Download to read offline
![Ewald’s title suggests a court of justice; and it has often been pointed out that God is both Judge and
Plaintiff, Israel the defendant, heaven and earth the jury, while the prophet is both principal witness and
prosecuting attorney. But all this is apt to withdraw the attention from the real pathos of the scene. No
doubt there is a judge, and judgment is pronounced. But the Judge is a Father. The paraphernalia of the
court-room pass into insignificance when there is heard the exceeding bitter cry, “I have nourished and
brought up children, and they have rebelled against me.”
The third verse is an illustration. It shows the ignorance of the children in contrast to the knowledge of the
domestic animals.
I
The Knowledge of the Domestic Animals
“The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib.”
1. It is knowledge of their owner. They both know and acknowledge him. He on his part not only owns but
takes care of them. He rears them, tames them, houses them, and heals them. In return they serve him.
True to the life, no sooner had the drove got within the walls than it began to disperse. Every ox knew
perfectly well his owner, and the way to his house; nor did it get bewildered for a moment in the mazes of
the narrow and crooked alleys. As for the ass, he walked straight to the door, and up to “his master’s
crib,” without turning to bid good-night to his companions of the field. I followed some into their habitation,
and saw each take his appropriate manger, and begin his evening meal of dry tibn.
1 [Note: 1 Thomson, The Land
and the Book, ii. 387.]
2. Their service brings them into fellowship—such fellowship as is possible between man and the lower
animals. There is some sense of mutual dependence. There is affection and sometimes self-sacrifice.
The prophet speaks of the domestic animals of his own people. We should see his point more clearly if
we thought of the horse and the dog.
It is not an uncommon thing in the Argentine pampas—I have on two occasions witnessed it myself—for a
riding horse to come home to die. I am speaking of horses that live out in the open, and have to be
hunted to the corral or enclosure, or roughly captured with a lasso as they run, when they are required.
On going out one summer evening—I was only a boy at the time—I saw one of the horses of the
establishment standing unsaddled and unbridled leaning his head over the gate. Going to the spot I
stroked his nose, and turning to an old native who happened to be standing near, asked him what could
be the meaning of such a thing. “I think he is going to die,” he answered; “horses often come to the house
to die.” And next morning the poor beast was found lying dead not twenty yards from the gate.
I now believe that the sensations of sickness and approaching death in the riding horse of the pampas
resemble or simulate the pains, so often experienced, of hunger, thirst, and fatigue, combined together
with the oppressive sensations caused by the ponderous native saddle, with its huge surcingle of raw
hide, drawn up so tightly as to hinder free respiration. The suffering animal remembers how at the last
relief invariably came when the twelve or fifteen hours’ torture was over, and when the great iron bridle
and ponderous gear were removed, and he had freedom and food and drink and rest. At the gate or at
the door of his master’s house the sudden relief had always come to him, and there does he go in his
sickness to find it again.
2 [Note: W. H. Hudson, The Naturalist in La Plata.]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-43-320.jpg)
![God, painful to the sensible soul; they were so to David when he complained (Psa_38:5), My
wounds stink, and are corrupt, because of my foolishness. See Psa_32:3, Psa_32:4. No
attempts were made for reformation, or, if they were, they proved ineffectual: The wounds have
not been closed, not bound up, nor mollified with ointment. While sin remains unrepented of
the wounds are unsearched, unwashed, the proud flesh in them not cut out, and while,
consequently, it remains unpardoned, the wounds are not mollified or closed up, nor any thing
done towards the healing of them and the preventing of their fatal consequences.
5. JAMISON, “Why — rather, as Vulgate, “On what part.” Image from a body covered all
over with marks of blows (Psa_38:3). There is no part in which you have not been smitten.
head ... sick, etc. — not referring, as it is commonly quoted, to their sins, but to the
universality of their punishment. However, sin, the moral disease of the head or intellect, and
the heart, is doubtless made its own punishment (Pro_1:31; Jer_2:19; Hos_8:11). “Sick,”
literally, “is in a state of sickness” [Gesenius]; “has passed into sickness” [Maurer].
6. K&D, “In this v. a disputed question arises as to the words ה ֶל־מ ַע (ה ֶ,מ the shorter, sharper
form of ה ָ,מ which is common even before non-gutturals, Ges. §32, 1): viz., whether they mean
“wherefore,” as the lxx, Targums, Vulgate, and most of the early versions render them, or “upon
what,” i.e., upon which part of the body, as others, including Schröring, suppose. Luzzatto
maintains that the latter rendering is spiritless, more especially because there is nothing in the
fact that a limb has been struck already to prevent its being struck again; but such objections as
these can only arise in connection with a purely literal interpretation of the passage. If we
adopted this rendering, the real meaning would be, that there was no judgment whatever that
had not already fallen upon Israel on account of its apostasy, so that it was not far from utter
destruction. We agree, however, with Caspari in deciding in favour of the meaning “to what” (to
what end). For in all the other passage in which the expression occurs (fourteen times in all), it
is used in this sense, and once even with the verb hiccah, to smite (Num_22:32), whilst it is only
in Isa_1:6 that the idea of the people as one body is introduced; whereas the question “upon
what” would require that the reader or hearer should presuppose it here. But in adopting the
rendering “whereto,” or to what end, we do not understand it, as Malbim does, in the sense of
Cui bono, with the underlying thought, “It would be ineffectual, as all the previous smiting has
proved;” for this thought never comes out in a direct expression, as we should expect, but rather
- according to the analogy of the questions with lamah in Eze_18:31; Jer_44:7 -in the sense of
qua de causa, with the underlying thought, “There would be only an infatuated pleasure in your
own destruction.”
Isa_1:5 we therefore render thus: “Why would ye be perpetually smitten, multiplying
rebellion?” עוֹד (with tiphchah, a stronger disjunctive than tebir) belongs to וּⅴ ; see the same
form of accentuation in Eze_19:9. They are not two distinct interrogative clauses (“why would ye
be smitten afresh? why do ye add revolt?” (Luzzatto), but the second clause is subordinate to the
first (without there being any necessity to supply Chi, “because,” as Gesenius supposes), an
adverbial minor clause defining the main clause more precisely; at all events this is the logical
connection, as in Isa_5:11 (cf., Psa_62:4, “delighting in lies,” and Psa_4:3, “loving vanity”): lxx
“adding iniquity.” Sarah (rebellion) is a deviation from truth and rectitude; and here, as in many](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-57-320.jpg)
![from it: The Lord of hosts left unto them a very small remnant, that were kept pure from the
common apostasy and kept safe and alive from the common calamity. This is quoted by the
apostle (Rom_9:27), and applied to those few of the Jewish nation who in his time embraced
Christianity, when the body of the people rejected it, and in whom the promises made to the
fathers were accomplished. Note, (1.) In the worst of times there is a remnant preserved from
iniquity and reserved for mercy, as Noah and his family in the deluge, Lot and his in the
destruction of Sodom. Divine grace triumphs in distinguishing by an act of sovereignty. (2.) This
remnant is often a very small one in comparison with the vast number of revolting ruined
sinners. Multitude is no mark of the true church. Christ's is a little flock. (3.) It is God's work to
sanctify and save some, when others are left to perish in their impurity. It is the work of his
power as the Lord of hosts. Except he had left us that remnant, there would have been none left;
the corrupters (Isa_1:4) did what they could to debauch all, and the devourers (Isa_1:7) to
destroy all, and they would have prevailed of God himself had not interposed to secure to
himself a remnant, who are bound to give him all the glory. (4.) It is good for a people that have
been saved from utter ruin to look back and see how near they were to it, just upon the brink of
it, to see how much they owed to a few good men that stood in the gap, and that that was owing
to a good God, who left them these good men. It is of the Lord's mercies that we are not
consumed.
5. JAMISON, “daughter of Zion — the city (Psa_9:14), Jerusalem and its inhabitants
(2Ki_19:21): “daughter” (feminine, singular being used as a neuter collective noun), equivalent
to sons (Isa_12:6, Margin) [Maurer]. Metropolis or “mother-city” is the corresponding term.
The idea of youthful beauty is included in “daughter.”
left — as a remnant escaping the general destruction.
cottage — a hut, made to give temporary shelter to the caretaker of the vineyard.
lodge — not permanent.
besieged — rather, as “left,” and Isa_1:9 require, preserved, namely, from the desolation all
round [Maurer].
6. K&D, ““And the daughter of Zion remains lie a hut in a vineyard; like a hammock in a
cucumber field.” The vineyard and cucumber field (mikshah, from kisshu, a cucumber, Cucumis,
not a gourd, Cucurbita; at least not the true round gourd, whose Hebrew name, dalath, does not
occur in the Old Testament) are pictured by the prophet in their condition before the harvest
(not after, as the Targums render it), when it is necessary that they should be watched. The point
of comparison therefore is, that in the vineyard and cucumber field not a human being is to be
seen in any direction; and there is nothing but the cottage and the night barrack or hammock
(cf., Job_27:18) to show that there are any human beings there at all. So did Jerusalem stand in
the midst of desolation, reaching far and wide - a sign, however, that the land was not entirely
depopulated. But what is the meaning of the third point of comparison? Hitzig renders it, “like a
watch-tower;” Knobel, “like a guard-city.” But the noun neither means a tower nor a castle
(although the latter would be quite possible, according to the primary meaning, Cingere); and
nezurah does not mean “watch” or “guard.” On the other hand, the comparison indicated (like, or
as) does not suit what would seem the most natural rendering, viz., “like a guarded city,” i.e., a](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-78-320.jpg)
!["Do not go on to offer oblation of vanity; incense of abomination is it to me; do not go on, I
say, on the new moon, and sabbath, to call a convocation: I cannot bear iniquity, together with
the most solemn congregation.''
4. HENRY, “The most pompous and costly devotions of wicked people, without a thorough
reformation of the heart and life, are so far from being acceptable to God that really they are an
abomination to him. It is here shown in a great variety of expressions that to obey is better than
sacrifice; nay, that sacrifice, without obedience, is a jest, an affront and provocation to God. The
comparative neglect which God here expresses of ceremonial observance was a tacit intimation
of what they would come to at last, when they would all be done away by the death of Christ.
What was now made little of would in due time be made nothing of. “Sacrifice and offering, and
prayer made in the virtue of them, thou wouldest not; then said I, Lo, I come.” Their sacrifices
are here represented,
(1.) As fruitless and insignificant; To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices?
Isa_1:11. They are vain oblations, Isa_1:13. In vain do they worship me, Mat_15:9. Their
attention to God's institutions was all lost labour, and served not to answer any good intention;
for, [1.] It was not looked upon as any act of duty or obedience to God: Who has required these
things at your hands? Isa_1:12. Not that God disowns his institutions, or refuses to stand by his
own warrants; but in what they did they had not an eye to him that required it, nor indeed did
he require it of those whose hands were full of blood and who continued impenitent. [2.] It did
not recommend them to God's favour. He delighted not in the blood of their sacrifices, for he did
not look upon himself as honoured by it. [3.] It would not obtain any relief for them. They pray,
but God will not hear, because they regard iniquity (Psa_66:18); he will not deliver them, for,
though they make many prayers, none of them come from an upright heart. All their religious
service turned to no account to them. Nay,
(2.) As odious and offensive. God did not only not accept them, but he did detest and abhor
them. “They are your sacrifices, they are none of mine; I am full of them, even surfeited with
them.” He needed them not (Psa_50:10), did not desire them, had had enough of them, and
more than enough. Their coming into his courts he calls treading them, or trampling upon
them; their very attendance on his ordinances was construed into a contempt of them. Their
incense, though ever so fragrant, was an abomination to him, for it was burnt in hypocrisy and
with an ill design. Their solemn assemblies he could not away with, could not see them with any
patience, nor bear the affront they gave him. The solemn meeting is iniquity; though the thing
itself was not, yet, as they managed it, it became so. It is a vexation (so some read it), a
provocation, to God, to have ordinances thus prostituted, not only by wicked people, but to
wicked purposes: “My soul hates them; they are a trouble to me, a burden, an incumbrance; I
am perfectly sick of them, and weary of bearing them.” God is never weary of hearing the
prayers of the upright, but soon weary of the costly sacrifices of the wicked. He hides his eyes
from their prayers, as that which he has an aversion to and is angry at. All this is to show, [1.]
That sin is very hateful to God, so hateful that it makes even men's prayers and their religious
services hateful to him. [2.] That dissembled piety is double iniquity. Hypocrisy in religion is of
all things most abominable to the God of heaven. Jerome applies the passage to the Jews in
Christ's time, who pretended a great zeal for the law and the temple, but made themselves and
all their services abominable to God by filling their hands with the blood of Christ and his
apostles, and so filling up the measure of their iniquities.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-105-320.jpg)
![with them.” He needed them not (Psa_50:10), did not desire them, had had enough of them,
and more than enough. Their coming into his courts he calls treading them, or trampling upon
them; their very attendance on his ordinances was construed into a contempt of them. Their
incense, though ever so fragrant, was an abomination to him, for it was burnt in hypocrisy and
with an ill design. Their solemn assemblies he could not away with, could not see them with any
patience, nor bear the affront they gave him. The solemn meeting is iniquity; though the thing
itself was not, yet, as they managed it, it became so. It is a vexation (so some read it), a
provocation, to God, to have ordinances thus prostituted, not only by wicked people, but to
wicked purposes: “My soul hates them; they are a trouble to me, a burden, an incumbrance; I
am perfectly sick of them, and weary of bearing them.” God is never weary of hearing the
prayers of the upright, but soon weary of the costly sacrifices of the wicked. He hides his eyes
from their prayers, as that which he has an aversion to and is angry at. All this is to show, [1.]
That sin is very hateful to God, so hateful that it makes even men's prayers and their religious
services hateful to him. [2.] That dissembled piety is double iniquity. Hypocrisy in religion is of
all things most abominable to the God of heaven. Jerome applies the passage to the Jews in
Christ's time, who pretended a great zeal for the law and the temple, but made themselves and
all their services abominable to God by filling their hands with the blood of Christ and his
apostles, and so filling up the measure of their iniquities.
5. JAMISON, “appointed — the sabbath, passover, pentecost, day of atonement, and feast
of tabernacles [Hengstenberg]; they alone were fixed to certain times of the year.
weary — (Isa_43:24).
6. K&D, “He gives a still stronger expression to His repugnance: “Your new-moons and your
festive seasons my soul hateth; they have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing
them.” As the soul (nephesh) of a man, regarded as the band which unites together bodily and
spiritual life, though it is not the actual principle of self-consciousness, is yet the place in which
he draws, as it were, the circle of self-consciousness, so as to comprehend the whole essence of
His being in the single thought of “I;” so, according to a description taken from godlike man, the
“soul” (nephesh) of God, as the expression “my soul” indicates, is the centre of His being,
regarded as encircled and pervaded (personated) by self-consciousness; and therefore, whatever
the soul of God hates (vid., Jer_15:1) or loves (Isa_42:1), is hated or loved in the inmost depths
and to the utmost bounds of His being (Psychol. p. 218). Thus He hated each and all of the
festivals that were kept in Jerusalem, whether the beginnings of the month, or the high feast-
days (moadim, in which, according to Lev 23, the Sabbath was also included) observed in the
course of the month. For a long time past they had become a burden and annoyance to Him: His
long-suffering was weary of such worship. “To bear” (שׂאְ,)נ in Isaiah, even in Isa_18:3, for ת ֵא ְשׂ or
את ֵשׂ ro , and here for את ֵשׂ ָ:ל Ewald, §285, c) has for its object the seasons of worship already
mentioned.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-110-320.jpg)
![("learn to do well"). If they will really amend, then he assures them of forgiveness and favor; if they refuse
and continue their rebellion, the sword will devour them.
Isa_1:16
Wash you, make you clean. The analogy of sin to defilement, and of washing to cleansing from sin, has
been felt among men universally wherever there has been any sense of sin. Outward purification by water
has been constantly made use of as typical of the recovery of inward purity. Hence the numerous
washings of the Levitical Law (Exo_29:4;
Le Exo_1:9, Exo_1:13; Num_19:7, Num_19:8, Num_19:19; Deu_21:6; Deu_23:11; etc.); hence the
ablutions of the priests in Egypt (Herod; 2.37); hence the appropriateness of the rite of baptism; hence the
symbolical washing of hands to free from complicity in blood-guiltiness (Mat_27:24). "Wash you, make
you clean, "could not be misunderstood by the Israelites; they would know that it was a requirement to
"wash their hands in innocency" (Psa_26:6; Psa_73:13), even apart from what follows. Put away the evil
of your doings from before mine eyes. Not "hide it, "for that was impossible; but remove it altogether -
in other words, "cease from it." "Cast off all the works of darkness;" get rid of evil, to begin with. So much
is negative.
17
Learn to do right; seek justice.
Defend the oppressed.[a]
Take up the cause of the fatherless;
plead the case of the widow.
1.BARNES, “Learn to do well - , To learn here is to become accustomed to, to practice it.
To do well stands opposed to all kinds of evil. “Seek judgment.” The word “judgment” - משׁפט
mishpatʖ - here means justice. The direction refers particularly to magistrates, and it is evident
that the prophet had them particularly in his view in all this discourse. Execute justice between
man and man with impartiality. The word “seek” - דרשׁוּ dı re
shu - means to pursue, to search for,](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-122-320.jpg)
![9. GREAT TEXTS, “Learning to do Well
Learn to do well.—Isa_1:17.
How is man to be distinguished from the lower animals? Man has been called a laughing animal. But do
not the apes also laugh, says Carlyle, or attempt to do it? Nor is Carlyle content with the Frenchman’s
definition that man is thecooking animal. His own definition is that man is the tool-using animal.
1 [Note: Sartor
Resartus, ch. v.]
But how will it do to describe him as the being who learns? This is Watkinson’s
definition.
2 [Note: The Bane and the Antidote, p. 169.]
Other creatures, he says, can scarcely be said to learn;
whatever pertains to their species they do immediately, instinctively, perfectly. “A lark builds its first nest
as skilfully as its last, a spider’s first embroidery is as exquisite as anything it spins in adult life, whilst a
bee constructs its first cell and compounds its first honey, with an efficiency that leaves nothing to be
desired.” It is altogether different with human beings; they have everything to learn.
I
What have we to learn?
1. We have to learn how to make the best use of the body. Hitherto the development of the body has
been done mostly out of school; it has been left to the playground. But now some attention is being given
to physical training. And we are even beginning to give our boys an opportunity of learning a trade at
school. However it is done, we must learn to use the body.
2. We must also educate the mind. We have to learn in order to know, to remember, to appreciate
literature and art, to make decisions in the conduct of life.
3. Do we stop there? Is the highest aim of education achieved when we possess “a sound mind in a
sound body”? What about the Soul? Besides learning a trade, besides learning to read and to understand
what we read, have we not also to learn to do well?
The training of the soul is scarcely recognised as any proper part of public education. Nor is the place of
the public teacher always efficiently supplied in the home. We seem to expect that our children should do
well naturally.
We are sometimes greatly pained when we detect in our young children pride, cruelty, falsehood,
dishonesty, selfishness, avarice, and other vices; but it is a mistake to lay this fact too much to heart and
to begin prophesying evil concerning them. Beginning with the piano, children make such sad work of it;
when they first try a pen, the characters are exceedingly ambiguous and the page liberally blotted; and
when for the first time they essay some task in art, the work of their pencil is utterly grotesque. But we do
not therefore despair of them, and write bitter things against them; they were sent to school to learn, and
we reasonably hope that by and by their senses will be exercised and developed, that they will shed their
barbarisms, and take a worthy place with scholars and artists. They must learn goodness as they learn
music, mathematics, languages, and art.
But is not the education of the soul the same thing as the education of the mind? That is just another way
of saying, is not cleverness goodness? And we know that cleverness is not always goodness. On the
contrary, great intellectual gifts are often found associated with great moral vices. The intellectual and
moral organs are so closely related that it is impossible to separate them in thought; yet the light of the
one is often eclipsed by the darkness of the other.
Astronomers have recently made very interesting discoveries respecting what are known as binary or
companion stars. They tell us that the two stars are in close proximity; indeed, they are so close together](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-128-320.jpg)
![that no telescope could separate their images; and yet one of them is dark and the other brilliant. The two
orbs are intimately related, and revolve round each other at slight distances; yet whilst one is bright the
other is dark, and the dark star is perpetually eclipsing its luminous companion.
1 [Note: The Bane and the Antidote,
p. 168.]
It is easy to understand the failure of “goody goody” literature. It is “goody goody” rather than good,
because it means well, but is not true either in the lower real or higher ideal sense. Its minor heroes pale
and are ineffective, while George Eliot’s Adam Bede, and Mary Garth, and Dinah live with us like friends,
and move us by their virtues,—while the heroic self-devotedness of Jean Valjean, and the infinite
goodness of the good Bishop in Les Misérables, shine in our minds and hearts as beacon lights of virtue,
made visible in the atmosphere of genius. Thus, in order that the examples of literature may work within
the mind, the literature must be good in the literary as well as in the ethical sense.
1 [Note: S. Byrant, Short Studies
in Character, p. 71.]
II
How then are we to learn to do well?
1. We need Power. We need the gift, the genius. The man who has no music in him will never learn to be
a musician. Those who visit the chapel in Milan which contains Leonardo da Vinci’s fresco of the Last
Supper see a copy of it first on the wall opposite the entrance door. But when they have seen the original
on the wall at the end of the building, they have no hesitation in preferring it. The copy shows traces of
careful workmanship, but the original has the stamp of genius.
Sir Joshua Reynolds was taken by a friend to see a picture. He was anxious to admire it, and he looked it
over with a keen and careful but favourable eye. “Capital composition; correct drawing; the colour, tone,
chiaroscuro excellent; but—but—it wants, hang it, it wants—That!” snapping his fingers; and, wanting
“that,” though it had everything else, it was worth nothing.
2 [Note: John Brown, Rab and his Friends, p. 392.]
I once knew a man who had apparently no ear for music. Possessing every opportunity for travel and
culture, he resented the fact that others enjoyed what was a closed world to him. So he set to work to
study music from the foundation. He became so expert that he could take to pieces a Wagner opera and
recompose its motifs. He enjoyed hearing such an opera rendered, but his pleasure involved scarcely any
appreciation of music. It was the pleasure accompanying the intellectual process of analysis and
synthesis, the kind of joy one has in working a difficult problem in calculus; but the man remained almost
as deaf to music as before he undertook the course of training.
3 [Note: E. H. Griggs, Moral Education, p. 22.]
The man of genius, we say, has “the gift.” The power to do well is also a gift.
This, nor gems, nor stores of gold,](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-129-320.jpg)
![Nor purple state, nor culture can bestow;
But God alone, when first His active hand
Imprints the secret bias of the soul.
Or, to put it in another way, as the poet is born, not made, so we must be born again before we learn to
do well. “The wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” St.
Paul says, “I learned in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.” He does not say, “I have
learned,” as though it had been the result of daily discipline; he goes back to the moment of the vision of
Christ.’ “It pleased God to reveal his Son in me,” and I learned that day to be content. It flashed upon him,
says R. M. Pope,
1 [Note: The Poetry of the Upward Way, p. 24.]
in the great moment of his history. When he knew
the power of Christ’s resurrection, the true explanation of life dawned upon him; the world suddenly wore
a new expression.
World—how it walled about
Life with disgrace,
Till God’s own smile came out;
That was thy face!
It is sometimes said that certain men have a natural genius for religion. What they have is natural ability
which, when taken possession of by the Spirit of God, makes them eminently successful as witnesses or
saints. How would St. Paul have used his reasoning power, or Bunyan his imagination, apart from the
grace of God?
The world is full of people who are ambitious to become poets, painters, musicians, or orators, but,
despite wearisome and pathetic application, they never do anything really first-rate; the masterpiece is not
forthcoming; they find supreme music, art, or eloquence so difficult as to be, in fact, practically impossible.
What do these baffled aspirants really need to make their work easy, and to secure them the rapture of
triumph? Give that despairing musician an atom of Mozart’s melodious brain, that halting poet a spark of
Shakespeare’s fire, that struggling painter a nerve of Turner’s colour-sense, that stammering orator a lick
of Demosthenes’ tongue, and bitter failure will be at an end; there will be no more exhausting difficulty](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-130-320.jpg)
![and delay, only the intoxicating sense of mastery, progress, and delight. More power in the learner is
what is needed, and every difficulty is vanquished, every aspiration fulfilled. So we experience repeated
difficulty and disappointment in the pursuit of holiness, because the power of Christ does not sufficiently
rest upon us. “Christ in you the hope of glory”—not the glory of the future only, but the glory of character
here and now. Let us plead for more inward vision, receptivity, and responsiveness, for more of the Spirit
that worketh mightily in full surrendered souls, and all things fair and perfect shall become possible.
1 [Note:
W. L. Watkinson, The Bane and the Antidote, p. 181.]
2. We need a Pattern. As the child who is to learn to write receives a copybook with a headline, so we
need an example if we are to learn to do well. Should the example be good or bad? Some ethical
teachers think it best to show us the repulsiveness and horror of vice. Many novelists follow this method.
“The drama,” says Mr. Watkinson, “is fond of holding up the mirror to nature, as the phrase goes, and
very ugly reflections they commonly are; one might think that the stage existed in the interests of the
doctrine of original sin. Newspapers foster purity by raking in the kennels, and journals with religious and
moral pretensions go to an extreme in exhuming and exhibiting repulsive incidents in individual and social
life.”
2 [Note: Ibid. p. 175.]
But how often are drunkards reformed by the sight of a drunkard? It is well known
that murders are apt to follow when the details of some ghastly murder are given in the newspapers. We
might as well hope to obtain a good style by familiarising ourselves with specimens of bad English. Let
the pattern be good, and as good as possible. As William Tell has made many patriots, as Florence
Nightingale has trained many nurses, as Lord Shaftesbury has shown the way to many philanthropists, so
the Lord Jesus Christ is the Pattern for all who would learn to do well. “Learn of me” is His own invitation,
and the Apostles are aware that the only way by which they themselves learned to do well was by
“looking unto Jesus.”
I remember speaking severely to a five-year-old child who was misbehaving at table. She answered quite
discourteously. On being asked why she had spoken so, she said, “Oh, I only wanted to show you the
tone of voice you used!”
1 [Note: E. H. Griggs, Moral Education, p. 190.]
3. We need Practice. How does a young man learn to cycle? By practising it. How does a young medical
man attain to usefulness in his profession? By the practice of it. He calls himself a practitioner, and his
business a practice.
“Do! Do! Do! Let your picture go, and do another!” said William Hunt to his students when they asked him
a thousand curious questions about lines, colours, and effects. In doing, they were to know and excel.
And the teachers of science specially demand that all theoretical knowledge shall go hand in hand with
experiment. The student must keep on applying his knowledge; only by repeated appeals to the facts of](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-131-320.jpg)
![nature does he learn the truth and become a real philosopher. We know only through doing, and through
doing ever do better. The famous physician John Hunter used to say to his pupils, “Don’t think, try.”
1. Take the virtue of contentment. In our best moments we feel that fretfulness and ingratitude partake of
the nature of blasphemy; yet the repinings and soreness of the soul are subdued only through repeated
failure and discipline.
It is true, no doubt, that there is a secret, and that the secret of contentment, as of every other virtue, may
be learned in a moment. But for the fulness of the following of Christ in contentment there is need of the
patient discipline of years. Contentment, says Dr. J. B. Campbell, is less a gift or a grace than a growth. It
is the flower and fruit of careful cultivation. And he mentions three things that aid in its cultivation. (1) A
just consideration of the worth of things. We shall never find contentment while we value the things that
are seen above those that are not seen, the trivial and temporal above the essential and eternal, the
material and physical above the moral and spiritual. (2) Confidence in God. He is a rewarder of those that
diligently seek Him. He is never unmindful of our work and labour of love. Then disappointments become
His appointments, and all things work together for good. (3) Co-operation with God. For this makes failure
impossible, this gives assurance that no word or work is vain. But co-operation with God demands the
consecration of self to His service. And so the simple secret of contentment is surrender to God’s will.
Does anyone doubt it? Let him try it. Does anyone desire it? Let him do it.
2. Take the virtue of sincerity. Some men are naturally theatrical; they constantly catch themselves
making postures; their life is vitiated and disfigured by endless pretence, affectation, and unreality.
Through repeated and bitter castigations of the soul, men master this passion for masquerading and
attain sincerity, simplicity, and thoroughness of life.
There comes to me a thought of Carlyle’s, which contains a world of wisdom: “The true merit of originality
is not novelty; it is sincerity.” That, as a motto for all who think and speak, may be added to a theory of
life, and become the hidden text of many a moral lesson indirectly conveyed through intellectual criticism
to others. How cheerful it is to think upon! We can all be sincere; we can all be original.
1 [Note: S. Bryant,
Studies in Character, p. 75.]
3. Take the virtue of veracity. How much it costs us to learn to speak the truth, to act the truth, to live the
truth. We suppress, distort, exaggerate, colour and discolour.
Instead of saying plain “yes,” or plain “no,” “it is so,” “it is not the case,” or some other simple,
straightforward phrase of assent or denial, a man swears or protests in some foolish way, thereby](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-132-320.jpg)
![weakening, not affirming, what he says. All these unnecessary enlargements show that he who uses
them is aware that his simple word is not valuable. He distrusts his own honour. Jesus Christ’s teaching in
respect to this there can be no mistaking. Eliciting the spirit of the third commandment, He declares, “Let
your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of the evil one.”
He would abolish even the solemn oath of the Old Testament, “As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand.”
No man who respects himself, certainly no obedient copier of Jesus Christ, will consent to confirm his
“yes” or “no,” unless when the law, which knows him not, demands it.
2 [Note: W. G. Rutherford, The Key of
Knowledge, p. 166.]
4. Take the virtue of courtesy. “Good breeding,” says Carlyle, “consists in gracefully remembering the
rights of others, high breeding in gracefully insisting on one’s own.” Thus there are three ways of it. There
is the discourteous person whose only practice has been in selfishly saying and doing things that hurt
others. There is the selfishly courteous person with the polish of a pagan. And there is the person who,
having the mind of Christ, learns to put the interests of others before his own. It is the “gift” that makes the
difference.
Courtesy is itself a form of service. By gentleness of manner, by an unobtrusive sympathy, by
thoughtfulness for others in little things, we may smooth the roughness of life for those with whom we live,
soothe their vexations, and contribute more to their real happiness than by great and signal acts of
generosity. On the other hand, a harsh, careless word may inflict a worse wound than a blow, and the
discomfort created by habitual indifference to the convenience, tastes, opinions, and prejudices of those
about us may be harder to bear than positive physical pain. Discourtesy occasions not merely suffering,
but sin; and Christian courtesy is a “means of grace” to all who have the happiness to receive it.
1 [Note: R.
W. Dale, Laws of Christ for Common Life, p. 121.]
They might not need me,
Yet they might;
I’ll let my heart be
Just in sight—
A smile so small](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-133-320.jpg)
![yourselves in all things to be ruled by him who is infinitely wise and good” Here is no penance
imposed for their former stubbornness, nor the yoke made heavier or bound harder on their
necks; only, “Whereas hitherto you have been perverse and refractory, and would not comply
with that which was for your own good, now be tractable, be governable” He does not say, “If
you be perfectly obedient,” but, “If you be willingly so;” for, if there be a willing mind, it is
accepted. (2.) That is very great which is promised hereupon. [1.] That all their sins should be
pardoned to them, and should not be mentioned against them. “Though they be as red as scarlet
and crimson, though you lie under the guilt of blood, yet, upon your repentance, even that shall
be forgiven you, and you shall appear in the sight of God as white as snow.” Note, The greatest
sinners, if they truly repent, shall have their sins forgiven them, and so have their consciences
pacified and purified. Though our sins have been as scarlet and crimson, as deep dye, a double
dye, first in the wool of original corruption and afterwards in the many threads of actual
transgression - though we have been often dipped, by our many backslidings, into sin, and
though we have lain long soaking in it, as the cloth does in the scarlet dye, yet pardoning mercy
will thoroughly discharge the stain, and, being by it purged as with hyssop, we shall be clean,
Psa_51:7. If we make ourselves clean by repentance and reformation (Isa_1:16), God will make
us white by a full remission. [2.] That they should have all the happiness and comfort they could
desire. “Be but willing and obedient, and you shall eat the good of the land, the land of promise;
you shall have all the blessings of the new covenant, of the heavenly Canaan, all the good of the
land.” Those that go on in sin, though they may dwell in a good land, cannot with any comfort
eat the good of it; guilt embitters all; but, if sin be pardoned, creature-comforts become comforts
indeed.
5. JAMISON, “God deigns to argue the case with us, that all may see the just, nay, loving
principle of His dealings with men (Isa_43:26).
scarlet — the color of Jesus Christ’s robe when bearing our “sins” (Mat_27:28). So Rahab’s
thread (Jos_2:18; compare Lev_14:4). The rabbins say that when the lot used to be taken, a
scarlet fillet was bound on the scapegoat’s head, and after the high priest had confessed his and
the people’s sins over it, the fillet became white: the miracle ceased, according to them, forty
years before the destruction of Jerusalem, that is, exactly when Jesus Christ was crucified; a
remarkable admission of adversaries. Hebrew for “scarlet” radically means double-dyed; so the
deep-fixed permanency of sin in the heart, which no mere tears can wash away.
snow — (Psa_51:7). Repentance is presupposed, before sin can be made white as snow
(Isa_1:19, Isa_1:20); it too is God’s gift (Jer_31:18, end; Lam_5:21; Act_5:31).
red — refers to “blood” (Isa_1:15).
as wool — restored to its original undyed whiteness. This verse shows that the old fathers did
not look only for transitory promises (Article VII, Book of Common Prayer). For sins of
ignorance, and such like, alone had trespass offerings appointed for them; greater guilt therefore
needed a greater sacrifice, for, “without shedding of blood there was no remission”; but none
such was appointed, and yet forgiveness was promised and expected; therefore spiritual Jews
must have looked for the One Mediator of both Old Testament and New Testament, though
dimly understood.
6. K&D, “The first leading division of the address is brought to a close, and Isa_1:18 contains
the turning-point between the two parts into which it is divided. Hitherto Jehovah has spoken to](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-138-320.jpg)
![1. An Invitation from God to reason with Him.
2. The Reasoning and its Result.
3. The Surprising Sequel.
I
An Invitation From God To Reason With Him
i. An Invitation from God
“Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord.” The proposition comes from God. It does not
arise from the human side at all. It is a piece of pure condescension on the part of the Almighty Himself.
Grace comes out of the sovereignty of God. The possibility of salvation comes from God’s grace. It is not
in anywise of our conception or of our own doing. We are saved by faith, and that not of ourselves, for
faith is the gift of God. God, having made this proposition, proceeds upon the assumption that He knows
Himself to be right in this case. It is precisely so in our own affairs, in the common controversies of the
day. The man who knows himself to be in the right, who feels himself to have a just cause in hand, is
always the first to make the noblest propositions, and to offer as many concessions as are possible
without impairing the law of absolute right, truth, and propriety.
I said, “I will find God,” and forth I went
To seek Him in the clearness of the sky,
But over me stood unendurably
Only a pitiless, sapphire firmament
Ringing the world,—blank splendour: yet intent
Still to find God, “I will go seek,” said I,
“His way upon the waters,” and drew nigh
An ocean marge, weed-strewn, and foam-besprent;
And the waves dashed on idle sand and stone
And very vacant was the long, blue sea:
But in the evening as I sat alone,
My window open to the vanishing day,
Dear God! I could not choose but kneel and pray,
And it sufficed that I was found of Thee.
1 [Note: Edward Dowden.]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-143-320.jpg)
![eyes; cease to do evil; learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead
for the widow.” This, he urged, is the true and necessary prelude to what follows: “Come now,”
come when this is done, “and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they
shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” The passage, he
argued, rightly understood, teaches not that sin is a light matter, easily condoned, but that only through
true repentance, and through reformation, is there a way to forgiveness and absolution. So far from
facilitating sin, it opposes to it the thorny and terrible obstacle of the necessity of retracing, in tears and
shame and pain, the devious path, and recovering, at bitter cost, the true, but lost, direction.
The argument was sound in substance, though wrong in form. That the doctrine of the Bible, with
reference to sin and repentance and forgiveness, is what the speaker represented it to be, no candid and
ingenuous mind could for one moment doubt. But the word “now” of our text,—“Come now,”—was being
pressed into a service for which Isaiah never intended it. It is not the “now” of time. It is in the original only
a word, closely connected with the preceding word (to which indeed it is actually joined in the Hebrew by
a hyphen), and emphasising it. We could express it in English by merely laying a stress upon the word
“Come”: “Come, and let us reason together, saith the Lord.” The language of the text thus becomes the
language of earnest invitation, of tender entreaty. “Come, I beseech you, and let us reason,” or confer,
“together, saith the Eternal.”
1 [Note: David J. Vaughan.]
ii. An Invitation to Reason
Our text gives us the highest form of appeal—the appeal to reason. In the earlier pages of the Bible, the
appeals of God to sinning men are more dramatic, tragic, in form. They are addressed to the imagination,
the emotion, as if men were yet only spiritual children. In Genesis, it is the gates of Paradise closed, and
the angel of the flaming sword. Later in the book, it is God directing that an ark be built, and opening the
windows of heaven in a destroying flood. In Exodus, it is the smoking of Mount Sinai, God wrapt in cloud
and thunder and lightning, and man standing afar off trembling, none daring to draw nigh to the Divine
Presence. In David, it is the devastating plague. In Solomon, it is the sensuous richness of temple, of
ritual, of sacrifice, and of cloudy incense. All as if men could be moved only by the ruder, the lower
motives of their nature. But here, in Isaiah, a new order of appeal is set in action. “Hear, O heavens; and
give ear, O earth; for the Lord hath spoken: I have nourished and brought up children, and they have
rebelled against me; the ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib; but Israel doth not know,
my people doth not consider.” O that My people would think; “Come now, and let us reason together.”
Napoleon, making a forced march accompanied by his chiefs of staff, came to a river and asked the
engineer how wide it was. The officer explained that his instruments had not yet come to the front. The
emperor asked him again, rather sharply, for the width of the river. The officer then brought his military
cap to the level of his eyes and marked where the line of vision fell on the opposite bank; fixing his
attention on that distance he turned carefully and marked where that line fell on the bank where they were
standing; he stepped the distance off and gave the emperor the width of the river. Thus in the absence of
instruments of precision, he fell back on common sense. In the absence of more stirring commanding
voices, let us listen to the voice of our own common sense on this matter of religion.
1 [Note: R. Mackenzie.]
When the Forth Bridge was in the course of construction, I remember spending a most delightful and
memorable afternoon with one of the leading engineers. He told me that in the vast undertaking there
were encountered numerous and difficult engineering problems. Of course they had on the work the very
highest mathematical skill which the country could supply, but here was the interesting fact—he told me
that most of the difficulties were solved by one man who possesses no great mathematical skill, but has a
kind of genius which, without formal rules, can always find its way through a difficulty. He said to me, “Just
give him a difficulty, however great it is, and somehow he will come out on the other side of it.” I suppose
you all remember the story of John Brown, the commentator, in illustration of his belief that unless
common sense is given us by Nature it cannot be acquired, and I suppose that is the general belief. Well,
that may or may not be true, but reason in some of its forms is extremely capable of cultivation, and it is
important to know how it can be cultivated.
2 [Note: J. Stalker.]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-146-320.jpg)
![Reason and Faith
1. The invitation is, “Let us reason together.” Bishop Butler, discussing the important distinction between
objections against the evidence of Christianity and objections against Christianity itself, writes in his wise
and guarded way: “I express myself with caution, lest I should be taken to vilify reason; which is indeed
the only faculty we have wherewith to judge concerning anything, even revelation itself.” In these days we
are often inclined to be afraid of exercising our reason on any matter which trenches in any degree upon
the field of revelation. We contrast reason and faith with one another, and assign faith to the domain of
revelation, yielding to reason the supremacy over everything outside that domain.
2. Notwithstanding the explicit teaching of the New Testament, the impression has got abroad that faith
and reason are opposed to each other, that both cannot flourish in the same man at the same time; that if
a man wants to be a man of faith, he must not think deeply, and that if he gives free rein to his reason it is
likely to go hard with his faith. In many a circle it is taken for granted that if a man becomes a Christian,
he must allow his mind to be shackled, and that if he wishes to think freely and to follow the truth
whithersoever it may lead him, he had better not attach himself to the Church.
Now a more mischievous impression could not possibly get abroad. Joseph Glanvill, near the middle of
the seventeenth century, wrote this: “There is not anything that I know which hath done more mischief to
religion than the disparaging of reason, for hereby the very foundations of Christian faith have been
undermined. If reason must not be heard, the being of God and the authority of Scripture can neither be
proved nor defended; and so our faith drops to the ground like a house that hath no foundation.” If that
was true in the seventeenth century, it is doubly true nowadays, for the entire world is using its intellect as
never before.
There are Christians in all parts of the country who are secretly afraid of reason. They do not like to think
themselves, they see no necessity for thinking, they feel that if a man thinks about the doctrines of his
faith he is almost certain to become a heretic. The man who thinks is to them what Cassius was to Julius
Cæsar. “Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; he thinks too much.” They prefer men who are sleek
and fat. They make religion merely a sentimental and emotional thing; they put no thought into it. They
speak of doctrines as something quite superfluous. They take no interest in doctrines, and as for a
dogma, it is nothing but a cur to be kicked about the streets. And as for theology, that is something to be
steadily eschewed. Theology, instead of being what it is, the greatest of the sciences, is to them only a
foolish piece of stupid speculation. It is just such Christians as these who perpetuate the impression that
Christianity has nothing to do with the reason, but moves entirely in the realm of the emotions.
1 [Note: C. E.
Jefferson.]
3. No doubt the use of certain words has had not a little to do with deepening this impression.
(1) An infidel is usually known as a free thinker. The first man who rejected Christianity, and then called
himself a “free thinker,” builded better than he knew. That epithet was a telling stroke of genius. The word
itself contains an argument against the Christian religion. If a man who rejects Christianity is a free
thinker, the implication is that the man who accepts it is a bound thinker—a man whose reason is in
chains. But the implication is not fair. A Christian has a right to think just as freely as any other man. All
Christians, if they avail themselves of their privileges, are free thinkers. I studied pedagogy first, says Mr.
Jefferson,
1 [Note: Things Fundamental, p. 36.]
and then law, and then theology. I was first a teacher, then a lawyer,
and then a preacher. But I never thought any more freely when I was a teacher or a lawyer than I have
thought since I became a preacher.
(2) The use of the word rationalist has also been misleading. The word came into common use in the
sixteenth century to designate the class of people who gave an exalted place to reason, and the word
was seized upon by certain infidel philosophers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, who
became known throughout the world as Rationalists. The word carries with it the implication that a man](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-147-320.jpg)
![who accepts Christianity is an irrationalist; that is, he does not use his reason. If a man reasons, he
rejects Christianity; if he refuses to reason, he accepts it. The insinuation is unjust. All Christians are
rationalists, or ought to be, in the sense that they make a vigorous use of their minds. The Christian
religion is a rational religion, and the evidences for it are rational. It addresses itself primarily to the
reason.
(3) The word reason is commonly used loosely. What men call reason is nothing but opinion. A certain
man asserts in my presence that the narrative of the Virgin Birth is contrary to reason. He says it very
blandly, and with great assurance. But I remind him that a distinguished professor of philosophy, who has
one of the finest and keenest minds in America, says that the story is not contrary to his reason. Nor is it
contrary to the reason of ten thousand men who read it and believe it, and feel it to be altogether
reasonable. It is not correct then for you, my friend, to say that the story is contrary to reason. What you
mean to say is that it is contrary to your reason, and that, you know, is another thing. But are you sure
that it is really contrary to your reason? What you are probably trying to say is that it is contrary to your
opinion.
But opinion is one thing and human reason is another. Opinion is the product of a man’s reading and
thinking and hearing. What a man thinks on any subject depends on what he has read and heard and
thought. It is for this cause that men’s opinions change from year to year. We hold a certain opinion, and
then we read more widely, or live more deeply, and our opinion changes. When you are saying, therefore,
that the story of Christ’s birth is contrary to your opinion, you are not saying anything of great significance,
for your opinion might change after more extensive reading, or after a little deeper thinking. I travel into
Alaska and meet an Eskimo who has never heard of the X-rays, and I say to him, “I have seen every
bone in that hand of mine. I know the size and shape and exact location of every bone just as clearly as I
should know all this if the flesh were scraped away.” And he looks at me with surprise, and says, “That is
contrary to reason.” What the man is trying to say is that it is contrary to his opinion. We should not expect
an Eskimo to use language accurately; we might expect it, however, of a New Yorker. Or I travel into the
South Seas, and I meet a man there who has never so much as heard of ice, and I say, “My southern
friend, I walked across a lake one day in February, and never even got my feet wet.” And he throws up
his hands in amazement, and says, “That is contrary to reason.” What he is trying to say is that it is
contrary to his experience. When the evangelist tells me that Jesus walked across a Palestinian lake in
April, I have no right to say that it is contrary to my reason. It is contrary to my experience. But my
experience is rather a diminutive affair. If I am to cut down Christianity to the dimensions of my
experience, I shall not have anything left of surpassing value. The fact is, Christ transcends my
experience at every point. What He said runs as far beyond me as what He did. “I do always those things
that are pleasing unto him.” That is farther beyond me than walking on the water. “He that hath seen me
hath seen the Father.” I never could say a thing like that.
1 [Note: C. E. Jefferson.]
Often the very men who make the loudest profession of acting reasonably have the very least reason in
their action. I try to convince a certain man that the sunset is beautiful. I say, “Oh, look at it! Could
anything be more glorious!” And he stands with his back to the sunset and will not look at it. He says, “I
do not believe what you say. Prove it to me.” And I say, “Turn round and look.” He says, “I won’t.” Is he
reasonable? I endeavour to persuade another man that Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony is great. The
orchestra is playing, the instruments are sweeping through the allegro, and I say to this man, “Wagner
was right. Instruments cannot carry music higher than that. If music is to travel any farther, it must be by
the human voice. Is not that fine?” And the man puts his fingers in his ears, and says, “I do not believe
what you say. Prove it to me.” And I say, “Listen!” And he says, “I won’t.” Is he reasonable? I endeavour
to persuade another man that a violet is fragrant. I say to him, “This odour is so delicate. Just smell it!” He
says, “I won’t. Prove it to me.” I say, “Will you smell it?” He says, “No.” Is he reasonable? I endeavour to
persuade another man that sugar is sweet. I say, “This sugar is sweet. I have eaten a piece just like this.”
He says, “I do not believe it.” I say to him, “Taste it.” He says, “I won’t.” Is he reasonable? I endeavour to
persuade another man that a cube of gold is heavier than a cube of iron. Both are of the same size. I say
to him, “Take the gold in one hand and the iron in the other, and you will see.” And he says, “I won’t.” Is
he reasonable? I endeavour to persuade another man to become a Christian. I say to him, “Jesus Christ
is sufficient for every need of the human soul.” And he says, “I do not believe it.” I say to him, “Try Him!”
And he says, “I won‘t.” Is he reasonable?](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-148-320.jpg)
![It was only yesterday I saw a plea for calm reflection in international affairs, sent abroad by an ethical
society, in all the chief languages of Europe. It is just a plea for the application of the principles of our
Christian morality to every part of our national life. I make no apology for quoting a word or two from this
utterance, for in my judgment they are the words of Christian truth.
“Remember,” it says, “that reason and justice alone should decide the merits of any case, whether it be
personal or national, national or international. Remember that no nation can safely be the judge in its own
cause, because self-interest and pride and anger and force are so liable to pervert the judgment and
distort the truth. Remember that as friendly international relations are of vital importance to every people,
the time is surely ripe for arbitration to supersede war. Remember, therefore, to press upon your
Government,” said this utterance, “the duty of entering into specific agreement for peace, and, instead of
war, to proceed by the method of arbitration. Remember that the cost of competitive armaments not only
involves a crushing burden for each people to bear, and consequent neglect of social improvement, but
engenders bitter feeling, and is provocative of strife. Remember in time of peace the horrors of war, and
the harvest of hatred and misery it leaves behind, and ask yourself, each citizen, ask yourself whether it is
not criminal to leave it to passion or ignorance, to misunderstandings, or jealousies, or self-interest, to
bring any such calamity upon the life of a Christian nation.”
1 [Note: Bishop J. Percival.]
iii. An Invitation to Reason Together
The invitation is not merely, “Let us reason”; but, “Let us reason together.” Our reasonings on revelation,
and on all the high and mysterious subjects associated with it, must proceed in the full recognition of what
is implied in this “together.” We may reason, if we are minded to do so, upon the Trinity, upon the
Incarnation, upon the Atonement, upon Final Judgment, upon the Restitution of all things; upon any
subject, however lofty and transcendent; provided only our reasonings ever be “together”;—that is, with
God,—as those, to whom God is speaking, and with whom God is reasoning; and who are therefore
constrained to reason back—if I may be allowed the expression—in all childlike humility and simplicity,
reverence and awe;—not as though we were the measure of all things, as the old Sophists maintained
that man was,—but in the full recognition of the limitation of our faculties and the poverty of our
intellectual resources, and at the same time in the full belief of St. Paul’s words: “Now we see through a
glass, darkly; but then, face to face; now I know in part, but then shall I know, even as also I am known.” It
has been well said by a great thinker of this century, adopting the language of one of the greatest of the
fathers of the Christian Church: “The foundation of our philosophy is humility.” The moment we strive to
answer to the invitation, “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord,” we shall find that it must
be so. No other attitude of mind is possible for us.
When a responsible being has made a wrong use of his powers, nothing is more reasonable than that he
should call himself to account for this abuse. Nothing, certainly, is more necessary. There can be no
amendment for the future until the past has been cared for. But that this examination may be both
thorough and profitable, it must be made in company with the Searcher of hearts. For there are always
two beings who are concerned with sin; the being who commits it, and the Being against whom it is
committed. We sin, indeed, against ourselves; against our own conscience, and against our own best
interest. But we sin in a yet higher, and more terrible sense, against Another than ourselves, compared
with whose majesty all of our faculties and interests, both in time and in eternity, are altogether nothing
and vanity. It is not enough, therefore, to refer our sin to the law written on the heart, and there stop. We
must ultimately pass beyond conscience itself, to God, and say, “Against Thee have I sinned.” It is not the
highest expression of the religious feeling when we say, “How can I do this great wickedness, and sin
against my conscience?” He alone has reached the summit of vision who looks beyond all finite limits,
however wide and distant, beyond all finite faculties, however noble and elevated, and says, “How can I
do this great wickedness, and sin against God?”
Modern history began in the year 1521 when an Augustinian monk, by the name of Martin Luther, went to
the Diet of Worms to give an account of himself to the Emperor of Germany. The appearance of Luther](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-149-320.jpg)
![Silently, like morning light,
Putting mists and chills to flight.
Mighty Spirit, dwell with me;
I myself would mighty be,
Mighty so as to prevail
Where unaided man must fail,
Ever by a mighty hope
Pressing on and bearing up.
Holy Spirit, dwell with me;
I myself would holy be;
Separate from sin, I would
Choose and cherish all things good,
And whatever I can be,
Give to Him, who gave to Thee.
1 [Note: Thomas Toke Lynch.]
II
The Reasoning And Its Result
i. The Subject of the Reasoning
In the immediate case before us, the case of God’s ancient people of Israel, the subject of argument was
their conduct, especially the ingratitude of it in the light of all that God had done for them. But the subject
is broader than that. In this very chapter, there is a threefold basis of reasoning, which is of universal
application.
1. First of all, God reasons with man on the basis of man’s whole life. There is a constant attempt on
man’s part—a device that is repeated from generation to generation and from age to age—to withdraw
the greater portion of man’s life from God’s reasoning, or, in other words, to endeavour to reason with
God on the basis of some lesser and limited portion of life. You can see it very clearly throughout this
chapter. God said to man, “Come, let us reason together.” “Very well,” says man, “let this be the ground of
our reasoning. Look at my life as it lies within the circle of its religious action and exercises, the sacrifices
I bring to you, the incense I offer, the fasts I make. Let us reason on that basis; let us take our stand
there.” And as you will see in this chapter, God utterly rejects reasoning like this, and says, “No, no; I](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-152-320.jpg)
![must deal with you on the basis of your whole life, not on any limited or selected part of it which you
choose to present and urge.” Now there is great significance in this connection in the opening words of
this chapter. God cries out and says, “Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth”; man is saying, “Let me be
judged and reasoned with on the basis of my life, as that life lies within certain narrow limits, on the basis
of my life regarded specially in its religious aspects. Look at me when I am present in the Temple, when I
bring my gifts to the altar; deal with me on that ground, let that be the basis of reasoning.” God cries out
to earth and heaven, and says, “These are the only limits of man’s life I can recognise—the earth on
which he walks, on the surface of which everything is done, the heavens over his head, which look down
upon every transaction of his life; that is the basis of My reasoning, and that alone.”
2. God reasons with men on the basis of His own Fatherhood. You will see how in this chapter He
reminds all men of it, gives men proofs of it, tells men He has fulfilled it in relation to them. He says, “You
are not simply My creatures. You are more—you are nearer to Me. I have done more for you. Hear, O
heavens; give ear, O earth. I have nourished and brought up these children; that is My plea.” He declares
His Fatherhood by calling them children. He says, “It is not a name with Me; I have fulfilled a Father’s
part; you owe everything to Me. Look at your life and see what it looks like in the light of this relationship
which I have sustained and fulfilled towards you. Admit,” He says, “My Fatherhood—and you cannot but
admit it—and what does your life look like in the light of it? How unnatural and base it becomes. You sink
below the brute, you are steeped in more absolute stupidity than the ox or the ass, for the ox knoweth its
owner and the ass its master’s crib, but Israel does not know My people.” This is God’s reasoning, and
who of us can stand against it? God, our Father, to whom we owe our being, from whom all gifts have
come to us, upon whom we depend for everything—what has been our conduct towards Him? “I have
nourished and brought up children, and ye have rebelled against Me, flung off My authority, despised My
love, lifted your hands against Me”—what can we say to reasoning like this? We cannot excuse
ourselves, we cannot justify ourselves; we can only hang our heads in silence and in shame while God
says, “Come, and let us bring this reasoning to an end—you know you have nothing to say: admit it.”
3. Thus in this chapter also God reasons with man on the basis of sin’s results. He says, “You have
rebelled against Me; has it justified itself in its success? You have rebelled against Me; what good has it
done you? Has it brought you freedom and happiness? Has it brought to the land and the nation peace
and prosperity?” God Himself gives the answer in searching and terrible words: “Why should ye be
stricken any more? Ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick and the whole heart faint. From
the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and
putrifying sores; and your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire—that is what sin has done
for you.” He points them to the terrible and pitiful results which have come to pass for the individual and
the nation through their disobedience towards God; and He challenges them and says, “Now look at it as
I have reasoned it out with you.”
1 [Note: W. Perkins.]
ii. The Result of the Reasoning
There is, there can be, but one result—our sins are as scarlet; they are red like crimson. “Scarlet” and
“crimson” are really synonyms for the one colour, properly “crimson.” According to the Biblical view, sin
and piety, anger and love or grace are mutually related as fire and light, hence as red and white; for red is
the colour of the fire that shines up now out of the darkness and returns into it, while white, without any
mixture of darkness, sets forth the pure, absolute triumph of light.
In a Chinese proclamation, issued by H.H. Tseng Kuo Fan, the energetic official who helped to suppress
the Tai Ping Rebellion, there is this sentence referring to the depredations of the rebels. “There is no
temple they do not burn, no image they do not destroy. The deities are enraged, they will cool their anger”
(in their destruction). The phrase is literally “snow their anger,” anger being regarded as both hot and
red.
2 [Note: W. A. Cornaby, A String of Chinese Peach Stones.]
1. Their sins were crimson because they were committed in the face of the light. It is a matter of common
sense that the servant who knows the master’s will, and yet disobeys, is worthy of more stripes than he](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-153-320.jpg)
![who knows it less perfectly. The sinners to whom Isaiah preached, under the more complete revelation of
the covenant of grace, sinned against clearer light than the sinners to whom Moses and Joshua
preached. How much more, even than those to whom the prophet is preaching, do sinners now sin
against the clearer light who have in their hands the last and complete development of the New
Testament covenant of grace; and over and above this, the knowledge of the outworking of the completed
scheme of grace, under His providence, through two thousand years.
2. They were crimson, because they were committed against special reasons for gratitude and well-doing.
Listen to that pathetic complaint: “I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled
against me. The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib; but Israel doth not know, my people
doth not consider” (Isa_1:2-3). And of whom speaketh He this? Not of Israel only. Which of us can recall
an hour of life unmarked by some blessing from God? Mercies have been showered upon us. Blessings
have been bestowed upon our country, our friends, our family, ourselves—mercies of providence and
mercies of grace. Through the whole journey of life we tread upon God’s blessings, strewn as flowers in
our way, and their perfume fills the very air we breathe.
3. Their sins were crimson, because they were committed against special covenants and vows. They
were sins of faithlessness and recklessness. Is it not so that among men the breach of a solemn bond is
more to be reprehended than failure to meet any other engagement? This was the special aggravation of
the sin of those to whom the prophet preached. They were solemnly engaged by covenants with
Abraham, with Moses, and with David, to be peculiarly Jehovah’s people, as He to be peculiarly their God
and Redeemer. In this regard, their sins were more aggravated than those of Sodom and Gomorrah,
whose cry ascended up to heaven, and brought down the fires of vengeance. For besides the intrinsic
wickedness of doing the deeds of Sodom and Gomorrah, these sinners in so sinning added the guilt of
faithlessness to their solemn vows and the vows of their fathers. And it is this that gives their peculiar
aggravation to the sins of such as have formally and publicly entered into the covenant of Jehovah in our
day. They add to the intrinsic guilt of their transgressions this violation of solemn faith pledged. And on
this account it is that their sins are also the most hurtful in their influence, by bringing reproach on the
religion of Jesus Christ, as a religion that hinders not its professors from being found faithless.
It was no figure of speech, it was no morbid self-depreciation, St. Paul spoke the real language of his
heart when he called himself “the chief of sinners.” I greatly mistrust the state of that man who cannot, at
this moment, truly and honestly, lay his hand upon his heart, and say this: “I do not believe that there ever
was a more wicked man upon the face of the whole earth than I am.” For only a man’s heart knows its
own wickedness. Only a man’s own heart knows the aggravations of his own guilt before Almighty God. It
is not a question of acts; it is a matter of thoughts. It is not only what we are positively; it is what we are
negatively. It does not depend on what stands in the foreground, but upon what lies behind in the
background. It is the convictions you have resisted; it is the feelings God has put into you; it is the early
advantages you enjoyed in the nursery, with a pious mother and a holy father; it is the glimpses of
particular providences, and the still small voices you have heard; it is the name you have borne, and the
profession you have made; it is the hedges you have thrown around you, and the barriers you have
overleaped; it is the love you have put away from you, and the grace you have quenched—it is these
which make a man’s sins glare before God, like red-hot under an Eastern sun,—it is these which cause a
man’s sins to be steeped sevenfold, like the fastest crimson.
1 [Note: J. Vaughan.]
III
The Surprising Sequel
The sequel of the reasoning is that sins which are scarlet become white as show, sins which are crimson
become as wool. Acknowledgment of the utter sinfulness of the heart and life is followed by pardon,
cleansing, and new obedience.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-154-320.jpg)
![I believe in a man having a place of private resort for the consideration of all the bearings of his life. I
have had such places ever since I could remember. I have occasion to go back to them, in recollection,
with joy and thanksgiving. Places in far-away quiet fields, where I used to go between school hours and
bend my knees behind some blossoming hawthorn hedge, or some old, old tree, and there, as a mere
boy in his teens, talk to God till the tears started and life seemed to be going out of me in one great
painful shudder. But oh! the sweetness of those hours! One came back even to play and enjoyments of a
boyish kind, and work, and suffering, with new life and new hope.
1 [Note: J. Parker.]
2. God’s Promise. God would not have made the demand for reform unless it were possible for man to
meet it. Where is the power to meet it to come from? Only two answers are possible: either it is inherent
in man—this is the answer of nature; or it is supplied from without—this is the answer of grace. The
former is the basis of all human efforts which have been or are being put forth to reform the world; the
latter is the basis of the Divine method.
(1) The answer of Nature.—The belief in the ability of man to reform himself is founded on ignorance of
the real nature of his moral condition, as was the case in the pagan world, or on a deliberate refusal to
recognise the truth when it is presented concerning that condition, as was the case in Judaism, and is the
case at the present day with those who persuade themselves to a belief in the infinite intrinsic capability
of human nature. I see no reason, says the modern enthusiast, why a man, given the necessary
favourable environments,—which happily are in a fair way to be supplied,—should not, by a little effort,
become perfectly good; why he should not so live as to be able to defy every law in heaven and on earth.
Is any one really justified by history or by experience in taking such a view of the question? Neither the
religion of the pagan world, nor the philosophy of the Greeks, nor the power and civilisation of the
Romans—of their religion we say nothing, for it was unworthy of the name—afford much ground for this
belief in human nature. Nor could even the Mosaic law by itself awaken in man a power which would
enable him to become righteous—“in that it was weak through the flesh.” The witness whether of history
or of experience little encourages belief in the capacity of human nature to reform itself.
All great dramatists and novelists insist upon the fact that sinners cannot cleanse themselves from the
inevitable stain which sin always leaves. Shakespeare has painted this truth in its most glaring colours
in Macbeth. Macbeth speaks after the murder.
“Whence is that knocking?
How is’t with me, when every noise appals me?
What hands are here? ha! they pluck out mine eyes!
Will all great Neptune’s ocean wash this blood
Clean from my hand? No; this my hand will rather
The multitudinous seas incarnadine,
Making the green one red.”
Lady Macbeth. “My hands are of your colour, but I shame
To wear a heart so white. (Knock). I hear a knocking
At the south entry: retire we to our chamber:
A little water clears us of this deed:
How easy is it, then!”](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-156-320.jpg)
![But in the night time, walking in her sleep, Lady Macbeth is conscious that she cannot remove the stain
left by the murder of Banquo:—
Gent. “It is an accustom’d action with her, to seem thus washing her hands: I have known her continue in
this a quarter of an hour.”
Lady Macbeth. “Yet here’s a spot. Out, damnèd spot! out, I say!—One, two; why, then ’tis time to
do’t.—Hell is murky!—Fie, my lord, fie! a soldier, and afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when
none can call our power to account?—Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much
blood in him? Here’s the smell of the blood still: all the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little
hand. Oh, oh, oh!”
“There is a lonely little pool of water in a hollow on the mountainside near Tarbet, Loch Lomond, called
the Fairy Loch. If you look into it you will see a great many colours in the water, owing to the varied nature
of the materials that form its bottom. There is a legend about it which says that the fairies used to dye
things for the people round about, if a specimen of the colour was left along with the cloth on the brink of
the pool at sunset. One evening a shepherd left beside the Fairy Loch the fleece of a black sheep, and
placed upon it a white woollen thread to show that he wished the fleece dyed white. This fairly puzzled
the good fol
What of the Night?
The burden of Dumah. One calleth unto me out of Seir, Watchman, what of the night? Watchman, what of
the night? The watchman said: The morning cometh, and also the night: if ye will inquire, inquire ye: turn
ye, come.—Isa_21:11-12.
I
The Oracle of Dumah
1. The Situation
1. “Abrupt in form, enigmatical in meaning, this oracle has nevertheless a certain grandeur and sublimity
even for those to whom its sense is obscure.” So says Samuel Cox, introducing one of the best sermons
ever preached upon it. And he proceeds to recall Mendelssohn’s use of the oracle: “He who has heard
Mendelssohn’s ‘Hymn of Praise’ has at least one proof of its power to excite the imagination and rouse
emotion. In that fine work of art, the tenor soloist demands, in sharp, ascending minors, ‘Watchman, will
the night soon pass?’ and replies, ‘Though the morning come, the night will come also.’ The demand is
thrice repeated in the same sequence of notes, but each time it is raised a whole tone in the scale, to
denote the growing intensity and urgency of the inquirer; thrice the answer is given in the same
sequence, but for the sake of added emphasis it also is raised a tone the second time; while in reply to
the third repetition of the inquirer, the soprano breaks in with the joyful proclamation, ‘The night is
departing,’ and the chorus take up and swell and prolong the glad news. As we listen, we feel that the
music, splendid as it is in itself, owes no little of its sublimity to the splendid dramatic force of the words to
which it is set.”
1 [Note: S. Cox, An Expositor’s Note Book, p. 201.]
2. The key to the passage is to be found in its historical circumstances. The period was that of the
Assyrian oppression, an oppression which not only harassed and depeopled Judah, but affected the
nations around. Sharing in their neighbour’s sin, these nations shared in their neighbour’s punishment,
and, like the primary sufferer, were downcast and desponding, asking wearily and anxiously, “How long?”
One by one they present themselves to the prophet’s vision—Philistia, Moab, Damascus, Ethiopia, Egypt,
Arabia; and now he is speaking of Edom, or, as it is here called, “Dumah,” Judah’s nearest neighbour as](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-157-320.jpg)
![well as its oldest and most inveterate foe. “The burden of Dumah,” he says, “What I have to say
concerning its present state, what I have to say concerning its future destiny.”
3. The prophet is standing in vision on the border. He has planted himself on the ridge between Judah
and Edom—night to right of him, night to left of him; night on the dwellings of Judah, night on the
dwellings of Edom, Judah’s ancient foe; the same pall of darkness hangs low over both. And as he waits,
the stillness is broken by a solitary cry. It is the voice of some unseen inquirer—not, you observe, in
Judah, but in Edom. “Watchman, what of the night?” he says. “Is it nearly over? Are there any streaks of
light yet? Do you see the morning star?” And the watchman answers cautiously. He does not commit
himself. “I will tell you this much,” he says, “The morning cometh, and also the night.”
Among the many offices that have become obsolete, during the advance of modern civilisation, may be
counted that of the watchman. In ancient times, however, the office was considered absolutely necessary
for the maintenance of order and safety in towns and cities. It was the watchman’s duty to patrol the
streets during the night, to prevent thieves and vagabonds prowling about in the dark. It was his duty to
sound the alarm in case of imminent danger. It was his duty to announce the hour, and state the various
changes in the weather. Those who listened to his firm, steady, regular step, as he passed their doors,
felt a sense of security, and cast themselves with confidence into the arms of sleep. At the entrance of the
cities, towers were not infrequently erected, and these were called “watch-towers,” in which watchmen
were regularly posted, whose eyes ever swept the distant horizon, to see if anybody was coming, of
whom it was necessary to give information.
1 [Note: D. Rowlands, in The Cross and the Dice-Box, p. 217.]
2. The Question
1. The question to the watchman, “What of the night?” means, What part of the night is it now? Is it the
first, the second, or the third watch? Will the light soon dawn? The A.V. translation, says Dr. G. A.
Smith,
1 [Note: The Book of Isaiah, p. 276.]
though picturesque, is misleading. The voice does not inquire, “What of
the night?” i.e. whether it be fair or foul weather, but “How much of the night is passed?” literally “What
from off the night?” This brings out a pathos that our English version has disguised. Edom feels that her
night is lasting terribly long.
2. It is worth while to point out—for the quality of poetry depends on such minute touches of art—that the
sentinel not only repeats his question, but repeats it in an abbreviated form. “Watchman, how far is it
in the night? Watchman,how far in the night?” expresses in English the Hebrew abbreviation, though in
the Hebrew it is much more telling. And both the repetition of the question and the more brief and winged
form of the question on the second utterance of it indicate the extreme urgency of the inquiry, the extreme
haste and impatience of the inquirer.
3. The word Dumah means “silence,” “the land of silent desolation.” It is a very suggestive thought. Sin is
the great silencer. The end of sin is silence. Assuredly that was true in the case of Edom. It was true of it
at the time when the prophet spoke, it was to be true of it still more completely in the ages to follow.
Travellers tell us that if we want to know how Providence can turn a fruitful land into barrenness, and
make a defenced city a heap, for the iniquity of the inhabitants thereof, we have only to look at Edom,
with its hills and plains picked clean of every vestige of vegetation, and its ruined palaces, once the home
of busy men, now the haunt of vultures and toe lair of scorpions, all human sound gone—the voice of
mirth, the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom, the voice of the bride!
4. Of course we are not to take Isaiah’s words literally. No voice, no sound, could reach from Mount Seir
to Mount Zion. Nor are we to suppose that the Edomites dispatched an embassy to the prophet at
Jerusalem to inquire of him concerning the future fate of Edom. Isaiah was a poet, and describes in a
dramatic form the thoughts and questions which rose in his soul as he looked through the ages, and the
shadows of coming events passed before him. He had already seen that the Babylonians would conquer
Jerusalem; and that they, in their turn, would be conquered by the Persians. But when the Babylonians
came against Jerusalem, the Edomites would join them in despoiling the city and slaying its inhabitants. If
the Babylonians were to be judged for their sin against Israel and the God of Israel, were the Edomites,
who had shared their sin, to escape their judgment?](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-158-320.jpg)
![3. The Answer
The answer is not clear to us now. Perhaps we do not know all the circumstances quite intimately
enough. Perhaps it is purposely made enigmatical, as was often the case with an oracle. Perhaps the
answer was not clear to the prophet himself. Cox thinks that the prophet, dismissing the Edomite inquirer
with a prediction so gloomy, felt some compunction. He cannot see beyond the night; yet the night may
have a morning beyond it. Let the inquirer return, therefore, and repeat his inquiries. The prophet hopes
he will. He reiterates the invitation. He makes it more warm and urgent. “If ye will inquire, ye may,” turns
into the entreaty “return, come again.” Davies understands that the Edomite was answered with the
promise of alternations of dawning day and darkening night. The Assyrians, Persians, Chaldeans,
Greeks, Romans, Muhammadans would in turn oppress them, and between each oppression there would
be but a ray of hope. Perhaps the brightest dawn to them would be the ascendancy of the Herods; but
even that would so soon culminate in a darker night.
II
Its Modern Use
i. The Heart’s Cry to God
It is the cry of the human heart to God. How often do the heavens seem pitiless, and send no answer to
our impassioned appeal, but “Morning cometh, and also night.” However sad we are, however racked
with suspense, though we have lost the friends we most loved, or apprehend the ill we most fear, the sun
shines on, the birds sing, our friends eat and drink and are merry, we have to do our work, to take our
food, to talk and smile, to listen to condolences, to endure remonstrance, to go through the whole daily
round as though nothing had happened to us. And when the day is over, the night comes, and we have to
lie down on a couch which has no rest for us, to drag through the slow weary hours, and long for the
morning. At such times, in such moods, our life grows very dark to us. Nature seems to have no sympathy
with us; friends and neighbours cannot even understand what our grief is like; our duties are burdensome
to us, pleasure even more burdensome than duty. The strain is heavier than we can endure; it seems
impossible that we should struggle on long under a burden so heavy. And yet the future holds out no
hope to us but death. A few faint, watery gleams of brightness, and then the great darkness will rush
down upon us, the night that has no end.
Apart from such special eclipses, times when the darkness thickens, there is the universal and permanent
shadow that broods over all, the shadow of this enigmatic and mysterious life. I mean the shadow to
which the poet refers when he writes—
So runs my dream: but what am I?
An infant crying in the night:
An infant crying for the light:
And with no language but a cry.
I mean the shadow of which a great Christian thinker spoke when, after a conversation with a friend on
the deepest problems of life and death, he wound up the interview with the words: “Ah! think now of the
great God looking down on our babblings in the dark!” We are compassed with mystery. The sky is heavy
with it, the heart is oppressed with it. Life has its mysteries. Truth has its mysteries.
1 [Note: W. A. Gray.]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-159-320.jpg)
![ii. The World’s Cry to the Church
It is the cry of the world to the Church. The voice comes from Seir. It comes from the men and women of
the world. It is addressed to God’s watchman on Mount Zion. It is the cry of the world to the Church of
God. Notice first the great variety there is in the manner of the cry, and then the fact of it.
1. The manner of it.
(1) Sometimes it is no more than a question of utter carelessness. There are those who haunt our
churches from the indolence of habit, who smilingly confess themselves “sinners” without once
remembering the tremendous import of the words they employ; who echo the thrilling penitence of our
liturgy in the same tone that inquires the news of the day; who are Christians because their fathers were,
and would, without a murmur, be heathens for the same reason.
(2) Sometimes it is the question of the merely curious. Most Christian teachers are familiar with a class of
inquirers who, without much sympathy with evangelical verities, sometimes without much attention to
moral demands, are greatly taken up with speculative difficulties. They want the mist cleared away from
this point, they want the uncertainty banished from that. The consistency of God’s sovereignty with man’s
responsibility, the nature and occupation of the unseen world, the destiny of the heathen, the fulfilment of
prophecy, the order of the last things—that whole class of interesting but not always practical subjects on
which a veil of uncertainty hangs, attracts them much. And they turn in curiosity to the Church, with their
appeals to the Church’s wisdom, their demands for the Church’s opinion.
(3) Sometimes the question is ironical, or even contemptuous. “How goes the task with you?” says the
world. “With all your money and with all your machinery, what have you to show? How many converted
heathens? How many converted Jews? What reduction is there in the statistics of immorality? What
increase in church attendance among the working classes? Watchman, what of the night?”
(4) But sometimes it is earnest. Not in any light or trifling spirit, but with a deep sense of perplexity, and an
honest desire for help, men turn inquiringly to the Church—at times even in anguish of heart. The agonies
of remorse have seized their spirit. The night has come down upon them in exceeding great darkness.
Conscience suggests retribution; they ask if revelation confirms it.
(5) And sometimes it is undefined and inarticulate, and then it is the saddest cry of all. This is the cry from
Seir. The true translation is “one calleth unto me out of Seir.” It is the utterance of a poor heartbroken
weary community; one voice attempting to utter the need, the yearning, the longing of many hearts.
Mr. C. T. Studd once told me a cry of anguish which he heard in China, and which has haunted him ever
since. He was negotiating in a Chinese dwelling for the tenancy of a building for an opium refuge. While
the negotiations were in progress, he and Mrs. Studd were horrified at a series of piercing shrieks which
fell upon their ears. They evidently came from a little girl, and knowing how dangerous it was to interfere
in anyone else’s business, they at first disregarded the cries, which were agonising in their character. At
last they could bear it no longer, and determined, whatever the consequences, to find out whence the
cries proceeded; they followed the sound until they found themselves in a room, where, forcibly held on a
rude bed, was a little girl, from whose feet the cruel bandages used in the process of foot-binding were
being stripped. One woman held her down by her little arms; another was tearing the bandages from the
poor feet; while a third was beating the child with a heavy stick, to divert the pain to other parts of the
body, and to punish the little one for her cries. Those cries were heard by a sympathetic man, but there
are thousands which are heard only by a sympathetic God. How can we, who have children of our own,
be indifferent to the wail of these little ones, into whose cries we may read the agonising question, “Will
the night never pass away?”
1[Note: J. Gregory Mantle.]
“He who has seen the misery of man only,” Victor Hugo tells us, “has seen nothing, he must see the](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-160-320.jpg)
![but its re-creation in the image of God is just as certain as its creation.
(1) We see the approach of the day in matters of faith. There never was a time in human history when
men were so loyal to the landmarks of truth. There never was a time when the blessed Bible was
entrenched in so many faithful hearts. True, there are controversies. God be praised! The worst that can
ever befall the Christian Church is stagnation. The Kingdom of God is not likely to suffer from any
investigation of its truth. To be sure, there are heretics and schismatics. They perish by the way and their
work serves to strengthen the battlements of truth, as coral insects toiling in unknown depths leave their
bones as a contribution to the continents of coming ages. The truth had never so many stalwart friends as
it has this day.
(2) We see it in social and ethical life. Ideals are higher than ever. Character means more. The character
of Jesus stands out more distinctly as the Exemplar of morals. His incomparable portrait is the touchstone
of character. More is expected of men than ever before in human history. More is expected of kings, of
politicians, of merchants, of the average man. Compare the dignitaries of our time with those of a few
centuries ago: Queen Victoria with Elizabeth, the President of the French Republic with Louis the Grand,
Gladstone with Machiavelli, President Harrison with our continental governors, the citizen, the country
gentleman, the ordinary church-goer or the non-church-goer, with those of a hundred years ago. I say
ideals are higher and men more eager in striving after them. There is more respect for common honesty,
for chastity and temperance, for benevolence. Many of the vices that were common have disappeared
from public view.
(3) And we see it in the coming of the Kingdom. It was but a hundred years ago that William Carey sat in
his cobbler shop in Northamptonshire, his attention divided between the lapstone on his knee and a map
of the world hanging on the wall. He said, “There is gold to be mined in India. I will go down after it if you
will hold the ropes.” He sailed for that pagan land a hundred years ago, went down into the mine, and
souls have been responding to that deed of consecration, born out of Carey’s travail, in countless
multitudes—gold minted in the heavenly treasury and stamped with the image and superscription of our
King! Oh, friends, everything is going right. The nations of the earth are coming unto our God.
“Watchman, what of the night?” There is no night. The darkness is past and gone, the Sun of
Righteousness hath risen with healing in His beams! Be glad and rejoice, O people of God; the sun
shineth brighter and brighter unto the perfect day!
1 [Note: D. J. Burrell.]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-163-320.jpg)
![and so justice was perverted:
they judge not the fatherless; that is, either they do not take their cause in hand at all, or, if
they do, do not do them justice, but wrong them of their goods and estates, which, of right,
belong to them:
neither doth the cause of the widow come unto them; there being no money to be got by
undertaking it; see the case of the unjust judge, a picture of judges in those times, Luk_18:2.
4. HENRY, “By some instances (Isa_1:23): “Thy princes, that should keep others in their
allegiance to God and subjection to his law, are themselves rebellious, and set God and his law at
defiance.” Those that should restrain thieves (proud and rich oppressors, those worst of robbers,
and those that designedly cheat their creditors, who are no better), are themselves companions
of thieves, connive at them, do as they do, and with greater security and success, because they
are princes, and have power in their hands; they share with the thieves they protect in their
unlawful gain (Psa_50:18) and cast in their lot among them, Pro_1:13, Pro_1:14. [1.] The profit
of their places is all their aim, to make the best hand they can of them, right or wrong. They love
gifts, and follow after rewards; they set their hearts upon their salary, the fees and perquisites of
their offices, and are greedy of them, and never think they can get enough; nay, they will do any
thing, though ever so contrary to law and justice, for a gift in secret. Presents and gratuities will
blind their eyes at any time, and make them pervert judgment. These they love and are eager in
the pursuit of, Hos_4:18. [2.] The duty of their places is none of their care. They ought to protect
those that are injured, and take cognizance of the appeals made to them; why else were they
preferred? But they judge not the fatherless, take no care to guard the orphans, nor does the
cause of the widow come unto them, because the poor widow has no bribe to give, with which to
make way for her and to bring her cause on. Those will have a great deal to answer for who,
when they should be the patrons of the oppressed, are their greatest oppressors.
5. JAMISON, “companions of thieves — by connivance (Pro_29:24).
gifts — (Eze_22:12). A nation’s corruption begins with its rulers.
6. K&D, “In Isa_1:23 the prophet says this without a figure: “Thy rulers are rebellious, and
companions of thieves; every one loveth presents, and hunteth after payment; the orphan they
right not, and the cause of the widow has no access to them.” In two words the prophet depicts
the contemptible baseness of the national rulers (sarim). He describes first of all their baseness
in relation to God, with the alliterative sorerim: rebellious, refractory; and then, in relation to
men, companions of thieves, inasmuch as they allowed themselves to be bribed by presents of
stolen goods to acts of injustice towards those who had been robbed. They not only willingly
accepted such bribes, and that not merely a few of them, but every individual belonging to the
rank of princes (Cullo, equivalent to haccol, the whole: every one loveth gifts); but they went
eagerly in pursuit of them (rodeph). It was not peace (shalom) that they hunted after (Psa_34:16),
but shalmonimshalmonim, things that would pacify their avarice; not what was good, but
compensation for their partiality. - This was the existing state of Jerusalem, and therefore it](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-181-320.jpg)
![sounded harshly in their ears; for they supposed that they were joined in such a confederacy with God,
that he was an adversary to their adversaries. He declares, on the other hand, that he is their enemy
because he had so often been provoked by their crimes. In this manner we must shake off the
slothfulness of hypocrites, who are continually waging war with God, and yet do not hesitate to allege that
they enjoy his protection. We need not wonder, therefore, if the Prophet sternly pronounces them to
beadversaries of God, who had broken the covenant, and had thus carried on war against him.
And yet, in order to show that he is unwillingly, as it were, constrained to inflict punishment on his people,
God utters his threatening with a kind of groan. For as nothing is more agreeable to his nature than to do
good, so whenever he is angry with us and treats us harshly, it is certain that our wickedness has
compelled him to do so, because we do not allow his goodness to take its free course. More especially he
is disposed to treat his own people with gentleness, and when he sees that there is no longer any room
for his forbearance, he takes measures, as it were in sorrow, for inflicting punishment.
Some would rather choose perhaps to explain the particle הוי (hoi) as of God made this exclamation when
aroused by anger. For my own part, I rather consider it, in this passage, to be an expression of grief;
because God, being mindful of his covenant, would willingly spare his chosen people, were it not that
pardon was entirely prevented by their obstinacy.
And avenge me of mine enemies In this second clause there is a reduplication, ( ἀναδίπλωσις) a figure of
speech customary with the Hebrews, who frequently express the same thing twice in one verse. Hence
also we learn that the object of the statement is, that God cannot rest until he has taken vengeance on a
wicked and treacherous people
(29) In our English version it runs, Ah! I will ease me of mine adversaries. — Ed.
25
I will turn my hand against you;[b]
I will thoroughly purge away your dross
and remove all your impurities.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-189-320.jpg)
![good work in their souls: all which is owing to his mighty hand of grace upon them, and to the
exertions of the exceeding greatness of his power towards them. This was accomplished in part
in the conversion of a large number of the Jews on the day of Pentecost, and afterwards; and will
be more fully accomplished in the latter day, when that people shall turn to the Lord, in
consequence of his hand of powerful grace being turned on them. The phrase is used of the
display of divine grace and mercy, in Zec_13:7.
and purely purge away thy dross; which the Targum rightly interprets of "ungodliness" or
wickedness; it means the sins of converted ones, which, at conversion, they are purely purged
from; not that sin, as to the being of it, is removed from them; that dwells in them, abides with
them; and, like dross, is a heavy burden, a dead weight upon them, and will be while they are in
this tabernacle, and makes them groan, being burdened; so far from it, that in their view it
rather increases; they see the plague of their own hearts; and such innumerable swarms of
corruption they never saw before; sin revives, and they die; but in conversion grace
superabounds it, deluges over it, keeps down the force and power of it, so that it has not the
dominion; the old man is put off concerning the former conversation, which ceases to be a
series, a course of sinning: besides, through the sprinkling of the blood of Christ, which
cleanseth from all the dross and filth of sin, the guilt is removed from the conscience, and
perfect peace and full pardon take place; all iniquity is caused to pass from them, and they are
clothed with change of raiment, the righteousness of Christ, by which they are justified from all
things, and are pure, spotless, and without fault before the throne:
and take away all thy tin. The Targum also interprets this of iniquity, rendering it, "I will
take away all thy sin"; but it is better to understand it of self-righteousness; which, as tin is of
more worth than dross, and looks like silver; so this has the appearance of some good in it, and
was what the Jews were fond of, trusted in, and depended on, and which they followed after, and
endeavoured to establish and hold fast; but this in conversion is all taken away: the Lord, by his
Spirit; convinces of the weakness and insufficiency of it, to justify in his sight; shows that it is
not a righteousness, and will be of no service in that respect; yea, takes away these filthy rags,
and clothes with the righteousness of Christ; causes the soul to drop and renounce its own
righteousness, and put on that; and not only to renounce works before conversion, but all after
it, as a profession of religion, subjection to Gospel ordinances, and all works, though done in
faith, and in a right manner; a glaring instance we have of all this in one of that little remnant,
the Apostle Paul, Phi_3:6. Moreover, by "dross" and "tin", or "tins", in the plural number, may
be meant persons; wicked and profane men, by the former, who should be put away like dross,
Psa_119:119 and self righteous persons, by the latter; who shine like silver, make a show of
religion, appear outwardly righteous; but these, as well as the other, should be separated from
the people of God, when the precious and the vile should be distinguished.
4. HENRY, “By reforming his church, and restoring good judges in the room of those corrupt
ones. Though the church has a great deal of dross in it, yet it shall not be thrown away, but
refined (Isa_1:25): “I will purely purge away thy dross. I will amend what is amiss. Vice and
profaneness shall be suppressed and put out of countenance, oppressors displaced, and deprived
of their power to do mischief.” When things are ever so bad God can set them to rights, and
bring about a complete reformation; when he begins he will make an end, will take away all the
tin. Observe, [1.] The reformation of a people is God's own work, and, if ever it be done, it is he
that brings it about: “I will turn my hand upon thee; I will do that for the reviving of religion
which I did at first for the planting of it.” He can do it easily, with the turn of his hand; but he
does it effectually, for what opposition can stand before the arm of the Lord revealed? [2.] He
does it by blessing them with good magistrates and good ministers of state (Isa_1:26): “I will](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-191-320.jpg)
![restore thy judges as at the first, to put the laws in execution against evil-doers, and thy
counsellors, to transact public affairs, as at the beginning,” either the same persons that had
been turned out or others of the same character. [3.] He does it by restoring judgment and
righteousness among them (Isa_1:27), by planting in men's minds principles of justice and
governing their lives by those principles. Men may do much by external restraints; but God does
it effectually by the influences of his Spirit, as a Spirit of judgment, Isa_4:4; Isa_28:6. See
Psa_85:10, Psa_85:11. [4.] The reformation of a people will be the redemption of them and their
converts, for sin is the worst captivity, the worst slavery, and the great and eternal redemption is
that by which Israel is redeemed from all his iniquities (Psa_130:8), and the blessed Redeemer
is he that turns away ungodliness from Jacob (Rom_11:26), and saves his people from their
sins, Mat_1:21. All the redeemed of the Lord shall be converts, and their conversion is their
redemption: “Her converts, or those that return of her (so the margin), shall be redeemed with
righteousness.” God works deliverance for us by preparing us for it with judgment and
righteousness. [5.] The reviving of a people's virtues is the restoring of their honour: Afterwards
thou shalt be called the city of righteousness, the faithful city; that is, First, “Thou shalt be so;”
the reforming of the magistracy is a good step towards the reforming of the city and the country
too. Secondly, “Thou shalt have the praise of being so;” and a greater praise there cannot be to
any city than to be called the city of righteousness, and to retrieve the ancient honour which was
lost when the faithful city became a harlot, Isa_1:21.
5. JAMISON, “turn ... hand — not in wrath, but in grace (Zec_13:7), “upon thee,” as
Isa_1:26, Isa_1:27 show; contrasted with the enemies, of whom He will avenge Himself
(Isa_1:24).
purely — literally, “as alkali purifies.”
thy dross — not thy sins, but the sinful persons (Jer_6:29); “enemies” (Isa_1:24);
degenerate princes (see on Isa_1:22), intermingled with the elect “remnant” of grace.
tin — Hebrew, bedil, here the alloy of lead, tin, etc., separated by smelting from the silver. The
pious Bishop Bedell took his motto from this.
6. K&D, “Isa_1:25 states clearly in what the revenge consisted with which Jehovah was
inwardly burdened (innakmah, a cohortative with the ah, indicating internal oppression): “And I
will bring my hand over thee, and will smelt out thy dross as with alkali, and will clear away
all thy lead.” As long as God leaves a person's actions or sufferings alone, His hand, i.e., His
acting, is at rest. Bringing the hand over a person signifies a movement of the hand, which has
been hitherto at rest, either for the purpose of inflicting judicial punishment upon the person
named (Amo_1:8; Jer_6:9; Eze_38:12; Psa_81:15), or else, though this is seldom the case, for
the purpose of saving him (Zec_13:7). The reference here is to the divine treatment of
Jerusalem, in which punishment and salvation were combined - punishment as the means,
salvation as the end. The interposition of Jehovah was, as it were, a smelting, which would
sweep away, not indeed Jerusalem itself, but the ungodly in Jerusalem. They are compared to
dross, or (as the verb seems to imply) to ore mixed with dross, and, inasmuch as lead is thrown
off in the smelting of silver, to such ingredients of lead as Jehovah would speedily and
thoroughly remove, “like alkali,” i.e., “as if with alkali” (Cabbor, Comparatio decurtata, for
C'babbor: for this mode of dropping Beth after Caph, compare Isa_9:3; Lev_22:13, and many](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-192-320.jpg)
![Afterward thou shall be called the city of righteousness: when many shall be converted
through the hand of the Lord turned upon them, and become incorporated into a church state,
and having the apostles and other ministers of the Gospel among them, with proper officers over
them, as the first Christian church at Jerusalem had; and the members of it were righteous
persons, such as were justified by the righteousness of Christ, and lived righteously, walking in
the ordinances of the Lord, and as became the Gospel of Christ, and will be the case of the
churches of Christ in the latter day:
the faithful city; to Christ, his Gospel, ordinances, and one another, as the first Christians at
Jerusalem were; see Act_2:12. A true church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, who
keep the ordinances as they were delivered; stand first in the faith of the Gospel; take care that
the laws of Christ's house are put in execution; and do not suffer sin upon one another, nor bear
them that are evil, whether in doctrine or practice; and which in the latter day will be the case of
the churches of Christ in a remarkable manner, when they will justly bear this character.
4. HENRY, “By cutting off those that hate to be reformed, that they may not remain either as
snares or as scandals to the faithful city. [1.] it is an utter ruin that is here threatened. They shall
be destroyed and consumed, and not chastened and corrected only. The extirpation of them will
be necessary to the redemption of Zion. [2.] It is a universal ruin, which will involve the
transgressors and the sinners together, that is, the openly profane that have quite cast of all
religion, and the hypocrites that live wicked lives under the cloak of a religious profession - they
shall both be destroyed together, for they are both alike an abomination to God, both those that
contradict religion and those that contradict themselves in their pretensions to it. And those that
forsake the Lord, to whom they had formerly joined themselves, shall be consumed, as the water
in the conduit-pipe is soon consumed when it is cut off from the fountain.
5. JAMISON, “As the degeneracy had shown itself most in the magistrates (Isa_1:17-23), so,
at the “restoration,” these shall be such as the theocracy “at the first” had contemplated, namely,
after the Babylonish restoration in part and typically, but fully and antitypically under Messiah
(Isa_32:1; Isa_52:8; Jer_33:7; Mat_19:28).
faithful — no longer “an harlot.”
6. K&D, “As the threat couched in the previous figure does not point to the destruction, but
simply to the smelting of Jerusalem, there is nothing strange in the fact that in Isa_1:26 it
should pass over into a pure promise; the meltingly soft and yearningly mournful termination of
the clauses with ayich, the keynote of the later songs of Zion, being still continued. “And I will
bring back thy judges as in the olden time, and thy counsellors as in the beginning; afterwards
thou wilt be called city of righteousness, faithful citadel.” The threat itself was, indeed,
relatively a promise, inasmuch as whatever could stand the fire would survive the judgment; and
the distinct object of this was to bring back Jerusalem to the purer metal of its own true nature.
But when that had been accomplished, still more would follow. The indestructible kernel that
remained would be crystallized, since Jerusalem would receive back from Jehovah the judges
and counsellors which it had had in the olden flourishing times of the monarchy, ever since it
had become the city of David and of the temple; not, indeed, the very same persons, but persons
quite equal to them in excellence. Under such God-given leaders Jerusalem would become what](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-196-320.jpg)
![3. GILL, “Zion shall be redeemed with judgment,.... The blessing of redemption by Christ
is the source and foundation of the other blessings of grace, before mentioned, the little remnant
are favoured with, as justification, pardon of sin, and conversion, Isa_1:18, Isa_1:25 it is of a
spiritual nature; the redemption of the soul is a deliverance from the captivity of sin, Satan, and
the law, and is plenteous and eternal; the objects of redeeming grace are "Zion"
and her converts; not the world, but the church is redeemed by Christ; for by Zion is meant,
not a place, but people, even the church and people of God, who frequently bear the name of
Zion in this prophecy, and in other passages of Scripture, both of the Old and of the New
Testament; see Isa_49:14 compared to Mount Zion for its height and holiness; for being the
object of God's love, the instance of his choice, the place of his habitation; where his worship is,
he grants his presence, and distributes his blessings; for its being a perfection of beauty, the joy
of the whole earth, well fortified and immovable: and the redemption of the church by Christ is
with judgment; with the judgment and vengeance of God on Christ, and through the
condemnation of him as her Head and representative; with the judgment of God, which is
according to truth, in whose judgment she is truly redeemed by the blood of Christ, and really
delivered from her bondage, according to his justice and holiness, which are glorified by it: but
here the redemption of Zion seems to mean a more glorious state of the church, a restoration of
her to her former glory, or to a greater, which will be in the latter day, and may be discerned as
drawing near by the signs of the times fulfilling, Luk_21:28 whereby the truth and faithfulness
of God, in his promises concerning it, will be honoured, and he will appear to be a God of
judgment:
and her converts with righteousness; so called, not because converted by the church, for
conversion is God's work, and not man's; no man can effect his own conversion, he is passive in
it; nor can any others, not their nearest friends and relations; they can only pray for it, as
Abraham did for Ishmael, and bring them under the means; nor are ministers sufficient, only
instruments of conversion neither Zion's ministers nor members can convert one sinner: but
they are so called, either because converted "in" her, through the ministry of the word as a
means, preached in the midst of her, Psa_87:5 or because converted "to" her, Isa_60:5 being
made to submit to the ordinances of the church, and to join themselves to it. "Converts" are the
objects of redemption by Christ; all that are redeemed are, sooner or later, converted; and all
that are converted are redeemed; and the redemption of them by his blood is consistent "with"
the "righteousness" of God; for hereby sin is fully condemned and punished; the justice of God
has all its demands, and the law is completely fulfilled; and so the end of God is answered, which
is to declare his righteousness by it. Moreover, in the latter day, when there, will be a
redemption and deliverance or the church out of all her troubles and distresses, her converts will
manifestly appear to be all righteous, being justified with the spotless righteousness of Christ,
Isa_60:21.
4. HENRY, “He does it by restoring judgment and righteousness among them (Isa_1:27), by
planting in men's minds principles of justice and governing their lives by those principles. Men
may do much by external restraints; but God does it effectually by the influences of his Spirit, as
a Spirit of judgment, Isa_4:4; Isa_28:6. See Psa_85:10, Psa_85:11. [4.] The reformation of a
people will be the redemption of them and their converts, for sin is the worst captivity, the worst
slavery, and the great and eternal redemption is that by which Israel is redeemed from all his
iniquities (Psa_130:8), and the blessed Redeemer is he that turns away ungodliness from Jacob
(Rom_11:26), and saves his people from their sins, Mat_1:21. All the redeemed of the Lord shall
be converts, and their conversion is their redemption: “Her converts, or those that return of her](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-200-320.jpg)
![(so the margin), shall be redeemed with righteousness.” God works deliverance for us by
preparing us for it with judgment and righteousness. [5.] The reviving of a people's virtues is the
restoring of their honour: Afterwards thou shalt be called the city of righteousness, the faithful
city; that is, First, “Thou shalt be so;” the reforming of the magistracy is a good step towards the
reforming of the city and the country too. Secondly, “Thou shalt have the praise of being so;”
and a greater praise there cannot be to any city than to be called the city of righteousness, and to
retrieve the ancient honour which was lost when the faithful city became a harlot, Isa_1:21.
5. JAMISON, “redeemed — temporarily, civilly, and morally; type of the spiritual
redemption by the price of Jesus Christ’s blood (1Pe_1:18, 1Pe_1:19), the foundation of
“judgment” and “righteousness,” and so of pardon. The judgment and righteousness are God’s
first (Isa_42:21; Rom_3:26); so they become man’s when “converted” (Rom_8:3, Rom_8:4);
typified in the display of God’s “justice,” then exhibited in delivering His covenant-people,
whereby justice or “righteousness” was produced in them.
converts — so Maurer. But Margin, “they that return of her,” namely the remnant that
return from captivity. However, as Isaiah had not yet expressly foretold the Babylonian
captivity, the English Version is better.
6. K&D, “Isa_1:27 presents it in a brief and concise form: “Sion will be redeemed through
judgment, and her returning ones through righteousness.” Mishpat and tzedakah are used
elsewhere for divine gifts (Isa_33:5; Isa_28:6), for such conduct as is pleasing to God (Isa_1:21;
Isa_32:16), and for royal Messianic virtues (Isa_9:6; Isa_11:3-5; Isa_16:5; Isa_32:1). Here,
however, where we are helped by the context, they are to be interpreted according to such
parallel passages as Isa_4:4; Isa_5:16; Isa_28:17, as signifying God's right and righteousness in
their primarily judicious self-fulfilment. A judgment, on the part of God the righteous One,
would be the means by which Zion itself, so far as it had remained faithful to Jehovah, and those
who were converted in the midst of the judgment, would be redeemed - a judgment upon
sinners and sin, by which the power that had held in bondage the divine nature of Zion, so far as
it still continued to exist, would be broken, and in consequence of which those who turned to
Jehovah would be incorporated into His true church. Whilst, therefore, God was revealing
Himself in His punitive righteousness; He was working out a righteousness which would be
bestowed as a gift of grace upon those who escaped the former. The notion of “righteousness” is
now following a New Testament track. In front it has the fire of the law; behind, the love of the
gospel. Love is concealed behind the wrath, like the sun behind the thunder-clouds. Zion, so far
as it truly is or is becoming Zion, is redeemed, and none but the ungodly are destroyed. But, as is
added in the next verse, the latter takes place without mercy.
7. PULPIT, “Redeemed with judgment; rather, delivered through judgment; i.e. God's judgment shall
have the effect of "delivering" a remnant, who shall build up Zion once more, and dwell in it. Her
converts; i.e. those of her children who turn to God, shall be delivered through God's
righteousness, i.e. through the righteous vengeance which he executes upon the unfaithful nation. Some,](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-201-320.jpg)
![4. HENRY, “By cutting off those that hate to be reformed, that they may not remain either as
snares or as scandals to the faithful city. [1.] it is an utter ruin that is here threatened. They shall
be destroyed and consumed, and not chastened and corrected only. The extirpation of them will
be necessary to the redemption of Zion. [2.] It is a universal ruin, which will involve the
transgressors and the sinners together, that is, the openly profane that have quite cast of all
religion, and the hypocrites that live wicked lives under the cloak of a religious profession - they
shall both be destroyed together, for they are both alike an abomination to God, both those that
contradict religion and those that contradict themselves in their pretensions to it. And those that
forsake the Lord, to whom they had formerly joined themselves, shall be consumed, as the water
in the conduit-pipe is soon consumed when it is cut off from the fountain.
5. JAMISON, “destruction — literally, “breaking into shivers” (Rev_2:27). The prophets
hasten forward to the final extinction of the ungodly (Psa_37:20; Rev_19:20; Rev_20:15); of
which antecedent judgments are types.
6. K&D, ““And breaking up of the rebellious and sinners together; and those who forsake
Jehovah will perish.” The judicial side of the approaching act of redemption is here expressed in
a way that all can understand. The exclamatory substantive clause in the first half of the v. is
explained by a declaratory verbal clause in the second. The “rebellious” were those who had both
inwardly and outwardly broken away from Jehovah; “sinners,” those who were living in open
sins; and “those who forsake Jehovah,” such as had become estranged from God in either of
these ways.
7.CALVIN, “28.And the destruction of the transgressors Lest hypocrites should imagine that any fruit
of these promises belongs to them, and should indulge in vain boasting, he threatens that they shall
perish, though God redeem his Church. For hypocrites have always been mingled with the Church, and
indeed are connected with it in the closest manner; but they form their estimation of it from outward show.
All that God promises they at once apply confidently to themselves. The apostle tears from them this
trust, if indeed it deserve the name of trust, which springs from pride and the arrogance of a haughty
mind. Here we ought to observe how great wisdom is needed by godly teachers, that, while they terrify
the wicked by the judgment of God, they may at the same time support good men, and strengthen them
by some consolation, that they may not be cast down and discouraged. On the other hand, when
believers are encouraged be the promise of God, and when wicked men falsely apply it to themselves,
and puff up their minds with vain confidence, the method and course which we ought to pursue is, that we](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/isaiah1commentary-150302064345-conversion-gate02/85/Isaiah-1-commentary-204-320.jpg)
Uploaded byGLENN PEASE
Isaiah 1 commentary
This document provides commentary on Isaiah 1 from multiple scholars. It summarizes the key details in the chapter, including that it contains a rebuke of Judah for its corruptions and a call to repentance. The document also provides background historical context, defining important terms and explaining the meaning of Isaiah's name. It details the reigns of the kings of Judah that Isaiah prophesied under, from Uzziah to Hezekiah.
More Related Content
More from GLENN PEASE
Isaiah 1 commentary
- 1. ISAIAH 1 COMMENTARY EDITEDBY GLENN PEASE 1 The vision concerning Judah and Jerusalem that Isaiah son of Amoz saw during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. 1.BARNES, “The vision - The first verse evidently is a title, but whether to the whole book or only to a part of it has been questioned. As it stands here, however, it seems clearly intended to include the entire book, because it embraces all that was seen during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah; that is, during the whole prophetic life of the prophet. The same title is also given to his prophecies in 2Ch_32:32 : ‘Now the rest of the acts of Hezekiah, and his goodness, behold they are written in the vision of Isaiah.’ Vitringa supposes that the former part of this title, ‘the vision of Isaiah,’ was at first affixed to the single prophecy contained in the first chapter, and that the latter part was inserted afterward as an introduction to the whole book. This might have been done by Isaiah himself if he collected his prophecies into a volume, or by some other inspired man who collected and arranged them; see the Introduction to Isa. 36. The word “vision,” חזון chazon, denotes properly that which is seen, from the verb, חזה chazah, “to see, to behold.” It is a term which is often used in reference to the prophecies of the Old Testament; Num_12:6; Num_24:4; 1Sa_3:1; Psa_89:19; Dan_2:19; Dan_7:2; Dan_8:1; Nah_1:1; Gen_15:1; Isa_21:2; Isa_22:1. Hence, the prophets were anciently called “Seers,” as those who saw or witnessed events which were yet to come; compare 1Sa_9:9 : ‘He that is now called a prophet was beforetime called a “Seer;”’ 1Sa_9:11, 1Sa_9:18-19; 1Ch_9:22; 1Ch_29:29; 2Ki_18:13. In these visions the objects probably were made to pass before the mind of the prophet as a picture, in which the various events were delineated with more or less distinctness, and the prophecies were spoken, or recorded, as the visions appeared to the observer. As many events could be represented only by symbols, those symbols became a matter of record, and are often left without explanation. On the nature of the prophetic visions, see Introduction, Section 7. (4.) Of Isaiah - The name Isaiah ישׁעיהו ye sha‛yahu from ישׁע yesha‛ - salvation, help, deliverance - and יהוה ye hovah or Jehovah, means ‘salvation of Yahweh,’ or ‘Yahweh will save.’ The Vulgate renders it “Isaias”; the Septuagint has: Ησαιʷ́ας Eesaias, “Esaias.” This is also retained in the New Testament; Mat_3:3; Mat_4:14; Mat_12:17; Mat_15:7; Mar_7:6; Luk_4:17; Joh_12:39; Act_8:28; Rom_9:27, etc. In the book of Isaiah itself we find the form ישׁעיהו ye sha‛yahu, but in the inscription the rabbis give the form ישׁעיה ye sha‛yah. It was common among the Hebrews to incorporate the name Yahweh, or a part of it, into their proper names; see the note at Isa_7:14. Probably the object of this was to express veneration or regard for him - as we now give the name of a parent or friend to a child; or in many cases the name may have been given to record some signal act of mercy on the part of God, or some special interposition of his goodness. The
- 2. practice of incorporatingthe name of the God that was worshipped into proper names was common in the East. Thus the name “Bel,” the principal idol worshipped in Babylon, appears in the proper names of the kings, as Belshazzar, etc.; compare the note at Isa_46:1. It is not known that the name was given to Isaiah with any reference to the nature of the prophecies which he would deliver; but it is a remarkable circumstance that it coincides so entirely with the design of so large a portion of his predictions. The substance of the latter portion of the book, at least, is the salvation which Yahweh would effect for his people from their oppressers in Babylon, and the far mightier deliverance which the world would experience under the Messiah. The son of Amoz - See the Introduction, Section 2. “Concerning Judah.” The Jews after the death of Solomon were divided into two kingdoms; the kingdom of Judah, and of Israel, or Ephraim. The kingdom of Judah included the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. Benjamin was a small tribe, and it was not commonly mentioned, or the name was lost in that of Judah. The kingdom of Israel, or Ephraim, included the remaining ten tribes. Few of the prophets appeared among them; and the personal ministry of Isaiah does not appear to have been at all extended to them. Jerusalem - The capital of the kingdom of Judah. It was on the dividing line between the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. It is supposed to have been founded by Melchizedek, who is called king of Salem Gen_14:18, and who is supposed to have given this name “Salem” to it. This was about 2000 years before Christ. About a century after its foundation as a city, it was captured by the “Jebusites,” who extended its walls and built a citadel on Mount Zion. By them it was called Jebus. In the conquest of Canaan, Joshua put to death its king Jos_10:23, and obtained possession of the town, which was jointly occupied by the Hebrews and Jebusites until the latter were expelled by David, who made it the capital of his kingdom under the name of “Jebus-Salem,” or, for the sake of easier pronunciation by changing the Hebrew letter ב (b) into the Hebrew letter ר (r), “Jerusalem.” After the revolt of the ten tribes, it of course became the capital of the kingdom of Judah. It was built on hills, or rocks, and was capable of being strongly fortified, and was well adapted to be the capital of the nation. For a more full description of Jerusalem, see the notes at Mat_2:1. The vision which is here spoken of as having been seen respecting Judah and Jerusalem, pertains only to this chapter; see Isa_2:1. In the days of Uzziah - In the time, or during the reign of Uzziah; 2 Chr. 26; compare the Introduction, Section 3. He was sixteen years old when he began to reign, and reigned fifty-two years. It is not affirmed or supposed that Isaiah began to prophesy at the commencement of his reign. The first part of the long reign of Uzziah was prosperous. He gained important victories over his enemies, and fortified his kingdom; 2Ch_26:5-15. He had under him an army of more than three hundred thousand men. But he became proud - attempted an act of sacrilege - was smitten of God, and died a leper. But though the kingdom under Uzziah was flourishing, yet it had in it the elements of decay. During the previous reign of Joash, it had been invaded and weakened by the Assyrians, and a large amount of wealth had been taken to Damascus, the capital of Syria; 2Ch_24:23-24. It is not improbable that those ravages were repeated during the latter part of the reign of Uzziah; compare Isa_1:7. Jotham - He began to reign at the age of twenty-five years, and reigned sixteen years; 2Ch_27:1-2. Ahaz - He began to reign at the age of twenty, and reigned sixteen years. He was a wicked man, and during his reign the kingdom was involved in crimes and calamities; 2 Chr. 28. Hezekiah - He was a virtuous and upright prince. He began his reign at the age of twenty- five years, and reigned twenty-nine; 2 Chr. 29; see the Introduction Section 3,
- 3. 2. CLARKE, “Thevision of Isaiah - It seems doubtful whether this title belongs to the whole book, or only to the prophecy contained in this chapter. The former part of the title seems properly to belong to this particular prophecy; the latter part, which enumerates the kings of Judah under whom Isaiah exercised his prophetical office, seems to extend it to the whole collection of prophecies delivered in the course of his ministry. Vitringa - to whom the world is greatly indebted for his learned labors on this prophet and to whom we should have owed much more if he had not so totally devoted himself to Masoretic authority - has, I think, very judiciously resolved this doubt. He supposes that the former part of the title was originally prefixed to this single prophecy; and that, when the collection of all Isaiah’s prophecies was made, the enumeration of the kings of Judah was added, to make it at the same time a proper title to the whole book. As such it is plainly taken in 2Ch_32:32, where the book of Isaiah is cited by this title: “The vision of Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz.” The prophecy contained in this first chapter stands single and unconnected, making an entire piece of itself. It contains a severe remonstrance against the corruptions prevailing among the Jews of that time, powerful exhortations to repentance, grievous threatenings to the impenitent, and gracious promises of better times, when the nation shall have been reformed by the just judgments of God. The expression, upon the whole, is clear; the connection of the several parts easy; and in regard to the images, sentiments, and style, it gives a beautiful example of the prophet’s elegant manner of writing; though perhaps it may not be equal in these respects to many of the following prophecies. 3. GILL, “The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz,.... This is either the particular title of the prophecy contained in this single chapter, as Jarchi and Abarbinel think; seeing the second chapter Isa_2:1 begins with another title, "the word that Isaiah saw", &c. or rather it is the common title of the whole book; since it is the vision which Isaiah saw in the reign of four kings, as is later affirmed; and so is no other than in general "the prophecy of Isaiah", as the Targum renders it; called a "vision", because it was delivered to him, at least the greatest part of it, in a vision; and because he had a clear perception of the things he prophesied of, as well as delivered them in a clear and perspicuous manner to others: hence the Jews say (m), that Moses and Isaiah excelled the other prophets, seeing they understood what they prophesied of. The name of Isaiah, the penman of this book, signifies either "the Lord shall save", according to Hilleras (n); or "the salvation of the Lord", as Abarbinel, Jerom, and others; and is very suitable to the message he was sent with to the people of God; to acquaint them that the Lord had provided a Saviour for them, and that he would come and save them. He is said to be "the son of Amoz"; not of Amos the prophet; the names differ; the name of the prophet that stands among the twelve lesser prophets is ,עמוס "Amos"; the name of Isaiah's parent is ,אמוץ "Amoz". It is a tradition with the Jews (o), that Amoz, the father of Isaiah, was brother to Amaziah, king of Judah, so that Isaiah was of the royal family. Abarbinei endeavours to confirm it from that greatness of mind, freedom and boldness, he used in reproofs, and from his polite and courtly way of speaking; and this is mentioned by Aben Ezra as a reason why the Jews did not harm him, as they did Jeremiah: but this tradition is not equally regarded by the Jewish writers; and though Kimchi takes notice of it, yet he says the genealogy of Isaiah is not known, nor of what tribe he was. If he was of the seed royal, this is an instance of God's calling some that are noble, not only by his grace, but to office in his church; and it is with a view to this tradition, no doubt, that Jerom (p) calls him "vir nobilis", a "nobleman". It is also a rule with the Jews (q), that where the name of a prophet's father is mentioned, it is a sign that his father was a prophet; and so they say this Amoz was, though the king's brother; and that he is the same with the man of God that came to Amaziah (r), 2Ch_25:7 but Aben Ezra suggests, that this rule does not always hold good.
- 4. Which he sawconcerning Judah and Jerusalem; that is, chiefly and principally; for though Ephraim, or the ten tribes of Israel, are mentioned, yet very rarely; and though there are prophecies concerning other nations in it, yet these relate to the deliverance of the Jews from them, or to God's vengeance on them for their sake. Judah is put for the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin, and is particularly mentioned, because the Messiah, so much spoken of in this book, was to spring from thence, whose title is the Lion of the tribe of Judah; and though Jerusalem was in it, yet that is also particularly taken notice of, because not only the temple, the place of divine worship, was in it, and it was the metropolis of the land; but because the Messiah, when he came, was often to appear here, and from thence the Gospel was to go forth into all the world; and this was a figure of the Gospel church state to the end of the world, which often bears this name: and many things are said in this prophecy not only concerning the coming of Christ, but of the Gospel dispensation, and of various things that should come to pass in it; concerning the glory of the church in the latter day, the calling of the Gentiles, the conversion of the Jews, the destruction of antichrist, and the new heavens and new earth. In the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah: if Isaiah began to prophesy in the first year of Uzziah's reign, as Kimchi and Abarbinel think, relying pretty much on 2Ch_26:22 and lived out the reign of Hezekiah, as he must, if he was put to death by Manasseh, according to the tradition of the Jews, he must prophesy a hundred and twelve or thirteen years; for Uzziah reigned fifty two years, Jotham sixteen, Ahaz sixteen, and Hezekiah twenty nine; but as this seems to begin his prophecy too soon, since so small a part of it was in or concerns Uzziah's reign; so it seems too late to fix the date of his prophecy from the year that King Uzziah died, when he had the vision in Isa_6:1 and desired to be sent of the Lord; which is the opinion of Jarchi, Aben Ezra, and others; but Dr. Lightfoot's opinion is more probable, who places the beginning of his prophecy in the twenty third year of Uzziah; though perhaps it may be sufficient to allow him only ten years of Uzziah's reign: and as he lived through the two reigns of Jotham and Ahaz, so it is certain that he lived through more than half of the reign of Hezekiah; his whole reign was twenty nine years; and therefore it was when he had reigned fourteen years that he was taken sick, and then fifteen years more were added to his days; and the year after this came the messengers from Babylon to congratulate him on his recovery; all which Isaiah gives an account of Isa_38:1 but how long he lived and prophesied after this cannot be said: had his days been prolonged to the times of Manasseh, it would have been written, as Aben Ezra observes, and who pays but little regard to the tradition of the Jews concerning Isaiah's being put to death by Manasseh; if the thing, says he, is "cabala", a tradition, it is truth; but he seems to call in question its reality; however, it is not to be depended on. 4. HENRY, “Here is, I. The name of the prophet, Isaiah, or Jesahiahu (for so it is in the Hebrew), which, in the New Testament is read Esaias. His name signifies the salvation of the Lord - a proper name for a prophet by whom God gives knowledge of salvation to his people, especially for this prophet, who prophesies so much of Jesus the Saviour and of the great salvation wrought out by him. He is said to be the son of Amoz, not Amos the prophet (the two names in the Hebrew differ more than in the English), but, as the Jews think, of Amoz the brother, or son, of Amaziah king of Judah, a tradition as uncertain as that rule which they give, that, where a prophet's father is named, he also was himself a prophet. The prophets' pupils and successors are indeed often called their sons, but we have few instances, if any, of their own sons being their successors. II. The nature of the prophecy. It is a vision, being revealed to him in a vision, when he was awake, and heard the words of God, and saw the visions of the Almighty (as Balaam speaks,
- 5. Num_24:4), though perhapsit was not so illustrious a vision at first as that afterwards, Amo_6:1. The prophets were called seers, or seeing men, and therefore their prophecies are fitly called visions. It was what he saw with the eyes of his mind, and foresaw as clearly by divine revelation, was as well assured of it, as fully apprised of it, and as much affected with it, as if he had seen it with his bodily eyes. Note 1. God's prophets saw what they spoke of, knew what they said, and require our belief of nothing but what they themselves believed and were sure of, Joh_6:69; 1Jo_1:1. 2. They could not but speak what they saw, because they saw how much all about them were concerned in it, Act_4:20; 2Co_4:13. III. The subject of the prophecy. It was what he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, the country of the two tribes, and that city which was their metropolis; and there is little in it relating to Ephraim, or the ten tribes, of whom there is so much said in the prophecy of Hosea. Some chapters there are in this book which relate to Babylon, Egypt, Tyre, and some other neighbouring nations; but it takes its title from that which is the main substance of it, and is therefore said to be concerning Judah and Jerusalem, the other nations spoken of being such as the people of the Jews had concern with. Isaiah brings to them in a special manner, 1. Instruction; for it is the privilege of Judah and Jerusalem that to them pertain the oracles of God. 2. Reproof and threatening; for if in Judah, where God is known, if in Salem, where his name is great, iniquity be found, they, sooner than any other, shall be reckoned with for it. 3. Comfort and encouragement in evil times; for the children of Zion shall be joyful in their king. IV. The date of the prophecy. Isaiah prophesied in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. By this it appears, 1. That he prophesied long, especially if (as the Jews say) he was at last put to death by Manasseh, to a cruel death, being sawn asunder, to which some suppose the apostle refers, Heb_11:37. From the year that king Uzziah died (Isa_6:1) to Hezekiah's sickness and recovery was forty-seven years; how much before, and after, he prophesied, is not certain; some reckon sixty, others eighty years in all. It was an honour to him, and a happiness to his country, that he was continued so long in his usefulness; and we must suppose both that he began young and that he held out to old age; for the prophets were not tied, as the priests were, to a certain age, for the beginning or ending of their administration. 2. That he passed through variety of times. Jotham was a good king, and Hezekiah a better, and no doubt gave encouragement to and took advice from this prophet, were patrons to him, and he a privy- counsellor to them; but between them, and when Isaiah was in the prime of his time, the reign of Ahaz was very profane and wicked; then, no doubt, he was frowned upon at court, and, it is likely, forced to abscond. Good men and good ministers must expect bad times in this world, and prepare for them. Then religion was run down to such a degree that the doors of the house of the Lord were shut up and idolatrous altars were erected in every corner of Jerusalem; and Isaiah, with all his divine eloquence and messages immediately from God himself, could not help it. The best men, the best ministers, cannot do the good they would do in the world. 5. JAMISON, “The General Title or Program applying to the entire book: this discountenances the Talmud tradition, that he was sawn asunder by Manasseh. Isaiah — equivalent to “The Lord shall save”; significant of the subject of his prophecies. On “vision,” see 1Sa_9:9; Num_12:6; and see my Introduction. Judah and Jerusalem — Other nations also are the subjects of his prophecies; but only in their relation to the Jews (Isaiah 13:1-23:18); so also the ten tribes of Israel are introduced only in the same relation (Isaiah 7:1-9:21). Jerusalem is particularly specified, being the site of the temple, and the center of the theocracy, and the future throne of Messiah (Psa_48:2, Psa_48:3, Psa_48:9; Jer_3:17). Jesus Christ is the “Lion of the tribe of Judah” (Rev_5:5).
- 6. Uzziah — calledalso Azariah (2Ki_14:21; 2Ch_26:1, 2Ch_26:17, 2Ch_26:20). The Old Testament prophecies spiritually interpret the histories, as the New Testament Epistles interpret the Gospels and Acts. Study them together, to see their spiritual relations. Isaiah prophesied for only a few years before Uzziah’s death; but his prophecies of that period (Isaiah 1:1-6:13) apply to Jotham’s reign also, in which he probably wrote none; for Isa_7:1-25 enters immediately on Ahaz’ reign, after Uzziah in Isa_6:1-13; the prophecies under Hezekiah follow next. 6. K&D, “Title of the collection, as given in Isa_1:1 : “Seeing of Jesha'-yahu, son of Amoz, which he saw over Judah and Jerusalem in the days of 'Uzziyahu, Jotham, Ahaz, and Yehizkiyahu, the kings of Judah.” Isaiah is called the “son of Amoz.” There is no force in the old Jewish doctrine (b. Megilla 15a), which was known to the fathers, that whenever the name of a prophet's father is given, it is a proof that the father was also a prophet. And we are just as incredulous about another old tradition, to the effect that Amoz was the brother of Amaziah, the father and predecessor of Uzziah (b. Sota 10b). There is some significance in this tradition, however, even if it is not true. There is something royal in the nature and bearing of Isaiah throughout. He speaks to kings as if he himself were a king. He confronts with majesty the magnates of the nation and of the imperial power. In his peculiar style, he occupies the same place among the prophets as Solomon among the kings. Under all circumstances, and in whatever state of mind, he is completely master of his materials - simple, yet majestic in his style - elevated, yet without affectation - and beautiful, though unadorned. But this regal character had its roots somewhere else than in the blood. All that can be affirmed with certainty is, that Isaiah was a native of Jerusalem; for notwithstanding his manifold prophetic missions, we never find him outside Jerusalem. There he lived with his wife and children, and, as we may infer from Isa_22:1, and the mode of his intercourse with king Hezekiah, down in the lower city. And there he laboured under the four kings named in Isa_1:1, viz., Uzziah (who reigned 52 years, 811-759), Jotham (16 years, 759-743), Ahaz (16 years, 743-728), and Hezekiah (29 years, 728-699). The four kings are enumerated without a Vav cop.; there is the same asyndeton enumerativum as in the titles to the books of Hosea and Micah. Hezekiah is there called Yehizkiyah, the form being almost the same as ours, with the simple elision of the concluding sound. The chronicler evidently preferred the fullest form, at the commencement as well as the termination. Roorda imagines that the chronicler derived this ill-shaped form from the three titles, were it is a copyist's error for הוָּ ִקְז ִחְו or הָ ִקְז ִחְ;ו but the estimable grammarian has overlooked the fact that the same form is found in Jer_15:4 and 2Ki_20:10, where no such error of the pen can have occurred. Moreover, it is not an ill-shaped form, if, instead of deriving it from the piel, as Roorda does, we derive it from the kal of the verb “strong is Jehovah,” an imperfect noun with a connecting i, which is frequently met with in proper names from verbal roots, such as Jesimiël from sim, 1Ch_4:36 : vid., Olshausen, §277, p. 621). Under these four kings Isaiah laboured, or, as it is expressed in Isa_1:1, saw the sight which is committed to writing in the book before us. Of all the many Hebrew synonyms for seeing, הָז ָח (cf., Cernere, κρίνειν, and the Sanscrit and Persian kar, which is founded upon the radical notion of cutting and separating) is the standing general expression used to denote prophetic perception, whether the form in which the divine revelation was made to the prophet was in vision or by word. In either case he saw it, because he distinguished this divine revelation from his own conceptions and thoughts by means of that inner sense, which is designated by the name of the noblest of all the five external senses. From this verb Chazah there came both the abstract Chazon, seeing, and the more concrete Chizzayon, a
- 7. sight (visum), whichis a stronger from of Chizyon (from Chazi = Chazah). The noun Chazon is indeed used to denote a particular sight (comp. Isa_29:7 with Job_20:8; Job_33:15), inasmuch as it consists in seeing (visio); but here in the title of the book of Isaiah the abstract meaning passes over into the collective idea of the sight or vision in all its extent, i.e., the sum and substance of all that was seen. It is a great mistake, therefore, for any one to argue from the use of the word Chazon (vision), that Isa_1:1 was originally nothing more than the heading to the first prophecy, and that it was only by the addition of Isa_1:1 that it received the stamp of a general title to the whole book. There is no force in the argument. Moreover, the chronicler knew the book of Isaiah by this title (2Ch_32:32); and the titles of other books of prophecy, such as Hosea, Amos, Micah, and Zephaniah, are very similar. A more plausible argument in favour of the twofold origin of Isa_1:1 has been lately repeated by Schegg and Meier, namely, that whilst “Judah and Jerusalem” are appropriate enough as defining the object of the first prophecy, the range is too limited to apply to all the prophecies that follow; since their object is not merely Judah, including Jerusalem, but they are also directed against foreign nations, and at chapter 7 the king of Israel, including Samaria, also comes within the horizon of the prophet's vision. And in the title to the book of Micah, both kingdoms are distinctly named. But it was necessary there, inasmuch as Micah commences at once with the approaching overthrow of Samaria. Here the designation is a central one. Even, according to the well-known maxims a potiori, and a proximo, fit denominatio, it would not be unsuitable; but Judah and Jerusalem are really and essentially the sole object of the prophet's vision. For within the largest circle of the imperial powers there lies the smaller one of the neighbouring nations; and in this again, the still more limited one of all Israel, including Samaria; and within this the still smaller one of the kingdom of Judah. And all these circles together form the circumference of Jerusalem, since the entire history of the world, so far as its inmost pragmatism and its ultimate goal were concerned, was the history of the church of God, which had for its peculiar site the city of the temple of Jehovah, and of the kingdom of promise. The expression “concerning Judah and Jerusalem” is therefore perfectly applicable to the whole book, in which all that the prophet sees is seen from Judah - Jerusalem as a centre, and seen for the sake and in the interests of both. The title in Isa_1:1 may pass without hesitation as the heading written by the prophet's own hand. This is admitted not only by Caspari (Micah, pp. 90-93), but also by Hitzig and Knobel. But if Isa_1:1 contains the title to the whole book, where is the heading to the first prophecy? Are we to take ר ֶשׁፍ as a nominative instead of an accusative (qui instead of quam, sc. visionem), as Luzzatto does? This is a very easy way of escaping from the difficulty, and stamping Isa_1:1 as the heading to the first prophetic words in Chapter 1; but it is unnatural, as חזוןאשׁרחזה , according to Ges. (§138, note 1), is the customary form in Hebrew of connecting the verb with its own substantive. The real answer is simple enough. The first prophetic address is left intentionally without a heading, just because it is the prologue to all the rest; and the second prophetic address has a heading in Isa_2:1, although it really does not need one, for the purpose of bringing out more sharply the true character of the first as the prologue to the whole. 7. PULPIT, “TITLE OF THE WORK. It is questioned whether the title can be regarded as Isaiah's, or as properly belonging to the work, and it is suggested that it is rather a heading invented by a collector who brought together into a volume such prophecies of Isaiah as were known to him, the collection being a much smaller one than that which was made ultimately. In favor of this view it is urged
- 8. (1) that theprophecies, as we have them, do not all "concern Judah and Jerusalem;" (2) that there is a mistake in the title, which Isaiah could not have made, none of the prophecies belonging to the reign of Uzziah. But it may be answered, that, in the scriptural sense, all and Jerusalem, prophecy "concerns Judah and Jerusalem," i.e. the people and city of God; and, further, that it is quite impossible to prove that no part of the "vision" was seen in the reign of Uzziah. There are no means of knowing whether Isaiah collected his prophecies into a volume himself or whether the collection was the work of others. In either case, the existing title must be regarded as designed for the entire work. All the earlier prophecies—those of Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Micah, Nahum, and Zephaniah—have some title introducing them. Isa_1:1 The vision (comp. Oba_1:1; Nah_1:1). The term is probably used in a collective sense, but is also intended to suggest the intrinsic unity of the entire body of prophecies put forth by Isaiah. As prophets were originally called "seers" (1Sa_9:9), so prophecy was called "vision;" and this latter use continued long after the other. Isaiah the son of Amoz (comp. Isa_2:1; Isa_13:1; Isa_37:2; etc.; 2Ki_20:1; 2Ch_32:32). The signification of the name Isaiah is "the salvation of Jehovah." The name Amen (Amots) is not to be confused with Amos ('Amos), who seems to have been a contemporary (Amo_1:1). Concerning Judah and Jerusalem. The prophecies of Isaiah concern primarily the kingdom of Judah, not that of Israel. They embrace a vast variety of nations and countries (see especially Isa_13:1-22; 15-21; Isa_23:1-18; Isa_47:1-15.); but these nations and countries are spoken of "only because of the relation in which they stand to Judah and Jerusalem" (Kay), or at any rate to the people of God, symbolized under those names. Jerusalem occupies a prominent place in the prophecies (see Isa_1:8, Isa_1:21; Isa_3:16-26; Isa_4:3-6;Isa_29:1-8; Isa_31:4-9, etc.). In the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. Uzziah (or Azariah, as he is sometimes called) reigned fifty-two years— probably from B.C. 811 to B.C. 759; Jotham sixteen years—from B.C. 759 to B.C. 743; Ahaz also sixteen years—from B.C. 743 to B.C. 727; and Hezekiah twenty-nine years—from B.C. 727 to B.C. 698. Isaiah probably prophesied only in the later years of Uzziah, say from B.C. 760; but as he certainly continued his prophetical career tin Sennacherib's invasion of Judaea (Isa_37:5), which was not earlier than B.C. 705, he must have exercised the prophet's office for at least fifty-six years. The lowest possible estimate of the duration of his ministry is forty-seven years—from the last year of Uzziah, B.C. 759, to the fourteenth of Hezekiah (Isa_38:5). The highest known to us is sixty-four years—from the fourth year before Uzziah's death to the last year of Hezekiah. 8. BI, “Isaiah the son of Amoz
- 9. This is notAmos the inspired herdsman. It is his glory simply that he was the father of Isaiah. Like many another he lives in the reflected glory of his offspring. The next best thing to being a great man is to be the father of one. (S. Horton.) Isaiah’s father The rabbis represent his father Amoz as having been a brother of King Amaziah; but, at any rate, if we may judge from his illustrious son’s name, which means “salvation is from Jehovah,” he was loyal to the national faith in days clouded by sore troubles, political danger threatening from without, and deep religious decay pervading all classes of the community. (C. Geikie, LL. D.) The vision of Isaiah The word “vision” is used here in the wide sense of a collection of prophetic oracles (Nah_1:1; Oba_1:1). As the prophet was called a “seer,” and his perception of Divine truth was called “seeing,” so his message as a whole is termed a “vision.” (Prof. J. Skinner, D. D.) The time when Isaiah prophesied Why does the Bible tell us so particularly the time when Isaiah prophesied? Does not the thinker belong to all the ages Does not the poet sing for all time? Why weight the narrative with these thronelogical details? Because you can only judge either a man or his message by knowing the circumstances of his time. If you take a geologist a new specimen he not only wants to know its genus and species, but the matrix out of which it was hewn. The best men not only help to make their times, but their times help to make them. He who is moulded entirely by his surroundings is a human jelly fish—of no account. He who is not influenced at all by “the play of popular passion”—the set of public opinion—is an anachronism, a living corpse. (S. Horton.) Isaiah’s manly outspokenness It is a living man who speaks to us. This is not an anonymous book. Much value attaches to personal testimony. The true witness is not ashamed of day and date and all the surrounding chronology; we know where to find him, what he sprang from, who he is, and what he wants. (J. Parker, D. D.) 9. EBC, “THE ARGUMENT OF THE LORD AND ITS CONCLUSION THE first chapter of the Book of Isaiah owes its position not to its date, but to its character. It was published late in the prophet’s life. The seventh verse describes the land as overrun by foreign soldiery, and such a calamity befell Judah only in the last two of the four reigns over which the first verse extends Isaiah’s prophesying. In the reign of Ahaz, Judah was invaded by Syria and Northern Israel, and some have dated chapter 1 from the year of that invasion, 734 B.C. In the reign again of Hezekiah some have imagined, in order to account for the chapter, a swarming of neighbouring tribes upon Judah; and Mr. Cheyne, to whom regarding the history of Isaiah’s time we ought to listen with the greatest deference, has supposed an Assyrian invasion in 711, under Sargon. But hardly of this, and certainly not of that, have we adequate evidence,
- 10. and the onlyother invasion of Judah in Isaiah’s lifetime took place under Sennacherib, in 701. For many reasons this Assyrian invasion is to be preferred to that by Syria and Ephraim in 734 as the occasion of this prophecy. But there is really no need to be determined on the point. The prophecy has been lifted out of its original circumstance and placed in the front of the book, perhaps by Isaiah himself, as a general introduction to his collected pieces. It owes its position, as we have said, to its character. It is a clear, complete statement of the points which were at issue between the Lord and His own all the time Isaiah was the Lord’s prophet. It is the most representative of Isaiah’s prophecies; a summary is found, perhaps better than any other single chapter of the Old Testament, of the substance of prophetic doctrine, and a very vivid illustration of the prophetic spirit and method. We propose to treat it here as introductory to the main subject and lines of Isaiah’s teaching, leaving its historical references till we arrive in due course at the probable year of its origin, 701 B.C. Isaiah’s preface is in the form of a Trial or Assize. Ewald calls it "The Great Arraignment." There are all the actors in a judicial process. It is a Crown case, and God is at once Plaintiff and Judge. He delivers both the Complaint in the beginning (Isa_1:2-3) and the Sentence in the end. The Assessors are Heaven and Earth, whom the Lord’s herald invokes to hear the Lord’s plea (Isa_1:2). The people of Judah are the Defendants. The charge against them is one of brutish, ingrate stupidity, breaking out into rebellion. The Witness is the prophet himself, whose evidence on the guilt of his people consists in recounting the misery that has overtaken their land (Isa_1:4-9), along with their civic injustice and social cruelty-sins of the upper and ruling classes (Isa_1:10, Isa_1:17, Isa_1:21-23). The people’s Plea-in-defence, laborious worship and multiplied sacrifice, is repelled and exposed (Isa_1:10-17). And the Trial is concluded-"Come now, let us bring our reasoning to a close, saith the Lord"-by God’s offer of pardon to a people thoroughly convicted (Isa_1:18). On which follow the Conditions of the Future: happiness is sternly made dependent on repentance and righteousness (Isa_1:19-20). And a supplementary oracle is given (Isa_1:24-31), announcing a time of affliction, through which the nation shall pass as through a furnace; rebels and sinners shall be consumed, but God will redeem Zion, and with her a remnant of the people. That is the plan of the chapter-a Trial at Law. Though it disappears under the exceeding weight of thought the prophet builds upon it, do not let us pass hurriedly from it, as if it were only a scaffolding. That God should argue at all is the magnificent truth on which our attention must fasten, before we inquire what the argument is about. God reasons with man-that is the first article of religion according to Isaiah. Revelation is not magical, but rational and moral. Religion is reasonable intercourse between one intelligent Being and another. God works upon man first through conscience. Over against the prophetic view of religion sprawls and reeks in this same chapter the popular- religion as smoky sacrifice, assiduous worship, and ritual. The people to whom the chapter was addressed were not idolaters. Hezekiah’s reformation was over. Judah worshipped her own God, whom the prophet introduces not as for the first time, but by Judah’s own familiar names for Him-Jehovah, Jehovah of Hosts, the Holy One of Israel, the Mighty One, or Hero, of Israel. In this hour of extreme danger the people are waiting on Jehovah with great pains and cost of sacrifice. They pray, they sacrifice, they solemnise to perfection. But they do not know, they do not consider; this is the burden of their offence. To use a better word, they do not think. They are God’s grown-up children (Isa_1:2) - children, that is to say, like the son of the parable, with native instincts for their God; and grown-up- that is to say, with reason and conscience developed. But they use neither, stupider than very beasts. "Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider." In all their worship conscience is asleep, and they are drenched in
- 11. wickedness. Isaiah putstheir life is an epigram-Wickedness and worship: "I cannot away," saith the Lord, "with wickedness and worship" (Isa_1:13). But the pressure and stimulus of the prophecy lie in this, that although the people have silenced conscience and are steeped in a stupidity worse than ox or ass, God will not leave them alone. He forces Himself upon them. He compels them to think. In the order and calmness of nature (Isa_1:2), apart from catastrophe nor seeking to influence by any miracle, God speaks to men by the reasonable words of His prophet. Before He will publish salvation or intimate disaster He must rouse and startle conscience. His controversy precedes alike His peace and His judgments. An awakened conscience is His prophet’s first demand. Before religion can be prayer, or sacrifice, or any acceptable worship, it must be a reasoning together with God. That is what mean the arrival of the Lord, and the opening of the assize, and the call to know and consider. It is the terrible necessity which comes back upon men, however engrossed or drugged they may be, to pass their lives in moral judgment before themselves; a debate to which there is never any closure, in which forgotten things shall not be forgotten, but a man "is compelled to repeat to himself things he desires to be silent about, and to listen to what he does not wish to hear, yielding to that mysterious power which says to him, Think. One can no more prevent the mind from returning to an idea than the sea from returning to a shore. With the sailor this is called the tide; with the guilty it is called remorse. God upheaves the soul as well as the ocean." Upon that ever-returning and resistless tide Hebrew prophecy, with its Divine freight of truth and comfort, rises into the lives of men. This first chapter of Isaiah is just the parable of the awful compulsion to think which men call conscience. The stupidest of generations, formal and fat-hearted, are forced to consider and to reason. The Lord’s court and controversy are opened, and men are whipped into them from His Temple and His Altar. For even religion and religiousness, the common man’s commonest refuge from conscience-not only in Isaiah’s time-cannot exempt from this writ. Would we be judged by our moments of worship, by our temple-treading, which is Hebrew for church-going, by the wealth of our sacrifice, by our ecclesiastical position? This chapter drags us out before the austerity and incorruptibleness of Nature. The assessors of the Lord are not the Temple nor the Law, but Heaven and Earth-not ecclesiastical conventions, but the grand moral fundamentals of the universe, purity, order, and obedience to God. Religiousness, however, is not the only refuge from which we shall find Isaiah startling men with the trumpet of the Lord’s assize. He is equally intolerant of the indulgent silence and compromises of the world, that give men courage to say, We are no worse than others. Men’s lives, it is a constant truth of his, have to be argued out not with the world, but with God. If a man will be silent upon shameful and uncomfortable things, he cannot. His thoughts are not his own; God will think them for him as God thinks them here for unthinking Israel. Nor are the practical and intellectual distractions of a busy life any refuge from conscience. When the politicians of Judah seek escape from judgment by plunging into deeper intrigue and a more bustling policy, Isaiah is fond of pointing out to them that they are only forcing judgment nearer. They do but sharpen on other objects the thoughts whose edge must some day turn upon themselves. What is this questioning nothing holds away, nothing stills, and nothing wears out? It is the voice of God Himself, and its insistence is therefore as irresistible as its effect is universal. That is not mere rhetoric which opens the Lord’s controversy: "Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth, for the Lord hath spoken." All the world changes to the man in whom conscience lifts up her voice, and to the guilty Nature seems attentive and aware. Conscience compels heaven and earth to act as her assessors, because she is the voice, and they the creatures, of God. This leads us to emphasise another feature of the prophecy. We have called this chapter a trial-at-law; but it is far more a personal than a legal controversy; of the formally forensic there is very little about it. Some theologies and many preachers have
- 12. attempted the convictionof the human conscience by the technicalities of a system of law, or by appealing to this or that historical covenant, or by the obligations of an intricate and burdensome morality. This is not Isaiah’s way. His generation is here judged by no system of law or ancient covenants, but by a living Person and by His treatment of them-a Person who is a Friend and a Father. It is not Judah and the law that are confronted; it is Judah and Jehovah. There is no contrast between the life of this generation and some glorious estate from which they or their forefathers have fallen; but they are made to hear the voice of a living and present God: "I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against Me." Isaiah begins where Saul of Tarsus began, who, though he afterwards elaborated with wealth of detail the awful indictment of the abstract law against man, had never been able to do so but for that first confronting with the Personal Deity, "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me?" Isaiah’s ministry started from the vision of the Lord; and it was no covenant or theory, but the Lord Himself, who remained the prophet’s conscience to the end. But though the living God is Isaiah’s one explanation of conscience, it is God in two aspects, the moral effects of which are opposite, yet complementary. In conscience men are defective by forgetting either the sublime or the practical, but Isaiah’s strength is to do justice to both. With him God is first the infinitely High, and then equally the infinitely Near. "The Lord is exalted in righteousness!" yes, and sublimely above the people’s vulgar identifications of His will with their own safety and success, but likewise concerned with every detail of their politics and social behaviour; not to be relegated to the Temple, where they were wont to confine Him, but by His prophet descending to their markets and councils, with His own opinion of their policies, interfering in their intrigues, meeting Ahaz at the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller’s field, and fastening eyes of glory on every pin and point of the dress of the daughters of Zion. He is no merely transcendent God. Though He be the High and Holy One, He will discuss each habit of the people, and argue upon its merits every one of their policies. His constant cry to them is "Come and let us reason together," and to hear it is to have a conscience. Indeed, Isaiah lays more stress on this intellectual side of the moral sense than on the other, and the frequency with which in this chapter he employs the expressions know, and consider, and reason, is characteristic of all his prophesying. Even the most superficial reader must notice how much this prophet’s doctrine of conscience and repentance harmonises with the metanoia of New Testament preaching. This doctrine, that God has an interest in every detail of practical life and will argue it out with men, led Isaiah to a revelation of God quite peculiar to himself. For the Psalmist it is enough that his soul come to God, the living God. It is enough for other prophets to awe the hearts of their generations by revealing the Holy One; but Isaiah, with his intensely practical genius, and sorely tried by the stupid inconsistency of his people, bends himself to make them understand that God is at least a reasonable Being. Do not, his constant cry is, and he puts it sometimes in almost as many words-do not act as if there were a fool on the throne of the universe, which you virtually do when you take these meaningless forms of worship as your only intercourse with Him, and beside them practise your rank iniquities, as if He did not see nor care. We need not here do more than mention the passages in which, sometimes by a word, Isaiah stings and startles self-conscious politicians and sinners beetle-blind in sin, with the sense that God Himself takes an interest in their deeds and has His own working plans for their life. On the land question in Judah: (Isa_5:9) "In mine ears, saith the Lord of Hosts." When the people were paralysed by calamity, as if it had no meaning or term: (Isa_28:29) "This also cometh forth from the Lord of Hosts, which is wonderful in counsel and excellent in effectual working." Again, when they were panic-stricken, and madly sought by foolish ways their own salvation: (Isa_30:18) "For the Lord is a God of judgment"-i.e., of principle, method, law, with His own way and time for doing things-"blessed are all they that wait for Him." And again, when politicians were carried away by the cleverness and success of their own schemes: (Isa_31:2)
- 13. "Yet He alsois wise," or clever. It was only a personal application of this Divine attribute when Isaiah heard the word of the Lord give him the minutest directions for his own practice-as, for instance, at what exact point he was to meet Ahaz; (Isa_7:3) or that he was to take a board and write upon it in the vulgar character; (Isa_8:1) or that he was to strip frock and sandals, and walk without them for three years (chapter 20). Where common men feel conscience only as something vague and inarticulate, a flavour, a sting, a foreboding, the obligation of work; the constraint of affection, Isaiah heard the word of the Lord, clear and decisive on matters of policy, and definite even to the details of method and style. Isaiah’s conscience, then, was perfect, because it was two-fold: God is holy; God is practical. If there be the glory, the purity as of fire, of His Presence to overawe, there is His unceasing inspection of us, there is His interest in the smallest details of our life, there are His fixed laws, from regard for all of which no amount of religious sensibility may relieve us. Neither of these halves of conscience can endure by itself. If we forget the first we may be prudent and for a time clever, but will also grow self-righteous, and in time self-righteousness means stupidity too. If we forget the second we may be very devotional, but cannot escape becoming blindly and inconsistently immoral. Hypocrisy is the result either way, whether we forget how high God is or whether we forget how near. To these two great articles of conscience, however-God is high and God is near-the Bible adds a greater third, God is Love. This is the uniqueness and glory of the Bible’s interpretation of conscience. Other writings may equal it in enforcing the sovereignty and detailing the minutely practical bearings of conscience: the Bible alone tells man how much of conscience is nothing but God’s love. It is a doctrine as plainly laid down as the doctrine about chastisement, though not half so much recognised-"Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth." What is true of the material pains and penalties of life is equally true of the inward convictions, frets, threats, and fears, which will not leave stupid man alone. To men with their obscure sense of shame, and restlessness, and servitude to sin the Bible plainly says, "You are able to sin because you have turned your back to the love of God; you are unhappy because yon do not take that love to your heart; the bitterness of your remorse is that it is love against which you are ungrateful." Conscience is not the Lord’s persecution, but His jealous pleading, and not the fierceness of His anger, but the reproach of His love. This is the Bible’s doctrine throughout, and it is not absent from the chapter we are considering. Love gets the first word even in the indictment of this austere assize: "I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against Me." Conscience is already a Father’s voice: the recollection, as it is in the parable of the prodigal, of a Father’s mercy; the reproach, as it is with Christ’s lamentation over Jerusalem, of outraged love. We shall find not a few passages in Isaiah, which prove that he was in harmony with all revelation upon this point, that conscience is the reproach of the love of God. But when that understanding of conscience breaks out in a sinner’s heart forgiveness cannot be far away. Certainly penitence is at hand. And therefore, because of all books the Bible is the only one which interprets conscience as the love of God, so is it the only one that can combine His pardon with His reproach, and as Isaiah now does in a single verse, proclaim His free forgiveness as the conclusion of His bitter quarrel. "Come, let us bring our reasoning to a close, saith the Lord. Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool." Our version, "Come, and let us reason together," gives no meaning here. So plain an offer of pardon is not reasoning together; it is bringing reasoning to an end; it is the settlement of a dispute that has been in progress. Therefore we translate, with Mr. Cheyne, "Let us bring our reasoning to an end." And how pardon can be the end and logical conclusion of conscience is clear to us, who have seen how much of conscience is love, and that the Lord’s controversy is the reproach of His Father’s heart, and His jealousy to make His own consider all His way of mercy towards them.
- 14. But the prophetdoes not leave conscience alone with its personal and inward results. He rouses it to its social applications. The sins with which the Jews are charged in this charge of the Lord are public sins. The whole people is indicted, but it is the judges, the princes, and counsellors who are denounced. Judah’s disasters, which she seeks to meet by worship, are due to civic faults, bribery, corruption of justice, indifference to the rights of the poor and the friendless. Conscience with Isaiah is not what it is with so much of the religion of today, a cul de sac, into which the Lord chases a man and shuts him up to Himself, but it is a thoroughfare by which the Lord drives the man out upon the world and its manifold need of him. There is little dissection and less study of individual character with Isaiah. He has no time for it. Life is too much about him, and his God too much interested in life. What may be called the more personal sins- drunkenness, vanity of dress, thoughtlessness, want of faith in God and patience to wait for Him-are to Isaiah more social than individual symptoms, and it is for their public and political effects that he mentions them. Forgiveness is no end in itself, but the opportunity of social service; not a sanctuary in which Isaiah leaves men to sing its praises or form doctrines of it, but a gateway through which he leads God’s people upon the world with the cry that rises from him here: "Seek justice, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow." Before we pass from this form in which Isaiah figures religion we must deal with a suggestion it raises. No modern mind can come into this ancient court of the Lord’s controversy without taking advantage of its open forms to put a question regarding the rights of man there. That God should descend to argue with men, what license does this give to men? If religion be reasonable controversy of this kind, what is the place of doubt in it? Is not doubt man’s side of the argument? Has he not also questions to put-the Almighty from his side to arraign? For God has Himself here put man on a level with Him, saying, "Come, and let us reason together." A temper of this kind, though not strange to the Old Testament, lies beyond the horizon of Isaiah. The only challenge of the Almighty which in any of his prophecies he reports as rising from his own countrymen is the bravado of certain drunkards (chapters 5 and 28). Here and elsewhere it is the very opposite temper from honest doubt which he indicts-the temper that does not know, that does not consider. Ritualism and sensualism are to Isaiah equally false, because equally unthinking. The formalist and the fleshly he classes together, because of their stupidity. What does it matter whether a man’s conscience and intellect be stifled in his own fat or under the clothes with which he dresses himself? They are stifled, and that is the main thing. To the formalist Isaiah says, "Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider"; to the fleshly (chapter 5), "My people are gone into captivity for want of knowledge." But knowing and considering are just that of which doubt, in its modern sense, is the abundance, and not the defect. The mobility of mind, the curiosity, the moral sensitiveness, the hunger that is not satisfied with the chaff of formal and unreal answers, the spirit to find out truth for one’s self, wrestling with God-this is the very temper Isaiah, would have welcomed in a people whose sluggishness of reason was as justly blamed by him as the grossness of their moral sense. And if revelation be of the form in which Isaiah so prominently sets it, and the whole Bible bears him out in this-if revelation be this argumentative and reasonable process, then human doubt has its part in revelation. It is, indeed, man’s side of the argument, and, as history shows, has often helped to the elucidation of the points at issue. Merely intellectual scepticism, however, is not within Isaiah’s horizon. He would never have employed (nor would any other prophet) our modern habits of doubt, except as he employs these intellectual terms, to know and to consider-viz., as instruments of moral search and conviction. Had he lived now he would have been found among those few great prophets who use the resources of the human intellect to expose the moral state of humanity; who, like Shakespeare and Hugo, turn man’s detective and reflective processes upon his own conduct; who make himself stand at the bar of his conscience. And truly to have doubt of everything in heaven-and earth, and never to doubt one’s self, is to be guilty of as stiff and stupid a piece of
- 15. self-righteousness as thereligious formalists whom Isaiah exposes. But the moral of the chapter is plainly what we have shown it to be, that a man cannot stifle doubt and debate about his own heart or treatment of God; whatever else he thinks about and judges, he cannot help judging himself. NOTE ON THE PLACE OF NATURE IN THE ARGUMENT OF THE LORD The office which the Bible assigns to Nature in the controversy of God with man is fourfold- Assessor, Witness, Man’s Fellow-Convict, and Doomster or Executioner. Taking these backward:- 1. Scripture frequently exhibits Nature as the domster of the Lord. Nature has a terrible power of flashing back from her vaster surfaces the guilty impressions of man’s heart; at the last day her thunders shall peal the doom of the wicked, and her fire devour them. In those prophecies of the book of Isaiah which relate to his own time this use is not made of Nature, unless it be in his very earliest prophecy in chapter 2 and in his references to the earthquake. (Isa_5:25) To Isaiah the sentences and scourges of God are political and historical, the threats and arms of Assyria. He employs the violences of Nature only as metaphors for Assyrian rage and force. But he often promises fertility as the effect of the Lord’s pardon, and when the prophets are writing about Nature, it is difficult to say whether they are to be understood literally or poetically. But, at any rate, there is much larger use made of physical catastrophes and convulsions in those other prophecies which do not relate to Isaiah’s own time, and are now generally thought not to be his. Compare chapters 13 and 14. 2. The representation of the earth as the fellow-convict of guilty man, sharing his curse, is very vivid in Isa_24:1-23; Isa_25:1-12; Isa_26:1-21; Isa_27:1-13. In the prophecies relating to his own time Isaiah, of course, identifies the troubles that afflict the land with the sin of the people, of Judah. But these are due to political causes-viz., the Assyrian invasion. 3. In the Lord’s court of judgment the prophets sometimes employ Nature as a witness against man, as, for instance, the prophet Micah. (Mic_6:10, ff) Nature is full of associations; the enduring mountains have memories from old, they have been constant witnesses of the dealing of God with His people. 4. Or lastly, Nature may be used as the great assessor of the conscience, sitting to expound the principles on which God governs life. This is Isaiah’s favourite use of Nature. He employs her to corroborate his statement of the Divine law and illustrate the ways of God to men, as in the end of chapter 28 and no doubt in the opening verse of this chapter. 10. MACLAREN, “THE GREAT SUIT: JEHOVAH VERSUS JUDAH Isa_1:1-9, Isa_1:16-20 The first bars of the great overture to Isaiah’s great oratorio are here sounded. These first chapters give out the themes which run through all the rest of his prophecies. Like most introductions, they were probably written last, when the prophet collected and arranged his life’s labours. The text deals with the three great thoughts, the leit-motifs that are sounded over and over again in the prophet’s message. First comes the great indictment (Isa_1:2-4). A true prophet’s words are of universal application, even when they are most specially addressed to a particular audience. Just because this indictment was so true of Judah, is it true of all men, for it is not concerned with details peculiar to a long-past period and state of society, but with the broad generalities common to us all. As another great teacher in Old Testament times said, ‘I will not reprove thee for thy sacrifices or thy burnt-offerings, to have been continually before me.’ Isaiah has nothing to say
- 16. about ritual orceremonial omissions, which to him were but surface matters after all, but he sets in blazing light the foundation facts of Judah’s (and every man’s) distorted relation to God. And how lovingly, as well as sternly, God speaks through him! That divine lament which heralds the searching indictment is not unworthy to be the very words of the Almighty Lover of all men, sorrowing over His prodigal and fugitive sons. Nor is its deep truth less than its tenderness. For is not man’s sin blackest when seen against the bright background of God’s fatherly love? True, the fatherhood that Isaiah knew referred to God’s relation to the nation rather than to the individual, but the great truth which is perfectly revealed by the Perfect Son was in part shown to the prophet. The east was bright with the unrisen sun, and the tinted clouds that hovered above the place of its rising seemed as if yearning to open and let him through. Man’s neglect of God’s benefits puts him below the animals that ‘know’ the hand that feeds and governs them. Some men think it a token of superior ‘culture’ and advanced views to throw off allegiance to God. It is a token that they have less intelligence than their dog. There is something very beautiful and pathetic in the fact that Judah is not directly addressed, but that Isa_1:2-4 are a divine soliloquy. They might rather be called a father’s lament than an indictment. The forsaken father is, as it were, sadly brooding over his erring child’s sins, which are his father’s sorrows and his own miseries. In Isa_1:4 the black catalogue of the prodigal’s doings begins on the surface with what we call ‘moral’ delinquencies, and then digs deeper to disclose the root of these in what we call ‘religious’ relations perverted. The two are inseparably united, for no man who is wrong with God can be right with duty or with men. Notice, too, how one word flashes into clearness the sad truth of universal experience-that ‘iniquity,’ however it may delude us into fancying that by it we throw off the burden of conscience and duty, piles heavier weights on our backs. The doer of iniquity is ‘laden with iniquity.’ Notice, too, how the awful entail of evil from parents to children is adduced-shall we say as aggravating, or as lessening, the guilt of each generation? Isaiah’s contemporaries are ‘a seed of evil-doers,’ spring from such, and in their turn are ‘children that are corrupters.’ The fatal bias becomes stronger as it passes down. Heredity is a fact, whether you call it original sin or not. But the bitter fountain of all evil lies in distorted relations to God. ‘They have forsaken the Lord’; that is why they ‘do corruptly.’ They have ‘despised the Holy One of Israel’; that is why they are ‘laden with iniquity.’ Alienated hearts separate from Him. To forsake Him is to despise Him. To go from Him is to go ‘away backward.’ Whatever may have been our inheritance of evil, we each go further from Him. And this fatherly lament over Judah is indeed a wail over every child of man. Does it not echo in the ‘pearl of parables,’ and may we not suppose that it suggested that supreme revelation of man’s misery and God’s love? After the indictment comes the sentence (Isa_1:5-8). Perhaps ‘sentence’ is not altogether accurate, for these verses do not so much decree a future as describe a present, and the deep tone of pitying wonder sounds through them as they tell of the bitter harvest sown by sin. The penetrating question, ‘Why will ye be still stricken, that ye revolt more and more?’ brings out the solemn truth that all which men gain by rebellion against God is chastisement. The ox that ‘kicks against the pricks’ only makes its own hocks bleed. We aim at some imagined good, and we get- blows. No rational answer to that stern ‘Why?’ is possible. Every sin is an act of unreason, essentially an absurdity. The consequences of Judah’s sin are first darkly drawn under the metaphor of a man desperately wounded in some fight, and far away from physicians or nurses, and then the metaphor is interpreted by the plain facts of hostile invasion, flaming cities, devastated fields. It destroys the coherence of the verses to take the gruesome picture of the wounded man as a description of men’s sins; it is plainly a description of the consequences of their sins. In accordance with the Old Testament point of view, Isaiah deals with national calamities as the punishment of national sins. He does not touch on the far worse results of individual sins on individual character. But while we are not to ignore his doctrine that nations are individual entities, and that ‘righteousness exalteth a nation’ in our days as well as in his, the
- 17. Christian form ofhis teaching is that men lay waste their own lives and wound their own souls by every sin. The fugitive son comes down to be a swine-herd, and cannot get enough even of the swine’s food to stay his hunger. The note of pity sounds very clearly in the pathetic description of the deserted ‘daughter of Zion.’ Jerusalem stands forlorn and defenceless, like a frail booth in a vineyard, hastily run up with boughs, and open to fierce sunshine or howling winds. Once ‘beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth, . . . the city of the great King’-and now! Isa_1:9 breaks the solemn flow of the divine Voice, but breaks it as it desires to be broken. For in it hearts made soft and penitent by the Voice, breathe out lowly acknowledgment of widespread sin, and see God’s mercy in the continuance of ‘a very small remnant’ of still faithful ones. There is a little island not yet submerged by the sea of iniquity, and it is to Him, not to themselves, that the ‘holy seed’ owe their being kept from following the multitude to do evil. What a smiting comparison for the national pride that is-’as Sodom,’ ‘like unto Gomorrah’! After the sentence comes pardon. Isa_1:16-17 properly belong to the paragraph omitted from the text, and close the stern special word to the ‘rulers’ which, in its severe tone, contrasts so strongly with the wounded love and grieved pity of the preceding verses. Moral amendment is demanded of these high-placed sinners and false guides. It is John the Baptist’s message in an earlier form, and it clears the way for the evangelical message. Repentance and cleansing of life come first. But these stern requirements, if taken alone, kindle despair. ‘Wash you, make you clean’-easy to say, plainly necessary, and as plainly hopelessly above my reach. If that is all that a prophet has to say to me, he may as well say nothing. For what is the use of saying ‘Arise and walk’ to the man who has been lame from his mother’s womb? How can a foul body be washed clean by filthy hands? Ancient or modern preachers of a self-wrought-out morality exhort to impossibilities, and unless they follow their preaching of an unattainable ideal as Isaiah followed his, they are doomed to waste their words. He cried, ‘Make you clean,’ but he immediately went on to point to One who could make clean, could turn scarlet into snowy white, crimson into the lustrous purity of the unstained fleeces of sheep in green pastures. The assurance of God’s forgiveness which deals with guilt, and of God’s cleansing which deals with inclination and habit, must be the foundation of our cleansing ourselves from filthiness of flesh and spirit. The call to repentance needs the promise of pardon and divine help to purifying in order to become a gospel. And the call to ‘repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ,’ is what we all, who are ‘laden with iniquity,’ and have forsaken the Lord, need, if ever we are to cease to do evil and learn to do well. As with one thunder-clap the prophecy closes, pealing forth the eternal alternative set before every soul of man. Willing obedience to our Father God secures all good, the full satisfaction of our else hungry and ravenous desires. To refuse and rebel is to condemn ourselves to destruction. And no man can avert that consequence, or break the necessary connection between goodness and blessedness, ‘for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it,’ and what He speaks stands fast for ever and ever. 11. MEYER, “THE INGRATITUDE OF A FAVORED NATION Isa_1:1-9 This chapter forms the preface to the prophecies of Isaiah. It is a clear and concise statement of the points at issue between Jehovah and His people. Special urgency was given to these appeals, when first uttered, from the fact which was well-known to the Hebrew politicians and people,
- 18. that Assyria waspreparing for a great war of conquest, which would be directed specially against Jerusalem and her allies. This chapter is east in the form of an assize, a crown case in which God is both complainant and judge. The conviction of sinfulness which the prophet desired to secure, was sought, not by appealing to a code of laws which had been transgressed, but by showing the ingratitude with which Israel had repaid the fatherly love of God. It is the personal element in sin that most quickly convicts men. “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?” “Thou art the man!” “He hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace!” 12. CALVIN, 1.The vision of Isaiah The Hebrew word חזון (chazon,) though it is derived from ,חזה (chazah,) he saw, and literally is a vision, yet commonly signifies a prophecy. For when the Scripture makes mention of special visions which were exhibited to the prophets in a symbolical manner, when it was the will of God that some extraordinary event should receive confirmation, in such cases the word Tibet, ( ),מראה vision, is employed. Not to multiply quotations, in a passage which relates to prophecy in general the writer says, that the word of God was precious, because ,חזון (chazon,) vision, was of rare occurrence. (1Sa_3:1.) A little afterwards, the word מראה : (mar-ah) is employed to denote the vision by which God revealed himself to Samuel. (1Sa_3:13.) In distinguishing between two ordinary methods of revelation, a vision and a dream, Moses speaks of a vision ( )מראה as the special method. (Num_12:6.) It is evident, however, that the seer, ,הראה (haroeh,) was the name formerly given to prophets, (1Sa_9:9;) but by way of excellence, because God revealed to them his counsel in a familiar manner. So far as relates to the present passage, this word unquestionably denotes the certainty of the doctrine; as if it had been said that there is nothing contained in this book which was not made known to Isaiah by God himself. The derivation of the word, therefore, deserves attention; for we learn by it that the prophets did not speak of their own accord, or draw from their own imaginations, but that they were enlightened by God, who opened their eyes to perceive those things which otherwise they would not of themselves have been able to comprehend. Thus the inscription of Isaiah recommends to us the doctrine of this book, as containing no human reasonings, but the oracles of God, in order to convince us that it contains nothing but what was revealed by the Spirit of God. Concerning Judah Were we to render it to Judah, it would make little difference, for the preposition על (al) has both significations, and the meaning will still be, that everything contained in this book belongs strictly to Judah and Jerusalem. For though many things are scattered through it which relate to Babylon, Egypt, Tyre, and other cities and countries, yet it was not necessary that those places should be expressly enumerated in the title; for nothing more was required than to announce the principal subject, and to explain to whom Isaiah was chiefly sent, that is, to Jerusalem, and the Jews. Everything else that is
- 19. contained in hisprophecies may be said to have been accidental and foreign to the subject. And yet it was not inconsistent with his office to make known to other nations the calamities which should overtake them; for in like manner Amos did not go beyond the limits of his calling, when he did not spare the Jews, though he was not sent to them. (Amo_2:4.) A still more familiar instance is found in the calling of Peter and Paul, the former of whom was appointed to the Jews, and the latter to the Gentiles. (Gal_2:8.) And yet Peter did not rush beyond the limits of his office, by preaching to the Gentiles; as, for example, when he went to Cornelius: (Act_10:17 :) nor did Paul, when he offered his services to the Jews, to whom he immediately went as soon as he entered into any city. (Act_13:5.) In the same light ought we to view Isaiah; for while he is careful to instruct the Jews, and directs his labors expressly towards that object, he does not transgress his proper limits when he likewise takes a passing notice of other nations. Judah and Jerusalem He takes Judah for the whole nation, and Jerusalem for the chief city in the kingdom; for he does not make a distinction between Jerusalem and the Jews, but mentions it, by way of eminence, ( κατ ᾿ ἐξοχὴν) as the metropolis, just as if a prophet of the present day were to address the kingdom of France, and Paris, which is the metropolis of the nation. And this was of great importance, that the inhabitants of Jerusalem might not hold themselves exempted, as if they were free from all blame, or placed above the laws on account of their high rank, and thus might send the meaner sort of people to be instructed by homely prophets. It is a mistake, however, to suppose that Jerusalem is mentioned separately, on account of its being situated in the tribe of Benjamin; for the half of that tribes which was subject to the posterity of David, is included under the name of Judah A Rebellious Nation 2 Hear me, you heavens! Listen, earth! For the LORD has spoken: “I reared children and brought them up, but they have rebelled against me.
- 20. 1.BARNES, “Hear, Oheavens - This is properly the beginning of the prophecy. It is a sublime commencement; and is of a highly poetic character. The heavens and the earth are summoned to bear witness to the apostasy, ingratitude, and deep depravity of the chosen people of God. The address is expressive of deep feeling - the bursting forth of a heart filled with amazement at a wonderful and unusual event. The same sublime beginning is found in the song of Moses, Deu_32:1 : Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; And hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. Compare Psa_4:3-4. Thus also the prophets often invoke the hills and mountains to hear them; Eze_6:3 : ‘Ye mountains of Israel, hear the words of the Lord God: Thus saith the Lord God to the mountains, and to the hills, and to the rivers, and to the valleys;’ compare Eze_36:1. ‘Be astonished, O ye heavens, at this, and be horribly afraid, be ye very desolate, saith the Lord,’ Jer_2:12. By the heavens therefore, in this place, we are not to understand the inhabitants of heaven, that is, the angels, anymore than by the hills we are to understand the inhabitants of the mountains. It is high poetic language, denoting the importance of the subject, and the remarkable and amazing truth to which the attention was to be called. Give ear, O earth - It was common thus to address the earth on any remarkable occasion, especially anyone implying warm expostulation, Jer_5:19; Jer_22:29; Mic_1:2; Mic_6:2; Isa_34:1; Isa_49:13. For - Since it is Yahweh that speaks, all the universe is summoned to attend; compare Psa_33:8-9 : ‘Let all the earth fear the Lord; let all the inhabitants of the World stand in awe of him. For he spake and it was done; he commanded and it stood fast.’ The Lord - - יהוה ye hovah, or Jehovah. The small capitals used here and elsewhere throughout the Bible in printing the word Lord, denote that the original word is Yahweh. It is derived from the verb היה hayah, “to be;” and is used to denote “being,” or the fountain of being, and can be applied only to the true God; compare Exo_3:14 : ‘And God said unto Moses, I Am That I Am, אהיה אשׁר אהיה 'ehe yeh 'asher 'ehe yeh; Exo_6:3; Num_11:21; Isa_47:8. It is a name which is never given to idols, or conferred on a creature; and though it occurs often in the Hebrew Scriptures, as is indicated by the small capitals, yet our translators have retained it but four times; Exo_6:3; Psa_83:18; Isa_12:2; Isa_26:4. In combination, however, with other names, it occurs often. Thus in Isaiah, meaning the salvation of Yahweh; “Jeremiah,” the exaltation or grandeur of Yahweh, etc.; compare Gen_22:14 : ‘Abraham called the name of the place “Jehovah-jireh,’” Exo_17:15; Jdg_6:24; Eze_48:35. The Jews never pronounced this name, not even in reading their own Scriptures. So sacred did they deem it, that when it occurred in their books, instead of the word Yahweh, they substituted the word אדני 'adonay, “Lord.” Our translators have shown respect to this feeling of the Jews in regard to the sacredness of the name; and hence, have rendered it by the name of Lord - a word which by no means conveys the sense of the word Yahweh. It would have been an advantage to our version if the word Yahweh had been retained wherever it occurs in the original. I have nourished - Hebrew “I have made great;” גדלתי gı dale tı y. In Piel, the word means “to make great, to cause to grow;” as e. g., the hair; Num_6:5, plants, Isa_44:14; then to educate or bring up children; Isa_49:21; 2Ki_10:6
- 21. And brought up- רוממתי romamethı y, from רום rum, “to lift up” or “exalt.” In Piel it means to bring up, nourish, educate; Isa_23:4. These words, though applied often to the training up of children, yet are used here also to denote the elevation to which they had been raised. He had not merely trained them up, but he had trained them up to an elevated station; to special honor and privileges. “Children.” Hebrew בנים bannı ym - sons.” They were the adopted children of God; and they are represented as being weak, and ignorant, and helpless as children, when he took them under his fatherly protection and care; Hos_11:1 : ‘When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt;’ compare the note at Mat_2:15; Isa_63:8-16. They have rebelled - This complaint was often brought against the Jews; compare Isa_63:10; Jer_2:6-8. This is the sum of the charge against them. God had shown them special favors. He recounted his mercy in bringing them out of Egypt; and on the ground of this, he demanded obedience and love; compare Exo_20:1-3. And yet they bad forgotten him, and rebelled against him. The Targum of Jonathan, an ancient Chaldee version, has well expressed the idea here. ‘Hear, O heavens, which were moved when I gave my law to my people: give ear, O earth, which didst tremble before my word, for the Lord has spoken. My people, the house of Israel, whom I called sons - I loved them - I honored them, and they rebelled against me.’ The same is true substantially of all sinners; and alas, how often may a similar expostulation be made with the professed people of God! 2. CLARKE, “Hear, O heavens “Hear, O ye heavens” - God is introduced as entering into a public action, or pleading, before the whole world, against his disobedient people. The prophet, as herald or officer to proclaim the summons to the court, calls upon all created beings, celestial and terrestrial, to attend and bear witness to the truth of his plea and the justice of his cause. The same scene is more fully displayed in the noble exordium of Psa_1:1-6, where God summons all mankind, from east to west, to be present to hear his appeal; and the solemnity is held on Sion, where he is attended with the same terrible pomp that accompanied him on Mount Sinai: - “A consuming fire goes before him And round him rages a violent tempest: He calleth the heavens from above. And the earth, that he may contend in judgment with his people.” Psa_50:3, Psa_50:4. By the same bold figure, Micah calls upon the mountains, that is, the whole country of Judea, to attend to him, Isa_6:1, Isa_6:2 : - “Arise, plead thou before the mountains, And let the hills hear thy voice. Hear, O ye mountains, the controversy of Jehovah; And ye, O ye strong foundations of the earth: For Jehovah hath a controversy with his people, And he will plead his cause against Israel.” With the like invocation, Moses introduces his sublime song, the design of which was the same as that of this prophecy, “to testify as a witness, against the Israelites,” for their disobedience, Deu_31:21 : -
- 22. “Give ear, Oye heavens, and I will speak; And let the earth hear the words of my mouth.” Deu_32:1. This, in the simple yet strong oratorical style of Moses, is, “I call heaven and earth to witness against thee this day; life and death have I set before thee; the blessing and the curse: choose now life, that thou mayest live, thou and thy seed.” Deu_30:19. The poetical style, by an apostrophe, sets the personification in a much stronger light. Hath spoken “That speaketh” - I render it in the present time, pointing it דבר dober. There seems to be an impropriety in demanding attention to a speech already delivered. But the present reading may stand, as the prophet may be here understood to declare to the people what the Lord had first spoken to him. I have nourished - The Septuagint have εγεννησα, “I have begotten.” Instead of גדלתי giddalti, they read ילדתי yaladti; the word little differing from the other, and perhaps more proper; which the Chaldee likewise seems to favor; “vocavi eos filios.” See Exo_4:22; Jer_31:9. 3. GILL, “Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth,.... To what the Lord was about to say of his controversy with his people, which was to be managed openly and publicly before them as spectators and witnesses; this designs either strictly and properly the heavens and the earth, or figuratively the inhabitants of them, angels and men. The address is solemn, and denotes something of moment and importance to be done and attended to: see Deu_32:1. The Targum is, "hear, O ye heavens, that were moved when I gave my law to my people; and hearken, O earth, that trembleth before my word.'' For the Lord hath spoken: not only by Moses, and the prophets that were before Isaiah, but he had spoken to him the words he was now about to deliver; for they were not his own words, but the Lord's: he spoke by the inspiration of God, and as moved by the Holy Ghost; and therefore what he said was to be received, not as the word of man, but as the word of God: I have nourished and brought up children; meaning the Jews; "my people, the house of Israel, whom I have called children,'' as the Targum paraphrases it; see Exo_4:22 to these, as a nation, belonged the adoption; they were reckoned the children of God; the Lord took notice and care of them in their infant state, brought them out of Egypt, led them through the wilderness, and fed them in it; brought them into Canaan's land, drove out the nations before them, and settled them there; gave them his laws and ordinances, distinguished them from all other nations by his favours, and raised them to a high estate, to much greatness and prosperity, especially in the days of David and Solomon. The words may be rendered, "I have magnified", or "made great, and have exalted children" (s); not only brought them up, but brought them to great honour and dignity; and even unto man's estate, unto the time appointed of the Father, when they should have been under tutors and governors no longer, but under the King Messiah; but they were rebellious, as follows:
- 23. and they haverebelled against me, their Lord and King; for the Jews were under a theocracy; God, who was their Father, was their King, and they rebelled against him by breaking his laws, which rebellion is aggravated by its being not only of subjects against their king, but of children against their father; the law concerning a rebellious son, see in Deu_21:18. The Targum paraphrases it, "they have rebelled against my Word"; the essential Word, the Messiah; the Septuagint version is, "but they have rejected me" (t); and the Vulgate Latin version (u), "but they have despised me": so the Jews rejected and despised the true Messiah when he came, would not have him to reign over them, would not receive his yoke, though easy, but rebelled against him. The Jews were a rebellious people from the beginning, in Moses's time, and in the prophets, and so quite down to the times of the Messiah. 4. HENRY, “We will hope to meet with a brighter and more pleasant scene before we come to the end of this book; but truly here, in the beginning of it, every thing looks very bad, very black, with Judah and Jerusalem. What is the wilderness of the world, if the church, the vineyard, has such a dismal aspect as this? I. The prophet, though he speaks in God's name, yet, despairing to gain audience with the children of his people, addresses himself to the heavens and the earth, and bespeaks their attention (Isa_1:2): Hear, O heavens! and give ear, O earth! Sooner will the inanimate creatures hear, who observe the law and answer the end of their creation, than this stupid senseless people. Let the lights of the heaven shame their darkness, and the fruitfulness of the earth their barrenness, and the strictness of each to its time their irregularity. Moses begins thus in Deu_32:1, to which the prophet here refers, intimating that now those times had come which Moses there foretold, Deu_31:29. Or this is an appeal to heaven and earth, to angels and then to the inhabitants of the upper and lower world. Let them judge between God and his vineyard; can either produce such an instance of ingratitude? Note, God will be justified when he speaks, and both heaven and earth shall declare his righteousness, Mic_6:1, Mic_6:2; Psa_50:6. II. He charges them with base ingratitude, a crime of the highest nature. Call a man ungrateful, and you can call him no worse. Let heaven and earth hear and wonder at, 1. God's gracious dealings with such a peevish provoking people as they were: “I have nourished and brought them up as children; they have been well fed and well taught” (Deu_32:6); “I have magnified and exalted them” (so some), “not only made them grow, but made them great - not only maintained them, but preferred them - not only trained them up, but raised them high.” Note, We owe the continuance of our lives and comforts, and all our advancements, to God's fatherly care of us and kindness to us. 2. Their ill-natured conduct towards him, who was so tender of them: “They have rebelled against me,” or (as some read it) “they have revolted from me; they have been deserters, nay traitors, against my crown and dignity.” Note, All the instances of God's favour to us, as the God both of our nature and of our nurture, aggravate our treacherous departures from him and all our presumptuous oppositions to him - children, and yet rebels! 5. JAMISON, “The very words of Moses (Deu_32:1); this implies that the law was the charter and basis of all prophecy (Isa_8:20). Lord — Jehovah; in Hebrew, “the self-existing and promise-fulfilling, unchangeable One.” The Jews never pronounced this holy name, but substituted Adonai. The English Version, Lord
- 24. in capitals, marksthe Hebrew “Jehovah,” though Lord is rather equivalent to “Adonai” than “Jehovah.” children — (Exo_4:22). rebelled — as sons (Deu_21:18) and as subjects, God being king in the theocracy (Isa_63:10). “Brought up,” literally, “elevated,” namely, to peculiar privileges (Jer_2:6-8; Rom_9:4, Rom_9:5). 6. K&D, “The difficult question as to the historical and chronological standpoint of this overture to all the following addresses, can only be brought fully out when the exposition is concluded. But there is one thing which we may learn even from a cursory inspection: namely, that the prophet was standing at the eventful boundary line between two distinct halves in the history of Israel. The people had not been brought to reflection and repentance either by the riches of the divine goodness, which they had enjoyed in the time of Uzziah-Jotham, the copy of the times of David and Solomon, or by the chastisements of divine wrath, by which wound after wound was inflicted. The divine methods of education were exhausted, and all that now remained for Jehovah to do was to let the nation in its existing state be dissolved in fire, and to create a new one from the remnant of gold that stood the fiery test. At this time, so pregnant with storms, the prophets were more active than at any other period. Amos appeared about the tenth year of Uzziah's reign, the twenty-fifth of Jeroboam II; Micah prophesied from the time of Jotham till the fall of Samaria, in the sixth year of Hezekiah's reign; but most prominent of all was Isaiah, the prophet par excellence, standing as he did midway between Moses and Christ. In the consciousness of his exalted position in relation to the history of salvation, he commences his opening address in Deuteronomic style. Modern critics are of opinion, indeed, that Deuteronomy was not composed till the time of Josiah, or at any rate not earlier than Manasseh; and even Kahnis adduces this as a firmly established fact (see his Dogmatik, i. 277). But if this be the case, how comes it to pass, not only that Micah (Mic_6:8) points back to a saying in Deu_10:12, but that all the post-Mosaic prophecy, even the very earliest of all, is tinged with a Deuteronomic colouring. This surely confirms the self-attestation of the authorship of Moses, which is declared most distinctly in Isa_31:9. Deuteronomy was most peculiarly Moses' own law-book - his last will, as it were: it was also the oldest national book of Israel, and therefore the basis of all intercourse between the prophets and the nation. There is one portion of this peculiarly Mosaic thorah, however, which stands not only in a more truly primary relation to the prophecy of succeeding ages than any of the rest, but in a normative relation also. We refer to Moses' dying song, which has recently been expounded by Volck and Camphausen, and is called shirath hazinu (song of “Give ear”), from the opening words in chapter 32. This song is a compendious outline or draft, and also the common key to all prophecy, and bears the same fundamental relation to it as the Decalogue to all other laws, and the Lord's Prayer to all other prayers. The lawgiver summed up the whole of the prophetic contents of his last words (Deut. 27-28, 29-30), and threw them into the form of a song, that they might be perpetuated in the memories and mouths of the people. This song sets before the nation its entire history to the end of time. That history divides itself into four great periods: the creation and rise of Israel; the ingratitude and apostasy of Israel; the consequent surrender of Israel to the power of the heathen; and finally, the restoration of Israel, sifted, but not destroyed, and the unanimity of all nations in the praise of Jehovah, who reveals Himself both in judgment and in mercy. This fourfold character is not only verified in every part of the history of Israel, but is also the seal of that history as a whole, even to its remotest end in New Testament times. In every age, therefore, this song has presented to Israel a mirror of its existing condition and future fate. And it was the task of the prophets to hold up this mirror to the people of their own times. This is
- 25. what Isaiah does.He begins his prophetic address in the same form in which Moses begins his song. The opening words of Moses are: “Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and let the earth hear the words of my mouth” (Deu_32:1). In what sense he invoked the heaven and the earth, he tells us himself in Deu_31:28-29. He foresaw in spirit the future apostasy of Israel, and called heaven and earth, which would outlive his earthly life, that was now drawing to a close, as witnesses of what he had to say to his people, with such a prospect before them. Isaiah commences in the same way (Isa_1:2), simply transposing the two parallel verbs “hear” and “give ear:” “Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth; for Jehovah speaketh!” The reason for the appeal is couched in very general terms: they were to hear, because Jehovah was speaking. What Jehovah said coincided essentially with the words of Jehovah, which are introduced in Deu_32:20 with the expression “And He said.” What it was stated there that Jehovah would one day have to say in His wrath, He now said through the prophet, whose existing present corresponded to the coming future of the Mosaic ode. The time had now arrived for heaven and earth, which are always existing, and always the same, and which had accompanied Israel's history thus far in all places and at all times, to fulfil their duty as witnesses, according to the word of the lawgiver. And this was just the special, true, and ultimate sense in which they were called upon by the prophet, as they had previously been by Moses, to “hear.” They had been present, and had taken part, when Jehovah gave the thorah to His people: the heavens, according to Deu_4:36, as the place from which the voice of God came forth; and the earth, as the scene of His great fire. They were solemnly invoked when Jehovah gave His people the choice between blessing and cursing, life and death (Deu_30:19; Deu_4:26). And so now they are called upon to hear and join in bearing witness to all that Jehovah, their Creator, and the God of Israel, had to say, and the complaints that He had to make: “I have brought up children, and raised them high, and they have fallen away from me” (Isa_1:2). Israel is referred to; but Israel is not specially named. On the contrary, the historical facts are generalized almost into a parable, in order that the appalling condition of things which is crying to heaven may be made all the more apparent. Israel was Jehovah's son (Exo_4:22-23). All the members of the nation were His children (Deu_14:1; Deu_32:20). Jehovah was Israel's father, by whom it had been begotten (Deu_32:6, Deu_32:18). The existence of Israel as a nation was secured indeed, like that of all other nations, by natural reproduction, and not by spiritual regeneration. But the primary ground of Israel's origin was the supernatural and mighty word of promise given to Abraham, in Gen_17:15-16; and it was by a series of manifestations of miraculous power and displays of divine grace, that the development of Israel, which dated from that starting-point, was brought up to the position it had reached at the time of the exodus from Egypt. It was in this sense that Israel had been begotten by Jehovah. And this relation between Jehovah and Israel, as His children, had now, at the time when Jehovah was speaking through the mouth of Isaiah, a long and gracious past behind it, viz., the period of Israel's childhood in Egypt; the period of its youth in the desert; and a period of growing manhood from Joshua to Samuel: so that Jehovah could say, “I have brought up children, and raised them high.” The piel (giddel) used here signifies “to make great;” and when applied to children, as it is here and in other passages, such as 2Ki_10:6, it means to bring up, to make great, so far as natural growth is concerned. The pilel (romem), which corresponds to the piel in the so-called verbis cavis, and which is also used in Isa_23:4 and Eze_31:4 as the parallel to giddel, signifies to lift up, and is used in a “dignified (dignitative) sense,” with reference to the position of eminence, to which, step by step, a wise and loving father advances a child. The two vv. depict the state of Israel in the times of David and Solomon, as one of mature manhood and proud exaltation, which had to a certain extent returned under Uzziah and Jotham. But how base had been the return which it had made for all that it had received from God: “And they have fallen away from me.” We should have expected an adversative particle here; but instead of that, we have merely a Vav cop., which is used energetically, as in Isa_6:7 (cf., Hos_7:13). Two things which ought never to
- 26. be coupled -Israel's filial relation to Jehovah, and Israel's base rebellion against Jehovah - had been realized in their most contradictory forms. The radical meaning of the verb is to break away, or break loose; and the object against which the act is directed is construed with Beth. The idea is that of dissolving connection with a person with violence and self-will; here it relates to that inward severance from God, and renunciation of Him, which preceded all outward acts of sin, and which not only had idolatry for its full and outward manifestation, but was truly idolatry in all its forms. From the time that Solomon gave himself up to the worship of idols, at the close of his reign, down to the days of Isaiah, idolatry had never entirely or permanently ceased to exist, even in public. In two different reformations the attempt had been made to suppress it, viz., in the one commenced by Asa and concluded by Jehoshaphat; and in the one carried out by Joash, during the lifetime of the high priest Jehoiada, his tutor and deliverer. But the first was not successful in suppressing it altogether; and what Joash removed, returned with double abominations as soon as Jehoiada was dead. Consequently the words, “They have rebelled against me,” which sum up all the ingratitude of Israel in one word, and trace it to its root, apply to the whole history of Israel, from its culminating point under David and Solomon, down to the prophet's own time. 7. PULPIT, “GOD'S COMPLAINT AGAINST HIS PEOPLE. The groundwork of Isaiah's entire prophecy is Judah's defection from God. God's people have sinned, done amiss, dealt wickedly. The hour of vengeance approaches. Punishment has begun, and will go on, continually increasing in severity. National repentance would avert God's judgments, but the nation will not repeat. God's vengeance will fall, and by it a remnant will be purified, and return to God, and be his true people. In the present section the indictment is laid. Judah's sins are called to her remembrance. Isa_1:2 Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth. "A grave and magnificent exorilium! All nature is invoked to hear Jehovah make complaint of the ingratitude of his people" (Rosenmüller). The invocation is cast in the same form with that so common in Deuteronomy (Deu_4:26; Deu_30:19; Deu_31:28; Deu_32:1), and seems to indicate familiarity with that book. The idea extends widely among sacred and other poets (see Psa_1:3, Psa_1:4; Mic_6:1, Mic_6:2; AEsch; 'P. V.,' 11. 88-92). The Lord hath spoken; rather, the Lord (literally, Jehovah) speaketh (so Lowth, Cheyne, and Gesenius). The speech of Jehovah follows in verses 2, 3. I have nourished and brought up children; literally, (my) sons I have made great and high; i.e. I have raised Israel to greatness and exalted him among the nations. Notwithstanding their disobedience, God still acknowledges them as his "sons." They have rebelled against me. The verb used is generally rendered in our version "transgressed" (see Jer_3:13; Hos_7:13; Amo_4:4); but it may also have the stronger sense here assigned it. Lowth translates, "revolted from me;" Gesenius, "fallen away from me;" Cheyne, "broken away from me."
- 27. 8. BI, “Godfinds vindication in nature I well remember two funerals going out of my house within a few brief months during my residence in London. There were cards sent by post and left at the door, in all kindliness; but one dark night when my grief overwhelmed me I looked at some of the cards and could find no vibration of sympathy there. I had not felt the touch of the hand that sent them. I went out into the storm that moaned and raged alternately, and walked round Regent’s Park through the very heart of the hurricane. It seemed to soothe me. You troy I could not find sympathy there. Perhaps not, but I at least found affinity: the storm without seemed to harmonise with the storm within; and then I remembered that He who sent that storm to sweep over the earth loved the earth still, and then remembered that He who sent the storm to sweep over my soul, and make desolate my home, loved me still. I got comfort there in the darkness, and the wild noise of a storm on an autumn night, which I found not in cards of condolence, sincere as in many instances the sympathy of the senders was. Ah me! when man not only failed to sympathise, but also forgot all gratitude and rebelled against his Heavenly Father, I can imagine God looking out to His own universe, to the work of His own hand, and seeking vindication, if not sympathy, as He spoke of man, his rebellion and folly. (D. Davies.) The sinful nation I. THE PRIVILEGES OF THE NATION. It was no mean prerogative to become the chosen people of God, but for what was that choice made? Not because of perfect characters surely; but rather to declare among the nations the messages of God; not a nation holy in character, but with a holy errand. When the ten tribes revolted, leaving only a remnant, that remnant must do the errand appointed. Thus did God speak of them as “My people,” “My children.” Our privileges cannot save us, and even our blessings may become a curse. God cannot give to us personally what we will not receive. II. THE NATIONAL CORRUPTION. What the first chapter of the Epistle to the Romans is in the New Testament, that is the first chapter of Isaiah’s prophecy in the Old. Deeper degradation than that of Israel it would be hard to find. In Isaiah’s time, gold and silver idols glittered on every street of Jerusalem. By royal authority, worship was given to the sun and moon. At the opening of each new season, snow-white horses, stalled in the rooms at the temple entrance, were driven forth harnessed to golden chariots to meet the sun at its rising. Incense ascended to heathen gods from altars built upon the streets. Vice had its impure rites in the temple itself. The valley of Hinnom echoed the dying screams of children offered as sacrifices in the terrible flames of the hideous Moloch. Words fail in depicting the deep corruption. There is the sting of sin in the plain statement of the awful history, “They have forsaken the Lord,” etc. III. THE RELATION OF RITUAL TO MORALITY. The more pronounced the ceremonial, the more tenaciously will men cling to it. Thus, in Isaiah’s day, they who had swung their incense to the sun and moon; who had worshipped Baal upon the high places and in the groves; who had cast their children into the burning arms of Moloch, turned immediately from these heathenish practices to worship in the temple. Of burnt offerings and sacrifices there was no end. The purest spiritual worship, like that of Enoch and Abraham and Melchizedek, did not need it; it was given when a nation of slaves, degraded by Egyptian bondage, could appreciate nothing higher, and it was taken away when the true, light was come. There was neither perfection nor spirituality in such a ritual; yet in such a system God tried to elevate the nation to spiritual truths they could not yet apprehend. The ritual could not make morality.
- 28. IV. ANY WORSHIPTO PLEASE GOD MUST BE REASONABLE. The Divine appeal claims the undivided attention of the profoundest thoughts; “Come, now, and let us reason together.” (Sermons by the Monday Club.) The sinful nation The message to the “sinful nation” with which the book of Isaiah begins has for ourselves the tremendous force of timeliness as well as truth. I. We are led to consider, that STATE AND NATION ARE INVOLVED TOGETHER. The country is “desolate,” the cities are “burned with fire, and the daughter of Zion is left as a cottage in a vineyard, as a lodge in a garden of cucumbers, as a besieged city.” We remember indeed that the saints have survived in “the dens and caves of the earth.” But these victories of truth and righteousness—God’s power to overrule wickedness—by no means contradict Isaiah’s vision. If it is true that the Founder of the Church can maintain its strength notwithstanding civil turmoil and decay, let us also consider how God magnifies the Church through days of peace and virtue. Jesus Himself waited until the nations were still And what may be the possibilities for His kingdom of the continued growth and happiness of our own country, it is entrancing to contemplate. The treasuries of love, how full they may be! The pastors and teachers for every dark land,—what hosts there may be prepared! II. Aroused to the consideration of such a problem, we readily appreciate the prophet’s reference to THE RESPONSIBILITY OF RULERS (verse 10). Our own happy visions of the future may all be over clouded if there be but one Ahab in authority. The exhortation, therefore, addresses those who as citizens are to be charged with the duty of placing men in power. III. We find the prophet distinctly TRACING THE NATIONAL CALAMITIES TO THE NATION’S WICKEDNESS (verses 4-8). IV. THE PROPHET’S MESSAGE TO HIS COUNTRYMEN IS PARTICULARLY DIRECTED AGAINST THEIR IMPIETY. They have forms of religion enough, indeed. But out of the people’s worship the heart and life have departed. Only the husks remain. Perhaps it will be seen in the end that the Pharisee is not only as bad, but as bad a citizen too, as the glutton and the winebibber. The Pharisaic poison works with a more stealthy force and makes its attacks upon more vital parts. We are to look not only for a sinful nation’s natural decay, but besides for those mighty interpositions of Providence in flood and famine, in pestilence and war, directly for its punishment and overthrow. V. THE VALUE OF A “REMNANT.” God has been saving remnants from the beginning—Noah, Abraham, Moses, Nehemiah—and the little companies of which such souls are the centre and the life in every age. God’s plans are not spoiled by man’s madness. If many rebel against Him, He saves the few and multiplies their power. The leaven leavens the whole lump again. VI. Most impressive, therefore, is THE TENDER AND EMPHATIC PROCLAMATION OF MERCY AND PARDON in this chapter. (Hanford A. Edson, D. D.) I. THE WRITER (verse 1). The sinful nation II. THE CHARACTER OF THE PEOPLE (Isa_1:2-6). III. THE FRUITS OF THIS CHARACTER (Isa_1:7-9).
- 29. IV. FALSE EFFORTSTO OBTAIN RELIEF (Isa_1:10-15). Murderers may be found at church, making their attendance a cloak for their iniquity or an atonement for their crime. God cannot become a party to such horrible trading. V. THE TRUE WAY OF DELIVERANCE (Isa_1:16-18). God not only describes the disease, but provides the remedy. The fountain is provided; sinners must wash in it—must confess, forsake, get the right spirit, and do right. (J. Sanderson, D. D.) Isaiah’s sermon The sermon which is contained in this chapter hath in it— I. A HIGH CHARGE exhibited in God’s name against the Jewish Church and nation. 1. For their ingratitude (verses 2, 3). 2. For their incorrigibleness (verse 5). 3. For the universal corruption and degeneracy of the people (verses 4, 6, 21, 22). 4. For their rulers’ perverting of justice (verse 23). II. A SAD COMPLAINT OF THE JUDGMENTS OF GOD which they had brought upon themselves by their sins, and by which they were brought almost to utter ruin (rots. 7-9). III. A JUST REJECTION OF THOSE SHOWS AND SHADOWS OF RELIGION which they kept up among them, notwithstanding this general defection and apostasy (verses 10-15). IV. AN EARNEST CALL TO REPENTANCE AND REFORMATION, setting before them life and death (verses 16-20). V. A THREATENING OF RUIN TO THOSE THAT WOULD NOT BE REFORMED (verses 24, 28-31). VI. A PROMISE OF A HAPPY REFORMATION AT LAST, and a return to their primitive purity and prosperity (verses 25-27). And all this is to be applied by us, not only to the communities we are members of, in their public interests, but to the state of our own souls. (M. Henry.) A last appeal The prophets are God’s storm signals. This was a crisis in Israel’s history. Mercy and judgment had alike failed. The mass of the people had become more hardened. Judgment alone had now become the only real mercy. The prophet was sent to make a last appeal; to warn of judgment. I. THE CHARGE. They have proved unnatural children. Have disowned their Father. Have failed to meet the claims due from them. Have frustrated the purpose of their national existence. Have, as a nation, wholly abandoned themselves to sin. In spite of exceptional privileges, they have lowered themselves beneath the level of the brutes. Nature witnesses against them, and puts them to shame. II. THE DEFACE. The prophet imagines them to point to their temple services,—so regular, elaborate, costly,—in proof that their natural relations to their Father have been maintained. But this common self-delusion is disallowed, exposed, repelled. Not ritual, not laborious costly worship is required, but sincerity of heart, integrity of purpose, rightness of mind. Acceptable religious observance must be the spontaneous expression of an inward religious life.
- 30. III. THE OFFEROF MERCY. But the day of grace is not even yet past. One last attempt is yet made to arouse the sleeping spiritual sensibilities of the nation by the offer of pardon. Reconciliation is possible only upon amendment. IV. THE THREAT OF JUDGMENT. Fire alone can now effect the change desired. God cannot be evaded. He is as truly merciful in threatening as in offering pardon. The nation shall be purged, yet not destroyed. Evil shall be consumed. But thereto who, like gold, can stand the fire and come out purified shall be the nucleus of an ideal society, and remodel the national life. All social amendment has its roots in complete purification of individual hearts. The prophet’s dream was never realised. Yet it was not therefore wasted. It was an ideal, an inspiration to the good in after ages. It will one day be realised through the Gospel. (Lloyd Robinson.) I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against Me The Fatherhood of God in relation to Israel Israel is Jehovah’s men Exo_4:22, etc.); all the members of the nation are His children Deu_14:1; Deu_32:20); He is the Father of Israel, whom He has begotten (Deu_32:6; Deu_32:18). The existence of Israel as a nation, like that of other nations, is effected, indeed, by means of natural reproduction, not by spiritual regeneration; but the primary ground of Israel’s origin is the supernaturally efficacious word of grace addressed to Abraham (Gen_17:15, etc.); and a series of wonderful dealings in grace has brought the growth and development of Israel to that point which it had attained at the Exodus from Egypt. It is in this sense that Jehovah has begotten Israel. (F. Delitzsch.) Israel’s apostasy Two things that ought never to have been conjoined— I. THE GRACIOUS AND FILIAL RELATION OF ISRAEL TO JEHOVAH. II. ISRAEL’S BASE APOSTASY FROM JEHOVAH. (F. Delitzsch.) The Fatherhood of God in the Old Testament Sometimes we imagine that the Fatherhood of God is a New Testament revelation; we speak of the prophets as referring to God under titles of resplendent glory and overpowering majesty, and we set forth in contrast the gentler terms by which the Divine Being is designated in the new covenant. How does God describe Himself in this chapter? Here He claims to be Father: I have nourished and brought up sons—not, I have nourished and brought up slaves—or subjects—or creatures—or insects—or beasts of burden—I have nourished and brought up sons: I am the Father of creation, thefountain and origin of the paternal and filial religion. (J. Parker, D. D.) Ingratitude As the Dead Sea drinks in the river Jordan and is never the sweeter, and the ocean all other rivers and is never the fresher, so we are apt to receive dally mercies from God and still remain insensible to them—unthankful for them. (Bishop Reynolds.)
- 31. God man’s truestFriend We are obliged to speak of the Lord after the manner of men, and in doing so we are clearly authorised to say that He does not look upon human sin merely with the eye of a judge who condemns it, but with the eye of a friend who, while he censures the offender, deeply laments that there should be such faults to condemn. Hear, “O heavens, and give ear, O earth: I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against Me,” is not merely an exclamation of surprise, or an accusation of injured justice, but it contains a note of grief, as though the Most High represented Himself to us as mourning like an ill-treated parent, and deploring that after having dealt so well with His offspring they had made Him so base a return. God is grieved that man should sin. That thought should encourage everyone who is conscious of having offended God to come back to Him. If thou lamentest thy transgression, the Lord laments it too. (C. H. Spurgeon.) The parental grief of God, and its pathetic appeal (with Isa_1:3):—I look upon this text as a fragment of Divine autobiography, and as such possessing the greatest significance to us. I. It presents to us in a striking manner THE SOCIAL SIDE OF GOD’S CHARACTER. It is well for us to remember that all that is tender and lovable in our social experience, so far as it is pure and noble, is obtained from God. The revelation which we have of God presents Him to us, not as isolated from all His creatures, but as finding His highest joy in perfect communion with exalted spirits whom He has created. I love to think that man exists because of this exalted social instinct in God. Further, when God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone,” methinks I hear but the echo of a Divine, of a God felt feeling. Among the mysteries of Christ’s passion we find an element of suffering which, as God and man, He felt—“Ye shall leave Me alone”; “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me!” Our God is to us an object of supremest interest because He holds with us the most sacred relationship. II. Our text represents GOD ON THE DOMESTIC SIDE OF HIS CHARACTER. It is the parental rather than the paternal that we see here. The word father does not express all that God is to us. The illustrations of this Book are not exhausted with those that refer to His fatherhood: “Can a woman forget her sucking child,” etc. (Isa_49:15). All that is tender in motherhood,as well as all that is strong in fatherhood, is to be found in Him. It is as a parent that He speaks here: “I have nourished”—or “given nutriment.” In other words, “Out of My rich resources of blessing have I provided for their need; I have nourished and brought up children.” Here we have God’s grief revealed in the light which can only come through such tender and loving channels as parental patience and wounded love. III. Our text reveals GOD’S CHARACTER IN ITS REPROVING ASPECT. The folly is emphasised by the comparison with two creatures, by no means noted for their intelligence. Yet both are domesticated creatures, and feel the ties of ownership. What is it that domesticates a creature? The creature that recognises man as his master, by that very act becomes domesticated. The higher type of knowledge possessed by the domesticated animal is a direct recognition of its master. The finest creatures possess that. There is a lower grade of knowledge, but yet one which stamps the creature as domesticated. That is an acknowledgment, not of the master directly, but a recognition of the provision which the master has made for its need. “The ox knoweth his owner.” The ass does not do that; but the ass knoweth “his master’s crib.” The ass knows the stall where it is fed, and it goes and is fed there. By that act it indirectly acknowledges the sovereignty of its owner, because it recognises his protection.
- 32. IV. The textpresents to us THE TENDER AND PATHETIC SIDE OF GOD’S CHARACTER. This is God’s version of human sin. His rebukes are full of pathos. With the great mantle of charity that covers over a multitude of sins, and with the Divine pity that puts the best construction upon human rebellion, He puts all down to ignorance and folly. Observe further, that although they have rebelled against Him, He does not withdraw the name He gave them, Israel—“Israel doth not know: My people doth not consider.” He does not repudiate them. The last thing that love can do is that. There is something exceedingly pathetic in God here making an appeal to creation relative to His relationship with man. What if it gave a relief to the heart of God to exclaim to His own creation that groaned with Him over human sin, “Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth!” Am I imagining? Do we not find a Divine as well as human feeling in Christ’s going to the wilderness or the mountain top in the hours of His greatest need? There, amid God’s creation, He found His Father very near. Here the fact that the child does not know his Heavenly Father is represented as the burden of God’s grief. But in this case the ignorance was wilful This was the burden on the heart of Christ in His prayer (Joh_17:1-26). There everything is made to depend upon men knowing God as their Father. That is just why we preach. We seek to make it impossible for you to pass through God’s world, and receive from His hands blessings great and boundless, and yet not know Him. We seek to make it impossible for you to look at the Cross and listen to the story of an infinite sacrifice, and yet forget that “God so loved the world,” etc. (D. Davies.) The heinousness of rebellion against God’s paternal government The criminality of rebellion must, of course, be affected by the nature of the government and administration against which it is exerted. It must be measured by the mildness and propriety of the system whose authority it renounces, and by the patience, lenity, and wisdom with which that system is administered. If the government be despotic in its character, and administered with implacable or ferocious sternness, it can hardly be unlawful, and may be deserving of commendation. If the government be paternal in its character and administered with paternal sensibilities, then criminal to a degree absolutely appalling. I. THE PATERNAL GOVERNMENT OF GOD. This is seen in— 1. The object of its precepts. The entire and simple aim of all and every one of His commands, and the motives by which He urges them, appear to be an advancement in knowledge, holiness, and felicity, that we may be fitted for His own presence and intimate communion; for the exalted dignities and interminable bliss of the realms where His honour dwelleth. 2. The length of His forbearance. Who but a father, surpassing all below that have honoured this endearing name, could have borne so long and so meekly, with the thankless, the wayward, the audacious, the provoking! Who but a father, such as Heaven alone can furnish, would return good for evil, and blessing for cursing, hundreds and thou sands of years, and then, when any finite experimenter had utterly despaired, resolve to vanquish his enemies, not by terror, wasting and woe, but by the omnipotence of grace and mercy! Who but a GOD, and a paternal GOD, would have closed such a strange and melancholy history as that of Israel, by sending “His Son into the world, not to condemn the world,” etc. 3. The nature of His tenderness. The philanthropist commiserates the distresses of his fellow creatures, and magnanimously resolves to meliorate them. But he is not animated by that lively, that overpowering, self-sacrificing tenderness which prompts the exertions of a father in behalf of his suffering child. No; that tenderness shrinks from no expenditure,
- 33. falters before noobstacles. And such was the tenderness of God, for it is not said that He so pitied, but that “He so loved the world as to give His only begotten Son,” etc. II. IF SIN BE THE RESISTANCE OF THE COMMANDS AND CLAIMS, THE MOTIVES AND EXPOSTULATIONS, THE GRACE AND MERCY OF ONE WHO HAS GIVEN US SUCH ILLUSTRIOUS PROOFS OF HIS PATERNAL REGARD AND GOODNESS—CAN IT BE OTHER THAN REBELLION? Can it be other than rebellion of a most aggravated character? The consideration should silence every whisper of pretension to meritorious virtue, and stir up the sentiments of profound contrition. It should take every symptom of stubbornness away, and make us self-accusing, lowly, and brokenhearted. (T. W.Coit.) 9. CALVIN, “2.Hear, O heavens Isaiah has here imitated Moses, as all the prophets are accustomed to do; and there cannot be a doubt that he alludes to that illustrious Song of Moses, in which, at the very commencement, he calls heaven and earth to witness against the people: Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. (Deu_32:1.) This is unquestionably a very severe protestation; for it conveys this meaning, that both turn to the elements which are dumb and devoid of feeling, because men have now no ears, or are bereft of all their senses. The Prophet, therefore, speaks of it as an extraordinary and monstrous thing, which ought to strike even the senseless elements with amazement. For what could be more shocking than that the Israelites should revolt from God, who had bestowed on them so many benefits? Those who think that by heaven are meant angels, and by earth men, weaken too much the import of those words, and thus destroy all their force and majesty. Almost all the commentators consider the clause to end with the words, for the Lord hath spoken; as if the Prophet had intimated, that as soon as the Lord opens his sacred mouth, all ought to be attentive tohear his voice. And certainly this meaning has the appearance of being more full; but the context demands that we connect the words in a different manner, so as to make the word hear to refer, not in a general manner to any discourse whatever, but only to the expostulation which immediately follows. The meaning therefore is, Hear the complaint which the Lord brings forward, I have nourished and brought up children, etc. For he relates a prodigy, which fills him with such horror that he is compelled to summon dead creatures as witnesses, contrary to nature. That no one may wonder at the circumstance of his addressing dumb and lifeless objects, experience very clearly shows that the voice of God is heard even by dumb creatures, and that the order of nature is
- 34. nothing else thanthe obedience which is rendered to him by every part of the world, so that everywhere his supreme authority shines forth; for at his bidding the elements observe the law laid down to them, and heaven and earth perform their duty. Theearth yields her fruits; the sea flows not beyond her settled boundaries; the sun, moon, and stars perform their Courses; the heavens, too, revolve at stated periods; and all with wonderful accuracy, though they are destitute of reason and understanding But man, endued with reason and understanding, in whose ears and in whose heart the voice of God frequently sounds, remains unmoved, like one bereft of his senses, and cannot bend the neck to submit to him. Against obstinate and rebellious men shall dumb and lifeless creatures bear testimony, so that they will one day feel that this protestation was not in vain. I have nourished Literally it runs, I have made them great; (7) but as he is speaking about children, we cannot obtain a better rendering than I have nourished, or, I have brought up; (8) for instead of the verb, to nourish, (9) the Latins employ the phrase, to bring up children (10) But he afterwards mentions other benefits which he had bestowed on them in rich abundance; as if he had said, that he not only had performed the part of a kind father, by giving them food and the ordinary means of support, but had labored to raise them to an honorable rank. For in every sort of kindness towards them he had, as it were, exhausted himself, as he elsewhere reproaches them, What could have been done to my vineyard that I have not done? (Isa_5:4.) A similar charge the Lord might indeed have brought against all nations; for all of them he feeds, and on all he confers great and multiplied benefits. But he had chosen the Israelites in a peculiar manner, had given them a preference above others by adopting them into his family, had treated them as his most beloved children, had tenderly cherished them in his bosom, and, in a word, had bestowed on them every kind of blessings. To apply these observations to our own times, we ought to consider whether our condition be not equal, or even superior to that which the Jews formerly enjoyed. Their adoption into the family of God bound them to maintain the purity of his worship. Our obligation is twofold; for not only have we been redeemed by the blood of Christ, but he who once redeemed us is pleased to favor us with his Gospel, and in this manner prefers us to all those whom he still allows to remain blinded by ignorance. If we do not acknowledge these things, how much severer punishment shall we deserve? For the more full and abundant the grace of God which hath been poured out on us, the higher will be the ingratitude of which it shall convict us. They have revolted. (11) Jerome translates it, they have despised; (12) but it is plain enough, from many
- 35. passages, that פשע(pashang) means something more, namely,revolt. God declares, that by no acts of kindness could they be kept in a state of obedience, that they were utterly disaffected and estranged, like a son who leaves his father’ house, and thus makes manifest that there remains no hope of his improvement. It is indeed a monstrous thing that children should not be obedient to their father, and to a Father who is so kind, and who gives unceasing attention to his family. Lycurgus refused to enact a law against ungrateful persons, because it was monstrously unnatural not to acknowledge a benefit received. A child who is ungrateful to his father is therefore a double monster; but a child who is ungrateful to a kind and generous father is a threefold monster. For he employs the word children, not for the purpose of treating them with respect, but in order to exhibit that revolt in a more striking manner, and in more hateful colors. (7) Feci magnos . The term feci (I have made) exhibits the force of the Pihel form, גדלתי (giddalti,) which, as in other instances, approaches the meaning of the Hiphil form, ,הגדלתי (higdalti.) — Ed (8) Educavi, vel sustuli. (9) Enutrire. (10) Tollere liberos. (11) Our Author, in his Latin version of the Prophet, ( see p. 33,) has rendered this word by “scelerate egerunt in me “ — “ have acted wickedly towards me;” and, in the margin, by “rebellarunt contra me,” — “ rebelled against me.” Without taking notice of either of these translations, he has here introduced a third, “defecerunt “ — “ revolted,” for which it would be easy to produce authorities. The participle, פושעים (poshegnim,) at Hos_14:9, is defined by Aben Ezra (quoted by Buxtorff) to mean מהרשות ,שיוצאים (sheyotzeim meharshoth,) those who withdraw from authority, who set at nought, or oppose, the authority of a lawful magistrate. — Ed (12) Spreverunt.
- 36. 3 The ox knowsits master, the donkey its owner’s manger, but Israel does not know, my people do not understand.” 1.BARNES, “The ox ... - The design of this comparison is to show the great stupidity and ingratitude of the Jews. Even the least sagacious and most stupid of the animals, destitute as they are of reason and conscience, evince knowledge anal submission far more than the professed people of God. The ox is a well known domestic animal, remarkable for patient willingness to toil, and for submission to his owner. Knoweth his owner - Recognizes, or is submissive to him. The ass - A well known animal, proverbial for dulness and stupidity. His master’s crib - אבוס 'ebus from אבס 'abas, to heap up, and then to fatten. Hence, it is applied to the stall, barn, or crib, where cattle are fed, or made fat; Job_39:9; Pro_14:4. The donkey has sufficient knowledge to understand that his support is derived from that. The idea is, that the ox was more submissive to laws than the Jews; and that even the most stupid animal better knew from where support was to be derived, than they did the source of their comfort and protection. The donkey would not wander away, and the ox would not rebel as they had done. This comparison was very striking, and very humiliating, and nothing could be more suited to bring down their pride. A similar comparison is used elsewhere. Thus, in Jer_8:7, the Jews are contrasted with the stork: ‘Yea, the stork in the heaven knoweth her appointed times; and the turtle Dove, and the crane, and the swallow, observe the time of their coming; but my people know not the judgment of the Lord.’ This idea has been beautifully expressed by Watts: The brutes obey their God, And bow their necks to men; But we more base, more brutish things, Reject his easy reign. Compare Hos_11:4. But Israel - The name Israel, though after the division of the tribes into two kingdoms specifically employed to denote that of the ten tribes, is often used in the more general sense to denote the whole people of the Jews, including the kingdom of Judah. It refers here to the kingdom of Judah, though a name is used which is not inappropriately characteristic of the whole people. Doth not know - The Latin Vulgate, the Septuagint, and the Arabic, add the word ‘me.’ The word know is used in the sense of recognizing him as their Lord; of acknowledging him, or submitting to him. Doth not consider - Hebrew, Do not “understand.” They have a stupidity greater than the brute.
- 37. 2. CLARKE, “Theox knoweth - An amplification of the gross insensibility of the disobedient Jews, by comparing them with the most heavy and stupid of all animals, yet not so insensible as they. Bochart has well illustrated the comparison, and shown the peculiar force of it. “He sets them lower than the beasts, and even than the most stupid of all beasts, for there is scarcely any more so than the ox and the ass. Yet these acknowledge their master; they know the manger of their lord; by whom they are fed, not for their own, but for his good; neither are they looked upon as children, but as beasts of burden; neither are they advanced to honors, but oppressed with great and daily labors. While the Israelites, chosen by the mere favor of God, adopted as sons, promoted to the highest dignity, yet acknowledged not their Lord and their God; but despised his commandments, though in the highest degree equitable and just.” Hieroz. i., Colossians 409. Jeremiah’s comparison to the same purpose is equally elegant, but has not so much spirit and severity as this of Isaiah. “Even the stork in the heavens knoweth her season; And the turtle, and the swallow, and the crane, observe the time of their coming: But my people doth not know the judgment of Jehovah. Jer_8:7. Hosea has given a very elegant turn to the same image, in the way of metaphor or allegory: - “I drew them with human cords, with the bands of love: And I was to them as he that lifteth up the yoke upon their cheek; And I laid down their fodder before them.” Hos_11:4. Salomo ben Melech thus explains the middle part of the verse, which is somewhat obscure: “I was to them at their desire as they that have compassion on a heifer, lest she be overworked in ploughing; and that lift up the yoke from off her neck, and rest it upon her cheek that she may not still draw, but rest from her labor an hour or two in the day.” But Israel - The Septuagint, Syriac, Aquila, Theodotion, and Vulgate, read וישראל veyisrael, But Israel, adding the conjunction, which being rendered as an adversative, sets the opposition in a stronger light. Doth not know - The same ancient versions agree in adding Me, which very properly answers, and indeed is almost necessarily required to answer, the words possessor and lord preceding. Ισραηλ δε ΜΕ ουκ εγνω; Sept. “Israel autem me non cognovit,” Vulg. Ισραηλ δε ΜΟΥ ο υκ εγνω; Aquil., Theod. The testimony of so scrupulous an interpreter as Aquila is of great weight in this case. And both his and Theodotion’s rendering is such as shows plainly that they did not add the word ΜΟΥ to help out the sense, for it only embarrasses it. It also clearly determines what was the original reading in the old copies from which they translated. It could not be ידעני yedani, which most obviously answers to the version of the Septuagint and Vulgate, for it does not accord with that of Aquila and Theodotion. The version of these latter interpreters, however injudicious, clearly ascertains both the phrase, and the order of the words of the original Hebrew; it was ישראלאותילאידע veyisrael othi lo yada. The word אותי othi has been lost out of the text. The very same phrase is used by Jeremiah, Jer_4:22, עמיאותילאידעו ammi othi lo yadau. And
- 38. the order ofthe words must have been as above represented; for they have joined ישראל yisrael, with אותי othi, as in regimine; they could not have taken it in this sense, Israel meus non cognovit, had either this phrase or the order of the words been different. I have endeavored to set this matter in a clear light, as it is the first example of a whole word lost out of the text, of which the reader will find many other plain examples in the course of these notes. But Rosenmuller contends that this is unnecessary, as the passage may be translated, “Israel knows nothing: my people have no understanding.” The Septuagint, Syriac, and Vulgate, read ועמי veammi, “and my people;” and so likewise sixteen MSS. of Kennicott, and fourteen of De Rossi. 3. GILL, “The ox knoweth his owner,.... Knows his voice, when he calls him, and follows him where he leads him, whether to plough in the field, or feed in the meadows; and the ass his masters crib, or "manger"; where he is fed, and to which he goes when he wants food, and at the usual times. Gussetius (w) interprets the words; the ass knows the floor where he treads out the corn, and willingly goes to it, though it is to labour, as well as to eat; and so puts Israel to shame, who were weary of the worship of God in the temple, where spiritual food was provided for them, but chose not to go for it, because of labour there. But Israel doth not know; his Maker and Owner, his King, Lord, and Master, his Father, Saviour, and Redeemer; he does not own and acknowledge him, but rejects him; see Joh_1:10. My people doth not consider; the Jews, who were the people of God by profession, did not stir themselves up to consider, nor make use of means of knowing and understanding, divine and spiritual things, as the word used (x) signifies; they would not attend to the word and ordinances, which answer to the crib or manger; they would not hear nor regard the ministry of the word by Christ and his apostles, nor suffer others, but hindered them as much as in them lay; see Mat_23:13. The Targum is, "Israel does not learn to know my fear, my people do not understand to turn to my law.'' In like manner the more than brutal stupidity of this people is exposed in Jer_8:7. 4. HENRY, “He attributes this to their ignorance and inconsideration (Isa_1:3): The ox knows, but Israel does not. Observe, 1. The sagacity of the ox and the ass, which are not only brute creatures, but of the dullest sort; yet the ox has such a sense of duty as to know his owner and to serve him, to submit to his yoke and to draw in it; the ass has such a sense of interest as to know has master's crib, or manger, where he is fed, and to abide by it; he will go to that of himself if he be turned loose. A fine pass man has come to when he is shamed even in knowledge and understanding by these silly animals, and is not only sent to school to them (Pro_6:6, Pro_6:7), but set in a form below them (Jer_8:7), taught more than the beasts of the earth (Job_35:11) and yet knowing less. 2. The sottishness and stupidity of Israel. God is their owner and proprietor. He made us, and his we are more than our cattle are ours; he has provided well for us; providence is our Master's crib; yet many that are called the people of God do not know and will not consider this, but ask, “What is the Almighty that we should serve him? He is not our owner; and what profit shall we have if we pray unto him? He has no crib for us to feed at.”
- 39. He had complained(Isa_1:2) of the obstinacy of their wills; They have rebelled against me. Here he runs it up to its cause: “Therefore they have rebelled because they do not know, they do not consider.” The understanding is darkened, and therefore the whole soul is alienated from the life of God, Eph_4:18. “Israel does not know, though their land is a land of light and knowledge; in Judah is God known, yet, because they do not live up to what they know, it is in effect as if they did not know. They know; but their knowledge does them no good, because they do not consider what they know; they do not apply it to their case, nor their minds to it.” Note, (1.) Even among those that profess themselves God's people, that have the advantages and lie under the engagements of his people, there are many that are very careless in the affairs of their souls. (2.) Inconsideration of what we do know is as great an enemy to us in religion as ignorance of what we should know. (3.) Therefore men revolt from God, and rebel against him, because they do not know and consider their obligations to God in duty, gratitude, and interest. 5. JAMISON, “He attributes this to their ignorance and inconsideration (Isa_1:3): The ox knows, but Israel does not. Observe, 1. The sagacity of the ox and the ass, which are not only brute creatures, but of the dullest sort; yet the ox has such a sense of duty as to know his owner and to serve him, to submit to his yoke and to draw in it; the ass has such a sense of interest as to know has master's crib, or manger, where he is fed, and to abide by it; he will go to that of himself if he be turned loose. A fine pass man has come to when he is shamed even in knowledge and understanding by these silly animals, and is not only sent to school to them (Pro_6:6, Pro_6:7), but set in a form below them (Jer_8:7), taught more than the beasts of the earth (Job_35:11) and yet knowing less. 2. The sottishness and stupidity of Israel. God is their owner and proprietor. He made us, and his we are more than our cattle are ours; he has provided well for us; providence is our Master's crib; yet many that are called the people of God do not know and will not consider this, but ask, “What is the Almighty that we should serve him? He is not our owner; and what profit shall we have if we pray unto him? He has no crib for us to feed at.” He had complained (Isa_1:2) of the obstinacy of their wills; They have rebelled against me. Here he runs it up to its cause: “Therefore they have rebelled because they do not know, they do not consider.” The understanding is darkened, and therefore the whole soul is alienated from the life of God, Eph_4:18. “Israel does not know, though their land is a land of light and knowledge; in Judah is God known, yet, because they do not live up to what they know, it is in effect as if they did not know. They know; but their knowledge does them no good, because they do not consider what they know; they do not apply it to their case, nor their minds to it.” Note, (1.) Even among those that profess themselves God's people, that have the advantages and lie under the engagements of his people, there are many that are very careless in the affairs of their souls. (2.) Inconsideration of what we do know is as great an enemy to us in religion as ignorance of what we should know. (3.) Therefore men revolt from God, and rebel against him, because they do not know and consider their obligations to God in duty, gratitude, and interest. 6. K&D, “Jehovah then complains that the rebellion with which His children have rewarded Him is not only inhuman, but even worse than that of the brutes: “An ox knoweth its owner, and an ass its master's crib: Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider.” An ox has a certain knowledge of its buyer and owner, to whom it willingly submits; and an ass has at least a knowledge of the crib of its master (the noun for “master” is in the plural: this is not to be understood in a numerical, but in an amplifying sense, “the authority over it,” as in Exo_21:29 : vid., Ges. §108, 2, b, and Dietrich's Heb. Gram. p. 45), i.e., it knows that it is its master who fills its crib or manger with fodder (evus, the crib, from avas, to feed, is radically associated with φάτν
- 40. η, vulgar πάτνη,Dor. and Lac. πάτνη, and is applied in the Talmud to the large common porringer used by labourers). (Note: Nedarim iv 4 jer. Demai viii. The stable is called repheth Even in jer. Shebuoth viii. 1, where cattle are spoken of as standing b'evus, the word signifies a crib or manger, not a stable. Luzzatto tries to prove that evus signifies a threshing-floor, and indeed an enclosed place, in distinction from geren; but he is mistaken.) Israel had no such knowledge, neither instinctive and direct, nor acquired by reflection (hithbonan, the reflective conjugation, with a pausal change of the e4 into a long a, according to Ges. §54, note). The expressions “doth not know” and “doth not consider” must not be taken here in an objectless sense - as, for example, in Isa_56:10 and Psa_82:5 -viz. as signifying they were destitute of all knowledge and reflection; but the object is to be supplied from what goes before: they knew not, and did not consider what answered in their case to the owner and to the crib which the master fills,” - namely, that they were the children and possession of Jehovah, and that their existence and prosperity were dependent upon the grace of Jehovah alone. The parallel, with its striking contrasts, is self-drawn, like that in Jer_8:7, where animals are referred to again, and is clearly indicated in the words “Israel” and “my people.” Those who were so far surpassed in knowledge and perception even by animals, and so thoroughly put to shame by them, were not merely a nation, like any other nation on the earth, but were “Israel,” descendants of Jacob, the wrestler with God, who wrestled down the wrath of God, and wrestled out a blessing for himself and his descendants; and “my people,” the nation which Jehovah had chosen out of all other nations to be the nation of His possession, and His own peculiar government. This nation, bearing as it did the God-given title of a hero of faith and prayer, this favourite nation of Jehovah, had let itself down far below the level of the brutes. This is the complaint which the exalted speaker pours out in Isa_1:2 and Isa_1:3 before heaven and earth. The words of God, together with the introduction, consist of two tetrastichs, the measure and rhythm of which are determined by the meaning of the words and the emotion of the speaker. There is nothing strained in it at all. Prophecy lives and moves amidst the thoughts of God, which prevail above the evil reality: and for that very reason, as a reflection of the glory of God, which is the ideal of beauty (Psa_50:1), it is through and through poetical. That of Isaiah is especially so. There was no art of oratory practised in Israel, which Isaiah did not master, and which did not serve as the vehicle of the word of God, after it had taken shape in the prophet's mind. With Isa_1:4 there commences a totally different rhythm. The words of Jehovah are ended. The piercing lamentation of the deeply grieved Father is also the severest accusation. The cause of God, however, is to the prophet the cause of a friend, who feels an injury done to his friend quite as much as if it were done to himself (Isa_5:1). The lamentation of God, therefore, is changed now into violent scolding and threatening on the part of the prophet; and in accordance with the deep wrathful pain with which he is moved, his words pour out with violent rapidity, like flash after flash, in climactic clauses having no outward connection, and each consisting of only two or three words. 7.CALVIN, “3.The ox knoweth his owner This comparison marks the more strongly the criminality of the revolt; for the Lord might have compared his people to the Gentiles; but he is still more severe when he compares them to dumb beasts, and pronounces them to be more stupid than the beasts are. Though
- 41. beasts are destituteof reason and understanding, still they are capable of being taught; to such an extent, at least, as to recognize those who feed them. Since, therefore, God had not only fed this people at a stall, but had nourished them with all the kindness which is wont to be exercised by a father towards his sons, and had not only filled their bellies, but supplied them daily with spiritual food; having perceived them to be so exceedingly sluggish, he justly considers that they deserve to be taught in the school of beasts, and not of men; and therefore he sends them to the oven and asses to learn from them what is their duty. Nor ought we to wonder at this; for the beasts frequently observe the order of nature more correctly, and display greater kindness, than men themselves. Not to multiply instances, it will be sufficient to notice that which is here mentioned by Isaiah, that the beasts, though they are exceedingly dull and stupid, do, notwithstanding, obey their masters and those who have the charge of them. But if we choose to attend to other points in which they excel men, how many shall we discover? What is the reason why scarcely any animal is cruel to its own species, and that it recognizes in another its own likeness? What is the reason why all animals commonly bestow so much care in rearing their young, while it frequently happens that mothers, forgetful of the voice of nature and of humanity, forsake their children? What is the reason why they are accustomed to take no more meat and drink than what is sufficient for sustaining their life and their strength, while men gorge themselves, and utterly ruin their constitutions? In a word, What is the reason why they do not, in any respect, transgress the laws which nature has prescribed to them? The papists, who are accustomed to set aside the true meaning of the Scriptures, and to spoil all the mysteries of God by their own fooleries, have here contrived an absurd fable; for they have falsely alleged that the oxen and assesin the stall worshipped Christ when he was born; by which they show themselves to be egregious asses. (And indeed I wish that they would imitate the ass which they have invented; for then they should be asses worshipping Christ, and not lifting up the heel against his divine authority.) For here the Prophet does not speak of miracles, but of the order of nature, and declares, that those who overturn that order may be regarded as monsters. We must not contrive new miracles for the purpose of adding to the authority of Christ; for, by mingling the false with the true, there is danger lest both should be disbelieved; nor can there be any doubt but that, if such a miracle had been wrought, the Evangelists would have committed it to writing. Israel doth not know. The name Israel, which he contrasts with those beasts, is emphatic. We know how honorable it was for the posterity of Abraham to be known by this name, which God had bestowed on the holy patriarch, because he had vanquished the angel in wrestling. (Gen_32:28.) So much the more dishonorable was it for bastard and rebellious children to make false boasting of that honor. First, there is an implied reproof, not only because those who do not at all resemble the holy mall do wrong in assuming
- 42. his name, butbecause they are ungrateful to God, from whom they had received most valuable blessings. Secondly, there is also conveyed an indirect comparison; for the higher their rank was in being far exalted above all other nations, so much the greater disgrace is flow intended to be expressed by separating them from other nations under the honorable designation of Israel The Greek translators have added the word me (13); but I prefer to repeat what he had said before, Israel doth not know His Owner, that is, God; nor his crib, that is, the Church, in which he had been brought up, and to which he ought to be attracted; while those beasts, on the other hand, recognize the master by whom they are nourished, and willingly return to the place where they have been fed. (13) ‘ Ἰσραὴλ δέ µε οὐκ ἔγνω καὶ ὁ λαός µε ού συνὢκεν — But Israel doth not know me, and the people doth not understand me 8. PULPIT, “The ox the ass. The ox and the ass are probably selected as the least intelligent of domesticated animals (so Jerome, Rosenmüller, and Gesenius). Yet even they recognize their owner or master. Jeremiah contrasts the brutish stupidity of Israel with the wise instinct of animals that have not been domesticated, as the stork, the turtle-dove, the crane, and the swallow (Jer_8:7). Israel doth not know; i.e. does not acknowledge its Master and Owner, pays him no respect, does not recognize him as either Owner or Master. My people. Compare the formula, so frequent in Exodus, "Let my people go" (Exo_7:16; Exo_8:1, Exo_8:20; Exo_9:1, etc.). Israel was God's people by election (Gen_15:13), by covenant (Exo_19:5-8; Exo_24:3-8), by pardoning grace (Exo_33:12-17). Despite all their backslidings, he had not yet cast them off. They are still "his people" in Isaiah from first to last, standing in contrast with "the nations, "or "the Gentiles, "among whom they are to be "set as a sign" (Isa_66:19). Doth net consider. Gesenius translates, "doth not consider thereof;" Cheyne, "is without understanding." Bishop Lowth retains the words of the Authorized Version. The meaning would seem to be, "My people doth not consider me, cloth not reflect on my relation to them as Lord and Master." 9. GREAT TEXTS, “The Unnatural Children The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib: but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider.—Isa_1:3. The first chapter of Isaiah has been called by Ewald the great arraignment. It contains four leading ideas. They are the ideas, says Skinner, which run through the whole of Isaiah’s teaching, and through the teaching of all the pre-Exilic prophets. These ideas are—(1) the breach between Jehovah and Israel; (2) the inefficiency of mere ritual; (3) the call to national repentance; (4) the certainty of a sweeping judgment.
- 43. Ewald’s title suggestsa court of justice; and it has often been pointed out that God is both Judge and Plaintiff, Israel the defendant, heaven and earth the jury, while the prophet is both principal witness and prosecuting attorney. But all this is apt to withdraw the attention from the real pathos of the scene. No doubt there is a judge, and judgment is pronounced. But the Judge is a Father. The paraphernalia of the court-room pass into insignificance when there is heard the exceeding bitter cry, “I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me.” The third verse is an illustration. It shows the ignorance of the children in contrast to the knowledge of the domestic animals. I The Knowledge of the Domestic Animals “The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib.” 1. It is knowledge of their owner. They both know and acknowledge him. He on his part not only owns but takes care of them. He rears them, tames them, houses them, and heals them. In return they serve him. True to the life, no sooner had the drove got within the walls than it began to disperse. Every ox knew perfectly well his owner, and the way to his house; nor did it get bewildered for a moment in the mazes of the narrow and crooked alleys. As for the ass, he walked straight to the door, and up to “his master’s crib,” without turning to bid good-night to his companions of the field. I followed some into their habitation, and saw each take his appropriate manger, and begin his evening meal of dry tibn. 1 [Note: 1 Thomson, The Land and the Book, ii. 387.] 2. Their service brings them into fellowship—such fellowship as is possible between man and the lower animals. There is some sense of mutual dependence. There is affection and sometimes self-sacrifice. The prophet speaks of the domestic animals of his own people. We should see his point more clearly if we thought of the horse and the dog. It is not an uncommon thing in the Argentine pampas—I have on two occasions witnessed it myself—for a riding horse to come home to die. I am speaking of horses that live out in the open, and have to be hunted to the corral or enclosure, or roughly captured with a lasso as they run, when they are required. On going out one summer evening—I was only a boy at the time—I saw one of the horses of the establishment standing unsaddled and unbridled leaning his head over the gate. Going to the spot I stroked his nose, and turning to an old native who happened to be standing near, asked him what could be the meaning of such a thing. “I think he is going to die,” he answered; “horses often come to the house to die.” And next morning the poor beast was found lying dead not twenty yards from the gate. I now believe that the sensations of sickness and approaching death in the riding horse of the pampas resemble or simulate the pains, so often experienced, of hunger, thirst, and fatigue, combined together with the oppressive sensations caused by the ponderous native saddle, with its huge surcingle of raw hide, drawn up so tightly as to hinder free respiration. The suffering animal remembers how at the last relief invariably came when the twelve or fifteen hours’ torture was over, and when the great iron bridle and ponderous gear were removed, and he had freedom and food and drink and rest. At the gate or at the door of his master’s house the sudden relief had always come to him, and there does he go in his sickness to find it again. 2 [Note: W. H. Hudson, The Naturalist in La Plata.]
- 44. II The Ignorance ofthe Children “Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider.” God has been as a Father to Israel. Now, a father has the right to obedience, service, and especially affection. But Israel had come short. Of the two great commandments of the Law they failed especially in the second. So was it with Israel always. The first commandment is, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart,” and there was at least much outward appearance of devotion to God. But the second commandment is, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” The failure was here. “Of what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me Relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.” The scribe who came to Jesus had no doubt of his duty to God. But, willing to justify himself, he asked, “Who is my neighbour?” 1. Their ignorance consisted in not knowing what God had done for them—“Israel doth not know.” What had He done? 1. He calls heaven and earth to witness. For He had created them and preserved them, and been their bountiful benefactor. They were not ignorant of the wonders of their world. The psalmists were accustomed to consider the heavens (Psa_8:3). And they found that the heavens declared the glory of God (Psa_19:1). 2. But God had chosen Israel to be His peculiar people. He had been as a Father to them and had done great things for them, as Samuel reminded them that day upon which He consented to give them a king. It was even a commonplace among the heathen. “Then said they among the nations, the Lord hath done great things for them.” And they admitted it when they considered—“The Lord hath done great things for us” (Psa_126:2-3). 3. Above all, God had shown them the care involved in training them to become a blessing to all the nations of the earth. “Thou shalt consider in thine heart,” said Moses, “that, as a man chasteneth his son, so the Lord thy God chasteneth thee” (Deu_8:5). It was this, above all, that they were ignorant of. They mistook the chastening of a father for the wounds of an enemy. 2. Their ignorance was due also to want of consideration—My people doth not consider.” (1) He would have them stop and think. When the rich young ruler came running to Jesus—“Master, what shall I do?”—
- 45. He stopped him.“Why callest thou me good?” Stop and think. When the Pharisees spoke glibly about the Messiah being David’s son, He recalled the 110th Psalm, where David calls the Messiah his Lord. “How can he be both son and Lord?” He said. Stop and think. (2) It is want of consideration that makes men miss Christ. For the most part they simply pass Him by, they do not consider Him. “Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by?” (Lam_1:12). (3) It is want of consideration that makes men lose life itself. They do not know what life is. They do not know that they have lost it. (4) But consideration of God brings considerateness for man. The two great commandments must always be kept in their right order: first, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God,” next, “Thy neighbour as thyself.” It was because Israel rebelled against God that they neglected the poor and the fatherless. It is to those who have tasted and seen that the Lord is gracious that St. Paul writes: “Let your considerateness be known unto all men” (Php_4:5). It was Israel’s lack of perception that was at the root of her sins. Ibsen, in the study of the tragedy of a lost soul in Peer Gynt, teaches that God meant something when He made each one of us, and that it is our duty to find out what He did mean. The devil’s staunchest ally is lack of perception. When at the end of his career Peer Gynt, who is the type of a compromising self-seeker, meets the button-moulder, who tells him it is his fate to be cast into the melting-pot, this dialogue ensues. (Peer Gynt, Act_5:9.) Peer. One question only: What is it, at bottom, this “being oneself”? Button-Moulder. A singular question, most odd in the mouth of a man who just now —— Peer. Come, a straightforward answer. Button-Moulder. To be oneself is: to slay oneself. But on you that answer is doubtless lost, and therefore we’ll say: to stand forth everywhere with Master’s intention displayed like a signboard. Peer. But suppose a man never has come to know what Master meant with him? Button-Moulder. He must divine it. Peer. But how often are divinings beside the mark—then one is carried ad undas in middle career. Button-Moulder. That is certain, Peer Gynt; in default of divining, the cloven-hoofed gentleman finds his best hook.
- 46. 4 Woe to thesinful nation, a people whose guilt is great, a brood of evildoers, children given to corruption! They have forsaken the LORD; they have spurned the Holy One of Israel and turned their backs on him. 1.BARNES, “Ah! sinful nation - The word rendered ‘ah!’ - הוי hoy - is not a mere exclamation, expressing astonishment. It is rather an interjection denouncing threatening, or punishment. ‘Wo to the sinful nation.’ Vulgate, ‘Vae genti peccatrici.’ The corruption pertained to the nation, and not merely to a part. It had become general. Laden with iniquity - The word translated “laden” - כבד kebed - denotes properly anything “heavy,” or burdensome; from כבד kabad, “to be heavy.” It means that they were oppressed, and borne down with the “weight” of their sins. Thus we say, Sin sits “heavy” on the conscience. Thus Cain said, ‘My punishment is greater than I can bear;’ Gen_4:13. The word is applied to an “employment” as being burdensome; Exo_18:18 : ‘This thing is too “heavy” for thee.’ Num_11:14 : ‘I am not able to bear eli this people alone; it is too “heavy” for me.’ It is applied also to a “famine,” as being heavy, severe, distressing. Gen_12:10 : ‘For the famine was “grievous” (כבד ka be d, heavy) in the land;’ Gen_41:31. It is also applied to “speech,” as being heavy, dull, unintelligible. Exo_4:10 : ‘I am slow (heavy כבד ke bad) of speech, and of a slow (heavy כבד ke bad) tongue.’ It is not applied to sin in the Scriptures, except in this place, or except in the sense of making atonement for it. The idea however, is very striking - that of a nation - an entire people, bowed and crushed under the enormous weight of accumulated crimes. To pardon iniquity, or to atone for it, is represented by bearing it, as if it were a heavy burden. Exo_28:38, Exo_28:43, ‘That Aaron may bear the iniquity of the holy things.’ Lev_10:17 : ‘God hath given it you to bear the iniquity of the congregation.’ Lev_22:9; Lev_16:22; Num_18:1; Isa_53:6 : ‘Jehovah hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.’ Isa_53:11 : ‘He shall bear their iniquities.’ 1Pe_2:24 : ‘Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree.’
- 47. A seed -זרע zera‛, from זרע zara‛, to sow, to scatter, to disperse. It is applied to seed sown in a field; Jdg_6:3; Gen_1:11-12; Gen_47:23; to plants set out, or engrafted; or to planting, or transplanting a nation. Isa_17:10 : ‘And thou shalt set it (תזרענוּ tize ra‛enu shalt sow, or plant it) with strange slips.’ Hence, it is applied to children, posterity, descendants, from the resemblance to seed sown, and to a harvest springing up, and spreading. The word is applied by way of eminence to the Jews, as being the seed or posterity of Abraham, according to the promise that his seed should be as the stars of heaven; Gen_12:7; Gen_13:15-16; Gen_15:5, Gen_15:18; Gen_17:7, ... Children - Hebrew sons - the same word that is used in Isa_1:2. They were the adopted people or sons of God, but they had now become corrupt. That are corrupters - mashchiytiym - משׁחיתים mashe chı ythı ym, from שׁחת shachath, to destroy, to lay waste, as an invading army does a city or country; Jos_22:33; Gen_19:13. To destroy a vineyard; Jer_12:10. To break down walls; Eze_26:4. Applied to conduct, it means to destroy, or lay waste virtuous principles; to break down the barriers to vice; to corrupt the morals. Gen_6:12 : ‘And God looked upon the earth, and it was corrupt - נשׁחתה nı she chathah; for all flesh had corrupted his way - השׁחית hı she chı yth - upon the earth;’ Deu_4:16; Deu_31:29; Jdg_2:19. They were not merely corrupt themselves, but they corrupted others by their example. This is always the case. When people become infidels and profligates themselves, they seek to make as many more as possible. The Jews did this by their wicked lives. The same charge is often brought against them; see Jdg_2:12; Zep_3:7. They have provoked - Hebrew נאצוּ nı 'atsu ‘They have despised the Holy One;’ compare Pro_1:30; Pro_5:12; Pro_15:5. Vulgate, ‘They have blasphemed.’ Septuagint, παρωργίσατε paro rgisate. ‘You have provoked him to anger.’ The meaning is, that they had so despised him, as to excite his indignation. The Holy One of Israel - God; called the Holy One of Israel because he was revealed to them as their God, or they were taught to regard him as the sacred object of their worship. They are gone away backward - Lowth: ‘They have turned their backs upon him.’ The word rendered “they are gone away,” נזרוּ nazoru, from זור zur, means properly, to become estranged; to be alienated. Job_19:13 : ‘Mine acquaintance are verily estranged from me.’ It means especially that declining from God, or that alienation, which takes place when people commit sin; Psa_78:30. 2. CLARKE, “Ah sinful nation “Degenerate” - Five MSS., one of them ancient, read משחתים moschathim, without the first י yod, in hophal corrupted, not corrupters. See the same word in the same form, and in the same sense, Pro_25:26. Are corrupters “Are estranged” - Thirty-two MSS., five ancient, and two editions, read נזורו nazoru; which reading determines the word to be from the root זור zur, to alienate, not from נזר nazar, to separate; so Kimchi understands it. See also Annotat. in Noldium, 68. They are gone away backward “They have turned their backs upon him” - So Kimchi explains it:” they have turned unto him the back and not the face.” See Jer_2:27;
- 48. Jer_7:24. I havebeen forced to render this line paraphrastically; as the verbal translation, “they are estranged backward,” would have been unintelligible. 3. GILL, “Ah sinful nation,..... Or "sinning nation" (y); that was continually sinning, doing nothing else but sin, the reverse of what they were chosen to be, Deu_7:6. These words are said, either as calling and crying to them, to cause them to hear and hearken to what is said, as Aben Ezra and Kimchi observe, and as הוי is used in Isa_55:1 or by way of complaint and lamentation, as Jarchi thinks, because of their general and continued wickedness, see 1Ki_13:30, or by way of threatening, as in Isa_1:24 and so the Targum paraphrases it, "woe to them who are called a holy people, and have sinned:'' and so the Vulgate Latin and Arabic versions render it, "woe to the sinning nation"; their ruin is at hand: a people laden with iniquity; full of sin; they multiplied offences, as in the Chaldee paraphrase: they were "heavy" with them, as the word (z) signifies, yet felt not, nor complained of, the burden of them: a seed of evil doers; this is not said of their fathers, but of themselves, as Jarchi observes; they had been planted a right seed, but now were degenerate, a wicked generation of men. Children that are corrupters; of themselves and others, by their words and actions; who had corrupted their ways, as the Targum adds; and so Kimchi and Aben Ezra. They have forsaken the Lord; the worship of the Lord, as the Targum interprets it; the ways and ordinances of God, forsook the assembling of themselves together, neglected the hearing of the word, and attendance on the worship of the Lord's house: they have provoked the Holy One of Israel to anger; by their numerous sins, both of omission and commission: they are gone away backward; were become backsliders and revolters, had apostatized from God and his worship, turned their backs on him, and cast his law behind them. The characters here given not only agree with the Jews in the times of Isaiah, but also with those in the times of Christ and his apostles, Mat_12:39. 4. HENRY, “He laments the universal pravity and corruption of their church and kingdom. The disease of sin was epidemic, and all orders and degrees of men were infected with it; Ah sinful nation! Isa_1:4. The prophet bemoans those that would not bemoan themselves: Alas for them! Woe to them! He speaks with holy indignation at their degeneracy, and a dread of the consequences of it. See here, 1. How he aggravates their sin, and shows the malignity that there was in it, Isa_1:4. (1.) The wickedness was universal. They were a sinful nation; the generality of the people were vicious and profane. They were so in their national capacity. In the management of their public treaties abroad, and in the administration of public justice at home, they were corrupt. Note, It is ill with
- 49. a people whensin becomes national. (2.) It was very great and heinous in its nature. They were laden with iniquity; the guilt of it, and the curse incurred by that guilt, lay very heavily upon them. It was a heavy charge that was exhibited against them, and one which they could never clear themselves from; their wickedness was upon them as a talent of lead, Zec_5:7, Zec_5:8. Their sin, as it did easily beset them and they were prone to it, was a weight upon them, Heb_12:1. (3.) They came of a bad stock, were a seed of evil-doers. Treachery ran in their blood; they had it by kind, which made the matter so much the worse, more provoking and less curable. They rose up in their fathers' stead, and trod in their fathers' steps, to fill up the measure of their iniquity, Num_32:14. They were a race and family of rebels. (4.) Those that were themselves debauched did what they could to debauch others. They were not only corrupt children, born tainted, but children that were corrupters, that propagated vice, and infected others with it - not only sinners, but tempters - not only actuated by Satan, but agents for him. If those that are called children, God's children, that are looked upon as belonging to his family, be wicked and vile, their example is of the most malignant influence. (5.) Their sin was a treacherous departure from God. They were deserters from their allegiance: “They have forsaken the Lord, to whom they had joined themselves; they have gone away backward, are alienated or separated from God, have turned their back upon him, deserted their colours, and quitted their service.” When they were urged forward, they ran backward, as a bullock unaccustomed to the yoke, as a backsliding heifer, Hos_4:16. (6.) It was an impudent and daring defiance of him: They have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger wilfully and designedly; they knew what would anger him, and that they did. Note, The backslidings of those that have professed religion and relation to God are in a special manner provoking to him. 5. JAMISON, “people — the peculiar designation of God’s elect nation (Hos_1:10), that they should be “laden with iniquity” is therefore the more monstrous. Sin is a load (Psa_38:4; Mat_11:28). seed — another appellation of God’s elect (Gen_12:7; Jer_2:21), designed to be a “holy seed” (Isa_6:13), but, awful to say, “evildoers!” children — by adoption (Hos_11:1), yet “evildoers”; not only so, but “corrupters” of others (Gen_6:12); the climax. So “nation - people - seed children.” provoked — literally, “despised,” namely, so as to provoke (Pro_1:30, Pro_1:31). Holy One of Israel — the peculiar heinousness of their sin, that it was against their God (Amo_3:2). gone ... backward — literally, “estranged” (Psa_58:3). 6. K&D, ““Woe upon the sinful nation, the guilt-laden people, the miscreant race, the children acting corruptly! They have forsaken Jehovah, blasphemed Israel's Holy One, turned away backwards.” The distinction sometimes drawn between hoi (with He) and oi (with Aleph) - as equivalent to oh! and woe! - cannot be sustained. Hoi is an exclamation of pain, with certain doubtful exceptions; and in the case before us it is not so much a denunciation of woe (vae genti, as the Vulgate renders it), as a lamentation (vae gentem) filled with wrath. The epithets which follow point indirectly to that which Israel ought to have been, according to the choice and determination of God, and plainly declare what it had become through its own choice and ungodly self-determination. (1.) According to the choice and determination of God, Israel was to be a holy nation (goi kadosh, Exo_19:6); but it was a sinful nation - gens peccatrix, as it is
- 50. correctly rendered bythe Vulgate. א ֵּטח is not a participle here, but rather a participial adjective in the sense of what was habitual. It is the singular in common use for the plural י ִא ָט ַ,ח sinners, the singular of which was not used. Holy and Sinful are glaring contrasts: for kadosh, so far as its radical notion is concerned (assuming, that is to say, that this is to be found in kad and not in dosh: see Psalter, i. 588, 9), signifies that which is separated from what is common, unclean, or sinful, and raised above it. The alliteration in hoi goi implies that the nation, as sinful, was a nation of woe. (2.) In the thorah Israel was called not only “a holy nation,” but also “the people of Jehovah” (Num_17:6, Eng. ver. Num_16:41), the people chosen and blessed of Jehovah; but now it had become “a people heavy with iniquity.” Instead of the most natural expression, a people bearing heavy sins; the sin, or iniquity, i.e., the weight carried, is attributed to the people themselves upon whom the weight rested, according to the common figurative idea, that whoever carries a heavy burden is so much heavier himself (cf., gravis oneribus, Cicero). וֹן ָע (sin regarded as crookedness and perversity, whereas א ְחט suggests the idea of going astray and missing the way) is the word commonly used wherever the writer intends to describe sin in the mass (e.g., Isa_33:24; Gen_15:16; Gen_19:15), including the guilt occasioned by it. The people of Jehovah had grown into a people heavily laden with guilt. So crushed, so altered into the very opposite, had Israel's true nature become. It is with deliberate intention that we have rendered ּוֹי a nation (Nation), and ַעם (am a people (Volk): for, according to Malbim's correct definition of the distinction between the two, the former is used to denote the mass, as linked together by common descent, language, and country; the latter the people as bound together by unity of government (see, for example, Psa_105:13). Consequently we always read of the people of the Lord, not the nation of the Lord; and there are only two instances in which goi is attached to a suffix relating to the ruler, and then it relates to Jehovah alone (Zep_2:9; Psa_106:5). (3.) Israel bore elsewhere the honourable title of the seed of the patriarch (Isa_41:8; Isa_45:19; cf., Gen_21:12); but in reality it was a seed of evil-doers (miscreants). This does not mean that it was descended from evil-doers; but the genitive is used in the sense of a direct apposition to zera (seed), as in Isa_65:23 (cf., Isa_61:9; Isa_6:13, and Ges. §116, 5), and the meaning is a seed which consists of evil-doers, and therefore is apparently descended from evil- doers instead of from patriarchs. This last thought is not implied in the genitive, but in the idea of “seed;” which is always a compact unit, having one origin, and bearing the character of its origin in itself. The rendering brood of evil-doers, however it may accord with the sense, would be inaccurate; for “seed of evil-doers” is just the same as “house of evil-doers” in Isa_31:2. The singular of the noun ים ִע ֵר ְמ is ַע ֵר ֵמ, with the usual sharpening in the case of gutturals in the verbs (' '(, ע ַמר with patach, ע ָמר with kametz in pause (Isa_9:16, which see) - a noun derived from the hiphil participle. (4.) Those who were of Israel were “children of Jehovah” through the act of God (Deu_14:1); but in their own acts they were “children acting destructively (banim mashchithim), so that what the thorah feared and predicted had now occurred (Deu_4:16, Deu_4:25; Deu_31:29). In all these passages we find the hiphil, and in the parallel passage of the great song (Deu_32:5) the piel - both of them conjugations which contain within themselves the object of the action indicated (Ges. §53, 2): to do what is destructive, i.e., so to act as to become destructive to one's self and to others. It is evident from Isa_1:2, that the term children is to be understood as indicating their relation to Jehovah (cf., Isa_30:1, Isa_30:9). The four interjectional clauses are followed by three declaratory clauses, which describe Israel's apostasy as total in every respect, and complete the mournful seven. There was apostasy in heart: “They
- 51. have forsaken Jehovah.”There was apostasy in words: “They blaspheme the Holy One of Israel.” The verb literally means to sting, then to mock or treat scornfully; the use of it to denote blasphemy is antiquated Mosaic (Deu_31:20; Num_14:11, Num_14:23; Num_16:30). It is with intention that God is designated here as “the Holy One of Israel,”a name which constitutes the keynote of all Isaiah's prophecy (see at Isa_6:3). It was sin to mock at anything holy; it was a double sin to mock at God, the Holy One; but it was a threefold sin for Israel to mock at God the Holy One, who had set Himself to be the sanctifier of Israel, and required that as He was Israel's sanctification, He should also be sanctified by Israel according to His holiness (Lev_19:2, etc.). And lastly, there was also apostasy in action: “they have turned away backwards;” or, as the Vulgate renders it, abalienati sunt. זוֹרָנ is the reflective of ,זוּר related to רַוָנ and ,סוּר for which it is the word commonly used in the Targum. The niphal, which is only met with here, indicates the deliberate character of their estrangement from God; and the expression is rendered still more emphatic by the introduction of the word “backwards” (achor, which is used emphatically in the place of .)מאחריו In all their actions they ought to have followed Jehovah; but they had turned their backs upon Him, and taken the way selected by themselves. 7. PULPIT, “Ah sinful nation. These are the words of Isaiah, not of Jehovah. The prophet, having delivered God's message in verses 2 and 3, proceeds to impress and enforce it on the people by remarks of his own. He begins with a lamentation over their wickedness and impenitence; "Ah sinful nation!" or "Alas for the sinful nation! "the nation called to be holy (Exo_19:6; Le Exo_20:26, etc.), but sunk in sin and wickedness. How sad their condition! How almost hopeless!Laden with iniquity; literally, heavy with guilt. But our version well expresses the sense. As the psalmist says, "My sins have gone up over my head, and are like a sore burden, toe heavy for me to bear" (Psa_38:4; cf. Mat_11:28). A seed of evil- doers. Not descendants of evil-doors, but "an evil-doing seed, "or "race" ( σπέρµα πονηρόν , LXX.; comp. Isa_14:20; Isa_61:9; Isa_65:23). Children that are corrupters; literally, sons that do corruptly. It is not their corrupting of others, though that might follow, but the corruption that was in themselves, which is spoken of. The corruption was both moral and doctrinal (see verse 21). In corroboration of the fact, see 2Ch_27:2. They have forsakenthe Lord. Not by renouncing his worship, which they still continued (see verses 11-15), but by reducing it to a formality. The people "honored him with their lips, while their hearts were far from him" (Isa_29:13). They have provoked to anger; rather, despised (Revised Version), or scorched (Kay, Cheyne), or rejected with disdain (Lowth), in allusion to their disobeying his commandments (see verses 21-23). The Holy One of Israel. This title of God is a favorite one with Isaiah (see Isa_5:19, Isa_5:24; Isa_10:17, Isa_10:20; Isa_12:6; Isa_17:7; Isa_29:19, Isa_29:23; Isa_30:11, Isa_ 30:12, Isa_30:15; Isa_31:1; Isa_37:23; Isa_41:14, Isa_41:16, Isa_41:20; Isa_43:3, Isa_43:14; Isa_45:11; I sa_49:7;Isa_54:5; Isa_55:5; Isa_60:9, Isa_60:14), and is very rarely used by the other sacred writers. We find it thrice in the Psalms (Psa_71:22; Psa_78:41; Psa_89:18); once in Kings (2Ki_19:22), but then in the mouth of Isaiah; twice in Jeremiah (Jer_1:1-19 :29; Jer_51:5); and once in Ezekiel (Eze_39:7). According to Isaiah's conception of God, holiness is the most essential element of his nature
- 52. (see Isa_6:3, Isa_6:5,Isa_6:7). They are gone away backward; literally, they are estranged backwards; or, as Bishop Lowth paraphrases, "they are estranged from him; they have turned their back upon him." Instead of looking to God, and following after him, they "followed a multitude to do evil (Exo_23:2)." 8. CALVIN, “4.Ah sinful nation ! (14) Though he held already reproved their crime with sufficient severity, yet, for the purpose of exposing it still more, he adds an exclamation, by which he expresses still more strongly his abhorrence of such base ingratitude and wickedness. Some are of opinion that the particle הוי (hoi) denotes grief; Jerome renders it vae (Wo to); but for my part I reckon it sufficient to say that it is an exclamation, suggested partly by astonishment, and partly by sorrow. For we burst into loud cries, when the disgracefulness of the action is such as cannot be expressed in plain terms, or when we want words to correspond to the depth of our grief Where we have rendered wicked nation, the Greeks have translated ἁµαρτωλὸν that is, a sinner; and such is likewise the rendering of the Vulgate. But the Hebrew word denotes those who are given up to crime; and the Prophet unquestionably charges them with abandoned wickedness. A people laden with iniquity The force of the metaphor ought to be observed; for not only does he mean that they are sunk in their iniquity, as in a deep mire, but he likewise brings a charge against them, that they sin, not through mistake or thoughtlessness, as frequently happens with those who are easily led astray, but that they follow out their rebellion with a firm purpose of mind; as if he had said that they were the slaves of sin, or sold to act wickedly. When he adds, a seed of evil-doers, he means a wicked seed. Others, with greater ingenuity, consider this passage to mean, that they are declared to be unworthy of holding a place among the children of Abraham, because they are bastards, and not related to him; as they are elsewhere called the seed of Canaan, and are reproached with being uncircumcised, (Jer_9:26,) as if they had been the descendants of heathens and foreigners. But it is customary with the Hebrews to employ the phrase, “ of the good” for “ children,” a mode of expression which has been imitated by the Greeks. (15) Degenerate children. The word משחיתים (mashchithim) literally means corrupting, and accordingly translators supply the word themselves, or, their pursuits. But I reckon that degenerate is a more appropriate rendering; for the Prophet means that they are so depraved as to be altogether unlike their parents. The four epithets which are here bestowed by him on his nation are far from being honorable, and are widely different from the opinion which they had formed about themselves. For this is the manner in which we must arouse hypocrites; and the more they flatter themselves, and the farther they are from being regulated by the fear of God, so much the more ought we to wield against them the thunderbolts of
- 53. words. On suchpersons a milder form of instruction would produce no effect, and an ordinary exhortation would not move them. It is necessary, also, to remove that false conviction of their holiness, righteousness, and wisdom, which they commonly employ as a disguise, and as the ground of idle boasting. For they have forsaken the Lord He assigns the reason why he reproves them with such sharpness and severity. It is, that they may not complain, as they are wont to do, of being treated with excessive harshness and rigour. And first he upbraids them with that which is the source of all evils, their revolt from God; for, as it is the highest perfection of righteousness to cleave to God, agreeably to those words of Moses, Now, Israel, what doth thy God require from thee but that thou shouldst cleave to him ? (16) so, when we have revolted from him, we are utterly ruined. The design of the Prophet is, not to convince the Jews that they are guilty of a single crime, but to show that they are wholly apostates. The following words, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel, whether the word be rendered provoke, or despise, the latter of which I prefer, are undoubtedly added in order to place their sin in a still stronger light; for it was shamefully base to treat with contempt the favor of him who had chosen them alone out of all the nations to be adopted into his family. This is also the reason why he calls himself the Holy One of Israel; because, by admitting them to alliance with him, he had at the same time adorned them with his holiness; for wherever this name occurs it is ascribed to him on account of the effect. What barbarous pride was there in despising so great an honor! If any one choose rather to render the word provoke, the meaning will be, that they rejected God, as if they expressly intended to provoke his anger; which shows how detestable their apostasy is. They are gone away backward The meaning is, that when the Lord laid down to them a fixed way and rule of living, they were hurried along by their sinful passions; but he confirms the statement which he had just now made, that their licentiousness was so unbridled that they utterly revolted from God, and deliberately turned aside from that course to which their life ought to have been directed. (14) This comes very near the rendering of the Septuagint, οὐαὶ ἔθνος ἁµαρτωλὸν (15) Vigerus remarks, that παῖδες, when construed with the genitives of nouns, denoting artists, nations, or any particular condition or profession of men, is put for the nouns themselves; and he adduces the following instances,ῥητόρων ἰατρῶν φιλοσόφων γραφέων παιδες which is far more elegant than ῥήτορες etc.; and in like manner, Κελτῶν παῖδες, sons of the Celts, or, Gauls, that is, Gauls; δυστήνων
- 54. παῖδες, sons ofthe wretched, that is, the wretched— Ed (16) Our Author, quoting from memory, has mingled two passages: And now, Israel, what doth the Lord thy God require of thee, but to fear the Lord thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul? (Deu_10:12.) Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God; him shalt thou serve, and to him shalt thou cleave and swear by his name. (Deu_10:20.) — Ed. 5 Why should you be beaten anymore? Why do you persist in rebellion? Your whole head is injured, your whole heart afflicted. 1.BARNES, “Why ... - The prophet now, by an abrupt change in the discourse, calls their attention to the effects of their sins. Instead of saving that they had been smitten, or of saying that they had been punished for their sins, he assumes both, and asks why it should be repeated. The Vulgate reads this: ‘Super quo - on what part - shall I smite you anymore?’ This expresses well the sense of the Hebrew - על־מה ‛al-meh - upon what; and the meaning is, ‘what part of the body can be found on which blows have not been inflicted? On every part there are traces of the stripes which have been inflicted for your sins.’ The idea is taken from a body that is all covered over with weals or marks of blows, and the idea is, that the whole frame is one continued bruise, and there remains no sound part to be stricken. The particular chastisement to which the prophet refers is specified in Isa_1:7-9. In Isa_1:5-6, he refers to the calamities of the nation, under the image of a person wounded and chastised for crimes. Such a figure of speech is not uncommon in the classic writers. Thus Cicero (de fin. iv. 14) says, ‘quae hie reipublicae vulnera imponebat hie sanabat.’ See also Tusc. Quaes. iii. 22; Ad Quintum fratrem, ii. 25; Sallust; Cat. 10. Should ye be stricken - Smitten, or punished. The manner in which they had been punished, he specities in Isa_1:7-8. Jerome says, that the sense is, ‘there is no medicine which I can administer to your wounds. All your members are full of wounds; and there is no part of your body which has not been smitten before. The more you are afflicted, the more will your impiety and iniquity increase.’ The word here, תכוּ tuku, from נכה nakah, means to smite, to beat, to strike down, to slay, or kill. It is applied to the infliction of punishment on an individual; or to the judgments of God by the plague, pestilence, or sickness. Gen_19:2 : ‘And they smote the men that were at the door with blindness.’ Num_14:12 : ‘And I will smite them with the pestilence.’ Exo_7:25 : ‘After that the Lord had smitten the river,’ that is, had changed it into blood;
- 55. compare Isa_1:20; Zec_10:2.Here it refers to the judgments inflicted on the nation as the punishment of their crimes. Ye will revolt - Hebrew You will add defection, or revolt. The effect of calamity, and punishment, will be only to increase rebellion. Where the heart is right with God, the tendency of affliction is to humble it, and lead it more and more to God. Where it is evil, the tendency is to make the sinner more obstinate and rebellious. This effect of punishment is seen every where. Sinners revolt more and more. They become sullen, and malignant, and fretful; they plunge into vice to seek temporary relief, and thus they become more and more alienated from God. The whole head - The prophet proceeds to specify more definitely what he had just said respecting their being stricken. He designates each of the members of the body - thus comparing the Jewish people to the human body when under severe punishment. The word head in the Scriptures is often used to denote the princes, leaders, or chiefs of the nation. But the expression here is used as a figure taken from the human body, and refers solely to the punishment of the people, not to their sins. It means that all had been smitten - all was filled with the effects of punishment - as the human body is when the head and all the members are diseased. Is sick - Is so smitten - so punished, that it has become sick and painful. Hebrew לחלי lacho lı y - for sickness, or pain. The preposition ל denotes a state, or condition of anything. Psa_69:21. ‘And in ()ל my thirst, they gave me vinegar to drink.’ The expression is intensive, and denotes that the head was entirely sick. The whole heart faint - The heart is here put for the whole region of the chest or stomach. As when the head is violently pained, there is also sickness at the heart, or in the stomach, and as these are indications of entire or total prostration of the frame so the expression here denotes the perfect desolation which had come over the nation. Faint - Sick, feeble, without vigor, attended with nausea. Jer_8:18 : ‘When I would comfort myself in my sorrow, my heart is faint within me;’ Lam_1:22. When the body is suffering; when severe punishment is inflicted, the effect is to produce landor and faintness at the seat of life. This is the idea here. Their punishment had been so severe for their sins, that the heart was languid and feeble - still keeping up the figure drawn from the human body. 2. CLARKE, “Why should ye be stricken any more “On what part,” etc.? - The Vulgate renders עלמה al meh, super quo, (see Job_38:6; 2Ch_32:10), upon what part. And so Abendana on Sal. Den Melech: “There are some who explain it thus: Upon what limb shall you be smitten, if you add defection? for already for your sins have you been smitten upon all of them; so that there is not to be found in you a whole limb on which you can be smitten.” Which agrees with what follows: “From the sole of the foot even unto the head, there is no soundness in it:” and the sentiment and image is exactly the same with that of Ovid, Pont. 2:7, 42: - Vix habet in nobis jam nova plaga locum. There is no place on you for a new stripe. Or that still more expressive line of Euripides; the great force and effect of which Longinus ascribes to its close and compressed structure, analogous to the sense which it expresses: - ́γεµω κακων δη· κ’ ουκετ’ εσθ’ ᆇπη τιθᇽ. I am full of miseries: there’s no room for more.
- 56. Herc. Fur. 1245,Long. sec. 40. “On what part will ye strike again? will ye add correction?” This is addressed to the instruments of God’s vengeance; those that inflicted the punishment, who or whatsoever they were. Ad verbum certae personae intelligendae sunt, quibus ista actio quae per verbum exprimitur competit; “The words are addressed to the persons who were the agents employed in the work expressed by the original word,” as Glassius says in a similar case, Philippians Sacr. 1:3, 22. See Isa_7:4. As from ידע yada, דעה deah, knowledge; from יעץ yaats, עצה etsah, counsel; from ישן yeshan, שנה shenah, sleep, etc.; so from יסר yasar is regularly derived סרה sarah, correction. The whole head is sick - The king and the priests are equally gone away from truth and righteousness. Or, The state is oppressed by its enemies, and the Church corrupted in its rulers and in its members. 3. GILL, “Why should ye be stricken any more? .... Or "for what are ye stricken again" (a)? with afflictions and chastisements, with which God smites his people by way of correction for their sins, Isa_57:17 and the sense is, either that they did not consider what they were afflicted for, that it was for their sins and transgressions; they thought they came by chance, or imputed them to second causes, and so went on in sin, and added sin to sin; to which sense the Targum, Jarchi, and Kimchi, incline: or the meaning is, that the chastisements that were laid upon them were to no purpose; had produced no good effect, were of no avail, and unprofitable to them; and which is mentioned as an aggravation of their sins, obstinacy, and impenitence; see Jer_5:3. Ye will revolt more and more, or "add defection" (b); go on in sin, and apostatize more and more, and grow more obdurate and resolute in it; unless afflictions are sanctified, men become more hardened by them: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint; which may be understood either of their chastisements, which were universal, and had reached all sorts and ranks of men among them, without any reformation, and therefore it was in vain to use more; or of their sins and transgressions which abounded among them, even among the principal of them; their civil rulers and governors, meant by the "head"; and the priests, who should feed the people with knowledge and understanding, designed by the "heart"; but both were corrupted, and in a bad condition. 4. HENRY, “How he illustrates it by a comparison taken from a sick and diseased body, all overspread with leprosy, or, like Job's, with sore boils, Isa_1:5, Isa_1:6. (1.) The distemper has seized the vitals, and so threatens to be mortal. Diseases in the head and heart are most dangerous; now the head, the whole head, is sick - the heart, the whole heart, is faint. They had become corrupt in their judgment: the leprosy was in their head. They were utterly unclean; their affection to God and religion was cold and gone; the things which remained were ready to die away, Rev_3:2. (2.) It has overspread the whole body, and so becomes exceedingly noisome; From the sole of the foot even to the head, from the meanest peasant to the greatest peer, there is no soundness, no good principles, no religion (for that is the health of the soul), nothing but wounds and bruises, guilt and corruption, the sad effects of Adam's fall, noisome to the holy
- 57. God, painful tothe sensible soul; they were so to David when he complained (Psa_38:5), My wounds stink, and are corrupt, because of my foolishness. See Psa_32:3, Psa_32:4. No attempts were made for reformation, or, if they were, they proved ineffectual: The wounds have not been closed, not bound up, nor mollified with ointment. While sin remains unrepented of the wounds are unsearched, unwashed, the proud flesh in them not cut out, and while, consequently, it remains unpardoned, the wounds are not mollified or closed up, nor any thing done towards the healing of them and the preventing of their fatal consequences. 5. JAMISON, “Why — rather, as Vulgate, “On what part.” Image from a body covered all over with marks of blows (Psa_38:3). There is no part in which you have not been smitten. head ... sick, etc. — not referring, as it is commonly quoted, to their sins, but to the universality of their punishment. However, sin, the moral disease of the head or intellect, and the heart, is doubtless made its own punishment (Pro_1:31; Jer_2:19; Hos_8:11). “Sick,” literally, “is in a state of sickness” [Gesenius]; “has passed into sickness” [Maurer]. 6. K&D, “In this v. a disputed question arises as to the words ה ֶל־מ ַע (ה ֶ,מ the shorter, sharper form of ה ָ,מ which is common even before non-gutturals, Ges. §32, 1): viz., whether they mean “wherefore,” as the lxx, Targums, Vulgate, and most of the early versions render them, or “upon what,” i.e., upon which part of the body, as others, including Schröring, suppose. Luzzatto maintains that the latter rendering is spiritless, more especially because there is nothing in the fact that a limb has been struck already to prevent its being struck again; but such objections as these can only arise in connection with a purely literal interpretation of the passage. If we adopted this rendering, the real meaning would be, that there was no judgment whatever that had not already fallen upon Israel on account of its apostasy, so that it was not far from utter destruction. We agree, however, with Caspari in deciding in favour of the meaning “to what” (to what end). For in all the other passage in which the expression occurs (fourteen times in all), it is used in this sense, and once even with the verb hiccah, to smite (Num_22:32), whilst it is only in Isa_1:6 that the idea of the people as one body is introduced; whereas the question “upon what” would require that the reader or hearer should presuppose it here. But in adopting the rendering “whereto,” or to what end, we do not understand it, as Malbim does, in the sense of Cui bono, with the underlying thought, “It would be ineffectual, as all the previous smiting has proved;” for this thought never comes out in a direct expression, as we should expect, but rather - according to the analogy of the questions with lamah in Eze_18:31; Jer_44:7 -in the sense of qua de causa, with the underlying thought, “There would be only an infatuated pleasure in your own destruction.” Isa_1:5 we therefore render thus: “Why would ye be perpetually smitten, multiplying rebellion?” עוֹד (with tiphchah, a stronger disjunctive than tebir) belongs to וּⅴ ; see the same form of accentuation in Eze_19:9. They are not two distinct interrogative clauses (“why would ye be smitten afresh? why do ye add revolt?” (Luzzatto), but the second clause is subordinate to the first (without there being any necessity to supply Chi, “because,” as Gesenius supposes), an adverbial minor clause defining the main clause more precisely; at all events this is the logical connection, as in Isa_5:11 (cf., Psa_62:4, “delighting in lies,” and Psa_4:3, “loving vanity”): lxx “adding iniquity.” Sarah (rebellion) is a deviation from truth and rectitude; and here, as in many
- 58. other instances, itdenotes apostasy from Jehovah, who is the absolutely Good, and absolute goodness. There is a still further dispute whether the next words should be rendered “every head” and “every heart,” or “the whole head” and “the whole heart.” In prose the latter would be impossible, as the two nouns are written without the article; but in the poetic style of the prophets the article may be omitted after Col, when used in the sense of “the whole” (e.g., Isa_9:12 : with whole mouth, i.e., with full mouth). Nevertheless Col, without the article following, never signifies “the whole” when it occurs several times in succession, as in Isa_15:2 and Eze_7:17-18. We must therefore render Isa_1:5, “Every head is diseased, and every heart is sick.” The Lamed in locholi indicates the state into which a thing has come: every head in a state of disease (Ewald, §217, d: locholi without the article, as in 2Ch_21:18). The prophet asks his fellow-countrymen why they are so foolish as to heap apostasy upon apostasy, and so continue to call down the judgments of God, which have already fallen upon them blow after blow. Has it reached such a height with them, that among all the many heads and hearts there is not one head which is not in a diseased state, not one heart which is not thoroughly ill? (davvai an emphatic form of daveh). Head and heart are mentioned as the noblest parts of the outer and inner man. Outwardly and inwardly every individual in the nation had already been smitten by the wrath of God, so that they had had enough, and might have been brought to reflection. 7. PULPIT, “Why should ye, etc.? Translate, Why will ye be still smitten, revolting more and more? or, Why will ye persist in rebellion, and so be smitten yet more? The Authorized Version does not express the sense, which is that suffering mustfollow sin—that if they still revolt, they must still be smitten for it—why, then, will they do so? Compare Ezekiel's "Why will ye die, O house of Israel?" (Eze_18:31). The whole head the whole heart. Mr. Cheyne translates, "Every head every heart;" but Lowth, Gesenius, and Ewald agree with the Authorized Version. The prophet personifies Israel, and means to say that the whole head of the nation is diseased, its whole heart faint, or "prostrate with languor" (Kay). The head and heart represent respectively the intellectual and moral natures. 8. CALVIN, “5.Why should ye be stricken any more ? Some render it, Upon what ? or, On what part ? and interpret the passage as if the Lord had said that he had not another scourge left; because so various are the methods by which he has attempted to bring them back to the path of duty, that no other way of chastising them remains to be tried. But I prefer to render it Why ? because this corresponds to the Hebrew word, and agrees better with the context. It is equivalent to phrases in daily use, To what purpose? For what object ? (17) He means that the Jews have proceeded to such a pitch of wickedness and crimes, that it is impossible to believe that chastisements will do them any good; for when desperate men have been hardened, we know that they will rather be broken to shreds than submit to correction. He complains of their prodigious obstinacy, like a physician who should declare that every remedy had been tried, and that his skill was now exhausted.
- 59. At the sametime he charges them with extreme malice; for when ungodly men are not even humbled by punishments, they have arrived at the very height of wickedness; as if the Lord had said, “ see that I should do you no good if I were to chastise you;” for although chastisements and afflictions are the remedies which God employs for curing our vices, yet, when they are found to be of no advantage to us, we are past hope. True, indeed, God does not on that account cease to punish us, but, on the contrary, his wrath against us is the more enflamed; for such obstinacy God abhors above all things else. But he justly says that his labor is lost when he does not succeed in bringing us to repentance, and that it is useless to apply remedies to those who cannot be cured. Thus he does not fail to double their chastisements and afflictions, and to try the very utmost of what can be done, and he is even compelled to take this course until he absolutely ruin and destroy them. But in all this he does not discharge the office of a physician; but what he laments is, that the chastisements which he inflicts will be of no avail to his people. You will yet grow more faithless It is a confirmation of the former statement, and therefore I separate it from the former clause, though there are some who put them together. It is as if he had said, “ you will not cease to practice treachery; yea, you will add to your crimes; for I perceive that you rush to the commission of iniquity as if you had leagued and banded yourselves for that purpose, so that we can no longer hope that you will slacken in your course.” The design of God is to exhibit their incorrigible disposition, that they may be left without excuse. The whole head is sick. Others translate it every head, and suppose that those terms denote the princes and nobles of the nation. I rather agree with the opinion of those who render itthe whole head; for I consider it to be a plain comparison taken from the human body, to this effect, that the body is so severely afflicted that there is no hope of returning health. He points out two principal parts on which the health of the body depends, and thus shows the extent of the disease which, he tells us, has infected this wretched people to such a degree that they are wasting away; that the disease exists not in a single member, or in the extremities of the body, but that the heart itself has been wounded, and the head is severely afflicted; in short, that the vital parts, as they are called, are so much injured and corrupted that it is impossible to heal them. But here also commentators differ; for some of them view this state of disease as referring to sins, and others to punishments. Those who view it as referring to sins interpret it thus: “ are like a rotten and stinking body, in which no part is sound or healthy. Crimes of the worst description prevail amongst you, by the infection of which every thing is corrupted and debased.” But I choose rather to interpret it as referring to punishments; for unquestionably God still proceeds with this complaint, that the nation is so
- 60. obstinate as tobe incapable of being cured by any chastisements, because, though it has been beaten almost to death, or at least has been maimed and frightfully torn by repeated blows, still it is not reformed. Such too is the import of — 6 From the sole of your foot to the top of your head there is no soundness— only wounds and welts and open sores, not cleansed or bandaged or soothed with olive oil. 1.BARNES, “From the sole of the foot ... - Or is we say, ‘from head to foot,’ that is, in every part of the body. There may be included also the idea that this extended from the lowest to the highest among the people. The Chaldee paraphrase is, ‘from the lowest of the people even to the princes - all are contumacious and rebellious.’ No soundness - מתם me thom, from תמם tamam, to be perfect, sound, uninjured. There is no part unaffected; no part that is sound. It is all smitten and sore. But wounds - The precise shade of difference between this and the two following words may not be apparent. Together, they mean Such wounds and contusions as are inflicted upon man by scourging, or beating him. This mode of punishment was common among the Jews; as it is at the East at this time. Abarbanel and Kimchi say that the word rendered here “wounds” (פצע petsa‛, a verbal from פצע patsa‛ to wound, to mutilate), means an open wound, or a cut from which blood flows. Bruises - חבורה chabburah. This word means a contusion, or the effect of a blow where the skin is not broken; such a contusion as to produce a swelling, and livid appearance; or to make it, as we say, black and blue. Putrifying sores - The Hebrew rather means recent, or fresh wounds; or rather, perhaps, a running wound, which continues fresh and open; which cannot be cicatrized, or dried up. The Septuagint renders it elegantly πληγή φλγµαίνουσα plege flegmainous, a swelling, or tumefying
- 61. wound. The expressionis applied usually to inflammations, as of boils, or to the swelling of the tonsils, etc. They have not been closed - That is, the lips had not been pressed together, to remove the blood from the wound. The meaning is, that nothing had been done toward healing the wound. It was an unhealed, undressed, all-pervading sore. The art of medicine, in the East, consists chiefly in external applications; accordingly the prophet’s images in this place are all taken from surgery. Sir John Chardin, in his note on Pro_3:8, ‘It shall be health to thy navel, and marrow to thy bones,’ observes, that the comparison is taken from the plasters, ointments, oils, and frictions, which are made use of in the East in most maladies. ‘In Judea,’ says Tavernier, ‘they have a certain preparation of oil, and melted grease, which they commonly use for the healing of wounds.’ Lowth. Compare the note at Isa_38:21. Neither mollified with ointment - Neither made soft, or tender, with ointment. Great use was made, in Eastern nations, of oil, and various kinds of unguents, in medicine. Hence, the good Samaritan is represented as pouring in oil and wine into the wounds of the man that fell among thieves Luk_10:34; and the apostles were directed to anoint with oil those who were sick; Jam_5:14; compare Rev_3:18. Ointment - Hebrew oil. שׁמן shemen. The oil of olives was used commonly for this purpose. The whole figure in these two verses relates to their being punished for their sins. It is taken from the appearance of a man who is severely, beaten, or scourged for crime; whose wounds had not been dressed, and who was thus a continued bruise, or sore, from his head to his feet. The cause of this the prophet states afterward, Isa_1:10 ff. With great skill he first reminds them of what they saw and knew, that they were severely punished; and then states to them the cause of it. Of the calamities to which the prophet refers, they could have no doubt. They were every where visible in all their cities and towns. On these far-spreading desolations, he fixes the eye distinctly first. Had he begun with the statement of their depravity, they would probably have revolted at it. But being presented with a statement of their sufferings, which they all saw and felt, they were prepared for the statement of the cause. To find access to the consciences of sinners, and to convince them of their guilt, it is often necessary to remind them first of the calamities in which they are actually involved; and then to search for the cause. This passage, therefore, has no reference to their moral character. It relates solely to their punishment. It is often indeed adduced to prove the doctrine of depravity; but it has no direct reference to it, and it should not be adduced to prove that people are depraved, or applied as referring to the moral condition of man. The account of their moral character, as the cause of their calamities, is given in Isa_1:10-14. That statement will fully account for the many woes which had come on the nation. 2. CLARKE, “They have not been closed, etc. “It hath not been pressed,” etc. - The pharmaceutical art in the East consists chiefly in external applications: accordingly the prophet’s images in this place are all taken from surgery. Sir John Chardin, in his note on Pro_3:8, “It shall be health to thy navel, and marrow to thy bones,” observes that “the comparison is taken from the plasters, ointments, oils, and frictions, which are made use of in the East upon the belly and stomach in most maladies. Being ignorant in the villages of the art of making decoctions and potions, and of the proper doses of such things, they generally make use of external medicines.” - Harmer’s Observations on Scripture, vol. 2 p. 488. And in surgery their materia medica is extremely simple, oil making the principal part of it. “In India,” says Tavernier, “they have a certain preparation of oil and melted grease, which they commonly use for the healing of wounds.” Voyage Ind. So the good Samaritan poured oil and wine on the wounds of the distressed Jew: wine, cleansing and somewhat astringent, proper for a fresh wound; oil,
- 62. mollifying and healing,Luk_10:34. Kimchi has a judicious remark here: “When various medicines are applied, and no healing takes place, that disorder is considered as coming immediately from God.” Of the three verbs in this sentence, one is in the singular number in the text; another is singular in two MSS., (one of them ancient), חבשה chubbeshah; and the Syriac and Vulgate render all of them in the singular number. 3. GILL, “From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it,.... Every member of the body politic was afflicted in one way or another, or sadly infected with the disease of sin; see Psa_28:3. So the Targum, "from the rest of the people, even unto the princes, there is none among them who is perfect in my fear;'' see Dan_9:8. but wounds, and bruises, and putrefying sores; to which either public calamities on a city or nation may be compared, Hos_5:13 or the sins and transgressions both of single persons, and of whole bodies of men, Psa_38:5. The Targum is, "they are all stubborn and rebellious, they are defiled with sins as an ulcerous plaster.'' They have not been closed; that is, the wounds and sores have not been healed; or "they have not been pressed" or "squeezed" (c), in order to get the purulent matter out of them: neither bound up; with bands, after the matter is squeezed out, and a plaster laid on: neither mollified with ointment; which is used for the supplying and healing of wounds; see Luk_10:34. The sense either is, that they were not reformed by their afflictions; or that they did not repent of their sins, nor seek to God for healing and pardon, nor make use of any means for their more healthful state and condition. The Targum paraphrases the words thus, "they do not leave their haughtinesses, nor are they desirous of repentance, nor have they any righteousness to protect them.'' 4. PULPIT, “From the sole of the foot even unto the head (comp. Job_2:7). From top to bottom, the body corporate is diseased throughout—there is no soundness in it (cf. Psa_38:3, Psa_38:7)—all is one wound, one livid bruise, one festering sore. Note the use of the singular number in the original. They have not been closed; literally, they have not been pressed; which is explained to mean (Aben Ezra, Kay) that they have not had the matter formed by suppuration pressed out of them. Neither bound up; i.e. not bandaged, Neither mollified with ointment; rather, with oil. On the treatment of wounds and ulcers with oil m ancient times, see 'Hippocrat; De Ulceribus,' § 4; Galen; 'De Compos. Medic.,' § 2; and comp. Luk_10:34. Recent medical science has revived the practice, and wounds of all kinds are now
- 63. frequently treated withnothing but carbolic oil. The general sentiment of the entire passage is that there has been no medical treatment of the wounds of any kind; they have been left to themselves, to spread corruption over the whole body—no attempt has been made to cure them. 5. JAMISON, “From the lowest to the highest of the people; “the ancient and honorable, the head, the prophet that teacheth lies, the tail.” See Isa_9:13-16. He first states their wretched condition, obvious to all (Isa_1:6-9); and then, not previously, their irreligious state, the cause of it. wounds — judicially inflicted (Hos_5:13). mollified with ointment — The art of medicine in the East consists chiefly in external applications (Luk_10:34; Jam_5:14). 6. K&D, “This description of the total misery of every individual in the nation is followed by a representation of the whole nation as one miserably diseased body. “From the some of the foot even to the head there is nothing sound in it: cuts, and stripes, and festering wounds; they have not been pressed out, nor bound up, nor has there been any soothing with oil.” The body of the nation, to which the expression “in it” applies (i.e., the nation as a whole), was covered with wounds of different kinds; and no means whatever had been applied to heal these many, various wounds, which lay all together, close to one another, and one upon the other, covering the whole body. Cuts (from ע ַצ ָ to cut) are wounds that have cut into the flesh - sword-cuts, for example. These need binding up, in order that the gaping wound may close again. Stripes (Chabburah, from Chabar, to stripe), swollen stripes, or weals, as if from a cut with a whip, or a blow with a fist: these require softening with oil, that the coagulated blood of swelling may disperse. Festering wounds, maccah teriyah, from tarah, to be fresh (a different word from the talmudic word t're, Chullin 45b, to thrust violently, so as to shake): these need pressing, for the purpose of cleansing them, so as to facilitate their healing. Thus the three predicates manifest an approximation to a chiasm (the crossing of the members); but this retrospective relation is not thoroughly carried out. The predicates are written in the plural, on account of the collective subject. The clause ּאלְוה ָכ ְⅴፑן ֶמ ָ ַ , which refers to חבורה (stripes), so far as the sense is concerned (olive-oil, like all oleosa, being a dispersing medium), is to be taken as neuter, since this is the only way of explaining the change in the number: “And no softening has been effected with oil.” Zoru we might suppose to be a pual, especially on account of the other puals near: it is not so, however, for the simple reason that, according to the accentuation (viz., with two pashtahs, the first of which gives the tone, as in tohu, Gen_1:2, so that it must be pronounced zóru), it has the tone upon the penultimate, for which it would be impossible to discover any reason, if it were derived from zarah. For the assumption that the tone is drawn back to prepare the way for the strong tone of the next verb (Chubbashu) is arbitrary, as the influence of the pause, though it sometimes reaches the last word but one, never extends to the last but two. Moreover, according to the usage of speech, zorah signifies to be dispersed, not to be pressed out; whereas zur and za
- 64. rar are commonlyused in the sense of pressing together and squeezing out. Consequently zoru is either the kal of an intransitive zor in the middle voice (like boshu), or, what is more probable - as zoru, the middle voice in Psa_58:4, has a different meaning (abalienati sunt: cf., Isa_1:4) - the kal of zarar (= Arab. Constringere), which is here conjugated as an intransitive (cf., Job_24:24, rommu, and Gen_49:23, where robbu is used in an active sense). The surgical treatment so needed by the nation was a figurative representation of the pastoral addresses of the prophets, which had been delivered indeed, but, inasmuch as their salutary effects were dependent upon the penitential sorrow of the people, might as well have never been delivered at all. The people had despised the merciful, compassionate kindness of their God. They had no liking for the radical cure which the prophets had offered to effect. All the more pitiable, therefore, was the condition of the body, which was sick within, and diseased from head to foot. The prophet is speaking here of the existing state of things. He affirms that it is all over with the nation; and this is the ground and object of his reproachful lamentations. Consequently, when he passes in the next v. from figurative language to literal, we may presume that he is still speaking of his own times. It is Isaiah's custom to act in this manner as his own expositor (compare Isa_1:22 with Isa_1:23). The body thus inwardly and outwardly diseased, was, strictly speaking, the people and the land in their fearful condition at that time. 7.CALVIN, “7.Your country is desolate Literally, it is desolation; and thus Isaiah goes on to speak more fully and plainly of what he had already said figuratively about chastisements, that the country has been reduced to a frightful state of devastation: for I choose to interpret all those statements as relating to past occurrences, because the Prophet does not threaten the vengeance of God, but describes those heavy calamities which have already happened. He upbraids them with indolence and stupidity in remaining unmoved by their afflictions. Like the destruction of strangers (18). This is added for the sake of heightening the picture; for the opinion that זרים (zarim) is here put for זרם (zerem), an inundation, is farfetched. That word might no doubt be applied to enemies, but it is better to take it as literally denoting foreigners. The calamity is more grievous when it is brought on by men who are unknown, and who have come from a distant country, who lay waste with far greater recklessness and cruelty than neighboring tribes. Such men destroy cities, burn houses, buildings, and villages, and spread desolation all around. In short, they rush forward with barbarous ferocity, bent on murders and conflagrations, and are more eager to inflict damage than to make gain. But neighbors, when they have subdued a country, can retain possession of it by having a garrison, and as soon as a revolt is attempted, or an insurrection takes place, can send additional troops; and therefore they are not so cruel; nor do they lay waste a country from which they hope to derive some advantage. It is therefore no ordinary calamity, but the most shocking of all calamities, that is here described.
- 65. Hence we oughtto learn that, when God begins to punish us, if we do not repent, he does not immediately desist, but multiplies the chastisements, and continually follows them up with other afflictions. We ought therefore to abstain from such obstinacy, if we do not wish to draw down upon ourselves the same punishments, or at least to deserve the same reproach which was brought against the Jews, that though they had received sharp warnings, and had felt the hand of God, still they could not be corrected or reformed. Moreover, we ought not to wonder that we are visited with so great an amount and variety of afflictions, of which we see no end or limit, for by our obstinacy we fight with God and with his stripes. It must therefore happen with us as with wincing and unruly horses, which, the more obstinate and refractory they are, have the whip and spur applied to them with greater severity. In the present day there are many who almost accuse God of cruelty, as if he always treated us with harshness, and as if he ought to chastise us more gently; but they do not take into account our shocking crimes. If those crimes were duly weighed by them, they would assuredly acknowledge that, amidst the utmost severity, the forbearance of God is wonderful; and that we may not think that in this case the Lord was too severe, we must take into consideration the vices which he afterwards enumerates. Here an objection will be started. Why does Isaiah declare that the nation endured such a variety of afflictions, while we have already mentioned that he began to prophesy under Uzziah, (19) during whose reign the kingdom of Judah was in a prosperous condition? (2Ch_26:5.) For although, towards the end of his life, the kingdom of Israel met with some disasters, still this did not affect the kingdom of Judah. Accordingly, the Jews think that these words relate to the reign of Jotham, (2Kg_15:32,) and not of Uzziah. Their opinion appears at first sight to have little weight; and yet, when the whole matter is examined, it is not destitute of probability; for we know that the prophets did not always attend to chronological arrangement in collecting their prophecies; and it is possible that this discourse of Isaiah was placed first in order for no other reason but because it contains a summary view of that doctrine which is afterwards to be delivered. Others think that they can easily get rid of the difficulty by interpreting the whole passage as a description of vice, and not of punishments; but what is said about the burning of cities and about the desolation of the country cannot easily be disposed of in that manner. If it is supposed that the Prophet speaks of the future and not the present condition of that kingdom, and that in the name of God he foretells approaching calamities, though they did not behold them with their eyes, I do not greatly object to that view, though it is probable that he treats of events which were known to them. It is a real narrative, and not a prediction, though in the next verse I acknowledge he announces the approaching result.
- 66. (18) In theEnglish version it runs, as overthrown by strangers; and the marginal reading, adhering more closely to the Hebrew idiom, is, as the overthrow of strangers. The interpretation rejected by Calvin has been approved by some able critics; and Lowth, distrusting the philological views given by his predecessors, has resorted to a conjectural alteration of the Hebrew text: — “ reading, though confirmed by all the ancient versions, gives us no good sense; for your land is devoured by strangers, and is desolate as if overthrown by strangers, is a mere tautology, or, what is as bad, an identical comparison. Aben Ezra thought that the word, in its present form, might be taken for the same with,זרם an inundation. Schultens is of the same opinion, (see Taylor’ Concord;) and Schindler, in his Lexicon, explains it in the same manner, and so, says Kimchi, some explain it.” After enumerating the attempts of Abendana “ reconcile it to grammatical analogy,” he adds, “ I rather suppose the true reading to be ,זרם and have translated it accordingly: the word ,זרים in the line above, seems to have caught the transcriber’ eye, and to have led him into this mistake.” —Notes on Isaiah. — Ed (19) Called also Azariah, 2Kg_15:1. — Ed. 7 Your country is desolate, your cities burned with fire; your fields are being stripped by foreigners right before you, laid waste as when overthrown by strangers. 1.BARNES, “Your country is desolate - This is the literal statement of what he had just affirmed by a figure. In this there was much art. The figure Isa_1:6 was striking. The resemblance between a man severely beaten, and entirely livid and sore, and a land perfectly desolate, was so impressive as to arrest the attention. This had been threatened as one of the curses which should attend disobedience; Lev_26:33 : And I will scatter you among the heathen, And will draw out a sword after you:
- 67. And your landshall be desolate, And your cities waste. Compare Isa_1:31; Deu_28:49-52. It is not certain, or agreed among expositors, to what time the prophet refers in this passage. Some have supposed that he refers to the time of Ahaz, and to the calamities which came upon the nation during his reign; 2Ch_28:5-8. But the probability is, that this refers to the time of Uzziah; see the Analysis of the chapter. The reign of Uzziah was indeed prosperous; 2 Chr. 26. But it is to be remembered that the land had been ravaged just before, under the reigns of Joash and Amaziah, by the kings of Syria and Israel; 2Ki_14:8-14; 2 Chr. 24; 25; and it is by no means probable that it had recovered in the time of Uzziah. It was lying under the effect of the former desolation, and not improbably the enemies of the Jews were even then hovering around it, and possibly still in the very midst of it. The kingdom was going to decay, and the reign of Uzziah gave it only a temporary prosperity. Is desolate - Hebrew: “Is desolation.” שׁממה she mamah. This is a Hebrew mode of emphatic expression, denoting that the desolation was so universal that the land might be said to be entirely in ruins. Your land - That is, the fruit, or productions of the land. Foreigners consume all that it produces. Strangers - זרים zaryı m, from זור zur, to be alienated, or estranged, Isa_1:4. It is applied to foreigners, that is, those who were not Israelites, Exo_30:33; and is often used to denote an enemy, a foe, a barbarian; Psa_109:11 : Let the extortioner catch all that he hath, And let the strangers plunder his labor. Eze_11:9; Eze_28:10; Eze_30:12; Hos_7:9; Hos_8:7. The word refers here particularly to the Syrians. Devour it - Consume its provisions. In your presence - This is a circumstance that greatly heightens the calamity, that they were compelled to look on and witness the desolation, without being able to prevent it. As overthrown by strangers - זרים כמהפכה ke mahpekah zaryı m - from הפך haphak, to turn, to overturn, to destroy as a city; Gen_19:21-25; Deu_29:22. It refers to the changes which an invading foe produces in a nation, where everything is subverted; where cities are destroyed, walls are thrown down, and fields and vineyards laid waste. The land was as if an invading army had passed through it, and completely overturned everything. Lowth proposes to read this, ‘as if destroyed by an inundation;’ but without authority. The desolation caused by the ravages of foreigners, at a time when the nations were barbarous, was the highest possible image of distress, and the prophet dwells on it, though with some appearance of repetition. 2. CLARKE, “Your country is desolate - The description of the ruined and desolate state of the country in these verses does not suit with any part of the prosperous times of Uzziah and Jotham. It very well agrees with the time of Ahaz, when Judea was ravaged by the joint invasion of the Israelites and Syrians, and by the incursions of the Philistines and Edomites. The date of this prophecy is therefore generally fixed to the time of Ahaz. But on the other hand it may be considered whether those instances of idolatry which are urged in Isa_1:29 - the worshipping in groves and gardens - having been at all times too commonly practiced, can be supposed to be the
- 68. only ones whichthe prophet would insist upon in the time of Ahaz; who spread the grossest idolatry through the whole country, and introduced it even into the temple; and, to complete his abominations, made his son pass through the fire to Molech. It is said, 2Ki_15:37, that in Jotham’s time “the Lord began to send against Judah Rezin - and Pekah.” If we may suppose any invasion from that quarter to have been actually made at the latter end of Jotham’s reign, I should choose to refer this prophecy to that time. And your cities are burned. - Nineteen of Dr. Kennicott’s MSS. and twenty-two of De Rossi’s, some of my own, with the Syriac and Arabic, add the conjunction which makes the hemistich more complete. Isaiah 1:7 At the end of the verse, זרים zarim. This reading, though confirmed by all the ancient versions, gives us no good sense; for “your land is devoured by strangers; and is desolate, as if overthrown by strangers,” is a mere tautology, or, what is as bad, an identical comparison. Aben Ezra thought that the word in its present form might be taken for the same with זרם zerem, an inundation: Schultens is of the same opinion; (see Taylor’s Concord.); and Schindler in his Lexicon explains it in the same manner: and so, says Zimchi, some explain it. Abendana endeavors to reconcile it to grammatical analogy in the following manner: “זרים zarim is the same with זרם zerem; that is, as overthrown by an inundation of waters: and these two words have the same analogy as קדם kedem and קדים kadim. Or it may be a concrete of the same form with שכיר shechir; and the meaning will be: as overthrown by rain pouring down violently, and causing a flood.” On Sal. ben Melech, in loc. But I rather suppose the true reading to be זרם zerem, and have translated it accordingly: the word זרים zerim, in the line above, seems to have caught the transcriber’s eye, and to have led him into this mistake. But this conjecture of the learned prelate is not confirmed by any MS. yet discovered. 3. GILL, “Your country is desolate,.... Or "shall be"; this is either a declaration in proper terms of what is before figuratively expressed, or rather a prophecy of what would be their case on account of transgressions; and which had its accomplishment partly in the Babylonish captivity, and fully in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans; when not only their city and temple, called their house, Mat_23:38, were left unto them desolate, but the whole land; and they were carried captive, and scattered among the nations, where they have been ever since: your cities are, or shall be, burned with fire; as, Jerusalem has been, and other cities in Judea, Mat_22:7. your land, strangers devour it in your presence; before their eyes, and it would not be in their power to prevent it; meaning either the Babylonians or the Romans, or both, and especially the latter, who were strangers and aliens from the commonwealth of Israel:
- 69. and it isdesolate, as overthrown by strangers; who ravage, plunder, and destroy all they meet with, and spare nothing, not intending to settle there, as those who are near do, when they conquer a neighbouring nation. Some think this prophecy was delivered in the times of Ahaz, and refers to the desolation in his time, 2Ch_28:17 but rather, as Joel and Amos prophesied before Isaiah, he may refer to those desolating judgments, they speak of, by the locusts, caterpillars, and fire, Joe_1:4 but to consider the words as a prediction of what should be in after times seems best; and so the Arabic version reads the words, "your land shall be desolate, your cities shall be burnt with fire, and your country strangers shall devour before you"; or shall be as overthrown by strangers, being overflown with a flood or storm of rain; so Abendana (d). (d) As if it was ,זרם which signifies a flood, or overflowing of water, Hab. iii. 10. to which sense Aben Ezra inclines; so Schultens in Job xxiv. 8. 4. HENRY, “He sadly bewails the judgments of God which they had brought upon themselves by their sins, and their incorrigibleness under those judgments. 1. Their kingdom was almost ruined, Isa_1:7. So miserable were they that both their towns and their lands were wasted, and yet so stupid that they needed to be told this, to have it shown to them. “Look and see how it is; your country is desolate; the ground is not cultivated, for want of inhabitants, the villages being deserted, Jdg_5:7. And thus the fields and vineyards become like deserts, all grown over with thorns, Pro_24:31. Your cities are burned with fire, by the enemies that invade you” (fire and sword commonly go together); “as for the fruits of your land, which should be food for your families, strangers devour them; and, to your greater vexation, it is before your eyes, and you cannot prevent it; you starve while your enemies surfeit on that which should be your maintenance. The overthrow of your country is as the overthrow of strangers; it is used by the invaders, as one might expect it should be used by strangers.” Jerusalem itself, which was as the daughter of Zion (the temple built on Zion was a mother, a nursing mother, to Jerusalem), or Zion itself, the holy mountain, which had been dear to God as a daughter, was now lost, deserted, and exposed as a cottage in a vineyard, which, when the vintage is over, nobody dwells in or takes any care of, and looks as mean and despicable as a lodge or hut, in a garden of cucumbers; and every person is afraid of coming near it, and solicitous to remove his effects out of it, as if it were a besieged city, Isa_1:8. And some think, it is a calamitous state of the kingdom that is represented by a diseased body, Isa_1:6. Probably this sermon was preached in the reign of Ahaz, when Judah was invaded by the kings of Syria and Israel, the Edomites and the Philistines, who slew many, and carried many away into captivity, 2Ch_28:5, 2Ch_28:17, 2Ch_28:18. Note, National impiety and immorality bring national desolation. Canaan, the glory of all lands, Mount Zion, the joy of the whole earth, both became a reproach and a ruin; and sin made them so, that great mischief-maker. 2. Yet they were not all reformed, and therefore God threatens to take another course with them (Isa_1:5): “Why should you be stricken any more, with any expectation of doing you good by it, when you increase revolts as your rebukes are increased? You will revolt more and more, as you have done,” as Ahaz particularly did, who, in his distress, trespassed yet more against the Lord, 2Ch_28:22. Thus the physician, when he sees the patient's case desperate, troubles him no more with physic; and the father resolves to correct his child no more when, finding him hardened, he determines to disinherit him. Note, (1.) There are those who are made worse by the methods God takes to make them better; the more they are stricken the more they revolt; their corruptions, instead of being mortified, are irritated and exasperated by their afflictions, and their hearts more hardened. (2.) God, sometimes, in a way of righteous judgment, ceases to correct those who have been long incorrigible, and whom therefore he designs to destroy. The reprobate silver shall be cast, not into the furnace, but to the dunghill, Jer_6:29, Jer_6:30. See Eze_24:13; Hos_4:14. He that is filthy, let him be filthy still.
- 70. 5. JAMISON, “Judahhad not in Uzziah’s reign recovered from the ravages of the Syrians in Joash’s reign (2Ch_24:24), and of Israel in Amaziah’s reign (2Ch_25:13, 2Ch_25:23, etc.). Compare Isaiah’s contemporary (Amo_4:6-11), where, as here (Isa_1:9, Isa_1:10), Israel is compared to “Sodom and Gomorrah,” because of the judgments on it by “fire.” in your presence — before your eyes: without your being able to prevent them. desolate, etc. — literally, “there is desolation, such as one might look for from foreign” invaders. 6. K&D, “This is described more particularly in Isa_1:7, which commences with the most general view, and returns to it again at the close.”Your land ... a desert; your cities ... burned with fire; your field ... foreigners consuming it before your eyes, and a desert like overthrowing by strangers.” Caspari has pointed out, in his Introduction to the Book of Isaiah, how nearly every word corresponds to the curses threatened in Lev 26 and Deut 28 (29); Mic_6:13-16 and Jer_5:15. stand in the very same relation to these sections of the Pentateuch. From the time of Isaiah downwards, the state of Israel was a perfect realization of the curses of the law. The prophet intentionally employs the words of the law to describe his own times; he designates the enemy, who devastated the land, reduced its towers to ashes, and took possession of its crops, by the simple term zarim, foreigners or barbarians (a word which would have the very same meaning if it were really the reduplication of the Aramaean bar; compare the Syriac baroye, a foreigner), without mentioning their particular nationality. He abstracts himself from the definite historical present, in order that he may point out all the more emphatically how thoroughly it bears the character of the fore-ordained curse. The most emphatic indication of this was to be found in the fact, which the clause at the close of Isa_1:7 palindromically affirms, that a desolation had been brought about “like the overthrow of foreigners.” The repetition of a catchword like zarim (foreigners) at the close of the v. in this emphatic manner, is a figure of speech, called epanaphora, peculiar to the two halves of our collection. The question arises, however, whether zarim is to be regarded as the genitive of the subject, as Caspari, Knobel, and others suppose, “such an overthrow as is commonly produced by barbarians” (cf., 2Sa_10:3, where the verb occurs), or as the genitive of the object, “such an overthrow as comes upon barbarians.” As mahpechah (overthrow) is used in other places in which it occurs to denote the destruction of Sodom, Gomorrah, etc., according to the primary passage, Deu_29:22, and Isaiah had evidently also this catastrophe in his mind, as Isa_1:8 clearly shows; we decide in favour of the conclusion that zarim is the genitive of the object (cf., Amo_4:11). The force of the comparison is also more obvious, if we understand the words in this sense. The desolation which had fallen upon the land of the people of God resembled that thorough desolation (subversio) with which God visited the nations outside the covenant, who, like the people of the Pentapolis, were swept from off the earth without leaving a trace behind. But although there was similarity, there was not sameness, as Isa_1:8, Isa_1:9 distinctly affirm. Jerusalem itself was still preserved; but in how pitiable a condition! There can be no doubt that bath-Zion (“daughter of Zion,” Eng. ver.) in Isa_1:8 signifies Jerusalem. The genitive in this case is a genitive of apposition: “daughter Zion,” not “daughter of Zion” (cf., Isa_37:22 : see Ges. §116, 5). Zion itself is represented as a daughter, i.e., as a woman. The expression applied primarily to the
- 71. community dwelling aroundthe fortress of Zion, to which the individual inhabitants stood in the same relation as children to a mother, inasmuch as the community sees its members for the time being come into existence and grow: they are born within her, and, as it were, born and brought up by her. It was then applied secondarily to the city itself, with or without the inhabitants (cf., Jer_46:19; Jer_48:18; Zec_2:11). In this instance the latter are included, as Isa_1:9 clearly shows. This is precisely the point in the first two comparisons. 7.CALVIN, “7.Your country is desolate Literally, it is desolation; and thus Isaiah goes on to speak more fully and plainly of what he had already said figuratively about chastisements, that the country has been reduced to a frightful state of devastation: for I choose to interpret all those statements as relating to past occurrences, because the Prophet does not threaten the vengeance of God, but describes those heavy calamities which have already happened. He upbraids them with indolence and stupidity in remaining unmoved by their afflictions. Like the destruction of strangers (18). This is added for the sake of heightening the picture; for the opinion that זרים (zarim) is here put for זרם (zerem), an inundation, is farfetched. That word might no doubt be applied to enemies, but it is better to take it as literally denoting foreigners. The calamity is more grievous when it is brought on by men who are unknown, and who have come from a distant country, who lay waste with far greater recklessness and cruelty than neighboring tribes. Such men destroy cities, burn houses, buildings, and villages, and spread desolation all around. In short, they rush forward with barbarous ferocity, bent on murders and conflagrations, and are more eager to inflict damage than to make gain. But neighbors, when they have subdued a country, can retain possession of it by having a garrison, and as soon as a revolt is attempted, or an insurrection takes place, can send additional troops; and therefore they are not so cruel; nor do they lay waste a country from which they hope to derive some advantage. It is therefore no ordinary calamity, but the most shocking of all calamities, that is here described. Hence we ought to learn that, when God begins to punish us, if we do not repent, he does not immediately desist, but multiplies the chastisements, and continually follows them up with other afflictions. We ought therefore to abstain from such obstinacy, if we do not wish to draw down upon ourselves the same punishments, or at least to deserve the same reproach which was brought against the Jews, that though they had received sharp warnings, and had felt the hand of God, still they could not be corrected or reformed. Moreover, we ought not to wonder that we are visited with so great an amount and variety of afflictions, of which we see no end or limit, for by our obstinacy we fight with God and with his stripes. It must therefore
- 72. happen with usas with wincing and unruly horses, which, the more obstinate and refractory they are, have the whip and spur applied to them with greater severity. In the present day there are many who almost accuse God of cruelty, as if he always treated us with harshness, and as if he ought to chastise us more gently; but they do not take into account our shocking crimes. If those crimes were duly weighed by them, they would assuredly acknowledge that, amidst the utmost severity, the forbearance of God is wonderful; and that we may not think that in this case the Lord was too severe, we must take into consideration the vices which he afterwards enumerates. Here an objection will be started. Why does Isaiah declare that the nation endured such a variety of afflictions, while we have already mentioned that he began to prophesy under Uzziah, (19) during whose reign the kingdom of Judah was in a prosperous condition? (2Ch_26:5.) For although, towards the end of his life, the kingdom of Israel met with some disasters, still this did not affect the kingdom of Judah. Accordingly, the Jews think that these words relate to the reign of Jotham, (2Kg_15:32,) and not of Uzziah. Their opinion appears at first sight to have little weight; and yet, when the whole matter is examined, it is not destitute of probability; for we know that the prophets did not always attend to chronological arrangement in collecting their prophecies; and it is possible that this discourse of Isaiah was placed first in order for no other reason but because it contains a summary view of that doctrine which is afterwards to be delivered. Others think that they can easily get rid of the difficulty by interpreting the whole passage as a description of vice, and not of punishments; but what is said about the burning of cities and about the desolation of the country cannot easily be disposed of in that manner. If it is supposed that the Prophet speaks of the future and not the present condition of that kingdom, and that in the name of God he foretells approaching calamities, though they did not behold them with their eyes, I do not greatly object to that view, though it is probable that he treats of events which were known to them. It is a real narrative, and not a prediction, though in the next verse I acknowledge he announces the approaching result. (18) In the English version it runs, as overthrown by strangers; and the marginal reading, adhering more closely to the Hebrew idiom, is, as the overthrow of strangers. The interpretation rejected by Calvin has been approved by some able critics; and Lowth, distrusting the philological views given by his predecessors, has resorted to a conjectural alteration of the Hebrew text: — “ reading, though confirmed by all the ancient versions, gives us no good sense; for your land is devoured by strangers, and is desolate as if overthrown by strangers, is a mere tautology, or, what is as bad, an identical comparison. Aben Ezra thought that the word, in its present form, might be taken for the same with,זרם an inundation.
- 73. Schultens is ofthe same opinion, (see Taylor’ Concord;) and Schindler, in his Lexicon, explains it in the same manner, and so, says Kimchi, some explain it.” After enumerating the attempts of Abendana “ reconcile it to grammatical analogy,” he adds, “ I rather suppose the true reading to be ,זרם and have translated it accordingly: the word ,זרים in the line above, seems to have caught the transcriber’ eye, and to have led him into this mistake.” —Notes on Isaiah. — Ed (19) Called also Azariah, 2Kg_15:1. — Ed. 8. PULPIT, “Your country is desolate. Metaphor is now dropped, and the prophet describes in strong but simple language the judgments of God, which have already followed the sins of the nation. First of all, their land is "a desolation." It has been recently ravaged by an enemy; the towns have been burnt, the crops devoured. There is nothing to determine who the enemy had been. Knobel supposes the Edomites and Philistines, who invaded Judaea in the time of Ahaz (2Ch_28:17, 2Ch_28:18), to be intended; Rosenmüller suggests the Israelites under Amaziah (2Ch_25:21-24); while Mr. Cheyne supposes the devastation to have been wrought by the Assyrians under Sargon. If we could be assured that the prophecies of Isaiah are arranged in chronological order, we should either have to accept Rosenmüller's view, or to suppose some invasion of Judaea to have taken place in the later years of Uzziah of which no mention is made by the authors of Kings and Chronicles; but it is impossible to be certain on what principle Isaiah's prophecies are arranged. The mention of "strangers" is in favor of the enemy having been actual foreigners, and therefore not the Israelites. Your cities are burned with fire. The common fate of cities taken in war. In the Assyrian sculptures we often see the torch applied to them. Your land. Mr. Cheyne translates, "your tillage." Adamah means "soil" or "ground" generally; but here no doubt denotes the ground which bore crops. Strangers devour it; i.e. "foreigners" others than the sons of the soil—not necessarily persons of a different race, but still probably such persons. In your presence; before your eyes, as you look on—an aggravation of the affliction. It is desolate, as overthrown by strangers; literally, it is a desolation, like an overthrow by strangers. The near approach to repetition displeases moderns, who conjecture (1) that zarim, strangers, has another meaning, and should be here translated by "inundation" or "deluge" (Aben Ezra, Michaelis, Lowth); or (2) that it is a wrong reading, and should be altered into sodim, a word not very different (Ewald, Cheyne). But "the return to words whose sounds are yet lingering in the ear" is characteristic of ancient writing, and a favorite practice of Isaiah's (Kay). The translation of the Authorized Version may therefore stand.
- 74. 8 Daughter Zion isleft like a shelter in a vineyard, like a hut in a cucumber field, like a city under siege. 1.BARNES, “And the daughter of Zion - Zion, or Sion, was the name of one of the hills on which the city of Jerusalem was built. On this hill formerly stood the city of the Jebusites, and when David took it from them he transferred to it his court, and it was called the city of David, or the holy hill. It was in the southern part of the city. As Zion became the residence of the court, and was the most important part of the city, the name was often used to denote the city itself, and is often applied to the whole of Jerusalem. The phrase ‘daughter of Zion’ here means Zion itself, or Jerusalem. The name daughter is given to it by a personification in accordance with a common custom in Eastern writers, by which beautiful towns and cities are likened to young females. The name mother is also applied in the same way. Perhaps the custom arose from the fact that when a city was built, towns and villages would spring up round it - and the first would be called the mother-city (hence, the word metropolis). The expression was also employed as an image of beauty, from a fancied resemblance between a beautiful town and a beautiful and well- dressed woman. Thus Psa_45:13, the phrase daughter of Tyre, means Tyre itself; Psa_137:8, daughter of Babylon, that is, Babylon; Isa_37:22, ‘The virgin, the daughter of Zion;’ Jer_46:2; Isa_23:12; Jer_14:17; Num_21:23, Num_21:32, (Hebrew); Jdg_11:26. Is left. נותרה nothe rah. The word used here denotes left as a part or remnant is left - not left entire, or complete, but in a weakened or divided state. As a cottage - literally, “a shade,” or “shelter” - כסכה ke sukkah, a temporary habitation erected in vineyards to give shelter to the grape gatherers, and to those who were uppointed to watch the vineyard to guard it from depredations; compare the note at Mat_21:33. The following passage from Mr. Jowett’s ‘Christian Researches,’ describing what he himself saw, will throw light on this verse. ‘Extensive fields of ripe melons and cucumbers adorned the sides of the river (the Nile). They grew in such abundance that the sailors freely helped themselves. Some guard, however, is placed upon them. Occasionally, but at long and desolate intervals, we may observe a little hut, made of reeds, just capable of containing one man; being in fact little more than a fence against a north wind. In these I have observed, sometimes, a poor old man, perhaps lame, protecting the property. It exactly illustrates Isa_1:8.’ ‘Gardens were often probably unfenced, and formerly, as now, esculent vegetables were planted in some fertile spot in the open field. A custom prevails in Hindostan, as travelers inform us, of planting in the commencement of the rainy season, in the extensive plains, an abundance of melons, cucumbers, gourds, etc. In the center of the field is an artificial mound with a hut on the top, just large enough to shelter a person from the storm and the heat;’ Bib. Dic. A.S.U. The sketch in the book will convey a clear idea of such a cottage. Such a cottage would be designed only for a temporary habitation. So Jerusalem seemed to be left amidst the surrounding desolation as a temporary abode, soon to be destroyed.
- 75. As a lodge- The word lodge here properly denotes a place for passing the night, but it means also a temporary abode. It was erected to afford a shelter to those who guarded the enclosure from thieves, or from jackals, and small foxes. ‘The jackal,’ says Hasselquist, ‘is a species of mustela, which is very common in Palestine, especially during the vintage, and often destroys whole vineyards, and gardens of cucumbers.’ A garden of cucumbers - The word cucumbers here probably includes every thing of the melon kind, as well as the cucumber. They are in great request in that region on account of their cooling qualities, and are produced in great abundance and perfection. These things are particularly mentioned among the luxuries which the Israelites enjoyed in Egypt, and for which they sighed when they were in the wilderness. Num_11:5 : ‘We remember - the cucumbers and the melons,’ etc. The cucumber which is produced in Egypt and Palestine is large - usually a foot in length, soft, tender, sweet, and easy of digestion (Gesenius), and being of a cooling nature, was especially delicious in their hot climate. The meaning here is, that Jerusalem seemed to be left as a temporary, lonely habitation, soon to be forsaken and destroyed. As a besieged city - נצוּרה כעיר ke ‛ı yr ne tsorah. Lowth. ‘As a city taken by siege.’ Noyes. “‘So is the delivered city.’ This translation was first proposed by Arnoldi of Marburg. It avoids the incongruity of comparing a city with a city, and requires no alteration of the text except a change of the vowel points. According to this translation, the meaning will be, that all things round about the city lay desolate, like the withered vines of a cucumber garden around the watchman’s hut; in other words, that the city alone stood safe amidst the ruins caused by the enemy, like the hut in a gathered garden of cucumber.” Noyes. According to this interpretation, the word נצוּרה ne tsorah is derived not from צור tsur, to besiege, to press, to straiten; but from נצר natsar, to preserve, keep, defend; compare Eze_6:12. The Hebrew will bear this translation; and the concinnity of the comparison will thus be preserved. I rather prefer, however, the common interpretation, as being more obviously the sense of the Hebrew, and as being sufficiently in accordance with the design of the prophet. The idea then is, that of a city straitened by a siege, yet standing as a temporary habitation, while all the country around was lying in ruins. Jerusalem, alone preserved amidst the desolation spreading throughout the land, will resemble a temporary lodge in the garden - itself soon to be removed or destroyed. The essential idea, whatever translation is adopted, is that of the solitude, loneliness, and temporary continuance of even Jerusalem, while all around was involved in desolation and ruin. 2. CLARKE, “As a cottage in a vineyard “As a shed in a vineyard” - A little temporary hut covered with boughs, straw, turf, or the like materials, for a shelter from the heat by day, and the cold and dews by night, for the watchman that kept the garden or vineyard during the short season the fruit was ripening, (see Job_27:18), and presently removed when it had served that purpose. See Harmer’s Observ. 1:454. They were probably obliged to have such a constant watch to defend the fruit from the jackals. “The jackal,” (chical of the Turks), says Hasselquist, (Travels, p. 227), “is a species of mustela which is very common in Palestine, especially during the vintage; and often destroys whole vineyards, and gardens of cucumbers.” “There is also plenty of the canis vulpes, the fox, near the convent of St. John in the desert, about vintage time; for they destroy all the vines unless they are strictly watched.” Ibid. p. 184. See Son_2:15. Fruits of the gourd kind, melons, watermelons, cucumbers, etc., are much used and in great request in the Levant, on account of their cooling quality. The Israelites in the wilderness regretted the loss of the cucumbers and melons among the other good things of Egypt,
- 76. Num_11:5. In Egyptthe season of watermelons, which are most in request, and which the common people then chiefly live upon, lasts but three weeks. See Hasselquist, p. 256. Tavernier makes it of longer continuance: L’on y void de grands carreaux de melons et de concombres, mais beaucoup plus de derniers, dont les Levantins font leur delices. Le plus souvent, ils les mangent sans les peter, apres quoi ils vont boire une verre d’eau. Dans toute l’Asie c’est la nourriture ordinaire du petit peuple pendant trois ou quatre mois; toute la famine en vit, et quand un enfant demand a manger, au lieu qu’en France ou aillieurs nous luy donnerions du pain, dans le Levant on luy presente un concombre, qu’il mange cru comme on le vient de cueillir. Les concombres dans le Levant ont une bonte particuliere; et quoiqu’ on les mange crus, ils ne font jamais de mal; “There are to be seen great beds of melons and cucumbers, but a greater number of the latter, of which the Levantines are particularly fond. In general they eat them without taking off the rind, after which they drink a glass of water. In every part of Asia this is the aliment of the common people for three or four months; the whole family live on them; and when a child asks something to eat, instead of giving it a piece of bread, as is done in France and other countries, they present it with a cucumber, which it eats raw, as gathered. Cucumbers in the Levant are peculiarly excellent; and although eaten raw, they are seldom injurious.” Tavernier, Relat. du Serrail, cap. xix. As a lodge, etc. - That is, after the fruit was gathered; the lodge being then permitted to fall into decay. Such was the desolate, ruined state of the city. So the ᆞς πολις πολιορκουµενη; Septuagint: see also the Vulgate. 3. GILL, “And the daughter of Zion is left as a cottage in the vineyard,.... The Targum is, "after they have got in the vintage.'' A cottage in the vineyard was a booth, as the word (e) signifies, which was erected in the middle of the vineyard for the keeper of the vineyard to watch in night and day, that the fruit might not be hurt by birds, or stolen by thieves, and was a very, lonely place; and when the clusters of the vine were gathered, this cottage or booth was left by the keeper himself: and such it is suggested Jerusalem should be, not only stand alone, the cities all around being destroyed by the besiegers, but empty of inhabitants itself, when taken. As a lodge in a garden of cucumbers: the Targum adds here also, "after they have gathered them out of it.'' A lodge in a garden of cucumbers was built up for the gardener to watch in at night, that nobody came and stole away the cucumbers, and this was also a lonely place; but when the cucumbers were gathered, the gardener left his lodge entirely; and such a forsaken place would Jerusalem be at the time of its destruction; see Luk_19:43.
- 77. as a besiegedcity; which is in great distress, and none care to come near it, and as many as can make their escape out of it; or "as a city kept"; so Gussetius (f), who understands this, and all the above clauses, of some places preserved from the sword in the common desolation. 4. HENRY, “He sadly bewails the judgments of God which they had brought upon themselves by their sins, and their incorrigibleness under those judgments. 1. Their kingdom was almost ruined, Isa_1:7. So miserable were they that both their towns and their lands were wasted, and yet so stupid that they needed to be told this, to have it shown to them. “Look and see how it is; your country is desolate; the ground is not cultivated, for want of inhabitants, the villages being deserted, Jdg_5:7. And thus the fields and vineyards become like deserts, all grown over with thorns, Pro_24:31. Your cities are burned with fire, by the enemies that invade you” (fire and sword commonly go together); “as for the fruits of your land, which should be food for your families, strangers devour them; and, to your greater vexation, it is before your eyes, and you cannot prevent it; you starve while your enemies surfeit on that which should be your maintenance. The overthrow of your country is as the overthrow of strangers; it is used by the invaders, as one might expect it should be used by strangers.” Jerusalem itself, which was as the daughter of Zion (the temple built on Zion was a mother, a nursing mother, to Jerusalem), or Zion itself, the holy mountain, which had been dear to God as a daughter, was now lost, deserted, and exposed as a cottage in a vineyard, which, when the vintage is over, nobody dwells in or takes any care of, and looks as mean and despicable as a lodge or hut, in a garden of cucumbers; and every person is afraid of coming near it, and solicitous to remove his effects out of it, as if it were a besieged city, Isa_1:8. And some think, it is a calamitous state of the kingdom that is represented by a diseased body, Isa_1:6. Probably this sermon was preached in the reign of Ahaz, when Judah was invaded by the kings of Syria and Israel, the Edomites and the Philistines, who slew many, and carried many away into captivity, 2Ch_28:5, 2Ch_28:17, 2Ch_28:18. Note, National impiety and immorality bring national desolation. Canaan, the glory of all lands, Mount Zion, the joy of the whole earth, both became a reproach and a ruin; and sin made them so, that great mischief-maker. 2. Yet they were not all reformed, and therefore God threatens to take another course with them (Isa_1:5): “Why should you be stricken any more, with any expectation of doing you good by it, when you increase revolts as your rebukes are increased? You will revolt more and more, as you have done,” as Ahaz particularly did, who, in his distress, trespassed yet more against the Lord, 2Ch_28:22. Thus the physician, when he sees the patient's case desperate, troubles him no more with physic; and the father resolves to correct his child no more when, finding him hardened, he determines to disinherit him. Note, (1.) There are those who are made worse by the methods God takes to make them better; the more they are stricken the more they revolt; their corruptions, instead of being mortified, are irritated and exasperated by their afflictions, and their hearts more hardened. (2.) God, sometimes, in a way of righteous judgment, ceases to correct those who have been long incorrigible, and whom therefore he designs to destroy. The reprobate silver shall be cast, not into the furnace, but to the dunghill, Jer_6:29, Jer_6:30. See Eze_24:13; Hos_4:14. He that is filthy, let him be filthy still. VI. He comforts himself with the consideration of a remnant that should be the monuments of divine grace and mercy, notwithstanding this general corruption and desolation, Isa_1:9. See here, 1. How near they were to an utter extirpation. They were almost like Sodom and Gomorrah in respect both of sin and ruin, had grown almost so bad that there could not have been found ten righteous men among them, and almost as miserable as if none had been left alive, but their country turned into a sulphureous lake. Divine Justice said, Make them as Admah; set them as Zeboim; but Mercy said, How shall I do it? Hos_11:8, Hos_11:9. 2. What it was that saved them
- 78. from it: TheLord of hosts left unto them a very small remnant, that were kept pure from the common apostasy and kept safe and alive from the common calamity. This is quoted by the apostle (Rom_9:27), and applied to those few of the Jewish nation who in his time embraced Christianity, when the body of the people rejected it, and in whom the promises made to the fathers were accomplished. Note, (1.) In the worst of times there is a remnant preserved from iniquity and reserved for mercy, as Noah and his family in the deluge, Lot and his in the destruction of Sodom. Divine grace triumphs in distinguishing by an act of sovereignty. (2.) This remnant is often a very small one in comparison with the vast number of revolting ruined sinners. Multitude is no mark of the true church. Christ's is a little flock. (3.) It is God's work to sanctify and save some, when others are left to perish in their impurity. It is the work of his power as the Lord of hosts. Except he had left us that remnant, there would have been none left; the corrupters (Isa_1:4) did what they could to debauch all, and the devourers (Isa_1:7) to destroy all, and they would have prevailed of God himself had not interposed to secure to himself a remnant, who are bound to give him all the glory. (4.) It is good for a people that have been saved from utter ruin to look back and see how near they were to it, just upon the brink of it, to see how much they owed to a few good men that stood in the gap, and that that was owing to a good God, who left them these good men. It is of the Lord's mercies that we are not consumed. 5. JAMISON, “daughter of Zion — the city (Psa_9:14), Jerusalem and its inhabitants (2Ki_19:21): “daughter” (feminine, singular being used as a neuter collective noun), equivalent to sons (Isa_12:6, Margin) [Maurer]. Metropolis or “mother-city” is the corresponding term. The idea of youthful beauty is included in “daughter.” left — as a remnant escaping the general destruction. cottage — a hut, made to give temporary shelter to the caretaker of the vineyard. lodge — not permanent. besieged — rather, as “left,” and Isa_1:9 require, preserved, namely, from the desolation all round [Maurer]. 6. K&D, ““And the daughter of Zion remains lie a hut in a vineyard; like a hammock in a cucumber field.” The vineyard and cucumber field (mikshah, from kisshu, a cucumber, Cucumis, not a gourd, Cucurbita; at least not the true round gourd, whose Hebrew name, dalath, does not occur in the Old Testament) are pictured by the prophet in their condition before the harvest (not after, as the Targums render it), when it is necessary that they should be watched. The point of comparison therefore is, that in the vineyard and cucumber field not a human being is to be seen in any direction; and there is nothing but the cottage and the night barrack or hammock (cf., Job_27:18) to show that there are any human beings there at all. So did Jerusalem stand in the midst of desolation, reaching far and wide - a sign, however, that the land was not entirely depopulated. But what is the meaning of the third point of comparison? Hitzig renders it, “like a watch-tower;” Knobel, “like a guard-city.” But the noun neither means a tower nor a castle (although the latter would be quite possible, according to the primary meaning, Cingere); and nezurah does not mean “watch” or “guard.” On the other hand, the comparison indicated (like, or as) does not suit what would seem the most natural rendering, viz., “like a guarded city,” i.e., a
- 79. city shielded fromdanger. Moreover, it is inadmissible to take the first two Caphs in the sense of sicut (as) and the third in the sense of sic (so); since, although this correlative is common in clauses indicating identity, it is not so in sentences which institute a simple comparison. We therefore adopt the rendering, Isa_1:8, “As a besieged city,” deriving nezurah not from zur, niphal nazor (never used), as Luzzatto does, but from nazar, which signifies to observe with keen eye, either with a good intention, or, as in Job_7:20, for a hostile purpose. It may therefore be employed, like the synonyms in 2Sa_11:16 and Jer_5:6, to denote the reconnoitring of a city. Jerusalem was not actually blockaded at the time when the prophet uttered his predictions; but it was like a blockaded city. In the case of such a city there is a desolate space, completely cleared of human beings, left between it and the blockading army, in the centre of which the city itself stands solitary and still, shut up to itself. The citizens do not venture out; the enemy does not come within the circle that immediately surrounds the city, for fear of the shots of the citizens; and everything within this circle is destroyed, either by the citizens themselves, to prevent the enemy from finding anything useful, or else by the enemy, who cut down the trees. Thus, with all the joy that might be felt at the preservation of Jerusalem, it presented but a gloomy appearance. It was, as it were, in a state of siege. A proof that this is the way in which the passage is to be explained, may be found in Jer_4:16-17, where the actual storming of Jerusalem is foretold, and the enemy is called nozerim, probably with reference to the simile before us. 7.CALVIN, “8.And the daughter of Zion shall be left (20) as a cottage in a vineyard He alludes to a custom which exists in France, that the vinekeepers rear a cottage for themselves when the grapes begin to ripen. His next comparison, which is closely allied to the former, is taken from a custom of that nation of protecting also gardens of cucumbers (21) by means of men who kept watch during the night. He next explains what he intended to convey by both comparisons. Like a besieged city This may be explained in two ways; either that the whole country will be wasted, with the solitary exception of the city, which shall be left standing like a cottage, or that the city itself will be destroyed. The former interpretation is adopted by the Jews, and they understand this passage to relate to the siege of Sennacherib; but I think that it has a wider signification, and embraces other calamities which followed afterwards. This may indeed refer to the neighboring country, from the misery and devastation of which it was impossible but that the city should sustain much damage; but I consider the Prophet’ meaning to be, that the evils of which he speaks shall reach even to the city itself, until, broken and ruined, it shall wear the aspect of a mean cottage The daughter of Zion is the name here given to Jerusalem, in accordance with what is customary in Scripture to give the designation of daughter to any nation, in the same manner as the daughter of Babylon (Isa_47:1) and the daughter of Tyre (Psa_45:12) are names given to the Tyrians and Babylonians. Zion is the name here employed rather than Jerusalem, on account of the dignity of the
- 80. temple; and thisfigure of speech, by which a part is taken for the whole, is frequently employed. (20) Residua manebit. (21) A lively French traveler, Tavernier, who flourished about the middle of the seventeenth century, in describing the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea, gives the following account: — “ we see large beds of melons and ofcucumbers, but especially of the latter, of which the inhabitants of the Levant are particularly fond. Most frequently they eat them without peeling, and afterwards drink a glass of water. Throughout the whole of Asia this is the ordinary food of the common people for three or four months. The whole family lives on it; and when a child asks for something to eat, instead of giving it bread, as in France and other places is the custom, in the Levant they offer it acucumber, which it eats raw just as it has been fresh pulled. Cucumbers in the Levant have a peculiarly excellent flavour, and though they are eaten raw they never do any injury.” — Ed. 8. PULPIT, “The daughter of Zion. Not "the faithful Church" (Kay), but the city of Jerusalem, which is thus personified. Comp. Isa_47:1, Isa_47:5, where Babylon is called the "daughter of the Chaldeans;" and Lam_1:6; Lam_2:1, Lam_2:4,Lam_2:8, Lam_2:10, where the phrase here used is repeated in the same sense. More commonly it designates the people without the city (Lam_2:13; Lam_4:22; Mic_3:8, Mic_3:10, 13; Zep_3:14; Zec_2:10; Zec_9:9, etc.). As a cottage; rather, as a booth (Revised Version; see Le 23:42). Vineyards required to be watched for a few weeks only as the fruit began to ripen; and the watchers, or keepers, built themselves, therefore, mere "booths" for their protection (Job_27:18). These were frail, solitary dwellings—very forlorn, very helpless. Such was now Jerusalem. As a lodge in a garden of cucumbers. Cucumber-gardens required watching throughout the season, i.e. from spring to autumn, and their watcher needed a more solid edifice than a booth. Hence such gardens had "lodges" in them, i.e. permanent huts or sheds, such as those still seen in Palestine. As a besieged city. Though not yet besieged, Jerusalem is as if besieged—isolated, surrounded by waste tracts, threatened. 9 Unless the LORD Almighty
- 81. had left ussome survivors, we would have become like Sodom, we would have been like Gomorrah. 1.BARNES, “Except ... - It is owing entirely to the mercy of God, that we are not like Sodom. The prophet traces this not to the goodness of the nation, not to any power or merit of theirs, but solely to the mercy of God. This passage the apostle Paul has used in an argument to establish the doctrine of divine sovereignty in the salvation of people; see the note at Rom_9:29. The Lord - Hebrew Yahweh. Note Isa_1:2. Of hosts - צבאות tseba'oth - the word sometimes translated “Sabaoth”; Rom_9:29; Jam_5:4. The word means literally armies or military hosts. It is applied, however, to the angels which surround the throne of God; 1Ki_22:19; 2Ch_18:18; Psa_103:21; and to the stars or constellations that appear to be marshalled in the sky; Jer_33:22; Isa_40:26. This host, or the “host of heaven,” was frequently an object of idolatrous worship; Deu_4:19; Deu_17:3; 2Ki_17:16. God is called Yahweh of hosts because he is at the head of all these armies, as their leader and commander; he marshals and directs them - as a general does the army under his command. ‘This,’ says Gesenius, ‘is the most common name of God in Isaiah, and in Jeremiah, Zechariah, and Malachi. It represents him as the ruler of the hosts of heaven, that is, the angels and the stars. Sometimes, but less frequently, we meet with the appellation Yahweh, God of hosts. Hence, some suppose the expression Yahweh of hosts to be elliptical. But it is not a correct assertion that Yahweh, as a proper name, admits of no genitive. But such relations and adjuncts as depend upon the genitive, often depend upon proper names. So in Arabic, one is called Rebiah of the poor in reference to his liability.’ The name is given here, because to save any portion of a nation so wicked implied the exercise of the same power as that by which he controlled the hosts of heaven. Remnant - A small part - that which is left. It means here, that God had spared a portion of the nation, so that they were not entirely overthrown. We should have been as Sodom ... - This does not refer to the character of the people, but to their destiny. If God had not interposed to save them they would have been overwhelmed entirely as Sodom was; compare Gen_19:24-25. 2. PULPIT, “Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom. Lowth and Cheyne prefer to divide the two clauses differently, and to translate, "Except the Lord of hosts had left us a remnant, within a little we should have been like Sodom." The "remnant" is that of the few godly men who still inhabit Jerusalem. The comparison of Jerusalem with Sodom is made again in Isa_3:9, and is carried out at some length by Ezekiel (Eze_16:44-57). It implies a condition of extreme depravity.
- 82. 3. GILL, “Exceptthe Lord of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant,.... This is an instance of the super abounding goodness of the Lord of hosts, as the Targum expresses it; that he should, in those very wicked and calamitous times, leave and reserve a few from being defiled with the sins of the age, and from being involved in the general calamity of it; which was true of the Christian Jews at the time of Jerusalem's destruction; for that this prophecy belongs to these times is clear from the application of it by the Apostle Paul, Rom_9:29 and which confirms the sense given of the above passages: "the very small remnant" are the remnant according to the election of grace, the little flock, the few that entered in at the strait gate and are saved, or the few that believed in Christ, and so were saved from that untoward generation; these were "left", reserved, distinguished, and secured in the grace of election, being a remnant according to it, in the hands of Christ to whom they were given, and in whom they were preserved; in redemption by him, that they might be a peculiar people; in providence till called, in which the Lord watched over them to do them good, and waited to be gracious to them, and saved them to be called; and in effectual calling, in which he separated them from the rest of the world, and kept them by his power through faith unto salvation. And this was done "unto us"; for the sake of his church, that that might continue, and he might have a seed to serve him: and by "the Lord of hosts", of the hosts of heaven, the sun, and moon, and stars, and of the angels there, and of the inhabitants of the earth; which shows great condescension in him to regard this remnant, and great grace to them; since he could not stand in need of them, having the host of heaven on his right hand and on his left; nor was there any thing in them that could deserve this of him; but it was, as Jarchi observes, in his mercy, and not for their righteousness: to which may be added, that since he is the Lord of hosts, he was able to protect and preserve this remnant, notwithstanding all the opposition of men and devils, as he did; and had he not taken such a method as this, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah: cities that were infamous for their sins, and notorious for the punishment of them, being consumed by fire from heaven, Gen_13:13 and not only the Jews, but any and every nation, even the whole world, would have been like these cities, both for sin and punishment, had it not been for the distinguishing grace of God, in leaving and reserving a few for his glory, and the support of his interest. All the holiness that ever was, is, or will be in the world, is owing to electing, redeeming, and efficacious grace: there had not been a holy man nor a holy woman in the world, in any age, if God had not taken such methods of grace; and it is owing to, and for the sake of, this small remnant, that temporal judgments are often averted from a nation and people, and that the conflagration of the world is not yet; this is kept back till they are gathered in; and were it not for this distinguishing grace, every individual of mankind would have been cast into hell, and must have suffered the vengeance of eternal fire, which the punishment of Sodom and Gomorrah, was an example of. 4. PULPIT 4-9, “The prophet's enforcement of God's charge. God's words are so weighty, that they may well be few; the preacher's enforcement of them must needs be, comparatively speaking, lengthy. Isaiah, in addressing his erring countrymen, aimed at producing in them— I. CONVICTION OF DIN. For this purpose, he begins with an array of seven charges (verse 4), varying, as it were, the counts of the indictment:
- 83. (1) they area sinful nation; (2) they are laden with guilt; (3) they are a race of evil-doers; (4) they are children that act corruptly; (5) they have forsaken Jehovah; (6) they have scorned him; (7) they have estranged themselves from him, and, as it were, turned away from him and gone backward. The first four are general, and seem to be little more than rhetorical variations of one and the same theme. We may learn from them that rhetorical variation is allowable, nay, proper, since different words catch hold of different persons, rouse them, touch them to the quick, are effectual to the producing of repentance. The last three charges are particular, and to some extent different, each exceeding the last in heinousness, and thus rising in the way of climax—desertion, insult, complete estrangement. Metaphor is then called in to work on the imagination, and through the imagination on the conscience: the nation is depicted as a diseased and stricken body, a mass of sores and corruption (verses 5, 6). II. FEAR OF PUNISHMENT. Undoubtedly fear is a low motive in religion—some think it altogether an unworthy one. But while human nature remains such as it is, while the mass of men are incapable of being stirred by the higher motives, appeal must be made to the lower ones. The prophet, therefore, reminds his people of God's judgments in the past (verse 7), threatens them with further judgments in the future (verse 5), and ends the paragraph by suggesting that his people have barely escaped the most terrible of all judgments—a destruction like that of Sodom and Gomorrah. 5. JAMISON, “Jehovah of Sabaoth, that is, God of the angelic and starry hosts (Psa_59:5; Psa_147:4; Psa_148:2). The latter were objects of idolatry, called hence Sabaism (2Ki_17:16). God is above even them (1Ch_16:26). “The groves” were symbols of these starry hosts; it was their worship of Sabaoth instead of the Lord of Sabaoth, which had caused the present desolation (2Ch_24:18). It needed no less a power than His, to preserve even a “remnant.” Condescending grace for the elect’s sake, since He has no need of us, seeing that He has countless hosts to serve Him.
- 84. 6. K&D, “Forthe present, however, Jerusalem was saved from this extremity. The omnipotence of God had mercifully preserved it: “Unless Jehovah of hosts had left us a little of what had escaped, we had become like Sodom, we were like Gomorrah.” Sarid (which is rendered inaccurately σπέρµα in the Sept.; cf., Rom_9:29) was used, even in the early Mosaic usage of the language, to signify that which escaped the general destruction (Deu_2:34, etc.); and ט ָע ְמ ִⅴ (which might very well be connected with the verbs which follow: “we were very nearly within a little like Sodom,” etc.) is to be taken in connection with sarid, as the pausal form clearly shows: “a remnant which was but a mere trifle” (on this use of the word, see Isa_16:14; 2Ch_12:7; Pro_10:20; Psa_105:12). Jehovah Zebaoth stands first, for the sake of emphasis. It would have been all over with Israel long ago, if it had not been for the compassion of God (vid., Hos_11:8). And because it was the omnipotence of God, which set the will of His compassion in motion, He is called Jehovah Zebaoth, Jehovah (the God) of the heavenly hosts - an expression in which Zebaoth is a dependent genitive, and not, as Luzzatto supposes, an independent name of God as the Absolute, embracing within itself all the powers of nature. The prophet says “us” and “we.” He himself was an inhabitant of Jerusalem; and even if he had not been so, he was nevertheless an Israelite. He therefore associates himself with his people, like Jeremiah in Lam_3:22. He had had to experience the anger of God along with the rest; and so, on the other hand, he also celebrates the mighty compassion of God, which he had experienced in common with them. But for this compassion, the people of God would have become like Sodom, from which only four human beings escaped: it would have resembled Gomorrah, which was absolutely annihilated. (On the prefects in the protasis and apodosis, see Ges. §126, 5.) 7.CALVIN, “9.Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us Here he concludes what he had formerly declared concerning God’ chastisements, that the desolation which shall take place — or rather which is present, and which they now behold — may be compared to the destruction of Sodom, were it not that the Lord snatched as it were from the burning a very small remnant. And this verse confirms what I formerly said, that the Prophet’ description of the calamities which had already taken place is interwoven with those events which were immediately at hand, as if he had said, Be not deceived by flatteries; you would be in the same condition that Sodom and Gomorrah now are, were it not that God, in compassion on you, has preserved a remnant. This agrees with the words of Jeremiah, It is of the Lord’ mercies that we are not consumed. (Lam_3:22.) Hence we ought to observe two things. First, the Prophet here describes utter destruction; and yet, because God had to deal with his Church and his beloved people, that judgment is mitigated by special grace, so that out of the general ruin of the whole nation God rescues his people, whom he justly compares to a very small remnant. But if God punished the crimes of the Jews by such dreadful
- 85. chastisements, let usconsider that we may share the same fate if we imitate their rebellion: for God had set apart that nation for himself, and had distinguished them from the ordinary lot of other men. Why then should he spare us if we shall be hardened in our ungodliness and treachery? Or rather, what is likely to be the result of that mass and sink of crimes in which men throughout the whole world give way to their passions? Unquestionably it will be the same with the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah, unless his vengeance shall be restrained by a regard to that gracious covenant in which he promised that the Church shall be eternal; and this threatening, which is truly awful and alarming, is applicable to all obstinate and incurable men, whose vices no punishments can destroy or weaken. Again, we ought to observe that saying of Jeremiah, which I have already glanced at, that it must be attributed to the tender mercies of God that we are not altogether destroyed. (Lam_2:22.) For if We Shall Consider the vast amount Of wickedness which prevails among all classes, we shall wonder that even a single individual is left, and that all have not been removed from the land of the living; and in this way God withdraws his hand, (Eze_20:22,) that there may be some Church preserved in the world. This is the reason assigned by Paul, who is the best interpreter of this passage, when, by quoting it, he represses the haughtiness of the Jews, that they may not boast of the mere name, as if it had been enough that they were descended from the fathers; for he reminds them that God could act towards them as he had formerly done towards the fathers, but that through his tender mercies a remnant shall be saved. (Rom_9:27.) And why? That the Church may not utterly perish; for it is through the favor which he bears towards it that the Lord, though our obstinacy lays him under the necessity of trying the severest judgments, still reserves some small seed. (Rom_9:29.) This statement ought to yield us powerful consolation even in those heaviest calamities in which we are apt to think that it is all over with the Church; that, though everything should go into confusion, and the world, as we say, be turned upside down, we may persevere with unshaken fortitude, and may rest assured that God will always be mindful of his Church. A very small remnant This clause may be connected either with what goes before or with what follows, and accordingly some render it, We would have been almost like Sodom. But I prefer connecting it with the former clause, so as to deduce that the number which God had reserved out of the destruction is small. Some think that: כ (caph) is here used affirmatively, so as to express the matter more strongly; and I have no objection to that view, though we may take it in its natural and literal signification, as if he had said, “ that shall be a small number.” This declaration ought to be carefully observed; for if the Church does not spread far and wide, men are wont to despise her. Hence it comes that hypocrites are proud of their numbers; and weak men, terrified by the pompous display of those numbers, stagger. We also learn from it that we ought not to judge by the largeness of the number, unless we choose to prefer the chaff to the wheat, because the quantity is greater; but we ought to be satisfied with knowing that, though the
- 86. number of thegodly be small, still God acknowledges them as his chosen people; and we ought also to call to remembrance that consolatory saying, Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’ good pleasure to give you the kingdom. (Luk_12:32.) 10 Hear the word of the LORD, you rulers of Sodom; listen to the instruction of our God, you people of Gomorrah! 1.BARNES, “Hear the word of the Lord - The message of God. Having stated the calamities under which the nation was groaning, the prophet proceeds to address the rulers, and to state the cause of all these woes. Ye rulers of Sodom - The incidental mention Sodom in the previous verse gives occasion for this beautiful transition, and abrupt and spirited address. Their character and destiny were almost like those of Sodom, and the prophet therefore openly addresses the rulers as being called to preside over a people like those in Sodom. There could have been no more severe or cutting reproof of their wickedness than to address them as resembling the people whom God overthrew for their enormous crimes. 2. CLARKE, “Ye rulers of Sodom “Ye princes of Sodom” - The incidental mention of Sodom and Gomorrah in the preceding verse suggested to the prophet this spirited address to the rulers and inhabitants of Jerusalem, under the character of princes of Sodom and people of Gomorrah. Two examples of a sort of elegant turn of the like kind may be observed in St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, Rom_15:4, Rom_15:5, Rom_15:12, Rom_15:13. See Locke on the place; and see Isa_1:29, Isa_1:30, of this chapter, which gives another example of the same. And - like unto Gomorrah. - The ו vau is added by thirty-one of Kennicott’s MSS., twenty-nine of De Rossi’s and one, very ancient, of my own. See note on Isa_1:6 (note).
- 87. 3. GILL, “Hearthe word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom,.... Not literally, but mystically, meaning the governors of Judea; they and their people having sinned in like manner, and as openly, as the rulers of Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof; see Isa_3:9 and so the Targum paraphrases the words, "receive the word of the Lord, ye governors, whose works are evil like the governors of Sodom.'' These are called to attend to the word of the Lord; either the Scriptures, which should be the rule of faith and practice, from which they had swerved; or to the word which now came to them by the prophet, and is contained in the following verses; or rather to the Gospel preached to them by John the Baptist, Christ, and his apostles, see Isa_2:3 which being rejected by them as it was, it is declared that it would be more tolerable for the land of Sodom, in the day of judgment, than for them, Mat_11:24. give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah; the inhabitants of Judea; for as were both the civil and ecclesiastical rulers, so were the people both in Isaiah's time, and in the times of Christ and his apostles. The Targum is, "hearken to the law of our God, ye people whose works are like to the people of Gomorrah.'' And by "the law of our God" is meant, not so much the law of Moses, which these people had not hearkened to, but had broken it, and cast it away from them, as the doctrine of the grace of God, the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is our God; which was first sent and preached to this wicked people, for the sake of the small remnant, according to the election of grace left among them; see Isa_2:3. 4. HENRY, “Here, I. God calls to them (but calls in vain) to hear his word, Isa_1:10. 1. The title he gives them is very strange; You rulers of Sodom, and people of Gomorrah. This intimates what a righteous thing it would have been with God to make them like Sodom and Gomorrah in respect of ruin (Isa_1:9), because that had made themselves like Sodom and Gomorrah in respect of sin. The men of Sodom were wicked, and sinners before the Lord exceedingly (Gen_13:13), and so were the men of Judah. When the rulers were bad, no wonder the people were so. Vice overpowered virtue, for it had the rulers, the men of figure, on its side; and it out- polled it, for it had the people, the men of number, on its side. The streams being thus strong, no less a power than that of the Lord of hosts could secure a remnant, Isa_1:9. The rulers are boldly attacked here by the prophet as rulers of Sodom; for he knew not how to give flattering titles. The tradition of the Jews is that for this he was impeached long after, and put to death, as having cursed the gods and spoken evil of the ruler of his people. 2. His demand upon them is very reasonable: “Hear the word of the Lord, and give ear to the law of our God; attend to that which God has to say to you, and let his word be a law to you.” The following declaration of dislike to their sacrifices would be a kind of new law to them, though really it was but an
- 88. explication of theold law; but special regard is to be had to it, as is required to the like, Psa_50:7, Psa_50:8. “Hear this, and tremble; hear it, and take warning.” 5. JAMISON, “Sodom — spiritually (Gen_19:24; Jer_23:14; Eze_16:46; Rev_11:8). 6. K&D, “The prophet's address has here reached a resting-place. The fact that it is divided at this point into two separate sections, is indicated in the text by the space left between Isa_1:9 and Isa_1:10. This mode of marking larger or smaller sections, either by leaving spaces of by breaking off the line, is older than the vowel points and accents, and rests upon a tradition of the highest antiquity (Hupfeld, Gram. p. 86ff.). The space is called pizka; the section indicated by such a space, a closed parashah (sethumah); and the section indicated by breaking off the line, an open parashah (petuchah). The prophet stops as soon as he has affirmed, that nothing but the mercy of God has warded off from Israel the utter destruction which it so well deserved. He catches in spirit the remonstrances of his hearers. They would probably declare that the accusations which the prophet had brought against them were utterly groundless, and appeal to their scrupulous observance of the law of God. In reply to this self-vindication which he reads in the hearts of the accused, the prophet launches forth the accusations of God. In Isa_1:10, Isa_1:11, he commences thus: “Hear the word of Jehovah, ye Sodom judges; give ear to the law of our God, O Gomorrah nation! What is the multitude of your slain-offerings to me? saith Jehovah. I am satiated with whole offerings of rams, and the fat of stalled calves; and blood of bullocks and sheep and he-goats I do not like.” The second start in the prophet's address commences, like the first, with “hear” and “give ear.” The summons to hear is addressed in this instances (as in the case of Isaiah's contemporary Micah, Mic_3:1-12) to the kezinim (from kazah, decidere, from which comes the Arabic el-Kadi, the judge, with the substantive termination in: see Jeshurun, p. 212 ss.), i.e., to the men of decisive authority, the rulers in the broadest sense, and to the people subject to them. It was through the mercy of God that Jerusalem was in existence still, for Jerusalem was “spiritually Sodom,” as the Revelation (Rev_11:8) distinctly affirms of Jerusalem, with evident allusion to this passage of Isaiah. Pride, lust of the flesh, and unmerciful conduct, were the leading sins of Sodom, according to Eze_16:49; and of these, the rulers of Jerusalem, and the crowd that was subject to them and worthy of them, were equally guilty now. But they fancied that they could not possibly stand in such evil repute with God, inasmuch as they rendered outward satisfaction to the law. The prophet therefore called upon them to hear the law of the God of Israel, which he would announce to them: for the prophet was the appointed interpreter of the law, and prophecy the spirit of the law, and the prophetic institution the constant living presence of the true essence of the law bearing its own witness in Israel. “To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith Jehovah.” The prophet intentionally uses the word ר ַּאמי, not ר ַמፎ: this was the incessant appeal of God in relation to the spiritless, formal worship offered by the hypocritical, ceremonial righteousness of Israel (the future denoting continuous actions, which is ever at the same time both present and future). The multitude of zebachim, i.e., animal sacrifices, had no worth at all to Him. As the whole worship is summed up here in one single act, zebachim appears to denote the shelamim, peace-offerings (or better still, communion offerings), with which a meal was associated, after the style of a sacrificial festival, and Jehovah gave the worshipper a share in the sacrifice offered. It is better, however, to take zebachim as the general name for all the bleeding sacrifices, which
- 89. are then subdividedinto 'oloth and Cheleb, as consisting partly of whole offerings, or offerings the whole of which was placed upon the altar, though in separate pieces, and entirely consumed, and partly of those sacrifices in which only the fat was consumed upon the altar, namely the sin- offerings, trespass-offerings, and pre-eminently the shelamim offerings. Of the sacrificial animals mentioned, the bullocks (parim) and fed beasts (meri'im, fattened calves) are species of oxen (bakar); and the lambs (Cebashim) and he-goats (atturim, young he-goats, as distinguished from se'ir, the old long-haired he-goat, the animal used as a sin-offering), together with the ram (ayil, the customary whole offering of the high priest, of the tribe prince, and of the nation generally on all the high feast days), were species of the flock. The blood of these sacrificial animals - such, for example, as the young oxen, sheep, and he-goats - was thrown all round the altar in the case of the whole offering, the peace-offering, and the trespass-offering; in that of the sin-offering it was smeared upon the horns of the altar, poured out at the foot of the altar, and in some instances sprinkled upon the walls of the altar, or against the vessels of the inner sanctuary. Of such offerings as these Jehovah was weary, and He wanted no more (the two perfects denote that which long has been and still is: Ges. §126, 3); in fact, He never had desired anything of the kind. 7. MEYER, “RELIGION WITHOUT RIGHTEOUSNESS VAIN Isa_1:10-20 The prophet points out, first the misery that had overtaken the country, Isa_1:4-9; and then the sins of the ruling classes, Isa_1:10; Isa_1:17; Isa_1:21-23. What may be called personal and private sins, such as drunkenness, vanity, bribery, and the oppression of the poor, are viewed in their public hearing, as bringing wrath and disaster on the whole nation. No man can sin by himself. His most private sins react on the whole community. Thistle-down floats far and wide. In reply, the nation pointed to the splendid ritual and innumerable sacrifices of the Temple service. But these observances only added to the tale of their sins, because they were formal and perfunctory. The sacrifice of God is a broken and contrite heart. The outward is absolutely worthless, unless it is the expression of the inward and the spiritual. But where a pure and holy spirit is present, the simplest forms are magnificent in their significance and value. To atone becomes the base of a ladder to heaven, and the thorn-bush flames with Deity. But forgiveness is freely offered to the guilty. Crimson and scarlet are the most lasting of all colors, and their removal impresses the completeness of God’s pardoning love. 8. PULPIT, “THE PEOPLE'S PLEA NO EXCUSE, BUT AN AGGRAVATION OF THEIR GUILT. The prophet supposes the people, by the mouth of their rulers, to meet the charge of rebellion with an appeal to the fact that they maintain all the outward ordinances of religion, as required by the Lawn and are therefore blameless. This draws from him a burst of indignant eloquence, which the Holy Spirit directs him to put, mainly, into the mouth of God (Isa_1:11-15), denouncing such a pretence of religion as an aggravation of their sin, and characterizing their whole worship as an "abomination."
- 90. Isa_1:10 Hear the wordof the Lord; i.e. "Do not speak to no purpose, but hear." The rulers are supposed to have begun their plea, but the prophet stops them. Ye rulers of Sodom. Having said in the preceding verse how nearly Jerusalem had suffered the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah, the writer grows more bold, and proceeds to give Jerusalem the obnoxious names. Her "rulers, "literally, judges (katsin in Hebrew corresponding to kadi in Arabic), are "rulers of Sodom;" her people are the "people of Gomorrah." There is as much wickedness, though it may be not the same wickedness, in "the daughter of Zion" at the existing time, as in the cities of the plain when God destroyed them. The law of our God.Not the Levitical Law, though the word used has generally that sense, but the "instruction" or "direction" that was about to be uttered (comp. Psa_78:1; and see below, Isa_2:3 and Isa_51:4). See Mr. Cheyne's note on the passage. 9. CALVIN, “10.Hear the word of the Lord He confirms what he had formerly said, that the Lord’ vengeance is not cruel; because they deserved far more severe punishment. For although there was a difference between them and the inhabitants of Sodom as to punishment, yet their guilt was the same; so that equal punishment might have been inflicted, if the Lord had not spared them. It amounts to this, that, if they have received milder treatment, it is not because they have sinned less heinously than the inhabitants of Sodom, but it must be ascribed to the mercy of God. When he gives to the rulers the name of Sodom, and distinguishes the people by the name of Gomorrah, this does not point out that there is a difference, but rather that their condition is alike. But by repeating the same thing twice, the diversity of the names lends additional elegance; as if he had said, that there is no greater difference between the rulers and the people than there is between Sodom and Gomorrah. There is, no doubt, an allusion to the various ranks of men, by assigning to them, separately, as it were, two cities; but as Sodom and Gomorrah mean the same thing, we perceive that he throws them, as it were, into one bundle. In short, the meaning is, “ any one shall form an opinion about the people and the rulers, he will find that there is as close a resemblance between them as between Sodom and Gomorrah, or between one egg and another; for no one part is more sound than any other part.” The Prophet begins with stripping the Jews of their disguises, and justly; for while all hypocrites are accustomed to employ strange coverings for concealing themselves from view, that nation was particularly addicted to this vice, and on no subject did the prophets contend with them more keenly or fiercely. Along with their vaunting about pretended holiness pride also reigned, and they boasted of the grandeur and excellency of their nation as much as of ceremonies and outward worship. So much the
- 91. more were theyoffended at the great harshness with which Isaiah addressed them. But it was necessary to drag their wickedness from their lurking places, and therefore the more haughty their demeanour, the greater is the vehemence with which the Prophet thunders against them. In the same manner ought we to deal with all hypocrites. The word of the Lord The Prophet takes the word and the law for the same thing; and yet I fully believe that he purposely employed the term law, in order to glance at their absurd opinion; because, by imagining that the offering of sacrifices, unaccompanied by faith and repentance, can appease God, they put an absurd interpretation on the law. By these words he reminded them that, by quoting Moses to them, he introduces nothing new and makes no addition to the law; that it is only necessary for them to hear what the will of God is; and that on this subject he will faithfully instruct them. Lest they should suppose that, by an unfounded belief of their own righteousness, they can deceive God, he likewise reminds them that the law gives no countenance to them in this matter. 11 “The multitude of your sacrifices— what are they to me?” says the LORD. “I have more than enough of burnt offerings, of rams and the fat of fattened animals; I have no pleasure in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats. 1.BARNES, “To what purpose - לי למה lamah lı y. ‘What is it to me; or what profit or pleasure can I have in them?’ God here replies to an objection which might be urged by the Jews to the representation which had been made of their guilt. The objection would be, that they were strict in the duties of their religion, and that they even abounded in offering victims of sacrifice. God replies in this and the following verses, that all this would be of no use, and would meet with no acceptance, unless it were the offering of the heart. He demanded righteousness; and without that, all external offerings would be vain. The same sentiment often occurs in the Old Testament. Hath Jehovah as great delight in burnt-offerings and sacrifices As in obeying the voice of the Lord?
- 92. Behold, to obeyis better than sacrifice, And to hearken than the fat of rams. 1Sa_15:22. To what purpose shall frankincense be brought unto me from Sabah? Or the rich aromatic reed from a far country? Your burnt-offerings are not acceptable, Nor your sacrifices pleasant unto me. Jer_6:20. Blaney. For I desired mercy and not sacrifice; And the knowledge of God more than burnt-offerings. Hos_6:6. I hate, I despise your solemn feast days, And I will not smell in your solemn assemblies; Though ye offer me your burnt-offerings, And your meat-offerings I will not accept them; Neither will I regard the thank-offerings of your fat beasts. Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs; For I will not hear the melody of thy viols. But let judgment run down as waters, And righteousness as a mighty stream. Amo_5:21-24. Is the multitude - There was no deficiency in the amount of offerings. It was admitted that they complied in this respect with the requirements of the law; and that they offered an abundance of sacrifices, so numerous as to be called a multitude - רב rob, a vast number. Hypocrites abound in outward religious observances just in proportion to their neglect of the spiritual requirements of God’s word; compare Mat_23:23. Your sacrifices - זבחיכב zibe cheykeb, from זבח zabach, to slay; especially to slay for sacrifice. The word used here denotes any sacrifice which was made by blood; but is distinguished from the burnt-offering from the fat, that this was not entirely consumed. It is applied to the sin- offering, trespass-offering, thank-offering. The word also stands opposed to the offerings which were made without blood מנחה minchah. Any offering that consisted in an animal that was slain came under this general denomination of sacrifice, Exo_10:25; Lev_17:8; Num_15:5. burnt-offerings - עלות 'oloth, from עלה ‛alah, to go up, ascend. It is applied to a sacrifice that was wholly consumed, or made to ascend on an altar. It corresponds to the Greek ᆇλόκαυστον holokauston, that which is entirely consumed. Such offerings abounded among the Hebrews. The burnt-offering was wholly consumed on the altar, excepting the skin and the blood. The blood was sprinkled round the altar, and the other parts of the animal which was slain, were laid upon the altar and entirely burned; see Lev. 1. This was commonly a voluntary offering; and this shows their zeal to comply with the external forms of religion. I am full - שׂבעתי s'aba‛e tı y, I am satiated. The word is usually applied to food and drink, denoting satisfaction, or satiety. It is used here with great force, denoting that their offerings had been so numerous and so incessant, that God was satiated with them. It means that he was
- 93. weary, tired, disgustedwith them. Thus, in Job_7:4 : ‘I am full - שׂבעתי s'aba‛e tı y - of tossings to and fro unto the dawning of the day.’ Pro_25:17 : Withdraw thy foot from thy neighbor’s house, Lest he be weary (Hebrew full) of thee, and hate thee. Fat ... - They were required to offer, not the lame, or the diseased Deu_15:21; Deu_17:1; Lev_23:12; Mal_1:7-8; and God admits here that they had externally complied with this requirement. The fat was burned on the altar. I delight not - That is; I delight; not in them when offered without the heart; or I delight not in them in comparison with works of righteousness; see Amo_5:21-24; Ps. 4:9-13; Psa_51:16-19. 2. CLARKE, “To what purpose, etc. “What have I to do” - The prophet Amos has expressed the same sentiments with great elegance: - I hate, I despise your feasts; And I will not delight in the odour of your solemnities: Though ye offer unto me burnt-offerings And your meat-offerings, I will not accept: Neither will I regard the peace-offerings of your fatlings. Take away from me the noise of your songs; And the melody of your viols I will not hear. But let judgment roll down like waters; And righteousness like a mighty stream. Amo_5:21-24. So has Persius; see Sat. 2 v. 71-75: - “Quin damus id Superis, de magna quod dare lanae,” etc. The two or three last pages of Plato’s Euthyphro contain the same idea. Sacrifices and prayers are not profitable to the offerer, nor acceptable to the gods, unless accompanied with an upright life. The fat of fed beasts, etc. - The fat and the blood are particularly mentioned, because these were in all sacrifices set apart to God. The fat was always burnt upon the altar, and the blood was partly sprinkled, differently on different occasions, and partly poured out at the bottom of the altar. See Leviticus 4. 3. GILL, “To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord,.... These people, though they neglected the weightier matters of the law, and the more substantial duties of religion, as did the Scribes and Pharisees in Christ's time, Mat_23:23 yet were very diligent in the observance of the ceremonial law, and repeated their sacrifices almost without number, on which they placed all their trust and dependence; wherefore, to take off their confidence in these things, the Lord observes to them the unprofitableness of them; they could be of no avail to them, for they could not expiate their sins, or atone for them; and they could not be profitable to God, for he had no need of them; see Psa_50:10.
- 94. I am fullof the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; to the loathing of them, and therefore would no more eat their flesh, and drink their blood, or accept of them in sacrifice, Psa_50:13 "rams" were used for burnt offerings, Exo_29:18, Lev_1:10 and the fat of any creature offered in sacrifice was burnt, and forbidden to be eaten by men, Lev_1:8, Lev_1:15. and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats: as he did in moral services, in acts of beneficence and mercy, and in sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving, 1Sa_15:22, Hos_6:6 much less did he delight in the sacrifices of these creatures, as offered by such wicked hands and without faith in the blood and sacrifice of Christ; and still less when these were superseded and abrogated by Christ; for this prophecy belongs to the times of the apostles, as appears from Isa_1:9 see Psa_40:6. The several creatures mentioned were used in sacrifice, and their blood was sprinkled round about the altar, Lev_3:2 and before the vail, Lev_4:6. 4. HENRY, “He justly refuses to hear their prayers and accept their services, their sacrifices and burnt-offerings, the fat and blood of them (Isa_1:11), their attendance in his courts (Isa_1:12), their oblations, their incense, and their solemn assemblies (Isa_1:13), their new moons and their appointed feasts (Isa_1:14), their devoutest addresses (Isa_1:15); they are all rejected, because their hands were full of blood. Now observe, 1. There are many who are strangers, nay, enemies, to the power of religion, and yet seem very zealous for the show and shadow and form of it. This sinful nation, this seed of evil-doers, these rulers of Sodom and people of Gomorrah, brought, not to the altars of false gods (they are not here charged with that), but to the altar of the God of Israel, sacrifices, a multitude of them, as many as the law required and rather more - not only peace-offerings, which they themselves had their share of, but burnt-offerings, which were wholly consumed to the honour of God; nor did they bring the torn, and lame, and sick, but fed beasts, and the fat of them, the best of the kind. They did not send others to offer their sacrifices for them, but came themselves to appear before God. They observed the instituted places (not in high places or groves, but in God's own courts), and the instituted time, the new moons, and sabbaths, and appointed feasts, none of which they omitted. Nay, it should seem, they called extraordinary assemblies, and held solemn meetings for religious worship, besides those that God had appointed. Yet this was not all: they applied to God, not only with their ceremonial observances, but with the exercises of devotion. They prayed, prayed often, made many prayers, thinking they should be heard for their much speaking; nay, they were fervent and importunate in prayer, they spread forth their hands as men in earnest. Now we should have thought these, and, no doubt, they thought themselves, a pious religious people; and yet they were far from being so, for (1.) Their hearts were empty of true devotion. They came to appear before God (Isa_1:12), to be seen before him (so the margin reads it); they rested in the outside of the duties; they looked no further than to be seen of men, and went no further than that which men see. (2.) Their hands were full of blood. They were guilty of murder, rapine, and oppression, under colour of law and justice. The people shed blood, and the rulers did not punish them for it; the rulers shed blood, and the people were aiding and abetting, as the elders of Jezreel were to Jezebel in shedding Naboth's blood. Malice is heart-murder in the account of God; he that hates his brother in his heart has, in effect, his hands full of blood. 5. JAMISON, “God does not here absolutely disparage sacrifice, which is as old and universal as sin (Gen_3:21; Gen_4:4), and sin is almost as old as the world; but sacrifice, unaccompanied
- 95. with obedience ofheart and life (1Sa_15:22; Psa_50:9-13; Psa_51:16-19; Hos_6:6). Positive precepts are only means; moral obedience is the end. A foreshadowing of the gospel, when the One real sacrifice was to supersede all the shadowy ones, and “bring in everlasting righteousness” (Psa_40:6, Psa_40:7; Dan_9:24-27; Heb_10:1-14). full — to satiety; weary of burnt offerings — burnt whole, except the blood, which was sprinkled about the altar. fat — not to be eaten by man, but burnt on the altar (Lev_3:4, Lev_3:5, Lev_3:11, Lev_3:17). 6. PULPIT, “To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? Cui bono? What good end do they serve? "Thinkest thou that I will eat the flesh of bulls, and drink the blood of goats? "(Psa_1:1-6 :13). God "delights not in burnt offerings." From the time of Samuel he had declared, "Behold, to obey is better then sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams" (1Sa_15:22). David had said of him, "Sacrifice and meat offering thou wouldest not; burnt offerings and sacrifice for sin hast thou not required" (Psa_40:8, Psa_40:9); and again, "I will not reprove thee because of thy sacrifices, or for thy burnt offerings, because they were not always before me. I will take no bullock out of thy house, nor he-goat out of thy folds; for all the beasts of the forest are mine, and so are the cattle upon a thousand hills" (Psa_50:8-10). Not, of course, that either David or Isaiah desired to abolish sacrifice, or had any commission so to do; but they were, both of them, anxious to impress on men that sacrifice, by itself, was nothing—that self-dedication, self-renunciation, true devotion of the heart, with its necessary concomitant obedience, must accompany sacrifice, for God to be pleased therewith. The sacrifices of a people such as is described in verses 21-23 could not but be an offence to him. Saith the Lord. The phrase employed is unusual, and almost confined to Isaiah, occurring elsewhere only inPsa_12:5. Isaiah uses it again in verse 18, and also in Isa_33:10; Isa_41:21; and Isa_66:9. It is explained to be emphatic, implying that this is what God says, and will say, concerning the matter in hand, once and forever (Kay). I am full of the burnt offerings of rams; rather, I am overfull, satiated, wearied with them. Barns formed a part of the required sacrifice on all great occasions, as at the Passover (Num_28:19), at the Feast of Weeks (Num_28:27), at the Feast of Tabernacles (Num_29:13, Num_29:17, Num_29:20, Num_29:23, Num_29:26, Num_29:29, Num_29:32, Num_29:36), at the Feast of Trumpets (Num_29:2), and on the great Day of Atonement (Num_29:8). They were commanded as the sole sacrifice for a trespass offering (Le Isa_5:16, Isa_5:18). Under David were offered on one occasion "a thousand rams" (1Ch_29:21); and the occasions where seven rams formed the legitimate sacrifice were many. Unaccompanied by a proper frame of mind, each such offering was an offence to God, displeased him, wearied him. The fat of fed beasts. The fat was always regarded, both by the Hebrews and the Greeks, as especially suitable for sacrifice. It was burnt upon the altar in every case, even where the greater part of the victim was consumed as food (see Le Isa_1:8, Isa_1:12; Isa_3:3, Isa_3:10, etc.; note particularly the expression in Le Isa_3:16, "All the fat is
- 96. the Lord's"). "Fedbeasts" are those which were kept separate in stalls or sheds for some time before the sacrifice, and given food in which there was nothing" unclean." The Paschal lambs were required to be thus separated and fed for four days (Exo_12:3, Exo_12:6). I delight not in the blood. The blood, "which is the life" (Le Isa_17:14), was to be sprinkled on the altar in every sacrifice of a victim. This sprinkling was of the very essence of the sacrifice (LeIsa_1:5; Isa_3:2, Isa_3:8, Isa_3:13; Isa_4:6, 17, 25, 30, etc.). Bullocks lambs he-goats. These, together with rams, constituted all the sacrificial beasts of the Hebrews. 7.CALVIN, “11.To what purpose is he multitude of your sacrifices to me ? Isaiah now introduces God as speaking, for the purpose of making known his own meaning; for it belongs to a lawgiver not only to issue commands, but likewise to give a sound interpretation to the laws, that they may not be abused. Beyond all doubt, the former reproof was exceedingly unpalatable and oppressive to them; for what language expressive of stronger disapprobation or abhorrence could have been employed? They gloried in the name of Abraham, boasted that they were his children, and on this ground maintained a haughty demeanor. This is the reason why the Prophet arms himself with the authority of God against them; as if he had said, “ that it is not with me but with God that you have to do.” Next he explains the intention and design of God in demanding sacrifices; that he does so, not because he sets a high value on them, but in order that they may be aids to piety; and, consequently, that the Jews were greatly mistaken who made all their holiness to consist of those services. For they thought that they had performed their duty admirably well when they offered sacrifices of slain beasts; and when the prophets demanded something beyond this, they complained that they were treated harshly. Now the Lord says that he rejects and abhors them, which may appear to be excessive severity, for it was by him that they were appointed. But it ought to be observed that some of the commandments of God ought to be obeyed on their own account, while others of them have a remoter object. For instance, the law enjoins us to serve and worship God, and next enjoins us to do good to our neighbors. (Deu_6:5;Lev_19:18.) These things are in themselves acceptable to God, and are demanded on their own account. The case is different with ceremonies; for they are performances which are not demanded on their own account, but for a different reason. The same thing may be said of fasting; For the kingdom of God does not consist in meat and drink; (Rom_14:17;) and therefore fasting is directed to another object. It follows, therefore, that ceremonies were not appointed in such a manner as if they were a satisfaction
- 97. by which heshould be appeased, but in order that by means of them the nation might be trained to godliness, and might make greater and greater progress in faith and in the pure worship of God. But hypocrites observe them with the most scrupulous care, as if the whole of religion turned on this point, and think that they are the most devout of all men, when they have long and anxiously wearied themselves in observing them. And that they may be thought more devout, they likewise add something of their own, and daily contrive new inventions, and most wickedly abuse the holy ordinances of God, by not keeping in view their true object. All their ceremonies, therefore, are nothing else than corruptions of the worship of God. For when their whole attention is given to the outward and naked performance, in what respect do their sacrifices differ from the sacrifices of the Gentiles, which, we know, were full of sacrilege, because they had no regard to a lawful end? This is the reason why the Lord rejects those ceremonies, though they had been appointed by his authority, because the nation did not consider the object and purpose for which they were enjoined. The unceasing contest between the prophets and the nation was to tear off these masks, and to show that the Lord is not satisfied with merely outward worship, and cannot be appeased by ceremonies. In all places godly ministers have experience of the same kind of conflicts; for men always form their estimate of God from themselves, and think that he is satisfied with outward display, but cannot without the greatest difficulty be brought to offer to him the integrity of their heart. All the perplexity of this passage will be easily removed by Jeremiah, who says, When I redeemed your fathers out of Egypt, I did not order them to offer sacrifices to me; I only enjoined them to hear me and to keep my commandments. (Jer_7:22.) For he shows that the observance of ceremonies depends wholly on the word, and that it is as idle and unprofitable to separate there from the word as it would be for the soul to be parted from the body. To this also belongs the argument in Psa_50:13, — Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? Offer to God thanksgiving, and pay thy vows to the Most High. And in another passage the same Jeremiah says, “ not in words of falsehood, saying, The temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD are we.
- 98. But rather excelin doing good, etc.” (Jer_7:4.) The Prophet Micah likewise says, “ the LORD take pleasure in thousands of rams, or in ten thousand rivers of oil?” Immediately afterwards he adds, “ will show thee, O man, what is good, and what the LORD requireth from thee, namely, to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.” (Mic_6:7.) From these passages it is evident that the reason why ceremonies are condemned is, that they are separated from the word as from their soul. Hence we see how great is the blindness of men, who cannot be convinced that all the pains they take to worship God are of no advantage unless they flow from integrity of heart. Nor is this vice confined to the common people, but is found in almost all men; and in those who in their opinion excel all others. Hence springs the notion of the efficacy which belongs to the mere performance of the outward act — or, as they call it, the opus operatum — which Popish doctors have contrived, and which at the present day keeps a firm hold of the minds of many. Now here it is not man but God himself who speaks, and who pronounces, by an unchangeable decree, that all that men do is in vain offered for his acceptance, is empty and unprofitable, unless they call upon him with true faith. 12 When you come to appear before me, who has asked this of you, this trampling of my courts? 1.BARNES, “When you come to appear before me - The temple was in Jerusalem, and was regarded as the habitation, or dwelling-place, of the God of Israel. Particularly, the most holy place of the temple was deemed the place of his sacred abode. The Shekinah - from שׁכן sha kan, to dwell - the visible symbol of his presence, rested on the cover of the ark, and from this place he was accustomed to commune with his people, and to give responses to their requests. Hence, ‘to appear before God,’ Hebrew ‘to be seen before my face,’ פני לראות le ra'oth panay for פני
- 99. את 'et panay,means to appear in his temple as a worshipper. The phrase occurs in this sense in the following places: Exo_34:23-24; Deu_31:11; 1Sa_1:22; Psa_42:3. Who hath required this - The Jews were required to appear there to worship God Exo_23:17; Deu_16:16; but it was not required that they should appear with that spirit and temper. A similar sentiment is expressed in Psa_50:16. At your hand - From you. The emphasis in this expression is to be laid on your. ‘Who has asked it of you?’ It was indeed the duty of the humble, and the sincere, to tread those courts, but who had required such hypocrites as they were to do it? God sought the offerings of pure worshippers, not those of the hypocritical and the profane. To tread my courts - The courts of the temple were the different areas or open spaces which surrounded it. None entered the temple itself but the priests. The people worshipped God in the courts assigned them around the temple. In one of those courts was the altar of burnt- offerings; and the sacrifices were all made there; see the notes at Mat_21:12. To tread his courts was an expression therefore, equivalent to, to worship. To tread the courts of the Lord here, has the idea of profanation. Who has required you to tread those courts with this hollow, heartless service? It is often used in the sense of treading down, or trampling on, 2Ki_7:17-20; Dan_8:7- 10; Isa_63:3-16. 2. CLARKE, “When ye come to appear - Instead of לראות leraoth, to appear, one MS. has לראות liroth, to see. See De Rossi. The appearing before God here refers chiefly to the three solemn annual festivals. See Exo_23:14. Tread my courts (no more) - So the Septuagint divide the sentence, joining the end of this verse to the beginning of the next: Πατειν την αυλην µου, ου προσθησεσθε; “To tread my court ye shall not add - ye shall not be again accepted in worship.” 3. GILL, “When ye come to appear before me,.... At the grand festivals of the passover, pentecost, and tabernacles, at which times all the males in Israel appeared before God, Exo_23:17. who hath required this at your hand; either to appear at such times, these feasts being no more to be observed; or to offer the above sacrifices; these were not required of the Israelites when they first came out of Egypt, Jer_7:22 nor were they necessary to appear before God with, or to introduce them to the throne of his grace, Mic_6:6 and much less under the Gospel dispensation, being abolished by the sacrifice of Christ; or this relates to what follows, to tread my courts? in that unbecoming and hypocritical way they did, and with such wicked hearts and bloody hands. "Courts" are mentioned, because, as Kimchi observes, the Israelites stood in the courts of the Lord's house, and did not go into the temple, only the priests. 4. HENRY, “He justly refuses to hear their prayers and accept their services, their sacrifices and burnt-offerings, the fat and blood of them (Isa_1:11), their attendance in his courts (Isa_1:12), their oblations, their incense, and their solemn assemblies (Isa_1:13), their new
- 100. moons and theirappointed feasts (Isa_1:14), their devoutest addresses (Isa_1:15); they are all rejected, because their hands were full of blood. Now observe, 1. There are many who are strangers, nay, enemies, to the power of religion, and yet seem very zealous for the show and shadow and form of it. This sinful nation, this seed of evil-doers, these rulers of Sodom and people of Gomorrah, brought, not to the altars of false gods (they are not here charged with that), but to the altar of the God of Israel, sacrifices, a multitude of them, as many as the law required and rather more - not only peace-offerings, which they themselves had their share of, but burnt-offerings, which were wholly consumed to the honour of God; nor did they bring the torn, and lame, and sick, but fed beasts, and the fat of them, the best of the kind. They did not send others to offer their sacrifices for them, but came themselves to appear before God. They observed the instituted places (not in high places or groves, but in God's own courts), and the instituted time, the new moons, and sabbaths, and appointed feasts, none of which they omitted. Nay, it should seem, they called extraordinary assemblies, and held solemn meetings for religious worship, besides those that God had appointed. Yet this was not all: they applied to God, not only with their ceremonial observances, but with the exercises of devotion. They prayed, prayed often, made many prayers, thinking they should be heard for their much speaking; nay, they were fervent and importunate in prayer, they spread forth their hands as men in earnest. Now we should have thought these, and, no doubt, they thought themselves, a pious religious people; and yet they were far from being so, for (1.) Their hearts were empty of true devotion. They came to appear before God (Isa_1:12), to be seen before him (so the margin reads it); they rested in the outside of the duties; they looked no further than to be seen of men, and went no further than that which men see. (2.) Their hands were full of blood. They were guilty of murder, rapine, and oppression, under colour of law and justice. The people shed blood, and the rulers did not punish them for it; the rulers shed blood, and the people were aiding and abetting, as the elders of Jezreel were to Jezebel in shedding Naboth's blood. Malice is heart-murder in the account of God; he that hates his brother in his heart has, in effect, his hands full of blood. 5. JAMISON, “appear before me — in the temple where the Shekinah, resting on the ark, was the symbol of God’s presence (Exo_23:15; Psa_42:2). who hath required this — as if you were doing God a service by such hypocritical offerings (Job_35:7). God did require it (Exo_23:17), but not in this spirit (Mic_6:6, Mic_6:7). courts — areas, in which the worshippers were. None but priests entered the temple itself. 6. K&D, “Jeremiah says this with regard to the sacrifices (Isa_7:22); Isaiah also applies it to visits to the temple: “When ye come to appear before my face, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts?” אוֹת ָלר is a contracted infinitive niphal for אוֹת ָר ֵה ְל (compare the hiphil forms contracted in the same manner in Isa_3:8; Isa_23:11). This is the standing expression for the appearance of all male Israelites in the temple at the three high festivals, as prescribed by
- 101. the law, andthen for visits to the temple generally (cf., Psa_42:3; Psa_84:8). “My face” (panai): according to Ewald, §279, c, this is used with the passive to designate the subject (“to be seen by the face of God”); but why not rather take it as an adverbial accusative, “in the face of,” or “in front of,” as it is used interchangeably with the prepositions ְ,ל ,את and ֶאל ? It is possible that אוֹת ָר ֵל is pointed as it is here, and in Exo_34:24 and in Deu_31:11, instead of אוֹת ְר ִל - like אוּ ָיר for אוּ ְרִ,י in Exo_23:15; Exo_34:20, - for the purpose of avoiding an expression which might be so easily misunderstood as denoting a sight of God with the bodily eye. But the niphal is firmly established in Exo_23:17; Exo_34:23, and 1Sa_1:22; and in the Mishnah and Talmud the terms הָי ִא ְר and יוֹןፎר are applied without hesitation to appearance before God at the principal feasts. They visited the temple diligently enough indeed, but who had required this at their hand, i.e., required them to do this? Jehovah certainly had not. “To tread my courts” is in apposition to this, which it more clearly defines. Jehovah did not want them to appear before His face, i.e., He did not wish for this spiritless and undevotional tramping thither, this mere opus operatum, which might as well have been omitted, since it only wore out the floor. 7. PULPIT, “When ye come to appear before me. Mr. Cheyne translates, "to see my face;" but most other commentators (Gesenius, Delitzsch, Ewald, Kay) regard the phrase used as equivalent to that employed in Exo_23:17; Exo_34:23;Deu_16:16; and the passage as referring to that attendance in the temple at the three great annual festivals, which was required of all adult male Israelites. The requirement of the Law was still observed in the letter, but not in thespirit. They came with no true religious object. Hence the question which follows: Who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts? This was not what God had enjoined—a mere bodily attendance, a trampling of his courts with their feet, when their hearts were far from him. 8. CALVIN, “12.Who hath required this at your hand ? What an admirable confutation of false worship, when God declares that they will not come before him according to the appointed manner, and makes a general declaration, that in vain do they offer to him anything which he does not require; for he does not choose to be worshipped in any other way than that which has been enjoined! For how comes it that men are so highly delighted with those inventions, but because they do not consider that all their services are neither profitable to themselves nor acceptable to God? Otherwise they would immediately recollect that obedience is all that remains for them to do; (1Sa_15:22;) and they would not so insolently vaunt of their exertions, which the Lord looks upon with scorn, not only because he derives no advantage from it, but because he does not wish that men should attribute to him what they have rashly undertaken without his authority, or suffer the caprice of men to pass for a law: Yet in order to express still stronger contempt, he immediately adds, that they improperly give the name of obedience to that which he considers to be labor thrown away; namely, that their close attendance at the temple amounts to nothing more than treading its
- 102. pavements; as if,in reference to their hypocritical prayers, he had said, “ they lay me under deep obligations by stunning my ears.” 13 Stop bringing meaningless offerings! Your incense is detestable to me. New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations— I cannot bear your worthless assemblies. 1.BARNES, “Bring no more - God does not intend absolutely to forbid this kind of worship, but he expresses his strong abhorrence of the manner in which it was done. He desired a better state of mind; he preferred purity of heart to all this external homage. Vain - Hebrew “offering of vanity” - שׁוא shav' - offerings which were hollow, false, deceitful, and hypocritical. Oblations - מנחת minchath. This word properly denotes a gift, or present, of any kind Gen_32:13, and then especially a present or offering to the Deity, Gen_4:3-5. It does not denote a bloody offering, but what is improperly rendered in the Old Testament, a meat-offering Lev_2:1; Lev_6:14; Lev_9:17 - an offering made of flour or fruits, with oil and frankincense. A small part of it was burned upon the altar, and the remainder was eaten by Aaron and his sons with salt, Lev_2:1, Lev_2:9, Lev_2:13. The proper translation would have been meat or flour- offering rather than meat-offering, since the word meat with us now denotes animal food only. Incense - More properly frankincense. This is an aromatic or odoriferous gum, which is obtained from a tree called Thurifera. Its leaves were like those of a pear-tree. It grew around Mount Lebanon, and in Arabia. The gum was obtained by making incisions in the bark in dogdays. It was much used in worship, not only by the Jews, but by the pagan. When burned, it produced an agreeable odor; and hence, it is called a sacrifice of sweet smell, an odor acceptable to God; compare Phi_4:18. That which was burned among the Jews was prepared in a special manner, with a mixture of sweet spices. It was offered by the priest alone, and it was not lawful to prepare it in any other way than that prescribed by the law: see Exo_30:34, ... Is an abomination - Is hateful, or an object of abhorrence; that is, as it was offered by them, with hollow service, and with hypocritical hearts. The new moons - On the appearance of the new moon. in addition to the daily sacrifices, two bullocks, a ram, and seven sheep, with a meal-offering, were required to be offered to God, Num_10:10; Num_28:11-14. The new moon in the beginning of the month Tisri (October), was the beginning of their civil year, and was commanded to be observed as a festival, Lev_23:24-25. The appearance of the new moon was announced by the blowing of silver trumpets, Num_10:10. Hence, the annual festival was called sometimes, ‘the memorial of the blowing of trumpets.’ The
- 103. time of theappearance of the new moon was not ascertained, as with us, by astronomical calculation; but persons were stationed, about the time it was to appear, on elevated places in the vicinity of Jerusalem, and when it was discovered, the trumpet was sounded. Moses did not command that this should be observed as a festival except at the beginning of the year, but it is not improbable that the Jews observed each return of the new moon as such. And sabbaths - שׁבת shabbath, from שׁבת shabath, “to cease to do anything”; “to rest from labor.” The words used here are all in the singular number, and should have been rendered ‘the new moon, and the sabbath, and the calling of the assembly;’ though used in a collective sense. The sabbaths here refer not only to the weekly sabbaths, but to all their days of rest. The word sabbath means properly a day of rest Gen_2:2-3; and it was applied not only to the seventh day, but particularly to the beginning and the close of their great festivals, which were days of unusual solemnity and sacredness, Lev_16:31; 23:24-39. The calling of assemblies - The solemn convocations or meetings at their festivals and fasts. I cannot away with - Hebrew אוּכל לא lo' 'ukal - I cannot bear, or endure. It is iniquity - That is, in the way in which it is conducted. This is a strong emphatic expression. It is not merely evil, and tending to evil; but it is iniquity itself. There was no mixture of good. Even the solemn meeting - The word which is used here - עצרה ‛atsarah - comes from the verb עצר ‛atsar, which signifies to shut up, or to close; and is applied to the solemnities which concluded their great feasts, as being periods of unusual interest and sacredness. It was applied to such solemnities, because they shut up, or closed the sacred festivals. Hence, that day was called the great day of the feast, as being a day of special solemnity and impressiveness; see the note at Joh_7:37; compare Lev. 23:3-36. In the translation of this word, however, there is a great variety in the ancient versions. Vulgate, ‘Your assemblies are iniquitous.’ Septuagint, ‘Your new moons, and sabbaths, and great day, I cannot endure; fasting and idleness.’ Chald. Paraph., ‘Sacrifice is abominable before me; and your new moons, and sabbaths, “since you will not forsake your sins, so that your prayer may be heard in the time of your assembling.” Syriac, ‘In the beginning of your months, and on the sabbath, you convene an assembly, but I do not eat that (that is, sacrifices) which has been Obtained by fraud and violence.’ The English translation has, however, probably expressed the correct sense of the Hebrew. 2. CLARKE, “The new moons and Sabbaths “The fast and the day of restraint” - אוןועצרה aven vaatsarah. These words are rendered in many different manners by different interpreters, to a good and probable sense by all; but I think by none in such a sense as can arise from the phrase itself, agreeably to the idiom of the Hebrew language. Instead of און aven, the Septuagint manifestly read צום tsom, νηστειαν, “the fast.” This Houbigant has adopted. The prophet could not well have omitted the fast in the enumeration of their solemnities, nor the abuse of it among the instances of their hypocrisy, which he has treated at large with such force and elegance in his fifty-eighth chapter. Observe, also, that the prophet Joel, (Joe_1:14, and Joe_2:15), twice joins together the fast and the day of restraint: - עצרה קראו צום קדשו
- 104. atsarah kiru tsomkaddeshu “Sanctify a fast; proclaim a day of restraint:” which shows how properly they are here joined together. עצרה atsarah, “the restraint,” is rendered, both here and in other places of our English translation, “the solemn assembly.” Certain holy days ordained by the law were distinguished by a particular charge that “no servile work should be done therein;” Lev_23:36; Num_29:35; Deu_16:8. This circumstance clearly explains the reason of the name, the restraint, or the day of restraint, given to those days. If I could approve of any translation of these two words which I have met with, it should be that of the Spanish version of the Old Testament, made for the use of the Spanish Jews: Tortura y detenimento, “it is a pain and a constraint unto me.” But I still think that the reading of the Septuagint is more probably the truth. 3. GILL, “Bring no more vain oblations,.... As all such were, which were offered up without faith in Christ, in hypocrisy, and with dependence on them for pardon and atonement, and particularly when put an end to by the sacrifice of Christ; see Mat_15:9. The Targum renders it, "an oblation of robbery"; see Isa_60:8. incense is an abomination to me; instead of being of a sweet smell. This was burnt on the altar of incense, and put upon the sacrifices, Exo_30:1 was typical of prayer, Psa_141:2 but now under the Gospel dispensation to be disused, and so disagreeable to God, that it is as if an idol was blessed, Isa_66:3. the new moons; the feasts kept on the first day of the month, at the appearance of the moon: and sabbaths; observed every seventh day, every seventh year, and every seven times seventh year: the calling of assemblies; or "the new moon and sabbath, do not call a congregation". These assemblies called were the holy convocations on the seventh day sabbath, at the feasts of passover, pentecost, and tabernacles, at the blowing of the trumpets, and on the day of atonement, Lev_23:3 &c. Num_28:26. The words, I cannot away with or "bear", may be joined with the following word, "iniquity"; and the meaning is, that the Lord could not bear the iniquity that was in their hearts when they had their solemn assemblies and holy convocations: it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting: or cessation from work on any of the above festivals; particularly the feast of weeks, or pentecost, was called ,עצרת "Atzareth", by the Jews (g), the same word with this here (h). (g) Misn. Chagiga, c. 2. sect. 4. (h) The whole verse, agreeably to the accents, is thus rendered by Reinbeck. de Accent. Heb. p. 377, 378.
- 105. "Do not goon to offer oblation of vanity; incense of abomination is it to me; do not go on, I say, on the new moon, and sabbath, to call a convocation: I cannot bear iniquity, together with the most solemn congregation.'' 4. HENRY, “The most pompous and costly devotions of wicked people, without a thorough reformation of the heart and life, are so far from being acceptable to God that really they are an abomination to him. It is here shown in a great variety of expressions that to obey is better than sacrifice; nay, that sacrifice, without obedience, is a jest, an affront and provocation to God. The comparative neglect which God here expresses of ceremonial observance was a tacit intimation of what they would come to at last, when they would all be done away by the death of Christ. What was now made little of would in due time be made nothing of. “Sacrifice and offering, and prayer made in the virtue of them, thou wouldest not; then said I, Lo, I come.” Their sacrifices are here represented, (1.) As fruitless and insignificant; To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices? Isa_1:11. They are vain oblations, Isa_1:13. In vain do they worship me, Mat_15:9. Their attention to God's institutions was all lost labour, and served not to answer any good intention; for, [1.] It was not looked upon as any act of duty or obedience to God: Who has required these things at your hands? Isa_1:12. Not that God disowns his institutions, or refuses to stand by his own warrants; but in what they did they had not an eye to him that required it, nor indeed did he require it of those whose hands were full of blood and who continued impenitent. [2.] It did not recommend them to God's favour. He delighted not in the blood of their sacrifices, for he did not look upon himself as honoured by it. [3.] It would not obtain any relief for them. They pray, but God will not hear, because they regard iniquity (Psa_66:18); he will not deliver them, for, though they make many prayers, none of them come from an upright heart. All their religious service turned to no account to them. Nay, (2.) As odious and offensive. God did not only not accept them, but he did detest and abhor them. “They are your sacrifices, they are none of mine; I am full of them, even surfeited with them.” He needed them not (Psa_50:10), did not desire them, had had enough of them, and more than enough. Their coming into his courts he calls treading them, or trampling upon them; their very attendance on his ordinances was construed into a contempt of them. Their incense, though ever so fragrant, was an abomination to him, for it was burnt in hypocrisy and with an ill design. Their solemn assemblies he could not away with, could not see them with any patience, nor bear the affront they gave him. The solemn meeting is iniquity; though the thing itself was not, yet, as they managed it, it became so. It is a vexation (so some read it), a provocation, to God, to have ordinances thus prostituted, not only by wicked people, but to wicked purposes: “My soul hates them; they are a trouble to me, a burden, an incumbrance; I am perfectly sick of them, and weary of bearing them.” God is never weary of hearing the prayers of the upright, but soon weary of the costly sacrifices of the wicked. He hides his eyes from their prayers, as that which he has an aversion to and is angry at. All this is to show, [1.] That sin is very hateful to God, so hateful that it makes even men's prayers and their religious services hateful to him. [2.] That dissembled piety is double iniquity. Hypocrisy in religion is of all things most abominable to the God of heaven. Jerome applies the passage to the Jews in Christ's time, who pretended a great zeal for the law and the temple, but made themselves and all their services abominable to God by filling their hands with the blood of Christ and his apostles, and so filling up the measure of their iniquities.
- 106. 5. JAMISON, “oblations— unbloody; “meat (old English sense, not flesh) offerings,” that is, of flour, fruits, oil, etc. (Lev_2:1-13). Hebrew, mincha. incense — put upon the sacrifices, and burnt on the altar of incense. Type of prayer (Psa_141:2; Rev_8:3). new moons — observed as festivals (Num_10:10; Num_28:11, Num_28:14) with sacrifices and blowing of silver trumpets. sabbaths — both the seventh day and the beginning and closing days of the great feasts (Lev_23:24-39). away with — bear, Maurer translates, “I cannot bear iniquity and the solemn meeting,” that is, the meeting associated with iniquity - literally, the closing days of the feasts; so the great days (Lev_23:36; Joh_7:37). 6. K&D, “Because they had not performed what Jehovah commanded as He commanded it, He expressly forbids them to continue it. “Continue not to bring lying meat-offering; abomination incense is it to me.” Minchah (the meat-offering) was the vegetable offering, as distinguished from zebach, the animal sacrifice. It is called a “lying meat-offering,” as being a hypocritical dead work, behind which there was none of the feeling which it appeared to express. In the second clause the Sept., Vulg., Gesenius, and others adopt the rendering “incense - an abomination is it to me,” ketoreth being taken as the name of the daily burning of incense upon the golden altar in the holy place (Exo_30:8). But neither in Psa_141:2, where prayer is offered by one who is not a priest, nor in the passage before us, where the reference is not to the priesthood, but to the people and to their deeds, is this continual incense to be thought of. Moreover, it is much more natural to regard the word ketoreth not as a bold absolute case, but, according to the conjunctive darga with which it is marked, as constructive rather; and this is perfectly allowable. The meat-offering is called “incense” (ketoreth) with reference to the so- called azcarah, i.e., that portion which the priest burned upon the altar, to bring the grateful offerer into remembrance before God (called “burning the memorial,” hiktir azcarah, in Lev_2:2). As a general rule, this was accompanied with incense (Isa_66:3), the whole of which was placed upon the altar, and not merely a small portion of it. The meat-offering, with its sweet-smelling savour, was merely the form, which served as an outward expression of the thanksgiving for God's blessing, or the longing for His blessing, which really ascended in prayer. But in their case the form had no such meaning. It was nothing but the form, with which they thought they had satisfied God; and therefore it was an abomination to Him. Isa_1:13. God was just as little pleased with their punctilious observance of the feasts: “New-moon and Sabbath, calling of festal meetings ... I cannot bear ungodliness and a festal crowd.” The first objective notions, which are logically governed by “I cannot bear” (ל ַּא־אוּכל: literally, a future hophal - I am unable, incapable, viz., to bear, which may be supplied, according to Psa_101:5; Jer_44:22; Pro_30:21), become absolute cases here, on account of another grammatical object presenting itself in the last two nouns: “ungodliness and a festal crowd.” As for new-moon and Sabbath (the latter always signifies the weekly Sabbath when construed with Chodesh) - and, in fact, the calling of meetings of the whole congregation on the weekly Sabbath and high festivals, which was a simple duty according to Lev 23 - Jehovah could not endure festivals associated with
- 107. wickedness. ה ָרָצ ֲע (from ר ַצ ָ,ע to press, or crowd thickly together) is synonymous with א ָר ְק ִ,)מ so far as its immediate signification is concerned, as Jer_9:1 clearly shows, just as πανήγυρις is synonymous with εκκλησία . ןֶוፎ (from ,אוּן to breathe) is moral worthlessness, regarded as an utter absence of all that has true essence and worth in the sight of God. The prophet intentionally joins these two nouns together. A densely crowded festal meeting, combined with inward emptiness and barrenness on the part of those who were assembled together, was a contradiction which God could not endure. 7.CALVIN, “13.Bring no more vain oblations This is a useful admonition for restraining the irregular desires of those who do not cease to follow inveterately unmeaning and hypocritical worship, that, warned by God, they may at length repent, if they would listen to any advice. But hence we learn how hard it is to shake the false confidence of hypocrites, when they have once been hardened, since they cannot even endure to hear God plainly warning them not to go on in losing their pains, and in the practice of such madness. Incense is an abomination to one To press them more closely, he proceeds farther, and declares that such worship is not only unprofitable, but even that he detests and abhors it; and justly, because the profanation of the worship of God, in which his name is falsely employed, is not free from sacrilege. For as nothing is more dear to God than his own glory, so there is nothing which he more strongly detests than to have it infringed by any kind of corruptions: and this is done, when any sort of unmeaning service is put in the room of true worship. The meaning of this passage has been mistaken by some, who have thought that the Prophet speaks of the repeal of the law; for that is not his object, but he recalls the people of his time to the right manner of observing ceremonies, and shows with what design and for what purpose they were instituted. For since the beginning of the world the worship of God was spiritual, and the diversity of our worship from that which prevailed under the Old Testament had a reference to men, but not to God. In God there is no change, (Jas_1:17,) but he accommodates himself to the weakness of men. That kind of government therefore was suitable to the Jews, just as a preparatory training (22) is needed for children. For what purpose they were instituted, and what is the right manner of observing ceremonies, he now describes. (22) Poedagogia. In what sense our Author uses this term may be gathered from his Commentary on Gal_3:24. The law was our schoolmaster ( παιδαγωγός) to Christ. — Ed
- 108. 8. PULPIT, “Bringno more vain oblations. The command is net "Bring no more oblations, "as though the daily oblation was to cease; but "bring no more oblations that are vain ones, "i.e. empty and unreal—mere forms, without the proper corresponding spirit. The "oblation" spoken of is the minchah, or "meat offering," cf. Le Isa_2:1-11; Num_28:12-31, which was a cake of fine flour mingled with oil, and generally had incense joined with it, which explains the nexus ofthis clause with the following one. Incense is an abomination unto me. God had commanded the use of incense in worship, as he had commanded burnt offerings and oblations (Exo_30:1-8, Exo_30:34-38; Le Exo_2:2; Exo_16:12,Exo_16:13). But incense symbolized prayer (Psa_141:2); and if no heartfelt prayer accompanied its use, it was emptied of all its significance, and became hateful to God—a mere form, and consequently an "abomination." The new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with. The weekly festival of the sabbath, the monthly one of the "new moon, "and the annual "assemblies" or "solemn feasts" (2Ch_8:13), were the main occasions of Jewish worship. As at this time conducted, God could endure none of them; all were tainted with the prevalent unreality. The construction of the passage is highly rhetorical, and indicates great excitement of feeling. Kay translates it literally, "New moon and sabbath, the calling of assemblies, I cannot—it is ungodliness—even the solemn meeting." The authors of the Revised Version also suppose an aposiopesis. The solemn meeting. The word thus translated is applied only to particular days in the great festival seasons, as to the eighth day of the Feast of Tabernacles (Le 23:36; Num_29:35; Neh_8:18), and the seventh day of the Passover (Deu_16:8), or else to days specially appointed for religious services by civil authority (2Ki_10:20; 2Ch_7:9; Joe_1:14; Joe_2:15). The meaning thus is, that even the very highest 'occasions of religious worship were abused by the Israelites of the time, and made an offence to God. 14 Your New Moon feasts and your appointed festivals I hate with all my being. They have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them. 1.BARNES, “Your appointed feasts - That is, your assemblies convened on regular set times - מועד mo‛ed, from יעד ya‛ad, to fix, to appoint. Hengstenberg (Chris. iii. p. 87) has shown
- 109. that this word(מועדים mo‛edı ym) is applied in the Scriptures only to the sabbath, passover, pentecost, day of atonement, and feast of tabernacles. Prof. Alexander, in loc. It is applied to those festivals, because they were fixed by law to certain periods of the year. This verse is a very impressive repetition of the former, as if the soul was full of the subject, and disposed to dwell upon it. My soul hateth - I hate. Psa_11:5. The nouns נפשׁ nephesh, soul, and רוּח ruach, spirit, are often used to denote the person himself, and are to be construed as “I.” Thus, Isa_26:9 : ‘With my soul have I desired thee in the night; yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early;’ that is, ‘I myself seek thee; I myself do desire thee.’ So the phrase, ‘deliver my soul,’ - נפשׁי naphe shı y - that is, deliver me, Psa_22:20; Psa_84:3; Psa_86:13-14; that thy soul may bless me, Gen_27:19; his soul shall dwell at ease, Psa_25:13; compare Num_11:6; Lev_16:29; Isa_55:2-3; Job_16:4. So the word spirit: ‘Thy watchfulness hath preserved my spirit’ - רוּחי ruchı y - Job_10:12; compare Psa_31:6; 1Ki_21:5. The expression here is emphatic, denoting cordial hatred: odi ex animo. They are a trouble - טרח tʖorach. In Deu_1:12, this word denotes a burden, an oppressive lead that produces weariness in bearing it. It is a strong expression, denoting that their acts of hypocrisy and sin had become so numerous, that they became a heavy, oppressive lead. I am weary to bear them - This is language which is taken from the act of carrying a burden until a man becomes weary and faint. So, in accordance with human conceptions, God represents himself as burdened with their vain oblations, and evil conduct. There could be no more impressive statement of the evil effects of sin, than that even Omnipotence was exhausted as with a heavy, oppressive burden. 2. PULPIT, “Your new moons. (For the ceremonies to be observed at the opening of each month, see Num_28:11-15.) Your appointed feasts. The "appointed feasts" are the great festival-times—the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks, and the Feast of Tabernacles. They do not include the sabbath or the "new moon, "with which they are, both here and elsewhere (1Ch_23:31; 2Ch_31:3), contrasted. They are a trouble unto me; literally, an encumbrance (seeDeu_1:12). 3. GILL, “Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth,.... The Targum is, "my Word abhorreth;'' the Messiah, the essential Word. These are the same as before. They are a trouble unto me; as they were kept and observed, either when they should not, or in a manner unbecoming: I am weary to bear them; because of the sins with which they made him to serve, Isa_43:24. 4. HENRY, “As odious and offensive. God did not only not accept them, but he did detest and abhor them. “They are your sacrifices, they are none of mine; I am full of them, even surfeited
- 110. with them.” Heneeded them not (Psa_50:10), did not desire them, had had enough of them, and more than enough. Their coming into his courts he calls treading them, or trampling upon them; their very attendance on his ordinances was construed into a contempt of them. Their incense, though ever so fragrant, was an abomination to him, for it was burnt in hypocrisy and with an ill design. Their solemn assemblies he could not away with, could not see them with any patience, nor bear the affront they gave him. The solemn meeting is iniquity; though the thing itself was not, yet, as they managed it, it became so. It is a vexation (so some read it), a provocation, to God, to have ordinances thus prostituted, not only by wicked people, but to wicked purposes: “My soul hates them; they are a trouble to me, a burden, an incumbrance; I am perfectly sick of them, and weary of bearing them.” God is never weary of hearing the prayers of the upright, but soon weary of the costly sacrifices of the wicked. He hides his eyes from their prayers, as that which he has an aversion to and is angry at. All this is to show, [1.] That sin is very hateful to God, so hateful that it makes even men's prayers and their religious services hateful to him. [2.] That dissembled piety is double iniquity. Hypocrisy in religion is of all things most abominable to the God of heaven. Jerome applies the passage to the Jews in Christ's time, who pretended a great zeal for the law and the temple, but made themselves and all their services abominable to God by filling their hands with the blood of Christ and his apostles, and so filling up the measure of their iniquities. 5. JAMISON, “appointed — the sabbath, passover, pentecost, day of atonement, and feast of tabernacles [Hengstenberg]; they alone were fixed to certain times of the year. weary — (Isa_43:24). 6. K&D, “He gives a still stronger expression to His repugnance: “Your new-moons and your festive seasons my soul hateth; they have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them.” As the soul (nephesh) of a man, regarded as the band which unites together bodily and spiritual life, though it is not the actual principle of self-consciousness, is yet the place in which he draws, as it were, the circle of self-consciousness, so as to comprehend the whole essence of His being in the single thought of “I;” so, according to a description taken from godlike man, the “soul” (nephesh) of God, as the expression “my soul” indicates, is the centre of His being, regarded as encircled and pervaded (personated) by self-consciousness; and therefore, whatever the soul of God hates (vid., Jer_15:1) or loves (Isa_42:1), is hated or loved in the inmost depths and to the utmost bounds of His being (Psychol. p. 218). Thus He hated each and all of the festivals that were kept in Jerusalem, whether the beginnings of the month, or the high feast- days (moadim, in which, according to Lev 23, the Sabbath was also included) observed in the course of the month. For a long time past they had become a burden and annoyance to Him: His long-suffering was weary of such worship. “To bear” (שׂאְ,)נ in Isaiah, even in Isa_18:3, for ת ֵא ְשׂ or את ֵשׂ ro , and here for את ֵשׂ ָ:ל Ewald, §285, c) has for its object the seasons of worship already mentioned.
- 111. 7.CALVIN, “14.Your new-moonsThe Prophet adds nothing new to his former doctrine; but with respect to all ceremonies, in which there is no spiritual truth, but only the glare of a false pretense, he declares generally that they are not merely useless but wicked. Hence we ought to observe that we labor to no purpose, if we do not worship God in the right manner, and as God himself enjoins. In all things God delights in truth, but especially in the worship due to his majesty. Besides, not only do we lose our labor, but the worship of God (as we have already said) is perverted; and nothing can be more wicked than this. Now all superstitions are so many corruptions of the worship of God; it follows, therefore, that they are wicked and unlawful. Superstition may be viewed, either in itself, or in the disposition of the mind. In itself when men have the audacity to contrive what God has not commanded. Such are those actions which spring from will- worship, ( ἐθελοθρησκεία,Col_2:23,) Which is commonly called devotion. One man shall set up an idol, another shall build a chapels another shall appoint annual festivals, and innumerable things of the same nature. When men venture to take such liberties as to invent new modes of worship, that is superstition. In the disposition of the mind, when men imitate those services which are lawful and of which God approves, but keep their whole attention fixed on the outward form, and do not attend to their object or truth. In this manner the Jews earnestly adhered to the ceremonies which Moses had enjoined, but left out what was of the greatest importance; for they paid no regard to a pure conscience, never mentioned faith and repentance, had no knowledge of their guilt, and — what was still worse — separated Christ from them, and left no room for the truth. This plainly shows, as I have already stated, that it was a spurious and deceitful mask; so that their sacrifices did not at all differ from the sacrifices of the Gentiles. It is therefore not wonderful that the Lord calls them abomination I shall not stay to notice the phrases here used, which are various; and yet they ought not to be lightly passed over. For the Lord perceives how great is the wantonness of men in contriving modes of worship; and therefore he heaps up a variety of expressions, that he may more powerfully restrain that wantonness, and again declares that those actions are hateful to him. Moreover, because men flatter themselves, and foolishly entertain the belief that the Lord will hold in some estimation the idle contrivances which they have framed, he declares, on the contrary, that he regards them with detestation and abhorrence.
- 112. 15 When you spreadout your hands in prayer, I hide my eyes from you; even when you offer many prayers, I am not listening. Your hands are full of blood! 1.BARNES, “Ye spread forth your hands - This is an expression denoting the act of supplication. When we ask for help, we naturally stretch out our hands, as if to receive it. The expression therefore is equivalent to ‘when ye pray, or implore mercy.’ Compare Exo_9:29; Exo_17:11-12; 1Ki_8:22. I will hide mine eyes ... - That is, I will not attend to, or regard your supplications. The Chaldee Paraphrase is, ‘When your priests expand their hands to pray for you.’ Your hands ... - This is given as a reason why he would not hear. The expression full of blood, denotes crime and guilt of a high order - as, in murder, the hands would be dripping in blood, and as the stain on the hands would be proof of guilt. It is probably a figurative expression, not meaning literally that they were murderers, but that they were given to rapine and injustice; to the oppression of the poor, the widow, etc. The sentiment is, that because they indulged in sin, and came, even in their prayers, with a determination still to indulge it, God would not hear them. The same sentiment is elsewhere expressed; Psa_66:18 : ‘If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me;’ Pro_28:9 : ‘He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination;’ Jer_16:10-12; Zec_7:11-12; Pro_1:28-29. This is the reason why the prayers of sinners are not heard - But the truth is abundantly taught in the Scriptures, that if sinners will forsake their sins, the greatness of their iniquity is no obstacle to forgiveness; Isa_1:18; Mat_11:28; Luk_16:11-24. 2. CLARKE, “When ye spread - The Syriac, Septuagint, and a MS., read בפרשכם beparshecem, without the conjunction ו vau. Your hands “For your hands” - Αᅷ γαρ χειρες - Sept. Manus enim vestrae-Vulg. They seem to have read כיידיכם ki yedeychem. 3. GILL, “And when ye spread forth your hands,.... That is, in prayer, this being a prayer gesture: hence the Targum paraphrases it, "and when the priests spread out their hands to pray for you.''
- 113. I will hidemine eyes from you; will not look upon them, nor regard their prayer; see Lam_3:42. yea, when ye make many prayers; as the Scribes and Pharisees did in Christ's time, and thought to be heard for their much speaking, like the Gentiles, Mat_6:7. I will not hear; so as to give an answer, or fulfil their requests: the reason follows, your hands are full of blood; of the prophets of the Lord, of Christ and his followers, whom they put to death. 4. PULPIT, “I will hide mine eyes, etc. A time comes when the wicked are alarmed, and seek to turn to God; but it is too late. "Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me" (Pro_1:28).When ye make many prayers; literally, multiply prayer. Full of blood (comp. Isa_1:21). Actual bloodshed may be pointed at, as the murder of Zechariah (2Ch_24:21), and the fate which befell Isaiah himself, according to the tradition, would seem to show. But cruelty and oppression, producing poverty and wretchedness, and tending to shorten life, are no doubt also included (comp. Mic_3:10, Mic_3:11). These were the special sins of the time (see verses 17, 23). 5. JAMISON, “(Psa_66:18; Pro_28:9; Lam_3:43, Lam_3:44). spread ... hands — in prayer (1Ki_8:22). Hebrew, “bloods,” for all heinous sins, persecution of God’s servants especially (Mat_23:35). It was the vocation of the prophets to dispel the delusion, so contrary to the law itself (Deu_10:16), that outward ritualism would satisfy God. 6. K&D, “Their self-righteousness, so far as it rested upon sacrifices and festal observances, was now put to shame, and the last inward bulwark of the sham holy nation was destroyed: “And if ye stretch out your hands, I hide my eyes from you; if ye make ever so much praying, I do not hear: your hands are full of blood.” Their praying was also an abomination to God. Prayer is something common to man: it is the interpreter of religious feeling, which intervenes and mediates between God and man; (Note: The primary idea of hithpallel and tephillah is not to be obtained from Deu_9:18 and Ezr_10:1, as Dietrich and Fürst suppose, who make hithpallel equivalent to hithnappel, to throw one's self down; but from 1Sa_2:25, “If a man sin against a man, the authorities right him” ( לוֹ ְל ִוּפי ִּהל ֶאם : it is quite a mistake to maintain that Elohim cannot have this meaning), i.e., they can set right the relation which he has disturbed. “But if one sin against Jehovah, who shall mediate for him ( י ִמל־לוֹ ֶ ַ ְתִי , quis intercedat pro eo)?” We may see from this that prayer is regarded as mediation, which sets right and establishes fellowship; and hithpallel signifies to make one's self a healer of divisions, or to settle for one's self, to strive after a
- 114. settlement (sibi, prose, intercedere: cf., Job_19:16, hithchannen, sibi propitium facere; Job_13:27, hithchakkah, sibi insculpere, like the Arabic ichtatta, to bound off for one's self).) it is the true spiritual sacrifice. The law contains no command to pray, and, with the exception of Deut 26, no form of prayer. Praying is so natural to man as man, that there was no necessity for any precept to enforce this, the fundamental expression of the true relation to God. The prophet therefore comes to prayer last of all, so as to trace back their sham-holiness, which was corrupt even to this the last foundation, to its real nothingness. “Spread out,” parash, or pi peresh, to stretch out; used with Cappaim to denote swimming in Isa_25:11. It is written here before a strong suffix, as in many other passages, e.g., Isa_52:12, with the inflection i instead of e. This was the gesture of a man in prayer, who spread out his hands, and when spread out, stretched them towards heaven, or to the most holy place in the temple, and indeed (as if with the feeling of emptiness and need, and with a desire to receive divine gifts) held up the hollow or palm of his hand (Cappaim: cf., tendere palmas, e.g., Virg. Aen. xii. 196, tenditque ad sidera palmas). However much they might stand or lie before Him in the attitude of prayer, Jehovah hid His eyes, i.e., His omniscience knew nothing of it; and even though they might pray loud and long (gam chi, etiamsi: compare the simple Chi, Jer_14:12), He was, as it were, deaf to it all. We should expect Chi here to introduce the explanation; but the more excited the speaker, the shorter and more unconnected his words. The plural damim always denotes human blood as the result of some unnatural act, and then the bloody deed and the bloodguiltiness itself. The plural number neither refers to the quantity nor to the separate drops, but is the plural of production, which Dietrich has so elaborately discussed in his Abhandlung, p. 40. (Note: As Chittah signified corn standing in the field, and Chittim corn threshed and brought to the market, so damim was not blood when flowing through the veins, but when it had flowed out-in other words, when it had been violently shed. (For the Talmudic misinterpretation of the true state of the case, see my Genesis, p. 626.)) The terrible damim stands very emphatically before the governing verb, pointing to many murderous acts that had been committed, and deeds of violence akin to murder. Not, indeed, that we are to understand the words as meaning that there was really blood upon their hands when they stretched them out in prayer; but before God, from whom no outward show can hide the true nature of things, however clean they might have washed themselves, they still dripped with blood. The expostulations of the people against the divine accusations have thus been negatively set forth and met in Isa_1:11-15 : Jehovah could not endure their work-righteous worship, which was thus defiled with unrighteous works, even to murder itself. The divine accusation is now positively established in Isa_1:16, Isa_1:17, by the contrast drawn between the true righteousness of which the accused were destitute, and the false righteousness of which they boasted. The crushing charge is here changed into an admonitory appeal; and the love which is hidden behind the wrath, and would gladly break through, already begins to disclose itself. There are eight admonitions. The first three point to the removal of evil; the other five to the performance of what is good. 7.CALVIN, “15.When ye spread forth your hands The ancient custom of spreading forth the hands in prayer did not arise from superstition; nor did that practice, like many others, obtain currency through
- 115. foolish and idleambition; but because nature herself prompts men to declare, even by outward signs, that they betake themselves to God. Accordingly, since they cannot fly to him, they raise themselves by this sign. No injunction, certainly, respecting this sign, was given to the fathers; but they used it as men divinely inspired; and by this very sign all idolaters are convicted of gross blindness; for, while they declare by an outward attitude that they betake themselves to God, in reality they betake themselves to idols. In order to convict them more strongly, the Lord permitted the uninterrupted use of this custom to continue among them. The Prophet, therefore, does not condemn the spreading forth of the hands, but their hypocrisy; because they assumed the appearance of men who called on God, while in their heart they were wholly averse to him, as he elsewhere declares more fully that “ people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honors me, but have removed their heart far from me” (Isa_29:13.) The Lord saith that he is nigh, but it is to those who call upon him in truth. (Psa_145:18.) Where hypocrisy is, there can be no true calling on God. And yet this passage does not contradict what is said elsewhere, “ they shall spread forth their hands, I will hear.” (23) For in that passage the Lord speaks of that calling which proceeds from confidence in him. Faith is the mother of calling on God; and if that be absent, nothing is left but empty mockery. Yea, when ye make many prayers He amplifies the former statement by threatening that he will be deaf to their cries, to whatever extent they may multiply prayers; as if he had said, “ you be constant in prayer, that diligence will be of no avail to you.” For this also is a fault which belongs to hypocrites, that the more their prayers abound in words, they think that they are more holy, and will more easily obtain what they wish. Thus their idle talkativeness is indirectly rebuked. Your hands are full of blood Here he begins to explain more fully the reason why he disapproves, and even disdainfully rejects, both their prayers and their sacrifices. It is because they are cruel and bloody, and stained with crimes of every sort, though they come into his presence with hypocritical display. Though he will afterwards add other kinds of crime, yet as he had mentioned the spreading forth of the hands, so he speaks of the hands, and says that in them they carry and hold out a testimony of their crimes, so that they need not wonder that he thrusts them back so harshly. For, on the other hand, the
- 116. phrase, to liftup clean hands, was employed not only by prophets and apostles, (1Ti_2:8,) but even by profane authors, who were driven by mere instinct to reprove the stupidity of men; if it were not that God perhaps forced them to make this confession, in order that true religion might never be without some kind of attestation. And yet the Prophet does not mean that they were robbers or murderers, but reproves the tricks and deceit by which they obtained possession of the property of others. God judges in a different manner from men; for the hidden tricks and wicked arts, by which wicked men are accustomed to deceive and take advantage of the more simple, are not taken into account by men; or if they are taken into account, they are at least extenuated, and are not estimated according to their just weight. But God, dragging forth to light those very men of dazzling reputation, who under specious pretenses had been in the habit of concealing their unjust practices, plainly declares that they are murderers. For in whatever way you kill a man, whether you cut his throat or take away his food and the necessaries of life, you are a murderer. Consequently, God does not speak of men who are openly wicked, or whose crimes have made them openly infamous, but of those who wished to be thought good men, and who kept up some kind of reputation. This circumstance ought to be carefully observed; for on the same grounds must we now deal with wicked men, who oppress the poor and feeble by fraud and violence, or some kind of injustice, and yet cloak their wickedness by plausible disguise. But with whatever impudence they may exclaim that they do not resemble thieves or assassins we must reprove them with the same severity which the Prophet employed towards persons of the same stamp; for when we speak in the name of God, we must not judge according to the views and opinions of men, but must boldly declare the judgment which the Lord hath pronounced. (23) Our Author seems to allude to Isa_65:24, It shall come to pass that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear. This conjecture is confirmed by the remarks which immediately follow on the word call, as the leading word in the passage. It appears to have escaped his recollection, that in this instance thespreading forth of the hands is not mentioned, though it occurs in an analogous passage of Solomon’ prayer at the dedication of the temple — What prayer or what supplication soever shall be made of any man, when he shallspread forth his hands in this house; then hear thou from heaven thy dwelling-place. 2Ch_6:29. — Ed.
- 117. 16 Wash and makeyourselves clean. Take your evil deeds out of my sight; stop doing wrong. 1.BARNES, “Wash you - This is, of course, to be understood in a moral sense; meaning that they should put away their sins. Sin is represented in the Scriptures as defiling or polluting the soul Eze_20:31; Eze_23:30; Hos_5:8; Hos_9:4; and the removal of it is represented by the act of washing; Psa_51:2 : ‘Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin;’ Jer_4:14 : ‘O Jerusalem, wash thine heart from wickedness, that thou mayest be saved;’ Job_9:30; 1Co_6:11; Heb_10:22; 2Pe_2:22; Rev_1:5; Rev_7:14. It is used here in close connection with the previous verse, where the prophet says that their hands were flied with blood. He now admonishes them to wash away that blood, with the implied understanding, that then their prayers would be heard. It is worthy of remark, also, that the prophet directs them to do this themselves. He addresses them as moral agents, and as having ability to do it. This is the uniform manner in which God addresses sinners in the Bible, requiring them to put away their sins, and to make themselves a new heart. Compare Eze_18:31-32. The evil of your doings - This is a Hebraism, to denote your evil doings. From before mine eyes - As God is omniscient, to put them away from before his eyes, is to put them away altogether. To pardon or forgive sin, is often expressed by hiding it; Psa_51:9 : Hide thy face from my sins. Cease to do evil - Compare 1Pe_3:10-11. The prophet is specifying what was necessary in order that their prayers might be heard, and that they might find acceptance with God. What he states here is a universal truth. If sinners wish to find acceptance with God, they must come renouncing all sin; resolving to put away everything that God hates, however dear it may be to the heart. Compare Mar_9:43-47. 2. CLARKE, “Wash you - Referring to the preceding verse, “your hands are full of blood;” and alluding to the legal washing commanded on several occasions. See Lev_14:8, Lev_14:9, Lev_14:47. 3. GILL, “Wash ye, make you clean, &c. These two words are to be regarded as one, since they intend the same thing, and suppose the persons spoken to to be unclean, as they were, notwithstanding their legal sacrifices and ceremonial ablutions; and are designed to convince them of it, to bring them to a sense of their inability to cleanse themselves, to lead them to
- 118. inquire after theproper means of it, and so to the fountain of Christ's blood to wash in, which only cleanses from it: put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; the exhortation is not barely to put away their doings, but the evil of them, and that not from themselves, but from before the eyes of God, from the eyes of his vindictive justice, which is only done by the sacrifice of Christ; and the use of this exhortation is to show the necessity of putting away sin to salvation, and the insufficiency of the blood of bulls and goats to do it, since, notwithstanding these, it remains untaken away; and to direct to the sacrifice of Christ, which effectually does it. Cease to do evil; either from ceremonial works done with a wicked mind, or from outward immoralities, such as shedding innocent blood, oppressing the fatherless and widow, things mentioned in the context; it denotes a cessation from a series and course of sinning, otherwise there is no ceasing from sin in this life. 4. HENRY, “Though God had rejected their services as insufficient to atone for their sins while they persisted in them, yet he does not reject them as in a hopeless condition, but here calls upon them to forsake their sins, which hindered the acceptance of their services, and then all would be well. Let them not say that God picked quarrels with them; no, he proposes a method of reconciliation. Observe here, I. A call to repentance and reformation: “If you would have your sacrifices accepted, and your prayers answered, you must begin your work at the right end: Be converted to my law” (so the Chaldee begins this exhortation), “make conscience of second-table duties, else expect not to be accepted in the acts of your devotion.” As justice and charity will never atone for atheism and profaneness, so prayers and sacrifices will never atone for fraud and oppression; for righteousness towards men is as much a branch of pure religion as religion towards God is a branch of universal righteousness. 1. They must cease to do evil, must do no more wrong, shed no more innocent blood. This is the meaning of washing themselves and making themselves clean, Isa_1:16. It is not only sorrowing for the sin they had committed, but breaking off the practice of it for the future, and mortifying all those vicious affections and dispositions which inclined them to it. Sin is defiling to the soul. Our business is to wash ourselves from it by repenting of it and turning from it to God. We must put away not only that evil of our doings which is before the eye of the world, by refraining from the gross acts of sin, but that which is before God's eyes, the roots and habits of sin, that are in our hearts; these must be crushed and mortified. 2. They must learn to do well. This was necessary to the completing of their repentance. Note, It is not enough that we cease to do evil, but we must learn to do well. (1.) We must be doing, not cease to do evil and then stand idle. (2.) We must be doing good, the good which the Lord our God requires and which will turn to a good account. (3.) We must do it well, in a right manner and for a right end; and, (4.) We must learn to do well; we must take pains to get the knowledge of our duty, be inquisitive concerning it, in care about it, and accustom ourselves to it, that we may readily turn our hands to our work and become masters of this holy art of doing well. He urges them particularly to those instances of well-doing wherein they had been defective, to second-table duties: “Seek judgment; enquire what is right, that you may do it; be solicitous to be found in the way of your duty, and do not walk carelessly. Seek opportunities of doing good:
- 119. Relieve the oppressed,those whom you yourselves have oppressed; ease them of their burdens, Isa_58:6. You, that have power in your hands, use it for the relief of those whom others do oppress, for that is your business. Avenge those that suffer wrong, in a special manner concerning yourselves for the fatherless and the widow, whom, because they are weak and helpless, proud men trample upon and abuse; do you appear for them at the bar, on the bench, as there is occasion. Speak for those that know not how to speak for themselves and that have not wherewithal to gratify you for your kindness.” Note, We are truly honouring God when we are doing good in the world; and acts of justice and charity are more pleasing to him than all burnt-offerings and sacrifices. 5. JAMISON, “God saith to the sinner, “Wash you,” etc., that he, finding his inability to “make” himself “clean,” may cry to God, Wash me, cleanse me (Psa_51:2, Psa_51:7, Psa_51:10). before mine eyes — not mere outward reformation before man’s eyes, who cannot, as God, see into the heart (Jer_32:19). 6. K&D, “The first three run thus: “Wash, clean yourselves; put away the badness of your doings from the range of my eyes; cease to do evil.” This is not only an advance from figurative language to the most literal, but there is also an advance in what is said. The first admonition requires, primarily and above all, purification from the sins committed, by means of forgiveness sought for and obtained. Wash: rachatzu, from rachatz, in the frequent middle sense of washing one's self. Clean yourselves: hizdaccu, with the tone upon the last syllable, is not the niphal of za kak, as the first plur. imper. niph. of such verbs has generally and naturally the tone upon the penultimate (see Isa_52:11; Num_17:10), but the hithpael of zacah for hizdaccu, with the preformative Tav resolved into the first radical letter, as is very common in the hithpael (Ges. §54, 2, b). According to the difference between the two synonyms (to wash one's self, to clean one's self), the former must be understood as referring to the one great act of repentance on the part of a man who is turning to God, the latter to the daily repentance of one who has so turned. The second admonition requires them to place themselves in the light of the divine countenance, and put away the evil of their doings, which was intolerable to pure eyes (Hab_1:13). They were to wrestle against the wickedness to which their actual sin had grown, until at length it entirely disappeared. Neged, according to its radical meaning, signifies prominence (compare the Arabic ne‛gd, high land which is visible at a great distance), conspicuousness, so that minneged is really equivalent to ex apparentia. 7. SBC, “As early then as the time of Isaiah we find the doctrine of the reformation of character dependent on forgiveness of sin distinctly taught. Consider:—
- 120. I. The demandmade. (1) The nature of the demand. It is for a reformation of practice. Put in one word, it is Reform. This is the one Divine call to fallen man. At one time it is an old commandment, at another a new one. Whether it be faith or love, hope or patience, that are enjoined, they are all to issue in the moral elevation of man’s character. (2) The word "learn" suggests a further thought, namely, the ground of this demand for reform. The ground of the demand is the perversity of the human will. (3) Consider the justice of the demand. It is God who makes it. But He could not have made it unless it were just to do so; nor would He have made it unless it were possible for man to meet it. II. How to meet God’s demand for reform. (1) The answer of nature. The belief in the ability of man to reform himself is founded either on ignorance of the real nature of his moral condition, as was the case in the pagan world, or on a deliberate refusal to recognise the truth when it is presented concerning that condition, as was the case in Judaism, and is the case at the present day with those who persuade themselves to a belief in the infinite intrinsic capability of human nature. (2) The answer of grace. A power from without is absolutely necessary to enable man to meet the demand for reform. This power is God’s forgiveness. (a) Pardon is an inducement to repentance, which is the first step in the reformation of character, (b) Pardon removes, or rather is itself, as its name implies, the removal of sin. When sin itself is removed in forgiveness, all its consequences, too, will soon vanish; and lightened of our burden, we shall feel free and ready to undertake the duties of the new life. R. E. Morris, The Welsh Pulpit of To-Day, p. 295. 8. CALVIN, “16.Wash you, make you clean He exhorts the Jews to repentance, and points out the true way of it, provided that they wish to have their obedience approved by God. Hence we conclude that nothing can please God, unless it proceed from a pure conscience; for God does not, like men, judge of our works according to their outward appearance. It frequently happens that some particular action, though performed by a very wicked man, obtains applause among men; but in the Sight of God, who beholds the heart, a depraved conscience pollutes every virtue. And this is what is taught by Haggai, holding out an illustration drawn from the ancient ceremonies, that everything which an unclean person has touched is polluted; from which he concludes that nothing clean proceeds from the wicked. Our Prophet has already declared, that in vain do they offer sacrifices to God, in vain do they pray, in vain do they call on his name, if integrity of heart do not sanctify the outward worship. For this reason, in order that the Jews may no longer labor to no purpose, he demands that cleanness; and he begins with a general reformation, lest, after having discharged one part of their duty, they should imagine that this would be a veil to conceal them from the eyes of God. Such is the manner in which we ought always to deal with men who are estranged from God. We must not confine our attention to one or a few sores of a diseased body but if we aim at a true and thorough cure, we must call on them to begin anew, and must thoroughly remove the contagion, that they who were formerly hateful and abominable in the sight of God may begin to please God. By the metaphor washing, he unquestionably exhorts to remove inward pollution, but shortly afterwards he will also add the fruits of actions.
- 121. When he bidsthem wash, he does not mean that men repent by their own exercise of free-will; but he shows that there is no other remedy but this, that they shall appear pure in the sight of God. Now, we know that the sacred writers attribute to men what is wrought in them by the Spirit of God, whom Ezekiel calls clean water, because to him belongs the work of repentance. (Eze_36:25.) Put away the evil of your doings The Prophet now comes to describe the fruits of repentance; for not only does he explain without a metaphor what it is to wash and to be cleansed, but he enjoins them to exhibit in their whole life, and in every action, the evidence of their being renewed. Yet he confirms the former statement, that the pollution of the people is before the eyes of God, that it stains and debases all their actions, and thus makes it impossible that they shall be pleasing in his sight. And he particularly mentions the eyes of God, lest, when they employed a veil to hinder themselves from seeing, they should vainly imagine that God shared with them in their blindness. Cease to do evil He still proceeds to reprove their manner of life. This passage is commonly interpreted as if by doing ill the Prophet meant loving ill; but it ought strictly to be understood as denoting those crimes by which a neighbor is injured; so that in the exhortation, Learn to do well, which occurs in the next verse, the expression to your neighbor ought to be supplied; for he speaks of the injuries and kind offices which Eve perform to our neighbors. Now since repentance has its seal in the heart of man, he describes it by those outward appearances by means of which it is, in some measure, brought before the eyes of men. There is no man who does not wish to be reckoned a good man; but the true character of every man is manifested by his actions. He therefore calls them to the performance of those outward actions by which they may give evidence of their repentance. He comprehends under two heads the fruits of repentance, ceasing to do evil, and doing well. First, we must cease to commit every act of injustice; for we must not imitate those spendthrifts who wish to be thought bountiful, and fraudulently take from one person what they bestow on another. Again, we must not resemble those idle people who think that they have done enough, if they have kept themselves from doing harm, and from invading the property of their neighbors, but are not careful to perform acts of kindness. He intended, therefore, to include both; for under those two heads the keeping of the second table of the law is comprehended. 9. PULPIT, “THE REQUIREMENT OF GOD—AMENDMENT OF LIFE. God, having put aside the worthless plea of outward religiousness made by his people, goes on to declare, by the mouth of his prophet, what he requires. First, in general terms (Isa_1:16), and then with distinct specification (Isa_1:17), he calls on them to amend their ways, both negatively ("cease to do evil") and positively
- 122. ("learn to dowell"). If they will really amend, then he assures them of forgiveness and favor; if they refuse and continue their rebellion, the sword will devour them. Isa_1:16 Wash you, make you clean. The analogy of sin to defilement, and of washing to cleansing from sin, has been felt among men universally wherever there has been any sense of sin. Outward purification by water has been constantly made use of as typical of the recovery of inward purity. Hence the numerous washings of the Levitical Law (Exo_29:4; Le Exo_1:9, Exo_1:13; Num_19:7, Num_19:8, Num_19:19; Deu_21:6; Deu_23:11; etc.); hence the ablutions of the priests in Egypt (Herod; 2.37); hence the appropriateness of the rite of baptism; hence the symbolical washing of hands to free from complicity in blood-guiltiness (Mat_27:24). "Wash you, make you clean, "could not be misunderstood by the Israelites; they would know that it was a requirement to "wash their hands in innocency" (Psa_26:6; Psa_73:13), even apart from what follows. Put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes. Not "hide it, "for that was impossible; but remove it altogether - in other words, "cease from it." "Cast off all the works of darkness;" get rid of evil, to begin with. So much is negative. 17 Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed.[a] Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow. 1.BARNES, “Learn to do well - , To learn here is to become accustomed to, to practice it. To do well stands opposed to all kinds of evil. “Seek judgment.” The word “judgment” - משׁפט mishpatʖ - here means justice. The direction refers particularly to magistrates, and it is evident that the prophet had them particularly in his view in all this discourse. Execute justice between man and man with impartiality. The word “seek” - דרשׁוּ dı re shu - means to pursue, to search for,
- 123. as an objectto be gained; to regard, or care for it, as the main thing. Instead of seeking gain, and bribes, and public favor, they were to make it an object of intense interest to do justice. Relieve - - אשׁרוּ 'ashe ru - literally, make straight, Or right (margin, righten). The root - אשׁר 'a shar - means to proceed, to walk forward in a direct line; and bears a relation to ישׁר yashar, to be straight. Hence, it often means to be successful or prosperous - to go straight forward to success. In Piel, which is the form used here, it means to cause to go straight; and hence, applied to leaders, judges, and guides, to conduct those under their care in a straight path, anal not in the devices and crooked Ways of sin; Pro_23:19 : Hear thou, my son, and he wise, And guide אשׁר 'asher, “make straight”) thine heart in the way. The oppressed - Him to whom injustice has been done in regard to his character, person, or property; compare the notes at Isa_58:6. Judge the fatherless - Do justice to him - vindicate his cause. Take not advantage of his weak and helpless, condition - his ignorance and want of experience. This charge was particularly necessary on account of the facilities which the guardians of orphans have to defraud or oppress, without danger of detection or punishment. Orphans have no experience. Parents are their natural protectors; and therefore God especially charged on their guardians to befriend and do justice to them; Deu_24:17 : ‘Thou shalt not pervert the judgment of the stranger, nor the fatherless, nor take the widow’s raiment to pledge.’ Plead for - Contend for her rights. Aid her by vindicating her cause. She is unable to defend herself; she is liable to oppression; and her rights may be taken away by the crafty and designing. It is remarkable that God so often insists on this in the Scriptures, and makes it no small part of religion; Deu_14:29; Deu_24:17; Exo_22:22 : ‘Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child.’ The ancient views of piety on this subject are expressed in the language, and in the conduct of Job. Thus, impiety was said to consist in oppressing the fatherless and widow. They drive away the donkey of the fatherless, They take the widow’s ox for a pledge. Job_24:3. He evil-entreateth the barren that beareth not, And doeth not good to the widow. Job_24:21. Job’s own conduct was an illustration of the elevated and pure views of ancient piety: When the ear heard me, then it blessed me; And when the eye saw me, it gave witness to me; Because I delivered the poor that cried, And the fatherless, And him that had none to help him. The blessing of him that was ready to perish came upon me; And I caused the widow’s heart to leap for joy. Job_29:11-13. See also Jer_7:6; Mal_3:5; Jam_1:27. Hence, God is himself represented as the vindicator of the rights of the widow and orphan: A father of the fatherless,
- 124. And a judgeof the widows, Is God in his holy habitation. Psa_68:5. Leave thy fatherless children, I will preserve them alive; And let thy widows trust in me. Jer_49:11. 2. CLARKE, “Relieve the oppressed “Amend that which is corrupted” - אשרוחמוץ asheru chamots. In rendering this obscure phrase I follow Bochart, (Hieroz. Part i., lib. ii., cap. 7), though I am not perfectly satisfied with this explication of it. 3. GILL, “Learn to do well,.... Which men are naturally ignorant of; to do good they have no knowledge; nor can they that are accustomed to do evil learn to do well of themselves; but the Lord can teach them to profit, and of him they should ask wisdom, and desire, under the influence of his grace, to learn to maintain good works for necessary uses, and particularly to do acts of beneficence to all men, and especially to the household of faith; and also, the following ones, seek judgment; seek to do justice between man and man in any cause depending, without respect of persons: relieve the oppressed; the poor that are oppressed by their neighbours that are richer and mightier than they, right their wrongs, and deliver them out of the hands of their oppressors (i): judge the fatherless; do justice to them who have none to take care of them, and defend them: plead for the widow; that is desolate, and has none to plead her cause. 4. HENRY, “They must learn to do well. This was necessary to the completing of their repentance. Note, It is not enough that we cease to do evil, but we must learn to do well. (1.) We must be doing, not cease to do evil and then stand idle. (2.) We must be doing good, the good which the Lord our God requires and which will turn to a good account. (3.) We must do it well, in a right manner and for a right end; and, (4.) We must learn to do well; we must take pains to get the knowledge of our duty, be inquisitive concerning it, in care about it, and accustom ourselves to it, that we may readily turn our hands to our work and become masters of this holy art of doing well. He urges them particularly to those instances of well-doing wherein they had
- 125. been defective, tosecond-table duties: “Seek judgment; enquire what is right, that you may do it; be solicitous to be found in the way of your duty, and do not walk carelessly. Seek opportunities of doing good: Relieve the oppressed, those whom you yourselves have oppressed; ease them of their burdens, Isa_58:6. You, that have power in your hands, use it for the relief of those whom others do oppress, for that is your business. Avenge those that suffer wrong, in a special manner concerning yourselves for the fatherless and the widow, whom, because they are weak and helpless, proud men trample upon and abuse; do you appear for them at the bar, on the bench, as there is occasion. Speak for those that know not how to speak for themselves and that have not wherewithal to gratify you for your kindness.” Note, We are truly honouring God when we are doing good in the world; and acts of justice and charity are more pleasing to him than all burnt-offerings and sacrifices. 5. JAMISON, “seek judgment — justice, as magistrates, instead of seeking bribes (Jer_22:3, Jer_22:16). judge — vindicate (Psa_68:5; Jam_1:27). 6. K&D, “Five admonitions relating to the practice of what is good: “Learn to do good, attend to judgment, set the oppressor right, do justice to the orphan, conduct the cause of the widow.” The first admonition lays the foundation for the rest. They were to learn to do good - a difficult art, in which a man does not become proficient merely by good intentions. “Learn to do good:” hetib is the object to limdu (learn), regarded as an accusative; the inf. abs. ַע ֵר ָה in Isa_1:16 takes the place of the object in just the same manner. The division of this primary admonition into four minor ones relating to the administration of justice, may be explained from the circumstance that no other prophet directs so keen an eye upon the state and its judicial proceedings as Isaiah has done. He differs in this respect from his younger contemporary Micah, whose prophecies are generally more ethical in their nature, whilst those of Isaiah have a political character throughout. Hence the admonitions: “Give diligent attention to judgment” (darash, to devote one's self to a thing with zeal and assiduity); and “bring the oppressor to the right way.” This is the true rendering, as Chamotz (from Chamatz, to be sharp in flavour, glaring in appearance, violent and impetuous in character) cannot well mean “the oppressed,” or the man who is deprived of his rights, as most of the early translators have rendered it, since this form of the noun, especially with an immutable kametz like ּודג ָ ה ָּודג ָ (cf., ּדקָנ ה ָ ְ,)נ is not used in a passive, but in an active or attributive sense (Ewald, §152, b: vid., at Psa_137:8): it has therefore the same meaning as Chomeotz in Psa_71:4, and ashok in Jer_22:3, which is similar in its form. But if Chamotz signifies the oppressive, reckless, churlish man, ר ֵ ִא cannot mean to make happy, or to congratulate, or to set up, or, as in the talmudic rendering, to strengthen (Luzzatto: rianimate chi è oppresso); but, as it is also to be rendered in Isa_3:12; Isa_9:15, to lead to the straight road, or to cause a person to keep the straight course. In the case before us, where the oppressor is spoken of, it means to direct him to the way of justice, to keep him in bounds by severe punishment and discipline.
- 126. (Note: The Talmudvaries in its explanation of Chamoz: in one instance it is applied to a judge who lets his sentence be thoroughly leavened before pronouncing it; in another the Chamuz is said to signify a person robbed and injured, in opposition to Chomez (b. Sanhedrin 35a). It is an instructive fact in relation to the idea suggested by the word, that, according to Joma 39b, a man who had not only taken possession of his own inheritance, but had seized upon another person's also, bore the nickname of ben chimzon as long as he lived.) In the same way we find in other passages, such as Isa_11:4 and Psa_72:4, severe conduct towards oppressors mentioned in connection with just treatment of the poor. There follow two admonitions relating to widows and orphans. Widows and orphans, as well as foreigners, were the protégés of God and His law, standing under His especial guardianship and care (see, for example, Exo_22:22 (21), cf., Exo_21:21 (20). “Do justice to the orphan” (Shaphat, as in Deu_25:1, is a contracted expression for shaphat mishpat): for if there is not even a settlement or verdict in their cause, this is the most crying injustice of all, as neither the form nor the appearance of justice is preserved. “Conduct the cause of the widows:” יב ִר with an accusative, as in Isa_51:22, the only other passage in which it occurs, is a contracted form for יב ִריב ִר . Thus all the grounds of self-defence, which existed in the hearts of the accused, are both negatively and positively overthrown. They are thundered down and put to shame. The law (thorah), announced in Isa_1:10, has been preached to them. The prophet has cast away the husks of their dead works, and brought out the moral kernel of the law in its universal application. 7.CALVIN, “17.Learn to do well As he had just now, ill enjoining them to cease to do evil, charged them with the continual practice of iniquity as if he had said that their whole life was a constant habit of sinning; so now he enjoins them to become skilled in acts of kindness, and in entreating them to learn this, he addresses them as scholars who had not yet learned their earliest lessons. And first he bids them seek judgment. Others render it, inquire respecting judgment, of which I do not approve; for by the word seek the Prophet meant more than this, he meant what we call the actual practice of it. By the wordjudgment he denotes what is good and right; as if he had said, “ at uprightness.” Relieve the oppressed The Prophet, after his wonted manner, adds to the general description the mention of particular classes; and although he has already given a special exhortation to kindness and justice, yet wishing to press them more closely, he enters into a more careful enumeration of certain classes, so as to present a more complete view of the subject. For otherwise men always wish to be reckoned good and righteous, and can scarcely be moved by general instruction; but when we come to particular cases, they are forced, as it were, to deal with the matter in hand, and are compelled to yield, or at least become more tractable, of which we have daily experience. Judge the fatherless, plead for the widow The Prophet here selects two classes, by means of which the
- 127. wickedness of menis more fully exposed; for it seldom happens that the causes of the fatherless and widows are defended, because men do not expect from them any rewards. To such an extent are they exposed to every kind of injustice, that no man comes forward in defense of them, because there is no man who follows justice on its own account; and not only so, but there is a very great number of persons who are ready to plunder the poor and needy. This proves that there is no one who cares about exercising judgment; for we need not at all wonder that men of wealth and influence have friends to assist them, who are excited and allured by the expectation of reward. But the Lord declares that he takes charge of the fatherless and widows, and will avenge them if they shall sustain any injury. “ shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child. If thou afflict then in any wise, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry: and my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless.” (Exo_22:22.) The same declaration is now extended to all others, who are oppressed and groan under the violence and lawless passions of men of rank and influence. This ought to yield the highest consolation to all the children of God, who are enjoined to possess their souls in patience. (Luk_21:19.) Whatever may be the haughty boasting of enemies, this will not prevent the people of God from glorying amidst their tribulations, while such considerations as these shall have an abiding place in their minds: “ Lord will be our avenger. Though men disregard us, he takes care of us. He will aid the destitute, and will defend their cause.” 8. PULPIT, “Learn to do well. Now comes the positive; first, in the general form" learn," etc.; which resembles the apostle's "Put on the armor of light" (Rom_13:12). Then follow the particulars. Seek judgment; or, seek out justice; i.e. endeavor to get justice done to all men; see that they "have right." Relieve the oppressed. So the LXX; the Vulgate, the Syriac, and the Chaldean Versions. But the word translated "oppressed" is thought by many to mean "oppressor" (Kimchi, Gesenius, Cheyne). This is certainly its meaning in Psa_71:4. Translate, tighten the oppressor; i.e. correct and chasten him. Judge the fatherless; rather, do justice to the orphan (Cheyne); see that he is not wronged—be his champion. Plead for the widow; i.e. plead her cause in the courts; or, if judge, and she have no advocate, lean towards her, as if her advocate. The widow and the orphan were taken under God's special protection from the time of Moses, and constantly commended to the tender care of the righteous (Exo_22:22-24; Deu_10:18; Deu_24:17; Deu_27:19, etc.).
- 128. 9. GREAT TEXTS,“Learning to do Well Learn to do well.—Isa_1:17. How is man to be distinguished from the lower animals? Man has been called a laughing animal. But do not the apes also laugh, says Carlyle, or attempt to do it? Nor is Carlyle content with the Frenchman’s definition that man is thecooking animal. His own definition is that man is the tool-using animal. 1 [Note: Sartor Resartus, ch. v.] But how will it do to describe him as the being who learns? This is Watkinson’s definition. 2 [Note: The Bane and the Antidote, p. 169.] Other creatures, he says, can scarcely be said to learn; whatever pertains to their species they do immediately, instinctively, perfectly. “A lark builds its first nest as skilfully as its last, a spider’s first embroidery is as exquisite as anything it spins in adult life, whilst a bee constructs its first cell and compounds its first honey, with an efficiency that leaves nothing to be desired.” It is altogether different with human beings; they have everything to learn. I What have we to learn? 1. We have to learn how to make the best use of the body. Hitherto the development of the body has been done mostly out of school; it has been left to the playground. But now some attention is being given to physical training. And we are even beginning to give our boys an opportunity of learning a trade at school. However it is done, we must learn to use the body. 2. We must also educate the mind. We have to learn in order to know, to remember, to appreciate literature and art, to make decisions in the conduct of life. 3. Do we stop there? Is the highest aim of education achieved when we possess “a sound mind in a sound body”? What about the Soul? Besides learning a trade, besides learning to read and to understand what we read, have we not also to learn to do well? The training of the soul is scarcely recognised as any proper part of public education. Nor is the place of the public teacher always efficiently supplied in the home. We seem to expect that our children should do well naturally. We are sometimes greatly pained when we detect in our young children pride, cruelty, falsehood, dishonesty, selfishness, avarice, and other vices; but it is a mistake to lay this fact too much to heart and to begin prophesying evil concerning them. Beginning with the piano, children make such sad work of it; when they first try a pen, the characters are exceedingly ambiguous and the page liberally blotted; and when for the first time they essay some task in art, the work of their pencil is utterly grotesque. But we do not therefore despair of them, and write bitter things against them; they were sent to school to learn, and we reasonably hope that by and by their senses will be exercised and developed, that they will shed their barbarisms, and take a worthy place with scholars and artists. They must learn goodness as they learn music, mathematics, languages, and art. But is not the education of the soul the same thing as the education of the mind? That is just another way of saying, is not cleverness goodness? And we know that cleverness is not always goodness. On the contrary, great intellectual gifts are often found associated with great moral vices. The intellectual and moral organs are so closely related that it is impossible to separate them in thought; yet the light of the one is often eclipsed by the darkness of the other. Astronomers have recently made very interesting discoveries respecting what are known as binary or companion stars. They tell us that the two stars are in close proximity; indeed, they are so close together
- 129. that no telescopecould separate their images; and yet one of them is dark and the other brilliant. The two orbs are intimately related, and revolve round each other at slight distances; yet whilst one is bright the other is dark, and the dark star is perpetually eclipsing its luminous companion. 1 [Note: The Bane and the Antidote, p. 168.] It is easy to understand the failure of “goody goody” literature. It is “goody goody” rather than good, because it means well, but is not true either in the lower real or higher ideal sense. Its minor heroes pale and are ineffective, while George Eliot’s Adam Bede, and Mary Garth, and Dinah live with us like friends, and move us by their virtues,—while the heroic self-devotedness of Jean Valjean, and the infinite goodness of the good Bishop in Les Misérables, shine in our minds and hearts as beacon lights of virtue, made visible in the atmosphere of genius. Thus, in order that the examples of literature may work within the mind, the literature must be good in the literary as well as in the ethical sense. 1 [Note: S. Byrant, Short Studies in Character, p. 71.] II How then are we to learn to do well? 1. We need Power. We need the gift, the genius. The man who has no music in him will never learn to be a musician. Those who visit the chapel in Milan which contains Leonardo da Vinci’s fresco of the Last Supper see a copy of it first on the wall opposite the entrance door. But when they have seen the original on the wall at the end of the building, they have no hesitation in preferring it. The copy shows traces of careful workmanship, but the original has the stamp of genius. Sir Joshua Reynolds was taken by a friend to see a picture. He was anxious to admire it, and he looked it over with a keen and careful but favourable eye. “Capital composition; correct drawing; the colour, tone, chiaroscuro excellent; but—but—it wants, hang it, it wants—That!” snapping his fingers; and, wanting “that,” though it had everything else, it was worth nothing. 2 [Note: John Brown, Rab and his Friends, p. 392.] I once knew a man who had apparently no ear for music. Possessing every opportunity for travel and culture, he resented the fact that others enjoyed what was a closed world to him. So he set to work to study music from the foundation. He became so expert that he could take to pieces a Wagner opera and recompose its motifs. He enjoyed hearing such an opera rendered, but his pleasure involved scarcely any appreciation of music. It was the pleasure accompanying the intellectual process of analysis and synthesis, the kind of joy one has in working a difficult problem in calculus; but the man remained almost as deaf to music as before he undertook the course of training. 3 [Note: E. H. Griggs, Moral Education, p. 22.] The man of genius, we say, has “the gift.” The power to do well is also a gift. This, nor gems, nor stores of gold,
- 130. Nor purple state,nor culture can bestow; But God alone, when first His active hand Imprints the secret bias of the soul. Or, to put it in another way, as the poet is born, not made, so we must be born again before we learn to do well. “The wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” St. Paul says, “I learned in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.” He does not say, “I have learned,” as though it had been the result of daily discipline; he goes back to the moment of the vision of Christ.’ “It pleased God to reveal his Son in me,” and I learned that day to be content. It flashed upon him, says R. M. Pope, 1 [Note: The Poetry of the Upward Way, p. 24.] in the great moment of his history. When he knew the power of Christ’s resurrection, the true explanation of life dawned upon him; the world suddenly wore a new expression. World—how it walled about Life with disgrace, Till God’s own smile came out; That was thy face! It is sometimes said that certain men have a natural genius for religion. What they have is natural ability which, when taken possession of by the Spirit of God, makes them eminently successful as witnesses or saints. How would St. Paul have used his reasoning power, or Bunyan his imagination, apart from the grace of God? The world is full of people who are ambitious to become poets, painters, musicians, or orators, but, despite wearisome and pathetic application, they never do anything really first-rate; the masterpiece is not forthcoming; they find supreme music, art, or eloquence so difficult as to be, in fact, practically impossible. What do these baffled aspirants really need to make their work easy, and to secure them the rapture of triumph? Give that despairing musician an atom of Mozart’s melodious brain, that halting poet a spark of Shakespeare’s fire, that struggling painter a nerve of Turner’s colour-sense, that stammering orator a lick of Demosthenes’ tongue, and bitter failure will be at an end; there will be no more exhausting difficulty
- 131. and delay, onlythe intoxicating sense of mastery, progress, and delight. More power in the learner is what is needed, and every difficulty is vanquished, every aspiration fulfilled. So we experience repeated difficulty and disappointment in the pursuit of holiness, because the power of Christ does not sufficiently rest upon us. “Christ in you the hope of glory”—not the glory of the future only, but the glory of character here and now. Let us plead for more inward vision, receptivity, and responsiveness, for more of the Spirit that worketh mightily in full surrendered souls, and all things fair and perfect shall become possible. 1 [Note: W. L. Watkinson, The Bane and the Antidote, p. 181.] 2. We need a Pattern. As the child who is to learn to write receives a copybook with a headline, so we need an example if we are to learn to do well. Should the example be good or bad? Some ethical teachers think it best to show us the repulsiveness and horror of vice. Many novelists follow this method. “The drama,” says Mr. Watkinson, “is fond of holding up the mirror to nature, as the phrase goes, and very ugly reflections they commonly are; one might think that the stage existed in the interests of the doctrine of original sin. Newspapers foster purity by raking in the kennels, and journals with religious and moral pretensions go to an extreme in exhuming and exhibiting repulsive incidents in individual and social life.” 2 [Note: Ibid. p. 175.] But how often are drunkards reformed by the sight of a drunkard? It is well known that murders are apt to follow when the details of some ghastly murder are given in the newspapers. We might as well hope to obtain a good style by familiarising ourselves with specimens of bad English. Let the pattern be good, and as good as possible. As William Tell has made many patriots, as Florence Nightingale has trained many nurses, as Lord Shaftesbury has shown the way to many philanthropists, so the Lord Jesus Christ is the Pattern for all who would learn to do well. “Learn of me” is His own invitation, and the Apostles are aware that the only way by which they themselves learned to do well was by “looking unto Jesus.” I remember speaking severely to a five-year-old child who was misbehaving at table. She answered quite discourteously. On being asked why she had spoken so, she said, “Oh, I only wanted to show you the tone of voice you used!” 1 [Note: E. H. Griggs, Moral Education, p. 190.] 3. We need Practice. How does a young man learn to cycle? By practising it. How does a young medical man attain to usefulness in his profession? By the practice of it. He calls himself a practitioner, and his business a practice. “Do! Do! Do! Let your picture go, and do another!” said William Hunt to his students when they asked him a thousand curious questions about lines, colours, and effects. In doing, they were to know and excel. And the teachers of science specially demand that all theoretical knowledge shall go hand in hand with experiment. The student must keep on applying his knowledge; only by repeated appeals to the facts of
- 132. nature does helearn the truth and become a real philosopher. We know only through doing, and through doing ever do better. The famous physician John Hunter used to say to his pupils, “Don’t think, try.” 1. Take the virtue of contentment. In our best moments we feel that fretfulness and ingratitude partake of the nature of blasphemy; yet the repinings and soreness of the soul are subdued only through repeated failure and discipline. It is true, no doubt, that there is a secret, and that the secret of contentment, as of every other virtue, may be learned in a moment. But for the fulness of the following of Christ in contentment there is need of the patient discipline of years. Contentment, says Dr. J. B. Campbell, is less a gift or a grace than a growth. It is the flower and fruit of careful cultivation. And he mentions three things that aid in its cultivation. (1) A just consideration of the worth of things. We shall never find contentment while we value the things that are seen above those that are not seen, the trivial and temporal above the essential and eternal, the material and physical above the moral and spiritual. (2) Confidence in God. He is a rewarder of those that diligently seek Him. He is never unmindful of our work and labour of love. Then disappointments become His appointments, and all things work together for good. (3) Co-operation with God. For this makes failure impossible, this gives assurance that no word or work is vain. But co-operation with God demands the consecration of self to His service. And so the simple secret of contentment is surrender to God’s will. Does anyone doubt it? Let him try it. Does anyone desire it? Let him do it. 2. Take the virtue of sincerity. Some men are naturally theatrical; they constantly catch themselves making postures; their life is vitiated and disfigured by endless pretence, affectation, and unreality. Through repeated and bitter castigations of the soul, men master this passion for masquerading and attain sincerity, simplicity, and thoroughness of life. There comes to me a thought of Carlyle’s, which contains a world of wisdom: “The true merit of originality is not novelty; it is sincerity.” That, as a motto for all who think and speak, may be added to a theory of life, and become the hidden text of many a moral lesson indirectly conveyed through intellectual criticism to others. How cheerful it is to think upon! We can all be sincere; we can all be original. 1 [Note: S. Bryant, Studies in Character, p. 75.] 3. Take the virtue of veracity. How much it costs us to learn to speak the truth, to act the truth, to live the truth. We suppress, distort, exaggerate, colour and discolour. Instead of saying plain “yes,” or plain “no,” “it is so,” “it is not the case,” or some other simple, straightforward phrase of assent or denial, a man swears or protests in some foolish way, thereby
- 133. weakening, not affirming,what he says. All these unnecessary enlargements show that he who uses them is aware that his simple word is not valuable. He distrusts his own honour. Jesus Christ’s teaching in respect to this there can be no mistaking. Eliciting the spirit of the third commandment, He declares, “Let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of the evil one.” He would abolish even the solemn oath of the Old Testament, “As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand.” No man who respects himself, certainly no obedient copier of Jesus Christ, will consent to confirm his “yes” or “no,” unless when the law, which knows him not, demands it. 2 [Note: W. G. Rutherford, The Key of Knowledge, p. 166.] 4. Take the virtue of courtesy. “Good breeding,” says Carlyle, “consists in gracefully remembering the rights of others, high breeding in gracefully insisting on one’s own.” Thus there are three ways of it. There is the discourteous person whose only practice has been in selfishly saying and doing things that hurt others. There is the selfishly courteous person with the polish of a pagan. And there is the person who, having the mind of Christ, learns to put the interests of others before his own. It is the “gift” that makes the difference. Courtesy is itself a form of service. By gentleness of manner, by an unobtrusive sympathy, by thoughtfulness for others in little things, we may smooth the roughness of life for those with whom we live, soothe their vexations, and contribute more to their real happiness than by great and signal acts of generosity. On the other hand, a harsh, careless word may inflict a worse wound than a blow, and the discomfort created by habitual indifference to the convenience, tastes, opinions, and prejudices of those about us may be harder to bear than positive physical pain. Discourtesy occasions not merely suffering, but sin; and Christian courtesy is a “means of grace” to all who have the happiness to receive it. 1 [Note: R. W. Dale, Laws of Christ for Common Life, p. 121.] They might not need me, Yet they might; I’ll let my heart be Just in sight— A smile so small
- 134. As mine mightbe Precisely their Necessity. 18 “Come now, let us settle the matter,” says the LORD. “Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool. 1.BARNES, “Come now - This is addressed to the nation of Israel; and the same exhortation is made to all sinners. It is a solemn act on the part of God, submitting the claims and principles of his government to reason, on the supposition that men may see the propriety of his service, and of his plan. Let us reason together - ונוכחה ve nivake chah from יכח yakach, not used in Kal, but in Hiphil; meaning to show, to prove. Job_13:15 : ‘Surely I will prove my ways (righteous) before him;’ that is, I will justify my ways before him. Also to correct, reprove, convince, Job_32:12; to rebuke, reproach, censure, Job_6:25; to punish, Job_5:17; Pro_3:12; to judge, decide, Isa_11:3; to do justice, Isa_11:4; or to contend, Job_13:3; Job_16:21; Job_22:4. Here it denotes the kind of contention, or argumentation, which occurs in a court of justice, where the parties reciprocally state the grounds of their cause. God had been addressing magistrates particularly, and commanding them to seek judgment, to relieve the oppressed, to do justice to the orphan and widow; all of which terms are taken from courts of law. He here continues the language, and addresses them as accustomed to the proceedings of courts, and proposes to submit the case as if on trial. He then proceeds Isa_1:18-20, to adduce the principles on which he is willing to bestow pardon on them; and submits the case to them, assured that those principles will commend themselves to their reason and sober judgment. Though your sins be as scarlet - The word used here - שׁנים shanı ym - denotes properly a bright red color, much prized by the ancients. The Arabic verb means to shine, and the name
- 135. was given tothis color, it is supposed by some, on account of its splendor, or bright appearance. It is mentioned as a merit of Saul, that he clothed the daughters of Israel in scarlet, 2Sa_1:24, Our word scarlet, denoting a bright red, expresses the color intended here. This color was obtained from the eggs of the coccus ilicis, a small insect found on the leaves of the oak in Spain, and in the countries east of the Mediterranean. The cotton cloth was dipped in this color twice; and the word used to express it means also double-dyed, from the verb שׁנה shanah, to repeat. From this double-dying many critics have supposed that the name given to the color was derived. The interpretation which derives it from the sense of the Arabic word to shine, however, is the most probable, as there is no evidence that the double-dying was unique to this color. It was a more permanent color than that which is mentioned under the word crimson. White is an emblem of innocence. Of course sins would be represented by the opposite. Hence, we speak of crimes as black, or deep-dyed, and of the soul as stained by sin. There is another idea here. This was a fast, or fixed color. Neither dew, nor rain, nor washing, nor long usage, would remove it. Hence, it is used to represent the fixedness and permanency of sins in the heart. No human means will wash them out. No effort of man, no external rites, no tears, no sacrifices, no prayers, are of themselves sufficient to take them away. They are deep fixed in the heart, as the scarlet color was in the Web of cloth, and an almighty power is needful to remove them. Shall be as white as snow - That is, the deep, fixed stain, which no human power could remove, shall be taken away. In other words, sin shall be pardoned, and the soul be made pure. White, in all ages, has been the emblem of innocence, or purity; compare Psa_68:14; Ecc_9:8; Dan_7:9; Mat_17:2; Mat_28:3; Rev_1:14; Rev_3:4-5; Rev_4:4; Rev_7:9, Rev_7:13. Though they be red - The idea here is not materially different from that expressed in the former part of the verse. It is the Hebrew poetic form of expressing substantially the same thought in both parts of the sentence. Perhaps, also, it denotes intensity, by being repeated; see Introduction, 8. Like crimson - כתולע katola‛. The difference between scarlet and crimson is, that the former denotes a deep red; the latter a deco red slightly tinged with blue. Perhaps this difference, however, is not marked in the original. The purple or crimson color was obtained commonly from a shellfish, called murex, or purpura, which abounded chiefly in the sea, near Tyre; and hence, the Tyrian dye became so celebrated. That, however, which is designated in this place, was obtained, not from a shellfish, but a worm (Hebrew: תולע tola‛, snail, or conchylium - the Helix Janthina of Linnaeus. This color was less permanent than the scarlet; was of a bluish east; and is commonly in the English Bible rendered blue. It was employed usually to dye wool, and was used in the construction of the tabernacle, and in the garments of the high priest. It was also in great demand by princes and great men, Jdg_8:26; Luk_14:19. The prophet has adverted to the fact that it was employed mainly in dying wool, by what he has added, ‘shall be as wool.’ As wool - That is, as wool undyed, or from which the color is removed. Though your sins appear as deep-stained, and as permanent as the fast color of crimson in wool, yet they shall be removed - as if that stain should be taken away from the wool, and it should be restored to its original whiteness. 2. CLARKE, “Though your sins be as scarlet - שני shani, “scarlet or crimson,” dibaphum, twice dipped, or double dyed; from שנה shanah, iterare, to double, or to do a thing twice. This derivation seems much more probable than that which Salmasius prefers from שנן shanan,
- 136. acuere, to whet,from the sharpness and strength of the color, οξυφοινικον; תלע tela, the same; properly the worm, vermiculus, (from whence vermeil), for this color was produced from a worm or insect which grew in a coccus or excrescence of a shrub of the ilex kind, (see Plin. Nat. Hist. 16:8), like the cochineal worm in the opuntia of America. See Ulloa’s Voyage book v., chap. ii., note to page 342. There is a shrub of this kind that grows in Provence and Languedoc, and produces the like insect, called the kermes oak, (see Miller, Dict. Quercus), from kermez, the Arabic word for this color, whence our word crimson is derived. “Neque amissos colores Lana refert medicata fuco,” says the poet, applying the same image to a different purpose. To discharge these strong colors is impossible to human art or power; but to the grace and power of God all things, even much more difficult are possible and easy. Some copies have כשנים keshanim, “like crimson garments.” Though they be red, etc. - But the conjunction ו vau is added by twenty-one of Kennicott’s, and by forty-two of De Rossi’s MSS., by some early editions, with the Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate, and Arabic. It makes a fuller and more emphatic sense. “And though they be red as crimson,” etc. 3. GILL, “Come now, and let us reason, together, saith the Lord,.... These words stand not in connection either with the preceding or following, but are to be read in a parenthesis, and are thrown in for the sake of the small remnant God had left among this wicked people, in order to comfort them, being distressed with sin. These, seeing their sins in their dreadful colours, and with all their aggravating circumstances, were ready to conclude that they were unpardonable; and, seeing God as an angry Judge, dared not come nigh him, but stood at a distance, fearing and expecting his vengeance to fall upon them, and therefore put away the promises, and refused to be comforted; when the Lord was pleased to encourage them to draw near to him, and come and reason with him: not at the bar of his justice; there is no reasoning with him there; none can contend with him, or answer him, one of a thousand; if he marks iniquity in strict justice, none can stand before him; there is no entering the lists with him upon the foot of justice, or at its bar: but at the bar of mercy, at the throne of grace; there the righteous may dispute with him from his declarations and promises, as well as come with boldness to him; and at the altar and sacrifice of Christ, and at the fountain of his blood: here sinners may reason with him from the virtue and efficacy of his blood and sacrifice; and from the Lord's proclamation of grace and mercy through him; and from his promises to forgive repenting and confessing sinners: and here God reasons with sensible souls from his own covenant promises and proclamations to forgive sin; from the aboundings of his grace over abounding sin; from the righteousness of Christ to justify, his blood to cleanse from sin, and his sacrifice to atone for it; and from the end of his coming into the world to save the chief of sinners: saying, though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. Every sin is a transgression of the law, and hateful and abominable to God; no sin is venial in itself, but deserving of the wrath of God, and the curses of the law; all sin is mortal, the wages of it is death: but all are not alike; some are greater, others lesser; some are attended with aggravating circumstances, as when the persons that commit them have, besides the light of nature, also the law of Moses, or the Gospel of Christ; have had the advantage of a religious education; have sat under a Gospel ministry, and received much
- 137. speculative light andknowledge; yea, have been under convictions of sin time after time, and yet have been ringleaders and encouragers of others in sin, guilty of very enormous crimes, which in themselves are comparable to "scarlet" and "crimson": and perhaps reference may be had to the sin of murder, since the persons, among whom these dwelt, their hands were full of blood; and may respect the crucifiers of Christ, among whom there were some savingly convicted and converted. Moreover, they may be signified hereby on account of the effects of them, they defile men, provoke God to wrath, and, through the law, work wrath in their consciences; and may signify, that they are sins of a deep dye, and which have such a place in their hearts and consciences, that nothing can remove them but the blood of Christ: and besides are open, flagrant, and notorious to all, and especially to God; yet these, through the grace and blood of Jesus, become as white as wool and as snow: not that pardon of sin takes sin out of the hearts and natures of men, nor changes the nature of sin, or causes it to cease to be sin; but this is to be understood of the persons of sinners, who hereby are made so white, yea, whiter than this, Psa_51:1 as they are considered in Christ, washed in his blood, and clothed with his righteousness, which is fine linen, clean and white; God, seeing no iniquity in them, has thus graciously dealt with them, and they being without fault, spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing. It was with respect to this Scripture that the Jews in later times were wont to tie a scarlet thread to the head of the scapegoat, when he was sent into the wilderness; though at first they fastened it to the door of the outward porch, and then to the door of the inward porch, and, if it turned white, it was a sign their sins were forgiven them, but, if not, otherwise (k); and it is owned by them, that it belongs to future time, the time of the Messiah (l). (k) T. Bab. Sabbat, fol. 89. 2. (l) Gussetius observes, that חמוץ signifies not "oppressed", but infected with leaven, and so אשריחמוץ means, reduce to a right way him that is corrupt with the leaven of vice, by hindering him that he may not go on to hurt the fatherless. Comment. Ebr. p. 265. 4. HENRY, “A demonstration, at the bar of right reason, of the equity of God's proceedings with them: “Come now, and let us reason together (Isa_1:18); while your hands are full of blood I will have nothing to do with you, though you bring me a multitude of sacrifices; but if you wash, and make yourselves clean, you are welcome to draw nigh to me; come now, and let us talk the matter over.” Note, Those, and those only, that break off their league with sin, shall be welcome into covenant and communion with God; he says, Come now, who before forbade them his courts. See Jam_4:8. Or rather thus: There were those among them who looked upon themselves as affronted by the slights God put upon the multitude of their sacrifices, as ch. 58:3, Wherefore have we fasted (say they) and thou seest not? They represented God as a hard Master, whom it was impossible to please. “Come,” says God, “let us debate the matter fairly, and I doubt not but to make it out that my ways are equal, but yours are unequal,” Eze_18:25. Note, Religion has reason on its side; there is all the reason in the world why we should do as God would have us do. The God of heaven condescends to reason the case with those that contradict him and find fault with his proceedings; for he will be justified when he speaks, Psa_51:4. The case needs only to be stated (as it is here very fairly) and it will determine itself. God shows here upon what terms they stood (as he does, Eze_18:21-24; Eze_33:18, Eze_33:19) and then leaves it to them to judge whether these terms are not fair and reasonable. 1. They could not in reason expect any more then, if they repented and reformed. they should be restored to God's favour, notwithstanding their former provocations. “This you may expect,” says God, and it is very kind; who could have the face to desire it upon any other terms? (1.) It is very little that is required, “only that you be willing and obedient, that you consent to obey” (so some read it), “that you subject your wills to the will of God, acquiesce in that, and give up
- 138. yourselves in allthings to be ruled by him who is infinitely wise and good” Here is no penance imposed for their former stubbornness, nor the yoke made heavier or bound harder on their necks; only, “Whereas hitherto you have been perverse and refractory, and would not comply with that which was for your own good, now be tractable, be governable” He does not say, “If you be perfectly obedient,” but, “If you be willingly so;” for, if there be a willing mind, it is accepted. (2.) That is very great which is promised hereupon. [1.] That all their sins should be pardoned to them, and should not be mentioned against them. “Though they be as red as scarlet and crimson, though you lie under the guilt of blood, yet, upon your repentance, even that shall be forgiven you, and you shall appear in the sight of God as white as snow.” Note, The greatest sinners, if they truly repent, shall have their sins forgiven them, and so have their consciences pacified and purified. Though our sins have been as scarlet and crimson, as deep dye, a double dye, first in the wool of original corruption and afterwards in the many threads of actual transgression - though we have been often dipped, by our many backslidings, into sin, and though we have lain long soaking in it, as the cloth does in the scarlet dye, yet pardoning mercy will thoroughly discharge the stain, and, being by it purged as with hyssop, we shall be clean, Psa_51:7. If we make ourselves clean by repentance and reformation (Isa_1:16), God will make us white by a full remission. [2.] That they should have all the happiness and comfort they could desire. “Be but willing and obedient, and you shall eat the good of the land, the land of promise; you shall have all the blessings of the new covenant, of the heavenly Canaan, all the good of the land.” Those that go on in sin, though they may dwell in a good land, cannot with any comfort eat the good of it; guilt embitters all; but, if sin be pardoned, creature-comforts become comforts indeed. 5. JAMISON, “God deigns to argue the case with us, that all may see the just, nay, loving principle of His dealings with men (Isa_43:26). scarlet — the color of Jesus Christ’s robe when bearing our “sins” (Mat_27:28). So Rahab’s thread (Jos_2:18; compare Lev_14:4). The rabbins say that when the lot used to be taken, a scarlet fillet was bound on the scapegoat’s head, and after the high priest had confessed his and the people’s sins over it, the fillet became white: the miracle ceased, according to them, forty years before the destruction of Jerusalem, that is, exactly when Jesus Christ was crucified; a remarkable admission of adversaries. Hebrew for “scarlet” radically means double-dyed; so the deep-fixed permanency of sin in the heart, which no mere tears can wash away. snow — (Psa_51:7). Repentance is presupposed, before sin can be made white as snow (Isa_1:19, Isa_1:20); it too is God’s gift (Jer_31:18, end; Lam_5:21; Act_5:31). red — refers to “blood” (Isa_1:15). as wool — restored to its original undyed whiteness. This verse shows that the old fathers did not look only for transitory promises (Article VII, Book of Common Prayer). For sins of ignorance, and such like, alone had trespass offerings appointed for them; greater guilt therefore needed a greater sacrifice, for, “without shedding of blood there was no remission”; but none such was appointed, and yet forgiveness was promised and expected; therefore spiritual Jews must have looked for the One Mediator of both Old Testament and New Testament, though dimly understood. 6. K&D, “The first leading division of the address is brought to a close, and Isa_1:18 contains the turning-point between the two parts into which it is divided. Hitherto Jehovah has spoken to
- 139. His people inwrath. But His love began to move even in the admonitions in Isa_1:16, Isa_1:17. And now this love, which desired not Israel's destruction, but Israel's inward and outward salvation, breaks fully through. “O come, and let us reason together, saith Jehovah. If your sins come forth like scarlet cloth, they shall become white as snow; if they are red as crimson, they shall come forth like wool!” Jehovah here challenges Israel to a formal trial: nocach is thus used in a reciprocal sense, and with the same meaning as nishpat in Isa_43:26 (Ges. §51, 2). In such a trial Israel must lose, for Israel's self-righteousness rests upon sham righteousness; and this sham righteousness, when rightly examined, is but unrighteousness dripping with blood. It is taken for granted that this must be the result of the investigation. Israel is therefore worthy of death. Yet Jehovah will not treat Israel according to His retributive justice, but according to His free compassion. He will remit the punishment, and not only regard the sin as not existing, but change it into its very opposite. The reddest possible sin shall become, through His mercy, the purest white. On the two hiphils here applied to colour, see Ges. §53, 2; though he gives the meaning incorrectly, viz., “to take a colour,” whereas the words signify rather to emit a colour: not Colorem accipere, but Colorem dare. Shani, bright red (the plural shanim, as in Pro_31:21, signifies materials dyed with shani), and tola, warm colour, are simply different names for the same colour, viz., the crimson obtained from the cochineal insect, Color cocccineus. The representation of the work of grace promised by God as a change from red to white, is founded upon the symbolism of colours, quite as much as when the saints in the Revelation (Rev_19:8) are described as clothed in white raiment, whilst the clothing of Babylon is purple and scarlet (Isa_17:4). Red is the colour of fire, and therefore of life: the blood is red because life is a fiery process. For this reason the heifer, from which the ashes of purification were obtained for those who had been defiled through contact with the dead, was to be red; and the sprinkling-brush, with which the unclean were sprinkled, was to be tied round with a band of scarlet wool. But red as contrasted with white, the colour of light (Mat_17:2), is the colour of selfish, covetous, passionate life, which is self-seeking in its nature, which goes out of itself only to destroy, and drives about with wild tempestuous violence: it is therefore the colour of wrath and sin. It is generally supposed that Isaiah speaks of red as the colour of sin, because sin ends in murder; and this is not really wrong, though it is too restricted. Sin is called red, inasmuch as it is a burning heat which consumes a man, and when it breaks forth consumes his fellow-man as well. According to the biblical view, throughout, sin stands in the same relation to what is well- pleasing to God, and wrath in the same relation to love or grace, as fire to light; and therefore as red to white, or black to white, for red and black are colours which border upon one another. In the Song of Solomon (Isa_7:5), the black locks of Shulamith are described as being “like purple,” and Homer applies the same epithet to the dark waves of the sea. But the ground of this relation lies deeper still. Red is the colour of fire, which flashes out of darkness and returns to it again; whereas white without any admixture of darkness represents the pure, absolute triumph of light. It is a deeply significant symbol of the act of justification. Jehovah offers to Israel an actio forensis, out of which it shall come forth justified by grace, although it has merited death on account of its sins. The righteousness, white as snow and wool, with which Israel comes forth, is a gift conferred upon it out of pure compassion, without being conditional upon any legal performance whatever. 7. PULPIT, “Come now, and let us reason together. God has from time to time permitted man to reason with him (Gen_18:23-32; Exo_4:1-17; Job_23:3-7; Mic_6:2); but it is difficult to see that there is
- 140. any "reasoning" or"controversy" here. Mr. Cheyne translates, "Let us bring our dispute to an end." Though your sins be as scarlet like crimson; i.e. "open, evident, glaring." Or there may be an allusion to their blood-guiltiness (see Isa_1:15, Isa_1:19). They shall be as white as snow. Comp. Psa_51:7, which is completely parallel, whether it was written before or after. There can be no better image of, purity than snow (comp. Job_9:30; Lam_4:7). As wool. A weaker illustration than the preceding one, but needed for the parallelism. (The resemblance of falling snow to wool is noted in Psa_147:16.) 8. CALVIN, “18.Come now, and let us reason together (24) The Hebrew word נא (na) is commonly translated I pray, ortherefore; but I think that it denotes the confidence of a good cause, and thus is an exhortation, Come. For the Lord declares that the Jews will have nothing, to reply, and that, even though they obtain an opportunity of clearing themselves, they will still be speechless. And certainly this is the way in which hypocrites ought to be treated; for they boldly enter into disputes with God, and there is no end of their reasonings. Accordingly, he tells them that, if they choose to debate, he will be equally prepared on the other side. The question will perhaps be put, Why does the Prophet speak chiefly about the second table of the law, and not rather about the worship of God? For we know that there were good reasons why God assigned the foremost place to the first table, when he divided the law; and there can be no doubt that, as it comes first in order, so it is likewise of greater importance. I reply, when the Prophets reprove the hypocrisy of men, they employ various modes of address. Sometimes they complain that the Sabbath has been profaned; sometimes they say that men do not call on God; but for the most part they censure idolatry, and raise their voice against superstitions. But here Isaiah complains that their duties towards their neighbors have not been performed. Still in all these cases the object is the same, to show that our actions are of no value in the sight of God, when they do not proceed from a good conscience, and when we are destitute of the fear of God. This fear they sometimes denote by “ on the name of God,” sometimes by “ the Sabbath,” and sometimes by other actions; but as the distinction between true worship and hypocrisy is most clearly and manifestly pointed out by means of the duties of brotherly kindness, there are good reasons why the mention of those duties is brought forward by Isaiah. For hypocrites are careful to perform outward worship and ceremonies; but inwardly they are full of envy, they swell with pride and contempt of the brethren, they burn with covetousness and ambition; and while they conceal themselves under those masks, they cannot easily be detected. They must, therefore, be tried by this rule, as by a touchstone, and thus it must be ascertained whether or not they fear God. We might, indeed, be deceived, were it from the second table only that we formed our judgment about the godliness of a man; but if any one discharge the duties of the first table, which are evidences of godliness
- 141. and of theworship of God, he must then be brought to this standard, Does he act inoffensively towards other men? Does he abstain from every act of injustice? Does he speak truth? Does he live in the exercise of kindness to his brethren? This is the reason why Christ pronounces mercy, judgment, and faith, to be the weighty matters of the law, (Mat_23:23,) and censures the Pharisees because, in their eagerness about tithes and offerings, they attended only to smaller matters, and neglected true righteousness. By faith he means fidelity, or what we commonly call loyalty. (25) Byjudgment he means every kind of uprightness, when we render to every man what belongs to him, and do not allow others to be injured, but assist them, as far as lies in our power. But if these are the weighty matters of the law, in what order ought we to place the commandments of the second table? I answer, they retain their due importance and order; but by means of those duties which Christ so rigidly demands, and on which he dwells so largely, hypocrisy is more fully detected, and we are better enabled to judge whether a man sincerely fears God or not. In the same sense ought we to understand that passage, I will have mercy and not sacrifice; (Hos_6:6; Mat_9:13;) for mercy is an evidence and proof of true godliness. Again, it is pleasing to God, because it is a true demonstration of the love which we owe to our fellow-men; but sacrifices are pleasing to him for a different reason. It is now, I think, sufficiently plain why the Prophet Isaiah mentions kindness rather than faith or calling upon God; and why the prophets employ such variety in their modes of address, when they endeavor to bring back hypocrites to the true worship of God, and when they bid them show it by its fruits. Though your sins be as scarlet It is as if he had said, that he does not accuse innocent persons, and has no wish to enter into controversy; so that the charges which he makes against them are not brought forward or maintained without strong necessity. For hypocrites are wont to find fault with God, as if he were too severe, and could not be at all appeased. They go still farther, and discover this excuse for their obstinacy, that it is in vain for them to attempt to return to a state of favor with God. If every other expedient fail, still they fly to this, that it is not proper to make such rigid demands on them, and that even the very best of men have something that needs to be forgiven. The Prophet anticipates the objection, by introducing the Lord speaking ill this manner — “ my part, if it be necessary, I do not refuse to dispute with you; for the result will be to show that it is your own obstinacy which prevents a reconciliation from taking place between us. Only bring cleanness of heart, and all controversy between us will be at an end. I would no longer contend with you, if you would bring me an upright heart.” Hence we obtain a declaration in the highest degree consolatory, that God does not contend with us as if he wished to pursue our offenses to the utmost. For if we sincerely turn to him, he will immediately return to favor with us, and will blot out all remembrance of our sins, and will not demand an account of them. For he is not like men who, even for a slight and inconsiderable offense, often refuse to be reconciled. Nay, so far is he from giving us reason to complain of his excessive severity, that he is ready to cleanse
- 142. us, and tomake us as white as snow. He is satisfied With cleanness of heart, and if, notwithstanding of this cleanness of heart, there be any offense, he forgives it, and acquits those who have provoked him. (24) ונוכחה (venivvakechah), and let us settle our dispute. —Bishop Stock. “ of us, I and you, that we may ascertain which of us has committed an offense against the other; and if you have sinned against me, still I hope to convert you.” — Jarchi. 9. GREAT TEXTS, “Reasoning with God Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.—Isa_1:18. Isaiah was one of a group or succession of men who might fairly be described as perhaps the greatest teachers of political righteousness whom the world has ever seen—teachers who drank out of the heart of the people, and represented in their turn every section of them. Isaiah himself, if we are to believe tradition, was a man of high social rank, a member of the governing class. His colleagues, or brother prophets, might be like Micah, a man of the people; or like Amos, a herdsman, a gatherer of sycamore fruits. Thus they represented every class, and they stood before their contemporaries, before kings, or nobles, or common people, before all alike, speaking the words of Divine inspiration and conviction. Their mission was simply to hold aloft, without fear of consequences and without thought of personal interest, the ideal national life of a God-fearing people. So they tried the life of those they addressed, their religious profession and their standards of conduct, as with the sword of the Spirit. The mission of the prophet was to sweep out of the life of his people those contradictions between religious profession and habitual practice which in every age are the besetting danger of all those who live in conventional worship, and with what we might call a tame conscience. The Hebrew prophet is, above all things, the preacher of reality in personal religion, of consistency in personal conduct, and of righteousness pervading every department of national life. It was because of their lack of this reality and consistency that another of these prophets flung out the graphic condemnation of his countrymen; “Ephraim,” he said, “is a cake not turned.” Their devotion to Jehovah was only a half devotion; they delighted in their worship, they gave Him of the external, of the emotions of their life, but they did not turn the cake. Isaiah begins his prophecy by calling upon the heavens and the earth to witness the exceeding sinfulness of God’s chosen people. “Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth, for the Lord hath spoken: I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me. The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib: but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider.” Such ingratitude and sin as this, he naturally supposes, would shock the very heavens and earth. Then follows a vehement and terrible rebuke. The elect people of God are called “Sodom” and “Gomorrah.” “Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.” “Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more.” This outflow of holy displeasure would prepare us to expect an everlasting rejection of the rebellious and unfaithful people, but it is strangely followed by the most yearning and melting entreaty ever addressed by the Most High to the creatures of His hand: “Come now, and let us reason together: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” The text may be considered in three parts—
- 143. 1. An Invitationfrom God to reason with Him. 2. The Reasoning and its Result. 3. The Surprising Sequel. I An Invitation From God To Reason With Him i. An Invitation from God “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord.” The proposition comes from God. It does not arise from the human side at all. It is a piece of pure condescension on the part of the Almighty Himself. Grace comes out of the sovereignty of God. The possibility of salvation comes from God’s grace. It is not in anywise of our conception or of our own doing. We are saved by faith, and that not of ourselves, for faith is the gift of God. God, having made this proposition, proceeds upon the assumption that He knows Himself to be right in this case. It is precisely so in our own affairs, in the common controversies of the day. The man who knows himself to be in the right, who feels himself to have a just cause in hand, is always the first to make the noblest propositions, and to offer as many concessions as are possible without impairing the law of absolute right, truth, and propriety. I said, “I will find God,” and forth I went To seek Him in the clearness of the sky, But over me stood unendurably Only a pitiless, sapphire firmament Ringing the world,—blank splendour: yet intent Still to find God, “I will go seek,” said I, “His way upon the waters,” and drew nigh An ocean marge, weed-strewn, and foam-besprent; And the waves dashed on idle sand and stone And very vacant was the long, blue sea: But in the evening as I sat alone, My window open to the vanishing day, Dear God! I could not choose but kneel and pray, And it sufficed that I was found of Thee. 1 [Note: Edward Dowden.]
- 144. Come The Rev. JamesVaughan, of Brighton, one of the masters in the art of addressing children, makes use of this verse and other four verses which contain the word come, as the basis of an address to children on the afternoon of Advent Sunday. Advent, he calls “Come Sunday,” and rejoices that there is no “Go-away Sunday” in the Christian Year. Then he says: I want to tell you of five beautiful Comings, and when I have told you of all the five, I shall ask you which you like best. 1. I shall call the first the Grand “Come.” You will find it in the 40th Psalm, and the 7th verse: “Then said I, Lo, I ‘come’!” Jesus said it when He was up in heaven. “Then.” When, I do not know. Thousands and thousands and thousands of years ago. “Then said I, Lo, I come!” Jesus was up in heaven, and He saw that we were going to be in this world, and He saw that we should be unhappy, because we were lost; and He saw that there would be a great many sacrifices, but they would not do any good, and the poor people would not be able to save themselves and help themselves; so He said to God the Father—He said it then, “Then said I, Lo, I come. I will go and save them. I will go.” How the angels must have wondered! I should think there was a perfect silence. I should think all heaven was silent when the Son of God said, “I will go to that world.” “Lo, I come!” I am so glad He came. He might have had us all up in heaven without coming here first. Then we should not have had Him as a little baby in a cradle. Then we should not have had Jesus as the Boy of twelve years old, or the young Man, as the pattern for us. It was so kind to say, “Lo, I come!”—better than if He did it all up in heaven. 2. The next “Come” I will call the Gracious “Come.” It is in the 1st chapter of Isaiah, and the 18th verse: “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” Perhaps there is a boy or girl in the church this afternoon who has been naughty—who knows that he or she has done something very wrong. I don‘t know what it is. You know. God knows. Now God sends me to you, my dear child, this day, and the message God gives to you is this: “Come now, and let us talk about it. Come now, and let us reason about it. You have been very naughty, and you cannot be happy. Come to Me!” God says, “Listen to Me. I am willing to forgive you. And though your sins be as red as scarlet, though they make you blush, though you know all the waters in the world cannot wash them out, I will do it. Come to Me—really come to Me. Let us reason together about it. I will pardon all. I will forgive all, and you shall have peace!” This is God’s message to the lost child. Do you think that when you come God will not receive you? Once upon a time, at Athens, the Senate was sitting. At their meeting out in the open fields, as the men of Athens were all assembled together deliberating, making laws, a little bird which was just by an oak-tree came flying into the middle of the assembly. And the poor little sparrow came and nestled itself in the breast of one of the Senators. The poor little thing was terribly frightened, and its feathers were all ruffled. As it came and nestled itself in the breast of one of the old Senators, this cruel man took the little bird out of his breast and flung it to the ground, stamped upon it, and killed it. The other Senators said, “It is shocking! He shall never be a Senator again.” They said more. They said, “He should die for his cruelty. The man who can kill a little bird in that way is not fit to live. He shall die.” And he was actually put to death for his cruelty to the little sparrow! Do you think that those Senators could be so kind to this little sparrow, and that the great God, who loves you, will not receive you when you go to His fatherly, loving breast? 3. Now I must give you a third “Come,” and that is a Tender “Come.” It is in Mat_9:28 : “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” Now I may be speaking to some boy who is very tired, tired in a great many ways. I do not suppose he is yet very tired of this life, though life is very hard work, and some little boys even have said, “I am tired of my life.” It is not so with you, perhaps. But possibly you are tired of your work or your lessons; perhaps somebody is teasing you very much; perhaps you have some burden on your mind, something you are always thinking of, so you are always “weary and heavy laden.” Now Jesus says to you, by me, this afternoon, “Come to Me, with that poor, tired, burdened feeling—come to Me, and I will give you rest.” It is so tender. Have you had a tender mother? He is more tender. “A mother may forget.” He will never forget.
- 145. I will tellyou what happened once. There was a poor woman who was very unhappy and low-spirited, and a clergyman went to see her; and this is what the clergyman said and did. He said to the poor woman, “You are very unhappy.” She said, “Yes, I am.” “What is it?” he asked. “Tell me.” She answered, “Oh, my prayers are poor prayers! I have got such a naughty heart, and I am so cold in my heart, and I do so many wrong things, and grieve God so much.” The clergyman said, “Very well, now you have told me about yourself, have you nothing else to tell me?” “No, sir; nothing else,” she replied, “only that I am so wicked.” “Now,” said the clergyman, “say what I say. Say, ‘Jesus!’ ” She said, “Jesus.” “Oh no!” said the clergyman, “not so; say it feelingly.” Then she said it a little better—“Jesus!” “No, that won’t do; you must say it still better, with all your heart. You must say, ‘JESUS!’ ” She began to cry, and in her tears she said, “JESUS!” And from that moment she began to be happy. 4. Now I come to my fourth “Come,” and I will call it the Echoing “Come”! You will find it at the end of the 22nd chapter of Revelation, the 20th verse—“Even so, come, Lord Jesus.” That is the Echoing “Come!” because it is the man saying it back to God. God said, “Come now!” and man says back to God, “Come, Lord Jesus!” I was once present with a clergyman who had a very little boy. His name was Georgie. He was playing on the rug. He had a very good father. He said to him, “Papa, I wish Jesus would come; oh, it would be very nice! His father said to him, “What if Jesus were to come and find you in one of your pets—what would you do then?” This puzzled little Georgie for a while. He was a very clever boy, and he made a very clever answer, but not a very good one. He said, “Well, papa, I should not mind.” His papa said, “Why would you not mind?” He said, “Because then I should be Christ’s enemy, and Christ says we must love our enemies; so He would love me.” That was very clever, but not quite right. 5. Now I come to my fifth and last “Come,” that I shall call the Crowning “Come.” You will find it in the 25th chapter of St. Matthew: “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” Oh, what a glorious “come” that will be! Do you ever think of Jesus coming? Do you think He will be alone? No. Do you know anybody who has gone to heaven—any dear friends, relations, or anybody else? I will tell you what it will be when Jesus comes. They will come with Him; you will see them. It says so in the 4th chapter of the First Epistle to the Thessalonians: “Them also which sleep in Jesus”—the good ones who are gone to Jesus—God will take, and “bring with him.” Whenever you read that verse always pay great attention to the last words, “with him”—Him, not God, but Jesus. God will “bring with Jesus!” “With Him!” That is, when Jesus comes, God will take care that those dear ones gone to heaven will come “with Him.” If you are there you will see them. Now This “now” is not the “now” of time, but of entreaty. Spurgeon, taking the word as temporal, says, “God would not have you live another moment as you are.” This is true and most important, but it belongs rather to the exposition of another text which Spurgeon appositely quotes: “Now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.” The note of the present text is tender entreaty rather than urgent warning. I remember very well, as if it were but yesterday, though it is now some five-and-twenty years ago, being present at a discussion in a little secularist or infidel hall in the east of London, where the controversy turned for a moment upon this very passage. The lecturer of the evening had had the audacity to attack the Bible on the score of its morality. He had quoted the words, “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” He had argued that by such language a dangerous facility was given to sin; that, if its effects and consequences could be so easily removed, there was less need for striving against the temptations to it. In the course of the discussion, there rose on the other side one who was to all appearance a common working man, not well educated, but evidently thoughtful, clear-headed, and in earnest. He quietly and very effectively called attention to the context of the passage, the two verses which precede our text. “Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings before from mine
- 146. eyes; cease todo evil; learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.” This, he urged, is the true and necessary prelude to what follows: “Come now,” come when this is done, “and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” The passage, he argued, rightly understood, teaches not that sin is a light matter, easily condoned, but that only through true repentance, and through reformation, is there a way to forgiveness and absolution. So far from facilitating sin, it opposes to it the thorny and terrible obstacle of the necessity of retracing, in tears and shame and pain, the devious path, and recovering, at bitter cost, the true, but lost, direction. The argument was sound in substance, though wrong in form. That the doctrine of the Bible, with reference to sin and repentance and forgiveness, is what the speaker represented it to be, no candid and ingenuous mind could for one moment doubt. But the word “now” of our text,—“Come now,”—was being pressed into a service for which Isaiah never intended it. It is not the “now” of time. It is in the original only a word, closely connected with the preceding word (to which indeed it is actually joined in the Hebrew by a hyphen), and emphasising it. We could express it in English by merely laying a stress upon the word “Come”: “Come, and let us reason together, saith the Lord.” The language of the text thus becomes the language of earnest invitation, of tender entreaty. “Come, I beseech you, and let us reason,” or confer, “together, saith the Eternal.” 1 [Note: David J. Vaughan.] ii. An Invitation to Reason Our text gives us the highest form of appeal—the appeal to reason. In the earlier pages of the Bible, the appeals of God to sinning men are more dramatic, tragic, in form. They are addressed to the imagination, the emotion, as if men were yet only spiritual children. In Genesis, it is the gates of Paradise closed, and the angel of the flaming sword. Later in the book, it is God directing that an ark be built, and opening the windows of heaven in a destroying flood. In Exodus, it is the smoking of Mount Sinai, God wrapt in cloud and thunder and lightning, and man standing afar off trembling, none daring to draw nigh to the Divine Presence. In David, it is the devastating plague. In Solomon, it is the sensuous richness of temple, of ritual, of sacrifice, and of cloudy incense. All as if men could be moved only by the ruder, the lower motives of their nature. But here, in Isaiah, a new order of appeal is set in action. “Hear, O heavens; and give ear, O earth; for the Lord hath spoken: I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me; the ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib; but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider.” O that My people would think; “Come now, and let us reason together.” Napoleon, making a forced march accompanied by his chiefs of staff, came to a river and asked the engineer how wide it was. The officer explained that his instruments had not yet come to the front. The emperor asked him again, rather sharply, for the width of the river. The officer then brought his military cap to the level of his eyes and marked where the line of vision fell on the opposite bank; fixing his attention on that distance he turned carefully and marked where that line fell on the bank where they were standing; he stepped the distance off and gave the emperor the width of the river. Thus in the absence of instruments of precision, he fell back on common sense. In the absence of more stirring commanding voices, let us listen to the voice of our own common sense on this matter of religion. 1 [Note: R. Mackenzie.] When the Forth Bridge was in the course of construction, I remember spending a most delightful and memorable afternoon with one of the leading engineers. He told me that in the vast undertaking there were encountered numerous and difficult engineering problems. Of course they had on the work the very highest mathematical skill which the country could supply, but here was the interesting fact—he told me that most of the difficulties were solved by one man who possesses no great mathematical skill, but has a kind of genius which, without formal rules, can always find its way through a difficulty. He said to me, “Just give him a difficulty, however great it is, and somehow he will come out on the other side of it.” I suppose you all remember the story of John Brown, the commentator, in illustration of his belief that unless common sense is given us by Nature it cannot be acquired, and I suppose that is the general belief. Well, that may or may not be true, but reason in some of its forms is extremely capable of cultivation, and it is important to know how it can be cultivated. 2 [Note: J. Stalker.]
- 147. Reason and Faith 1.The invitation is, “Let us reason together.” Bishop Butler, discussing the important distinction between objections against the evidence of Christianity and objections against Christianity itself, writes in his wise and guarded way: “I express myself with caution, lest I should be taken to vilify reason; which is indeed the only faculty we have wherewith to judge concerning anything, even revelation itself.” In these days we are often inclined to be afraid of exercising our reason on any matter which trenches in any degree upon the field of revelation. We contrast reason and faith with one another, and assign faith to the domain of revelation, yielding to reason the supremacy over everything outside that domain. 2. Notwithstanding the explicit teaching of the New Testament, the impression has got abroad that faith and reason are opposed to each other, that both cannot flourish in the same man at the same time; that if a man wants to be a man of faith, he must not think deeply, and that if he gives free rein to his reason it is likely to go hard with his faith. In many a circle it is taken for granted that if a man becomes a Christian, he must allow his mind to be shackled, and that if he wishes to think freely and to follow the truth whithersoever it may lead him, he had better not attach himself to the Church. Now a more mischievous impression could not possibly get abroad. Joseph Glanvill, near the middle of the seventeenth century, wrote this: “There is not anything that I know which hath done more mischief to religion than the disparaging of reason, for hereby the very foundations of Christian faith have been undermined. If reason must not be heard, the being of God and the authority of Scripture can neither be proved nor defended; and so our faith drops to the ground like a house that hath no foundation.” If that was true in the seventeenth century, it is doubly true nowadays, for the entire world is using its intellect as never before. There are Christians in all parts of the country who are secretly afraid of reason. They do not like to think themselves, they see no necessity for thinking, they feel that if a man thinks about the doctrines of his faith he is almost certain to become a heretic. The man who thinks is to them what Cassius was to Julius Cæsar. “Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; he thinks too much.” They prefer men who are sleek and fat. They make religion merely a sentimental and emotional thing; they put no thought into it. They speak of doctrines as something quite superfluous. They take no interest in doctrines, and as for a dogma, it is nothing but a cur to be kicked about the streets. And as for theology, that is something to be steadily eschewed. Theology, instead of being what it is, the greatest of the sciences, is to them only a foolish piece of stupid speculation. It is just such Christians as these who perpetuate the impression that Christianity has nothing to do with the reason, but moves entirely in the realm of the emotions. 1 [Note: C. E. Jefferson.] 3. No doubt the use of certain words has had not a little to do with deepening this impression. (1) An infidel is usually known as a free thinker. The first man who rejected Christianity, and then called himself a “free thinker,” builded better than he knew. That epithet was a telling stroke of genius. The word itself contains an argument against the Christian religion. If a man who rejects Christianity is a free thinker, the implication is that the man who accepts it is a bound thinker—a man whose reason is in chains. But the implication is not fair. A Christian has a right to think just as freely as any other man. All Christians, if they avail themselves of their privileges, are free thinkers. I studied pedagogy first, says Mr. Jefferson, 1 [Note: Things Fundamental, p. 36.] and then law, and then theology. I was first a teacher, then a lawyer, and then a preacher. But I never thought any more freely when I was a teacher or a lawyer than I have thought since I became a preacher. (2) The use of the word rationalist has also been misleading. The word came into common use in the sixteenth century to designate the class of people who gave an exalted place to reason, and the word was seized upon by certain infidel philosophers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, who became known throughout the world as Rationalists. The word carries with it the implication that a man
- 148. who accepts Christianityis an irrationalist; that is, he does not use his reason. If a man reasons, he rejects Christianity; if he refuses to reason, he accepts it. The insinuation is unjust. All Christians are rationalists, or ought to be, in the sense that they make a vigorous use of their minds. The Christian religion is a rational religion, and the evidences for it are rational. It addresses itself primarily to the reason. (3) The word reason is commonly used loosely. What men call reason is nothing but opinion. A certain man asserts in my presence that the narrative of the Virgin Birth is contrary to reason. He says it very blandly, and with great assurance. But I remind him that a distinguished professor of philosophy, who has one of the finest and keenest minds in America, says that the story is not contrary to his reason. Nor is it contrary to the reason of ten thousand men who read it and believe it, and feel it to be altogether reasonable. It is not correct then for you, my friend, to say that the story is contrary to reason. What you mean to say is that it is contrary to your reason, and that, you know, is another thing. But are you sure that it is really contrary to your reason? What you are probably trying to say is that it is contrary to your opinion. But opinion is one thing and human reason is another. Opinion is the product of a man’s reading and thinking and hearing. What a man thinks on any subject depends on what he has read and heard and thought. It is for this cause that men’s opinions change from year to year. We hold a certain opinion, and then we read more widely, or live more deeply, and our opinion changes. When you are saying, therefore, that the story of Christ’s birth is contrary to your opinion, you are not saying anything of great significance, for your opinion might change after more extensive reading, or after a little deeper thinking. I travel into Alaska and meet an Eskimo who has never heard of the X-rays, and I say to him, “I have seen every bone in that hand of mine. I know the size and shape and exact location of every bone just as clearly as I should know all this if the flesh were scraped away.” And he looks at me with surprise, and says, “That is contrary to reason.” What the man is trying to say is that it is contrary to his opinion. We should not expect an Eskimo to use language accurately; we might expect it, however, of a New Yorker. Or I travel into the South Seas, and I meet a man there who has never so much as heard of ice, and I say, “My southern friend, I walked across a lake one day in February, and never even got my feet wet.” And he throws up his hands in amazement, and says, “That is contrary to reason.” What he is trying to say is that it is contrary to his experience. When the evangelist tells me that Jesus walked across a Palestinian lake in April, I have no right to say that it is contrary to my reason. It is contrary to my experience. But my experience is rather a diminutive affair. If I am to cut down Christianity to the dimensions of my experience, I shall not have anything left of surpassing value. The fact is, Christ transcends my experience at every point. What He said runs as far beyond me as what He did. “I do always those things that are pleasing unto him.” That is farther beyond me than walking on the water. “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” I never could say a thing like that. 1 [Note: C. E. Jefferson.] Often the very men who make the loudest profession of acting reasonably have the very least reason in their action. I try to convince a certain man that the sunset is beautiful. I say, “Oh, look at it! Could anything be more glorious!” And he stands with his back to the sunset and will not look at it. He says, “I do not believe what you say. Prove it to me.” And I say, “Turn round and look.” He says, “I won’t.” Is he reasonable? I endeavour to persuade another man that Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony is great. The orchestra is playing, the instruments are sweeping through the allegro, and I say to this man, “Wagner was right. Instruments cannot carry music higher than that. If music is to travel any farther, it must be by the human voice. Is not that fine?” And the man puts his fingers in his ears, and says, “I do not believe what you say. Prove it to me.” And I say, “Listen!” And he says, “I won’t.” Is he reasonable? I endeavour to persuade another man that a violet is fragrant. I say to him, “This odour is so delicate. Just smell it!” He says, “I won’t. Prove it to me.” I say, “Will you smell it?” He says, “No.” Is he reasonable? I endeavour to persuade another man that sugar is sweet. I say, “This sugar is sweet. I have eaten a piece just like this.” He says, “I do not believe it.” I say to him, “Taste it.” He says, “I won’t.” Is he reasonable? I endeavour to persuade another man that a cube of gold is heavier than a cube of iron. Both are of the same size. I say to him, “Take the gold in one hand and the iron in the other, and you will see.” And he says, “I won’t.” Is he reasonable? I endeavour to persuade another man to become a Christian. I say to him, “Jesus Christ is sufficient for every need of the human soul.” And he says, “I do not believe it.” I say to him, “Try Him!” And he says, “I won‘t.” Is he reasonable?
- 149. It was onlyyesterday I saw a plea for calm reflection in international affairs, sent abroad by an ethical society, in all the chief languages of Europe. It is just a plea for the application of the principles of our Christian morality to every part of our national life. I make no apology for quoting a word or two from this utterance, for in my judgment they are the words of Christian truth. “Remember,” it says, “that reason and justice alone should decide the merits of any case, whether it be personal or national, national or international. Remember that no nation can safely be the judge in its own cause, because self-interest and pride and anger and force are so liable to pervert the judgment and distort the truth. Remember that as friendly international relations are of vital importance to every people, the time is surely ripe for arbitration to supersede war. Remember, therefore, to press upon your Government,” said this utterance, “the duty of entering into specific agreement for peace, and, instead of war, to proceed by the method of arbitration. Remember that the cost of competitive armaments not only involves a crushing burden for each people to bear, and consequent neglect of social improvement, but engenders bitter feeling, and is provocative of strife. Remember in time of peace the horrors of war, and the harvest of hatred and misery it leaves behind, and ask yourself, each citizen, ask yourself whether it is not criminal to leave it to passion or ignorance, to misunderstandings, or jealousies, or self-interest, to bring any such calamity upon the life of a Christian nation.” 1 [Note: Bishop J. Percival.] iii. An Invitation to Reason Together The invitation is not merely, “Let us reason”; but, “Let us reason together.” Our reasonings on revelation, and on all the high and mysterious subjects associated with it, must proceed in the full recognition of what is implied in this “together.” We may reason, if we are minded to do so, upon the Trinity, upon the Incarnation, upon the Atonement, upon Final Judgment, upon the Restitution of all things; upon any subject, however lofty and transcendent; provided only our reasonings ever be “together”;—that is, with God,—as those, to whom God is speaking, and with whom God is reasoning; and who are therefore constrained to reason back—if I may be allowed the expression—in all childlike humility and simplicity, reverence and awe;—not as though we were the measure of all things, as the old Sophists maintained that man was,—but in the full recognition of the limitation of our faculties and the poverty of our intellectual resources, and at the same time in the full belief of St. Paul’s words: “Now we see through a glass, darkly; but then, face to face; now I know in part, but then shall I know, even as also I am known.” It has been well said by a great thinker of this century, adopting the language of one of the greatest of the fathers of the Christian Church: “The foundation of our philosophy is humility.” The moment we strive to answer to the invitation, “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord,” we shall find that it must be so. No other attitude of mind is possible for us. When a responsible being has made a wrong use of his powers, nothing is more reasonable than that he should call himself to account for this abuse. Nothing, certainly, is more necessary. There can be no amendment for the future until the past has been cared for. But that this examination may be both thorough and profitable, it must be made in company with the Searcher of hearts. For there are always two beings who are concerned with sin; the being who commits it, and the Being against whom it is committed. We sin, indeed, against ourselves; against our own conscience, and against our own best interest. But we sin in a yet higher, and more terrible sense, against Another than ourselves, compared with whose majesty all of our faculties and interests, both in time and in eternity, are altogether nothing and vanity. It is not enough, therefore, to refer our sin to the law written on the heart, and there stop. We must ultimately pass beyond conscience itself, to God, and say, “Against Thee have I sinned.” It is not the highest expression of the religious feeling when we say, “How can I do this great wickedness, and sin against my conscience?” He alone has reached the summit of vision who looks beyond all finite limits, however wide and distant, beyond all finite faculties, however noble and elevated, and says, “How can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?” Modern history began in the year 1521 when an Augustinian monk, by the name of Martin Luther, went to the Diet of Worms to give an account of himself to the Emperor of Germany. The appearance of Luther
- 150. before the emperoris a picture that ought to be burned into the retina of the eyes of every young man in America. It is April, and evening has come. The torches have been lighted, and they cast a flickering glow over the faces of the earnest men who have come together to hear this monk from Wittenberg. As Luther goes through the door, the greatest general of Germany taps him on the shoulder and says, “My poor monk, my poor monk, you are on the way to make such a stand as I have never made in my toughest battle.” And what the general said was true. The emperor is there, the electors, and the princes of Germany are there. In front of the king there is a table on which are piled books which this Augustinian monk has written. Luther is now thirty-eight years old. For over fifteen years he has been a monk. The fundamental principles of the Roman Catholic Church have been built into his mind. But as a student he has learned that the church councils can make mistakes. He has said so, and has said so openly. The question before the Diet of Worms is: Will this Augustinian monk recant? The emperor tells him haughtily that he is not there to question matters which have been settled in general councils long ago, and that what he wants is a plain answer without horns, whether he will retract what he has said contradicting the decisions of the Council of Constance. Luther rises to reply, and this is what he says: “Since your Imperial Majesty requires a plain answer, I will give one without horns or hoofs. It is this, that I must be convinced either by the testimony of Scripture or by clear argument. I cannot trust the pope or councils by themselves, for both have erred. I cannot and will not retract.” An awful silence falls upon them all. And then the Augustinian monk continues: “I can do nothing else. Here I stand. So help me God. Amen.” But in what way can God approach a man in order to reason with him? There are more ways than one. 1. First, and clearly, He may reason through Conscience. It will be admitted that the first requisite of all moral improvement is that there should be thoughtfulness, seriousness, attention to our conduct. We often hear the excuse, “I did not give it a thought”; to which the only reply can be, “But you ought to have given it.” Self-recollection and self-collection are essential to sound speech, true thought, wise action. And what are these again but a partial human answer to the Divine invitation, “Come, and let us reason together”? It would make that answer far less partial, much more complete, if, when we enter into the innermost chamber of the soul to reflect and collect ourselves, we would remember who meets us there, and whose shrine that chamber is. It is the Eternal Himself who meets us there. The Apostle’s words are true: “Your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own.” There is, indeed, no human soul surely that has failed at some time or another to be in debate with itself. And what is implied in this? Most certainly condemnation of some course of conduct which seems at the moment preferable; most certainly also a rule, external to the soul, which claims, and on all occasions, to be imperial. Two anecdotes may be given of the way in which the word “conscience” is understood by children. A Sunday-school teacher asked the question of her class, “What is that within you which makes you uneasy when you have done wrong?” After some hesitation, a small boy with a healthy appetite answered, in a very Scotch accent, “Ma stomach.” The other anecdote is from James Vaughan, of Brighton. A gentleman was examining a class in a Sunday school and he said to the children, “What is conscience?” They were all much puzzled. One of the big boys said, “It is too big a word for me.” The gentleman then said, “Did you ever feel anything inside you which seemed to say, ‘You ought not to have done this or that,’ or, ‘Go and do that; go and pray’?” “Oh yes, sir,” they all said, “we all have heard that.” Then the gentleman said again, “What is conscience?” And little Benny said, “It is Jesus whispering in the heart.” That was a little boy’s answer. It was very beautiful. There are many of these “whispers of Jesus to the heart.” 2. But again, the soul is instructed by the Providence of God. The Bible, from beginning to end, is ever exhibiting this blessed truth. The beautiful stories of the earlier patriarchs, the incidental episodes (such as the sweet picture of dutiful devotion in the Book of Ruth), the proclamation of the prophets, the tender verses of the Psalms, as well as the history of the Chosen
- 151. People, conspire towitness to the consoling fact that “the Lord careth for His people.” And what is the general lesson learnt? Conscience says, “Sin,” “a Judge.” Providence says, “Care, and watchful love,” “a Father”; both teach us that God neither does nor permits anything, except to certain ends before Him conformable to His nature of righteousness. The solemn thought is this, that men may, by deliberate, continued sin, frustrate the loving purpose in themselves; but “God is not mocked,” they shall not frustrate the righteous end. 3. And lastly, God instructs the soul of the creature by the revelation of Jesus Christ. Conscience speaks of sin and judgment; Providence of watchful, regulated care. What does Jesus Christ teach? (1) In His example, as exhibited in the Gospel, He shows us a righteousness so transcendent that it corroborates the teachings of conscience, a course of action of such unvarying tenderness that it illustrates and manifests the providence of God; (2) He gives the most vivid, the most appalling revelation of the mystery and magnitude of human sin; but with it—what conscience could never do—of the most loving, most complete forgiveness to the penitent, and the brightest hope (after sorrow) as to human destiny, in the tragedy—the love-marked tragedy—of the Passion; (3) And beyond that He displays to us a prospect and a power of attainment to the heights of spiritual longing, by revealing the method and confirming the promise of the implanting of His own life, of His own image, ever more and more fully in the soul of His creature, which is the daily, hourly work of God’s blessed Spirit in those who diligently seek Him. Gracious Spirit, dwell with me; I myself would gracious be, And with words that help and heal Would Thy life in mine reveal, And with actions bold and meek Would for Christ my Saviour speak. Truthful Spirit, dwell with me; I myself would truthful be, And with wisdom kind and clear Let Thy life in mine appear, And with actions brotherly Speak my Lord’s sincerity. Silent Spirit, dwell with me; I myself would quiet be, Quiet as the growing blade Which through earth its way has made,
- 152. Silently, like morninglight, Putting mists and chills to flight. Mighty Spirit, dwell with me; I myself would mighty be, Mighty so as to prevail Where unaided man must fail, Ever by a mighty hope Pressing on and bearing up. Holy Spirit, dwell with me; I myself would holy be; Separate from sin, I would Choose and cherish all things good, And whatever I can be, Give to Him, who gave to Thee. 1 [Note: Thomas Toke Lynch.] II The Reasoning And Its Result i. The Subject of the Reasoning In the immediate case before us, the case of God’s ancient people of Israel, the subject of argument was their conduct, especially the ingratitude of it in the light of all that God had done for them. But the subject is broader than that. In this very chapter, there is a threefold basis of reasoning, which is of universal application. 1. First of all, God reasons with man on the basis of man’s whole life. There is a constant attempt on man’s part—a device that is repeated from generation to generation and from age to age—to withdraw the greater portion of man’s life from God’s reasoning, or, in other words, to endeavour to reason with God on the basis of some lesser and limited portion of life. You can see it very clearly throughout this chapter. God said to man, “Come, let us reason together.” “Very well,” says man, “let this be the ground of our reasoning. Look at my life as it lies within the circle of its religious action and exercises, the sacrifices I bring to you, the incense I offer, the fasts I make. Let us reason on that basis; let us take our stand there.” And as you will see in this chapter, God utterly rejects reasoning like this, and says, “No, no; I
- 153. must deal withyou on the basis of your whole life, not on any limited or selected part of it which you choose to present and urge.” Now there is great significance in this connection in the opening words of this chapter. God cries out and says, “Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth”; man is saying, “Let me be judged and reasoned with on the basis of my life, as that life lies within certain narrow limits, on the basis of my life regarded specially in its religious aspects. Look at me when I am present in the Temple, when I bring my gifts to the altar; deal with me on that ground, let that be the basis of reasoning.” God cries out to earth and heaven, and says, “These are the only limits of man’s life I can recognise—the earth on which he walks, on the surface of which everything is done, the heavens over his head, which look down upon every transaction of his life; that is the basis of My reasoning, and that alone.” 2. God reasons with men on the basis of His own Fatherhood. You will see how in this chapter He reminds all men of it, gives men proofs of it, tells men He has fulfilled it in relation to them. He says, “You are not simply My creatures. You are more—you are nearer to Me. I have done more for you. Hear, O heavens; give ear, O earth. I have nourished and brought up these children; that is My plea.” He declares His Fatherhood by calling them children. He says, “It is not a name with Me; I have fulfilled a Father’s part; you owe everything to Me. Look at your life and see what it looks like in the light of this relationship which I have sustained and fulfilled towards you. Admit,” He says, “My Fatherhood—and you cannot but admit it—and what does your life look like in the light of it? How unnatural and base it becomes. You sink below the brute, you are steeped in more absolute stupidity than the ox or the ass, for the ox knoweth its owner and the ass its master’s crib, but Israel does not know My people.” This is God’s reasoning, and who of us can stand against it? God, our Father, to whom we owe our being, from whom all gifts have come to us, upon whom we depend for everything—what has been our conduct towards Him? “I have nourished and brought up children, and ye have rebelled against Me, flung off My authority, despised My love, lifted your hands against Me”—what can we say to reasoning like this? We cannot excuse ourselves, we cannot justify ourselves; we can only hang our heads in silence and in shame while God says, “Come, and let us bring this reasoning to an end—you know you have nothing to say: admit it.” 3. Thus in this chapter also God reasons with man on the basis of sin’s results. He says, “You have rebelled against Me; has it justified itself in its success? You have rebelled against Me; what good has it done you? Has it brought you freedom and happiness? Has it brought to the land and the nation peace and prosperity?” God Himself gives the answer in searching and terrible words: “Why should ye be stricken any more? Ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick and the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores; and your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire—that is what sin has done for you.” He points them to the terrible and pitiful results which have come to pass for the individual and the nation through their disobedience towards God; and He challenges them and says, “Now look at it as I have reasoned it out with you.” 1 [Note: W. Perkins.] ii. The Result of the Reasoning There is, there can be, but one result—our sins are as scarlet; they are red like crimson. “Scarlet” and “crimson” are really synonyms for the one colour, properly “crimson.” According to the Biblical view, sin and piety, anger and love or grace are mutually related as fire and light, hence as red and white; for red is the colour of the fire that shines up now out of the darkness and returns into it, while white, without any mixture of darkness, sets forth the pure, absolute triumph of light. In a Chinese proclamation, issued by H.H. Tseng Kuo Fan, the energetic official who helped to suppress the Tai Ping Rebellion, there is this sentence referring to the depredations of the rebels. “There is no temple they do not burn, no image they do not destroy. The deities are enraged, they will cool their anger” (in their destruction). The phrase is literally “snow their anger,” anger being regarded as both hot and red. 2 [Note: W. A. Cornaby, A String of Chinese Peach Stones.] 1. Their sins were crimson because they were committed in the face of the light. It is a matter of common sense that the servant who knows the master’s will, and yet disobeys, is worthy of more stripes than he
- 154. who knows itless perfectly. The sinners to whom Isaiah preached, under the more complete revelation of the covenant of grace, sinned against clearer light than the sinners to whom Moses and Joshua preached. How much more, even than those to whom the prophet is preaching, do sinners now sin against the clearer light who have in their hands the last and complete development of the New Testament covenant of grace; and over and above this, the knowledge of the outworking of the completed scheme of grace, under His providence, through two thousand years. 2. They were crimson, because they were committed against special reasons for gratitude and well-doing. Listen to that pathetic complaint: “I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me. The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib; but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider” (Isa_1:2-3). And of whom speaketh He this? Not of Israel only. Which of us can recall an hour of life unmarked by some blessing from God? Mercies have been showered upon us. Blessings have been bestowed upon our country, our friends, our family, ourselves—mercies of providence and mercies of grace. Through the whole journey of life we tread upon God’s blessings, strewn as flowers in our way, and their perfume fills the very air we breathe. 3. Their sins were crimson, because they were committed against special covenants and vows. They were sins of faithlessness and recklessness. Is it not so that among men the breach of a solemn bond is more to be reprehended than failure to meet any other engagement? This was the special aggravation of the sin of those to whom the prophet preached. They were solemnly engaged by covenants with Abraham, with Moses, and with David, to be peculiarly Jehovah’s people, as He to be peculiarly their God and Redeemer. In this regard, their sins were more aggravated than those of Sodom and Gomorrah, whose cry ascended up to heaven, and brought down the fires of vengeance. For besides the intrinsic wickedness of doing the deeds of Sodom and Gomorrah, these sinners in so sinning added the guilt of faithlessness to their solemn vows and the vows of their fathers. And it is this that gives their peculiar aggravation to the sins of such as have formally and publicly entered into the covenant of Jehovah in our day. They add to the intrinsic guilt of their transgressions this violation of solemn faith pledged. And on this account it is that their sins are also the most hurtful in their influence, by bringing reproach on the religion of Jesus Christ, as a religion that hinders not its professors from being found faithless. It was no figure of speech, it was no morbid self-depreciation, St. Paul spoke the real language of his heart when he called himself “the chief of sinners.” I greatly mistrust the state of that man who cannot, at this moment, truly and honestly, lay his hand upon his heart, and say this: “I do not believe that there ever was a more wicked man upon the face of the whole earth than I am.” For only a man’s heart knows its own wickedness. Only a man’s own heart knows the aggravations of his own guilt before Almighty God. It is not a question of acts; it is a matter of thoughts. It is not only what we are positively; it is what we are negatively. It does not depend on what stands in the foreground, but upon what lies behind in the background. It is the convictions you have resisted; it is the feelings God has put into you; it is the early advantages you enjoyed in the nursery, with a pious mother and a holy father; it is the glimpses of particular providences, and the still small voices you have heard; it is the name you have borne, and the profession you have made; it is the hedges you have thrown around you, and the barriers you have overleaped; it is the love you have put away from you, and the grace you have quenched—it is these which make a man’s sins glare before God, like red-hot under an Eastern sun,—it is these which cause a man’s sins to be steeped sevenfold, like the fastest crimson. 1 [Note: J. Vaughan.] III The Surprising Sequel The sequel of the reasoning is that sins which are scarlet become white as show, sins which are crimson become as wool. Acknowledgment of the utter sinfulness of the heart and life is followed by pardon, cleansing, and new obedience.
- 155. “I recollect,” saysSpurgeon, “that I used to say to myself, when I was quite a lad, ‘If God does not punish me for my sin, He ought to do so.’ That thought used to come to me again and again. I felt that God was just, and that He knew that I did not wish Him to be anything but just; for even my imperfect knowedge of God included my recognition that He was a just and holy God. If I could have been certain of salvation by any method in which God would have ceased to be just, I could not have accepted even salvation on those terms; I should have felt that it was derogatory to the dignity of the Most High, and that it was contrary to the universal laws of right. But this was the question that puzzled me—How can I be saved, since I have sinned, and sin must be punished? You see, in our text, the blessed answer which the Lord Himself gives, ‘Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.’ That is to say, the Lord means, ‘You shall have no sin to be punished, for I will so effectively remove it that there shall be none left upon you. I will be as sternly just to you as a righteous and holy God must be, yet I shall not smite you, for I see nothing in you, or upon you, which I ought to smite.’ O wondrous miracle of mercy and grace!” This sequel to the reasoning is surprising enough in its completeness and comprehensiveness, and yet it follows naturally (1) from God’s character, (2) from God’s promise, (3) from the nature of God’s forgiveness. 1. God’s Character. He who has seriously “reasoned together” with God is far better prepared to find God in the forgiveness of sins than he who has merely brooded over his own unhappiness without any reference to the qualities and claims of his Judge. It has been a plain and personal matter throughout, and having now come to a clear conviction that he is a guilty sinner, he turns directly to the great and good Being who stands immediately before him, and prays to be forgiven, and is forgiven. One reason why the soul so often gropes days and months without finding a sin-pardoning God lies in the fact that its thoughts and feelings respecting religious subjects, and particularly respecting the state of the heart, have been too vague and indistinct. They have not had an immediate and close reference to the one single Being who is most directly concerned, and who alone can minister to a mind diseased. The soul is wretched, and there may be some sense of sin, but there is no one to go to—no one to address with an appealing cry. “Oh that I knew where I might find Him,” is its language. “Oh that I might come even to His seat. Behold I go forward, but He is not there; and backward, but I cannot perceive Him.” But this groping would cease were there a clear view of God. This suggests two practical directions— (1) In all states of religious anxiety we should betake ourselves directly to God. There is no other refuge for the human soul but God in Christ, and if this fails us, we must renounce all hope here and hereafter. If this fail, The pillared firmament is rottenness, And earth’s base built on stubble. (Milton, Comus, 597–599.) (2) In all our religious anxiety, we should make a full and plain statement of everything to God. God loves to hear the details of our sin, and our woe. The soul that pours itself out as water will find that it is not like water spilt upon the ground, which cannot be gathered up again. Even when the story is one of shame and remorse, we find it to be mental relief, patiently and without any reserve or palliation, to expose the whole not only to our own eye but to that of our Judge. For, to this very thing have we been invited. This is precisely the “reasoning together” which God proposes to us.
- 156. I believe ina man having a place of private resort for the consideration of all the bearings of his life. I have had such places ever since I could remember. I have occasion to go back to them, in recollection, with joy and thanksgiving. Places in far-away quiet fields, where I used to go between school hours and bend my knees behind some blossoming hawthorn hedge, or some old, old tree, and there, as a mere boy in his teens, talk to God till the tears started and life seemed to be going out of me in one great painful shudder. But oh! the sweetness of those hours! One came back even to play and enjoyments of a boyish kind, and work, and suffering, with new life and new hope. 1 [Note: J. Parker.] 2. God’s Promise. God would not have made the demand for reform unless it were possible for man to meet it. Where is the power to meet it to come from? Only two answers are possible: either it is inherent in man—this is the answer of nature; or it is supplied from without—this is the answer of grace. The former is the basis of all human efforts which have been or are being put forth to reform the world; the latter is the basis of the Divine method. (1) The answer of Nature.—The belief in the ability of man to reform himself is founded on ignorance of the real nature of his moral condition, as was the case in the pagan world, or on a deliberate refusal to recognise the truth when it is presented concerning that condition, as was the case in Judaism, and is the case at the present day with those who persuade themselves to a belief in the infinite intrinsic capability of human nature. I see no reason, says the modern enthusiast, why a man, given the necessary favourable environments,—which happily are in a fair way to be supplied,—should not, by a little effort, become perfectly good; why he should not so live as to be able to defy every law in heaven and on earth. Is any one really justified by history or by experience in taking such a view of the question? Neither the religion of the pagan world, nor the philosophy of the Greeks, nor the power and civilisation of the Romans—of their religion we say nothing, for it was unworthy of the name—afford much ground for this belief in human nature. Nor could even the Mosaic law by itself awaken in man a power which would enable him to become righteous—“in that it was weak through the flesh.” The witness whether of history or of experience little encourages belief in the capacity of human nature to reform itself. All great dramatists and novelists insist upon the fact that sinners cannot cleanse themselves from the inevitable stain which sin always leaves. Shakespeare has painted this truth in its most glaring colours in Macbeth. Macbeth speaks after the murder. “Whence is that knocking? How is’t with me, when every noise appals me? What hands are here? ha! they pluck out mine eyes! Will all great Neptune’s ocean wash this blood Clean from my hand? No; this my hand will rather The multitudinous seas incarnadine, Making the green one red.” Lady Macbeth. “My hands are of your colour, but I shame To wear a heart so white. (Knock). I hear a knocking At the south entry: retire we to our chamber: A little water clears us of this deed: How easy is it, then!”
- 157. But in thenight time, walking in her sleep, Lady Macbeth is conscious that she cannot remove the stain left by the murder of Banquo:— Gent. “It is an accustom’d action with her, to seem thus washing her hands: I have known her continue in this a quarter of an hour.” Lady Macbeth. “Yet here’s a spot. Out, damnèd spot! out, I say!—One, two; why, then ’tis time to do’t.—Hell is murky!—Fie, my lord, fie! a soldier, and afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account?—Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him? Here’s the smell of the blood still: all the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. Oh, oh, oh!” “There is a lonely little pool of water in a hollow on the mountainside near Tarbet, Loch Lomond, called the Fairy Loch. If you look into it you will see a great many colours in the water, owing to the varied nature of the materials that form its bottom. There is a legend about it which says that the fairies used to dye things for the people round about, if a specimen of the colour was left along with the cloth on the brink of the pool at sunset. One evening a shepherd left beside the Fairy Loch the fleece of a black sheep, and placed upon it a white woollen thread to show that he wished the fleece dyed white. This fairly puzzled the good fol What of the Night? The burden of Dumah. One calleth unto me out of Seir, Watchman, what of the night? Watchman, what of the night? The watchman said: The morning cometh, and also the night: if ye will inquire, inquire ye: turn ye, come.—Isa_21:11-12. I The Oracle of Dumah 1. The Situation 1. “Abrupt in form, enigmatical in meaning, this oracle has nevertheless a certain grandeur and sublimity even for those to whom its sense is obscure.” So says Samuel Cox, introducing one of the best sermons ever preached upon it. And he proceeds to recall Mendelssohn’s use of the oracle: “He who has heard Mendelssohn’s ‘Hymn of Praise’ has at least one proof of its power to excite the imagination and rouse emotion. In that fine work of art, the tenor soloist demands, in sharp, ascending minors, ‘Watchman, will the night soon pass?’ and replies, ‘Though the morning come, the night will come also.’ The demand is thrice repeated in the same sequence of notes, but each time it is raised a whole tone in the scale, to denote the growing intensity and urgency of the inquirer; thrice the answer is given in the same sequence, but for the sake of added emphasis it also is raised a tone the second time; while in reply to the third repetition of the inquirer, the soprano breaks in with the joyful proclamation, ‘The night is departing,’ and the chorus take up and swell and prolong the glad news. As we listen, we feel that the music, splendid as it is in itself, owes no little of its sublimity to the splendid dramatic force of the words to which it is set.” 1 [Note: S. Cox, An Expositor’s Note Book, p. 201.] 2. The key to the passage is to be found in its historical circumstances. The period was that of the Assyrian oppression, an oppression which not only harassed and depeopled Judah, but affected the nations around. Sharing in their neighbour’s sin, these nations shared in their neighbour’s punishment, and, like the primary sufferer, were downcast and desponding, asking wearily and anxiously, “How long?” One by one they present themselves to the prophet’s vision—Philistia, Moab, Damascus, Ethiopia, Egypt, Arabia; and now he is speaking of Edom, or, as it is here called, “Dumah,” Judah’s nearest neighbour as
- 158. well as itsoldest and most inveterate foe. “The burden of Dumah,” he says, “What I have to say concerning its present state, what I have to say concerning its future destiny.” 3. The prophet is standing in vision on the border. He has planted himself on the ridge between Judah and Edom—night to right of him, night to left of him; night on the dwellings of Judah, night on the dwellings of Edom, Judah’s ancient foe; the same pall of darkness hangs low over both. And as he waits, the stillness is broken by a solitary cry. It is the voice of some unseen inquirer—not, you observe, in Judah, but in Edom. “Watchman, what of the night?” he says. “Is it nearly over? Are there any streaks of light yet? Do you see the morning star?” And the watchman answers cautiously. He does not commit himself. “I will tell you this much,” he says, “The morning cometh, and also the night.” Among the many offices that have become obsolete, during the advance of modern civilisation, may be counted that of the watchman. In ancient times, however, the office was considered absolutely necessary for the maintenance of order and safety in towns and cities. It was the watchman’s duty to patrol the streets during the night, to prevent thieves and vagabonds prowling about in the dark. It was his duty to sound the alarm in case of imminent danger. It was his duty to announce the hour, and state the various changes in the weather. Those who listened to his firm, steady, regular step, as he passed their doors, felt a sense of security, and cast themselves with confidence into the arms of sleep. At the entrance of the cities, towers were not infrequently erected, and these were called “watch-towers,” in which watchmen were regularly posted, whose eyes ever swept the distant horizon, to see if anybody was coming, of whom it was necessary to give information. 1 [Note: D. Rowlands, in The Cross and the Dice-Box, p. 217.] 2. The Question 1. The question to the watchman, “What of the night?” means, What part of the night is it now? Is it the first, the second, or the third watch? Will the light soon dawn? The A.V. translation, says Dr. G. A. Smith, 1 [Note: The Book of Isaiah, p. 276.] though picturesque, is misleading. The voice does not inquire, “What of the night?” i.e. whether it be fair or foul weather, but “How much of the night is passed?” literally “What from off the night?” This brings out a pathos that our English version has disguised. Edom feels that her night is lasting terribly long. 2. It is worth while to point out—for the quality of poetry depends on such minute touches of art—that the sentinel not only repeats his question, but repeats it in an abbreviated form. “Watchman, how far is it in the night? Watchman,how far in the night?” expresses in English the Hebrew abbreviation, though in the Hebrew it is much more telling. And both the repetition of the question and the more brief and winged form of the question on the second utterance of it indicate the extreme urgency of the inquiry, the extreme haste and impatience of the inquirer. 3. The word Dumah means “silence,” “the land of silent desolation.” It is a very suggestive thought. Sin is the great silencer. The end of sin is silence. Assuredly that was true in the case of Edom. It was true of it at the time when the prophet spoke, it was to be true of it still more completely in the ages to follow. Travellers tell us that if we want to know how Providence can turn a fruitful land into barrenness, and make a defenced city a heap, for the iniquity of the inhabitants thereof, we have only to look at Edom, with its hills and plains picked clean of every vestige of vegetation, and its ruined palaces, once the home of busy men, now the haunt of vultures and toe lair of scorpions, all human sound gone—the voice of mirth, the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom, the voice of the bride! 4. Of course we are not to take Isaiah’s words literally. No voice, no sound, could reach from Mount Seir to Mount Zion. Nor are we to suppose that the Edomites dispatched an embassy to the prophet at Jerusalem to inquire of him concerning the future fate of Edom. Isaiah was a poet, and describes in a dramatic form the thoughts and questions which rose in his soul as he looked through the ages, and the shadows of coming events passed before him. He had already seen that the Babylonians would conquer Jerusalem; and that they, in their turn, would be conquered by the Persians. But when the Babylonians came against Jerusalem, the Edomites would join them in despoiling the city and slaying its inhabitants. If the Babylonians were to be judged for their sin against Israel and the God of Israel, were the Edomites, who had shared their sin, to escape their judgment?
- 159. 3. The Answer Theanswer is not clear to us now. Perhaps we do not know all the circumstances quite intimately enough. Perhaps it is purposely made enigmatical, as was often the case with an oracle. Perhaps the answer was not clear to the prophet himself. Cox thinks that the prophet, dismissing the Edomite inquirer with a prediction so gloomy, felt some compunction. He cannot see beyond the night; yet the night may have a morning beyond it. Let the inquirer return, therefore, and repeat his inquiries. The prophet hopes he will. He reiterates the invitation. He makes it more warm and urgent. “If ye will inquire, ye may,” turns into the entreaty “return, come again.” Davies understands that the Edomite was answered with the promise of alternations of dawning day and darkening night. The Assyrians, Persians, Chaldeans, Greeks, Romans, Muhammadans would in turn oppress them, and between each oppression there would be but a ray of hope. Perhaps the brightest dawn to them would be the ascendancy of the Herods; but even that would so soon culminate in a darker night. II Its Modern Use i. The Heart’s Cry to God It is the cry of the human heart to God. How often do the heavens seem pitiless, and send no answer to our impassioned appeal, but “Morning cometh, and also night.” However sad we are, however racked with suspense, though we have lost the friends we most loved, or apprehend the ill we most fear, the sun shines on, the birds sing, our friends eat and drink and are merry, we have to do our work, to take our food, to talk and smile, to listen to condolences, to endure remonstrance, to go through the whole daily round as though nothing had happened to us. And when the day is over, the night comes, and we have to lie down on a couch which has no rest for us, to drag through the slow weary hours, and long for the morning. At such times, in such moods, our life grows very dark to us. Nature seems to have no sympathy with us; friends and neighbours cannot even understand what our grief is like; our duties are burdensome to us, pleasure even more burdensome than duty. The strain is heavier than we can endure; it seems impossible that we should struggle on long under a burden so heavy. And yet the future holds out no hope to us but death. A few faint, watery gleams of brightness, and then the great darkness will rush down upon us, the night that has no end. Apart from such special eclipses, times when the darkness thickens, there is the universal and permanent shadow that broods over all, the shadow of this enigmatic and mysterious life. I mean the shadow to which the poet refers when he writes— So runs my dream: but what am I? An infant crying in the night: An infant crying for the light: And with no language but a cry. I mean the shadow of which a great Christian thinker spoke when, after a conversation with a friend on the deepest problems of life and death, he wound up the interview with the words: “Ah! think now of the great God looking down on our babblings in the dark!” We are compassed with mystery. The sky is heavy with it, the heart is oppressed with it. Life has its mysteries. Truth has its mysteries. 1 [Note: W. A. Gray.]
- 160. ii. The World’sCry to the Church It is the cry of the world to the Church. The voice comes from Seir. It comes from the men and women of the world. It is addressed to God’s watchman on Mount Zion. It is the cry of the world to the Church of God. Notice first the great variety there is in the manner of the cry, and then the fact of it. 1. The manner of it. (1) Sometimes it is no more than a question of utter carelessness. There are those who haunt our churches from the indolence of habit, who smilingly confess themselves “sinners” without once remembering the tremendous import of the words they employ; who echo the thrilling penitence of our liturgy in the same tone that inquires the news of the day; who are Christians because their fathers were, and would, without a murmur, be heathens for the same reason. (2) Sometimes it is the question of the merely curious. Most Christian teachers are familiar with a class of inquirers who, without much sympathy with evangelical verities, sometimes without much attention to moral demands, are greatly taken up with speculative difficulties. They want the mist cleared away from this point, they want the uncertainty banished from that. The consistency of God’s sovereignty with man’s responsibility, the nature and occupation of the unseen world, the destiny of the heathen, the fulfilment of prophecy, the order of the last things—that whole class of interesting but not always practical subjects on which a veil of uncertainty hangs, attracts them much. And they turn in curiosity to the Church, with their appeals to the Church’s wisdom, their demands for the Church’s opinion. (3) Sometimes the question is ironical, or even contemptuous. “How goes the task with you?” says the world. “With all your money and with all your machinery, what have you to show? How many converted heathens? How many converted Jews? What reduction is there in the statistics of immorality? What increase in church attendance among the working classes? Watchman, what of the night?” (4) But sometimes it is earnest. Not in any light or trifling spirit, but with a deep sense of perplexity, and an honest desire for help, men turn inquiringly to the Church—at times even in anguish of heart. The agonies of remorse have seized their spirit. The night has come down upon them in exceeding great darkness. Conscience suggests retribution; they ask if revelation confirms it. (5) And sometimes it is undefined and inarticulate, and then it is the saddest cry of all. This is the cry from Seir. The true translation is “one calleth unto me out of Seir.” It is the utterance of a poor heartbroken weary community; one voice attempting to utter the need, the yearning, the longing of many hearts. Mr. C. T. Studd once told me a cry of anguish which he heard in China, and which has haunted him ever since. He was negotiating in a Chinese dwelling for the tenancy of a building for an opium refuge. While the negotiations were in progress, he and Mrs. Studd were horrified at a series of piercing shrieks which fell upon their ears. They evidently came from a little girl, and knowing how dangerous it was to interfere in anyone else’s business, they at first disregarded the cries, which were agonising in their character. At last they could bear it no longer, and determined, whatever the consequences, to find out whence the cries proceeded; they followed the sound until they found themselves in a room, where, forcibly held on a rude bed, was a little girl, from whose feet the cruel bandages used in the process of foot-binding were being stripped. One woman held her down by her little arms; another was tearing the bandages from the poor feet; while a third was beating the child with a heavy stick, to divert the pain to other parts of the body, and to punish the little one for her cries. Those cries were heard by a sympathetic man, but there are thousands which are heard only by a sympathetic God. How can we, who have children of our own, be indifferent to the wail of these little ones, into whose cries we may read the agonising question, “Will the night never pass away?” 1[Note: J. Gregory Mantle.] “He who has seen the misery of man only,” Victor Hugo tells us, “has seen nothing, he must see the
- 161. misery of awoman; he who has seen the misery of a woman only, has seen nothing, he must see the misery of childhood.” 2. The fact of it. Three things are to be observed here. (1) When night hangs heavily on the Church, it hangs still more heavily on the world. The Assyrian oppression lay like a cloud on Judah, but in lying on Judah it projected a still heavier cloud upon Edom. We take Judah (as we are bound to do) as a type of the Kingdom of God, and we take Edom (as we are also bound to do) as a type of the kingdoms of sense and sin; and the lesson to be first noted is this, that whatsoever casts a gloom on the one casts the same gloom or a deeper gloom on the other. There never was a greater mistake than to suppose that, because Christianity is bound up with problems, the abandonment of belief is the abandonment of mystery, mystery will meet you still. Do you get rid of the mystery of human sin, or of human pain, or of human inequalities, or of human death, or of any one of those great and pressing perplexities that make existence a puzzle, our belief in the kindness and righteousness of Providence hard? No, you do not. But you get rid of the one fund of hope that can soften these mysteries, the one source of light that can brighten them. (2) In the midst of this common night there is the significant fact that the world does turn to the Church. It is very suggestive that in the general pressure of the general gloom the Edomite is represented as appealing to the Jew—a votary of the Jewish worship, a representative of the Jewish God. Was there none to consult nearer home? Where were the seers of Idumæa? No doubt there were seers in abundance, necromancers, astrologers, wizards that peeped and muttered. But it is not to these that the questioner turns. He looks away from them all to yonder lonely man on the serrated ridge, clad in camel- skin, now standing still, now pacing backwards and forwards, as he swept the cloud-hung horizon with his eye. It is from him the Edomite expects the oracle. It is on him he depends for the truth. “Watchman,” he says, “prophet of Israel’s race, servant of Israel’s God, what of the night?” Through all ages the principle is the same. Ever, in the midst of the cloud that surrounds us all, the world puts its questions to the Church. It puts them to the Church’s representatives, puts them to the Church’s ministers. We have no more significant testimony to the place which God gives to the witnesses of religion than the way, friendly or unfriendly as the case may be, in which those most removed from their habits and thoughts continually ask their opinion. They are the mark of perpetual notice. They are the subjects of unceasing examination. The question, “Watchman, what of the night?” is raised in a variety of forms, comes through a variety of channels. But there it is, and those applied to must take account of it and face it. (3) The Church must be ready with some answer. Has the Church an answer to give? It has. The Church is the watchman standing on the tower to look into and ascertain the nature of the world’s night. That, when you come to examine it, gives us a very wide range, perhaps wider than we sometimes think. For what would we include in the night—the world’s night? First of all, unquestionably and fundamentally, the world’s sin, the world’s alienation from God, the world’s wandering from holiness and purity and truth, the world’s rejection of the Divine Spirit in its beneficent and soul-healing power. But that is the starting-point. By the world’s night you must understand all its need, all its heart-breaking, all the problems that weary, harass, and perplex the brain of man, all the tears it is shedding, all the burdens it is bearing, all the sorrows it is enduring, all its chaos, all its discomfort, all its failure, all its darkness. That is the world’s night; and the Christian Church has to do with all of it. And more than that, I say this, that it is the Christian Church, as I have defined it, and that alone, that is competent to understand the meaning of it, to look into the nature of it. And if a remedy is to be found for it at all, it must be found in the name and spirit of Jesus Christ; it must be found by the watchman that has been set upon the tower to note the progress of the night, and to declare the passing away of the darkness. It is only the spirit that rules the Church, or should rule it, that can see clearly into the night. The Church has an answer, but it is not always ready to give it. The Church is sometimes taken aback by the world’s moral or religious questions, because it does not appreciate the world’s moral or religious difficulties. Sad, were the question to go up from Edom, “Watchman, what of the night?” and the answer to come back from Judah, “ ‘Night,’ did you say? we are scarcely aware that there is a night!” With one class, that,
- 162. then, is thereason of the absence of reply—want of perception of the difficulty. And for another class, the reason may be that, while feeling the pressure of the difficulty, they have not obtained a solution for themselves. That is just as sad. Sad, were outsiders to appeal to us, doubting and looking to us for faith, ignorant and looking to us for knowledge, to find that the faith and knowledge they look for are absent— never truly possessed, or if once in a fashion possessed, now well-nigh vanished. Sad, we say, were the question to arise from Edom, “Watchman, what of the night?” and the answer from Judah to be this, “The truth is, we are brothers in blindness; in spite of position, in spite of profession, we know as little as yourselves.” iii. The Answer of the Church The answer of the Church is twofold 1. Throughout her history there have been both night and morning. There is a rhythm everywhere here on earth. Things vary and alternate. We have day and night, summer and winter; we sleep and we wake, we have youth and age, we live and die. Tides ebb and flow; moons wax and wane; the flowers have yearly their resurrection and their death. “The morning cometh and also the night.” Nations rise and fall. Greece cultivates the garden, and Rome breaks down all her hedges; Rome builds walls, and the Goth scales them; patriots purchase liberty, and by and by the people throw their liberty away. And thus, in human history, the continual variation and alternation go on. “The morning cometh and also the night.” The Church goes down into Egypt, and she is ransomed; again, she is bound with fetters and borne to Babylon. She has palmy days, and then days of adversity. She knows revival, and soon reaction and depression follow. Her Reformation grows to rationalism, her noblest Puritanism to prudishness and politics. The church of the parish falls cold and dead, and the chapels become the centres of spiritual light and life; anon the chapel is made the club-house of petty interests in the village, and life and work revive in the church. The dawn of civilisation seems to break on heathen Africa when the pioneer missionary touches its shore, and ere long civilisation casts darker shadows there than those of heathendom’s midnight. So true it is that “The morning cometh and also the night”! 2. Yet the night is far spent and the day is at hand. Many forms of wrong, cruelty, and vice are impossible now which were possible and even common before the Son of God and Son of Man dwelt among us; nay, even before the Reformation carried through Europe a light by which such deeds of darkness were reproved. The individual man may stand little higher, whether in wisdom or in goodness, than of old; but the number of men capable of high thoughts, noble aims, and lives devoted to the service of truth and righteousness, is incomparably larger. The world took long to make, and may take still longer to remake;
- 163. but its re-creationin the image of God is just as certain as its creation. (1) We see the approach of the day in matters of faith. There never was a time in human history when men were so loyal to the landmarks of truth. There never was a time when the blessed Bible was entrenched in so many faithful hearts. True, there are controversies. God be praised! The worst that can ever befall the Christian Church is stagnation. The Kingdom of God is not likely to suffer from any investigation of its truth. To be sure, there are heretics and schismatics. They perish by the way and their work serves to strengthen the battlements of truth, as coral insects toiling in unknown depths leave their bones as a contribution to the continents of coming ages. The truth had never so many stalwart friends as it has this day. (2) We see it in social and ethical life. Ideals are higher than ever. Character means more. The character of Jesus stands out more distinctly as the Exemplar of morals. His incomparable portrait is the touchstone of character. More is expected of men than ever before in human history. More is expected of kings, of politicians, of merchants, of the average man. Compare the dignitaries of our time with those of a few centuries ago: Queen Victoria with Elizabeth, the President of the French Republic with Louis the Grand, Gladstone with Machiavelli, President Harrison with our continental governors, the citizen, the country gentleman, the ordinary church-goer or the non-church-goer, with those of a hundred years ago. I say ideals are higher and men more eager in striving after them. There is more respect for common honesty, for chastity and temperance, for benevolence. Many of the vices that were common have disappeared from public view. (3) And we see it in the coming of the Kingdom. It was but a hundred years ago that William Carey sat in his cobbler shop in Northamptonshire, his attention divided between the lapstone on his knee and a map of the world hanging on the wall. He said, “There is gold to be mined in India. I will go down after it if you will hold the ropes.” He sailed for that pagan land a hundred years ago, went down into the mine, and souls have been responding to that deed of consecration, born out of Carey’s travail, in countless multitudes—gold minted in the heavenly treasury and stamped with the image and superscription of our King! Oh, friends, everything is going right. The nations of the earth are coming unto our God. “Watchman, what of the night?” There is no night. The darkness is past and gone, the Sun of Righteousness hath risen with healing in His beams! Be glad and rejoice, O people of God; the sun shineth brighter and brighter unto the perfect day! 1 [Note: D. J. Burrell.]
- 164. 19 If you arewilling and obedient, you will eat the good things of the land; 1.BARNES, “If ye be willing - If you submit your wills, and become voluntary in your obedience to my law. And obedient - Hebrew If you will hear; that is, my commands. Ye shall eat ... - That is, the land shall yield its increase; and you shall be saved from pestilence, war, famine, etc. The productions of the soil shall no more be devoured by strangers, Isa_1:7; compare the notes at Isa_65:21-23. This was in accordance with the promises which God made to their fathers, and the motives to obedience placed before them, which were drawn from the fact, that they should possess a land of distinguished fertility, and that obedience should be attended with eminent national prosperity. Such an appeal was adapted to the infancy of society, and to the circumstances of the people. It should be added, however, that with this they connected the idea, that God would be their God and Protector; and, of course, the idea that all the blessings resulting from that fact would be theirs; Exo_3:8 : ‘And I am come down to deliver them out of the band of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey;’ compare Exo_3:17; Exo_13:5; Deu_28:1-9. In accordance with this, the language of promise in the New Testament is, that of inheriting the earth, that is, the land, Note, Mat_5:5. The expression here means, that if they obeyed God they should be under his patronage, and be prospered. It refers, also, to Isa_1:7, where it is said, that strangers devoured the land. The promise here is, that if they were obedient, this calamity should be removed. 2. CLARKE, “Ye shall eat the good of the land - Referring to Isa_1:7 : it shall not be “devoured by strangers.” 3. GILL, “If ye be willing and obedient,.... The Targum adds, "to my Word": the Word made flesh, and dwelling among them; who would have gathered the inhabitants of Jerusalem to his ministry, to attend his word and ordinances, but their rulers would not: ye shall eat the good of the land; the land of Canaan; as the Jews held the possession of that land, before the times of Christ, by their obedience to the laws of God, which were given them as a body politic, and which, so long as they observed, they were continued in the quiet and full enjoyment of all the blessings of it; so, when Christ came, had they received, embraced, and
- 165. acknowledged him asthe Messiah, and been obedient to his will, though only externally, they would have remained in their own land, and enjoyed all the good things in it undisturbed by enemies. 4. PULPIT, “If ye be willing and obedient. Rosenmüller explains this as equivalent to "if ye be willing to obey" (cf. Eze_3:7); but perhaps it is better to give each verb its separate force: "If you consent in your wills, and are also obedient in your actions" (so Kay). Ye shall eat the good of the land; i.e. there shall be no invasion; strangers shall not devour your crops (see Isa_1:7); you shall consume them yourselves. "The good of the land" is a common expression for its produce (Gen_45:18, Gen_45:20; Ezr_9:12; Neh_9:36; Jer_2:7). If ye be willing and obedient. Rosenmüller explains this as equivalent to "if ye be willing to obey" (cf. Eze_3:7); but perhaps it is better to give each verb its separate force: "If you consent in your wills, and are also obedient in your actions" (so Kay). Ye shall eat the good of the land; i.e. there shall be no invasion; strangers shall not devour your crops (see Isa_1:7); you shall consume them yourselves. "The good of the land" is a common expression for its produce (Gen_45:18, Gen_45:20; Ezr_9:12; Neh_9:36; Jer_2:7). 5. JAMISON, “Temporal blessings in “the land of their possession” were prominent in the Old Testament promises, as suited to the childhood of the Church (Exo_3:17). New Testament spiritual promises derive their imagery from the former (Mat_5:5). 6. K&D, “But after the restoration of Israel in integrum by this act of grace, the rest would unquestionably depend upon the conduct of Israel itself. According to Israel's own decision would Jehovah determine Israel's future. “If ye then shall willingly hear, ye shall eat the good of the land; if ye shall obstinately rebel, ye shall be eaten by the sword: for the mouth of Jehovah hath spoken it.” After their justification, both blessing and cursing lay once more before the justified, as they had both been long before proclaimed by the law (compare Isa_1:19 with Deu_28:3., Lev_26:3., and Isa_1:20 with the threat of vengeance with the sword in Lev_26:25). The promise of eating, i.e., of the full enjoyment of domestic blessings, and therefore of settled, peaceful rest at home, is placed in contrast with the curse of being eaten with the sword. Chereb (the sword) is the accusative of the instrument, as in Psa_17:13-14; but this adverbial construction without either genitive, adjective, or suffix, as in Exo_30:20, is very rarely met with (Ges. §138, Anm. 3); and in the passage before us it is a bold construction which the prophet allows himself, instead of saying, ב ֶר ֶחֶכ ְל ַּאכם , for the sake of the paronomasia (Böttcher, Collectanea, p. 161). In the conditional clauses the two futures are followed by two preterites (compare Lev_26:21, which is more in conformity with our western mode of expression), inasmuch as obeying and rebelling are both of them consequences of an act of will: if ye shall be willing, and in consequence of this obey; if ye shall refuse, and rebel against Jehovah. They are therefore, strictly speaking, perfecta consecutiva. According to the ancient mode of writing, the
- 166. passage Isa_1:18-20 formeda separate parashah by themselves, viz., a sethumah, or parashah indicated by spaces left within the line. The piskah after Isa_1:20 corresponds to a long pause in the mind of the speaker. - Will Israel tread the saving path of forgiveness thus opened before it, and go on to renewed obedience, and will it be possible for it to be brought back by this path? Individuals possibly may, but not the whole. The divine appeal therefore changes now into a mournful complaint. So peaceful a solution as this of the discord between Jehovah and His children was not to be hoped for. Jerusalem was far too depraved. 7.CALVIN, “19.If ye be willing and obedient Isaiah continues to plead the cause of God against the people, and states in a few words, that not only must the people bear the blame of all the calamities which they endured, but that it lies in their own power to regain immediately prosperity and happiness; because God is always ready to forgive them, provided that they do not harden their hearts. But because happiness appears here to be placed in the power of men, and at their disposal, the papists openly maintain that men, by the exercise of their own will, are free to choose either good or evil. When God charges men with obstinacy, we must not on that account believe that he describes the nature or extent of their ability. But it would be useless to say, if ye be willing, unless it were in the power of men to will. I answer, though the choice be not so free as they pretend that it is, yet sinners are justly chargeable with being the voluntary agents of their calamities, because it is of their own accord, and not by compulsion, that they provoke God to anger. It is therefore true, that it is a special gift of God when a man aims at what is good; but it is equally true that it is their own wickedness that hinders the reprobate from applying their mind to it, and, consequently, that the whole blame of their obstinacy rests with themselves. On this depends the reproach brought against the people, that they would have led a prosperous and happy life, if they had been submissive and obedient to God. For since God is by nature disposed to acts of kindness, nothing but our ingratitude and enmity hinders us from receiving that goodness which he freely offers to all. On the other hand, he adds a sharp and heavy threatening, that it is in his power to take vengeance; lest they should imagine that they who despise God will escape without punishment. It ought also to be observed, that the only rule of living well is to yield obedience to God and his word; for to will and to hear mean nothing else than to comply with the will of God. A change of the construction of the words (hypallage) has been admitted into this sentence; for the meaning fully brought out would stand thus: “ your mind be ready, and your will be disposed, to obey;” or, which amounts to the same thing, “ you render obedience to me, and lend an ear to my word.” since, therefore, God places the happiness of men in obedience, it follows that our life is properly conducted,
- 167. when we hearGod speaking, and obey him in all things. How great, therefore, is the wickedness of men, when they refuse to listen to God who is continually speaking to them, and reject the happiness which he has provided and offered! It was proper that their wayward dispositions should be subdued, lest those wretched men should draw down on themselves the wrath of God, and willingly throw themselves, like wild beasts, on the edge of the sword. We must likewise observe, that he at length threatens them with final destruction, if they shall obstinately refuse to submit themselves to God. Ye shall eat the good of the land He means the fruits which the earth yields for supplying the necessaries of life; for in some sense the earth may be said to be unkind when it does not produce its fruits, and keeps them, as it were, in its bosom. Yet I have no doubt he alludes to the promises of the law, in which God declares, that to those who fear him he will bless the earth and will cause it to produce a great abundance of all good things. The Lord shall make thee plenteous in the fruit of the ground, in the land which the Lord sware unto thy fathers to give thee. (Deu_28:11.) And yet, when he offers to us the conveniences of the earthly life, it is not because he wishes that our attention should be confined to our present happiness, which alone hypocrites value, and which entirely occupies their minds; but in order that, by the contemplation of it, we may rise to the heavenly life, and that, by tasting so much goodness, he may prepare us for the enjoyment of eternal happiness. More especially was God accustomed to act in this manner towards the ancient people, that, by tasting present benefits, as by a shadow, they might be called to the heavenly inheritance. This distinction ought to be carefully observed, that we may apply this instruction to ourselves, according to the degree of prosperity to which God has exalted us. The Prophet intended to show that true happiness, with its accompaniments, consists in obedience to God; and that the wicked, by their obstinacy, bring upon themselves every kind of calamities, and therefore that all our distresses ought to be ascribed to the sins and crimes which we have committed. 20 but if you resist and rebel, you will be devoured by the sword.” For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.
- 168. 1.BARNES, “But ifye refuse, ye shall be devoured with the sword - Your enemies shall come in, and lay waste the land. This prediction was fulfilled, in consequence of their continuing to rebel, when the land was desolated by Nebuchadnezzar, and the nation was carried captive to Babylon. It illustrates a general principle of the divine government, that if people persevere in rebelling against God, they shall be destroyed. The word devour is applied to the sword, as if it were insatiable for destruction. Whatever destroys may be figuratively said to devour; see the notes at Isa_34:5-6; compare Isa_5:24; Lam_2:3; Eze_15:4; Joe_2:3; Rev_11:5 - where fire is said to devour. The mouth of the Lord - Yahweh Himself. This had been spoken by the mouth of the Lord, and recorded, Lev_26:33 : And I will scatter you among the heathen, And will draw out a sword after you; And your land shall be desolate And your cities waste. On these points God proposed to reason; or rather, perhaps, these principles are regarded as reasonable, or as commending themselves to men. They are the great principles of the divine administration, that if people obey God they shall prosper; if not, they shall be punished. They commend themselves to people as just and true; and they are seen and illustrated every where. 2. CLARKE, “Ye shall be devoured with the sword “Ye shall be food for the sword” - The Septuagint and Vulgate read תאכלכם tochalchem, “the sword shall devour you;” which is of much more easy construction than the present reading of the text. The Chaldee seems to read בחרבאויבתאכלו bechereb oyeb teachelu, “ye shall be consumed by the sword of the enemy.” The Syriac also reads בחרב beehereb and renders the verb passively. And the rhythmus seems to require this addition. - Dr. Jubb. 3. GILL, “But if ye refuse and rebel,.... The Targum is, "and do not receive my Word"; the Messiah, when come, neither his person, nor his doctrines and ordinances: ye shall be devoured with the sword; of the Roman armies, as they were under Titus Vespasian; see Mat_22:7. for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it; now, by Isaiah, as well as in former times, Lev_26:25. 4. HENRY, “They could not in reason expect any other than that, if they continued obstinate in their disobedience, they should be abandoned to ruin, and the sentence of the law should be executed upon them; what can be more just? (Isa_1:20); “If you refuse and rebel, if you continue to rebel against the divine government and refuse the offers of the divine grace, you shall be devoured with the sword, with the sword of your enemies, which shall be commissioned to destroy you - with the sword of God's justice, his wrath, and vengeance, which shall be drawn
- 169. against you; forthis is that which the mouth of the Lord has spoken, and which he will make good, for the maintaining of his own honour.” Note, Those that will not be governed by God's sceptre will certainly and justly be devoured by his sword. “And now life and death, good and evil, are thus set before you. Come, and let us reason together. What have you to object against the equity of this, or against complying with God's terms?” 5. JAMISON, “Lord hath spoken it — Isaiah’s prophecies rest on the law (Lev_26:33). God alters not His word (Num_23:19). 6. PULPIT, “If ye refuse and rebel; i.e. "if ye neither consent in will, nor obey in act, "antithetical to the two verbs in the first clause of Isa_1:19. Ye shall be devoured; or, ye shall be eaten. The same verb as in the latter clause of Isa_1:19. With the sword. The metaphor is not a common one, but occurs in Jeremiah (Jer_2:30; Jer_12:12; Jer_46:10, Jer_46:14) and Nahum (Nah_2:13). The mouth of the Lord hath spoken it. A weighty ending, indicating the certainty of fulfillment, Jehovah, who cannot lie, has spoken; the result will assuredly follow. 7.CALVIN, “20.But if ye refuse and rebel The wicked always think that the severity of the punishment is greater than their guilt, even though the Lord chastise them very gently; and although they do not venture to justify themselves entirely, yet they never cease, as I formerly said, to accuse God of excessive severity. But the Prophet threatens that there will be no end of their calamities till they be destroyed; and lest they should imagine that they had nothing more to fear than those slight and inconsiderable punishments which they had hitherto suffered, he declares that far heavier judgments of God are still awaiting them. The papists torture this passage to support the doctrine of freewill, and argue in the following manner: — “ men be happy whenever they are willing to obey God, it follows that this is placed in our own power.” The argument certainly is very childish; for the Lord does not inform us by the Prophet what is the nature or extent of our capacity for good or evil; but he reminds us that it is our own fault if we do not enjoy good things, and that the calamities with which we are afflicted are the punishments of our disobedience. The question, whether a man can make his bad will good, is altogether different from the question, whether, by the bad will, which is natural to him, he brings upon himself all the evils which he endures. Unjustly and falsely, therefore, do those skillful and ingenious doctors employ this passage to support their doctrine about a free choice of good and evil.
- 170. For the mouthof the Lord hath spoken it (26) Since men who are blinded by their lusts are little moved by threatenings, the Prophet, in order to arouse them from deep slothfulness, reminds them that this declaration is not uttered by a mortal man, but has proceeded from the mouth of God, who is not changeable like men, but adheres constantly to his purpose. (27) He therefore mentions the mouth of the Lord, in order to terrify them, that they who in their vices have fallen into a deep slumber may give earnest attention to his threatenings. (26) This paragraph, which our Author had inadvertently inserted in his exposition of the nineteenth verse, is here restored to its proper place. — Ed. (27) “For Jehovah hath spoken, who fulfills his threatening as well as his promises, and does not rashly recall what he hath spoken.” — Rosensmuller. 21 See how the faithful city has become a prostitute! She once was full of justice; righteousness used to dwell in her— but now murderers! 1.BARNES, “How is - This is an expression of deploring, or lamenting. It indicates that that had occurred which was matter of grief. The prophet had stated the principles of the divine government; had urged the people to reason with God; and had affirmed his willingness to pardon. But it was seen that they would not repent. They were so wicked and perverse, that there was no hope of their reformation. His mind is full of this subject; he repeats the charge of their wickedness Isa_1:21-23, and states what must be the consequences. The faithful city - Jerusalem. It is represented here under the image of a wife - once faithful to her husband; once a devoted and attached partner. Jerusalem was thus once. In former days, it was the seat of the pure worship of God; the place where his praise was celebrated, and where his people came to offer sincere devotion. In the Scriptures, the church is often represented
- 171. under the imageof a wife, to denote the tenderness and sacredness of the union; Hos_2:19-20; Isa_62:5; Isa_54:6; Rev_21:9. An harlot - She has proved to be false, treacherous, unfaithful. The unfaithfulness of the people of God, particularly their idolatry, is often represented under the idea of unfaithfulness to the marriage contract; Jer_3:8-9; Jer_5:7; Jer_13:27; Jer_23:14; Eze_16:32; Eze_23:37; Jos_2:2; Jos_4:2. It was full of judgement - It was distinguished for justice and righteousness. Lodged in it - This is a figurative expression, meaning that it was characterized as a righteous city. The word ילין yalı yn is from לוּן lun, to pass the night, to remain through the night Gen_19:2; and then to lodge, to dwell; Psa_25:13; Job_17:2; Job_29:19. In this place it has the sense of abiding, remaining, continuing permanently. Jerusalem was the home of justice, where it found protection and safety. Now murderers - By murderers here are meant probably unjust judges; people who did not regard the interests of the poor, the widow, and the orphan; and who therefore, by a strong expression, are characterized as murderers. They had displaced justice from its home; and had become the permanent inhabitants of the city; compare the note at Isa_1:15. 2. CLARKE, “Become a harlot - See before, the Discourse on the Prophetic Style; and see Lowth’s Comment on the place, and De Sacr. Poes. Hebr. Prael. xxxi. 3. GILL, “How is the faithful city become a harlot!.... The city of Jerusalem, in which were the temple, and the pure worship of God, and was in the tribe of Judah, which ruled with God, and was very faithful with the saints when the ten tribes revolted, and fell in with the sin of Jeroboam; but now, in Isaiah's time, was become like a treacherous wife to her husband, unfaithful to the Lord, went after other lovers, committed spiritual adultery, that is, idolatry, with stocks and stones; and in the times of Christ were a wicked and an adulterous generation, corrupting the word and worship of God; see Mat_12:39. it was full of judgment; strict justice was exercised privately between man and man, as well as in the public courts of judicature; righteousness lodged in it; that is, righteous men, who walked in all the commandments of the Lord, and lived soberly, righteously, and godly; see 2Pe_3:13. but now murderers: of the prophets whom they stoned, who were sent unto them, and of the Lord Jesus Christ, of whom they were the betrayers and murderers; see Mat_23:37. 4. HENRY, “Here, I. The woeful degeneracy of Judah and Jerusalem is sadly lamented. See, 1. What the royal city had been, a faithful city, faithful to God and the interests of his kingdom among men, faithful to the nation and its public interests. It was full of judgment; justice was duly administered upon the thrones of judgment which were set there, the thrones of the house of David, Psa_122:5. Men were generally honest in their dealings, and abhorred to do an unjust
- 172. thing. Righteousness lodgedin it, was constantly resident in their palaces and in all their dwellings, not called in now and then to serve a turn, but at home there. Note, Neither holy cities nor royal ones, neither places where religion is professed nor places where government is administered, are faithful to their trust if religion do not dwell in them. 2. What it had now become. That beauteous virtuous spouse was now debauched, and become an adulteress; righteousness no longer dwelt in Jerusalem (terras Astraea reliquit - Astrea left the earth); even murderers were unpunished and lived undisturbed there; nay, the princes themselves were so cruel and oppressive that they had become no better than murderers; an innocent man might better guard himself against a troop of banditti or assassins than against a bench of such judges. Note, It is a great aggravation of the wickedness of any family or people that their ancestors were famed for virtue and probity; and commonly those that thus degenerate prove the most wicked of all men. Corruptio optimi est pessima - That which was originally the best becomes when corrupted the worst, Luk_11:26; Ecc_3:16; See Jer_22:15-17. The degeneracy of Jerusalem is illustrated, 5. JAMISON, “faithful — as a wife (Isa_54:5; Isa_62:5; Hos_2:19, Hos_2:20). harlot — (Eze_16:28-35). righteousness lodged — (2Pe_3:13). murderers — murderous oppressors, as the antithesis requires (see on Isa_1:15; see on 1Jo_3:15). 6. K&D, ““How is she become a harlot, the faithful citadel! she, full of right, lodged in righteousness, and now-murderers.” It is the keynote of an elegy (kinah) which is sounded here. ה ָ,איכ and but rarely ְ,איך which is an abbreviated form, is expressive of complaint and amazement. This longer form, like a long-drawn sigh, is a characteristic of the kinah. The kinoth (Lamentations) of Jeremiah commence with it, and receive their title from it; whereas the shorter form is indicative of scornful complaining, and is characteristic of the mashol (e.g., Isa_14:4, Isa_14:12; Mic_2:4). From this word, which gives the keynote, the rest all follows, soft, full, monotonous, long drawn out and slow, just in the style of an elegy. We may see clearly enough that forms like י ִת ֲא ִל ְמ for תፍ ֵל ְ,מ softened by lengthening, were adapted to elegiac compositions, from the first v. of the Lamentations of Jeremiah, where three of these forms occur. Jerusalem had previously been a faithful city, i.e., one stedfastly adhering to the covenant of Jehovah with her (vid., Psa_78:37). (Note: We have translated the word kiryah “citadel” (Burg), instead of “city;” but Burg also became the name of the town which sprang up around the citadel, and the persons living in and around the Burg or citadel were called burgenses, “burghers.” Jerusalem, which was also called Zion, might be called, with quite as much right, a citadel (Burg), as a city.)
- 173. This covenant wasa marriage covenant. And she had broken it, and had thereby become a zonah (harlot) - a prophetic view, the germs of which had already been given in the Pentateuch, where the worship of idols on the part of Israel is called whoring after them (Deu_31:16; Exo_34:15-16; in all, seven times). It was not, however, merely gross outward idolatry which made the church of God a “harlot,” but infidelity of heart, in whatever form it might express itself; so that Jesus described the people of His own time as an “adulterous generation,” notwithstanding the pharisaical strictness with which the worship of Jehovah was then observed. For, as the v. before us indicates, this marriage relation was founded upon right and righteousness in the broadest sense: mishpat, “right,” i.e., a realization of right answering to the will of God as positively declared; and tzedek, “righteousness,” i.e., a righteous state moulded by that will, or a righteous course of conduct regulated according to it (somewhat different, therefore, from the more qualitative tzedakah). Jerusalem was once full of such right; and righteousness was not merely there in the form of a hastily passing guest, but had come down from above to take up her permanent abode in Jerusalem: she tarried there day and night as if it were her home. The prophet had in his mind the times of David and Solomon, and also more especially the time of Jehoshaphat (about one hundred and fifty years before Isaiah's appearance), who restored the administration of justice, which had fallen into neglect since the closing years of Solomon's reign and the time of Rehoboam and Abijah, to which Asa's reformation had not extended, and re- organized it entirely in the spirit of the law. It is possible also that Jehoiada, the high priest in the time of Joash, may have revived the institutions of Jehoshaphat, so far as they had fallen into disuse under his three godless successors; but even in the second half of the reign of Joash, the administration of justice fell into the same disgraceful state, at least as compared with the times of David, Solomon, and Jehoshaphat, as that in which Isaiah found it. The glaring contrast between the present and the past is indicated by the expression “and now.” In all the correct MSS and editions, mishpat is not accented with zakeph, but with rebia; and bah, which ought to have zakeph, is accented with tiphchah, on account of the brevity of the following clause. In this way the statement as to the past condition is sufficiently distinguished from that relating to the present. (Note: It is well known that rebia has less force as a disjunctive than tiphchah, and that zakeph is stronger then either. With regard to the law, according to which bah has rebia instead of zakeph, see Bär, Thorath Emeth, p. 70. To the copies enumerated by Luzzatto, as having the correct accentuation (including Brescia 1494, and Venice, by J. B. Chayim, 1526), we may add Plantin (1582), Buxtorf (1618), Nissel (1662), and many others (cf., Dachselt's Biblia accentuata, which is not yet out of date).) Formerly righteousness, now “murderers” (merazzechim), and indeed, as distinguished from rozechim, murderers by profession, who formed a band, like king Ahab and his son (2Ki_6:32). The contrast was as glaring as possible, since murder is the direct opposite, the most crying violation, of righteousness. 7. PULPIT, “How is the faithful city become an harlot! Not here an idolatress, but one that has left her first love, and turned to other attractions. Faithful once to her lord her spouse (Cant; passim), she has now cast him off—she is an adulterous wife, she no longer obeys or loves her husband. It was full of
- 174. judgment; righteousness, etc."She that was full" (Revised Version). Under Solomon (1Ki_3:9-28) and again under Jehoshaphat (2Ch_19:5-11). It is not clear when the systematic perversion of justice by the rulers began. Perhaps it originated in the latter part of Uzziah's reign, when the royal authority was weakened by being divided between Uzziah and Jotham (2Ch_26:21). But now murderers (see the last note on Isa_1:15). 8. CALVIN, “21.How is the faithful city become an harlot ! In order to make the rebuke more forcible, and the crime of the people more shocking, in having thus departed from God and from all uprightness, he cries aloud as if he had seen some monstrous thing; and certainly it was a change fitted to awaken horror, that a nation devoted to God, and chosen to a royal priesthood, (Exo_19:6,) had fallen from lofty piety to the lowest sink of wickedness. More especially he speaks of the city of Jerusalem, which was God’ sanctuary and royal abode. He complains that the city which had formerly been a guardian of justice is a den of robbers; that she who formerly was a chaste and pure virgin hathbecome a harlot, To strike the deeper shame into the degenerate Jews, who had departed widely from their holy fathers, he assumes the air of a person astonished, and asks himself how this could possibly have happened. The faithful city By the word faithful he alludes, in my opinion, to the conjugal fidelity which a wife ought to preserve to her husband. The signification is undoubtedly more extensive; but when I look at the connection of the passage I do not hesitate to say that faithful means chaste; for immediately afterwards he employs another term in contrast with it, calling her an harlot. Whereas she once was a virtuous wife, faithful to the marriage-contract, she has nowbecome an harlot, and her base conduct brings not a blush on her countenance. The Scriptures frequently call the Church the wife of God. (Hos_2:19.) That honorable rank Jerusalem held, so long as she maintained spiritual chastity, and continued in the pure and lawful worship of God; but as soon as she departed from it she became an harlot. This astonishment of the Prophet was undoubtedly joined with the deepest grief; for we ought to look upon it as something monstrous when men revolt from God, and refuse that allegiance which they have promised to render; nor is it possible that right-hearted men, when they behold such a revolt, can fail to be affected with the most poignant grief. We read that the angels in heaven rejoice at the conversion of one sinner; (Luk_15:7;) and therefore they cannot but mourn over the final ruin of any sinner. How much more then will they bewail the ruin and destruction of a whole state and Church! Besides, that astonishment conveys also a complaint; as if the Prophet had said, “ Jerusalem, from what a flourishing condition hast thou fallen! Into what distress hast thou plunged thyself! What shame and disgrace hast thou brought upon thee!” When the flourishing state in which she had been, and the respect that had been paid to her in former times, are called to her remembrance, it ought to produce a still
- 175. deeper impression onher mind; for she who was at one time the respected mother of a family is naturally more careful about her honor and reputation than one who has spent her whole life in base and licentious conduct. It was full of judgment He shows what fruits were produced by that allegiance to God at a former period. We may take judgment as but another name for uprightness; or, if it be thought preferable, we may call it justice when men render to every man his own, and judgment when the cause of the innocent is defended, and the poor and needy are avenged; for such is the use of the words in Scripture when they are employed together; but as they are not perfectly connected in this passage, I consider judgment to denote uprightness; so that the same thing is twice expressed for the purpose of explaining it more fully. But now murderers He shows in what manner Jerusalem became an harlot. It was, that the city, which had formerly been distinguished for the love of justice and equity, was now full of murders. The meaning is, as we have formerly said, not that they were assassins or robbers, but that, by fraudulent and dishonest methods, under the pretense of justice, they had gained the property of others. In short, he means that they did not act fairly and justly towards their fellow-men, whatever might be the estimation in which they were held; for sometimes, and indeed very frequently, it happens that very wicked men are held in high esteem. The condition to which Jerusalem was reduced should lead us to consider how often Satan exercises what may be called unbounded tyranny over the Church of God; for if ever there was a Church, there was one at that time in Jerusalem; and yet Isaiah affirms that it was a den of robbers, or a slaughterhouse, where they cut men’ throats. But if Satan could freely riot in that Church, let us not wonder that the same thing takes place among us; but let us labor not to suffer ourselves to be corrupted by such wicked examples. 22 Your silver has become dross, your choice wine is diluted with water.
- 176. 1.BARNES, “Thy silver- The sentiment in this verse, as it is explained by the following, is, thy princes and people have become corrupt, and polluted. Silver is used here to denote what should have been more valuable - virtuous princes. Dross - This word - סיג sı g - means the scoriae, or baser metal, which is separated from the purer in smelting. It is of little or no value; and the expression means, that the rulers had become debased and corrupt, as if pure silver had been converted wholly to dross. Thy wine - Wine was regarded as the most pure and valuable drink among the ancients. It is used, therefore, to express that which should have been most valued and esteemed among them - to wit, their rulers. Mixed with water - Diluted, made weak. According to Gesenius, the word rendered “mixed” - מהוּל mahul - is from מהל mahal, the same as מוּל mul, to circumcise; and hence, by a figure common with the Arabians, to adulterate, or dilute wine. The word does not occur in this sense elsewhere in the Scriptures, but the connection evidently requires it to be so understood. Wine mixed with water is that which is weakened, diluted, rendered comparatively useless. So with the rulers and judges. They had lest the strength and purity of their integrity, by intermingling those things which tended to weaken and destroy their virtue, pride, the love of gifts, and bribes, etc. Divested of the figure, the passage means, that the rulers had become wholly corrupt. 2. CLARKE, “Wine mixed with water - An image used for the adulteration of wines, with more propriety than may at first appear, if what Thevenot says of the people of the Levant of late times were true of them formerly. He says, “They never mingle water with their wine to drink; but drink by itself what water they think proper for abating the strength of the wine.” “Lorsque les Persans boivent du vin, ils le prennent tout pur, a la facon des Levantins, qui ne le melent jamais avec de l’eua; mais en beuvant du vin, de temps en temps ils prennent un pot d’eau, et en boivent de grand traits.” Voyage, part ii., 54 ii., chap. 10. “Ils (les Turcs) n’y meslent jamais d’eau, et se moquent des Chretiens qui en mettent, ce qui leur semble tout a fait ridicule.” Ibid. part i., chap. 24. “The Turks never mingle water with their wine, and laugh at the Christians for doing it, which they consider altogether ridiculous.” It is remarkable that whereas the Greeks and Latins by mixed wine always understood wine diluted and lowered with water, the Hebrews on the contrary generally mean by it wine made stronger and more inebriating by the addition of higher and more powerful ingredients, such as honey, spices, defrutum, (or wine inspissated by boiling it down to two-thirds or one-half of the quantity), myrrh, mandragora, opiates, and other strong drugs. Such were the exhilarating, or rather stupefying, ingredients which Helen mixed in the bowl together with the wine for her guests oppressed with grief to raise their spirits, the composition of which she had learned in Egypt: - Αυτικ’ αρ’ εις οινον βαλε φαρµακον, ενθεν επινον, Νηπενθες τ’ αχολον τε, κακων επιληθον ᅋπαντων. Homer. Odyss. lib. iv., ver. 220. “Meanwhile, with genial joy to warm the soul, Bright Helen mix’d a mirth-inspiring bowl; Temper’d with drugs of sovereign use, to assuage The boiling bosom of tumultuous rage: Charm’d with that virtuous draught, the exalted mind
- 177. All sense ofwo delivers to the wind.” Pope. Such was the “spiced wine and the juice of pomegranates,” mentioned Son_8:2. And how much the Eastern people to this day deal in artificial liquors of prodigious strength, the use of wine being forbidden, may be seen in a curious chapter of Kempfer upon that subject. Amoen. Exot. Fasc. iii., Obs. 15. Thus the drunkard is properly described, Pro_23:30, as one “that seeketh mixed wine,” and “is mighty to mingle strong drink,” Isa_5:22. And hence the poet took that highly poetical and sublime image of the cup of God’s wrath, called by Isa_51:17, the “cup of trembling,” causing intoxication and stupefaction, (see Chappelow’s note on Hariri, p. 33), containing, as St. John expresses in Greek the Hebrew idea with the utmost precision, though with a seeming contradiction in terms, κεκερασµενον ακρατον, merum mixtum, pure wine made yet stronger by a mixture of powerful ingredients; Rev_14:10. “In the hand of Jehovah,” saith the psalmist, Psa_75:8, “there is a cup, and the wine is turbid: it is full of a mixed liquor, and he poureth out of it,” or rather, “he poureth it out of one vessel into another,” to mix it perfectly, according to the reading expressed by the ancient versions, ויגרמזהאלזה vaiyagger mizzeh al zeh, and he pours it from this to that, “verily the dregs thereof,” the thickest sediment of the strong ingredients mingled with it, “all the ungodly of the earth shall wring them out, and drink them.” R. D. Kimchi says, “The current coin was adulterated with brass, tin, and other metals, and yet was circulated as good money. The wine also was adulterated with water in the taverns, and sold notwithstanding for pure wine.” 3. GILL, “Thy silver is become dross,.... Meaning either that such persons, who had the appearance of goodness, looked like genuine silver, were now become reprobate, and, as the wicked of the earth, like dross, Jer_6:30 or that the word of God, which is as silver purified seven times, was now corrupted with false glosses and human traditions, which were as dross: thy wine mixed with water (m); the wine of the divine word, which was mixed and blended with the inventions of men, as before; so the roof of the church's mouth, which is no other than the ministry of the word, is compared to the best wine, Son_7:9. (m) It being usual to mix water with wine, and drink it, and this being not at all reproachful, but commendable, Gussetius thinks such a version does not express the sense of the words; he therefore thinks that מהל is the same as מהולל contracted, which signified "infatuated"; and so the words should be rendered, "thy wine is infatuated into water"; is degenerated, and has lost its spirit and sprightliness, and is become insipid and tasteless. So Jarchi mentions a Midrash, which interprets it by the same word in Ecc_2:2. It is a word only used in this place. Joseph Kimchi says that in the Arabic, language has the signification of mixture, but without giving any instance. Indeed, according to Castel, it is used for the lees of oil. 4. HENRY, “What it had now become. That beauteous virtuous spouse was now debauched, and become an adulteress; righteousness no longer dwelt in Jerusalem (terras Astraea reliquit - Astrea left the earth); even murderers were unpunished and lived undisturbed there; nay, the
- 178. princes themselves wereso cruel and oppressive that they had become no better than murderers; an innocent man might better guard himself against a troop of banditti or assassins than against a bench of such judges. Note, It is a great aggravation of the wickedness of any family or people that their ancestors were famed for virtue and probity; and commonly those that thus degenerate prove the most wicked of all men. Corruptio optimi est pessima - That which was originally the best becomes when corrupted the worst, Luk_11:26; Ecc_3:16; See Jer_22:15-17. The degeneracy of Jerusalem is illustrated, (1.) By similitudes (Isa_1:22): Thy silver has become dross. This degeneracy of the magistrates, whose character is the reverse of that of their predecessors, is a great a reproach and injury to the kingdom as the debasing of their coin would be and the turning of their silver into dross. Righteous princes and righteous cities are as silver for the treasury, but unrighteous ones are as dross for the dunghill. How has the gold become dim! Lam_4:1. Thy wine is mixed with water, and so has become flat and sour. Some understand both these literally: the wine they sold was adulterated, it was half water; the money they paid was counterfeit, and so they cheated all they dealt with. But it is rather to be taken figuratively: justice was perverted by their princes, and religion and the word of God were sophisticated by their priests, and made to serve what turn they pleased. Dross may shine like silver, and the wine that is mixed with water may retain the colour of wine, but neither is worth any thing. Thus they retained a show and pretence of virtue and justice, but had no true sense of either. 5. JAMISON, “Thy princes and people are degenerate in “solid worth,” equivalent to “silver” (Jer_6:28, Jer_6:30; Eze_22:18, Eze_22:19), and in their use of the living Word, equivalent to “wine” (Son_7:9). mixed — literally, “circumcised.” So the Arabic, “to murder” wine, equivalent to dilute it. 6. K&D, “The complaint now turns from the city generally to the authorities, and first of all figuratively. “Thy silver has become dross, thy drink mutilated with water.” It is upon this passage that the figurative language of Jer_6:27. and Eze_22:18-22 is founded. Silver is here a figurative representation of the princes and lords, with special reference to the nobility of character naturally associated with nobility of birth and rank; for silver - refined silver - is an image of all that is noble and pure, light in all its purity being reflected by it (Bähr, Symbolik, i. 284). The princes and lords had once possessed all the virtues which the Latins called unitedly Candor animi, viz., the virtues of magnanimity, affability, impartiality, and superiority to bribes. This silver had now become l'sigim, dross, or base metal separated (thrown off) from silver in the process of refining (sig, pl. sigim, siggim from sug, recedere, refuse left in smelting, or dross: cf., Pro_25:4; Pro_26:23). A second figure compares the leading men of the older Jerusalem to good wine, such as drinkers like. The word employed here (sobe) must have been used in this sense by the more cultivated classes in Isaiah's time (cf., Nah_1:10). This pure, strong, and costly wine was now adulterated with water (lit. castratum, according to Pliny's expression in the Natural History: compare the Horatian phrase, jugulare Falernum), and therefore its strength and odour were weakened, and its worth was diminished. The present was nothing but the dross and shadow of the past.
- 179. 7. PULPIT, “Thysilver is become dross. Primarily, "thy great men have deteriorated." From pure silver, they have become mere dross, the vile refuse of the smelted ore, only fit to be cast away as worthless. But per-Imps there is some further reference to all that was once precious in Jerusalem; there had been a general deterioration—all the silver was now a debased metal of no value. Thy wine mixed with water. A parallelism; but (as so often happens) a weakened iteration of the preceding sentiment. 8. CALVIN, “22.Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water Isaiah speaks metaphorically, and by two comparisons shows here, that though the outward appearance of affairs was not openly overturned, yet their condition was changed and corrupted, so as to be widely different from what it had formerly been: for he says that dross now shines instead of gold, and that the wine, though it retains its color, has lost its flavour. “ thou still make an empty show,” saith the Prophet, “ nothing pure will be found in thee: that wine which was wont to be Stare in thee is corrupted; and though its color deceive the eye, its taste shows that it has been mixed. ” All this means nothing more than that the Jews should lay aside hypocrisy, and should begin to confess their sins, and no longer flatter themselves after the manner of hypocrites. The comparisons here employed are exceedingly well adapted to this end, for dross bears some resemblance to gold; and in like manner, the color of wine mixed with water resembles that of pure wine; and yet both are very far from having that purity of which they make an outward show. In like manner hypocrites, by their hypocrisy, may be said to assume a false color of silver, though they are of no more value than dross, and indeed are the more detestable on this account, that, though they are exceedingly wicked, yet, with not less treachery than baseness, they present to God and to men those hollow pretensions by which they cloak their malice. 23 Your rulers are rebels, partners with thieves; they all love bribes and chase after gifts.
- 180. They do notdefend the cause of the fatherless; the widow’s case does not come before them. 1.BARNES, “Thy princes ... - This is an explanation of the previous verse. Princes mean here those attached to the royal family; those who by rank, or office, had an influence over the people. Rebellious - Against God. The corruption of a nation commonly begins with the rulers. Companions of thieves - That is, they connive at the doings of robbers; they do not bring them to justice; they are their accomplices, and are easily bribed to acquit them. Every one loveth gifts - Every magistrate can be bribed. Followeth afar rewards - רדף rodeph. This word denotes the act of pursuing after in order to obtain something; and means here that they made it an object to obtain rewards by selling or betraying justice They sell justice to the highest bidder. No more distressing condition of a people can be conceived than this, where justice could not be secured between man and man, and where the wicked could oppress the poor, the widow, and the orphan, as much as they pleased, because they knew they could bribe the judge. They judge not - They do not render justice to; Isa_1:17. The Chaldee has well expressed the sense of a part of this verse: ‘They say, each one to his neighbor, Favour me in my judgment, or do me good in it, and I will recompense you in your cause.’ The cause of the widow come unto them - Or, rather, come before them. They would not take up her cause, but rather the cause of those who were esteemed able to offer a bribe, and from whom a gift might be expected, if a decision was made in their favor. 2. CLARKE, “Companions of thieves “Associates” - The Septuagint, Vulgate, and four MSS., read חברי chabrey without the conjunction ו vau. 3. GILL, “Thy princes are rebellious,.... Stubborn and obstinate, refused to receive and acknowledge the Messiah; such were the Jewish rulers, civil and ecclesiastical, in the times of Christ. And companions of thieves: who devoured widows' houses; made the temple, which was a house of prayer, a den of thieves; and took away the key of knowledge from the people, and would not suffer them to attend the ministry of the Gospel, Mat_21:13. everyone loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards. The Targum paraphrases it, "everyone says to his neighbour, do me a favour in my cause, I will return "it" to thee in thy cause;''
- 181. and so justicewas perverted: they judge not the fatherless; that is, either they do not take their cause in hand at all, or, if they do, do not do them justice, but wrong them of their goods and estates, which, of right, belong to them: neither doth the cause of the widow come unto them; there being no money to be got by undertaking it; see the case of the unjust judge, a picture of judges in those times, Luk_18:2. 4. HENRY, “By some instances (Isa_1:23): “Thy princes, that should keep others in their allegiance to God and subjection to his law, are themselves rebellious, and set God and his law at defiance.” Those that should restrain thieves (proud and rich oppressors, those worst of robbers, and those that designedly cheat their creditors, who are no better), are themselves companions of thieves, connive at them, do as they do, and with greater security and success, because they are princes, and have power in their hands; they share with the thieves they protect in their unlawful gain (Psa_50:18) and cast in their lot among them, Pro_1:13, Pro_1:14. [1.] The profit of their places is all their aim, to make the best hand they can of them, right or wrong. They love gifts, and follow after rewards; they set their hearts upon their salary, the fees and perquisites of their offices, and are greedy of them, and never think they can get enough; nay, they will do any thing, though ever so contrary to law and justice, for a gift in secret. Presents and gratuities will blind their eyes at any time, and make them pervert judgment. These they love and are eager in the pursuit of, Hos_4:18. [2.] The duty of their places is none of their care. They ought to protect those that are injured, and take cognizance of the appeals made to them; why else were they preferred? But they judge not the fatherless, take no care to guard the orphans, nor does the cause of the widow come unto them, because the poor widow has no bribe to give, with which to make way for her and to bring her cause on. Those will have a great deal to answer for who, when they should be the patrons of the oppressed, are their greatest oppressors. 5. JAMISON, “companions of thieves — by connivance (Pro_29:24). gifts — (Eze_22:12). A nation’s corruption begins with its rulers. 6. K&D, “In Isa_1:23 the prophet says this without a figure: “Thy rulers are rebellious, and companions of thieves; every one loveth presents, and hunteth after payment; the orphan they right not, and the cause of the widow has no access to them.” In two words the prophet depicts the contemptible baseness of the national rulers (sarim). He describes first of all their baseness in relation to God, with the alliterative sorerim: rebellious, refractory; and then, in relation to men, companions of thieves, inasmuch as they allowed themselves to be bribed by presents of stolen goods to acts of injustice towards those who had been robbed. They not only willingly accepted such bribes, and that not merely a few of them, but every individual belonging to the rank of princes (Cullo, equivalent to haccol, the whole: every one loveth gifts); but they went eagerly in pursuit of them (rodeph). It was not peace (shalom) that they hunted after (Psa_34:16), but shalmonimshalmonim, things that would pacify their avarice; not what was good, but compensation for their partiality. - This was the existing state of Jerusalem, and therefore it
- 182. would hardly belikely to take the way of mercy opened before it in Isa_1:18; consequently Jehovah would avail himself of other means of setting it right. 7.PULPIT, “Thy princes are rebellious; i.e. "rebels against their true King, Jehovah." Companions of thieves. Leagued with those who are engaged in filching away the inheritance of the widow and the orphan by chicane in the law courts (see above, Isa_1:15-17; and compare the Homiletics on Isa_1:16- 20). Gifts rewards; i.e. "bribes, "given and taken on the condition of their perverting justice (comp. Jer_22:17; Eze_22:12; Mic_3:11; Mic_7:3). They judge not the fatherless, etc. They dismiss the orphan's complaint without hearing it, and are so noted for perversion of justice that the widow does not even bring her cause before them. 8. CALVIN, “23.Thy princes are rebellious There is here an elegant allusion or play on words. (28) He does not speak of princes in such a manner as if the common people were holy and needed no reproof, but he points out the source of the evil; for as no disease is more injurious than that which spreads from the head into the whole body, so no evil is more destructive in a commonwealth than a wicked and depraved prince, who conveys his corruptions into the whole body both by his example and by the liberty which he allows. Hence, too, comes the proverb, ὁποῖα ἡ δέσποινα τοῖαι καὶ αἱ θεραπαινίδες, like mistress, like maids. The meaning, therefore, is as if the Prophet had said that there was no one vice more than another that reigned among the people, but that an unbounded commission of crimes prevailed among the nobles themselves, and that in this manner the whole body was stained with pollution. Something which gives additional force to the statement is implied in the word princes; for it is deeply to be lamented when an evil arises from that very quarter in which the remedy for it ought to be expected. He next mentions a particular instance. Companions of thieves By these words he means that they are so far from restraining theft and false dealing, that, on the contrary, they draw gain from them; and he justly calls those persons companions of thieves, who, by receiving part of the booty, grant permission to commit theft. And, indeed, when a judge is corrupted by a bribe, it is impossible but that crimes shall abound and pass unpunished, with the perpetrators of which we must consider him to be in collusion. Every one loveth a gift He next points out the reason why princes have made themselves companions of thieves, and have bound themselves by a wicked conspiracy to lend countenance to crimes. It is avarice. When judges are devoted to the love of money, justice is utterly destroyed; for if the acceptance of persons be a corruption of judgment, so that no room is left for justice, every man who is under the dominion of covetousness will assuredly regard the person rather than the cause. The consequence is,
- 183. that he willnot be able to perceive what is just and right, but, as one expresses it, will make laws and unmake them. This reminds us how great a virtue it is in a magistrate to disregard money; for unless he keep his mind, his hands, and his eyes under restraint, he will never be able to judge justly. It is absurd to say, as some men do, that they keep their heart pure and uncorrupted, even though they receive bribes. What the Lord saith must be true, that a gift blindeth the eyes of the wise, and perverteth the words of the righteous. (Exo_23:8.) No man is so upright, no man is so clearsighted and sagacious, that his mind shall resist the enchantment, and his eyes the blinding influence, of gifts. Such judges, therefore, he justly declares to be companions of thieves; for, hurried along by a blind desire of money, they overturn all law both of God and man, and leave no room for justice or modesty. We must likewise observe that the Prophet, in order to convince hypocrites, brings forward their actions which were open and universally known; for otherwise they would not submit. And yet there can be no doubt that there were at that time many who objected, when he thus called them thieves, as even in the present day most men impudently and obstinately exclaim that they are not thieves on account of receiving the rewards and gifts which are offered to them, because their do not prevent them from passing a just judgment. But these replies being frivolous, the Prophet, after having exposed their wicked actions, satisfies himself with the reproof which he has given, and argues with them no longer. And, indeed, nature declares that it is impossible to give just judgment, when judges are so eager for gain and regard; because they cannot but absolutely expose to sale their honesty and reputation. They judge not the fatherless As the Lord specially recommends to us the fatherless and widows, because they have been deprived of the protection of men, so we need not wonder if he is displeased when they are abandoned by the judges, who ought to have been their guardians and defenders; for since they have neither foresight, nor industry nor strength if no one comes forward to render assistance they must be exposed without redress to every kind of violence and injustice. Now, when no regard is paid to them, it follows that the sway is held, not by justice, but by covetousness and plunder. (28) Our author illustrates it by the alliteration of primi pravi . “ word סוררים (sorerim) is here equivalent,” says Jarchi, “ ,סרים (sarim,) that is, persons departing from the right path.” “ this word ,סוררים (sorerim,)” says his annotator Breithaupt, which our Commentator here explains by ,סרים (sarim,) departers, “ is an allusion to the word ,שרים (princes,) which we here find in the sacred text.” — Ed
- 184. 24 Therefore the Lord,the LORD Almighty, the Mighty One of Israel, declares: “Ah! I will vent my wrath on my foes and avenge myself on my enemies. 1.BARNES, “Therefore saith the Lord ... - The prophet having stated the guilt of the nation, proceeds to show the consequences of their crimes; or to foretell what would happen. The name of God is repeated, to attract attention; to fill the mind with awe; and to give emphasis to the solemn sentence which was about to be uttered. The Lord - אדון 'adon. This word properly denotes master, lord, owner. Gen_24:9 : “lord over his whole house.” 1Ki_16:24 : “owner of the hill Samaria.” It is applied here to Yahweh, not as a special title, or as one of the names which he assumes to himself, but as owner, proprietor, master, ruler of the nation. The word, when applied to God as one of his special titles, has the form of an ancient plural termination, אדני 'adonay. The root is probably דוּן don, to judge, which in ancient times was also closely connected with the idea of ruling. The Lord of hosts - Yahweh - ruling in the hosts of heaven, and therefore able to accomplish his threatenings; note, Isa_1:9. The mighty One of Israel - He who had been their defender in the days of their peril; who had manifested his mighty power in overthrowing their enemies; and who had shown, therefore, that he was able to inflict vengeance on them. Ah - הוי hoy. This is an expression of threatening. It is that which is used when an affront is offered, and there is a purpose of revenge; see Isa_1:4. I will ease me - This refers to what is said in Isa_1:14, where God is represented as burdened with their crimes. The Hebrew word is, I will be consoled, or comforted - that is, by being delivered from my foes - אנחם 'enachem from נחם nacham, in Niphil, to suffer pain, to be grieved; and hence, to have pity, to show compassion. In Piel, to console or comfort one’s-self; to take revenge. The idea included in the word is that of grief or distress, either in beholding the sufferings of others, or from some injury received from others. Hence, in Piel, it denotes to obtain relief from that distress, either by aiding the distressed object, or by taking revenge. In both instances, the mind, by a law of its nature, finds relief. The passion expends itself on its proper object, and the mind is at ease. It is used here in the latter sense. It is an instance where God uses the language which people employ to denote passion, and where they obtain relief by revenge. When applied to God, it is to be understood in accordance with his nature, as implying simply, that he would punish them; compare the note at Isa_1:13. It means that he had been
- 185. pained and grievedby their crimes; his patience had been put to its utmost trial; and now he would seek relief from this by inflicting due punishment on them. An expression explaining this may be seen in Eze_5:13; ‘Then shall mine anger be accomplished, and I will cause my fury to rest upon them, and I will be comforted.’ Also, Deu_28:63 : ‘As the Lord rejoiced over you, to do you good; so the Lord will rejoice over you, to destroy you.’ Mine adversaries - The enemies to his law and government among the rebellious Jews. The expression in this verse is a remarkable instance of God’s adapting himself to our apprehension, by using our language. Instances occur often in the Scriptures where language expressive of human passions is applied to God; and as human language must be employed in revelation, it was indispensable. But those expressions are not to be understood as they are when applied to the passions of mankind. In God, they are consistent with all that is pure, and glorious, and holy, and should be so understood. The Chaldee renders this verse, ‘I will console the city of Jerusalem; but woe to the impious, when I shall be revealed to take vengeance on the enemies of my people.’ But this is manifestly a false interpretation; and shows how reluctant the Jews were to admit the threatenings against themselves. 2. CLARKE, “Ah, I will ease me “Aha! I will be eased” - Anger, arising from a sense of injury and affront, especially from those who, from every consideration of duty and gratitude, ought to have behaved far otherwise, is an uneasy and painful sensation: and revenge, executed to the full on the offenders, removes that uneasiness, and consequently is pleasing and quieting, at least for the present. Ezekiel, Eze_5:13, introduces God expressing himself in the same manner: - “And mine anger shall be fully accomplished; And I will make my fury rest upon them; And I will give myself ease.” This is a strong instance of the metaphor called anthropopathia, by which, throughout the Scriptures, as well the historical as the poetical parts, the sentiments sensations, and affections, the bodily faculties qualities, and members, of men, and even of brute animals, are attributed to God, and that with the utmost liberty and latitude of application. The foundation of this is obvious; it arises from necessity; we have no idea of the natural attributes of God, of his pure essence, of his manner of existence, of his manner of acting: when therefore we would treat on these subjects, we find ourselves forced to express them by sensible images. But necessity leads to beauty; this is true of metaphor in general, and in particular of this kind of metaphor, which is used with great elegance and sublimity in the sacred poetry; and what is very remarkable, in the grossest instances of the application of it, it is generally the most striking and the most sublime. The reason seems to be this: when the images are taken from the superior faculties of the human nature, from the purer and more generous affections, and applied to God, we are apt to acquiesce in the notion; we overlook the metaphor, and take it as a proper attribute; but when the idea is gross and offensive as in this passage of Isaiah, where the impatience of anger and the pleasure of revenge is attributed to God, we are immediately shocked at the application; the impropriety strikes us at once, and the mind, casting about for something in the Divine nature analogous to the image, lays hold on some great, obscure, vague idea, which she endeavors to comprehend, and is lost in immensity and astonishment. See De Sacr. Poesi. Hebr. Praeel. 16 sub. fin., where this matter is treated and illustrated by examples.
- 186. 3. GILL, “Therefore,saith the Lord, the Lord of hosts, the mighty One of Israel,.... All these names and titles, which are expressive of the majesty, power, and authority of God, are used to give the greater solemnity and weight to what follows; and to show that he is able to accomplish what he determines and threatens to do. Ah! which is a particle, either expressive of grief at their wretched and miserable condition, or of indignation at their provoking sins and transgressions: I will ease me of mine adversaries; or, "I will take comfort (n) of" them, by destroying them; expressing the pleasure and satisfaction he should take in avenging his justice on them: they had been a trouble to him, and had wearied him with their sins, and now he will ease himself of them by removing them. The Targum is, "I will comfort the city of Jerusalem;'' not taking the sense of the words: and avenge me of mine enemies; the Jews, who were enemies to Christ and his Gospel, and would not have him to reign over them, and which was the cause of the destruction of their city, temple, and nation; see Luk_19:14. 4. HENRY, “A resolution is taken up to redress these grievances (Isa_1:24): Therefore saith the Lord, the Lord of hosts, the Mighty One of Israel - who has power to make good what he says, who has hosts at command for the executing of his purposes, and whose power is engaged for his Israel - Ah! I will ease me of my adversaries. Observe, 1. Wicked people, especially wicked rulers that are cruel and oppressive, are God's enemies, his adversaries, and shall so be accounted and so dealt with. If the holy seed corrupt themselves, they are the foes of his own house. 2. They are a burden to the God of heaven, which is implied in his easing himself of them. The Mighty One of Israel, that can bear any thing, nay, that upholds all things, complains of his being wearied with men's iniquities, Isa_43:24. Amo_2:13. 3. God will find out a time and a way to ease himself of this burden, by avenging himself on those that thus bear hard upon his patience. He here speaks as one triumphing in the foresight of it: Ah. I will ease me. He will ease the earth of the burden under which it groans (Rom_8:21, Rom_8:22), will ease his own name of the reproaches with which it is loaded. He will be eased of his adversaries, by taking vengeance on his enemies; he will spue them out of his mouth, and so be eased of them, Rev_3:16. He speaks with pleasure of the day of vengeance being in his heart, Isa_63:4. If God's professing people conform not to his image, as the Holy One of Israel (Isa_1:4), they shall feel the weight of his hand as the Mighty One of Israel: his power, which was wont to be engaged for them, shall be armed against them. In two ways God will ease himself of this grievance: - 5. JAMISON, “Lord ... Lord — Adonai, Jehovah. mighty One of Israel — mighty to take vengeance, as before, to save. Ah — indignation. ease me — My long tried patience will find relief in at last punishing the guilty (Eze_5:13). God’s language condescends to human conceptions.
- 187. 6. K&D, ““Therefore,saying of the Lord, of Jehovah of hosts, of the Strong One of Israel: Ah! I will relieve myself on mine adversaries, and will avenge myself upon mine enemies.” Salvation through judgment was the only means of improvement and preservation left to the congregation, which called itself by the name of Jerusalem. Jehovah would therefore afford satisfaction to His holiness, and administer a judicial sifting to Jerusalem. There is no other passage in Isaiah in which we meet with such a crowding together of different names of God as we do here (compare Isa_19:4; Isa_3:1; Isa_10:16, Isa_10:33; Isa_3:15). With three names, descriptive of the irresistible omnipotence of God, the irrevocable decree of a sifting judgment is sealed. The word ፏְנם , which is used here instead of ר ַמፎ and points back to a verb ፍָנם , related to ַהָנם and ה ָמ ָ,ה corresponds to the deep, earnest pathos of the words. These verbs, which are imitations of sounds, all denote a dull hollow groaning. The word used here, therefore, signifies that which is spoken with significant secrecy and solemn softness. It is never written absolutely, but is always followed by the subject who speaks (saying of Jehovah it is, i.e., Jehovah says). We meet with it first of all in Gen_22:16. In the prophetic writings it occurs in Obadiah and Joel, but most frequently in Jeremiah and Ezekiel. It is generally written at the close of the sentence, or parenthetically in the middle; very rarely at the commencement, as it is here and in 1Sa_2:30 and Psa_110:1. The “saying” commences with hoi (ah!), the painfulness of pity being mingled with the determined outbreak of wrath. By the side of the niphal nikkam min (to be revenged upon a person) we find the niphal nicham (lit. to console one's self). The two words are derived from kindred roots. The latter is conjugated with e in the preformative syllable, the former with i, according to the older system of vowel-pointing adopted in the East. (Note: The so-called Assyrian mode of pointing, which was entirely supplanted, with the exception of a few relics, by the Tiberian mode which now lies before us, has no seghol (see DMZ. xviii. 322). According to Luzzatto (Proleg. p. 200), they wrote ektol instead of iktol, to avoid confounding it with ּלט ְקִ,י which was pronounced iktol, and not yiktol.) Jehovah would procure Himself relief from His enemies by letting out upon them the wrath with which He had hitherto been burdened (Eze_5:13). He now calls the masses of Jerusalem by their right name. 7. PULPIT, “THE DECLARATION OF GOD'S JUDGMENT. It is foreknown to God that Israel will not repent. He therefore fulminates his judgment; which, however, is still conditional, so far as individuals are con-corned. His vengeance will fall upon the land; but the result will be twofold. Destruction will come upon the unrighteous and the sinners (Isa_1:28)—they will be "consumed" (Isa_1:28), and "confounded" (Isa_1:29); but there will be some on whom the punishment will have a purifying power, whose dross it will purge away, and whom it will convert to God (Isa_1:25, Isa_1:27). From these will rise up a new Jerusalem—a "city of righteousness," a "faithful stronghold" (Isa_1:26).
- 188. Isa_1:24 The Lord, theLord of hosts. In the original, Ha-Adon, Jehovah Sabaoth—i.e. "The Lord" (or "Master" of men and angels), "the Self-Existing One of the hosts of heaven"—i.e; their God, the only proper object of their worship. It gives peculiar weight and significance to this prophecy, that it is introduced by a triple designation of the Divine Being. The Mighty One of Israel. A very unusual designation, only found here and, with the modification of "Jacob" for "Israel, "in the following places: Isa_49:26; Isa_60:16; Gen_49:24; Psa_132:2, Psa_132:5. God's might would be shown alike in his vengeance on his enemies, and in his purification of a remnant to serve him. I will ease me of mine adversaries; literally, I will comfort me; i.e. I will rid myself of them, and so obtain the only comfort that they will allow me to receive from them (comp. Eze_5:13, "I will cause my fury to rest upon them, and I will be comforted"). 8. CALVIN, “24.Therefore saith the lord, the LORD of hosts He first employs the word ,האדון (haadon) which literally signifies lord, and expresses the relation to a servant. Next is added the word יהוה (Jehovah,) which denotes the eternal essence and majesty of God. After having laid open some kinds of crimes, which made it manifest that in that nation everything was corrupted, Isaiah, now wishing to threaten and to hold out to them the judgment of God, not only represents God as invested with the power and authority of a Judge, but at the same time reminds them that the children of Abraham are his peculiar people, and for this reason he immediately adds, the mighty One of Israel. There may also be implied in it a kind of irony, by which he stings the Jews, as if he had said that it was foolishness in them to boast of the name of God, seeing that they were worthless and unprincipled servants, and that it was vain for them to rely on his strength, which would immediately break forth against them. After this preface, he adds — Ah! I will take consolation on my adversaries (29) By these words he intimates that God will not be pacified until he has satiated himself with inflicting punishment. He employs the word consolation after the manner of men; for as anger is nothing else than the desire of revenge, so revenge gives relief to the mind, and he who has taken vengeance congratulates himself and is satisfied. By this course, which may be regarded as a kind of compensation, the Lord says that he will satisfy himself with inflicting punishment on his adversaries There are various ways, indeed, of expounding this passage; and I shall not undertake the task of examining all the interpretations and refuting those which I do not approve: it will be enough if we ascertain the true meaning. He does not here speak of Chaldeans or Assyrians, as some imagine, but of Jews, to whom, in the character of a herald, he proclaims war in the name of the Lord. This threatening
- 189. sounded harshly intheir ears; for they supposed that they were joined in such a confederacy with God, that he was an adversary to their adversaries. He declares, on the other hand, that he is their enemy because he had so often been provoked by their crimes. In this manner we must shake off the slothfulness of hypocrites, who are continually waging war with God, and yet do not hesitate to allege that they enjoy his protection. We need not wonder, therefore, if the Prophet sternly pronounces them to beadversaries of God, who had broken the covenant, and had thus carried on war against him. And yet, in order to show that he is unwillingly, as it were, constrained to inflict punishment on his people, God utters his threatening with a kind of groan. For as nothing is more agreeable to his nature than to do good, so whenever he is angry with us and treats us harshly, it is certain that our wickedness has compelled him to do so, because we do not allow his goodness to take its free course. More especially he is disposed to treat his own people with gentleness, and when he sees that there is no longer any room for his forbearance, he takes measures, as it were in sorrow, for inflicting punishment. Some would rather choose perhaps to explain the particle הוי (hoi) as of God made this exclamation when aroused by anger. For my own part, I rather consider it, in this passage, to be an expression of grief; because God, being mindful of his covenant, would willingly spare his chosen people, were it not that pardon was entirely prevented by their obstinacy. And avenge me of mine enemies In this second clause there is a reduplication, ( ἀναδίπλωσις) a figure of speech customary with the Hebrews, who frequently express the same thing twice in one verse. Hence also we learn that the object of the statement is, that God cannot rest until he has taken vengeance on a wicked and treacherous people (29) In our English version it runs, Ah! I will ease me of mine adversaries. — Ed. 25 I will turn my hand against you;[b] I will thoroughly purge away your dross and remove all your impurities.
- 190. 1.BARNES, “nd Iwill turn my hand upon thee - This expression is capable of two significations. The hand may be stretched out for two purposes, either to inflict punishment, or to afford help and protection. The phrase here refers evidently to the latter, to the act of redeeming and restoring his people, Isa_1:26-27. The idea may be thus expressed: ‘I will stretch out my hand to punish my enemies Isa_1:24, and will turn my hand upon thee for protection, and recovery.’ Purge away - This refers to the process of smelting, or purifying metals in the fire. It means, I will remove all the dross which has accumulated Isa_1:22, and will make the silver pure. This was commonly done by fire; and the idea is, that he would render his own people pure by those judgments which would destroy his enemies who were intermingled with them. Purely - The original word here - כבר kabor - has been commonly understood to mean, according to purity; that is, effectually or entirely pure. Thus it is translated by the Septuagint, and by the Latin Vulgate. But by the Chaldee it is translated, ‘I will purify thee as with the herb borith.’ The word may mean lye, alkali, or potash, Job_9:30; and it may mean also borax - a substance formed of alkali and boracic acid, much used in purifying metals. The essential idea is, I will make you effectually, or entirely pure. Thy tin - Tin is with us a well-known white metal. But the word used here does not mean tin. It denotes the stannum of the ancients; a metal formed of lead mixed with silver ore. Here it means, I will take away all the impure metal mixed with thee; varying the idea but little from the former part of the verse. 2. CLARKE, “I will turn my hand upon thee - So the common version; and this seems to be a metaphor taken from the custom of those who, when the metal is melted, strike off the scoriae with their hand previously to its being poured out into the mould. I have seen this done with the naked hand, and no injury whatever sustained. Purge away thy dross “In the furnace” - The text has כבר cabbor, which some render “as with soap;” as if it were the same with כברית keborith; so Kimchi; but soap can have nothing to do with the purifying of metals. Others, “according to purity,” or “purely,” as our version. Le Clerc conjectured that the true reading is ככור kechur, “as in the furnace;” see Eze_22:18, Eze_22:20. Dr. Durell proposes only a transposition of letters בכר to the same sense; and so likewise Archbishop Secker. That this is the true reading is highly probable. 3. GILL, “And I will turn my hand upon thee,.... The remnant, according to the election of grace, left in Jerusalem, Isa_1:9 meaning not his afflicting hand, no, not even as a fatherly chastisement; though the Lord sometimes, by such means, purges away the iniquity of his people, as follows; see Isa_27:9 much less his hand of wrath and vengeance, the lighting down of his arm, with the indignation of his anger; but his hand of efficacious grace in conversion, with which he plucks sinners as brands out of the burning; delivers them from the power of Satan; turns their hearts to himself; opens them, to attend unto and understand divine things; breaks them in pieces with the hammer of his word; works grace in them, and carries on the
- 191. good work intheir souls: all which is owing to his mighty hand of grace upon them, and to the exertions of the exceeding greatness of his power towards them. This was accomplished in part in the conversion of a large number of the Jews on the day of Pentecost, and afterwards; and will be more fully accomplished in the latter day, when that people shall turn to the Lord, in consequence of his hand of powerful grace being turned on them. The phrase is used of the display of divine grace and mercy, in Zec_13:7. and purely purge away thy dross; which the Targum rightly interprets of "ungodliness" or wickedness; it means the sins of converted ones, which, at conversion, they are purely purged from; not that sin, as to the being of it, is removed from them; that dwells in them, abides with them; and, like dross, is a heavy burden, a dead weight upon them, and will be while they are in this tabernacle, and makes them groan, being burdened; so far from it, that in their view it rather increases; they see the plague of their own hearts; and such innumerable swarms of corruption they never saw before; sin revives, and they die; but in conversion grace superabounds it, deluges over it, keeps down the force and power of it, so that it has not the dominion; the old man is put off concerning the former conversation, which ceases to be a series, a course of sinning: besides, through the sprinkling of the blood of Christ, which cleanseth from all the dross and filth of sin, the guilt is removed from the conscience, and perfect peace and full pardon take place; all iniquity is caused to pass from them, and they are clothed with change of raiment, the righteousness of Christ, by which they are justified from all things, and are pure, spotless, and without fault before the throne: and take away all thy tin. The Targum also interprets this of iniquity, rendering it, "I will take away all thy sin"; but it is better to understand it of self-righteousness; which, as tin is of more worth than dross, and looks like silver; so this has the appearance of some good in it, and was what the Jews were fond of, trusted in, and depended on, and which they followed after, and endeavoured to establish and hold fast; but this in conversion is all taken away: the Lord, by his Spirit; convinces of the weakness and insufficiency of it, to justify in his sight; shows that it is not a righteousness, and will be of no service in that respect; yea, takes away these filthy rags, and clothes with the righteousness of Christ; causes the soul to drop and renounce its own righteousness, and put on that; and not only to renounce works before conversion, but all after it, as a profession of religion, subjection to Gospel ordinances, and all works, though done in faith, and in a right manner; a glaring instance we have of all this in one of that little remnant, the Apostle Paul, Phi_3:6. Moreover, by "dross" and "tin", or "tins", in the plural number, may be meant persons; wicked and profane men, by the former, who should be put away like dross, Psa_119:119 and self righteous persons, by the latter; who shine like silver, make a show of religion, appear outwardly righteous; but these, as well as the other, should be separated from the people of God, when the precious and the vile should be distinguished. 4. HENRY, “By reforming his church, and restoring good judges in the room of those corrupt ones. Though the church has a great deal of dross in it, yet it shall not be thrown away, but refined (Isa_1:25): “I will purely purge away thy dross. I will amend what is amiss. Vice and profaneness shall be suppressed and put out of countenance, oppressors displaced, and deprived of their power to do mischief.” When things are ever so bad God can set them to rights, and bring about a complete reformation; when he begins he will make an end, will take away all the tin. Observe, [1.] The reformation of a people is God's own work, and, if ever it be done, it is he that brings it about: “I will turn my hand upon thee; I will do that for the reviving of religion which I did at first for the planting of it.” He can do it easily, with the turn of his hand; but he does it effectually, for what opposition can stand before the arm of the Lord revealed? [2.] He does it by blessing them with good magistrates and good ministers of state (Isa_1:26): “I will
- 192. restore thy judgesas at the first, to put the laws in execution against evil-doers, and thy counsellors, to transact public affairs, as at the beginning,” either the same persons that had been turned out or others of the same character. [3.] He does it by restoring judgment and righteousness among them (Isa_1:27), by planting in men's minds principles of justice and governing their lives by those principles. Men may do much by external restraints; but God does it effectually by the influences of his Spirit, as a Spirit of judgment, Isa_4:4; Isa_28:6. See Psa_85:10, Psa_85:11. [4.] The reformation of a people will be the redemption of them and their converts, for sin is the worst captivity, the worst slavery, and the great and eternal redemption is that by which Israel is redeemed from all his iniquities (Psa_130:8), and the blessed Redeemer is he that turns away ungodliness from Jacob (Rom_11:26), and saves his people from their sins, Mat_1:21. All the redeemed of the Lord shall be converts, and their conversion is their redemption: “Her converts, or those that return of her (so the margin), shall be redeemed with righteousness.” God works deliverance for us by preparing us for it with judgment and righteousness. [5.] The reviving of a people's virtues is the restoring of their honour: Afterwards thou shalt be called the city of righteousness, the faithful city; that is, First, “Thou shalt be so;” the reforming of the magistracy is a good step towards the reforming of the city and the country too. Secondly, “Thou shalt have the praise of being so;” and a greater praise there cannot be to any city than to be called the city of righteousness, and to retrieve the ancient honour which was lost when the faithful city became a harlot, Isa_1:21. 5. JAMISON, “turn ... hand — not in wrath, but in grace (Zec_13:7), “upon thee,” as Isa_1:26, Isa_1:27 show; contrasted with the enemies, of whom He will avenge Himself (Isa_1:24). purely — literally, “as alkali purifies.” thy dross — not thy sins, but the sinful persons (Jer_6:29); “enemies” (Isa_1:24); degenerate princes (see on Isa_1:22), intermingled with the elect “remnant” of grace. tin — Hebrew, bedil, here the alloy of lead, tin, etc., separated by smelting from the silver. The pious Bishop Bedell took his motto from this. 6. K&D, “Isa_1:25 states clearly in what the revenge consisted with which Jehovah was inwardly burdened (innakmah, a cohortative with the ah, indicating internal oppression): “And I will bring my hand over thee, and will smelt out thy dross as with alkali, and will clear away all thy lead.” As long as God leaves a person's actions or sufferings alone, His hand, i.e., His acting, is at rest. Bringing the hand over a person signifies a movement of the hand, which has been hitherto at rest, either for the purpose of inflicting judicial punishment upon the person named (Amo_1:8; Jer_6:9; Eze_38:12; Psa_81:15), or else, though this is seldom the case, for the purpose of saving him (Zec_13:7). The reference here is to the divine treatment of Jerusalem, in which punishment and salvation were combined - punishment as the means, salvation as the end. The interposition of Jehovah was, as it were, a smelting, which would sweep away, not indeed Jerusalem itself, but the ungodly in Jerusalem. They are compared to dross, or (as the verb seems to imply) to ore mixed with dross, and, inasmuch as lead is thrown off in the smelting of silver, to such ingredients of lead as Jehovah would speedily and thoroughly remove, “like alkali,” i.e., “as if with alkali” (Cabbor, Comparatio decurtata, for C'babbor: for this mode of dropping Beth after Caph, compare Isa_9:3; Lev_22:13, and many
- 193. other passages). Bybedilim (from badal, to separate) we are to understand the several pieces of stannum or lead (Note: Plumbum nigrum, says Pliny, n. n. xxiv. 16, is sometimes found alone, and sometimes mixed with silver: ejus qui primus fluic in fornacibus liquor, stannum appellatur. The reference here is to the lead separated from the ore in the process of obtaining pure silver. In the form of powder this dross is called bedil, and the pieces bedilim; whereas ophereth is the name of solid lead, obtained by simply melting down from ore which does not contain silver. The fact that bedil is also apparently used as a name for tin, may be explained in the same way as the homonymy of iron and basalt (Com. on Job_28:2), and of the oak and terebinth. The two metals are called by the same name on account of their having a certain outward resemblance, viz., in softness, pliability, colour, and specific gravity.) in which the silver is contained, and which are separated by smelting, all the baser metals being distinguished from the purer kinds by the fact that they are combustible (i.e., can be oxidized). Both bor, or potash (an alkali obtained from land-plants), and nether, natron (i.e., soda, or natron obtained from the ashes of marine plants, which is also met with in many mineral waters), have been employed from the very earliest times to accelerate the process of smelting, for the purpose of separating a metal from its ore. 7. PULPIT, “I will turn my hand upon thee; rather, I will bring back my hand upon thee; i.e. I will once more put forth the "strong hand and mighty arm, with which I brought thee out of Egypt" (Psa_136:12), and will work another deliverance—the deliverance of Israel out of captivity. Purely purge away thy dross; literally, will purge away thy dross like borax, which was used as a flux in purifying the metal. The prophet continues the metaphor of Isa_1:22. And take away all thy tin; rather, thy had—the alloy with which the "silver" had become mixed. 8. CALVIN, “25.And I will turn my hand upon thee This is an alleviation of the former threatening; for though he still proceeds with what he had begun to state about his severity, he at the same time declares that, amidst those calamities which were to be inflicted, the Church would be preserved. But the principal design was to comfort believers, that they might not suppose the Church to be utterly ruined, though God treated them more roughly than before. The Spirit of God, by the Prophets, continually warns the children of God, who always tremble at his word, not to be overwhelmed and lose heart on account of terrors and threatening; for the more daringly that wicked men practice licentiousness and scoff at all threatening the more do those who are affected by a sincere fear of God tremble at them. Besides, the turning of the hands of God denotes generally a token of his presence, as if he should say, I will display my hand. This he is wont to do in two ways, either by chastising the wicked, or by delivering
- 194. believers from theirdistresses. Since, therefore, it is evident from the context that God purposes, by applying consolation, to mitigate the severity of punishment, the turning of the hands must here be viewed as referring to the restoration of the Church; for although he declared in general terms that all were his enemies, he now modifies or limits that statement by addressing Jerusalem or Zion by name. When he adds, I will purge away thy dross, though he points out the fruit of correction, that believers may not be immoderately grieved or distressed on account of it, yet we learn from this expression that the purification of the Church is God’ own work. For this purpose he always lifts up his hand to punish transgressions, that he may bring back wanderers into the road; but rods would be of no avail, if he did not make them useful by touching their hearts inwardly. And, indeed, since he points out here a special favor which he bestows on his elect, it follows from this that repentance is a true and peculiar work of the Holy Spirit; for otherwise the sinner, instead of profiting in the smallest degree, would be more and more hardened by chastisements. The pure purging, so that no dross remains, must not, however, be understood as if God ever cleansed his Church entirely in this world from every stain, but must be regarded as spoken after the manner of men; as if he said that the condition of his Church will be such that her holiness will shine like pure silver. These words, therefore, indicate real purity, for the Jews had formerly been too well satisfied with their filthiness. This is a highly appropriate comparison, by which the Prophet declares, that though the Church was at that time polluted by many defilements, still some remnant would be left, which, after the removal of the pollution, would regain its brightness. In this manner he also connects both clauses; for when he formerly spoke of their crimes, he said that their silver had become dross. (Isa_1:22.) 26 I will restore your leaders as in days of old, your rulers as at the beginning. Afterward you will be called the City of Righteousness, the Faithful City.”
- 195. 1.BARNES, “And Iwill restore ... - That is, I will give you such judges as the nation had in former days - in the times of Moses, Joshua, etc. Most of the charges in this chapter are against the magistrates. The calamities of the nation are traced to their unfaithfulness and corruption, Isa_1:17-23. God now says that he will remove this cause of their calamity, and give them pure magistrates. Thy counselors - Thy advisers; that is, those occupying places of trust and responsibility. When this should be, the prophet does not say. The Jewish commentators suppose that he refers to the time after the return from captivity, and to such men as Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah; and to the times of Hyrcanus and Herod, Jerome supposes that the times of the Messiah are referred to. It is impossible to determine which is the correct opinion; though, as the Babylonian captivity was the punishment of those national sins which the prophet was denouncing, it is more probable that he refers to the time immediately succeeding that punishment, when the nation would be restored. I am inclined, therefore, to the opinion, that the prophet had reference solely to the prosperity of the Jewish nation, under a succession of comparatively virtuous princes, after the Babylonian captivity. Thou shalt be called ... - The principal cause of your wickedness and calamity, that is, your unfaithful rulers being removed and punished, you shall afterward be distinguished as a city of righteousness. The faithful city - That is, faithful to Yahweh - faithful in keeping his laws, and maintaining the rites of his religion as formerly; compare Isa_1:21. 2. CLARKE, “I will restore - “This,” says Kimchi, “shall be in the days of the Messiah, in which all the wicked shall cease, and the remnant of Israel shall neither do iniquity, nor speak lies.” What a change must this be among Jews! Afterward “And after this” - The Septuagint, Syriac, Chaldee, and eighteen MSS., and one of my own, very ancient, add the conjunction ו vau, And. 3. GILL, “And I will restore thy judges as at the first,.... This refers not to the times after the Babylonish, captivity, when the Jews had judges and rulers, such as Zerubbabel and Nehemiah, as they had in the times of Moses, Joshua, and the judges, or as in the times of David and Solomon; but it refers, as Kimchi observes, to the times of the Messiah; and is true of the apostles of Christ, who were set on twelve thrones, had power and authority from Christ to preach his Gospel, and to judge the twelve tribes of Israel in a doctrinal way, Mat_19:28 for which they were abundantly qualified, having the spirit of counsel and of judgment resting upon them, as the prophets of old; and will be again verified in the ministers of the Gospel, at the time of the Jews' conversion, when the watchmen shall see eye to eye, have a clear discerning and judgment of things as at the first, Isa_52:8. and thy counsellors as at the beginning; which is to be understood of the same persons; the apostles at Jerusalem gave advice and counsel in matters of difficulty, and were consulted on special occasions, of which there is an instance in Act_15:1 and ordinary ministers of the word are qualified, and especially will be in the latter day, to give advice both to sensible sinners, inquiring the way of salvation, and to saints when under desertion, and have lost their beloved, or have any matters of difficulty upon them, whether with respect to faith or practice.
- 196. Afterward thou shallbe called the city of righteousness: when many shall be converted through the hand of the Lord turned upon them, and become incorporated into a church state, and having the apostles and other ministers of the Gospel among them, with proper officers over them, as the first Christian church at Jerusalem had; and the members of it were righteous persons, such as were justified by the righteousness of Christ, and lived righteously, walking in the ordinances of the Lord, and as became the Gospel of Christ, and will be the case of the churches of Christ in the latter day: the faithful city; to Christ, his Gospel, ordinances, and one another, as the first Christians at Jerusalem were; see Act_2:12. A true church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, who keep the ordinances as they were delivered; stand first in the faith of the Gospel; take care that the laws of Christ's house are put in execution; and do not suffer sin upon one another, nor bear them that are evil, whether in doctrine or practice; and which in the latter day will be the case of the churches of Christ in a remarkable manner, when they will justly bear this character. 4. HENRY, “By cutting off those that hate to be reformed, that they may not remain either as snares or as scandals to the faithful city. [1.] it is an utter ruin that is here threatened. They shall be destroyed and consumed, and not chastened and corrected only. The extirpation of them will be necessary to the redemption of Zion. [2.] It is a universal ruin, which will involve the transgressors and the sinners together, that is, the openly profane that have quite cast of all religion, and the hypocrites that live wicked lives under the cloak of a religious profession - they shall both be destroyed together, for they are both alike an abomination to God, both those that contradict religion and those that contradict themselves in their pretensions to it. And those that forsake the Lord, to whom they had formerly joined themselves, shall be consumed, as the water in the conduit-pipe is soon consumed when it is cut off from the fountain. 5. JAMISON, “As the degeneracy had shown itself most in the magistrates (Isa_1:17-23), so, at the “restoration,” these shall be such as the theocracy “at the first” had contemplated, namely, after the Babylonish restoration in part and typically, but fully and antitypically under Messiah (Isa_32:1; Isa_52:8; Jer_33:7; Mat_19:28). faithful — no longer “an harlot.” 6. K&D, “As the threat couched in the previous figure does not point to the destruction, but simply to the smelting of Jerusalem, there is nothing strange in the fact that in Isa_1:26 it should pass over into a pure promise; the meltingly soft and yearningly mournful termination of the clauses with ayich, the keynote of the later songs of Zion, being still continued. “And I will bring back thy judges as in the olden time, and thy counsellors as in the beginning; afterwards thou wilt be called city of righteousness, faithful citadel.” The threat itself was, indeed, relatively a promise, inasmuch as whatever could stand the fire would survive the judgment; and the distinct object of this was to bring back Jerusalem to the purer metal of its own true nature. But when that had been accomplished, still more would follow. The indestructible kernel that remained would be crystallized, since Jerusalem would receive back from Jehovah the judges and counsellors which it had had in the olden flourishing times of the monarchy, ever since it had become the city of David and of the temple; not, indeed, the very same persons, but persons quite equal to them in excellence. Under such God-given leaders Jerusalem would become what
- 197. it had oncebeen, and what it ought to be. The names applied to the city indicate the impression produced by the manifestation of its true nature. The second name is written without the article, as in fact the word kiryah (city), with its massive, definite sound, always is in Isaiah. Thus did Jehovah announce the way which it had been irrevocably determined that He would take with Israel, as the only way to salvation. Moreover, this was the fundamental principle of the government of God, the law of Israel's history. 7. PULPIT, “I will restore thy judges as at the first (see Exo_19:25, 26). In the early times there was no bribery, no perversion of justice (Jer_2:2, Jer_2:3). God will bring back a time when the nation will renew its first love, and be as it was in the days of Moses and Joshua. Thy counselors. The city of righteousness; or, of justice. The prophecy may have been fulfilled in part by the earthly Jerusalem under Zerubhabel, Ezra, and the Maccabees. but is mainly fulfilled in the heavenly Jerusalem—the Church of God, the true Israel. The faithful city (comp. verse 21). Certainly the post-Captivity Church was "faithful" to Jehovah, in the way of acknowledging him, and him only, to be God, to a very remarkable degree, and in strong contrast to its inclination during pro-Captivity times. 8. CALVIN, “26.And I will restore thy judges as at the first He now speaks without a figure; and having said that the source and origin of the evils was in the princes, he shows that a divine hand will purify that rank, when the Lord shall be pleased to restore the Church to perfect health. And, indeed, when they who rule are good and holy men, public order is maintained; for when wicked men have power, everything goes to ruin. By judges and counsellors are evidently meant any kind of magistrates; and when he promises that they will be such as they were at the beginning, he brings to their remembrance the extraordinary goodness of God, of which they had been deprived. God had graciously raised up the throne of David, and in that government was pleased to give a bright resemblance of his own parental love. Though the authority of the family of David had degenerated into the grossest tyranny, yet they continued to boast of a false title; for they still vaunted of the reign of David in the same manner as the papists of the present day plume themselves on a false pretense of the Church. Justly, therefore, are the people reminded of the happiness from which they had fallen by their own fault, that they might not be displeased at a diminution of their numbers, by means of which they would again possess that order which God had established Then shalt thou be called He describes the fruit of that reformation, of which he has spoken, as extending to the whole body; for, having said that Jerusalem, before she revolted from God, was a faithful city, full of righteousness, the Prophet now says, that when she shall have been chastised the same virtues will be illustriously displayed in her. Here, too, is expressed the sum of true repentance; for by righteousness is meant uprightness, when every man obtains what belongs to him, and men live with each other without
- 198. committing injury. Theword faithful has a still more extensive meaning; for when a city is called faithful, it means not only that justice and honesty between man and man are observed, but that the purity of God’ worship is maintained and therefore the chastity and purity of the mind are included under that designation. It must also be observed, however, that from this faithfulness springs justice; for when we adhere to truth in our mutual intercourse, justice easily gains the ascendency. And, indeed, when I closely examine the whole passage, I think that the Prophet now employs the word faithfulness in a more limited sense than formerly, and connects the two virtues as leading to the same object, so that, while truth goes first as the cause, justice is the effect of it. Isaiah promises not only that she will be righteous and faithful, but that she will also be distinguished by these commendations; by which he means that the knowledge or reputation of it will be everywhere diffused. We know that hypocrites, too, are adorned with honorable titles; but Isaiah, having introduced God as speaking, takes for granted that the city will actually be righteous, as it is foretold that she shall be. In the meantime, as I have said, he describes the fruit of a true conversion; as if he had said,” When Jerusalem shall be brought Jack to true godliness, men will be persuaded that she is renewed.” 27 Zion will be delivered with justice, her penitent ones with righteousness. 1.BARNES, “Zion - See the note at Isa_1:8. The word Zion here is used to designate the whole Jewish people to whom the prophet had reference; that is, the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem, Isa_1:1. Shall be redeemed - The word used here - פדה padah - is employed in two senses in the Scriptures. It implies always the idea of deliverance, as from captivity, danger, punishment, slavery, sin. But this idea occurs: (1) sometimes without any reference to a price paid, but simply denoting to deliver, or to set at liberty; and (2) in other instances the price is specified, and then the word occurs under the strict and proper sense of redeem; that is, to rescue, or deliver, by a ransom price. Instances of the former general sense occur often; as e. q., to deliver from slavery without mere ion of a price; Deu_7:8 : ‘The Loan loved you, and redeemed you out of the house of
- 199. bondmen.’ See alsoJer_15:21; Jer_31:11. The idea of delivering in any way from danger occurs often; Job_5:20 : ‘In famine he shall redeem thee from death, and in war from the power of the sword;’ 1Ki_1:29 : ‘As Jehovah liveth, that hath redeemed my soul out of all distress.’ 1Sa_4:9. But the word often occurs in connection with the mention of the price, and in this sense the words rendered redeem are commonly used in the New Testament; see Exo_13:13; Num_18:15- 17; compare Gal_3:13; 1Pe_1:18; Rev_5:9; Eph_1:17. Mat_20:28; 1Ti_2:6. In these last places, the blood of Christ, or his atoning sacrifice, is mentioned as the price, or the valuable consideration, by which deliverance from sin is effected; compare the note at Isa_43:3. In the case now before us, however, the word is used in the general sense, to denote that God would rescue and save his people from the calamities and judgments to which they were to be subjected on account of their sins. Though they were to be taken captive for their sins, yet they should again be delivered and restored to their land. The Septuagint evidently so understands it: ‘Her captivity shall be saved with judgment and with mercy.’ The Chaldee Paraphrase renders it in a manner somewhat similar: ‘But Zion, when judgment shall have been accomplished in her, shall be redeemed; and they who keep the law shall be returned to it in righteousness.’ With judgment - In a righteous, just manner. That is, God shall evince his justice in doing it; his justice to a people to whom so many promises had been made, and his justice in delivering them from long and grievous oppression. All this would be attended with the displays of judgment, in effecting their deliverance. This might be evinced (1) in keeping his promises made to their fathers; (2) in delivering an oppressed people from bondage; and (3) in the displays of judgment on the nations necessary in accomplishing the deliverance of the Jews. This is the common interpretation. It may be, however, that the expression does not refer to the character of God, which is not at all the subject of discourse, but to the character of the people that should be redeemed. Before, the nation was corrupt; after the captivity, they would be just. Zion should be redeemed; and the effect of that redemption would be, that the people would be reformed, and holy, and just. This does not refer, properly, to redemption by the Lord Jesus, though it is equally true that that will be accomplished with justice, that is, in entire consistency with the character of a just and holy God. Her converts - This is an unhappy translation. The Hebrew here means simply, ‘they that return of her’ (margin); that is, those who return from captivity. It is implied that all would not return - which was true - but those who did return, would come back in righteousness. With righteousness - This refers to the character of those who shall return. The prediction is, that the character of the nation would be reformed Isa_1:26; that it would be done by means of this very captivity; and that they who returned would come back with a different character from the nation at the time that Isaiah wrote. They would be a reformed, righteous people. The character of the nation was greatly improved after the captivity. Their propensity to idolatry, in a particular manner, was effectually restrained; and probably the character of the people after the captivity, for morals and religion, was not inferior to the best periods of their history before. 2. CLARKE, “With judgment “In judgment” - By the exercise of God’s strict justice in destroying the obdurate, (see Isa_1:28), and delivering the penitent in righteousness; by the truth and faithfulness of God in performing his promises.”
- 200. 3. GILL, “Zionshall be redeemed with judgment,.... The blessing of redemption by Christ is the source and foundation of the other blessings of grace, before mentioned, the little remnant are favoured with, as justification, pardon of sin, and conversion, Isa_1:18, Isa_1:25 it is of a spiritual nature; the redemption of the soul is a deliverance from the captivity of sin, Satan, and the law, and is plenteous and eternal; the objects of redeeming grace are "Zion" and her converts; not the world, but the church is redeemed by Christ; for by Zion is meant, not a place, but people, even the church and people of God, who frequently bear the name of Zion in this prophecy, and in other passages of Scripture, both of the Old and of the New Testament; see Isa_49:14 compared to Mount Zion for its height and holiness; for being the object of God's love, the instance of his choice, the place of his habitation; where his worship is, he grants his presence, and distributes his blessings; for its being a perfection of beauty, the joy of the whole earth, well fortified and immovable: and the redemption of the church by Christ is with judgment; with the judgment and vengeance of God on Christ, and through the condemnation of him as her Head and representative; with the judgment of God, which is according to truth, in whose judgment she is truly redeemed by the blood of Christ, and really delivered from her bondage, according to his justice and holiness, which are glorified by it: but here the redemption of Zion seems to mean a more glorious state of the church, a restoration of her to her former glory, or to a greater, which will be in the latter day, and may be discerned as drawing near by the signs of the times fulfilling, Luk_21:28 whereby the truth and faithfulness of God, in his promises concerning it, will be honoured, and he will appear to be a God of judgment: and her converts with righteousness; so called, not because converted by the church, for conversion is God's work, and not man's; no man can effect his own conversion, he is passive in it; nor can any others, not their nearest friends and relations; they can only pray for it, as Abraham did for Ishmael, and bring them under the means; nor are ministers sufficient, only instruments of conversion neither Zion's ministers nor members can convert one sinner: but they are so called, either because converted "in" her, through the ministry of the word as a means, preached in the midst of her, Psa_87:5 or because converted "to" her, Isa_60:5 being made to submit to the ordinances of the church, and to join themselves to it. "Converts" are the objects of redemption by Christ; all that are redeemed are, sooner or later, converted; and all that are converted are redeemed; and the redemption of them by his blood is consistent "with" the "righteousness" of God; for hereby sin is fully condemned and punished; the justice of God has all its demands, and the law is completely fulfilled; and so the end of God is answered, which is to declare his righteousness by it. Moreover, in the latter day, when there, will be a redemption and deliverance or the church out of all her troubles and distresses, her converts will manifestly appear to be all righteous, being justified with the spotless righteousness of Christ, Isa_60:21. 4. HENRY, “He does it by restoring judgment and righteousness among them (Isa_1:27), by planting in men's minds principles of justice and governing their lives by those principles. Men may do much by external restraints; but God does it effectually by the influences of his Spirit, as a Spirit of judgment, Isa_4:4; Isa_28:6. See Psa_85:10, Psa_85:11. [4.] The reformation of a people will be the redemption of them and their converts, for sin is the worst captivity, the worst slavery, and the great and eternal redemption is that by which Israel is redeemed from all his iniquities (Psa_130:8), and the blessed Redeemer is he that turns away ungodliness from Jacob (Rom_11:26), and saves his people from their sins, Mat_1:21. All the redeemed of the Lord shall be converts, and their conversion is their redemption: “Her converts, or those that return of her
- 201. (so the margin),shall be redeemed with righteousness.” God works deliverance for us by preparing us for it with judgment and righteousness. [5.] The reviving of a people's virtues is the restoring of their honour: Afterwards thou shalt be called the city of righteousness, the faithful city; that is, First, “Thou shalt be so;” the reforming of the magistracy is a good step towards the reforming of the city and the country too. Secondly, “Thou shalt have the praise of being so;” and a greater praise there cannot be to any city than to be called the city of righteousness, and to retrieve the ancient honour which was lost when the faithful city became a harlot, Isa_1:21. 5. JAMISON, “redeemed — temporarily, civilly, and morally; type of the spiritual redemption by the price of Jesus Christ’s blood (1Pe_1:18, 1Pe_1:19), the foundation of “judgment” and “righteousness,” and so of pardon. The judgment and righteousness are God’s first (Isa_42:21; Rom_3:26); so they become man’s when “converted” (Rom_8:3, Rom_8:4); typified in the display of God’s “justice,” then exhibited in delivering His covenant-people, whereby justice or “righteousness” was produced in them. converts — so Maurer. But Margin, “they that return of her,” namely the remnant that return from captivity. However, as Isaiah had not yet expressly foretold the Babylonian captivity, the English Version is better. 6. K&D, “Isa_1:27 presents it in a brief and concise form: “Sion will be redeemed through judgment, and her returning ones through righteousness.” Mishpat and tzedakah are used elsewhere for divine gifts (Isa_33:5; Isa_28:6), for such conduct as is pleasing to God (Isa_1:21; Isa_32:16), and for royal Messianic virtues (Isa_9:6; Isa_11:3-5; Isa_16:5; Isa_32:1). Here, however, where we are helped by the context, they are to be interpreted according to such parallel passages as Isa_4:4; Isa_5:16; Isa_28:17, as signifying God's right and righteousness in their primarily judicious self-fulfilment. A judgment, on the part of God the righteous One, would be the means by which Zion itself, so far as it had remained faithful to Jehovah, and those who were converted in the midst of the judgment, would be redeemed - a judgment upon sinners and sin, by which the power that had held in bondage the divine nature of Zion, so far as it still continued to exist, would be broken, and in consequence of which those who turned to Jehovah would be incorporated into His true church. Whilst, therefore, God was revealing Himself in His punitive righteousness; He was working out a righteousness which would be bestowed as a gift of grace upon those who escaped the former. The notion of “righteousness” is now following a New Testament track. In front it has the fire of the law; behind, the love of the gospel. Love is concealed behind the wrath, like the sun behind the thunder-clouds. Zion, so far as it truly is or is becoming Zion, is redeemed, and none but the ungodly are destroyed. But, as is added in the next verse, the latter takes place without mercy. 7. PULPIT, “Redeemed with judgment; rather, delivered through judgment; i.e. God's judgment shall have the effect of "delivering" a remnant, who shall build up Zion once more, and dwell in it. Her converts; i.e. those of her children who turn to God, shall be delivered through God's righteousness, i.e. through the righteous vengeance which he executes upon the unfaithful nation. Some,
- 202. however, understand bothclauses to mean that the penitent remnant shall "deliver their own souls by their righteousness" (comp. Eze_14:14, Eze_14:20; Eze_18:27, etc.) 8. CALVIN, “27.Zion shall be redeemed with judgment He confirms the same doctrine; and because the restoration of the Church was hard to be believed, he shows that it does not depend on the will of men, but is founded on the justice andjudgment of God; as if he had said, that God will by no means permit his Church to be altogether destroyed, because he is righteous. The design of the Prophet, therefore, is to withdraw the minds of the godly from earthly thoughts, that in looking for the safety of the Church they may depend entirely on God, and not cease to entertain good hopes, although instead of aids they should see nothing but obstructions. It is a great mistake to consider justice andjudgment to refer to the Church, as if Isaiah were speaking about the well-ordered condition of a city; for the plain meaning is what I have stated, that though men yield no assistance, the justice of God is fully sufficient for redeeming his Church. And, indeed, so long as we look at ourselves, what hope are we entitled to cherish? How many things, on the contrary, immediately present themselves that are fitted to weaken our faith! It is only in the justice of God that we shall find solid and lasting ground of confidence. And they that return to her (30) This second clause points out the manner of their deliverance; namely that the exiles, who had been widely dispersed, will again be gathered together. (30) In the English version it is rendered, her converts; but the marginal reading is, And they that return of her. “ is,” says Jarchi, “ who are in her (in the city of Zion) that repent.” — Ed. 28 But rebels and sinners will both be broken, and those who forsake the LORD will perish. 1.BARNES, “And the destruction - Hebrew שׁבר sheber - the breaking, or crushing, that is, the punishment which was about to come upon them; compare Lam_2:11; Lam_3:47; Pro_16:18.
- 203. Of the transgressors- “Revolters,” or those that rebel against God. And of the sinners - Of all the sinners in the nation, of all kinds and degrees. Together - At the same time with the redemption of Zion. Shall be consumed - יכלוּ yı kelu, from כלה kalah, to be completed, or finished; to be consumed, wasted away; to vanish, or disappear. It denotes complete and entire extinction; or the completing of anything. It is applied to a cloud of smoke, that entirely dissolves and disappears: As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away: So he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more, Job_7:9. But the wicked shall perish, And the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs; They shall consume, Into smoke shall they cosume away. Psa_37:20. It is applied to time, as vanishing and disappearing Job_7:6; and to the destruction or perishing of men; Jer_16:4; Eze_5:13. The idea is that of complete and entire consumption and destruction, so that none shall be left. Applied to future punishment, it means that the destruction of sinners shall be total and complete. There shall be no sinner who shall not be destroyed; and there shall be none destroyed whose destruction shall not be entire and total. The expression here refers to the heavy calamities which were about to come upon the guilty nation, but it is as descriptive of the future punishment that shall come upon the wicked. 2. PULPIT, “Transgressors sinners they that forsake the Lord (comp. Isa_1:2 and Isa_1:4). These are scarcely distinct classes—rather different names for the ungodly. All of them, by whatever name they were called, would perish "together." 3. GILL, “And the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together,.... Of the beast and false prophet, of the followers of antichrist, the man of sin, who are transgressors of the law of God, and sinners against the Lord; the destruction of these, or the breaking of them into shivers, as the word (o) signifies, see Rev_2:27 will be at the time of Zion's redemption, and make a part of it; and it shall be all at once and together; these sinners will be all together consumed out of the earth, and these wicked antichristian ones will be no more in it, Psa_104:35. and they that forsake the Lord; his word, his worship and ordinances; as the Papists have manifestly done, by setting up their own unwritten traditions against the word of God, by adulterating his ordinances, and introducing new ones, and by worshipping images of gold, silver, brass, and wood; wherefore they shall be consumed; with the breath of Christ's mouth, and with the brightness of his coming, 2Th_2:8.
- 204. 4. HENRY, “Bycutting off those that hate to be reformed, that they may not remain either as snares or as scandals to the faithful city. [1.] it is an utter ruin that is here threatened. They shall be destroyed and consumed, and not chastened and corrected only. The extirpation of them will be necessary to the redemption of Zion. [2.] It is a universal ruin, which will involve the transgressors and the sinners together, that is, the openly profane that have quite cast of all religion, and the hypocrites that live wicked lives under the cloak of a religious profession - they shall both be destroyed together, for they are both alike an abomination to God, both those that contradict religion and those that contradict themselves in their pretensions to it. And those that forsake the Lord, to whom they had formerly joined themselves, shall be consumed, as the water in the conduit-pipe is soon consumed when it is cut off from the fountain. 5. JAMISON, “destruction — literally, “breaking into shivers” (Rev_2:27). The prophets hasten forward to the final extinction of the ungodly (Psa_37:20; Rev_19:20; Rev_20:15); of which antecedent judgments are types. 6. K&D, ““And breaking up of the rebellious and sinners together; and those who forsake Jehovah will perish.” The judicial side of the approaching act of redemption is here expressed in a way that all can understand. The exclamatory substantive clause in the first half of the v. is explained by a declaratory verbal clause in the second. The “rebellious” were those who had both inwardly and outwardly broken away from Jehovah; “sinners,” those who were living in open sins; and “those who forsake Jehovah,” such as had become estranged from God in either of these ways. 7.CALVIN, “28.And the destruction of the transgressors Lest hypocrites should imagine that any fruit of these promises belongs to them, and should indulge in vain boasting, he threatens that they shall perish, though God redeem his Church. For hypocrites have always been mingled with the Church, and indeed are connected with it in the closest manner; but they form their estimation of it from outward show. All that God promises they at once apply confidently to themselves. The apostle tears from them this trust, if indeed it deserve the name of trust, which springs from pride and the arrogance of a haughty mind. Here we ought to observe how great wisdom is needed by godly teachers, that, while they terrify the wicked by the judgment of God, they may at the same time support good men, and strengthen them by some consolation, that they may not be cast down and discouraged. On the other hand, when believers are encouraged be the promise of God, and when wicked men falsely apply it to themselves, and puff up their minds with vain confidence, the method and course which we ought to pursue is, that we
- 205. neither give occasionto wicked men to become proud, nor depress and discourage the minds of the godly; as Isaiah does in this passage. For while he speaks of the redemption of the Church, he at the same time threatens that sinners, that is, wicked men, shall be destroyed, that they may not suppose that these acts of God’ kindness belong at all to them. And yet, while he pronounces destruction against the wicked, by this comparison he exhibits more fully the favor of God towards believers, which is far more distinctly seen, when God allows the reprobate to perish, but preserves his own in safety, as it is said, A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee. Psa_91:7. Besides, he mitigates the grief and anguish which the diminution of the numbers of the Church might produce in godly minds; for he shows that there is no other way of imparting health to the whole body than by removing its corruption. 29 “You will be ashamed because of the sacred oaks in which you have delighted; you will be disgraced because of the gardens that you have chosen. 1.BARNES, “For they shall be ashamed - That is, when they see the punishment that their idolatry has brought upon them, they shall be ashamed of the folly and degradation of their worship. Moreover, the gods in which they trusted shall yield them no protection, and shall leave them to the disgrace and confusion of being forsaken and abandoned. Of the oaks - Groves, in ancient times, were the favorite places of idolatrous worship. In the city of Rome, there were thirty-two groves consecrated to the gods. Those were commonly selected which were on hills, or high places; and they were usually furnished with temples, altars, and all the implements of idolatrous worship. Different kinds of groves were selected for this purpose, by different people. The Druids of the ancient Celtic nations in Gaul, Britain, and Germany, offered their worship in groves of oak - hence the name Druid, derived from δρሞς
- 206. drus, an oak.Frequent mention is made in the Scriptures of groves and high places; and the Jews were forbidden to erect them; Deu_16:21; 1Ki_16:23; 2Ki_16:4; Eze_6:13; Eze_16:16, Eze_16:39; Exo_34:13; Jdg_3:7; 1Ki_18:19; Isa_17:8; Mic_5:14. When, therefore, it is said here, that they should be ashamed of the oaks, it means that they should be ashamed of their idolatrous worship, to which they were much addicted, and into which, under their wicked kings, they easily fell. Their calamities were coming upon them mainly for this idolatry. It is not certainly known what species of tree is intended by the word translated oaks. The Septuagint has rendered it by the word “idols” - ᅊπᆵ τራν εᅶδώλων αᆒτራν apo ton eidolon auton. The Chaldee, ‘ye shall be confounded by the groves of idols.’ The Syriac version also has idols. Most critics concur in supposing that it means, not the oak, but the terebinth or turpentine tree - a species of fir. This tree is the Pistacia Terebinthus of Linnaeus, or the common turpentine tree, whose resin or juice is the China or Cyprus turpentine, used in medicine. The tree grows to a great age, and is common in Palestine. The terebinth - now called in Palestine the but’m-tree - ‘is not an evergreen, as is often represented; but its small, leathered, lancet-shaped leaves fall in the autumn, and are renewed in the spring. The flowers are small, and are followed by small oval berries, hanging in clusters from two to five inches long, resembling much the clusters of the vine when the grapes are just set. From incisions in the trunk there is said to flow a sort of transparent balsam, constituting a very pure and fine species of turpentine, with an agreeable odor like citron or jessamine, and a mild taste, and hardening gradually into a transparent gum. The tree is found also in Asia Minor, Greece, Italy, the south of France, and in the north of Africa, and is described as not usually rising to the height of more than twenty feet.’ Robinson’s Bib. Researches, iii. 15, 16. It produces the nuts called the pistachio nuts. They have a pleasant, unctuous taste, resembling that of almonds, and they yield in abundance a sweet and pleasant oil. The best Venice turpentine, which, when it can be obtained pure, is superior to all the rest of its kind, is the produce of this tree. The picture in the book will give you an idea of the appearance of the terebinth. The Hebrew word אילים 'e ylı ym, from איל 'eyl, or more commonly אלה 'elah, seems to be used sometimes as the Greek δρሞ ς drus is, to denote any large tree, whether evergreen or not; and especially any large tree, or cluster of trees, where the worship of idols was celebrated. Which ye have desired - The Jews, until the captivity at Babylon, as all their history shows, easily relapsed into idolatry. The meaning of the prophet is, that the punishment at Babylon would be so long and so severe as to make them ashamed of this, and turn them from it. Shall be confounded - Another word meaning to be ashamed. For the gardens - The places planted with trees, etc., in which idolatrous worship was practiced. ‘In the language of the Hebrews, every place where plants and trees were cultivated with greater care than in the open field, was called a garden. The idea of such an enclosure was certainly borrowed from the garden of Eden, which the bountiful Creator planted for the reception of his favorite creature. The garden of Hesperides, in Eastern fables, was protected by an enormous serpent; and the gardens of Adonis, among the Greeks, may be traced to the same origin, for the terms horti Adenides, the gardens of Adonis, were used by the ancients to signify gardens of pleasure, which corresponds with the name of Paradise, or the garden of Eden, as horti Adonis answers to the garden of the Lord. Besides, the gardens of primitive nations were commonly, if not in every instance, devoted to religious purposes. In these shady retreats were celebrated, for a long succession of ages, the rites of pagan superstition.’ - Paxton. These groves or gardens were furnished with the temple of the god that was worshipped, and with altars, and with everything necessary for this species of worship. They were usually, also, made as shady
- 207. and dark aspossible, to inspire the worshippers with religious awe and reverence on their entrance; compare the note at Isa_66:17. 2. CLARKE, “For they shall be ashamed of the oaks “For ye shall be ashamed of the ilexes” - Sacred groves were a very ancient and favorite appendage of idolatry. They were furnished with the temple of the god to whom they were dedicated, with altars, images, and every thing necessary for performing the various rites of worship offered there; and were the scenes of many impure ceremonies, and of much abominable superstition. They made a principal part of the religion of the old inhabitants of Canaan; and the Israelites were commanded to destroy their groves, among other monuments of their false worship. The Israelites themselves became afterwards very much addicted to this species of idolatry. “When I had brought them into the land, Which I swore that I would give unto them; Then they saw every high hill and every thick tree; And there they slew their victims; And there they presented the provocation of their offerings; And there they placed their sweet savor; And there they poured out their libations.” Eze_20:28. “On the tops of the mountains they sacrifice; And on the hills they burn incense; Under the oak and the poplar; And the ilex, because her shade is pleasant.” Hos_4:13. Of what particular kinds the trees here mentioned are, cannot be determined with certainty. In regard to אלה ellah, in this place of Isaiah, as well as in Hosea, Celsius (Hierobot.) understands it of the terebinth, because the most ancient interpreters render it so; in the first place the Septuagint. He quotes eight places; but in three of these eight places the copies vary, some having δρυς, the oak, instead of τερεβινθος, the terebinth or turpentine tree. And he should have told us, that these same seventy render it in sixteen other places by δρυς, the oak; so that their authority is really against him; and the Septuagint, “stant pro quercu,” contrary to what he says at first setting out. Add to this that Symmachus, Theodotion, and Aquila, generally render it by δρυς, the oak; the latter only once rendering it by τερεβινθος, the terebinth. His other arguments seem to me not very conclusive; he says, that all the qualities of אלה ellah agree to the terebinth, that it grows in mountainous countries, that it is a strong tree, long-lived, large and high, and deciduous. All these qualities agree just as well to the oak, against which he contends; and he actually attributes them to the oak in the very next section. But I think neither the oak nor the terebinth will do in this place of Isaiah, from the last circumstance which he mentions, their being deciduous, where the prophet’s design seems to me to require an evergreen, otherwise the casting of its leaves would be nothing out of the common established course of nature, and no proper image of extreme distress and total desolation, parallel to that of a garden without water, that is, wholly burnt up and destroyed. An ancient, who was an inhabitant and a native of this country, understands it in like manner of a tree blasted with uncommon and
- 208. immoderate heat; velutarbores, cum frondes aestu torrente decusserunt. Ephrem Syr. in loc., edit. Assemani. Compare Psa_1:4; Jer_17:8. Upon the whole I have chosen to make it the ilex, which word Vossius, Etymolog., derives from the Hebrew אלה ellah, that whether the word itself be rightly rendered or not, I might at least preserve the propriety of the poetic image. - L. By the ilex the learned prelate means the holly, which, though it generally appears as a sort of shrub, grows, in a good soil, where it is unmolested, to a considerable height. I have one in my own garden, rising three stems from the root, and between twenty and thirty feet in height. It is an evergreen. For they shall be ashamed “For ye shall be ashamed” - תבושו teboshu, in the second person, Vulgate, Chaldee, three MSS., one of my own, ancient, and one edition; and in agreement with the rest of the sentence. 3. GILL, “For they shall be ashamed of the oaks which ye have desired,.... Though there is a change of persons in the words, the same are intended; and design such, who being convinced of the idolatries of the church of Rome they have been fond of, and delighted in, will be ashamed of them, and relinquish them, and come out of Babylon a little before the destruction of it; for under oaks, and such like green trees, idolatry used to be committed, to which the allusion is; see Jer_2:20 and so the Targum interprets it of "trees of idols"; that is, under which idolatry was practised: and ye shall be confounded for the gardens ye have chosen; where also idolatrous practices were used, see Isa_65:3 and so the Targum paraphrases it, "and ye shall be ashamed of the gardens of idols, from whom ye have sought help.'' The sense is the same as before; unless both clauses should rather be understood of the destruction of sinners, before spoken of, who at that time will be filled with shame and confusion, they in vain praying to their idols for help; which sense the following words incline to. 4. HENRY, “It is an inevitable ruin; there is no escaping it. First, Their idols shall not be able to help them, the oaks which they have desired, and the gardens which they have chosen; that is, the images, the dunghill-gods, which they had worshipped in their groves and under the green trees, which they were fond of and wedded to, for which they forsook the true God, and which they worshipped privately in their own garden even when idolatry was publicly discountenanced. “This was the practice of the transgressors and the sinners; but they shall be ashamed of it, not with a show of repentance, but of despair, Isa_1:29. They shall have cause to be ashamed of their idols; for, after all the court they have made to them, they shall find no benefit by them; but the idols themselves shall go into captivity,” Isa_46:1, Isa_46:2. Note, Those that make creatures their confidence are but preparing confusion for themselves. You were fond of the oaks and the gardens, but you yourselves shall be, 1. “Like an oak without leaves, withered and blasted, and stripped of all its ornaments.” Justly do those wear no leaves that bear no fruit; as the fig-tree that Christ cursed. 2. “Like a garden without water, that is neither rained upon nor watered with the foot (Deu_11:10), that had no fountain (Son_4:15), and consequently is parched, and all the fruits of it gone to decay.” Thus shall those be that trust
- 209. in idols, orin an arm of flesh, Jer_17:5, Jer_17:6. But those that trust in God never find him as a wilderness, or as waters that fail, Jer_2:31. 5. JAMISON, “ashamed — (Rom_6:21). oaks — Others translate the “terebinth” or “turpentine tree.” Groves were dedicated to idols. Our Druids took their name from the Greek for “oaks.” A sacred tree is often found in Assyrian sculpture; symbol of the starry hosts, Saba. gardens — planted enclosures for idolatry; the counterpart of the garden of Eden. 6. K&D, “Isa_1:29 declares how God's judgment of destruction would fall upon all of these. The v. is introduced with an explanatory “for” (Chi): “For they become ashamed of the terebinths, in which ye had your delight; and ye must blush for the gardens, in which ye took pleasure.” The terebinths and gardens (the second word with the article, as in Hab_3:8, first binharim, then banneharim) are not referred to as objects of luxury, as Hitzig and Drechsler assume, but as unlawful places of worship and objects of worship (see Deu_16:21). They are both of them frequently mentioned by the prophets in this sense (Isa_57:5; Isa_65:3; Isa_66:17): Chamor and bachar are also the words commonly applied to an arbitrary choice of false gods (Isa_44:9; Isa_41:24; Isa_66:3), and bosh min is the general phrase used to denote the shame which falls upon idolaters, when the worthlessness of their idols becomes conspicuous through their impotence. On the difference between bosh and Chapher, see the comm. on Psa_35:4. (Note: It is perfectly certain that Chapher (Arab. Chaphira, as distinguished from Chaphar, hafara, to dig) signifies to blush, erubescere; but the combination of bosh and yabash (bada), which would give albescere or expallescere (to turn white or pale) as the primary idea of bosh, has not only the Arabic use of bayyada and ibyadda (to rejoice, be made glad) against it, but above all the dialectic bechath, bahita (bahuta), which, when taken in connection with bethath (batta), points rather to the primary idea of being cut off (abscindi: cf., spes abscissa). See Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon, i. 263.) The word elim is erroneously translated “idols” in the Septuagint and other ancient versions. The feeling which led to this, however, was a correct one, since the places of worship really stand for the idols worshipped in those places. (Note: With regard to the derivation, elim, whether used in the sense of strong men, or gods, or rams, or terebinths, is still but one word, derived from ı̄l or ul, so that in all three senses it may be written either with or without Yod. Nevertheless elim in the sense of “rams” only occurs without Yod in Job_42:8. In the sense of “gods” it is always written without Yod; in that of “strong men” with Yod. In the singular the name of the terebinth is always written elah without Yod; in the plural, however, it is written either with or without. But this no
- 210. more presupposes asingular el (ayil) in common use, than betzim presupposes a singular bets (bayits); still the word el with Yod does occur once, viz., in Gen_14:6. Allah and allon, an oak, also spring from the same root, namely alal = il; just as in Arabic both ı̄l and ill are used for el (God); and al and ill, in the sense of relationship, point to a similar change in the form of the root.) The excited state of the prophet at the close of his prophecy is evinced by his abrupt leap from an exclamation to a direct address (Ges. §137, Anm. 3). 7. PULPIT, “The oaks which ye have desired are, primarily, the "green trees" under which images were set up (2Ki_17:10), but perhaps represent also any worldly attractions which draw the soul away from God—as wealth, or power, or honors. In the day of suffering, sinners are ashamed of having been led away by such poor temptations as those to which they have yielded (comp. Rom_6:21, "What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed?"). The gardens. Kay suggests "idolatrous pleasure- gardens as those at Daphne, near Antioch, "which is a reasonable exegesis. Such were probably to be found wherever Astarte, or the "Dea Syra," was worshipped. 8. CALVIN, “29.For (or, that is)they shall be ashamed In the Hebrew the particle כי (ki) is employed, which properly denotes a cause, but frequently also denotes exposition. Now, since the Prophet does not here state anything new, but only explains the cause of the destruction which awaited the ungodly, to render כי (ki) by that is, appears to connect it better with the preceding word, ,כלה (kalah,) consumed, They shall be consumed, that is, they shall be ashamed of the oaks which ye have desired; as if the Prophet had said that no evil will be more destructive to them than their own superstition. The idols, says he, which you call upon for your protection and safety will rather bring destruction upon you. The word ,אלים (elim,) oaks, (31) has been sometimes rendered Gods; (32) but this meaning is set aside by the context; for immediately afterwards he adds the word groves:Ye shall be ashamed of the groves which you have chosen. Now, under the image both of trees and of groves, the Prophet, by a figure of speech, in which a part is taken for the whole, reproves every kind of false worship; for although among the Jews there were many forms of idolatry, the custom here mentioned, of choosing groves and forests for offering sacrifices, was the most common of all. Whether the word גנות (gannoth) in the second clause be translated groves or gardens, there can be no doubt that it means the altars and sacred buildings in which they performed their idolatrous worship. Although they did not intend openly to revolt from God, they invented new kinds of worship; and, as if one place had been more acceptable to God than another, they devoted it to his service, as we see done by the papists. Next follows a change of the person; for, in order to make the reproof more severe, those wicked men of whom
- 211. he spoke inthe third person are now directly addressed, Ye shall be ashamed Which you have desired By the word desired he reproves the mad and burning eagerness with which wicked men follow their superstitions. They ought to have been earnestly devoted with their whole heart to the service of one Gods but they rush with blind violence to false worship, as if they were driven by brutish lust. In almost every human mind there naturally exists this disease, that they have forsaken the true God, and run mad in following idols; and hence Scripture frequently compares this madness to the loves of harlots, who shake off shame, as well as reason. For the gardens that ye have chosen That the Prophet describes not only their excessive zeal, but their presumption, in corrupting the worship of God, is evident from this second clause, in which he says that they chose gardens, for this term is contrasted with the injunction of the law. Whatever may be the plausible appearances under which unbelievers endeavor to cloak their superstitions, still this saying remains true, that obedience is better than all sacrifices. (1Sa_15:22.) Accordingly, under the term willworship ( ἐθελοθρησκεία) Paul includes (Col_2:23) all kinds of false worship which men contrive for themselves without the command of God. On this account God complains that the Jews have despised his word, and have delighted themselves with their own inventions; as if he had said, “ was your duty to obey, but you wished to have an unfettered choice, or rather an unbounded liberty.” This single consideration is sufficient to condemn the inventions of men, that they have it not in their power to choose the manner of worshipping God, because to him alone belongs the right to command. God had at that time enjoined that sacrifices should not be offered to him anywhere else than at Jerusalem (Deu_12:13); the Jews thought that they pleased him in other places, and that false imagination deceived also the heathen nations. Would that it had gone no farther! But we see how the papists are involved in the same error, and, in short, experience shows that the disease has prevailed extensively in every age. If it be objected that there was not so much importance in the place, that God ought to have regarded with such strong abhorrence the worship which was everywhere offered to him, — first, we ought to consider the reason why God chose that at that time there should be only one altar, which was, that it might be a bond of holy unity to an uncivilized nation, and that by means of it their religion might continue unchanged. Besides, granting that this spiritual reason were but of temporary force, we must hold by the principle that commandments were given in the smallest matters, that the Jews might be better trained to obedience; for since superstition conceals itself under the pretense of devotion, it is hardly possible but that men will flatter themselves with their own inventions. But since obedience is the mother of true religion, it follows that when men exercise their own fancy, it becomes the source of all superstitions.
- 212. It must alsobe added, that as Isaiah formerly complained of those crimes which were contrary to brotherly love and to the second table of the law, so he now complains of their having transgressed the first table. For since the whole perfection of righteousness consists in keeping the law, when the Prophets wish to reprove men for their sins, they speak sometimes of the first, and sometimes of the second, table of the law. But we ought always to observe the figurative mode of expression, when under one class they include the whole. (31) “ word אילים (elim) has, in the singular number, ,אלה (elah,) a kind of tree, called, in the German language, ulme.” — Jarchi. For the purpose of proving that by ,אולמא Jarchi means the elm, his annotator, Breithaupt, adduces not only the German ulme, but the Italian (lang. it) olmo , the French orme , and the Latin ulmus . — Ed (32) Evidently supposing that it is the plural of ,אל (el,) God, and overlooking the medial radical Yod, which is sometimes expressed, but oftener left out, in this word. — Ed 30 You will be like an oak with fading leaves, like a garden without water. 1.BARNES, “For ye ... - The mention of the tree in the previous verse, gives the prophet occasion for the beautiful image in this. They had desired the oak, and they should be like it. That, when the frost came, was divested of its beauty, and its leaves faded, and fell; so should their beauty and privileges and happiness, as a people, fade away at the anger of God. A garden that hath no water - That is therefore withered and parched up; where nothing would flourish, but where all would be desolation - a most striking image of the approaching desolation of the Jewish nation. In Eastern countries this image would be more striking than with us. In these hot regions, a constant supply of water is necessary for the cultivation, and even for the very existence and preservation of a garden. Should it lack water for a few days, everything in it would be burned up with neat and totally destroyed. In all gardens, therefore, in those regions; there must be a constant supply of water, either from some neighboring river, or from some fountain or reservoir within it. To secure such a fountain became an object of
- 213. indispensable importance, notonly for the coolness and pleasantness of the garden, but for the very existence of the vegetation. Dr. Russell, in his Natural History of Aleppo, says, that ‘all the gardens of Aleppo are on the banks of the river that runs by that city, or on the sides of the rill that supplies their aqueduct;’ and all the rest of the country he represents as perfectly burned up in the summer months, the gardens only retaining their verdure, on account of the moistness of their situation. 2. CLARKE, “Whose leaf “Whose leaves” - Twenty-six of Kennicott’s, twenty-four of De Rossi’s, one ancient, of my own, and seven editions, read אליה aleyha, in its full and regular form. This is worth remarking, as it accounts for a great number of anomalies of the like kind, which want only the same authority to rectify them. As a garden that hath no water “A garden wherein is no water” - In the hotter parts of the Eastern countries, a constant supply of water is so absolutely necessary for the cultivation and even for the preservation and existence of a garden, that should it want water but for a few days, every thing in it would be burnt up with the heat, and totally destroyed. There is therefore no garden whatever in those countries but what has such a certain supply, either from some neighboring river, or from a reservoir of water collected from springs, or filled with rain water in the proper season, in sufficient quantity to afford ample provision for the rest of the year. Moses, having described the habitation of man newly created as a garden planted with every tree pleasant to the sight and good for food, adds, as a circumstance necessary to complete the idea of a garden, that it was well supplied with water, “And a river went out of Eden to water the garden;” Gen_2:10 : see also Gen_13:10. That the reader may have a clear notion of this matter, it will be necessary to give some account of the management of their gardens in this respect. “Damascus,” says Maundrell, p. 122, “is encompassed with gardens, extending no less, recording to common estimation, than thirty miles round; which makes it look like a city in a vast wood. The gardens are thick set with fruit trees of all kinds, kept fresh and verdant by the waters of the Barrady, (the Chrysorrhoas of the ancients), which supply both the gardens and city in great abundance. This river, as soon as it issues out from between the cleft of the mountain before mentioned into the plain, is immediately divided into three streams; of which the middlemost and biggest runs directly to Damascus, and is distributed to all the cisterns and fountains of the city. The other two (which I take to be the work of art) are drawn round, one to the right hand, and the other to the left, on the borders of the gardens, into which they are let as they pass, by little currents, and so dispersed all over the vast wood, insomuch that there is not a garden but has a fine quick stream running through it. The Barrady is almost wholly drunk up by the city and gardens. What small part of it escapes is united, as I was informed, in one channel again on the southeast side of the city; and, after about three or four hours’ course finally loses itself in a bog there, without ever arriving at the sea.” This was likewise the case in former times, as Strabo, lib. xvi., Pliny, lib. 5:18, testify; who say, “that this river was expended in canals, and drunk up by watering the place.” “The best sight,” says the same Maundrell, p. 39, “that the palace of the emir of Beroot, anciently Berytus, affords, and the worthiest to be remembered, is the orange garden. It contains a large quadrangular plat of ground, divided into sixteen lesser squares, four in a row, with walks between them. The walks are shaded with orange trees of a large spreading size. Every one of these sixteen lesser squares in the garden was bordered with stone; and in the stone work were troughs, very artificially contrived, for conveying the water all over the garden; there being little outlets cut at every tree for the stream as it passed by to flow out and water it.”
- 214. The royal gardensat Ispahan are watered just in the same manner, according to Kempfer’s description, Amoen. Exot., p. 193. This gives us a clear idea of the פלגימים palgey mayim, mentioned in the first Psalm, and other places of Scripture, “the divisions of waiters,” the waters distributed in artificial canals; for so the phrase properly signifies. The prophet Jeremith, chap. 17:8, has imitated, and elegantly amplified, the passage of the psalmist above referred to: - “He shall be like a tree planted by the water side, And which sendeth forth her roots to the aqueduct. She shall not fear, when the heat cometh; But her leaf shall be green; And in the year of drought she shall not be anxious, Neither shall she cease from bearing fruit.” From this image the son of Sirach, Ecclesiasticus 24:30, 31, has most beautifully illustrated the influence and the increase of religious wisdom in a well prepared heart. “I also come forth as a canal from a river, And as a conduit flowing into a paradise. I said, I will water my garden, And I will abundantly moisten my border: And, lo! my canal became a river, And my river became a sea.” This gives us the true meaning of the following elegant proverb, Pro_21:1 : - “The heart of the king is like the canals of waters in the hand of Jehovah; Whithersoever it pleaseth him, he inclineth it.” The direction of it is in the hand of Jehovah, as the distribution of the water of the reservoir through the garden by different canals is at the will of the gardener. “Et, cum exustus ager morientibus aestuat herbis, Ecce supercilio clivosi tramitis undam Elicit: illa cadens raucum per levia murmur Saxa ciet, scatebrisque arentia temperat arva.” Virg., Georg. 1:107. “Then, when the fiery suns too fiercely play, And shrivelled herbs on withering stems decay, The wary ploughman on the mountain’s brow Undams his watery stores; huge torrents flow; And, rattling down the rocks, large moisture yield, Tempering the thirsty fever of the field.” Dryden. Solomon, Ecc_2:1, Ecc_2:6, mentions his own works of this kind: - “I made me gardens, and paradises; And I planted in them all kinds of fruit trees. I made me pools of water, To water with them the grove flourishing with trees.”
- 215. Maundrell, p. 88,has given a description of the remains, as they are said to be, of these very pools made by Solomon, for the reception and preservation of the waters of a spring, rising at a little distance from them; which will give us a perfect notion of the contrivance and design of such reservoirs. “As for the pools, they are three in number, lying in a row above each other; being so disposed that the waters of the uppermost may descend into the second, and those of the second into the third. Their figure is quadrangular, the breadth is the same in all, amounting to about ninety paces. In their length there is some difference between them; the first being about one hundred and sixty paces long, the second, two hundred, and the third, two hundred and twenty. They are all lined with wall and plastered; and contain a great depth of water.” The immense works which were made by the ancient kings of Egypt for recovering the waters of the Nile, when it overflowed, for such uses, are well known. But there never was a more stupendous work of this kind than the reservoir of Saba, or Merab, in Arabia Felix. According to the tradition of the country, it was the work of Balkis, that queen of Sheba who visited Solomon. It was a vast lake formed by the collection of the waters of a torrent in a valley, where, at a narrow pass between two mountains, a very high mole or dam was built. The water of the lake so formed had near twenty fathoms depth; and there were three sluices at different heights, by which, at whatever height the lake stood, the plain below might be watered. By conduits and canals from these sluices the water was constantly distributed in due proportion to the several lands; so that the whole country for many miles became a perfect paradise. The city of Saba, or Merab, was situated immediately below the great dam; a great flood came, and raised the lake above its usual height; the dam gave way in the middle of the night; the waters burst forth at once, and overwhelmed the whole city, with the neighboring towns and people. The remains of eight tribes were forced to abandon their dwellings, and the beautiful valley became a morass and a desert. This fatal catastrophe happened long before the time of Mohammed, who mentions it in the Koran, chap. 34: ver. 15. See also Sale, Prelim. s. 1 p. 10, and Michaelis, Quest. aux Voyag. Daniel No. 94. Niebuhr, Descrip. de l’Arabie. p. 240. - L. 3. GILL, “For ye shall be as an oak whose leaf fadeth,.... Shall be stripped of all their dependencies and self confidence, and be as naked and as bare as an oak that has cast its leaves; or thus, in a way of just retaliation, since they have desired oaks, and sacrificed under them, they shall be like them as in the wintertime, stripped of all their riches, honour, substance, and desirable things; see Rev_18:12. and as a garden that hath no water; in which the herbs and plants are dried up and withered: it signifies the uncomfortable condition such shall be in, as before. 4. HENRY, “It is an inevitable ruin; there is no escaping it. First, Their idols shall not be able to help them, the oaks which they have desired, and the gardens which they have chosen; that is, the images, the dunghill-gods, which they had worshipped in their groves and under the green trees, which they were fond of and wedded to, for which they forsook the true God, and which they worshipped privately in their own garden even when idolatry was publicly discountenanced. “This was the practice of the transgressors and the sinners; but they shall be ashamed of it, not with a show of repentance, but of despair, Isa_1:29. They shall have cause to be ashamed of their idols; for, after all the court they have made to them, they shall find no
- 216. benefit by them;but the idols themselves shall go into captivity,” Isa_46:1, Isa_46:2. Note, Those that make creatures their confidence are but preparing confusion for themselves. You were fond of the oaks and the gardens, but you yourselves shall be, 1. “Like an oak without leaves, withered and blasted, and stripped of all its ornaments.” Justly do those wear no leaves that bear no fruit; as the fig-tree that Christ cursed. 2. “Like a garden without water, that is neither rained upon nor watered with the foot (Deu_11:10), that had no fountain (Son_4:15), and consequently is parched, and all the fruits of it gone to decay.” Thus shall those be that trust in idols, or in an arm of flesh, Jer_17:5, Jer_17:6. But those that trust in God never find him as a wilderness, or as waters that fail, Jer_2:31. 5. JAMISON, “oak — Ye shall be like the “oaks,” the object of your “desire” (Isa_1:29). People become like the gods they worship; they never rise above their level (Psa_135:18). So men’s sins become their own scourges (Jer_2:9). The leaf of the idol oak fades by a law of necessary consequence, having no living sap or “water” from God. So “garden” answers to “gardens” (Isa_1:29). 6. K&D, “He still continues in the same excitement, piling a second explanatory sentence upon the first, and commencing this also with “for” (Chi); and then, carried away by the association of ideas, he takes terebinths and gardens as the future figures of the idolatrous people themselves. “For ye shall become like a terebinth with withered leaves, and like a garden that hath no water.” Their prosperity is distroyed, so that they resemble a terebinth withered as to its leaves, which in other cases are always green (nobleth ‛aleah, genitives connection according to (Ges. §112, 2). Their sources of help are dried up, so that they are like a garden without water, and therefore waste. In this withered state terebinths and gardens, to which the idolatrous are compared, are easily set on fire. All that is wanted is a spark to kindle them, when they are immediately in flames. 7.CALVIN, “30.Ye shall certainly be (33) as an oak whose leaf fadeth The Hebrew particle כי (ki) may be taken in an affirmative sense, as I have translated it; and the Prophet appears to allude to those groves to which they had improperly restricted the worship of God; for, having mentioned gardens, he reproaches them with the confidence which they placed in theme and threatens drought. “ take pleasure,” says he, “ your gardens and trees, but you shall be like withered trees that have lost their foliage.” God therefore mocks the vain boasting of idolaters, who marvellously flatter themselves with their contrivances, and think that heaven is open to them, when they are employed in their ceremonies. Just as at the present day, when the papists have lighted their lamps and adorned their temples, when they dazzle with gold and precious stones, when they have played on their organs and rung their bells, they imagine that they are the happiest of all men, as if there were now no reason to dread that any evil should come to them from God, who had received from them a hundredfold satisfaction.
- 217. (33) For yeshall be. — Eng. Ver. 31 The mighty man will become tinder and his work a spark; both will burn together, with no one to quench the fire.” 1.BARNES, “And the strong - Those who have been thought to be strong, on whom the people relied for protection and defense - their rulers, princes, and the commanders of their armies. As tow - The coarse or broken part of flax, or hemp. It means here that which shall be easily and quickly kindled and rapidly consumed. As tow burns and is destroyed at the touch of fire, so shall the rulers of the people be consumed by the approaching calamities. And the maker of it - This is an unhappy translation. The word פעלו po‛alo may be indeed a participle, and be rendered ‘its maker,’ but it is more commonly a noun, and means his work, or his action. This is its plain meaning here. So the Latin Vulgate, the Septuagint, and the Chaldee. It means, that as a spark enkindles tow, so the works or deeds of a wicked nation shall be the occasion or cause of their destruction. The ambition of one man is the cause of his ruin; the sensuality of a second is the cause of his; the avarice of a third is the cause of his. These passions, insatiable and ungratified, shall be the occasion of the deep and eternal sorrows of hell. So it means here, that the crimes and hypocrisy of the nation would be the real cause of all the calamities that would come upon them as a people. Shall both burn together - The spark and the flame from the kindled flax mingle, and make one fire. So the people and their works would be enkindled and destroyed together. They would burn so rapidly, that nothing could extinguish them. The meaning is, that the nation would be punished; and that all their works of idolatry and monuments of sin would be the occasion of their punishment, and would perish at the same time. The “principle” involved in this passage teaches us the following things: (1) That the wicked, however mighty, shall be destroyed. (2) That their works will be the “cause” of their ruin - a cause necessarily leading to it. (3) That the works of the wicked - all that they do and all on which they depend - shall be destroyed.
- 218. (4) That thisdestruction shall be final. Nothing shall stay the flame. No tears of penitence, no power of men or devils, shall “put out” the fires which the works of the wicked shall enkindle. 2. PULPIT, “The strong (literally, the strong one) shall be as tow; i.e. weak and powerless (comp. Jdg_16:9), utterly unable to resist the Divine fiat when it goes forth. The maker of it. An extraordinary mistranslation, since po'al never means anything but "work." His own acts would light the fire by which the "strong one" would be consumed and perish. 3. GILL, “And the strong shall be as tow,.... ,החסון "that strong one", who is eminently so; the little horn, whose look is more stout than his fellows, Dan_7:20 the beast who had great power and authority given by the dragon, Rev_13:2 who shall be cast alive into the lake of fire; when he will be like tow in those devouring flames, easily, quickly, and irrecoverably consumed, Dan_7:11, Rev_19:20. and the maker of it as a spark, or "his work"; so the Targum, "and the work of their hands shall be as a spark of fire;'' or like the embers and ashes of a coal, which are blown away and lost at once: so antichrist, and all his evil works, as well as all his evil workers under him, will be entirely consumed: or, as it may be rendered, "he that wrought him": that is, Satan, for his coming is after the working of Satan; he has his seat, power, and authority, from the dragon, the old serpent, and the devil, and may be truly called a creature of his, 2Th_2:9. and they shall both burn together; both the pope and the devil in the lake of fire and brimstone, into which they will both be cast, Rev_20:10. and none shall quench them; that fire will be unquenchable and everlasting; they will be tormented for ever and ever, and so will all the worshippers of the beast, Mat_25:41. The Chaldee paraphrase is, "so the wicked shall be consumed, and their evil works, and there shall be no mercy upon them.'' 4. HENRY, “Secondly, They shall not be able to help themselves (Isa_1:31): “Even the strong man shall be as tow not only soon broken and pulled to pieces, but easily catching fire; and his work (so the margin reads it), that by which he hopes to fortify and secure himself, shall be as a spark to his own tow, shall set him on fire, and he and his work shall burn together. His counsels shall be his ruin; his own skin kindles the fire of God's wrath, which shall burn to the lowest hell, and none shall quench it.” When the sinner has made himself as tow and stubble, and God makes himself to him as a consuming fore, what can prevent the utter ruin of the sinner? Now all this is applicable, 1. To the blessed work of reformation which was wrought in Hezekiah's time after the abominable corruptions of the reign of Ahaz. Then good men came to be preferred, and the faces of the wicked were filled with shame. 2. To their return out of their
- 219. captivity in Babylon,which had thoroughly cured them of idolatry. 3. To the gospel-kingdom and the pouring out of the Spirit, by which the New Testament church should be made a new Jerusalem, a city of righteousness. 4. To the second coming of Christ, when he shall thoroughly purge his floor, his field, shall gather the wheat into his barn, into his garner, and burn the chaff, the tares, with unquenchable fire. 5. JAMISON, “strong — powerful rulers (Amo_2:9). maker of it — rather, his work. He shall be at once the fuel, “tow,” and the cause of the fire, by kindling the first “spark.” both — the wicked ruler, and “his work,” which “is as a spark.” 6. K&D, “Isa_1:31 shows in a third figure where this spark was to come from: “And the rich man becomes tow, and his work the spark; and they will both burn together, and no one extinguishes them.” The form poalo suggests at first a participial meaning (its maker), but סוֹן ָח ֶה would be a very unusual epithet to apply to an idol. Moreover, the figure itself would be a distorted one, since the natural order would be, that the idol would be the thing that kindled the fire, and the man the object to be set on fire, and not the reverse. We therefore follow the lxx, Targ., and Vulg., with Gesenius and other more recent grammarians, and adopt the rendering “his work” (opus ejus). The forms לוֹ ָע ָ and לוֹ ָּע (cf., Isa_52:14 and Jer_22:13) are two equally admissible changes of the ground-form לוֹ ְע ָפ (לוֹ ְע ). As Isa_1:29 refers to idolatrous worship, poalo (his work) is an idol, a god made by human hands (cf., Isa_2:8; Isa_37:19, etc.). The prosperous idolater, who could give gold and silver for idolatrous images out of the abundance of his possessions (Chason is to be interpreted in accordance with Isa_33:6), becomes tow (talm. “the refuse of flax:” the radical meaning is to shake out, viz., in combing), and the idol the spark which sets this mass of fibre in flames, so that they are both irretrievably consumed. For the fire of judgment, by which sinners are devoured, need not come from without. Sin carries the fire of indignation within itself. And an idol is, as it were, an idolater's sin embodied and exposed to the light of day. The date of the composition of this first prophecy is a puzzle. Caspari thoroughly investigated every imaginary possibility, and at last adopted the conclusion that it dates from the time of Uzziah, inasmuch as Isa_1:7-9 do not relate to an actual, but merely to an ideal, present. But notwithstanding all the acuteness with which Caspari has worked out his view, it still remains a very forced one. The oftener we return to the reading of this prophetic address, the stronger is our impression that Isa_1:7-9 contain a description of the state of things which really existed at the time when the words were spoken. There were actually two devastations of the land of Judah which occurred during the ministry of Isaiah, and in which Jerusalem was only spared by the miraculous interposition of Jehovah: one under Ahaz in the year of the Syro-Ephraimitish war; the other under Hezekiah, when the Assyrian forces laid the land waste but were scattered at last in their attack upon Jerusalem. The year of the Syro-Ephraimitish war is supported by Gesenius, Rosenmüller (who expresses a different opinion in every one of the three editions of his Scholia), Maurer, Movers, Knobel, Hävernick, and others; the time of the Assyrian oppression by Hitzig, Umbreit, Drechsler, and Luzzatto. Now, whichever of these views we may adopt, there will still remain, as a test of its admissiblity, the difficult question, How did this prophecy come to stand at the head of the book, if it belonged to the time of Uzziah-Jotham? This question,
- 220. upon which thesolution of the difficulty depends, can only be settled when we come to Isa_6:1- 13. Till then, the date of the composition of chapter 1 must be left undecided. It is enough for the present to know, that, according to the accounts given in the books of Kings and Chronicles, there were two occasions when the situation of Jerusalem resembled the one described in the present chapter. 7.CALVIN, “31.And your God (34) shall be as tow The Hebrew word חסן (chason) signifies strong: and though it is here applied to God, still it retains its signification, as if he had said, “ god who was your strength shall be turned into stubble.” And the maker of it By the maker he means the carver; but as he mentions an idol, we must explain it agreeably to the matter in hand. Some think that he expresses the repentance of idolaters, by telling us that they would acknowledge their folly, and, being covered with shame, would burn their idols. But I consider the meaning to be different; for as a fire is made of dry fuel such as tow, “ like manner,” saith the Prophet,” gather you and your idols into one heap, as when a pile of wood is built up, that you may be consumed together, so that the idols may be like tow, and the men like fire, and that one conflagration may consume the whole.” And there shall be none to quench them It ought to be observed that the Prophets, when they mention the wrath of God, describe it by outward representations, because it cannot be perceived by the eyes or by any other sense. Thus the wrath of God, by which the ungodly are destroyed, is compared to fire, which consumes all things. It is now evident enough what the Prophet means, namely, that all the ungodly shall be destroyed, whatever may be the nature of their confidence; and not only so, but that their destruction shall be the greater, because they have placed their confidence in false and deceitful things, and that utter destruction will overtake them from that very quarter from which they had vainly looked for deliverance. For the images and idols are excitements of the wrath of God, kindling it into a flame which cannot be quenched. (34) And the strong. — Eng. Ver. Footnotes:
- 221. a. Isaiah 1:17Or justice. / Correct the oppressor b. Isaiah 1:25 That is, against Jerusalem New International Version (NIV) Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.®Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.