jehoiakim,
vers. 13&#8211;19. He is a despot who does every thing to ruin the people committed to
him. There is, therefore, the most glaring contrast between his beautiful name and
his miserable fate. The Lord, instead of raising him up, will cast him down to the
lowest depth; not even an honourable burial is to be bestowed upon him. No one weeps
or laments over him; like a trodden down carcass, he lies outside the gates of Jerusalem,
the city of the great King, which he attempted to wrest from him, and make his own.
Then follows a parenthetical digression, vers. 20&#8211;23. Apostate Judah is addressed.
The judgment upon her kings is not one with which she has nothing to do, as little
as their guilt belongs to them as individuals only. It is, at the same time a judgment
upon the people which, by the Lord&#39;s anger which they have called forth by their
wickedness, is thrown down into the depth, from the height on which the Lord&#39;s mercy
had raised them.--Next follows Jehoiachin, vers. 24-30. In his name &quot;The <i>Lord</i>
will establish,&quot; the word <i>will</i> has no foundation; the Lord <i>will</i> reject
him, cast him away, and break him in pieces like a worthless vessel. With his mother,
he shall be carried away from his native land, and die in exile and captivity. Irrevocable
is the Lord&#39;s decree, that none of his sons shall ascend the throne of David, so
that he, having begotten children in vain, is to be esteemed as one who is childless.</p>
<p class="normal">At the commencement of the section under consideration (vers.
1 and 2), the contents of chap. xxii. are comprehended into one sentence. &quot;Woe to
the shepherds that destroy and scatter the flock of the Lord.&quot; Woe, then, to those
shepherds who have done so. With this is then, in vers. 3&#8211;8, connected the announcement
of salvation for the poor scattered flock. For the same reason, that the Lord visits
upon those who have hitherto been their shepherds, the wickedness of their doings--viz.,
because of His being the chief Shepherd, or because of His covenant-faithfulness,
He will in mercy remember them also, gather them from their dispersion, give, instead
of the bad shepherds, a good one, viz., the long promised and longed for great descendant
of David, who, being a <i>righteous</i> King, shall diffuse justice and righteousness
in the land, and thus <span class="pagenum">[Pg 400]</span> acquire for it righteousness
and salvation from the Lord. So great shall the mercy of the Future be, that thereby
the greatest mercy in the people&#39;s past history--their deliverance out of Egypt--shall
be altogether cast into the shade.</p>
<p class="normal">There cannot be any doubt that the whole prophecy belongs to the
reign of Jehoiakim; for the end of Jehoiakim and the fate of Jehoiachin are announced
as future events.</p>
<p class="normal"><i>Eichhorn</i> asserts that this section was composed under Zedekiah;
but he could do so only by proceeding from his erroneous fundamental view, that
the prophecies are veiled descriptions of historical events. &quot;When Jeremiah&quot;--so
he says--&quot;delivered this discourse, Jehoiakim had not only already met his ignominious
end (xxii. 19), but Jeconiah also was, with his mother, already carried away captive
to Babylon.&quot; It is matter of astonishment that <i>Dahler</i>, without holding the
same fundamental view, could yet adopt its result. He specially refers to the circumstance
that, in ver. 24, Jehoiachin is addressed as king,--a circumstance by which <i>Berthold</i>
also supports his view, who, cutting the knot, advances the position that vers.
1&#8211;19 belong to the reign of Jehoiakim, but vers. 20--xxxii. 8 to the time when Jehoiachin
was carried away to Babylon. (<i>Maurer</i> and <i>Hitzig</i> too suppose that vers.
20 ff. were added at a later period, under the reign of Jehoiachin). But what difficulty
is there in supposing that the Prophet transfers himself into the time, when he
who is now a hereditary prince will be king,--of which the address is then a simple
consequence? It is undeniable that a connection with chap. xxi. takes place, in
which chapter Jeremiah announces to Zedekiah, threatened by the Chaldeans, the fall
of the Davidic house, and the capture and destruction of the city. And this connection
is to be accounted for by the fact that Jeremiah here connects with this announcement
a former prophecy, in which, under the reign of Jehoiakim, he had foretold the fall
of the Davidic house. The fate of the house of David is the subject common to both
the discourses. <i>Küper</i> (<i>Jeremias</i>, <i>libror. Sacror. interpres</i>,
p. 58), supposes that, in the message to Zedekiah, Jeremiah had, at that time, repeated
his former announcement; but this supposition is opposed by the circumstance that,
in chaps. xxii., xxiii., there is no trace of a reference to Zedekiah and his embassy.
<i>Ewald</i> asserts that Jeremiah <span class="pagenum">[Pg 401]</span> here only
puts together what &quot;perhaps&quot; he had formerly spoken regarding the three kings; but
the words in chap. xxii. 1: &quot;Go down into the house of the king of Judah and speak
there this word,&quot; is conclusive against this assertion. For, according to these
words, we have here not something put together, but a discourse which was delivered
at a distinct, definite time; although nothing prevents us from supposing that the
going down was done in the Spirit only.</p>
<p class="normal">We have here still to make an investigation concerning the names
of the three kings occurring in chap. xxii., the result of which is of importance
for the exposition of ver. 5.--It cannot but appear strange that the same king who,
in the Book of the Kings, is called Jehoahaz, is here called Shallum only; that
the same who is there called Jehoiachin, has here the name of Jeconias, which is
abbreviated into Conias. The current supposition is, that the two kings had two
names each. But this supposition is unsatisfactory, because, by the context in which
they stand, the names employed by Jeremiah too clearly appear as <i>nomina realia</i>,
as new names given to them by which the contrast between the name and thing was
to be removed, and hence are evidently of the same nature with the <i>nomen reale</i>
of the good Shepherd in chap. xxiii. 6, which, with quite the same right, could
have been changed into a <i>nomen proprium</i> in the proper sense, as has, indeed,
been done by the LXX. The numerous passages in the prophets, where the name occurs
as a designation of the nature and character, <i>e.g.</i>, Is. ix. 5, lxii. 4; Jer.
xxxiii. 16; Ezek. xlviii. 35, plainly show that a name which has merely a prophetical
warrant (and such an one alone takes place here, although the name Shallum occurs
also in 1 Chron. iii. 15 [in the historical representation itself, however, Jehoahaz
is used in the Book of Kings, and 2 Chron. xxxvi. 1], and the name Jeconias likewise
in 1 Chron. iii. 16, while Jehoiakim is found not only in the Book of Kings, but
also in Ezek. i. 2; for it is quite possible that those later writers may have drawn
from Jeremiah), cannot simply be considered as a <i>nomen proprium</i>; but, on
the contrary, that there is a strong probability that it is not so. And this probability
becomes certainty when that name occurs, either <i>alone</i>, as <i>e.g.</i>, Shallum,
or <i>first</i>, as Jeconiah, (which occurs again in chap. xxiv. 1, xxvii. 20; the
abbreviated <span class="pagenum">[Pg 402]</span> Coniah in xxxvii. 1, while, which
is well to be observed, we have in the historical account, chap. lii. 31, Jehoiachin)
in a context, such as that under consideration; especially when this phenomenon
occurs in a prophet such as Jeremiah, in whom, elsewhere also, many traces of holy
wit, and even punning, can be pointed out.--With reference to the calamity which
more and more threatened Judah, pious Josiah had given to his sons names, which
announced salvation. According to his wish, these names should be as many actual
prophecies, and would, indeed, have proved themselves to be such, unless they who
bore them had made them of no avail by their apostacy from the Lord, and had thus
brought about the most glaring contrast between idea and reality. That comes out
first in the case of Jehoahaz. He whom the Lord should <i>hold</i>, was violently
and irresistibly carried away to Egypt. The Prophet, therefore, calls him Shallum,
<i>i.e.</i>, the <i>recompensed</i>,--not <i>retribution</i>, as <i>Hiller</i>,
<i>Simonis</i>, and <i>Roediger</i> think, nor <i>retributor</i> according to <i>
Fürst</i> (comp. <i>Ewald</i> § 154d); the same who, in 1 Chron. v. 38, is called
Shallum, is in 1 Chron. ix. 11, called Meshullam--he upon whom the Lord has visited
the wickedness of his deeds.--As regards the name Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin, we must,
above all things, keep in view the relation of these names to the promise given
to David. In 2 Sam. vii. 12 it is said: &quot;And I cause to rise up (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1492;&#1511;&#1497;&#1502;&#1514;&#1497;</span>)
thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish
(<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1492;&#1499;&#1497;&#1504;&#1514;&#1497;</span>) his kingdom.&quot; This passage contains
the ground of <i>both</i> names; and this is the more easily explained, since both
of them have one author, Jehoiakim. Even his former name Eliakim had probably been
given to him by his father Josiah with a view to the promise. When Pharaoh, however,
desired him to change his name--as the name itself shows, we cannot but supply,
in 2 Kings xxiii. 31, such a request to a proposal which was afterwards approved
of by Pharaoh--he performed that change in such a manner as to bring it into a still
nearer relation to the promise, in which, not El, but Jehovah, is expressly mentioned
as He who promised; and indeed the matter proceeded from Jehovah, the God of Israel.
As, however, from the whole character of Jehoiakim, we cannot suppose that the twofold
naming proceeded from true piety, nothing is more natural <span class="pagenum">
[Pg 403]</span> than to account for it from an opposition to the prophets. The centre
of their announcements was formed by the impending calamity from the North, and
the decline of the Davidic family. The promise given to David shall indeed be fulfilled
in the Messiah; but not till after a previous deep abasement. Jehoiakim mocking
at these threatenings, means to transfer the salvation from the future into the
present. In his own name, and that of his son, he presented a standing protest to
the prophetic announcement; and this protest could not but call forth a counter-protest,
which we find expressed in the prophecy under consideration. The Prophet first overthrows
the false interpretation: Jehoiakim is not Jehoiakim, and Jehoiachin is not Jehoiachin,
chap. xxii.; he then restores the right interpretation: the true Jehoiakim is, and
remains, the Messiah, chap. xxiii. 5. As regards the first point, he. in the case
of Jehoiakim, contents himself with the <i>actual</i> contrast, and omits to substitute
a truly significant name for the usurped one, which may most easily be accounted
for from the circumstance, that he thought it to be unsuitable to exercise any kind
of wit, even holy wit, against the then reigning king. But the case is different
with regard to Jehoiachin. The first change of the name into Jeconiah has its cause
not in itself; the two names have quite the same meaning; it had respect to the
second change into Coniah only. In Jeconiah we have the Future; and this is put
first, in order that, by cutting off the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;</span>,
the sign of the Future, he might cut off hope; a Jeconiah without the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;</span> says only God establishes, but not that
He <i>will</i> establish. In reference to these names, <i>Grotius</i> came near
the truth; but he erred in the nearer determination, because he did not see the
true state of the matter; so that, according to him, it amounts to a mere play:
&quot;The Jod,&quot; he says, &quot;with which the name begins, is taken away, to intimate that
his head shall be diminished; and a Vav is added at the end as a sign of contempt,
<i>q.d.</i> that Coniah!&quot; <i>Lightfoot</i> comes nearer to the truth; yet even he
was not able to gain assent to it (compare against him <i>Hiller</i> and <i>Simonis</i>
who thought his views scarcely worth refuting), because he took an one-sided view.
He remarks (<i>Harmon.</i> p. 275): &quot;By taking away the first syllable, God intimated
that He would not establish to the progeny of Solomon the <span class="pagenum">
[Pg 404]</span> uninterrupted government and royal dignity, as Jehoiakim, by giving
that name to his son, seems to have expected.&quot; Besides these two, compare farther,
<i>Alting</i>, <i>de Cabbala sacra</i> § 73.</p>
<p class="normal">In conclusion, we must still direct attention to chap. xx. 3.
Who, indeed, could infer from that passage, that, by way of change, <i>Pashur</i>
was called also <i>Magor-Missabib</i>?</p>
<p class="normal">Chap. xxiii. 1. &quot;<i>Woe to shepherds that destroy and scatter
the sheep of my pasture, saith the Lord.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">It must be well observed that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1465;&#1506;&#1460;&#1497;&#1501;</span>
is here without the article, but, in ver. 2, with it. <i>Venema</i> remarks on this:
&quot;A general woe upon bad shepherds is premised, which is soon applied to the shepherds
of Judah, <i>q.d.</i>, since Jehovah has denounced a woe upon all bad shepherds,
therefore ye bad shepherds,&quot; &amp;c. By the &quot;shepherds,&quot; several interpreters would
understand only the false prophets and priests. Others would at least have them
thought of, along with the kings. This view has exercised an injurious influence
upon the understanding of the subsequent Messianic announcement, inasmuch as it
occasioned the introduction into it of features which are altogether foreign to
it. It is only when it is perceived, that the bad shepherds refer to the kings exclusively,
that it is seen that, in the description of the good Shepherd, that only is applicable
which has reference to Him as a King. But the very circumstance that, according
to a correct interpretation, nothing else is found in this description, is a sufficient
proof that, by the bad shepherds, the kings only can be understood. But all doubt
is removed when we consider the close connection of the verses under consideration
with chap. xxii. In commenting upon chap. iii. 15, we saw that, ordinarily, rulers
only are designated by the shepherds; compare, farther, chap. xxv. 34-36, and the
imitation and first interpretation of the passage under review by Ezekiel, in chap.
xxxiv. Ps. lxxviii. 70, 71: &quot;He chose David his servant, and took him from the sheep-folds.
He took him from behind the ewes to feed Jacob, His people, and Israel, His inheritance,&quot;
shows that a typical interpretation of the former circumstances of David lies at
the foundation of this <i>usus loquendi</i>; compare Ezek. xxxiv. 23, 24: &quot;And I
raise over them one Shepherd, and he feedeth them, my servant David; he shall feed
them, and he shall be <span class="pagenum">[Pg 405]</span> their shepherd.&quot;--What
is to be understood by the destroying and scattering, must be determined partly
from ver. 3 and vers. 13 ff. of the preceding chapter; partly from ver. 3 of the
chapter before us. The former passages show that the acts of violence of the kings,
their oppressions and extortions, come here into consideration (compare Ezek. xxxiv.
2, 3: &quot;Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! Should not the
shepherds feed the flocks? Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill
them that are fed, &amp;c., and with force and with cruelty ye rule them&quot;), while the
latter passage shows that it is chiefly the heaviest guilt of the kings which comes
into consideration, viz., all that by which they became the cause of the people&#39;s
being carried away into captivity. To this belonged, besides their foolish political
counsels, which were based upon ungodliness (comp. chap. x. 21), the negative (<i>Venema</i>:
&quot;It was their duty to take care that the true religion, the spiritual food of the
people, was rightly and properly exercised&quot;), and positive promotion of ungodliness,
and of immorality proceeding from it, by which the divine judgments were forcibly
drawn down. It is in this contrast of idea and reality (<i>Calvin</i>: &quot;It is a
contradiction that the shepherd should be a destroyer&quot;), that the woe has its foundation,
and that the more, that it is pointed out that the flock, which they destroy and
scatter, is <i>God&#39;s</i> flock. (<i>Calvin</i>: &quot;God intimates that, by the unworthy
scattering of the flock, an atrocious injury had been committed against himself&quot;)
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1488;&#1503; &#1502;&#1512;&#1506;&#1497;&#1514;&#1497;</span> must not be explained by: &quot;the
flock of my feeding,&quot; <i>i.e.</i>, which I feed. For, wherever
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1512;&#1506;&#1497;&#1514;</span> occurs by itself, it always has the
signification &quot;pasture,&quot; but never the signification <i>pastio</i>, <i>pastus</i>
commonly assigned to it. This signification, which is quite in agreement with the
form of the word, must therefore be retained in those passages also where it occurs
in connection with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1488;&#1503;</span>, when it always denotes
the relation of Israel to God. Israel is called the flock of God&#39;s pasture, because
He has given to them the fertile Canaan as their possession, compare my remarks
on Ps. lxxiv. 1. It is, at first sight, strange that a guilt of the rulers only
is spoken of, and not a guilt of the people; for every more searching consideration
shows that both are inseparable from one another; that bad rulers proceed from the
development of the nation, and are, at the same time, a punishment
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 406]</span> of its wickedness sent by God. But the fact
is easily accounted for, if only we keep in mind that the Prophet had here to do
with the kings only, and not with the people. To them it could not serve for an
excuse that their wickedness was naturally connected with that of the people. This
<i>natural</i> connection was not by any means a necessary one, as appears from
the example of a Josiah, in whose case it was broken through by divine grace. Nor
were they justified by the circumstance, that they were rods of chastisement in
the hand of God. To this the Prophet himself alludes, by substituting, in ver. 3:
&quot;I have driven away,&quot; for &quot;you have driven away,&quot; in ver. 2. All which they had
to do, was to attend to their vocation and duty; the carrying out of God&#39;s counsels
belonged to Him alone. From what we have remarked, it plainly follows that we would
altogether misunderstand the expression &quot;flock of my pasture,&quot; if we were to infer
from it a contrast of the <i>innocent</i> people with the guilty kings. <i>Calvin</i>
remarks: &quot;In short, when God calls the Jews the flock of His pasture, He has no
respect to their condition, or to what they have deserved, but rather commends His
grace which He has bestowed upon the seed of Abraham.&quot; The kings have nothing to
do with the moral condition of the people; they have to look only to God&#39;s covenant
with them, which is for them a source of obligations so much the greater and more
binding than the obligations of heathen kings, as Jehovah is more glorious than
Elohim. The moral condition of the people does, to a certain degree, not even concern
God; how bad soever it is, He looks to His covenant; and when more deeply viewed,
even the outward scattering of the flock is a gathering.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 2. &quot;<i>Therefore thus saith the Lord the God of Israel, against
the shepherds that feed my people: Ye have scattered my flock and driven them away,
and have not visited them; behold, I visit upon you the wickedness of your doings,
saith the Lord.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">In the designation of God as Jehovah the God of Israel, there
is already implied that which afterwards is expressly said. Because God is Jehovah,
the God of Israel, the crime of the kings is, at the same time, a <i>sacrilegium</i>;
they have desecrated God. It was just here that it was necessary prominently to
point out the fact, that the people still continued to <span class="pagenum">[Pg
407]</span> be God&#39;s people. In another very important aspect, they were indeed
called <i>Lo-Ammi</i> (Hos. i. 9); but that aspect did not here come into consideration.
<i>Calvin</i>: &quot;They had estranged themselves from God; and He too had, in His decree,
already renounced them. But, in one respect, God might consider them as aliens,
while, in respect to His covenant, He still acknowledged them as His, and hence
He calls them His people.&quot;--The words &quot;that feed my people,&quot; render the idea still
more prominent and emphatic than the simple &quot;the shepherds&quot; would have done, and
hence serve to make more glaring the contrast presented by the reality. The words
&quot;you have not visited them,&quot; seem, at first sight, since graver charges have been
mentioned before, to be feeble. But that which they did, appears in its whole heinousness
only by that which they did not, but which, according to their vocation, they ought
to have done. This reference to their destination imparts the greatest severity
to the apparently mild reproof Similar is Ezek. xxxiv. 3: &quot;Ye eat the fat, and ye
clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed, and ye feed not the flock.&quot;
The visiting forms the general foundation of every single activity of the shepherd,
so that the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488; &#1508;&#1511;&#1491;&#1514;&#1501;</span> comprehends within itself
all that which Ezekiel particularly mentions in chap. xxxiv. 4: &quot;The weak ye strengthen
not, and the sick ye heal not, and the wounded ye bind not up, and the scattered
ye bring not back, and the perishing ye seek not.&quot;--The words: &quot;the wickedness of
your doings,&quot; look back to Deut. xxviii. 20: &quot;The Lord shall send upon thee curse,
terror, and ruin in all thy undertakings, until thou be destroyed, and until thou
perish quickly, <i>because of the wickedness of thy doings</i>, that thou hast forsaken
me.&quot; The gentle allusion to that fearful threatening in that portion of the Pentateuch,
which was the best known of all, was sufficient to make every one supplement from
it that, which was there actually and expressly uttered. Such an allusion to that
passage of Deuteronomy can be traced out, wherever the phrase
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;&#1506; &#1502;&#1506;&#1500;&#1500;&#1497;&#1501;</span> occurs, which, in later times, had
become obsolete; compare chap. iv. 4 and xxi. 12 (in both of these passages
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1508;&#1504;&#1497;</span>, too, is introduced); Is. i. 16; Ps.
xxviii. 4; Hos. ix. 15.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 3. &quot;<i>And I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all
the countries whither I have driven them away, and I</i> <span class="pagenum">[Pg
408]</span> <i>bring them back again to their folds, and they are fruitful and increase.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Compare chap. xxix. 14, xxxi. 8, 10; Ezek. xxxiv. 12, 13: &quot;As
a shepherd looketh after his flock in the day that he is in the midst of his flock,
the scattered, so will I look after my flock, and I deliver them out of all the
places, where they have been scattered in the day of clouds and of darkness. And
I bring them out from the nations, and gather them from the countries, and bring
them to their land, and feed them upon the mountains of Israel, in the valleys,
and in all the dwelling places of the land.&quot;--A spiritless clinging to the letter
has, here too, led several interpreters to suppose, that the Prophet had here in
view merely the return from the Babylonish captivity, and perhaps, also, the blessings
of the times of the Maccabees, besides and in addition to it. Altogether apart from
the consideration that, in that case, the fulfilment would very little correspond
to the promise,--for, to the returning ones, Canaan was too little the land of God
to allow of our seeing, in this return, the whole fulfilment of God&#39;s promise--we
can, from the context, easily demonstrate the opposite. With the gathering and bringing
back appears, in ver. 4, closely connected the raising of the good shepherds; and
according to ver. 5, that promise is to find, if not its sole fulfilment, at all
events its substance and centre, in the raising of David&#39;s righteous Branch, the
Messiah. And from vers. 7, 8, it appears that it is here altogether inadmissible
to suppose that these events will take place, one after the other. The particle
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1499;&#1503;</span> with which these verses begin, and which
refers to the whole sum and substance of the preceding promises, shows that the
bringing back from the captivity, and the raising of the Messiah, cannot, by any
means, be separated from one another; and to the same result we are led by the contents
of the two verses also. How indeed could it be said of the bodily bringing back
from the captivity, that it would far outshine the former deliverance from Egypt,
and would cause it to be altogether forgotten? The correct view was stated as early
as by <i>Calvin</i>, who says: &quot;There is no doubt that the Prophet has in view,
in the first instance, the free return of the people; but Christ must not be separated
from this blessing of the deliverance, for, otherwise, it would be difficult to
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 409]</span> show the fulfilment of this prophecy.&quot; The
right of thus assuming a concurrent reference to Christ is afforded to us by the
circumstance, that Canaan had such a high value for Israel, not because it was its
fatherland in the lower sense, but because it was the land of God, the place where
His glory dwelt. From this it follows that a bodily return was to the covenant-people
of value, in so far only as God manifested himself as the God of the land. And since,
before Christ, this was done in a manner very imperfect, as compared with what was
implied in the idea, the value of such a return could not be otherwise than very
subordinate. And in like manner, it follows from it, that the gathering and bringing
back by Christ is included in the promise. For wherever God is, there is Canaan.
Whether it be the old fold, or a new one, is surely of very little consequence,
if only the good Shepherd be in the midst of His sheep. <i>As a rule</i>, such externalities
lie without the compass of prophecy, which, having in view the substance, refers,
as to the way of its manifestation, to history. Into what ridiculous assertions
a false clinging to the letter may lead, appears from remarks such as those of
<i>Grotius</i> on the second hemistich of the following verse: &quot;They shall live
in security under the powerful protection of the Persian kings.&quot;<!--inserted quote-->
Protection by the world, and oppression by the world, differed very slightly only,
in the case of the covenant-people. The circumstance that Gentiles ruled over them
at all, was just that which grieved them; and this grief must therefore continue
(compare Neh. ix. 36, 37), although, by the grace of God, a mild rule had taken
the place of the former severe one; for this grace of God had its proper value only
as a prophecy and pledge of a future greater one. The circumstance that it is to
the <i>remnant</i> only that the gathering is promised (compare Is. x. 22; Rom.
ix. 27), points to the truth, that the divine mercy will be accompanied with justice.
<i>Calvin</i> remarks on this point: &quot;The Prophet again confirms what I formerly
said, viz., mercy shall not be exercised until He has cleansed His Church of filthiness,
so great and so horrid, in which she at that time abounded.&quot; One must beware of
exchanging the Scriptural hope of a conversion of Israel on a large scale, in contrast
to the small <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#954;&#955;&#959;&#947;&#8053;</span> at the time of Christ and
the Apostles, for the hope of a <i>general</i> conversion in the strict sense.
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 410]</span> When considering the relation of God to the
free human nature, the latter is absolutely impossible. When consistently carried
out, it necessarily leads to the doctrine of universal restoration. It is beyond
doubt, that God <i>wills</i> that all men should be saved; and it would necessarily
follow that all men could be saved, if all the members of one nation could be saved.
There is no word of Scripture in favour of it, except the
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#8118;&#962;</span> in Paul, which must just be interpreted
and qualified by the contrast to the <i>small</i> <span lang="el" class="Greek">
&#7952;&#954;&#955;&#959;&#947;&#8053;</span>, while there are opposed to it a number of declarations of Scripture,--especially
all those passages of the prophets where, to the remnant, to the escaped ones of
Israel only, salvation is promised. And, besides the Word of God, there are opposed
to it His deeds also,--especially the great typical prefiguration of things spiritual
by things external at the deliverance of the people from Egypt, when the <i>remnant</i>
only came to Canaan, while the bodies of thousands fell in the wilderness; and no
less at the deliverance from Babylon, when by far the greatest number preferred
the temporary delight in sin to delight in the Lord in His land.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 4. &quot;<i>And I raise shepherds over them, and they feed them;
and they shall fear no more, nor be terrified, neither be lost, saith the Lord.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Even here, the reference to 2 Sam. vii. 12, and to the name of
Jehoiakim, is manifest, although, in the subsequent verse, it appears still more
distinctly, compare p. 401. This reference also is a proof in favour of this prophecy&#39;s
having been written under Jehoiakim. The reference was, at that time, easily understood
by every one; even the slightest allusion was sufficient. This reference farther
shows that <i>Venema</i>, and several others who preceded him in this view, are
wrong in here thinking of the Maccabees. These are here quite out of the question,
inasmuch as they were not descended from David. Besides the contrast between the
people&#39;s apostacy and God&#39;s covenant-faithfulness, the Prophet evidently has still
another in view, viz., that between the apostacy of the Davidic house, and God&#39;s
faithfulness in the fulfilment of the promise given to David. The single apostate
members of this family are destroyed, although, appropriating to themselves the
promise, they, in their names, promise deliverance and salvation to
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 411]</span> themselves. But from the family itself, God&#39;s
grace cannot depart; just because Jehovah is God, a true Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin
must rise out of it. It thus appears that the Maccabees are here as little referred
to as Ezra and Nehemiah, of whom <i>Grotius</i> thinks. Much stronger ground is
there for thinking of Zerubbabel, for his appearance had really some reference to
the promise to David, although as a weak type and prelude only of the true fulfilment,
to which he occupies the same relation, as does the gathering from the Babylonish
captivity to the gathering by Christ. If, after all, we wish to urge the Plural,
we must not, by any means, sever our verse from ver. 5, and declare this to be the
sense: <i>first</i> will I raise up to you shepherds; <i>then</i>, the Messiah.
We must, in that case, following <i>C. B. Michaelis</i>, rather supplement: specially
one, the Messiah. In <i>none</i> of Jeremiah&#39;s prophecies are there different stages
and degrees in the salvation; everywhere he has in his view the whole in its completion.
Where this is overlooked, the whole interpretation must necessarily take a wrong
direction, as is most clearly seen in the case of <i>Venema</i>. But there is no
reason at all for laying so much stress on the Plural. Every Plural may be used
for designating the idea of the whole species; and this kind of designation was
here so much the more obvious, that the bad species, with which the good is here
contrasted, consisted of a series of individuals. With the bad pastoral office,
the Prophet here <i>first</i> contrasts the good one; <i>then</i> he gives, in ver.
5, a more detailed description of the individual who is to represent the species,
in whom the idea of the species is to be completely realised. The correctness of
this interpretation is confirmed by the comparison of the parallel passage in chap.
xxxiii. 15, which, almost <i>verbatim</i>, agrees with that under consideration,
and in which only one descendant of David, viz., the Messiah, is spoken of And that
is quite natural; for, in that passage, there is no antithesis to the bad shepherds,
which was the cause that here, at first, the species was made prominent. And another
confirmation is afforded by Ezek. xxxiv. With him, too, one good shepherd is mentioned
in contrast with the bad shepherds.--The words: &quot;And they feed them&quot; stand in contrast
to &quot;Who feed my people,&quot; in ver. 2. The shepherds mentioned in ver. 2 ought to feed
the flock; but, instead of doing <span class="pagenum">[Pg 412]</span> that, they
feed themselves (compare Ezek. xxxiv. 2); the shepherds, however, mentioned in our
verse, really feed. The former are shepherds in name only, but, in reality, wolves;
the latter are shepherds, both in name and reality.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1511;&#1491;</span> must be taken in the signification &quot;to
be missing,&quot; &quot;lacking.&quot; (Compare the Remarks on chap. iii. 16.) There is an allusion
to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488; &#1508;&#1511;&#1491;&#1514;&#1501;</span> in ver. 2. Because the bad shepherd
does not visit, the sheep are not sought, <i>q.d.</i>, they are lost; but those
who did not visit, are now, in a very disagreeable manner, visited by God (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1511;&#1491;
&#1506;&#1500;&#1497;&#1499;&#1501;</span>); the good shepherd visits, and, therefore, the sheep need not be sought.
The clause: &quot;They shall fear no more, nor be terrified,&quot; receives its explanation
from Ezek. xxxiv. 8: &quot;Because my flock are a prey, and meat to every beast of the
field, because they have no shepherd, and because my shepherds do not concern themselves
with the flock.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 5. &quot;<i>Behold the days come, saith the Lord, and I raise
unto David a righteous Branch, and He ruleth as a King, and acteth wisely, and worketh
justice and righteousness in the land.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The expression: &quot;Behold the days come,&quot; according to the constant
<i>usus loquendi</i> of Jeremiah, does not designate a progress in time, in reference
to what precedes, but only directs attention to the greatness of that which is to
be announced. It contains, at the same time, an allusion to the contrast presented
by the visible state of things, which affords no ground for such a thing. How dark
soever the present state of things may be, the time is <i>still</i> coming; although
the heart may loudly say. <i>No</i>, the word of <i>God</i> must be more certain.
Concerning <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1502;&#1495;</span>, compare Isa. iv. 2, and the
passages of Zechariah there quoted, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span> stands
here in the same signification as in Zech. ix. 9,--different from that which it
has in Isa. liii. 11. In the latter passage, where the Servant of God is described
as the High Priest and sin-offering. His righteousness comes into consideration
as the fundamental condition of justification; here, where He appears as King only,--as
the cause of the diffusion of justice and righteousness in the land. That there
is implied in this a contrast to the former kings, was pointed out as early as by
<i>Abarbanel</i>: &quot;He shall not be an unrighteous seed, such as Jehoiakim and his
son, but a righteous <span class="pagenum">[Pg 413]</span> one.&quot; <i>Calvin</i> also
points out &quot;the obvious antithesis between Christ and so many false, and, as it
were, adulterous sons. For we know for certain that He alone was the righteous seed
of David; for although Hezekiah and Josiah were legitimate successors, yet, when
we look to others, they were, as it were, monsters. Except three or four, all the
rest were degenerate and covenant-breakers.&quot; The words: &quot;I raise unto David a righteous
Branch&quot; are here, as well as in chap. xxxiii. 15, not by any means equivalent to:
a righteous Branch of David. On the contrary, David is designated as he to whom
the act of raising belongs, for whose sake it is undertaken. God has promised to
him the eternal dominion of his house. How much soever, therefore, the members of
this family may sin against the Lord,--how unworthy soever the people may be to
be governed by a righteous Branch of David, God, as surely as He is God, must raise
Him for the sake of David. The word <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1462;&#1500;&#1462;&#1498;&#1456;</span>
must not be overlooked. It shows that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1464;&#1500;&#1463;&#1498;&#1456;</span>,
which, standing by itself, may designate also another government than by a king,
such as, <i>e.g.</i>, that of Zerubbabel, is to be taken in its full sense. And
this qualification was so much the more necessary, that the deepest abasement of
the house of David, announced by the Prophet in chap. xxii., compare especially
ver. 30, was approaching, and that thereby every hope of its rising to <i>complete</i>
prosperity seemed to be set aside. Since, therefore, the faith in this event rested
merely on the word, it was necessary that the word should be as distinct as possible,
in order that no one might pervert, or explain it away. <i>Calvin</i> remarks: &quot;He
shall rule as a King, <i>i.e.</i>, He shall rule gloriously; so that there do not
merely appear some relics of former glory, but that He flourish and be powerful
as a King, and attain to a perfection, such as existed under David and Solomon;
and even much more excellent.&quot;--As regards <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1513;&#1499;&#1497;&#1500;</span>,
we have already, in our remarks on chap. iii. 15, proved that it never and nowhere
means &quot;to prosper,&quot; &quot;to be prosperous,&quot; but always &quot;to act wisely.&quot; It has been
shown by <i>Calvin</i> that even the context here requires the latter signification.
He says: &quot;The Prophet seems here rather to speak of right judgment than of prosperity
and success; for we must read this in connexion with one another: He shall act wisely,
and then work justice and <span class="pagenum">[Pg 414]</span> righteousness. He
shall be endowed with the spirit of wisdom, as well as of justice and righteousness;
so that he shall perform all the offices and duties of a king.&quot; Yet <i>Calvin</i>
has not exhausted the arguments which may be derived from the context. The <i>whole</i>
verse before us treats of the endowments of the King; the whole succeeding one,
of the prosperity which, by these endowments, is imparted to the people. To this
may still be added the evident contrast to the folly of the former shepherds, which
was the consequence of their wickedness, and which, in the preceding chapter, had
been described as the cause of their own, and the people&#39;s destruction; compare
chap. x. 21: &quot;For the shepherds are become brutish, and do not seek the Lord; therefore
they do not act wisely, and their whole flock is scattered.&quot; But if here the signification
&quot;to act wisely&quot; be established, then it is also in all those passages where
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1513;&#1499;&#1497;&#1500;</span> is used of David; compare remarks on
chap. iii. For the fact, that the Prophet has in view these passages, and that,
according to him, the reign of David is, in a more glorious manner, to be revived
in his righteous Branch, appears from the circumstance that every thing else has
its foundation in the description of David&#39;s reign, in the books of Samuel. Thus
the words: &quot;And he ruleth as a king, and worketh justice and righteousness in the
land,&quot; refer back to 2 Sam. viii. 15: &quot;And David reigned over all Israel, and David
wrought justice and righteousness unto all his people.&quot; The foundation of the announcement
of ver. 6 is formed by 2 Sam. viii. 14 (compare ver. 6): &quot;And the Lord gave prosperity
(<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1497;&#1493;&#1513;&#1506;</span>) to David in all his ways.&quot; But if
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1513;&#1499;&#1497;&#1500;</span>, wherever it occurs of David, must be
taken in this sense, then the LXX. are right also in translating Is. lii. 13 by
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#963;&#965;&#957;&#8053;&#963;&#949;&#953;</span>: for, in that passage, just as in the
verse under consideration, David is referred to as the type of the Messiah. The
phrase <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1492; &#1502;&#1513;&#1508;&#1496; &#1493;&#1510;&#1491;&#1511;&#1492;</span> is by <i>De Wette</i>
commonly translated: &quot;to <i>exercise</i> justice and righteousness.&quot; But the circumstance
that, in Ps. cxlvi. 7, he is obliged to give up this translation, proves that it
is wrong. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1513;&#1492;</span> must rather be explained by
&quot;to work,&quot; &quot;to establish.&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1508;&#1496;</span> is here, as
everywhere else, the objective right and justice; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1510;&#1491;&#1511;&#1492;</span>, the subjective righteousness. The <i>working</i> of justice is the
means by which <i>righteousness</i> is wrought. The forced dominion of justice is
necessarily followed by the voluntary, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 415]</span> just
as the judgments of God, by means of which He is sanctified <i>upon</i> mankind,
are, at the same time, the means by which He is sanctified <i>in</i> them. The high
vocation of the King to work justice and righteousness rests upon His dignity, as
the bearer of God&#39;s image; comp. Ps. cxlvi. 7; chap. ix. 23: &quot;For I the Lord work
love, justice, and righteousness in the land.&quot; Chap. xxii. 15 is, moreover, to be
compared, where it is said of Josiah, the true descendant of David, &quot;he wrought
justice and righteousness,&quot; and chap. xxii. 3, where his spurious descendants are
admonished: &quot;Work justice and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the
hand of the oppressor, and do not oppress the stranger; the fatherless and the widow
do not wrong, neither shed innocent blood in this place.&quot; Farther, still, is the
progress to be observed: the King is righteous, his righteousness passeth over from
him to the subjects; then follows salvation and righteousness from the Lord.--To
explanations, such as that of <i>Grotius</i>, who, by the righteous Branch, understands
Zerubbabel, we here need the less to pay any attention, that the fact of his being
in this without predecessors or followers palpably proves it to be erroneous. If,
indeed, we could rely on <i>Theodoret&#39;s</i> statement (&quot;The blinded Jews endeavour,
with great impudence, to refer this to Zerubbabel&quot;--then follows the refutation),
the older Jews must have led the way to this perverted interpretation. But we cannot
implicitly rely on <i>Theodoret&#39;s</i> statements of this kind. In the Jewish writings
themselves, not the slightest trace of such an interpretation is to be found. The
Chaldean Paraphrast is decidedly in favour of the Messianic interpretation:
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514;&#1503; &#1488;&#1502;&#1512; &#1497;&#1497; &#1493;&#1488;&#1511;&#1497;&#1501; &#1492;&#1488; &#1497;&#1493;&#1502;&#1497;&#1488; &#1500;&#1491;&#1493;&#1491; &#1502;&#1513;&#1497;&#1495; &#1491;&#1510;&#1491;&#1511;&#1492;</span>
&quot;Behold the days shall come, and I will raise up to David the righteous Messiah,
(not <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1510;&#1491;&#1511;&#1497;&#1488;</span> &#39;the Messiah of the righteous,&#39;
as many absurdly read), saith the Lord.&quot; <i>Eusebius</i> (compare <i>Le Moyne</i>,
<i>de Jehova justitia nostra</i>, p. 23), it is true, refutes the interpretation
which refers it to Joshua, the son of Josedech; but we are not entitled to infer
from this circumstance, that this view found supporters in his time. His intention
is merely to guard against the erroneous interpretation of
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7992;&#969;&#963;&#949;&#948;&#8051;&#954;</span> of the following verse in the Alexandrian
version (<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#959;&#8166;&#964;&#959; &#964;&#8056; &#8004;&#957;&#959;&#956;&#945; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166;, &#8003; &#954;&#945;&#955;&#941;&#963;&#949;&#953; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056;&#957;
&#954;&#973;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#962;, &#7992;&#969;&#963;&#949;&#948;&#8051;&#954;</span>). It can scarcely be imagined that the translators themselves
proceeded from this erroneous view. For <span class="pagenum">[Pg 416]</span> Josedech,
the father of Joshua the high-priest, is a person altogether obscure. All which
they intended, by their retaining the Hebrew form, was certainly only the wish,
to express that it was a <i>nomen proprium</i> which occurred here; and they were
specially induced to act thus by the circumstance, that this name was, in their
time, generally current, as one of the proper names of the Messiah.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 6. &quot;<i>And in His days Judah is endowed with salvation, and
Israel dwelleth safely; and this is the name whereby they shall call him: The Lord
our righteousness.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">It has already been pointed out that the first words here look
back to David. That which Jeremiah here expresses by several words, Zechariah expresses
more briefly, by calling the Sprout of David <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;
&#1493;&#1504;&#1493;&#1513;&#1506;</span> &quot;righteous, and protected by God.&quot; It makes no difference that, in
that passage, the salvation, the inseparable concomitant of righteousness, is ascribed
to the King, its possessor; while, here, it is ascribed to the people. For, in that
passage, too, it is for his subjects that salvation is attributed to the King who
comes for Zion, just as he is righteous for Zion also. Israel must here be taken
either in the restricted sense, or in the widest, either as the ten tribes <i>alone</i>,
or as the ten tribes along with Judah. It is a favourite thought of Jeremiah, which
recurs in all his Messianic prophecies, that the ten tribes are to partake in the
future prosperity and salvation. He has a true tenderness for Israel; his bowels
roar when he remembers them, who were already, for so long a time, forsaken and
rejected. His lively hope for Israel is a great testimony of his lively faith. For,
in the case of Israel, the visible state of things afforded still less ground for
hope than in the case of Judah. There is here an allusion to Deut. xxxiii. 28: (&quot;And
He thrusteth out thine enemy from before thee, and saith: Destroy&quot;) &quot;And Israel
dwelleth in safety (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1497;&#1513;&#1499;&#1503; &#1497;&#1513;&#1512;&#1488;&#1500; &#1489;&#1496;&#1495;</span>), alone,
Jacob looketh upon a land of corn and wine, and his heavens drop dew.&quot; There can
be the less doubt of the existence of this allusion, that this expression occurs,
besides in Deuteronomy, and in the verse under consideration, only once more in
chap. xxxiii. 16,--that a reference to the majestic close of the blessing of Moses,
which certainly was in the hearts and mouths of all the pious, was very natural,
and that the word <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1493;&#1513;&#1506;</span> has there its analogy
in ver. 29: <span class="pagenum">[Pg 417]</span> &quot;Happy art thou, O Israel, who
is like unto thee, a people saved (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1465;&#1493;&#1513;&#1463;&#1473;&#1506;</span>)
by the Lord, the shield of thy help, thy proud sword; and thine enemies flatter
thee, and thou treadest upon their high places.&quot; This glorious destination of the
covenant-people, which, hitherto, had been so imperfectly only realized (most perfectly
under David, compare 2 Sam. viii. 6, 14), shall, under the reign of the Messiah,
be carried out in such a manner that idea and reality shall fully coincide. The
covenant-people is to appear in its full dignity.--In the second hemistich of the
verse, the reading requires first to be established. Instead of the reading
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1460;&#1511;&#1456;&#1512;&#1456;&#1488;&#1493;&#1465;</span> which is found in the text, and
which is the third pers. Sing. with the Suffix, several MSS. (compare <i>De Rossi</i>),
have the third pers. Plur. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1460;&#1511;&#1456;&#1512;&#1456;&#1488;&#1493;&#1468;</span>. Several
controversial writers, such as <i>Raim. Martini</i>, <i>Pug. Fid.</i> p. 517, and
<i>Galatinus</i>, iii. 9, p. 126, (The Jews of our time assert that here Jeremiah
did not say &quot;they shall call,&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1460;&#1511;&#1456;&#1512;&#1456;&#1488;&#1493;&#1468;</span>,
as we read it, but &quot;he shall call him,&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1460;&#1511;&#1456;&#1512;&#1456;&#1488;&#1493;&#1465;</span>;
and they declare this to be the sense: &quot;This is the name of Him who shall call him,
viz., the Messiah: Our righteous God,&quot;) declare the latter to be unconditionally
correct, and assert that the other had originated from an intentional Jewish corruption,
got up for the purpose of setting aside the divinity of the Messiah, which, to them,
was so offensive. This allegation, however, is certainly unfounded. It is true,
that some Jewish interpreters availed themselves of the reading
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1460;&#1511;&#1456;&#1512;&#1456;&#1488;&#1493;&#1465;</span> for the purpose stated. Thus <i>
Rabbi Saadias Haggaon</i>, according to <i>Abenezra</i> and <i>Manasseh Ben Israel</i>,
who explain: &quot;And this is the name by which the Lord will call him: Our righteousness.&quot;
But it by no means follows from this, that they invented the reading; it may have
existed, and they only connected their perversion with it. That the latter was indeed
the case, appears from the circumstance that by far the greater number of Jewish
interpreters and controversialists rejected this perversion, because it was in opposition
to the accents (compare especially <i>Abenezra</i> and <i>Norzi</i> on the passage),
and acknowledged <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492; &#1510;&#1491;&#1511;&#1504;&#1493;</span> to be the name
of the Messiah. The reading <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1460;&#1511;&#1456;&#1512;&#1456;&#1488;&#1493;&#1468;</span> must
be unconditionally rejected, because it has by far the smallest external authority
in its favour. It is true, that its supporters (comp. especially <i>Schulze</i>,
<i>vollst. Critik der gewöhnlichen</i> <span class="pagenum">[Pg 418]</span> <i>
Bibelausgaben</i>, S. 321) have endeavoured to make up for its deficiency in manuscript
authority, by appealing to the authority of the ancient translators, all of whom,
with the sole exception of the Alexandrian version, according to them, express it.
But this assertion is entirely without foundation. The <i>vocabunt eum</i> of <i>
Jonathan</i> and the Vulgate is the correct translation of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1460;&#1511;&#1456;&#1512;&#1456;&#1488;&#1493;&#1465;</span>. And when <i>Jerome</i>, in opposition
to the Alex., remarks that, according to the Hebrew, the translation ought to be:
<i>Nomen ejus vocabunt</i>, he does not contend against their use of the Singular
<i>per se</i>, but only against their arbitrarily supplying &quot;Jehovah&quot; as the subject;
against their explaining &quot;The Lord shall call,&quot; instead of &quot;one&quot; shall call. The
manner in which the false reading <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1460;&#1511;&#1456;&#1512;&#1456;&#1488;&#1493;&#1468;</span>
first arose, is clearly seen from the reasons by which its later defenders endeavour
to support it; compare especially <i>Schulze</i> l. c. The chief argument is the
erroneous supposition that the third Plur. only could be used impersonally. To this
was farther added the use of the rarer Suffix <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1465;</span>
instead of the common <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1470;&#1461;&#1492;&#1493;&#1468;</span>--But from internal
reasons, too, the reading <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1460;&#1511;&#1456;&#1512;&#1456;&#1488;&#1493;&#1468;</span> is objectionable;
the designation of the object of calling cannot be omitted.--There cannot be any
doubt that we are not allowed to refer the Suffix in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1460;&#1511;&#1456;&#1512;&#1456;&#1488;&#1493;&#1465;</span> to Israel, (<i>Ewald</i>: &quot;And this
is their name by which they call them,&quot;) but to the Messiah. For it is only in this
case, that those who call, viz., Judah or Israel, the Members of the Church, are
indirectly mentioned in the preceding words; and the Messiah is, in both verses,
the chief person to whom all the other clauses refer. At all events, the <i>then</i>
could not, in that case, have been omitted, as in this context every thing depends
upon the connection of the salvation with the person of the King; and this connection
must be clearly and distinctly expressed. We now come to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492; &#1510;&#1491;&#1511;&#1504;&#1493;</span>. Great difference of opinion prevails
as to the explanation of these words. The better portion of the Jewish interpreters,
indeed, likewise consider them as names of the Messiah, but not in such a manner
that He is called &quot;Jehovah,&quot; and then, in apposition to it, &quot;Our righteousness,&quot;
but rather in such a manner that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492; &#1510;&#1491;&#1511;&#1504;&#1493;</span>
is an abbreviation of the whole sentence. Thus the Chaldean, who thus paraphrases:
&quot;And this is the name by which they shall call him: Righteousness
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 419]</span> will be bestowed upon us from the face of
the Lord;&quot; <i>Kimchi</i>, &quot;Israel shall call the Messiah by this name: The Lord
our righteousness, because at His time, the righteousness of the Lord will be to
us firm, continuous, everlasting;&quot; the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1505;&#1508;&#1512; &#1506;&#1511;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501;</span>
(in <i>Le Moyne</i>, p. 20): &quot;Scripture calls the name of the Messiah: The Lord
our righteousness, because He is the Mediator of God, and we obtain the righteousness
of God by His ministry.&quot; Besides to chap. xxxiii. 16, they refer to passages such
as Exod. xvii. 15, where Moses calls the altar &quot;Jehovah my banner;&quot; to Gen. xxxiii.
20, where Jacob calls it <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500; &#1488;&#1500;&#1492;&#1497; &#1497;&#1513;&#1512;&#1488;&#1500;</span>. <i>
Grotius</i> follows these expositors, only that he dilutes the sense still more.
The other Christian expositors, (the Vulgate excludes every other interpretation,
even by its translation: <i>Dominus justus noster</i>) on the contrary, contend
with all their might for the opinion, that the Messiah is here called Jehovah, and
hence must be truly God. That which <i>Dassov</i> i. h. 1. remarks: &quot;Since then
the Messiah is called Jehovah, we have firm ground for inferring, that He is truly
God, inasmuch as that name is peculiar and essential to the true God,&quot; is the argument
common to all of them. <i>Le Moyne</i> wrote in defence of this explanation a whole
book, which we have already quoted, but from which little is to be learned. Even
<i>Calvin</i>, who elsewhere sometimes erred from an exaggerated dread of doctrinal
prejudice, decidedly adopts it. He remarks: &quot;Those who judge without prejudice and
bitterness, easily see that that name belongs to Christ, in so far as He is God,
just as the name of the Son of David is assigned to Him in reference to His human
nature. To all those who are just and unprejudiced, it will be clear that Christ
is here distinguished by a twofold attribute; so that the Prophet commends Him to
us, both as regards the glory of His deity, and his true human nature.&quot; By righteousness
he, too, understands justification through the merits of Christ, &quot;for Christ is
not righteous for himself, but received righteousness in order to communicate it
to us&quot; (1 Cor. i. 30). We have the following observations to make in reference to
this exposition. 1. The principal mistake in it is this, that it has been overlooked
that the Prophet here expresses the nature of the Messiah and of His time in the
form of a <i>nomen proprium</i>. If the words were thus: &quot;And this is Jehovah our
righteousness,&quot; we should be fully <span class="pagenum">[Pg 420]</span> entitled
to take Jehovah as a personal designation of the Messiah. But in reference to a
name, it is as common, as it is natural, to take from a whole sentence the principal
words only, and to leave it to the reader or hearer to supply the rest. In the case
of all <i>naming</i>, brevity is unavoidable, as is proved by the usual abbreviation
of even those proper names which consist of one word only. The two cases mentioned
by <i>Kimchi</i> will serve as instances. &quot;Jehovah my Banner&quot; is a concise expression
for: &quot;This altar is consecrated to Jehovah my Banner;&quot;
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500; &#1488;&#1500;&#1492;&#1497; &#1497;&#1513;&#1512;&#1488;&#1500;</span> for: &quot;This altar belongs to
the Almighty, the God of Israel.&quot; A number of other instances might easily be quoted;
one need only compare, in <i>Hiller&#39;s</i> and <i>Simonis&#39;</i> Onomastica, the names
which are compounded with Jehovah. Thus, <i>e.g.</i>, Jehoshua, <i>i.e.</i>, Jehovah
salvation, is a concise expression for: Jehovah will grant me salvation; Jehoram,
<i>i.e.</i>, <i>Jehovah altus</i>, for: I am consecrated to the exalted God of Israel.
Most perfectly analogous, however, is the name Zedekiah, <i>i.e.</i>, the righteousness
of the Lord, for: He under whose reign the Lord will grant righteousness to His
people. This name, moreover, seems to refer directly to the prophecy before us.
Just as Eliakim, by changing his name into Jehoiakim, intended to represent himself
as he in whom the prophecy in 2 Sam. vii. would be fulfilled; so he who was formerly
called Mattaniah changed, at the instance of Nebuchadnezzar (who had, indeed, no
other object in view than that, as a sign of his supremacy, his name should be different
from that by which he was formerly called, and who left the choice of the name to
Mattaniah himself), his name into Zedekiah, imagining that in a manner so easy,
he would become the Jehovah Zidkenu announced by Jeremiah, and longed for by the
people. 2. The preceding argument only showed that there is nothing opposed to the
exposition: He by whom and under whom Jehovah will be our righteousness. A positive
proof, however, in favour of it is offered by the parallel passage, chap. xxxiii.
15, 16: &quot;In those days and at that time will I cause a righteous Branch to grow
up unto David; and He worketh justice and righteousness in the land. In those days
shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely, and this is the name which
they shall give to <i>her</i>: Jehovah our righteousness.&quot; Here Jehovah Zidkenu
by no means <span class="pagenum">[Pg 421]</span> appears as the name of the Messiah,
but as that of Jerusalem in the Messianic time. In vain are all the attempts which
have been made to set aside this troublesome argument. They only serve to show,
that it cannot be invalidated. <i>Le Moyne</i>, &quot;in order that no way of escape
may be left to the enemies,&quot; brings forward, p. 298 ff., five different expedients
among which the reader may choose. But their very difference is a plain sign of
arbitrariness; and that appears still more clearly, when we begin to examine them
individually. Several interpreters assume an <i>enallage generis</i>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1492;</span> = <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1493;</span>,
&quot;and thus shall they call <i>him</i>.&quot; <i>Le Moyne</i> thinks that we need have
no difficulty in assuming such an <i>enallage</i>. Others explain: &quot;And he who shall
call, <i>i.e.</i>, invite her, is Jehovah our righteousness.&quot; A simple reference
to the passage before us is decisive against it; the parallelism of the two passages
is too close to admit of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1511;&#1512;&#1488;</span> in the second
passage being understood in a sense altogether different. By the same argument,
the explanations by <i>Hottinger</i> (Thesaur. Philolog. p. 17l), and <i>Dassov</i>:
&quot;This shall come to pass when the Lord, the Lord our righteousness, shall call her,&quot;
are also refuted, quite apart from the consideration, that
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1513;&#1512;</span> cannot by any means signify <i>when</i>.
The most recent defender of the old orthodox view, <i>Schmieder</i>, cuts the knot
by simply severing our passage from chap. xxxiii. 16&#8211;3. The ancient explanation,
which refers <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1491;&#1511;&#1504;&#1493;</span>, &quot;our righteousness,&quot; to
the remission of sins, does not even correctly understand this word. It is true
that the remission of sins is often represented as one of the chief blessings of
the Messianic time; but here it is out of place. According to the context, it is
actual justification, <i>i.e.</i>, salvation according to another mode of viewing
it, which is here spoken of (compare remarks on Mal. iii. 20). Righteousness in
this sense implies, of course, the forgiveness of sins; but, besides, the righteousness
of life is comprehended in it. Righteousness stands here in parallelism with salvation,
and the order and progress is this: righteousness of the king, righteousness of
the subjects, then salvation and righteousness as a reward from God, To this argument
may still be added the contrast to the former time. Connected with the unrighteousness
of the kings was that of the people; and hence it was that the country was deprived
of salvation, and smitten by the divine judgments. That <span class="pagenum">[Pg
422]</span> which Jeremiah comprehends in the name <i>Jehovah Zidkenu</i>, Ezekiel,
in the parallel passage, chap. xxxiv. 25-31, farther carries out and expands. The
Lord enters into a covenant of peace with them; rich blessing is bestowed upon them;
He breaks their yoke and delivers them from servitude; they do not become a prey
to the Gentiles.--<i>Schmieder</i> has objected, that the name would be without
meaning for the promised King, unless the name Jehovah belonged to him. But the
King, by being called <i>Jehovah Zidkenu</i>, is designated as the channel, through
which the divine blessings flow upon the Church, as the Mediator of Salvation, as
the Saviour. We must not, however, omit to remark that this ancient explanation
was wrong only in endeavouring to draw out from the word that which, no doubt, is
contained in the matter itself No one born of a woman is <i>righteous</i>, in the
full sense of the word; and if there be anything wanting in the personal righteousness
of the King, the working of justice and righteousness, too, will at once be deficient;
and salvation and righteousness are not granted in their full extent from above.
To no one among all the former kings did the attribute
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1510;&#1491;&#1497;&#1511;</span> belong in a higher degree than to David;
and yet in how imperfect a degree did even he possess it! The calamity which, by
this imperfection, was inflicted upon the people, is, <i>e.g.</i>, seen in the numbering
of the people. And it was not only the <i>will</i> to work justice and righteousness
which was imperfect, but the power also was imperfect, and the knowledge limited.
He only who truly rules as a king, and is truly wise (compare the words
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1493;&#1468;&#1502;&#1464;&#1500;&#1463;&#1498;&#1456; &#1502;&#1462;&#1500;&#1462;&#1498;&#1456; &#1493;&#1456;&#1492;&#1460;&#1513;&#1456;&#1474;&#1499;&#1460;&#1468;&#1497;&#1500;</span>) can come up
to, and realize the idea, after which David was striving in vain. All the three
offices of Christ, the royal no less than the prophetic and priestly, imply His
divinity; and the conviction that, in the way hitherto pursued, nothing was to be
effected; that it was only by the divine entering into the earthly, that such splendid
promises could be fulfilled,--this conviction surely must have been plain to a Jeremiah,
whose fundamental sentiment is, &quot;all flesh is grass,&quot; and who lived at a time which,
more than any other, was fitted to cure that Pelagianism which always seeks to gather
grapes from thorns. If then, farther, we keep in mind that Jeremiah had before him
the clear announcements of the former prophets, as regards the divinity of the Messiah
(compare <span class="pagenum">[Pg 423]</span> remarks on Mic. v. 1; Is. ix. 5),
we can account for the fact, that he does not expressly speak of it, only because
it was not suitable in this context, in which only the fact itself comes into consideration,
but not the particular way.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 7. &quot;<i>Wherefore, behold days come, saith the Lord, that
they shall no more say: As the Lord liveth who brought up the children of Israel
out of the land of Egypt</i>; ver. 8, but: <i>As the Lord liveth, who brought up,
and who led the seed of the house of Israel out of the North country, and from all
the countries whither I have driven them; and they dwell in their land.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The sense is this: The future prosperity and salvation shall by
far outshine the greatest deliverance and salvation of the Past. <i>Calvin</i> remarks:
&quot;If the first deliverance be valued by itself, it will be worthy of everlasting
remembrance; but if it be compared with the second deliverance, it will almost vanish;&quot;
compare, besides chap. xvi. 14, 15, where the verses now under consideration already
occurred almost <i>verbatim</i> (Jeremiah is fond of such repetitions, which are
any thing but vain repetitions; and this fondness forms one of his peculiarities);
chap. iii. 16, where, in the same sense, it is said of the Ark of the Covenant that
it shall be forgotten in future; Is. xliii. 18, 19, lxv. 17.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1495;&#1497;&#1470;&#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span>
&quot;living (is) Jehovah,&quot; for: &quot;As Jehovah liveth.&quot; It is quite natural that, when
God is invoked as a witness and judge, He should be designated as the <i>living
one</i>; and it is as natural that, on such an occasion, the greatest sign of life
which He gave should be pointed to. But that, under the Old Testament dispensation,
was the deliverance from Egypt, the strongest and most impressive of all those deeds
by which the delusion was dissipated, that God was walking upon the vault of heaven,
and did not judge through the clouds. In future, a still stronger manifestation
of life is to take place. Hence the formula of the oath is altogether general; the
deliverance from Egypt comes into consideration as a manifestation of life, and
not as an act of grace. This was overlooked by <i>Calvin</i> when he remarked: &quot;Whensoever
they saw themselves so oppressed, that they did not see any other end to their evils
than in the grace of God, they said that the same God, who, in former times, had
been the deliverer of His people, was still living, and His power undiminished.&quot;</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 424]</span></p>
<h3><a name="div2_424" href="#div2Ref_424">CHAP. XXXI. 31-40.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">The 30th and 31st chapters may rightly be called the grand hymn
of Israel&#39;s deliverance. They are connected into one whole, not only a material,
but also by a formal unity; so that we must indeed wonder at views such as those
of <i>Venema</i> and <i>Rosenmüller</i>, who assume that the section is composed
of fragments loosely connected, and written at different times; but still more at
the views of <i>Movers</i> and <i>Hitzig</i>, who assert that a whole number of
strange interpolations had been introduced into the text; compare <i>Küper</i>,
Jerem. S. 170 ff.</p>
<p class="normal">With respect to the time of the composition, we must not allow
ourselves to be deceived by the circumstance that, as a rule, Judah appears no less
that Israel, already far away from the land of the Lord, in captivity. The Prophet,
taking his stand in the time when the catastrophe has already taken place, speaks
from an ideal Present. The fact that the destruction of Jerusalem was indeed imminent,
and immediately in view, but had not yet taken place, becomes probable even from
the inscriptions in chap. xxxii. and xxxiii., according to which these two chapters,
which are so closely related to the two before us, belong to the tenth year of Zedekiah,
when Jerusalem was besieged by the Chaldeans. This is rendered certain by chap.
xxx. 5-7, where the final catastrophe upon the covenant-people, which belongs to
the time of Jeremiah, is represented as still impending. Hitherto the threatening
had prevailed in the predictions of the Prophet; but now, in the view of their fulfilment,
when the thunders of the judgment were already heard from the heavens, the promise
flows in full streams. The false prophets had prophesied prosperity and salvation,
at a time when, to the human eye, there was no. cause for fear; but Jeremiah just
steps forth to announce salvation, at a time when all human hope had vanished.</p>
<p class="normal">The Prophet begins, in chap. xxx., with the promise of salvation
for <i>all</i> Israel; and after a detailed description, he comprehends and sums
it up, in ver. 22, in the words, brief but infinitely rich and comprehensive: &quot;And
ye shall be my people <span class="pagenum">[Pg 425]</span> and I will be your God.&quot;<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_425a" href="#ftn_425a">[1]</a></sup>
The majestic close of the promise for the true Israel is, in vers. 23, 24, formed
by the threatening against those who are Israel in appearance only,--analogous to
the words of Isaiah: &quot;There is no peace to the wicked.&quot; Let them not, in their foolish
delusion, seize the promise for themselves. The time of the highest blessing for
the godly, and for those who are willing to become godly, the
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1495;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514; &#1492;&#1497;&#1502;&#1497;&#1501;</span>. will be for them, at the same
time, a time of the highest curse. The climax of the manifestation of grace has
the climax of the manifestation of justice as its inseparable companion. &quot;Behold
the storm of the Lord, glowing fire, goeth forth, a <i>continuing</i> storm, on
the head of the wicked it shall remain. The fierce anger of the Lord shall not return,
until He have done, and until He have performed the intents of His heart; at the
end of days ye shall consider it.&quot; Formerly, in chap. xxiii. 19, 20, in a threatening
prophecy which referred to the exile, the Prophet had uttered the same words. By
their verbal repetition, he intimates that the matter was not by any means settled
with the exile; that the latter must not be considered as the absolute and final
punishment for the sins of the whole nation, but that, as truly as God is Jehovah,
so surely His words will revive, as often as the circumstances again exist, to which
they originally referred.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 426]</span></p>
<p class="normal">The more specific the consolation is, the more impressive is it,
and the more does it reach the heart. After having announced salvation, therefore,
to <i>all</i> Israel, the Prophet now proceeds to the consolation for the two divisions
of Israel. He begins with Israel in the restricted sense--the ten tribes (chap.
xxxi. 1&#8211;22), and with them he continues longest, because, when looking to the outward
appearance, they seemed to be lost beyond all hope of recovery, to be for ever rejected
by the Lord. The thought, that we have here an original and independent announcement
of salvation for Israel, is set aside even by the relation of ver. 1 to ver. 22
of the preceding chapter. For it is to this verse that the Prophet immediately connects
his discourse; vers. 23 and 24 are only a parenthetical remark, an <i>Odi profanum
vulgus et arceo</i>, addressed to those to whom the promise did not belong. Upon
the words: &quot;You shall be my people, and I will be your God,&quot; follow in an inverted
order, the words: &quot;At that time, saith the Lord, I will (specially) be the God of
all the families of Israel, and they shall be my people.&quot; Rachel, the mother of
Joseph and Benjamin, weeping over her sons, vers. 15&#8211;17, is so much the more suited
to represent Israel, that the tribe of Benjamin also, as to its principal portion,
belonged to the kingdom of the ten tribes; compare my commentary on Ps. lxxx. Upon
Israel there follows, in vers. 23&#8211;26, Judah. The announcement closes in ver. 26
with the words so often misunderstood: &quot;Upon this I awaked, and I beheld, and my
sleep was sweet unto me.&quot; The Prophet has lost sight of the Present; like a sleeping
man, he is not susceptible of its impressions, compare remarks on Zech. iv. 1. Then
he awakes for a moment from his sweet dream (an allusion to Prov. iii. 24), which,
however, is not, like ordinary dreams, without foundation. He looks around; every
thing is dark, dreary, and cold; nowhere is there consolation for the weary soul.
&quot;Ah,&quot; he exclaims, &quot;I have sweetly dreamed,&quot;--and immediately the hand of the Lord
again seizes him, and carries him away from the scenes of the Present.</p>
<p class="normal">There is not by any means a different salvation destined for Israel
and Judah; it is one salvation to be partaken of by both, who are in future to be
re-united into one covenant-people, into a nation of brethren. From the parts, therefore,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 427]</span> the description returns, in vers. 27&#8211;40, to
the whole from which it had proceeded, and is thus completely rounded off, especially
by the circumstance that, just in this close, there is contained the crown of the
promises, the substance and centre of the declaration recurring here in ver. 33:
&quot;And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The whole description in both chapters is Messianic; and after
what we have already had frequent occasion to remark, no farther proof is necessary
to show how inadmissible is a proceeding like that of <i>Venema</i>, who cuts it
all up into small pieces, and here assumes an exclusive reference to the return
from the captivity; there, to the Maccabees, whom he almost raises to Saviours;
in another place, to Christ and His Kingdom. We ought therefore, indeed, to give
an exposition of the whole section; but, for external reasons, we are obliged to
limit ourselves to an exposition of the principal portion, chap. xxxi. 31&#8211;40.</p>
<p class="normal">It is chap. xxxi. 22 only which we shall briefly explain, because
that passage was, in former times, understood by many interpreters to contain a
personal Messianic prophecy. &quot;<i>How long wilt thou turn aside, O thou apostate
daughter? for the Lord createth a new thing in the land, woman shall compass about
man.</i>&quot; The last words of the verse are, by the ancient interpreters, commonly
explained as referring to Christ&#39;s birth by a virgin. Thus, <i>e.g.</i>, <i>Cocceius</i>:
&quot;It could not be said more distinctly, at least not without ceasing to be enigmatical,
unless he had said that a virgin has born Christ the Son of God.&quot; But quite apart
from other arguments, this explanation is opposed by the obvious consideration,
in that case, just that would here be stated which, in the birth of Christ by a
virgin, is <i>not</i> peculiar. For <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1489;&#1512;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1511;&#1489;&#1492;</span> are a designation of the sex; the fact
that the woman brings forth the man (since <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1489;&#1512;</span>
is asserted to designate <i>proles mascula</i>), is something altogether common;
but the important feature is wanting, that the woman is to be a virgin, and the
man, the Son of God. But certainly not a whit better than this explanation is that
which modern interpreters (<i>Schnurrer</i>, <i>Gesenius</i>, <i>Rosenmüller</i>,
<i>Maurer</i>), have advanced in its stead: &quot;The woman shall protect the man, shall
perform for him the <i>munus excubitoris circumeuntis</i>.&quot; This, surely, is a &quot;<i>ridiculus</i>
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 428]</span> <i>mus</i>&quot;--an argument quite unique. We
must fully agree with <i>Schnurrer</i>, who remarks: &quot;This, surely, is something
new, uncommon, unheard of;&quot; but not every thing <i>new</i> is, for that reason,
suitable for furnishing an effectual motive for conversion. The sense at which
<i>Ewald</i> arrives: &quot;A woman transforming herself into a man,&quot; is surely not worthy
of being entertained at the expense of a change in the reading. The correct view
is the following:--The Prophet founds his exhortation to return to the Lord upon
the most effectual argument possible, viz., upon the fact that the Lord was to return
to them, that the time of wrath was now over, that they might hasten back into the
open arms of God&#39;s love. Without hope of mercy, there cannot be a conversion. The
perverse and desponding heart of man must, by His preventing love, be allured to
come to God. How important and valuable the &quot;new thing&quot; is which the Lord is to
create, the Prophet shows by the terms which he has selected. It is just the <i>
nomina sexus</i> which here are suitable; the omission of the article also is intentional.
The relation is represented in its general aspect; and thereby the look is more
steadily directed to its fundamental nature and substance. &quot;Woman shall compass
about (Ps. xxxii. 7, 10) man;&quot; the strong will again take the weak and tender into
His intimate communion, under His protection and loving care. The woman art thou,
O Israel, who hitherto hast sufficiently experienced, what a woman is without the
man, how she is a reed exposed to, and a sport of, all winds. The man is the Lord.
How foolish would it be on thy part, if thou wert to persevere any longer in thine
independence and dissoluteness, and if thou didst refuse to return into the sweet
relation of dependence and unconditional surrefender, which alone, being the only
natural relation, can be productive of happiness! In favour of this explanation
is also the clear reference of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1505;&#1493;&#1489;&#1489;</span> to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1514;&#1495;&#1502;&#1511;&#1497;&#1503;</span>, and to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1513;&#1493;&#1489;&#1489;&#1492;</span>, which, in the case of the latter word,
is even outwardly expressed by the alliteration. How foolish would it be still farther
to <i>depart</i>, as now the time is at hand when the Lord is approaching.--It is
obvious that, even according to our interpretation, the prophecy retains its Messianic
character.</p>
<p class="continue"><span class="pagenum">[Pg 429]</span></p>
<p class="normal">The contents of the section, vers. 31&#8211;40, are as follows:--The
Lord is far from punishing with entire rejection the contempt of His former gifts
and blessings. On the contrary, by increased grace, He will renew the bond between
Him and the people, and render it for ever indissoluble. The foundation of this
is formed by the remission of sins, of which the richer outpouring of the Spirit
is a consequence; and it is now, when the Law no more comes to Israel as an outward
letter, but is written in their hearts, that Israel attain their destination; they
will truly be the people of God, and God will be truly their God, vers. 31&#8211;34. To
the people conscious of their guilt, and still groaning under the judgments of God,
such a manifestation of God&#39;s continuous grace appears incredible; but God most
emphatically assures them, that this election is still in force, and must continue
for ever, as truly as He is God, vers. 31&#8211;37. The city of God shall gloriously arise
out of its ashes. While formerly the unholy abomination entered into her, the holy
one, even into her innermost parts, she <i>now</i> shall extend her boundaries beyond
the territory of the unholy; and the Lord, who is sanctified <i>within</i> her,
will sanctify himself <i>upon</i> her also. There shall be no more destruction.</p>
<hr class="W20">
<p class="normal">Ver. 31. &quot;<i>Behold, days come, saith the Lord, and I make a new
covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 32. &quot;<i>Not as the covenant that I made with their fathers,
in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt,
which my covenant they brake; but I marry them to me, saith the Lord.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The first question which we have here to examine is: What is to
be understood by the making of a covenant? We cannot here think of a formal transaction,
of a mutual contract, such as the covenant made on Sinai. This appears from ver.
32, according to which the old covenant was concluded on the day when the Lord took
Israel by the hand, in order to bring them out of Egypt; but at that time a covenant-transaction
proper was not yet mentioned. Most interpreters erroneously suppose that by the
words: &quot;In the day,&quot; &amp;c., the abode at Sinai is <span class="pagenum">[Pg 430]</span>
designated. But since the <i>day</i> of the deliverance from Egypt is commonly thus
spoken of (comp. Exod. xii. 51 ff.); since this <i>day</i> was, as such, marked
out by the annually returning feast of the Passover, we must, here also, take
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1493;&#1501;</span>, &quot;day,&quot; in its proper sense. And there
is the less reason for abandoning this most obvious sense that, in Exod. vi. 4;
Ezek. xvi. 8; Hag. ii. 5, a covenant with Israel is spoken of, which was not first
concluded on Sinai, but was already concluded when they went out from Egypt. <i>
Farther</i>--No obligation is spoken of in reference to the new covenant; blessing
and gifts are mentioned, and nothing but these. But are we to adopt the opinion
of <i>Frischmuth</i> (<i>de foedere nov.</i> in the <i>Thes. Ant.</i> i. p. 857),
and of many other interpreters and lexicographers, and say that
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514;</span> &quot;does not only signify a covenant entered
upon by two or several parties, but also <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#961;&#8057;&#952;&#949;&#963;&#953;&#957;</span>,
<i>propositum Dei</i>, <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#960;&#945;&#947;&#947;&#949;&#955;&#8055;&#945;&#962;</span>, His gratuitous
and unconditional promises, as well as His constant ordinances?&quot; That might after
all be objectionable. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1512;&#1514; &#1489;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514;</span> cannot <i>signify</i>
any thing but to make a covenant.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_430a" href="#ftn_430a">[2]</a></sup>
But the question is, whether the making of a covenant cannot be spoken of in passages,
where there is no mention of transactions of a mutual agreement between two parties.
The substance of the covenant evidently precedes the outward conclusion of the covenant,
and forms the foundation of it. The conclusion of the covenant does not first form
the relation, but is merely a solemn acknowledgment of the relation already existing.
Thus it is ever in human relations; the contract, as a rule, only fixes and settles
outwardly, a relation already existing. And that is still more the case in the relation
between God and man. By every benefit from God, an obligation is imposed upon him
who receives it, whether it may, in express words, have been stated by God, and
have been outwardly acknowledged by the recipient or not. This is clearly seen in
the case under consideration. At the giving of the Law on Sinai, the obligatory
power of the commandments of <span class="pagenum">[Pg 431]</span> God is founded
upon the fact, that God brought Israel out of the land of Egypt, the house of bondage.
Hence, it appears that the Sinaitic covenant existed, in substance, from the moment
that the Lord led Israel out of Egypt. By apostatizing from the Lord, the people
would have broken the covenant, even if it had not been solemnly confirmed on Sinai;
just as their apostacy, in the time between their going out and the transactions
on Sinai, was treated as a violation of the covenant. It would have been a breach
of the covenant, if the people had answered, in the negative, the solemn questions
of God, whether they would enter into a covenant with Him. This appears so much
the more clearly, when we keep in mind, that the New Covenant was not at all sanctioned
by such an external solemn act. But if, nevertheless, it is a covenant in the strictest
sense; if, here, the relation is independent upon its acknowledgment,--then, under
the Old Testament too, this acknowledgment must be a secondary element. The same
is the case with all the other passages commonly quoted in proof, that
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1512;&#1514; &#1489;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514;</span> may also be used of mere blessings
and promises. Thus, <i>e.g.</i>, Gen. ix. 9: &quot;Behold, I establish my covenant with
you, and with your seed after you.&quot; That which is here designated as a covenant
is not the promise <i>per se</i>, that in future the course of nature should, on
the whole, remain undisturbed, but in so far only, as it imposes upon them who receive
it, the obligation to glorify, by their walk, the Lord of the order of nature. In
part, this obligation is afterwards outwardly fixed in the commandments concerning
murder, eating of blood, &amp;c. Gen. xv. 18: &quot;In the same day God made a covenant with
Abraham, saying: Unto thy seed I give this land.&quot; In what precedes, a promise only
is contained; but this promise itself is, at the same time, an obligation; and this
obligation existed even then, although it was at a later period only, solemnly undertaken
by receiving the sign of the covenant, circumcision. Exod. xxxiv. 10: &quot;And He said:
Behold I make a covenant; before all thy people I will do marvels such as have not
been done in all the earth, nor in any nation; and all the people among whom thou
art, shall see the work of the Lord; for it is a terrible thing that I will do with
thee.&quot; The covenant on Sinai is here already made; the making of the new covenant
here spoken of consists <span class="pagenum">[Pg 432]</span> in the mercies by
which God will manifest himself to His people as their God. Every one of these mercies
involves a new obligation for the people; every one is a question in deeds: This
I do to thee, what doest thou to me?--It will now be possible to determine in what
sense the Old Covenant is here contrasted with the New, The point in question cannot
be a new and more perfect revelation of the Law of God; for that is common to both
the dispensations. No jot or tittle of it can be lost under the New Testament, and
as little can a jot or tittle be added. God&#39;s law is based on His nature, and that
is eternal and unchangeable, compare Mal. iii. 22 (iv. 4). The revelation of the
Law does not belong to the going out from Egypt, to which the making of the former
covenant is here attributed, but to Sinai. As little can the discourse be of the
introduction of an entirely new relation, which is not founded at all upon the former
one. On this subject, <i>David Kimchi&#39;s</i> remark is quite pertinent: &quot;It will
not be the newness of the covenant, but its stability.&quot; The covenant with Israel
is an everlasting covenant. Jehovah would not be Jehovah, if an entirely new commencement
could take place; <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#955;&#941;&#947;&#969; &#948;&#949;</span>--so the Apostle writes
in Rom. xv. 8--<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7992;&#951;&#963;&#959;&#8166;&#957; &#935;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#8056;&#957; &#948;&#953;&#940;&#954;&#959;&#957;&#959;&#957; &#947;&#949;&#947;&#949;&#957;&#8134;&#963;&#952;&#945;&#953;
&#960;&#949;&#961;&#953;&#964;&#959;&#956;&#8134;&#962; &#8017;&#960;&#8050;&#961; &#7936;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#949;&#943;&#945;&#962; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#964;&#8056; &#946;&#949;&#946;&#945;&#953;&#8182;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#964;&#8048;&#962; &#7952;&#960;&#945;&#947;&#947;&#949;&#955;&#943;&#945;&#962; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#960;&#945;&#964;&#941;&#961;&#969;&#957;&#903; &#964;&#8048; &#948;&#949;
&#7956;&#952;&#957;&#951; &#8017;&#960;&#8050;&#961; &#7952;&#955;&#941;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#948;&#959;&#958;&#940;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#952;&#949;&#972;&#957;</span>. The sending of Christ with His gifts and
blessings, the making of the New Covenant, is thus the consequence of the covenant-faithfulness
of God. If then the Old and New Covenants are here contrasted, the former cannot
designate the relation of God to Israel <i>per se</i>, and in its whole extent,
but it must rather designate the former mode only, in which this relation was manifested,--that
whereby the Lord had, up to the time of the Prophet, manifested himself as the God
of Israel. With this former imperfect form, the future more perfect form is here
contrasted, under the name of the New Covenant. The New Covenant which is to take
the place of the Old, when looking to the form (comp. Heb. viii. 13:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7952;&#957; &#964;&#8183; &#955;&#941;&#947;&#949;&#953;&#957;&#903; &#922;&#945;&#953;&#957;&#8052;&#957;, &#960;&#949;&#960;&#945;&#955;&#945;&#943;&#969;&#954;&#949; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#974;&#964;&#951;&#957;· &#964;&#8056; &#948;&#8050;
&#960;&#945;&#955;&#945;&#953;&#959;&#973;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#947;&#951;&#961;&#940;&#963;&#954;&#959;&#957;, &#7952;&#947;&#947;&#8058;&#962; &#7936;&#966;&#945;&#957;&#953;&#963;&#956;&#959;&#8166;</span>), is, in substance, the realization
of the Old. These remarks are in perfect harmony with that which was formerly said
concerning the meaning of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1512;&#1514; &#1489;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514;</span>. We saw
that this expression does not designate an act only once done,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 433]</span> by which a covenant is solemnly sanctioned,
but rather that it is used of every action, by which a covenant-relation is instituted
or confirmed.--If, then, the Old Covenant is the former form of the covenant with
Israel; and the New Covenant the future form of it, another question is:--Which
among the manifold differences of those two forms are here specially regarded by
the Prophet? The answer to this question is supplied by that which the Prophet declares
concerning the New Covenant. For since it is <i>not</i> to be like the former covenant,
the excellences of the New must be as many defects of the Old. These excellences,
however, are all of a spiritual nature,--first, the forgiveness of sins, and then
the writing of the Law in the heart. It follows from this, that the blessings of
the Old Covenant were <i>pre-eminently</i> (for we shall afterwards see that an
entire absence of these spiritual blessings cannot be spoken of, and that the difference
between the Old and the New Covenant is, in this respect, a relative one only, not
an absolute one) of an external nature; and this is also suggested by the circumstance,
that it is represented as being concluded when the people were led out of Egypt;
in which fact, all the later similar deliverances and blessings are comprehended.
The Prophet, if any one, had learned that, in the way hitherto pursued, they could
not successfully continue. The sinfulness of the people had, at his time, manifested
itself in such fearful outbreaks, that, even when looking at the matter from a human
point of view, he could not but feel most deeply that, with outward blessings and
gifts, with an outward deliverance from servitude, the people were very little benefited.
What is the use of a mercy which, according to divine necessity, must be immediately
followed by a punishment so much the more severe? The necessary condition for the
true and lasting bestowal of outward salvation, is the bestowal of the internal
salvation; without the latter the former is only a mockery. It is this internal
salvation, therefore, which is the highest aim of the Prophet&#39;s longings; to it
he here points as the highest blessing of the Future; compare also chap. xxxii.
40: &quot;And I make an everlasting covenant with them, and I will no more turn away
from them to do them good, and I will put my fear in their hearts that they shall
not depart from me.&quot;--The closing words of ver. 32 are frequently misunderstood.
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 434]</span> The erroneous interpretation of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1513;&#1512;</span> by &quot;<i>quia</i>,&quot; which is found with
most expositors, is of less consequence. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1513;&#1512;</span>
indicates, in general, the connection with what precedes. We may explain it either
by: &quot;which my covenant they brake,&quot; as is done by <i>Ewald</i>; or, &quot;since (Deut.
iii. 24) they brake my covenant,&quot; in which latter case,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1513;&#1512;</span> refers at the same time to &quot;I marry them
unto me.&quot; We have here farther carried out and detailed that which previously was
said of the making of a new covenant; and the sense is: Although they have broken
my former covenant, yet I marry them unto me, or make a new covenant with them.
Of greater importance is the difference in the interpretation of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;&#1514;&#1497;</span>. By far the greater number of interpreters
understand this <i>sensu malo</i>; the ancient interpreters in doing so refer to
the words <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#8115;&#947;&#8060; &#7968;&#956;&#941;&#955;&#951;&#963;&#945; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8182;&#957;</span>, (Heb. viii. 9);
but these can scarcely prove anything. For the author of that epistle, whose sole
object it is to show that the new covenant stands higher than the old--the insufficiency
of the latter was, as the Prophet&#39;s expressions show, sufficiently felt even by
those who lived under it--has, in these words, which do not stand in any relation
to the object which he has in view, followed the LXX. But it is a rather doubtful
and suspicious circumstance that, in determining the sense, these interpreters greatly
vary. Some, referring to the Arabic, explain <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span>
by &quot;<i>fastidire</i>;&quot; others, as they allege, from the Hebrew <i>usus loquendi</i>,
by &quot;to tyrannize.&quot; Thus, <i>e.g.</i> <i>Buddeus</i> (<i>de praerogat. fidelium N.
T.</i> in the Miscell. p. 106): &quot;We may readily understand thereby every severe
chastisement by the neighbouring nations, such as frequently happened: they did
not remain in my covenant, therefore I made them to bear the yoke of others,
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7968;&#956;&#941;&#955;&#951;&#963;&#945; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8182;&#957;</span>, <i>neglexi eos</i>.&quot; But we
have already seen (comp. remarks on chap. iii. 14), that for neither of these significations
is there any foundation; and this has been felt by those also who, in order to bring
out a bad signification, such as, according to their view, the text requires, undertook
to change the reading, as <i>e.g.</i> <i>Cappellus</i>, who would read
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1506;&#1500;&#1514;&#1497;</span>, and <i>Grotius</i>, who would read
<span dir="ltr"><sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_434a" href="#ftn_434a">[3]</a></sup></span>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew" dir="rtl">&#1489;&#1492;&#1500;&#1514;&#1497;</span>.
The signification &quot;to betroth onesself,&quot; &quot;to <span class="pagenum">[Pg 435]</span>
take in marriage,&quot; which in that passage we vindicated for
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span> with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;</span>,
is, here too, quite applicable; comp. Jer. ii. 1. This signification the Chaldee
Paraphrast too seems to have had in view; for he translates
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1514;&#1512;&#1506;&#1497;&#1514;&#1497;</span> &quot;<i>cupio vos</i>,&quot; &quot;<i>delector vobis</i>.&quot;
And is there anything to indicate, that here the reason is to be stated, why the
old covenant is abolished? That reason can be brought in only by very forced explanations
(comp. <i>e.g.</i> <i>Maurer</i> and <i>Hitzig</i>); and it is, moreover, sufficiently
expressed, as the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews has shown. Even in the announcement
of a <i>new</i> covenant, the declaration is implied that the old covenant was insufficient:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#949;&#7984; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#7969; &#960;&#961;&#974;&#964;&#951; &#7952;&#954;&#949;&#943;&#957;&#951; &#7974;&#957; &#7940;&#956;&#949;&#956;&#960;&#964;&#959;&#962;, &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7938;&#957; &#948;&#949;&#965;&#964;&#941;&#961;&#945;&#962;
&#7952;&#950;&#951;&#964;&#949;&#8150;&#964;&#959; &#964;&#972;&#960;&#959;&#962;</span> (Heb. viii. 7), as well as the reason why it was so, viz.,
on account of human sinfulness and hardness of heart, which are not helped and remedied
by pre-eminently outward blessings and benefits, be they never so great. This their
former greatness is indicated by the words: &quot;When I took them by the hand,&quot;--words
which imply the most tender love. To this subjective cause of the insufficiency
of the old covenant there is a reference in the words:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#949;&#956;&#966;&#972;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8150;&#962; &#955;&#941;&#947;&#949;&#953;</span>, in Heb. viii.
8, which by <i>De Wette</i> and <i>Bleek</i> are erroneously translated: &quot;For reprovingly
He says to them.&quot; The Dative <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8150;&#962;</span> belongs
to <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#956;&#949;&#956;&#966;&#972;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#962;</span> (comp. <i>Mathiae</i>, S. 705);
if it were otherwise it would be redundant, and would the less be in its place,
that the discourse is not addressed to the children of Israel. The reason why a
better covenant was required, such a one <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7973;&#964;&#953;&#962; &#7952;&#960;&#8054;
&#954;&#961;&#949;&#943;&#964;&#964;&#959;&#963;&#953;&#957; &#7952;&#960;&#945;&#947;&#947;&#949;&#955;&#943;&#945;&#953;&#962; &#957;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#956;&#959;&#952;&#941;&#964;&#951;&#964;&#945;&#953;</span>, Heb. viii. 6, appears sufficiently
from that which, in vers. 33, 34, is said of this new covenant in contrast to the
old. Here, however, it is rather the infinite love of God, the greatness of His
covenant-faithfulness which are pointed out; and this thought is, from among all
others, best suited to the context. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1502;&#1492;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1504;&#1499;&#1497;</span> form an emphatic contrast. <i>They</i>,
in wicked ingratitude, have broken the former covenant, have shaken off the obligations
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 436]</span> which God&#39;s former mercies imposed upon them.
God too--so it might be expected--ought now to annul the old covenant, and for ever
withdraw from them the old mercies. But, instead of doing so, He grants the new
covenant, the greater mercy. He anew takes in marriage apostate Israel, and in such
a manner that now the bond of love becomes firm and indestructible. <i>Bleek</i>
objects to our interpretation: &quot;The object is not the city of Jerusalem, or even
the Congregation of Israel, but the single Israelites, who may indeed be designated
as the children of Jehovah, but not as His spouse.&quot; But, in such personifications,
it is quite a common thing that the real plurality should take the place of the
ideal unity. In Exod. xxxiv. 15, for instance, it is said: &quot;And they go a whoring
after their gods,&quot;--instead of the congregation, to which the <i>whoring</i> properly
belongs, (comp. Is. lvii. 7), the individual members are mentioned; comp. Hos. ii.
1, 2 (i. 10, ii. 19).</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 33. &quot;<i>For this is the covenant that I will make with the
house of Israel after these days, saith the Lord: I give my law in their inward
parts, and will write it in their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall
be my people.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal"><span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span> is, by some interpreters,
here supposed to mean &quot;but;&quot; so much, only, however, is correct that &quot;but&quot; might
<i>also</i> have been put; <i>for</i> is here quite in its place. The words: &quot;Not
as the covenant,&quot; &amp;c., in the preceding verse, are here vindicated, and expanded
by a positive definition of the nature and substance of the New Covenant. It is
just because it is of such a nature, that it is not like the former covenant.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1492;&#1501;</span> does not, by any means, as is erroneously
supposed by <i>Venema</i> and <i>Hitzig</i>, refer to the days mentioned in ver.
31, in which the New Covenant was to be made. &quot;These days,&quot; on the contrary, are
a designation of the Present; &quot;after these days,&quot; equivalent to
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1488;&#1495;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514; &#1492;&#1497;&#1502;&#1497;&#1501;</span> &quot;at the end of days.&quot; The Prophet
so repeatedly and emphatically points to the Future, because unbelief and weak faith
imagined that, with the Present, the history of the covenant-people was finished,
and that no Future was in store for them. <i>Calvin</i> pertinently remarks: &quot;It
is just as if the Prophet had said, that the grace of which he was prophesying could
not be apprehended, unless they, believers, kept their minds composed, and patiently
waited until the <span class="pagenum">[Pg 437]</span> time of the promised salvation
had come.&quot; As regards the following enumeration of the blessings, in and by the
bestowal of which the new covenant-relation is to be established, <i>Venema</i>
very correctly remarks: &quot;The blessings are distinguished into radical or causal
ones, and subsequent or derived ones.&quot; The second <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1499;&#1497;</span>, in ver. 34: &quot;<i>For</i> I will forgive their sin,&quot; proves the correctness
of this division, which is also pointed out by the <i>Athnach</i>.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1493;&#1512;&#1492;</span>
is, by many interpreters, here understood to signify &quot;doctrine.&quot; Thus <i>Buddeus</i>:
&quot;By the word <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1493;&#1512;&#1492;</span>, the whole New Testament
doctrine is to be understood.&quot; This interpretation, however, is objectionable, and
destructive of the sense, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1493;&#1512;&#1492;</span> never means
&quot;doctrine,&quot; but always &quot;law;&quot; and the fact that it is only <i>the</i> law of God,
the eternal expression of His nature, and common, therefore, to both the Old and
New Covenants, which can be here spoken of, and not a new constitution for the latter,
is seen from the reference in which the giving in the inward parts and the writing
on the heart (the tables of the heart, 2 Cor. iii. 3), stands to the outward communication
and the writing on the tables of stone on Sinai. The law is the same; the relation
only is different in which God places it to man, (&quot;<i>lex cum homine conciliatur
quasi</i>,&quot; <i>Michaelis</i>.) One might easily infer from the passage before us
a confirmation of the error, that the law under the Old Covenant was <i>only</i>
an outward dead letter. Against this error <i>Buddeus</i> already contended, who,
S. 117, acknowledges that it is a relative difference and contrast only, which are
here spoken of He says: &quot;This, of course, was the case with the Old Testament believers
also; here, however, God promises a richer fulness and higher degree of this blessing.&quot;
<i>Calvin</i> declares the opinion that, under the Old Testament dispensation, there
did not exist any regeneration, to be absurd, and says: &quot;we know that, under the
Law, the grace of God was rare and dark; but that, under the Gospel, the gifts of
the Spirit were <i>poured</i> out, and that God dealt much more liberally with His
Church.&quot; The idea of a purely outward giving of the Law is indeed one which is quite
inconceivable. God would, in that case, have done nothing else towards Israel than
He did to the traitor Judas, in whose conscience He proclaimed His holy Law, without
communicating to him strength for repentance. But such a proceeding can be conceived
of, only where there is a subjective impossibility <span class="pagenum">[Pg 438]</span>
of <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#957;&#945;&#954;&#945;&#953;&#957;&#8055;&#950;&#949;&#953;&#957; &#949;&#7984;&#962; &#956;&#949;&#964;&#8049;&#957;&#959;&#953;&#945;&#957;</span>. Every outward
manifestation of God <i>must</i>, according to the constitution of human nature,
be accompanied by the inward manifestation, since it is inconceivable that He who
knows our nature, should mock us by the semblance of a blessing. As soon as we know
the outward fact of the deliverance from Egypt, we know, at the same time, that
God has then powerfully touched the heart of Israel. As soon as it is established
that the Law on Sinai was written on tables of stone by the finger of God, it is
also established that He, at the same time, wrote it on the tables of Israel&#39;s heart.
But that which is thus implied in the matter itself, is confirmed by the testimony
of history. In the Law itself, circumcision is designated as the pledge and seal
of the bestowal, not merely of outward blessings, but of the circumcision of the
heart, of the removal of sin attaching to every one by birth; so that man can love
God with all his heart, all his sold, and all his powers, Deut. xxx. 6. This circumcision
of the heart which, in the outward circumcision, was at the same time <i>required</i>
and promised by God (comp. Deut. l. c. with x. 16), is not substantially different
from the writing of the Law on the heart. <i>Farther</i>--If the Law of the Lord
had, for Israel, been a mere outward letter, how could the animated praise of it
in the Holy Scriptures, <i>e.g.</i>, in Ps. xix., be accounted for? Surely, a bridge
must already have been formed between the Law and him who can speak of it as rejoicing
the heart, as enlightening the eyes, as converting the soul, as sweeter than honey
and the honeycomb. That is no more the Law in its isolation which worketh wrath,
but it is the Law in its connection with the Spirit, whose commandments are not
grievous; comp. my commentary on Ps. xix. 8 ff. A <i>new</i> heart was created under
the Old Testament also, Ps. li. 12; and not to know the nature of this creation
was, for a teacher in Israel, the highest disgrace, John iii. 10. Yea, that which
is here promised for the Future, a pious member of the Old Covenant expresses, in
Ps. xl. 9, <i>in the same form</i>, as being already granted to him as his present
spiritual condition: &quot;I delight to do thy will, O my God, and thy Law is in the
midst of my bowels,&quot;<!--inserted quote-->--words which imply the same contrast to
the Law as outward letter, as being written on tables of stone, comp. Prov. iii.
1&#8211;3: &quot;My son, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 439]</span> forget not my law, and let thine
heart keep my commandments ... bind them about thy neck, write them upon the table
of thine heart;&quot; compare my commentary on Psalms, Vol. iii. p. lxvii.--But how is
it to be explained that the contrariety which, in itself, is relative, appears here
under the form of the absolute contrariety,--the difference in degree, as a difference
in kind? Evidently in the same manner as the same phenomenon must be explained elsewhere
also, <i>e.g.</i> John i. 17, where it is said that the Law was given by Moses,
but mercy and truth by Christ. By overlooking this fact, so many errors have been
called forth. The blessings of the Old Covenant which, when considered in themselves,
are so important and rich, appear, when compared with the much fuller and more important
blessings of the New Covenant, to be so trifling that they vanish entirely out of
sight. It is quite similar when, in chap. iii. 16, the Prophet represents the highest
sanctuary of the Old Covenant, the Ark of the Covenant, as sinking into entire oblivion
in future; when, in chap. xxiii. 7, 8, he describes the deliverance from Egypt as
no longer worthy of being mentioned. Parallel to the passage under consideration
is the promise of Joel of the pouring out of the Spirit, chap. iii. 1, 2 (ii. 28,
29); so that that which we remarked on that passage, is applicable here also. But,
in that passage, the relative nature of the promise appears more clearly than it
does here, just because, in general, under the New Covenant, in its relation to
the Old, there is nowhere an absolutely new beginning, but always a completion only
(just in the same manner as, on the other hand, under the New Covenant itself, it
is in the relation of the <i>regnum gloriae</i> to the <i>regnum gratiae</i>). Joel,
in reference to the communication of the Spirit, puts the abundance in the place
of the scarcity; the many in the place of the few. Compare, moreover, chap. xxiv.
7: &quot;And I give them a heart to know me, that I am the Lord; and they shall be my
people, and I will be their God;&quot; xxxii. 39: &quot;And I give them one heart and one
way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them and of their children
after them;&quot; but especially Ezek. xi. 19, 20, xxxvi. 26, 27.--The remarks of Jewish
interpreters on the passage under consideration, in which they cannot avoid seeing
that, in it, a purely moral revelation is prophesied, <span class="pagenum">[Pg
440]</span> in contrast to a mere external one, clearly show how strongly the Old
Testament is opposed to that carnal Jewish delusion of the condition of the Messianic
Kingdom (as it is most glaringly expressed in the Talmudic passage <i>Massechet
Sanhedrim</i>, fol. 119: &quot;There is no other difference between the days of the Messiah
and the present state of things, excepting only that the kingdoms shall be our slaves),&quot;--a
delusion which is quite analogous to the expectations which are entertained by revolutionists
concerning the Future, and which flow from the same source. Thus Rabbi <i>Bechai</i>
(see <i>Frischmuth</i>) remarks: &quot;This means that every evil concupiscence shall
be taken away, and every desire to covet any thing;&quot; <i>Moses Nachmanides</i> (<i>ibid.</i>
S. 861): &quot;And this is nothing else than that every evil concupiscence shall be taken
away, so that the heart, by an internal impulse, does what is right.--In the days
of Messiah there will not exist any evil desire, but, from the impulse of his nature,
man will do what is right. And there will, therefore, not be innocence and guilt,
inasmuch as these depend upon concupiscence.&quot; But if once bent upon it, pre-conceived
opinions will overcome every, even the strongest,<!--inserted presumed missing comma-->
contradiction offered by the matter itself This may be seen from the example of
<i>Grotius</i>, who here explains: &quot;I will cause that all of them keep my Law in
memory,--in the first instance, by the multitude of synagogues which, at that time,
were built, and in which the Law was taught thrice a-week.&quot; Thrice a-week! Surely
that will produce first-rate men, viz., such as are described in Isa. lviii. 2.
It is not without meaning, that the words: &quot;And I will be their God,&quot; &amp;c., follow
upon: &quot;And I give my Law in their inward parts,&quot; &amp;c. The Law is the expression of
God&#39;s nature; it is only by the Law being written in the heart that man can become
a partaker of God&#39;s nature; that His name can be sanctified in him. And it is this
participation in the nature of God, this sanctification of God&#39;s name, which forms
the foundation of: &quot;I will be their God, and they shall be my people.&quot; Without this,
the relation cannot exist at all, as truly as God is not an idol, but the True and
Holy One. These words express, as <i>Buddeus</i>, S. 94, rightly remarks: &quot;That
He will impart himself altogether to them.&quot; But how were it possible that God, with
His blessings and gifts, should <span class="pagenum">[Pg 441]</span> impart himself
entirely and unconditionally to them who are not of His nature? Of all unnatural
things, this would be the most unnatural. Here, however, likewise the relative character
of the promise most clearly appears. As early as to Abraham, God had promised that
He would be a God to <i>him</i>, and to his seed after him; and this promise he
had afterwards repeated to the whole people, Lev. xxvi. 12, comp. Exod. xxix. 45:
&quot;And I dwell in the midst of the children of Israel and will be their God.&quot; In the
consciousness that this promise was fulfilled in the time then present, David exclaims
in Ps. xxxiii. 12: &quot;Blessed is the nation whose God is Jehovah, the generation whom
He hath chosen for His inheritance.&quot; Hence, here too, there is nothing absolutely
new. If such were the subject of discourse, then the whole Kingdom of God under
the Old Testament dispensation would be changed into a mere semblance and illusion.
But the small measure of the condition--with which even God himself cannot dispense,
but of which He may vouchsafe a larger measure, viz., the writing of the Law in
the heart, whereby man becomes a copy of God, the personal Law--was necessarily
accompanied by the small measure of the consequence, The perfect fulfilment of God&#39;s
promise to Abraham and Israel, to which the prophet here alludes, could, therefore,
be expected from the future only.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 34. &quot;<i>And they shall teach no more a man his neighbour,
and a man his brother, saying: Know the Lord; for they all shall know me, small
and great, saith the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember
their sin no more.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Even from ancient times, the first hemistich of the verse has
created great embarrassment to interpreters, from which very few of them, not excepting
even <i>Calvin</i>, manage to extricate themselves skilfully. The declaration that,
because all will be taught by God, human instruction in things divine is to cease,
has, at first sight, something fanatical in it, and, indeed, was made use of by
Anabaptists and other enthusiasts in vindication of their delusion.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_441a" href="#ftn_441a">[4]</a></sup>
Many interpreters attempt an evasion, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 442]</span> by referring
the words to the future life; thus <i>Theodoret</i>, <i>Augustine</i>, (<i>de Spirit.
et lit.</i> c. 24) and <i>Este</i>, who, in a manner almost <i>naïve</i>, remarks:
&quot;This difficulty, it seems, is very simply avoided by those who refer this promise
to the future world, where, no doubt, all care about teaching will cease.&quot; But the
matter is, indeed, not at all difficult. All that is necessary is to keep in mind
that human instruction is here excluded, in so far only as it is opposed to divine
instruction concerning God himself; that hence, that which is here spoken of, is
<i>mere</i> human instruction, by which men are trained and drilled in religion,
just as in every other branch of common knowledge,--a result of which is, that they
may learn for ever without ever coming to the knowledge of the truth. Such an instruction
may be productive of historical faith, of belief in human authority; but it is just
by this, that the nature of religion will be altogether destroyed. Even the true
God becomes an idol when He is not known through himself, when He himself does not
prepare the heart as a place to dwell in. He is, and remains a mere idea that can
impart no strength in the struggle against sin which is a real power, and no comfort
in affliction. Now, such a condition was very frequent under the Old Testament dispensation.
The mass of the people possessed only a knowledge of God, which was chiefly, although
not exclusively, obtained through human instrumentality. By the New Covenant, richer
gifts of the Spirit were to be bestowed, and along with them, the number of those
was to be increased who were to partake in them, just as Isaiah, in chap. vii. 16,
represents believers under the Old Testament as being taught by the Lord, while
in chap. liv. 13, in reference to the Messianic time, he announces: &quot;And all thy
children shall be taught of the Lord.&quot; Under the New Covenant, the antithesis of
teaching by God, and teaching by man, is to cease. The teachers do not teach in
their own strength, but as servants and instruments of the Lord. It is not they
who speak, Init the Holy Spirit in them. Those who are taught by them hear the word
that comes to them through men, not as man&#39;s word, but as God&#39;s word; and they receive
it, not because it satisfies their limited human reason, but because the Spirit
testifies that the Spirit is truth. How this antithesis is done away with, and reconciled
in a higher unity, is, among other passages, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 443]</span>
shown by 2 Cor. iii. 3: &quot;You are an epistle of Christ ministered by us, written
not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God.&quot; They are
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#952;&#949;&#959;&#948;&#8055;&#948;&#945;&#954;&#964;&#959;&#953;</span>, but through the ministry of the
Apostle who, in so far as he performs this service, is not different from God, but
only a conductor of His power, a channel through which the oil of the Holy Spirit
flows to the Church of God; compare remarks on Zech. iv. The same is taught in 1
John ii. 20: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#922;&#945;&#8054; &#8017;&#956;&#949;&#8150;&#962; &#967;&#961;&#8150;&#963;&#956;&#945; &#7956;&#967;&#949;&#964;&#949; &#7936;&#960;&#8056; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#7937;&#947;&#943;&#959;&#965;,
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#959;&#7988;&#948;&#945;&#964;&#949; &#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#945;. &#927;&#8016;&#954; &#7956;&#947;&#961;&#945;&#968;&#945; &#8017;&#956;&#8150;&#957;, &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#959;&#7988;&#948;&#945;&#964;&#949; &#964;&#8052;&#957; &#7936;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#949;&#8055;&#945;&#957;, &#7936;&#955;&#955;&#8217; &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#959;&#7988;&#948;&#945;&#964;&#949;
&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#942;&#957;.</span> Ver. 27: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#922;&#945;&#8054; &#8017;&#956;&#949;&#8150;&#962; &#964;&#8056; &#967;&#961;&#8150;&#963;&#956;&#945;, &#8003; &#7952;&#955;&#940;&#946;&#945;&#964;&#949;
&#7936;&#960;&#8217; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8166;, &#7952;&#957; &#8017;&#956;&#8150;&#957;, &#956;&#941;&#957;&#949;&#953; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#959;&#8016; &#967;&#961;&#949;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#7956;&#967;&#949;&#964;&#949;, &#7989;&#957;&#945; &#964;&#953;&#962; &#948;&#953;&#948;&#940;&#963;&#954;&#8131; &#8017;&#956;&#8118;&#962;, &#7936;&#955;&#955;&#8217; &#8033;&#962; &#964;&#8056;
&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8056; &#967;&#961;&#8150;&#963;&#956;&#945; &#948;&#953;&#948;&#940;&#963;&#954;&#949;&#953; &#8017;&#956;&#8118;&#962; &#960;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#960;&#940;&#957;&#964;&#969;&#957; &#954;. &#964;. &#955;.</span> The
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#948;&#953;&#948;&#940;&#963;&#954;&#949;&#953;&#957;</span> here signifies the human teaching
in contrast to that which is divine, such an one as undertakes by its own power
to work knowledge in him who is taught. Such a teaching cannot take place under
the new covenant. A fundamental knowledge is already imparted to all its members;
the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#945;&#961;&#8048;&#954;&#955;&#951;&#964;&#959;&#962;</span>, the Holy Ghost, alone teaches
them, John xiv. 26; He leads them into all truth, John xvi. 13. But, just because
this is the case, the teaching by means of those whom God has given, in His Church,
as apostles, prophets, evangelists, teachers (Eph. iv. 11), to whom He has communicated
His <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#967;&#945;&#961;&#8055;&#963;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#945;</span>, is quite in its place. The apostle
writes just <i>because</i> they know the truth. If it were otherwise, his efforts
would be altogether in vain. Of what use is it to give instruction about colours
to him who is blind? In things divine, the truth becomes truth to the single individual,
only because his knowledge of God is founded on his being in God; and that can be
accomplished only by his being connected to God through God. Being, life, and hence,
also, real living knowledge, can proceed only from the fountain of all being and
life. But in the case of those who are in God, who possess the fundamental knowledge,
this knowledge must be developed, carried on, and brought to full consciousness
through the instrumentality of those to whom God has granted the gifts for it. A
glance into the deep meaning of our passage was obtained by the author of the book
<i>Jelammedenu</i>, which is quoted by <i>Abarbanel</i> (in <i>Frischmuth</i>, S.
863); he says: &quot;Under the present dispensation, Israel learns the Law from mortal
men, and therefore forgets it; for as flesh and blood pass away (comp.
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 444]</span> Matt. xvi. 17, where the antithesis existing
between a knowledge of divine things which rests on human ground, and that which
rests on divine ground, is brought before us in its strictest form), so also its
instruction passes away. But a time shall come when a man shall not learn from the
mouth of a man, but from the mouth of the blessed God, for it is written: &#39;All thy
children shall be taught by God.&#39; In these words, it is implied that hitherto the
knowledge of the Law was an artificial one obtained by mortal men. But for that
reason, it cannot stand long, for the effect stands in proportion to its cause.
At the time of the deliverance, however, the knowledge of the Law will be obtained
in a miraculous manner.&quot; It is, however, quite obvious that this promise, too, must
be understood relatively only. All the pious men of the Old Covenant were
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#952;&#949;&#959;&#948;&#8055;&#948;&#945;&#954;&#964;&#959;&#953;</span>; and under the New Covenant, the
number of those is infinitely great who, through their own guilt, stand to truth
in a relation which is entirely or preeminently mediate.--Instead of the &quot;small,&quot;
by way of individualization, servants and handmaids are mentioned in Joel iii. 2
(ii. 29); compare remarks on Rev. xi. 18.--We have already seen that in the last
words of the verse, the fundamental blessing is promised. But whether
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span> be referred only to that which immediately
precedes, or to every thing which goes before (<i>Venema</i>: <i>vocala</i>
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1499;&#1497;</span> <i>non ad proxime praecedentia referenda,
sed ad totam pericopam, qua bona foederis recensita sunt, extenda</i>), amounts
to nearly the same thing; for that which immediately precedes includes all the rest.
We have before us nothing but designations of the same thing from various aspects;
everything depends upon the richer bestowal of the gifts of the Spirit. This has
the forgiveness of sins for its necessary foundation; for, before God can give,
He must first take. The sins which separate the people and their God from one another,
must first be taken away; it is then only that the inward means can be bestowed,
so that the people may become truly God&#39;s people, and God&#39;s name may be sanctified
in them. It is obvious that, here too, a relative difference only between the Old
and New Covenant can be spoken of A covenant-people without forgiveness of sins
is no covenant-people; a God with whom there is not forgiveness, in order that He
may be feared, who does not heal the bones <span class="pagenum">[Pg 445]</span>
which He has broken, who in this respect gives promises for the Future only, is
no God, and no blessing. For if He does not grant this, He cannot grant any thing
else, inasmuch as every thing else implies this, and is of no value without it.
Forgiveness of sins is the essence of the Passover as the feast of the covenant.
On the Ark of the Covenant, it was represented by the <i>Capporeth</i> (see <i>Genuineness
of the Pentateuch</i>, Vol. ii., p. 525 f.). Without it the sin-offerings appointed
by God are a lie; without it, all that is untrue which God says of himself as the
covenant-God, that He is gracious and merciful, Exod. xxxiv. 6. The holy Psalmists
often acknowledge with praise and thanks that God <i>has</i> forgiven sins; comp.
<i>e.g.</i> Ps. lxxxv. 3: &quot;Thou hast taken away the iniquities of thy people, thou
hast covered all their sins.&quot; In the same manner they are loud in praising the high
blessing bestowed upon the individual by the forgiveness of sins; comp. Ps. xxxii.
51. The consciousness that their sins are forgiven, forms the foundation of the
disposition of heart which we perceive in the Psalmists; see Commentary on the Psalms,
Vol. iii. p. lxv. f. &quot;What a <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#959;&#966;&#959;&#961;&#8055;&#945;</span>&quot;--so
<i>Buddeus</i> remarks, p. 109--&quot;what a confidence, what a joy of a tranquil and
quiet conscience shines forth in the psalms and prayers of David!&quot; We have thus
before us merely a difference in degree. To the believers of that time, the sin
of the covenant-people appeared to be too great to admit of its being forgiven.
Driven away from the face of the Lord, so they imagined, it would close its miserable
existence in the land of Nod; never would the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#953;&#961;&#959;&#8054;
&#7936;&#957;&#945;&#968;&#8059;&#958;&#949;&#969;&#962;</span> return. But, in opposition to such fears, the Prophet declares,
in the name of the Lord, that they would not only return, but come, for the first
time, in the true and full sense; that where they imagined to behold the end to
the forgiveness of sins, there would be its real beginning; that where sin abounded,
the grace of God should there so much the more abound. Only, they should not despair,
and thus place a barrier in the way of God&#39;s mercy. Your God is not a mere hard
task-master; He himself will sow and then reap, as surely as He is God, the gracious
and merciful One.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 35. &quot;<i>Thus saith the Lord, giving the sun for a light by
day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for</i>
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 446]</span> <i>a light by night, agitating the sea, and
the waves thereof roar, the Lord of hosts is His name.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 36. &quot;<i>If these ordinances will cease before me, saith the
Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for
ever.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Interpreters commonly assume that, already in ver. 35, the discourse
is of the firm and immutable divine laws which every thing must obey. But opposed
to this view are the words: &quot;Agitating the sea, and the waves thereof roar,&quot; in
which no definite perceptible rule, no uninterrupted return takes place. To this
argument may be added the comparison of the fundamental passage, Isa. li. 15, in
which the omnipotence only of God is to be brought out: &quot;And I am the Lord thy God,
who agitates the sea, and its waves roar, the Lord of hosts is His name;&quot; comp.
also Amos. ix. 5, 6. It thus appears that, in ver. 35, God&#39;s omnipotence only is
spoken of, which establishes that He is God and not man; and this forms the foundation
for the declaration set forth in ver. 36, which is so full of comfort for the despairing
covenant-people,--the proposition, namely, that, while all men are liars, He does
not lie; that He can never repent of His covenant and promises. The &quot;ordinances&quot;
(moon and stars are, in their regular return, themselves, as it were, embodied ordinances),
are mentioned already in ver. 35, because just the circumstance that, according
to eternal and inviolable laws, sun and moon must appear every day at a fixed time,
and have done so for thousands and thousands of years, testifies more strongly for
His omnipotence and absolute power, never liable to any foreign influence or interference,
than if they at one time appeared, and, at another, failed to appear. God&#39;s omnipotence,
as it is testified by a look to nature (<i>Calvin</i>: &quot;The Prophet contents himself
with pointing out what even boys knew, viz., that the sun makes his daily circuit
round the whole earth, that the moon does the same, and that the stars in their
turn succeed, so that, as it were, the moon with the stars exercises dominion by
night, and, afterwards, the sun reigns by day&quot;), results from the fact that He is
the pure, absolute, being (Jehovah His name, comp. remarks on Mal. iii. 6); and
it is just because He is this, that His counsels, which He declared without any
condition attached to them, must be <span class="pagenum">[Pg 447]</span> unchangeable.
To believe that He has for ever rejected Israel, is to degrade Him, to make Him
an idol, a creature.--In ver. 36, the immutability of God&#39;s counsel of grace is
put on a level with the immutability of God&#39;s order of nature; but this is done
with a view to the weakness of the people, who receive, for a pledge of their election,
that which is most firm among visible things; so that every rising of the sun and
moon is to them a guarantee of it; compare Ps. lxxxix. 37, 38. But considered in
itself, the counsels of God&#39;s grace are <i>much firmer</i> than the order of nature.
The heavens wax old as a garment, and as a vesture He changes them and they are
changed (Ps. cii. 27-29); heaven and earth shall pass away, but the word of God
shall not pass away.--From chap. xxxiii. 24: &quot;They despise my people (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1502;&#1497;</span>)
that they should be still a nation (<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1493;&#1497;</span>) before
them&quot; it appears why it is that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1493;&#1497;</span> is here
used, and not <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1501;</span>. The covenant-people in their
despair imagined that their national existence, which, in the Present, was destroyed,
was gone for ever. If only their national existence was sure, then also was their
existence as a covenant-people. For, just as their national existence had ceased,
because they had ceased to be the covenant-people, so they could again obtain a
national existence as the covenant-people only.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 37. &quot;<i>Thus saith the Lord: If the heavens above be measured,
and the foundations of the earth beneath be searched out, I will also cast off all
the seed of Israel, for all that they have done, saith the Lord.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">It is not without meaning that the Prophet so frequently repeats:
Thus saith the Lord. This formed the <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#913;</span> and
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#937;</span>; His word was the <i>sole</i> ground of hope
for Israel. Apart from it, despair was as reasonable, as now it was unreasonable.
The measuring of heaven, and the searching out of the innermost parts of the earth,
come here into consideration as things impossible. The words: &quot;All the seed of Israel,&quot;
take from the hypocrites that consolation which they might be disposed to draw from
these promises. It is as much in opposition to the nature of God that He should
permit all the seed of Israel, the faithful with the unbelievers, to perish, as
that He should save all the seed of Israel, unbelievers as well as believers. The
promise, as well as the threatening, always leaves a remnant. All that the covenant
grants is, that the whole cannot <span class="pagenum">[Pg 448]</span> perish (the
discourse is here, of course, of definite rejection); but it gives no security to
the individual sinner. The words: &quot;For all that they have done,&quot; are added intentionally,
because the greatness of the sins of the people was the <i>punctum saliens</i> in
the believers&#39; despair of the mercy of God. <i>Calvin</i> says: &quot;The Prophet here
intentionally brings forward the sins of the people, in order that we may know that
the grace of God is greater still, and that the multitude of so many wicked men
would not be an obstacle to God&#39;s granting pardon.&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 38. &quot;<i>Behold, days, saith the Lord, and the city is built
to the Lord from the tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner.</i> Ver. 39.
<i>And the measuring line goeth yet farther over against it, over the hill Gareb</i>
(the leper), <i>and turneth towards Goah</i> (place of execution). Ver. 40. <i>And
the whole valley of the carcasses and of the ashes, and all the fields unto the
brook of Kidron, and from thence unto the horsegate, towards the East,</i> (all
this is) <i>holiness unto the Lord. No more shall it be destroyed, nor shall it
be laid waste for ever.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">This prophecy embraces two features: <i>first</i>, the restoration
of the Kingdom of God, represented under the figure of a restoration of Jerusalem,
which, under the Old Covenant, was its seat and centre (it is this aspect only which
Zechariah, in resuming this prophecy, has brought forward in chap. xiv. 10); and,
<i>secondly</i>, the glorification of the Kingdom of God, which now is so strengthened
and increased, that it can undertake to attack and assail the dark kingdom of evil,
and subject it to itself, while formerly it was attacked and assailed by it, and
often could not prevent the enemy from penetrating into the innermost heart of its
territory. This thought the Prophet graphically clothes in a perceptible form, and
in such a manner that he describes how the unholy places, by which Jerusalem, the
holy city, was surrounded on all sides, are included in its circumference, and become
holiness unto the Lord. In former times, the victory of the world over the Kingdom
of God had been embodied in the fact, that the abominations of sin and idolatry
had penetrated into the very temple; compare chap. vii. 11: &quot;Is then this house,
which is called by the name of the Lord, a den of robbers, saith the Lord?&quot; Other
passages will be mentioned when we come to comment upon Dan. ix. 27. This inward
victory must, according to divine necessity, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 449]</span>
be followed by the outward one. The covenant-people which, inwardly, had submitted
to the world, which, by its own guilt, had profaned itself, was, outwardly also,
given up to the world, and was profaned in punishment. And this profanation, inflicted
upon it as a punishment, again manifested itself just at that place, where the profanation
by the guilt had chiefly manifested itself, viz., in the holy city, and in the holy
temple. It is with a view to the former manifestation of the victory of the world
over the Kingdom of God, that here the victory of the Kingdom of God over the world
is described; and the imagery is just simple imagery. To the outward holiness of
the city and of the temple, the outward unholiness of the places around Jerusalem
is opposed. While the victory of the world over the Kingdom of God had been manifested
by the profanation of these places, the victory of the Kingdom of God now appears
under the image of the sanctification of these formerly unholy places. By what means
that great change had been brought about; by what means the Kingdom of God, which
now lay so powerlessly prostrate, should again obtain powers which it had never
before possessed; by what means the servant was to be changed into a lord, it was
unnecessary for the Prophet here to point out; it had been already mentioned in
vers. 32&#8211;34. The difference consists in this, that the New Covenant is not like
the Old, but that it first furnishes the right weapons by which sin and the world
can be overcome, viz., an infinitely richer measure of the forgiveness of sins,
of the graces of the Spirit.--We must still premise a general remark concerning
the determination of the boundaries of the New Jerusalem here given, because this
must guide us in determining the single doubtful places which are here mentioned.
The correct view has been already given by <i>Vitringa</i> in his Commentary on
Isaiah xxx. 33: &quot;The Prophet promises to the returning ones the restoration of the
city of Jerusalem in its whole circumference; and he describes it in this way, that
he begins from the Eastern wall, passes on thence, through the North side, to the
West side, and thence, by the South side, returns to the East.&quot; For the Prophet
begins with the tower of Hananeel which was situated at the East side of the town,
near the sheep-gate; compare remarks on Zech. xiv. 10. Thence he proceeds to
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 450]</span> the corner-gate, which was situated in that
corner where the North and East met (compare l. c.), and hence comprehends the whole
North side. He closes with the horse-gate, of which he expressly states that it
was situated towards the East, and hence points out that he had again arrived at
the place from which he set out. We have thus gained a firm foundation for determining
those among the places mentioned, the situation of which is, in itself, doubtful.--Let
us now proceed to the consideration of particulars. After
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1502;&#1497;&#1501;</span>, the <i>Keri</i> inserts
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1488;&#1497;&#1501;</span>. It is true that this fuller expression
is commonly used by the Prophet; but, for that very reason, the more concise one
is to be preferred, which alone has the authority of the MSS. in its favour, while
the <i>Keri</i> is nothing but a conjecture, perhaps not even that. The full expression
having already occurred so frequently in the passage under consideration, the Prophet
here, at the close, and for a change, contents himself with the mere intimation.
The Prophet says intentionally: &quot;The city is built to the Lord,&quot; so that &quot;to the
Lord&quot; must be connected with &quot;is built;&quot; not &quot;the city of the Lord.&quot; The latter
expression had become so much a <i>nomen proprium</i> of Jerusalem, that the full
depth of its meaning was no more thought of. This new city is no more to be called
simply the city of the Lord; it is truly to be built to the Lord, so that it belongs
to Him.--In the first two points of the boundary, the tower of Hananeel and the
Corner-gate, the second main idea of the passage does not yet come out so prominently.
This is to be accounted for simply by the circumstance, that on the whole North
side of the town there was not any unholy places. The Suffix in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1504;&#1490;&#1491;&#1493;</span> refers to the Corner-gate; the measuring
line, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1462;&#1493;&#1462;&#1492;</span> according to the <i>Kethibh</i>,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1493; &#1492;&#1468;&#1463;&#1502;&#1460;&#1468;&#1491;&#1464;&#1468;&#1492;</span>, which is the common form, according
to the <i>Keri</i>, goes yet farther over against it, &amp;c. By the words &quot;over against,&quot;
it is intimated that it now goes beyond the former dimensions of the town.
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;</span> &quot;over&quot; (<i>Hitzig</i> erroneously translates
it &quot;towards,&quot; or &quot;by the side of it&quot;), shows that the hill Gareb is included within
the circumference of the new city. From the remarks formerly made, it appears that
the hill Gareb, and Goah, places which are nowhere else mentioned, must have been
situated on the West side; and, moreover, Gareb on the North-west
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 451]</span> side<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_451a" href="#ftn_451a">[5]</a></sup>
and Goah on the South-west side, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1512;&#1489;</span> has no
other signification than &quot;the leper;&quot; and &quot;the hill of the leper&quot; can be the hill
only, where the lepers had their abode. For, as early as in the second year after
the Exodus from Egypt, these lepers were obliged to remain without the camp (comp.
Numb. v. 3: &quot;Without the camp shall ye send them, and not shall they defile their
camp in the midst whereof I dwell&quot;); and this law was so strictly enforced, that
even Moses&#39; sister was removed out of the camp. When they had come to Canaan, the
provisions of the law in reference to the camp were transferred to the towns; comp.
farther Lev. xiii. 46: &quot;All the days that he has the leprosy, he shall be defiled;
he shall dwell alone, without the camp shall his habitation be;&quot; Luke xvii. 12.
Even Uzziah could not be released from it; he lived without the city in Beth Chofshith,
2 Kings xv. 5, which is commonly translated &quot;house of the sick,&quot; instead of &quot;house
of emancipation,&quot; viz., place where they lived, whom the Lord had manumitted, who
no more belonged to His servants; compare remarks on Psa. lxxxviii. 6. Even in the
kingdom of Israel they were so strict in the execution of this Mosaic ordinance
(one from among the numberless proofs which are opposed to the current views of
the religious condition of this kingdom, and of its relation to the Law of Moses),
that, even during the siege of Samaria, the lepers were not allowed to leave the
place before the gate assigned to them, 2 Kings vii. 3.--In order more fully to
understand the meaning of our passage, it is indispensable that we should inquire
into the causes of that regulation. <i>J. D. Michaelis</i> (Mos. Recht. iv. § 210)
has his answer at once in readiness, and is so fully convinced of its being right
and to the point, that he does not think it worth while to mention any other view.
Because <i>to him</i> the temporal objects and aims are the highest, he at once
supposes them everywhere in the Law of the Holy God also. The ordinance is to him
nothing but a sanitary measure intended to prevent contagion. But that would surely
be a degree of severity against the sick which could the less be excused by a regard
to the healthy, that leprosy, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 452]</span> if contagious
at all, is so, at all events, very slightly only, and is never propagated by a single
touch. (<i>Michaelis</i> himself remarks: &quot;Except in the case of cohabitation, one
may be quite safe.&quot;) But this severity against the sick must appear in a still more
glaring light, and the concern for the healthy becomes even ridiculous, when we
take into consideration the other regulations concerning the lepers. They were obliged
to go about in torn clothes, bare-headed, and with covered chin, and to cry out
to every that came near them, that they were unclean. Even <i>Michaelis</i> grants
that those regulations could not be designed to guard against infection. He remarks:
&quot;But the leper should not cause disgust to any one by his really shocking appearance,
or terror by an accidental, unexpected touch.&quot; But such a sentimental, unmerciful
regard to the tender nerves is surely elsewhere not to be perceived in the Law,
which regulates all the relations of man to his neighbour, by the principle: Thou
shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. <i>Farther</i>--From mere sanitary or police
considerations, the law in reference to the leprosy of the clothes and houses, which
is closely connected with the law about the leprosy of men, cannot be accounted
for. The reason which <i>Michaelis</i> advances for the law in reference to the
clothes, is of such a nature, that not even the most refined politicians have ever
yet thought of a similar one. The leprosy of the houses is, according to him, the
dry-rot, which, although not contagious, was so hateful to Moses, that, out of concern
for the health of the possessor, and for the goods kept in them, he ordered them
to be altogether pulled down. If Moses had entertained the views on the power of
the magistrates which lie at the foundation of this, he could not have been an ambassador
of God,--even apart altogether from the absurdity of the measure. But the shallowness
and untenableness of <i>Michaelis&#39;</i> view will appear still more strongly, when
we state the positive argument for our view. It is this: Leprosy is the outward
image of sin; that, therefore, which is done upon the leper, is, in reality, done
upon the sinner. Every leper, therefore, was a living sermon, a loud admonition
to keep unspotted from the world. The exclusion of the lepers from the camp, from
the holy city, conveyed figuratively quite the same lesson, as is done in Words
by John, in Revel. xxi. 27: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#922;&#945;&#8054; &#959;&#8016; &#956;&#8052; &#949;&#7984;&#963;&#941;&#955;&#952;&#8131; &#949;&#7984;&#962;
&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8052;&#957;</span> <span class="pagenum">[Pg 453]</span> <span lang="el" class="Greek">
&#960;&#8118;&#957; &#954;&#959;&#953;&#957;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#959;&#953;&#959;&#8166;&#957; &#946;&#948;&#941;&#955;&#965;&#947;&#956;&#945; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#968;&#949;&#8166;&#948;&#959;&#962;</span>, and by Paul, in Ephes. v. 5:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#964;&#959;&#8166;&#964;&#959; &#947;&#8048;&#961; &#7988;&#963;&#964;&#949; &#947;&#953;&#957;&#974;&#963;&#954;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962;, &#8005;&#964;&#953; &#960;&#8118;&#962; &#960;&#972;&#961;&#957;&#959;&#962;, &#7970; &#7936;&#954;&#940;&#952;&#945;&#961;&#964;&#959;&#962;,
&#7970; &#960;&#955;&#949;&#959;&#957;&#941;&#954;&#964;&#951;&#962; ... &#959;&#8016;&#954; &#7956;&#967;&#949;&#953; &#954;&#955;&#951;&#961;&#959;&#957;&#959;&#956;&#943;&#945;&#957; &#7952;&#957; &#964;&#8135; &#946;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#955;&#949;&#943;&#8115; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#935;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#8166; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#920;&#949;&#959;&#8166;</span>;
comp. Gal. v. 19, 21. Now it is clearly seen what is the Prophet&#39;s meaning in including
the hill of the lepers in the holy city. That which hitherto was unclean becomes
clean; the Kingdom of God now does violence to the sinners, while, hitherto, the
sinners had done violence to the Kingdom of God. It is only when we take this view
of leprosy, that we account for the fact, that just this disease so frequently occurs
as the theocratic punishment of sin. The image of sin is best suited for reflecting
it; he who is a sinner before God, is represented as a sinner in the eyes of man
also, by the circumstance that he must exhibit before men the image of sin. God
took care that ordinarily the image and the thing itself were perfectly coincident;
although, no doubt, there were exceptions,--cases where God, according to His wise
and holy purposes, allowed that one relatively innocent (in the case of a perfectly
innocent man, if such an one existed, that would not be possible, except in the
case of Christ who bore <i>our</i> disease), had to bear the image of sin, <i>e.g.</i>,
in the case of such as were in danger of self-righteousness. As a theocratic punishment,
leprosy is found especially with such as had secretly sinned, or had surrounded
their sin with a good appearance, which, in the eyes of men, prevents them from
appearing as sinners, <i>e.g.</i>, in the case of Miriam, Uzziah, Gehazi, 2 Kings
v. 27. In the Law, there are many warnings against it, <i>e.g.</i>, Deut. xxiv.
8; and David wishes, 2 Sam. iii. 29, that the threatening of the Law might be fulfilled
upon the house of wicked Joab. The leprosy of houses, too, comes into consideration
only as an image of spiritual leprosy, as is seen from the command in Lev. xiv.
49: &quot;And he shall take to cleanse the house two birds, and cedar wood, and scarlet,
and hyssop; ver. 53: and make an atonement for the house, and it shall be clean.&quot;
The procedure here is quite the same as that which was applied in the case of sin
and sinners; and since the house cannot sin, it follows that a symbolical action
only can here be spoken of.--Goah, in this context, in the midst of unclean places,
can hardly be anything else than some unclean place; and it is a very obvious supposition
that this nature is expressed in the very <span class="pagenum">[Pg 454]</span>
name. This signification interpreters usually endeavour to obtain by deriving the
word from <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1506;&#1492;</span> &quot;to roar,&quot; of which it is properly
the Partic. Fem., hence &quot;the roaring one;&quot; but it is more easily obtained by adopting
the derivation from <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1464;&#1493;&#1463;&#1506;</span>, just as
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1473;&#1493;&#1465;&#1506;&#1463;</span> is derived from
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1473;&#1464;&#1493;&#1463;&#1506;</span>, a derivation which was first proposed
by <i>Hiller</i>, S. 127. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1493;&#1506;</span> is used of a
violent death, no less than of a natural death; thus Numb. xvii. 27, 28, of a death
like that of the company of Korah, Datham, and Abiram; comp. Zech. xiii. 8. This
derivation being assumed, Goah would denote &quot;expiring,&quot; &quot;hill<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_454a" href="#ftn_454a">[6]</a></sup>
of expiring,&quot; which would be a very suitable name of the place for the execution
of criminals. <i>Vitringa</i>, in commenting upon Is. xxx. 33, already expressed
the conjecture that Goah, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1500; &#1490;&#1493;&#1506;&#1514;&#1492;</span> might perhaps
be identical with Golgotha, but retracted it, because the Evangelists explain Golgotha
by <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#961;&#945;&#957;&#8055;&#959;&#965; &#964;&#8057;&#960;&#959;&#962;</span>. But this is no sufficient
and conclusive reason. When the Aramean became the prevailing language, the name
of the place may have received a new etymology, just as the Fathers of the Church
derive <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#8049;&#963;&#967;&#945;</span>, from
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#8049;&#963;&#967;&#949;&#953;&#957;</span>, and many similar instances. It has
already been observed that the appellation, &quot;place of skulls,&quot; is rather strange,
inasmuch as the skulls did not remain in the place of execution.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_454b" href="#ftn_454b">[7]</a></sup>
The use of &quot;skull&quot; for &quot;the place of skulls,&quot; as well as the omission of the <i>
L</i>, have been found strange. But all that is easily accounted for, if the new
signification, which substantially agreed with the former, was merely transferred
to the word. The identity of Goah and Golgotha cannot be disputed,--at least, not
from the situation. From Heb. xiii. 12, it is certain that Golgotha, as an unclean
place, was situated outside the city; that it was situated on the West side is,
it is <span class="pagenum">[Pg 455]</span> true, testified by tradition only; comp.
<i>Krafft</i>, S. 168 ff.; <i>Ritter</i>, <i>Erdk.</i> xvi. 1, S. 422 ff.--We now
come to the valley of carcasses and of ashes. Even from the position, it becomes
probable that this is the valley of Hinnom. The North and West sides are already
done, and hence the South and East sides only remain. But the valley of Hinnom was
situated towards the South, or South-east of Jerusalem, comp. <i>Krafft</i>, S 2;
v. <i>Raumer</i>, S. 269. The valley of the carcasses is here brought into immediate
connection with <i>all</i> the fields (<i>q.d.</i>, all the other fields), unto
the brook Kidron, and is hence designated as a portion of the valley of Kidron.
But the valley of Hinnom was the Southern, or South-eastern continuation of the
valley of Kidron, which extended on the East side. To this it may be added that,
in this context, we must necessarily expect the mention of the valley of Hinnom,
but that otherwise it would be wanting. Among all the unclean places around Jerusalem,
this was the most unclean. There could be no greater victory of the Kingdom of God
over the world, than if this strictest antithesis to the holy city, this image of
hell, was included within the Holy City. It is only with respect to the cause of
the appellation, that some doubt may exist, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1490;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501; ,&#1508;&#1490;&#1512;</span>
is a common designation of dead bodies,
of carcasses. There is not one among the twenty-two passages in which it occurs,
where it refers to deceased righteous ones. It is used of the dead bodies of animals,
of idols, Lev. xxvi. 30; of the dead bodies of those whom the Lord has smitten in
His anger and wrath, Jer. xxxiii. 5; 1 Sam. xvii. 46; Amos viii. 3; Neh. iii. 3;
Is. lxvi. 24; of such as are, after death, treated like beasts, Jer. i. 49. Hence,
opinions such as that of <i>Venema</i> fall to the ground, who supposes that the
valley had that name, because it was the public burying-ground. But there is, nevertheless,
scope for difference of opinion. One may understand by
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1490;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501;</span> the carcasses of animals;--the valley
of Hinnom would, in that case, be the public flaying-ground. It is in itself probable,
and it is generally held<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_455a" href="#ftn_455a">[8]</a></sup>
that, after the defilement by Josiah (2 Kings xxiii. 10), it received this designation.
But there are not wanting evident traces that, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 456]</span>
even in former times, the valley served this purpose. In Is. xxx. 33, it is said
in reference to the Assyrians: &quot;For Tophet (<i>Gesenius</i> arbitrarily changes
the <i>nomen proprium</i> into an <i>appellativum</i>, and translates: the place
for burning) is ordained of old; yea, for the king it is prepared, made deep and
large; the pile thereof has fire and wood in abundance.&quot; This passage supposes that,
even at that time, the valley of Hinnom, or Tophet (which properly is only a part
of it, but is sometimes, however, used for the whole), had that destination; that
piles were constantly burning in it, on which the carcasses of animals were burned.
Such a place of execution and burial is already prepared for the carcasses of the
Assyrians rebelling against God. Even the existence of the name Tophet, <i>i.e.</i>,
<i>horror</i>, <i>abomination</i>, bears witness to the impure destination. The
second passage is Is. lxvi. 24. Outside the Holy City, the place where formerly
the carcasses of the beasts were lying, there now lie the dead bodies of the transgressors.
As the former were, in times past, food both for the worms and fire, so they are
now. It is true, that <i>Vitringa&#39;s</i> objection, that it can scarcely be imagined
that the idolators should have chosen a place so unclean, is very plausible. But
how plausible soever such an argument may appear, it cannot invalidate distinct
historical testimonies; and it might very well be set aside, although it would lead
us too far away from our purpose, to do so here. But it may also be supposed that
the Prophet looks back to his own declarations, chap. vii. 31, and xix. 4 ff.; and
that by <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1508;&#1490;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501;</span> here the corpses of transgressors
are to be understood, who are destined to destruction, and therefore are to be buried
in the flaying-ground. But this reference is, after all, too far-fetched; and it
is more natural to say, that the nature of Tophet, as the flaying-ground, forms
the foundation, which is common to those passages and that before us.--But, besides
the arguments already advanced, there is still a grammatical reason, which shows
that it is really the valley of Hinnom which is meant. The article in
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1506;&#1502;&#1511;</span> forbids us to view it as being in the
<i>Stat. construct.</i> and connected with the following words. We must translate:
&quot;And the whole valley, (viz. the valley of) the carcasses and ashes.&quot; The place
is, hence, first designated as &quot;the valley,&quot; without any further qualification,
and receives this qualification only afterwards. But it is just the valley of Hinnom
which, in Jer. ii. 23, is <span class="pagenum">[Pg 457]</span> designated as the
valley <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#964;&#700; &#7952;&#958;&#959;&#967;&#8053;&#957;</span>, and the gate leading to
it, as the gate of the valley, in Neh. ii. 13, 15; comp. remarks on Zech. xi. 13.--In
reference to <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1468;&#1513;&#1473;&#1503;</span>, <i>Gousset</i> Lex. p.
368, remarks: &quot;The words <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1462;&#1468;&#1513;&#1462;&#1473;&#1503;</span>, and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1460;&#1468;&#1513;&#1461;&#1473;&#1503;</span> are used only of the ashes of the
sacrificial animals, and their removal.&quot; This observation is confirmed by every
careful examination of the passages in question. Never are
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;&#1462;&#1468;&#1513;&#1462;&#1473;&#1503;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1491;&#1460;&#1468;&#1513;&#1461;&#1473;&#1503;</span> used otherwise than of the ashes of sacrificial animals; comp. Lev.
i. 16; vi. 3, 4; 1 Kings xiii. 5; Numb. iv. 13; Exod. xxvii. 3. The derivation of
the signification &quot;ashes,&quot; from the fundamental signification &quot;fat,&quot; as advanced
by <i>Winer</i> and others (<i>cinis</i> = <i>pinguefactio agrorum</i>), is therefore
wrong. On the contrary, even the burnt fat was still considered as fat; the ashes
of the fat are the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1488;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514;</span>, the residuum of
the fat. By this determination of the word, the explanation is very much facilitated.
In Lev. vi. 3, 11, it is said: &quot;And he (the priest, after having offered up the
burnt-offering) shall put off his garments, and put on other garments, and carry
forth the ashes without the camp into a clean place.&quot; According to this regulation,
the ashes of the sacrificial animals were considered as relatively unclean. The
priest had to put off his holy garments, and to put on common garments, and to carry
the ashes without the camp,--afterwards without the Holy City. Hence, in contrast
to the sacrifices themselves, the ashes were considered as the impure residuum which
is found in everything which men do in relation to God, as the image of sinful contamination
attaching to all, even the best works, and to the holiest elevation of the heart.
If, then, the place where the ashes are deposited is to be included within the boundaries
of the Holy City; is, in holiness, to be equal to the place where the sacrifices
themselves are offered,--what else can be signified thereby, than that the unholy
is to be overpowered by the holy, the earthly by the divine, by means of a more
glorious communication of the Holy Spirit? It is quite analogous, when Zechariah
represents the horses as being in future adorned by the Lord with the symbol of
holiness, which formerly the High-priest only wore; compare remarks on Zech. xiv.
20. This one argument might be brought forward against the explanation which we
have given, viz., that we cannot well imagine that this was the destination of
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 458]</span> the valley of Hinnom, because, according to
the Law, the ashes of the sacrifices were to be carried to a <i>clean</i> place;
because that which once stood in connection with that which is most holy and pure,
although, in itself, it may be unclean, must not be mingled with that which is absolutely
and constantly unclean. But in opposition to this we remark, that it was not this
whole valley that was unclean, but only the place Tophet in it; and that if sometimes
the whole is designated as unclean, it is only because it included this most unclean
among all unclean places; comp. chap. vii. 31, xxxii. 35; 2 Kings xxiii. 10.--There
cannot be any doubt that &quot;the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1456;&#1473;&#1512;&#1502;&#1493;&#1465;&#1514;</span> unto
the brook Kidron&quot; are identical with the fields of Kidron,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1473;&#1463;&#1491;&#1456;&#1502;&#1493;&#1465;&#1514; &#1511;&#1460;&#1491;&#1460;&#1512;&#1493;&#1465;&#1503;</span>, mentioned in 2 Kings xxiii.;
but much to be doubted is the correctness of the common supposition (after the example
of <i>Kuypers</i>, <i>ad varia V. T. loca</i>, in the <i>Syll. Dissert. sub praes.
Schultens, et Schroederi</i>, t. 1. p. 537), that <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">
&#1513;&#1456;&#1473;&#1512;&#1502;&#1493;&#1465;&#1514;</span> is identical with <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1473;&#1456;&#1491;&#1461;&#1502;&#1493;&#1465;&#1514;</span>.
If that were the case, we could not see why Jeremiah should have exchanged the common
word for an uncommon one, which elsewhere does not occur. Jeremiah is fond of exchanging
words of similar sounds, and especially words differing from one another merely
by one letter, and especially by <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1491;</span> and
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1512;</span>; but these exchanges are always significant.
(Compare <i>Küper</i>. Jerem. p. xiv. and 43, and <i>History of Balaam</i>, p. 447
f.) Although we cannot, with certainty, fix the meaning of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1512;&#1502;&#1493;&#1514;</span>, yet so much seems to be sure, that
this word was one which more accurately designated the nature of those places than
the current <i>nomen proprium</i>, inasmuch as it would be absurd to substitute
for it another name, if there had not been deeper reasons. One need only compare
the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1512; &#1492;&#1502;&#1513;&#1495;&#1497;&#1514;</span> itself which, in the simple
historical prose, is used of the Mount of Olives, 2 Kings xxiii. 13. The most simple
and natural supposition is the following. All the significations of the verbs
<img border="0" src="images/458.png" width="117" height="23" alt="Arabic"> in Arabic
run together in that of <i>cutting off</i>. <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1473;&#1463;&#1491;&#1456;&#1502;&#1493;&#1465;&#1514;</span>
the Plural of the Feminine of the Adjective <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1513;&#1464;&#1473;&#1512;&#1461;&#1502;</span>
are, accordingly, <i>loca abscissa</i>, places which are cut off and excluded [from
the Holy City] outwardly (<i>Aq.</i>: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#960;&#961;&#959;&#8049;&#963;&#960;&#949;&#953;&#945;</span>),
and, at the same time, inwardly. Thus we obtain a striking contrast between their
present nature and future destination. What is now distinctly separated from the
holy, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 459]</span> then become holiness,
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1491;&#1513;</span>. From 2 Kings xxiii. it appears, moreover,
that the fields of Kidron were unclean. It was thither as to an unclean place, that
Josiah caused all the abominations of idolatry to be carried, and to be burnt; comp.
ver. 4 (Josiah commanded all the vessels which had been made to Baal and Ashera
to be brought forth out of the temple): &quot;And he burned them <i>without Jerusalem</i>
in the fields of Kidron.&quot; Ver. 6: &quot;And he brought out the Ashera out of the house
of the Lord, <i>without Jerusalem</i>, unto the brook Kidron, and he burned them
in the valley of Kidron.... And cast the powder thereof upon the graves of the children
of the people.&quot; These last words (the children of the people = the mob, high and
low, who had polluted themselves by idolatry, comp. 2 Chron. xxxiv. 4: &quot;And he strewed
the dust upon the graves of them that had sacrificed unto them&quot;)<!--see 1856 ed of placement of quotese-->
enable us perhaps to conjecture the cause of the uncleanness of these fields. They
served as a burying ground to the adherents of the worship of Moloch, who were anxious
to rest in the neighbourhood of their idol, which dwelt in the neighbouring Tophet;
and this is the more easily accounted for, that it is very probable that the sacrifices
offered up to the idol were, in a great measure, sacrifices offered for the dead.--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1491;&#1513;
&#1500;&#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;</span> refers to every thing mentioned in the verse before us. As regards
the last words, comp. Remarks on Zech. xiv. 11.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_425a" href="#ftnRef_425a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[1]</sup></a> The person of the Messiah meets us as the
	living centre of the salvation in ver. 9: &quot;And they serve the Lord their God,
	and David their King, whom I will raise up unto them;&quot; on which words <i>Jonathan</i>
	remarks: &quot;And the Messiah the Son of David;&quot; and <i>Abarbanel</i>: &quot;This is
	King Messiah, who is of the house of David, and is therefore called by his name.&quot;
	From the parallel passages, Hos. iii. 5; Is. lv. 3, our passage differs in this,
	that David here does not, as in those passages, designate the family of David
	which centres in Christ, but the person of the Messiah. The commentary is furnished
	by chap. xxiii. 5: &quot;I raise unto David a righteous Sprout.&quot; The circumstance,
	that it is not the Sprout of David, but David, that is spoken of here, is explained
	from a reference to the words which the ten tribes spoke at their rebellion,
	1 Kings xii. 16: &quot;We have no portion in David, neither have we inheritance in
	the Son of Jesse. To your tents, O Israel.&quot; To the person of the Messiah the
	Prophet reverts once more towards the close also: &quot;And their glorious one shall
	be out of themselves, and their governor shall proceed from the midst of them
	(compare Mic. v. 1, 2, [2, 3]), and I cause him to draw near, and he approacheth
	unto me; for who is surety for his heart to approach unto me, saith the Lord?&quot;
	God himself receives the King of the Future into the closest communion with
	Him,--&quot;I and the Father are one&quot;--a communion which no one can usurp by his
	own power, and which, in the case of the former kings, even in that of David,
	was frequently disturbed by their sinful weakness.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_430a" href="#ftnRef_430a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[2]</sup></a> <i>Hofmann</i> (<i>Weiss. u. Erf.</i> 1 S.
	138) assigns to the phrase the meaning: &quot;to make an arrangement.&quot; But decisive
	against this is not only the derivation, (comp. <i>Gesenius Thesaurus</i>),
	but the circumstance also, that it is almost exclusively and quite manifestly
	used of a relation resting on reciprocity, of the making of a covenant in the
	ordinary sense; and that the few instances where there is apparently a reference
	to one party, form an exception only to the rule.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_434a" href="#ftnRef_434a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[3]</sup></a> Even the most recent interpreters, who take
	<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span> <i>sensu malo</i>, still greatly differ,--a
	proof that this interpretation has a very insufficient foundation on which to
	rest. <i>Gesenius</i>, <i>De Wette</i>, <i>Bleek</i> (on Heb. viii. 9), retain
	the explanation by <i>fastidire</i>, <i>rejicere</i>; <i>Maurer</i> translates:
	<i>dominarer</i>, <i>domini partes sustinerem</i>, contrasting tyrannical dominion
	with a relation of love; <i>Ewald</i>: &quot;Seeing that I am her master and protector;&quot;
	<i>Hitzig</i>: &quot;And I got possession of her.&quot; All these interpretations are
	opposed by the <i>usus loquendi</i>, according to which
	<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1506;&#1500;</span> has only the two significations: &quot;to
	possess,&quot; and &quot;to take for a wife,&quot; the latter being the ordinary and prevailing
	one.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_441a" href="#ftnRef_441a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[4]</sup></a> Not less than these, <i>Hitzig</i> too has
	allowed himself to be carried away by the appearance. He says: &quot;Then, indeed,
	the office of religious instructors must cease.&quot;</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_451a" href="#ftnRef_451a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[5]</sup></a> According to <i>Krafft</i> (<i>sur Topographie
	Jerus.</i> S. 158), it is only the hill Bezetha which, by the third wall of
	Agrippa, was added to the town, that can correspond to the situation of Gareb.</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_454a" href="#ftnRef_454a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[6]</sup></a> <i>Thenius</i>, in the appendix to the Commentary
	on the Books of Kings, S. 24, remarks: &quot;<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1490;&#1500;</span>
	does not, in any of the dialects, denote the natural hill of rocks, but merely
	stones heaped up.&quot; Hence, the hill would be an artificial hill for the execution
	of criminals. (Compare the German word <i>Rabenstein</i>, lit. &quot;raven-stone,&quot;
	for: place of execution.)</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_454b" href="#ftnRef_454b">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[7]</sup></a> This objection would be removed if, following
	<i>Thenius</i> and <i>Krafft</i>, S. 158, we were to explain the name from the
	form of the hill, which is that of a skull. But <i>none</i> of the Evangelists
	at least have advanced this explanation. The fact that three of them add the
	Greek explanation to the name (Matt. xxvii. 33; Mark xv. 22; John xix. 17),
	and one translated it into Greek (Luke xxiii. 33) shows that it stood in connection
	with the event in question. But this circumstance is quite decisive, that three
	Evangelists explain it by <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#961;&#945;&#957;&#8055;&#959;&#965; &#964;&#8057;&#960;&#959;&#962;</span>,
	&quot;place of a skull.&quot;</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_455a" href="#ftnRef_455a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[8]</sup></a> Compare the Book <i>Kosri</i>, p. 72. <i>Buxtorff</i>
	says: &quot;Gehenna was a well-known place near Jerusalem, viz., a valley in which
	the fire was never extinguished, and where unclean bones, carcasses, and other
	unclean things, were burned.&quot;</p>
</div>
<h3><a name="div2_459" href="#div2Ref_459">CHAPTER XXXIII. 14-26.</a></h3>
<p class="normal">Still before the destruction, but in the view of it, the Prophet,
while in the outer court of the prison, was favoured with the revelation contained
in chap. xxxii., and with that revelation of which our section forms a portion.
It may appear strange that, in the introduction, the revelation of great things
hitherto unknown to him is promised to the Prophet, and which he is told to seek
by calling unto the Lord; while, after all, the subsequent prophecy contains scarcely
any prominent, peculiar feature. But this is easily explained, when we take into
consideration that, throughout Scripture, dead <span class="pagenum">[Pg 460]</span>
knowledge is not regarded as knowledge; that the hope of<!--dup 'of' deleted-->
restoration had, in the natural man, in the Prophet as well as in all believers,
an enemy that strove to darken and extinguish it; that, therefore, the promise of
restoration was ever new, and the word of God always great and exalted. In the first
part of the revelation, after the destruction had been represented as unavoidable,
and all human hope had been cut oft, the restoration is described more in general
terms. In the second part, the Lord meets a two-fold special grief of the believers.
The time was approaching when the house of David was to be most deeply humbled,
when every trace of its former glory was to be done away with. With it, the hopes
of the people seem to be buried. God himself had declared this house to be the medium,
through which all the mercies were to come, which He, as the King, had promised
to bestow upon His people. But what was to become of the mercies, if the channel
was destroyed, through which they were to be bestowed upon the people? The temple
which, through the guilt of the people, had been changed into a den of robbers,
was to be destroyed. But, with the existence of the temple, the existence of the
Levitical priesthood was bound up, and if the latter was done away with, how was
to be obtained forgiveness of sins, which, in the Law, had been connected with the
mediation of the Levitical priesthood? These fears and cares the Lord now meets
by declaring that, in both respects, the perishing would be an arising, that life
should arise from death.</p>
<p class="normal">The genuineness of this section has been assailed by <i>Jahn</i>
(<i>Vaticinia Mess.</i> iii. p. 112, ff.<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_460a" href="#ftn_460a">[1]</a></sup>),
after the example of <i>J. D. Michaelis</i>, who, in the German translation of the
Bible, inclosed it within brackets. For the present, we mention only the internal
reason--deferring the refutation till we come to the exposition of particulars--because
we require it in order to set aside the external reason. Jahn, p. 121, sums it up
in these words: &quot;The matter stands in opposition to all the prophecies of Jeremiah
and all the other Prophets. For all of them limit themselves to the one David who
was to come <span class="pagenum">[Pg 461]</span> after the captivity, and do not
mention any successor to him, far less such a multitude of descendants of David
and of Levites, which is promised to the people under the name of a blessing, but
which would, in reality, have been a very heavy burden to the people, at whose expense
they were to be splendidly maintained.&quot; The external reason is the omission of the
section in the Alexandrian version. Proceeding upon the altogether gratuitous assumption
of a double recension of the prophecies of Jeremiah, people imagine that, by the
omission in the Alexandrian version, they are entitled to suppose that, in that
recension which the LXX. followed, this section was not contained. But the arguments
are most unsatisfactory, by which the attempt is made to establish that many portions,
not translated by the LXX., were not found by them in their manuscripts. Where there
notoriously prevail negligence, ignorance, arbitrariness, entire want of a clear
conception of the task of a translator, those inferences are out of place which
suppose just the opposite of all these (comp. <i>e.g.</i>, the inferences in <i>
Jahn</i>, S. 116 ff.) Although we cannot sometimes discover and state the reason
which induced the LXX. to make any omission, in case that that which was omitted
was really in the text, what is it that is thereby proved? Could we, <i>a priori</i>,
expect anything else, since we are on the territory of accident and whim? It is
quite sufficient that in a multitude of passages we can point out the most insufficient
reasons which induced them to make omissions, alterations, transpositions; for it
is just these which show that we are in the territory of accident and whim, where
it is unreasonable every where to expect reasons. Now, to these passages, that before
us likewise belongs; so that, even supposing that the ground of the deviation sometimes
lies in a different recension, our passage cannot be regarded as belonging to this
class; and, hence, from its omission, nothing can be inferred against its genuineness.
A twofold reason here presents itself, which may have induced them to the omission:
1. Important elements of the prophecy under consideration have already occurred,
vers. 15, 16, almost <i>verbatim</i>, in chap. xxiii. 3, 6; vers. 20&#8211;25, as regards
the thought, altogether, and as regards the words, partly agree with chap. xxxi.
35&#8211;37; and it is certain that the LXX. often omitted <span class="pagenum">[Pg 462]</span>
that which had occurred previously, because they were unable to perceive the deeper
meaning of the repetition, and transferred their own ignorance to the Prophet. 2.
In that which was peculiar to the passage before us, it was just the principal thought--the
same which <i>J. D. Michaelis</i> and <i>Jahn</i> advance against the genuineness--which
must have been most objectionable to the LXX., who were incapable of perceiving
the deeper meaning. An increase of the Levites and of the family of David as the
stare of the heavens and the sand of the sea, is a thought of which the Prophet
must be freed, whether he entertained it or not. The omission in the Alexandrian
version, therefore, does not prove any thing, except that even 2000 years before
<i>J. D. Michaelis</i>, <i>Jahn</i>, <i>Hitzig</i>, and <i>Movers</i>, there were
men who were as little able to understand the text as these expositors.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 14. &quot;<i>Behold days come, saith the Lord, and I perform the
good word which I leave spoken unto the house of Israel, and concerning the house
of Judah.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The &quot;good word&quot; may, in a more general way, be understood of all
the gracious promises of God to Israel, in contrast to the evil word, the threatenings
which hitherto had been fulfilled upon Israel; comp. 1 Kings viii. 56, where Solomon,
in the prayer at the consecration of the temple, says: &quot;Blessed be the Lord, that
has given rest unto His people Israel, according to all which He spoke; there has
not failed (the opposite of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1511;&#1493;&#1501;</span>) one word
of all His good word which He spoke through Moses His servant.&quot; In Deut. xxviii.
the <i>good</i> word and the <i>evil</i> word are placed beside one another; and
the former is blessed, from vers. 1&#8211;14; afterwards, the curse is declared. The centre
and substance of this good word was the promise to David, through whose righteous
Sprout all the promises to Israel should find their final fulfilment. But we may
also suppose that, by the &quot;good word,&quot; the Prophet specially denotes this promise
to David, which he had repeated in chap. xxiii. 5, 6. This latter supposition is
preferable, since, in vers. 15, 16, that repetition of it is quoted, and ver. 17
contains an allusion to the fundamental promise. The change of
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1500;</span> and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1506;&#1500;</span>
is significant; Judah is considered as the object of the proclamation of salvation,
because salvation cometh from the Jews. The correctness of this view is proved by
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 463]</span> vers. 15, 16, where that only is spoken of,
which, in the first instance, belongs to Judah; so that Israel is only received
into the communion of the salvation, in the first instance, destined for Judah.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 15, 16. &quot;<i>In those days and at that time will I cause a
righteous Sprout to grow up unto David, and he worketh justice and righteousness
in the land. In those days Judah is endowed with salvation, and Jerusalem dwelleth
safely; and this is the name by which she shall be called: The Lord our righteousness.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">It is intentionally that the promise is here repeated in the former
shape, in order to show that it still existed; that the glaring contrast presented
by the present state of things was not able to annul it; that even in the view of
the destruction, of the deepest abasement of the house of David, it still retained
its right and power. Instead of <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1511;&#1497;&#1502;&#1493;&#1514;&#1497;</span>, the
more suitable <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1488;&#1510;&#1502;&#1497;&#1495;</span> is here used, because
the reference to Jehoiakim does not take place in this passage, as it did in the
previous one. Instead of Israel, which is found there, we have here Jerusalem, because
it was just the restoration of Jerusalem, which it was so difficult for the faithful
to believe, after its destruction had been described in ver. 4 ff. For the same
reason, the Prophet here assigns the same name to Jerusalem which he did there to
the Sprout of David. The same city, which as yet is groaning under the wrath of
God, shall, in future, be endowed with righteousness by the Lord.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 17. &quot;<i>For thus saith the Lord: There shall not be cut of
from David a man sitting upon the throne of the house of Israel.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The connection with what precedes is pertinently brought out by
<i>Calvin</i>: &quot;The Prophet had spoken of the restoration of the Church; that doctrine
he now confirms by promising, that both the kingly and priestly office should be
perpetual; and it was just these two things which constituted the salvation of the
people. For, without a king, they were just like a cut-off tree, or a mutilated
body; without a priest they were in a state of dispersion. For the priest was the
mediator between God and the people, but the king represented the person of God.&quot;
The expression <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1500;&#1488; &#1497;&#1499;&#1512;&#1514;</span>, &quot;there shall not be
cut off,&quot; &amp;c., is a simple repetition of the promise to David, in
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 464]</span> that form in which it had been quoted by David
himself, shortly before his death, in his address to Solomon, 1 Kings ii. 4, and
afterwards twice by Solomon, 1 Kings viii. 25, ix. 5. It does not designate an uninterrupted
succession, but forms the contrast only to a breaking off for ever. This appears
even from the circumstance that, in the fundamental promise, God reserves to himself
the punishment of the apostate members of the Davidic house, and that in Jeremiah
the announcement of its utter abasement is so frequently repeated.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 18, &quot;<i>And to the Levitical priests there shall not be cut
off before me a man, offering burnt-offerings, and kindling meat-offerings, and
doing sacrifice all days.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">In order rightly to understand these words, it is necessary to
go back to their cause; for it is from the grief only that the comfort receives
its explanation. The Prophet has here not by any means to do with members of the
tribe of Levi mourning over the loss of the prerogatives of their tribe. If such
were the case, it would be necessary to hold fast by the letter, inasmuch as it
is only when the letter is adhered to, that the promise can afford consolation for
such grief. The Prophet&#39;s consolations, on the contrary, are destined for all the
believers, who were mourning over the destruction of the relation to God, which
hitherto had existed through the mediation of the tribe of Levi. If only the relation
remained, it was of little importance whether it was realised by the tribe of Levi,
as heretofore, or in some other way. Just as the grief has respect to the substance
only, so has the consolation also. Israel, in future too, shall retain free access
to his reconciled God,--that is the fundamental thought; and every thing by which
this thought was manifested and realised in history, in what form soever it might
be, must be viewed as comprehended in it. We thus obtain a threefold fulfilment:
1. In the time after the return from the captivity, the consolation was realised
in the form in which it is here expressed. The fact, that God admitted and promoted
the rebuilding of the temple, was an actual declaration that the Levitical priesthood
was reinstated in its mediatorial office. 2. In the highest degree the idea of the
Levitical priesthood was realised through Christ, who, as a High-Priest and Mediator,
bore the sins of His people, and made intercession for the transgressors, and
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 465]</span> in whom the Levitical priesthood ceased, just
as the seed-corn disappears in the stalk. 3. Through Christ, the believers themselves
became priests, and obtained free access to the Father.--The following reasons show
that we have a right to maintain this independence of the thought upon the form:
1. The Prophet is so penetrated with the thought of the glory of the New Dispensation
far outshining that of the Old, that, <i>even a priori</i>, we could not suppose
that, as regards the priesthood, he expected an eternal duration of its form, hitherto
so poor. It is the substance only which, in his view, is permanent. One need only
compare the section, chap. xxxi. 31 ff. How intentionally does he here bring forward
the idea that the New Covenant would not be like the Old; how does he point from
the shadow to the substance! But it is especially chap. iii. 16 which, in this respect,
is to be regarded. In that passage, the ceasing of the former dignity of the Ark
of the Covenant is announced repeatedly, and in the strongest terms; and we have
already seen that, along with the Ark of the Covenant, the temple, the Levitical
priesthood, the whole sacrificial service stands in the closest and most indissoluble
connection; so that all this must fall along with it. 2. A very important proof
is furnished by ver. 22, which must be regarded as a declaration, by the Prophet
himself, as to the manner in which he wishes to be understood. Now, in that verse,
it is promised that all the descendants of Abraham shall be changed into Levites;
and this is declared to form a part of the eternal acceptance of the tribe of Levi,
promised in the verse under consideration. This shows then, that, in the verse under
review, the Levites cannot come into consideration as descendants of Levi after
the flesh, but only as regards their destination and vocation. 3. As the most ancient
and authentic interpreter of Jeremiah, Zechariah must be considered. He was most
anxious to obviate the same fears which Jeremiah here meets; and, in him, the first
two of the three features which Jeremiah comprehends in the unity of the idea, appear
separated, but in such a manner that the connecting unity of the idea is not lost
sight of In Zech. iii., God assures the people that, notwithstanding the greatness
of their sins, He would not only allow the office of High-priest to continue as
heretofore, and accept his mediation, but that, at some future period,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 466]</span> He would also send the true High-priest, who
should make a complete and everlasting atonement. In ver. 8, the High-priest and
his colleagues in the priestly office are designated as types of Christ who, putting
most completely to shame the people&#39;s despair in God&#39;s mercy, should fully accomplish
the expiation and atonement which the former had effected only imperfectly. In chap.
iv. the priestly is, along with the royal order, designated as one of the two sons
of the oil, the two anointed ones of the Lord, whose anointing remaineth for ever;
and from chap. vi. 13, where the Messiah appears as the true High-priest and King
at the same time, it appears that, here too, the shadow only belongs to the Levitical
priesthood, but the substance to Christ. 4. Elsewhere, too, plain examples are not
wanting, in which the idea of the priesthood only is regarded, while the peculiar
form of its manifestation under the Old Testament is lost sight of. Among those
is Is. lxi. 6, where, in reference to all Israel, it is said: &quot;And ye shall be named
priests of Jehovah, ministers of our God shall they call you.&quot; Here the change of
all Israel into the tribe of Levi is announced; and the objection which, perhaps,
might be brought forward, that here only priests in general are spoken of, while
Jeremiah speaks of Levitical priests, is met by the second passage, chap. lxvi.
21: &quot;And from them also will I take for <i>Levitical</i> priests saith the Lord.&quot;
It makes no difference for our purpose whether &quot;from them&quot; be referred to the Gentiles
(which is the correct view, compare p. 360), as is done by <i>Vitringa</i> and
<i>Gesenius</i>, or to the Israelites living in exile. For, although the latter
interpretation be received, yet so much is certain, that such shall be taken for
Levitical priests as were not descendants of Levi: for, otherwise, no <i>taking</i>,
no special divine mercy would have taken place. Even the Law already knows an <i>
ideal</i> priesthood by the side of the ordinary one; and such an one meets us also
in Ps. xcix. 6; compare my Commentary on that passage.--After having thus fixed
the sense of the promise referring to the Levitical priesthood, it will not be difficult
to discover the right view in reference to the family of David. Here, too, a threefold
fulfilment takes place. 1. It was realized in the times immediately after the captivity,
when Zerubbabel, a scion of the Davidic house, became the mediator of the mercies
which God <span class="pagenum">[Pg 467]</span> as King, vouchsafed to His people.
To a certain degree, that mercy too comes in here which, at a later period, God,
in His capacity as King, bestowed upon the people by means of civil rulers, who
were not from the house of David. For, since the dominion had been for ever transferred
to the house of David, these rulers can be considered only as being engrafted into
it, as representatives and vice-regents,--much in the same way as the blessing,
which was bestowed upon the people by the priestly office of the non-priest Samuel,
must be considered as being included in the promise in reference to the Aaronic
priesthood. For all that God vouchsafed through those rulers, was for the sake of
the Davidic house only, which for ever had been destined to be the channel of His
regal blessings. If the kingdom of David had really been at an end, He would not
have given to the people even those rulers, and the deliverance and prosperity granted
to them,--as is clearly seen from a comparison of the times, after the great Hero
of David&#39;s race ascended the throne, when every trace of the regal grace of God
in raising other rulers ceased; for now, that the race of David itself rules again,
and for ever, no representation of it can any more take place. But, in the passage
under consideration, it would the less be suitable to separate everything which
does not, in the strictest sense, belong to it, that here the promise to David is
not viewed with reference to him and his house, but solely with reference to the
people. Hence, the manifestation of the regal grace of God forms the centre; and
the house of David comes into consideration, only in so far as it was destined to
be the mediator of this grace. 2. It was fulfilled in Christ; and from vers. 15,
16, it appears that the Prophet had this fulfilment chiefly in view. These two fulfilments
are connected with one another by Zechariah also, in chap. iv.--3. It was realized
by the raising of the whole true posterity of Abraham to the royal dignity, through
Christ. This most striking antithesis to the despair--the despair saying: there
is no king in Israel; the consolation: all Israel are kings--is expressly brought
forward in ver. 22.--We still remark that we must not, by any means, as is commonly
done, translate: &quot;To the priests and Levites,&quot; but, as also in Is. lxvi. 21: To
the Levitical priests; compare the arguments in proof in <i>Genuineness of the Pentateuch</i>,
p. 329 ff. The epithet, <span class="pagenum">[Pg 468]</span> &quot;Levitical,&quot; is added
in order to prevent the thought that, perhaps, priests in another than the literal
sense are spoken of, compare p. 360. It serves therefore the same purpose as the
expression: &quot;He ruleth as a king,&quot; in chap. xxxiii. 5.--As regards the sacrifices,
we must not by any means suppose, as is done by the ancient interpreters, that spiritual
sacrifices are here simply spoken of. The correct view rather is, that the Prophet
represents the substance under its present form, in and with which it would now
soon be lost for a season; and as he has to do with the substance only, he does
not say anything as to whether this substance would, in future, rise again in the
same form, and whether it was to continue for ever in that form. History has answered
the first in the affirmative, and the second in the negative; and from chap. iii.
16, it appears that the Prophet, too, would, upon <i>inquiry</i>, have answered
in the negative as regards the last point. Moreover, how well they knew, even under
the Old Testament dispensation, to distinguish, in reference to the sacrifices,
between the substance and the form, considering the latter as a thing merely accidental,
is seen from passages such as Hosea xiv. 3 (2): &quot;Take with you words, and turn to
the Lord and say unto Him: <i>Take</i> all iniquity, and <i>give</i> good, and we
will recompense to thee bulls, our lips.&quot; Here the thanks are represented as the
substance of the thank-offering, and, indeed, so perfectly, that the thank-offering,
the bullocks, is <i>entirely</i> where only thanks, the lips, are. The outward sacrifice
is the vessel only in which the gift is presented to God. <i>Farther</i>--Ps. iv.
14, where, in contrast to the merely external sacrifices, it is said: &quot;Offer unto
God thanksgivings;&quot; Mal. i. 11, and many other passages.</p>
<p class="normal">Vers. 19, 20. &quot;<i>And the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, saying:
Thus saith the Lord, If ye will make void my covenant, the day, and my covenant,
the night, so that there shall be no more day and night in their season</i>; Ver.
21. <i>Then also shall be void my covenant with David, my servant, that he shall
not have one who reigns on his throne, and with the Levitical priests, my servants.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal" dir="ltr">The word <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1508;&#1512;&#1493;</span>
is very significant. <i>Calvin</i> says: &quot;The Prophet indirectly reproves the wickedness
of the people, because, as much as lay with them, they destroyed the covenant
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 469]</span> of God by their obstreperous cries.... This
incredulity, therefore, the Prophet blames, and it is as if he were saying: To what
are these complaints to lead? It is just as if you were trying to draw down sun
and moon from heaven, and to do away with the difference between day and night,
and overturn all the laws of nature, because it is I, the same God, whose will it
was that the night should follow the day, who have also promised, &amp;c.&quot;--<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1497;&#1493;&#1501;</span>
and <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1492;&#1500;&#1497;&#1500;&#1492;</span> are appositions to: My covenant.
The day and night in their regular succession are the covenant which is here spoken
of The phrase <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1497;&#1493;&#1502;&#1501; &#1493;&#1500;&#1497;&#1500;&#1492;</span>, which signifies
&quot;by day and night,&quot; &quot;daily and nightly,&quot; stands here for: <i>tempus diurnum et nocturnum</i>.
&quot;The covenant,&quot; <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1489;&#1512;&#1497;&#1514;</span>, does not by any means
stand here in the signification <i>stabilis ordinatio</i>; nor is it be considered
as being entered into with the day and night; these, on the contrary, are the covenant-blessings.
God, who vouchsafed <i>them</i>, and all that is connected with them, that the sun
shines by day, and the moon by night, enters thereby, according to the explanation
given on chap. xxxi. 32, into a covenant with man. By the inviolable maintenance
of the course of nature, He binds himself to the inviolable maintenance of the moral
order. This clearly appears when we consider that, after the great flood, the covenant
with nature is anew entered into, and its inviolability anew established; comp.
Gen. ix. 9: &quot;Behold, I establish my covenant <i>with you</i>, and with your seed
after you;&quot; viii. 22: &quot;All the days of the earth, seed time and harvest, and heat
and cold, and summer and autumn, and day and night shall not cease any more.&quot; With
these covenant-promises, covenant-laws and obligations are connected, which the
covenant imposes. With this covenant of nature, which is common to all men, and
which, at Noah&#39;s time, was not made for the first time, but only renewed, the covenant
of grace, which is peculiar to Israel only, stands on a level. To assert that the
latter has become void, is nothing else than to attempt to pull sun and moon down
from heaven. For it is one and the same God who has made both covenants.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 22. &quot;<i>As the host of heaven is not numbered, and as the
sand of the sea is not measured, so will I increase the seed of David, my servant,
and the Levites that minister unto me.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">Even considered in itself, the literal fulfilment of this verse
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 470]</span> involves an absurdity. Such an increase of
the bodily descendants of David lies beyond the bounds of possibility; and even
if this were not the case, yet this increase, just as the similar increase of the
Levites, would not have the nature of a promise, but that of a threatening. At all
events, the consolation would have no relation to, or connection with, the grief
For the latter did not refer to the number of the descendants of David, and that
of the Levites, but to their acceptance with God, and, in them, to the acceptance
of the people; but that acceptance has nothing to do with number. To this, another
reason is still to be added. It cannot be denied that there is a verbal reference
to the promise to Abraham in Gen. xv. 5, xxii. 17. Since, then, these words, which
originally referred to all Israel, are here transferred to the family of David,
and to the Levites, it is thereby sufficiently intimated that all Israel shall be
changed into the family of David, and into the tribe of Levi. This idea need not
at all surprise us. It has its foundation in the Law itself All that is announced
here is, that the vocation and destination of the covenant-people, which is already
expressed in the Law, but which hitherto was realised only very imperfectly, is,
at some future period, to be perfectly realised. In Exod. xix. 6, God says of Israel:
&quot;Ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1502;&#1500;&#1499;&#1514;
&#1499;&#1492;&#1504;&#1497;&#1501;</span>.&quot;<sup class="ftnRef"><a name="ftnRef_470a" href="#ftn_470a">[2]</a></sup>
Hence, first a kingdom. The nature of a kingdom is, not to have any power over it
other than the Divine power, and to have everything else under its authority. By
this declaration, the dominion of the world was secured to the people of God. This
high prerogative always remained with the covenant-people so long as they had not,
by their guilt, spontaneously got under a moral servitude to the world. The outward
servitude was always a reflection of the inward only. It never was inflicted upon
the covenant-people as such, but always upon that covenant-people which had become
like the world. And even when this <i>unnatural</i> condition took place, this high
dignity was not forfeited by the single individuals who, knowing that they were
purchased at a high price, had kept themselves inwardly free from the bondage of
the world. Although in fetters and bonds, they yet remained inwardly free. World,
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 471]</span> sin, death, and hell, could do them no harm.
Yea, notwithstanding all outward appearance of victory, those enemies were, in reality,
ruled by them; and even their outward servitude was, when more deeply considered,
a sign of their dominion. For the Law of the Lord of Hosts was in their inward parts;
it was the living principle of their existence. It was according to this Law that
the whole world was governed; and it was according to it that the servitude of their
people also took place. They were thus co-regents with God, and, as such, ruled
over their rulers.--All the single members of this kingdom, which consists entirely
of kings, were, at the same time, to be priests. In these words it was already implied
and declared, that the Levitical priesthood, which was instituted at a later period,
could not have that importance which the priesthood had with other nations of antiquity,
where priests and people stood in an absolute antithesis, which admitted of no mediation,
and where it was the priests only who stood in an immediate relation to God. It
was thereby implied and declared, that the priests, in one aspect, (in other respects,
they were types and foreshadowings of Christ) possessed rights that were only transferred
to them; that they were representatives of Christ, and that, hence, their mediation
would, at some future period, disappear altogether. And in order that the people
might always remain fully conscious of this; in order that they might know that
they themselves were the real bearers of the priestly dignity, they retained, even
after the institution of the Levitical priesthood, that priestly function which
formed the root and foundation of all others, viz., the slaying of the covenant-sacrifice,
of the paschal lamb, which formed the centre of all other sacrifices, inasmuch as
the latter served only as a supplement to it. That, even under the Old Testament
dispensation, this importance of the paschal rite was duly recognized, is seen from
<i>Philo</i>, <i>de vita Mos.</i> (p. 686, Francf.): &quot;In offering up the paschal
lamb, the office of the laymen is by no means simply to bring the sacrificial animals
to the altar, that they may be slain and offered up by the priests; but, according
to the regulations of the Law, the whole people exercise priestly functions, inasmuch
as every one in his own behalf offers up the prescribed sacrifice.&quot;--We have thus
here before <span class="pagenum">[Pg 472]</span> us the highest completion of the
comfort for the mourning covenant-people. They are not merely to receive back their
king, their priests; nay, they are altogether to be changed into a kingly and priestly
generation. It must not be overlooked that, in substance, this was already contained
in the promise to Abraham. We have already proved in Vol. i. p. 211, ff., that this
promise to Abraham does not refer to a great number of bodily descendants, <i>tales
quales</i>, but that, on the contrary, it refers only to such sons of Abraham as
are, at the same time, sons of God; hence, to a royal and priestly generation.--If
now we look to the fulfilment, the passage which, above all, presents itself, is
1 Pet. ii. 9: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8017;&#956;&#949;&#8150;&#962; &#948;&#8050; &#947;&#941;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#7952;&#954;&#955;&#949;&#954;&#964;&#972;&#957;, &#946;&#945;&#963;&#943;&#955;&#949;&#953;&#959;&#957; &#7985;&#949;&#961;&#940;&#964;&#949;&#965;&#956;&#945;
&#954;.&#964;.&#955;.</span> Here that passage of Exodus is represented as a prophecy which, in
the present only, was fulfilled. Israel has now become that which, according to
its destiny, it ought always to have been, a host of royal priests,--priests who
at the same time have a royal nature and character. That which now already exists
perfectly in the germ, shall, at some future period, come forth in full development,
according to Rev. v. 10: <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#960;&#959;&#943;&#951;&#963;&#945;&#962; &#945;&#8016;&#964;&#959;&#8058;&#962; &#964;&#8183; &#952;&#949;&#8183;
&#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#946;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#955;&#949;&#8150;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7985;&#949;&#961;&#949;&#8150;&#962;, &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#946;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#955;&#949;&#973;&#963;&#959;&#965;&#963;&#953;&#957; &#7952;&#960;&#8054; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#947;&#8134;&#962;</span> Believers, when sin
has been extirpated in them, shall have the freest access to God. When His will
shall have become theirs, and when, at the same time, His dominion over the whole
world appears more visibly, they shall unconditionally rule with Him. How this dignity
of theirs has its foundation in Christ, is seen from Rev. i. 5, 6, where the words:
<span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#960;&#959;&#943;&#951;&#963;&#949;&#957; &#7969;&#956;&#8118;&#962; &#946;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#955;&#949;&#943;&#945;&#957;, &#7985;&#949;&#961;&#949;&#8150;&#962; &#964;&#8183; &#952;&#949;&#8183; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#960;&#945;&#964;&#961;&#8054;
&#945;&#8017;&#964;&#959;&#8166;</span>, stand in close connection to <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#8001; &#7940;&#961;&#967;&#969;&#957;
&#964;&#8182;&#957; &#946;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#955;&#8051;&#969;&#957; &#964;&#8134;&#962; &#947;&#8134;&#962;</span>, and to <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#954;&#945;&#8055; &#955;&#8059;&#963;&#945;&#957;&#964;&#953; &#7969;&#956;&#8118;&#962;
&#7936;&#960;&#8056; &#964;&#8182;&#957; &#7937;&#956;&#961;&#964;&#953;&#8182;&#957; &#7969;&#956;&#8182;&#957; &#7952;&#957; &#964;&#8183; &#945;&#7989;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#953; &#945;&#8017;&#964;&#959;&#8166;</span>.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 23. &quot;<i>And the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, saying:</i>
Ver. 24. <i>Dost thou not see what this people are speaking, and say: The two families
which the Lord hath chosen, He hath now rejected them, and my people they despise,
that they should still be a people before them.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">It is scarcely conceivable how modern interpreters can assert
that by &quot;this people,&quot; not the Israelites, but Gentiles, the Egyptians or Chaldeans,
or the &quot;neighbours of the Jews on the Chaboras,&quot; (<i>Hitzig</i>), or the Samaritans
(<i>Movers</i>), are to be understood. In advancing such assertions, it is overlooked
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 473]</span> that the Prophet has here quite the same persons
in view as in the whole remaining section, and as in these chapter&#39;s throughout,
viz., those among Israel--and to them more or less all belonged, even those most
faithful--who, because they saw Israel prostrate, for ever despaired of its deliverance
and salvation; and, indeed, for the most part, in such a manner as to give to this
despair a good aspect, viz., that of humility. They imagined, and said that the
people had sinned in such a manner against God, that He was free from all his obligations,
and could not at all receive them again. To those the Prophet shows that such a
thought is, notwithstanding the fair appearance, blasphemy. All despair abases God
into an idol, into a creature. Faith holds fast by the word, by the promise. It
says: Although sin abounds with us, the grace of God does much more abound. As truly
as God always remains God, so surely His people will always remain His people. He
indeed chastises them, but He does not give them over to death. One need only consider
the <span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1514;&#1508;&#1512;&#1493;</span> in ver. 20.--The expression &quot;this
people,&quot; is contemptuous, comp. Is. viii. 11. The Prophet thereby intimates that
those who use such language, cease thereby to be members of the people of God. The
&quot;two families&quot; are Judah and Israel. These had, in the preceding verses, likewise
been, in substance, the subject of discourse; for the election and rejection of
the tribe of Levi, and of the house of David, had been treated of in so far only,
as they stood in relation to the election or rejection of the people; so that here
only the same thing is repeated in a different form, in consideration of the fact,
that weak faith and despair are so slow to hear. The words: &quot;He hath now rejected
them,&quot; were, in a certain sense, true; but not in the sense of the speakers. They,
on the contrary, maintained, in opposition to the election, a rejection for ever,
which was tantamount to: Jehovah, the eternal and unchangeable One, is no more Jehovah;
He is a man that He lieth, and a son of man that He repenteth. As surely as God
is Jehovah, so surely also <span lang="el" class="Greek">&#7936;&#956;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#956;&#941;&#955;&#951;&#964;&#945; &#964;&#8048; &#967;&#945;&#961;&#943;&#963;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#945;
&#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7969; &#954;&#955;&#8134;&#963;&#953;&#962; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#952;&#949;&#959;&#8166;</span>, Rom. xi. 29. The expression &quot;<i>my</i> people,&quot; directs
attention to how God is now despised in Israel. On the contrast between &quot;<i>my</i>
people&quot; and &quot;a people,&quot; compare remarks on chap. xxxi. 36.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 25. &quot;<i>Thus saith the Lord: If not my covenant daily</i>
<span class="pagenum">[Pg 474]</span> <i>and nightly, if I have not appointed the
ordinances of heaven and earth</i>;&quot;--</p>
<p class="normal">Compare ver. 20. The covenant daily and nightly, <i>i.e.</i>,
the covenant which refers to the constant and regular alternation of day and night.
The ordinances of heaven and earth denote the whole course of nature,--especially
the relations of sun, moon, and stars, to the earth, comp. chap. xxxi. 35--in so
far as it is regulated by God&#39;s ordinance, and is, therefore, a lasting one.</p>
<p class="normal">Ver. 26. &quot;<i>So will I also cast away the seed of Jacob, and of
David, my servant, that I do not take farther from his seed rulers over the seed
of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For I will turn to their captivity, and have mercy
upon them.</i>&quot;</p>
<p class="normal">The casting away of the seed of Jacob, and that of the seed of
David, are inseparably connected. For since, by the promise to David, the kingdom
had been for ever bound together with his race, Israel was no more the people of
God, and no more a people at all, if David was no more the servant of God. The Plural
<span lang="he" class="Hebrew">&#1502;&#1513;&#1500;&#1497;&#1501;</span> is easily accounted for, from the circumstance
that it was not the number, but only the <i>fact</i> that was here concerned (comp.
remarks on chap. xxiii. 4, and, at the same time, those on ver. 18); but it is beyond
any doubt, that the Prophet has here in view the revival of the dominion of David
in the Messiah,--has it, at least, chiefly in view. The enumeration of the three
Patriarchs recalls to mind the whole series of the promises granted to them. The
words: &quot;I will turn to their captivity&quot; (not: &quot;I will turn their captivity,&quot; compare
remarks on Ps. xiv. 7; captivity is an image of misery), rest on Deut. xxx. 3.</p>
<hr class="ftn">
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_460a" href="#ftnRef_460a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[1]</sup></a> They have been joined by <i>Movers</i> (<i>de
	utriusque recens. Jerem. indole</i>), who declares ver. 18 and 21&#8211;24 to be a
	later interpolation (comp. against this view <i>Küper</i>, S. 173, and <i>Wichelhaus</i>,
	de Jerem. Vers. Alex., p. 170), and <i>Hitzig</i>, according to whom the whole
	portion, vers. 14&#8211;26, consists of &quot;a series of single additions from a later
	period.&quot;</p>
</div>
<div class="ftn">
	<p class="ftnText"><a name="ftn_470a" href="#ftnRef_470a">
	<sup class="ftnRef">[2]</sup></a> Compare the discussions on this passage in
	my Commentary on Rev. i. 6.</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<h4>END OF VOLUME SECOND.</h4>








<pre>





End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Christology of the Old Testament: And
a Commentary on the Messianic Predictions. Vol. 2, by Ernst Hengstenberg

*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CHRISTOLOGY OF OLD TESTAMENT, V2 ***

***** This file should be named 30608-h.htm or 30608-h.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
        https://www.gutenberg.org/3/0/6/0/30608/

Produced by Charles Bowen, from images obtained from Google Books.

Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
will be renamed.

Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
redistribution.



*** START: FULL LICENSE ***

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
https://gutenberg.org/license).


Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works

1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.  See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
States.

1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org

1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
1.E.9.

1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.

1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.

1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
that

- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."

- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
     License.  You must require such a user to return or
     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
     Project Gutenberg-tm works.

- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
     of receipt of the work.

- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.

1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
your equipment.

1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.


Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm

Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.


Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.

The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
page at https://pglaf.org

For additional contact information:
     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
     Chief Executive and Director
     gbnewby@pglaf.org


Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
particular state visit https://pglaf.org

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate


Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.


Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.


Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:

     https://www.gutenberg.org

This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.


</pre>

</body>

</html>
generated by cgit v1.2.3 (git 2.25.1) at 2026-01-06 11:08:58 +0000