Bible Commentaries

Lange's Commentary: Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical

Isaiah 8

Verses 1-4

2. ISAIAH GIVING THE WHOLE NATION A SIGN BY THE BIRTH OF HIS SON MAHER-SHALAL-HASH-BAZ

CHAPTER Isaiah 8:1-4

1MOREOVER the LORD said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with 2 a man’s pen concerning 1 Maher-shalal-hash-baz. And I took unto me faithful witnesses 3 to record, Uriah the priest, and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah. And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived and bare a son. Then said the LORD to me, Call his name Maher-shalal-hash-baz 4 For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, My father, and my mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

On Isaiah 9:1. חֶרֶט (found only here and Exodus 32:4), is an instrument for cutting in, engraving in wood, metal, wax, etc., the chisel, style. It stands here as stylus, metonymically as efficiens pro effecto, i. e., the writing instrument stands for the writing. חרט אנוש seems to me not to mean writing of the common man in distinction from that of men of higher degree, say, a popular as distinguished from priestly writing. [In an ordinary and familiar hand, J. A. ALEXANDER, BARNES.] For in the first place it is very doubtful if אֱנוֹשׁ has this meaning. The word is distinguished from אָדָם (comp. Psalm 73:5) but only by its poetic use. It occurs in Isaiah six times, here, and Isaiah 13:7; Isaiah 13:12; Isaiah 24:6; Isaiah 33:8; Isaiah 51:7; Isaiah 56:2. In the second place we have no trace of there being two sorts of writing in use among the Hebrews before the exile. The passages Habakkuk 2:2; Psalm 45:2, cited by some in support of the notion, prove nothing. I much rather believe that a contrast of human and superhuman writing is meant. For as Paul distinguishes between human and angel tongues ( 1 Corinthians 13:1) so we may distinguish between human and angel writing. Of the latter, Daniel 5:5 sqq. offers us an example. Comp. Exodus 32:32; Psalm 69:29; Psalm 139:16; Daniel 12:1; Revelation 19:12; Revelation 20:12; Revelation 20:15; Revelation 21:12; Revelation 21:27. For the prophets were not merely “hearers of the words of God,” but also “men whose eyes were open,” “who saw the vision of the Almighty” ( Numbers 24:3-4). The לְ is variously explained. It is taken as constructio periphrastica (acceleratura sunt spolia or accelerationi spolia, comp. Genesis 15:12; Joshua 2:5; Isaiah 10:32; Isaiah 37:26; Isaiah 38:20, etc.), as depending on כְּתֹב in the sense of commanding ( 1 Chronicles 21:17), as sign of dedication, or as stating the object. The first two explanations are inadmissible, because לְ would then fit only the first member (מהר as infinitive), not the second (חָשׁ particip.). לְ can thus be taken only as a dedication or as stating the aim. Both these ways of explaining it agree in not taking מהר as infin, but as a verbal adjective like Zephaniah 1:14 (comp. מָאֵן מַקֵּל). But they differ in sense. This can be no dedication in the common sense. For there is no gift to be presented to Maher-shalal, only the attention of the nation is directed to him. The לְ can define therefore only the reference or the destiny, the aim. It is thereby said that this tablet with its inscription concerns a Maher-shalal-hash-baz, but of whom absolutely nothing is known, not even whether a person or a thing. Comp. Ezekiel 37:16. The case is different with Jeremiah 46:2; Jeremiah 48:1; Jeremiah 49:1. Comp. on Jeremiah 46. sqq.

On Isaiah 9:2. ואעידה וגו׳ the LXX. translates μάρτυράσ μοι ποίησον as if וְהָעִֽידָה stood in the text. Song of Solomon, too, the SYR, CHALD. and ARAB. in the London Polyglotte, which HITZIG follows. The VULG. translates: ”et adhibui;” it therefore read וָאָעִֽידָה; and Song of Solomon, too, would EICHHORN, DE WETTE, ROORDA, KNOBEL, and others read. But, after mature consideration, I find there is no ground for departing from the reading of the text. It is perfectly supported by testimony. First of all it is the more difficult reading, and both the others give evidence of being attempts to relieve the difficulty by correction. Then, too, Isaiah never uses the cohortative form with the weakened sense, as it occurs elsewhere with the Vav consec. imperf. in the first pers, especially in Daniel, Ezra, and Neh. Thus the form וָאָעִֽידָה especially occurs Nehemiah 13:21 (along with וָאָעִיד ibid. Isaiah 9:15). Why did not Isaiah write וָאָעֵיד as Jeremiah did in precisely the same sense, Isaiah 32:10? Comp. 1 Kings 2:42. The form וְאָעִידָה is found Deuteronomy 31:28; Psalm 50:7; Psalm 81:9; Jeremiah 6:10, everywhere as cohortative.—העיד עדים like Jeremiah 32:10; Jeremiah 32:25; Jeremiah 32:44.

On Isaiah 9:4. יִשָּׂא = “one will bear.”—חַיִל in the sense of possession, riches, treasures is found beside here Isaiah 10:14; Isaiah 60:5; Isaiah 60:11; Isaiah 61:6.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

1. Moreover the Lord said——the king of Assyria.

Vers1-4. A compound token! First, Isaiah is to take a large tablet (only found beside Isaiah 3:23; here is meant certainly a tablet coated with smooth wax), and write on it with human handwriting some words. It is therefore assumed here that there is a superhuman handwriting (see Text. and Gram.) and that the Prophet could understand and make use of it (comp. Daniel 5:5 sqq.). But Isaiah must not employ this superhuman, but common, human writing. Isaiah must write on the tablet “Maher-shalal-hash-baz.” It is clear that when he wrote these words they were not designated as the name of a son to be expected. For, first, there is nothing of this in the text. Second, there is a two-fold gradation of the prophecy wherein the first stage gives a pledge of the second. The words on the tablet are the prophecy of a Maher-shalal-hash-baz to be looked for; the appearance of the latter is therefore the fulfilment of this prophecy, and so the guaranty that the event, to which the significant name itself in turn refers, shall certainly come to pass.

The Lord commands the Prophet therefore to set up a tablet with the inscription mentioned, and at the same time makes known his will, that Uriah and Zechariah shall act as witnesses. What they are to witness is as little stated as that Isaiah shall accomplish the will of the LORD in regard to the witnesses and that he actually did this. The latter is assumed as being a matter of course. This scantiness is too common in the prophetic manner of narrating to cause us any surprise. The former is to be obtained from the context. For when we read immediately after: “And I went unto the Prophetess,” etc., it is plain that the witnesses should testify that is, at the time he set up the tablet, had communicated to them that he would approach his wife, and that she, in consequence, would become pregnant and bear a son. But why, it may be asked, did not the Prophet declare this publicly? Not out of regard for propriety certainly; for there would not have been anything the least offensive in doing so. But why must then the witnesses receive this announcement? I can think of no other reason than the enmity and vindictiveness of Ahaz. He was, we may be sure, only half rejoiced at the quieting of his fears in regard to the impending danger from Rezin and Pekah. The way in which Hebrews, according to Isaiah 7:10 sqq, received that reassuring announcement, and what was connected with it as a further finger-board for the remote future ( Isaiah 7:17 sqq.), all this was calculated to embitter him and his against the Prophet. Had, therefore, the Prophet announced publicly the pregnancy of his wife, the mother and child might have incurred danger. This was easiest avoided by imparting the announcement only to witnesses, who, however, were in such esteem with the nation, that their assurance that they had at the proper time received such a communication from the Prophet was universally credited. Then we obtain the following chain of events. First, the tablet. This, makes known in general that the LORD purposes a great crisis of war, and that it is to be looked for shortly. Immediately thereupon the witnesses receive the announcement of the pregnancy of the Prophetess, The son is born, and thereby, on the authority of the witnesses, is given to all, the pledge that the event to which the inscription of the tablet and the corresponding name of the child pointed, shall really come to pass.

Whether Uriah is the priest mentioned, 2 Kings 16:10 sqq. [BARNES, J. A. ALEXANDER], who, out of regard for Ahaz, placed in the temple the altar made after the heathen pattern, is just as doubtful as whether Zechariah is identical with the one said to be the author of Zechariah 9-11, or with the son of Asaph ( 2 Chronicles 29:13).

Isaiah’s wife is hardly called Prophetess, because she was the wife of a Prophet, but because she herself was a prophetic woman. We do not indeed know of prophecies of which she was the authoress, but she, along with other things of the Prophet’s family, was set for a sign and wonder ( Isaiah 9:18).

Our exposition of Isaiah 7:14 of itself shows that the present history is not coincident with Isaiah 7:10 sqq, and therefore that Maher-shalal is not identical with Immanuel. Yet the present narrative is nearly related to Isaiah 7:10 sqq. In both, pregnancy and the birth of a son are pledges of deliverance. In both, a stage of development in the child is made the measure that defines the period of the deliverance. But a child can say father and mother, sooner than it can distinguish between good and evil. If then, as also the place of the passage in the book, indicates, what is now narrated, took place somewhat later than the events Isaiah 7:10 sqq, it agrees very well. Both have the same objective end, viz., the rendering harmless Syria and Ephraim. Therefore the later one must use the shorter time measure. As Pekah and Rezin lived during the events prophesied here, yet the former died B. C739, so the transactions related here must fall between B. C743,739. The king of Assyria did not at that time destroy Samaria. He only desolated a few border regions ( 2 Kings 15:29). But as we showed at Isaiah 7:17, that the prophecy contemplated two events, inwardly related, but separated as to time, so it is here. That first, preliminary devastation of the region of Ephraim bears the later one ( 2 Kings 17:6) so really in it, that the Prophet is justified in comprehending both together.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.

2. On Isaiah 7:2. “Quando ecclesia, etc. When the Church is assaulted and Christ crucified over again in His elect, Rezin and Pekah, Herod and Pilate are wont to form alliance and enter into friendly relations. There are, so to speak, the foxes of Samson, joined indeed by the tails, but their heads are disconnected.”—Foerster.—“He that believes flees not ( Isaiah 28:16). ‘The righteous is bold as a lion’ ( Proverbs 28:1). Hypocrites and those that trust in works (work-saints) have neither reason nor faith. Therefore they cannot by any means quiet their heart. In prosperity they are, indeed, overweening, but in adversity they fall away ( Jeremiah 17:9).” Cramer.

3. On Isaiah 7:9. (“If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.”) “Insignis sententia, etc. A striking sentiment that may be adapted generally to all temptation, because all earnest endeavor after anything, as you know, beguiles us in temptation. But only faith in the word of promise makes us abide and makes sure whatever we would execute. He warns Ahaz, therefore, as if he said: I now promise you by the word, it shall be that those two kings shall not hurt you. Believe this word! For if you do not, whatever you afterwards devise will deceive you: because all confidence is vain which is not supported by the word of God.”—Luther.

4. On Isaiah 7:10-12. “Wicked Ahaz pretends to great sanctity in abstaining from asking a sign through fear of God. Thus hypocrites are most conscientious where there is no need for it: on the other hand, when they ought to be humble, they are the most insolent. But where God commands to be bold, one must be bold. For to be obedient to the word is not tempting God. That is rather tempting God when one proposes something without having the word for it. It is, indeed, the greatest virtue to rest only in the word, and desire nothing more. But where God would add something more than the word, then it must not be thought a virtue to reject it as superfluous. We must therefore exercise such a faith in the word of God that we will not despise the helps that are given in addition to it as aids to faith. For example the Lord offers us in the gospel all that is necessary to salvation. Why then Baptism and the Lord’s Supper? Are they to be treated as superfluous? By no means. For if one believes the word he will at the same time exhibit an entire obedience toward God. We ought therefore to learn to join the sign with the word, for no man has the power to sever the two.

But do you ask: is it permitted to ask God for a sign? We have an example of this in Gideon. Answer: Although Gideon was not told of God to ask a sign, yet he did it by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not according to his own fancy. We must not therefore abuse his example, and must be content with the sign that is offered by the Lord. But there are extraordinary signs or miracles, like that of the text, and ordinary ones like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yet both have the same object and use. For as Gideon was strengthened by that miraculous event, Song of Solomon, too, are we strengthened by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, although no miracle appears before our eyes.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, also asked the Lord to show him the right wife for Isaac by means of a sign of His own choosing, ( Genesis 24:14).

It ought to be said that this asking a sign (opening the Bible at a venture, or any other book) does not suit Christian perfection ( Hebrews 6:1). A Christian ought to be inwardly sensible of the divine will. He ought to content himself with the guarantees that God Himself offers. Only one must have open eyes and ears for them. This thing of demanding a sign, if it is not directly an effect of superstition ( Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4; 1 Corinthians 1:22), is certainly childish, and, because it easily leads to superstitious abuses, it is dangerous.

5. On Isaiah 7:13. “Non caret, etc. That the Prophet calls God his God is not without a peculiar emphasis. In Zechariah 2:12 it is said, that whoever touches the servants of God touches the pupil of God’s eye. Whoever opposes teacher and preacher will have to deal with God in heaven or with the Lord who has put them into office.”—Foerster.

6. On Isaiah 7:14. “The name Immanuel is one of the most beautiful and richest in contents of all the Holy Scripture. ‘God with us’ comprises God’s entire plan of salvation with sinful humanity. In a narrower sense it means ‘God-man’ ( Matthew 1:23), and points to the personal union of divinity and humanity, in the double nature of the Son of God become man. Jesus Christ was a God-with-us, however, in this, that for about 33 years He dwelt among us sinners ( John 1:11; John 1:14). In a deeper and wider sense still He was such by the Immanuel’s work of the atonement ( 2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Timothy 2:3). He will also be such to every one that believes on Him by the work of regeneration and sanctification and the daily renewal of His holy and divine communion of the Spirit ( John 17:23; John 17:26; John 14:19-21; John 14:23). He is such now by His high-priestly and royal administration and government for His whole Church ( Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 7:25). He will be snch in the present time of the Church in a still more glorious fashion ( John 10:16). The entire and complete meaning of the name Immanuel, however, will only come to light in the new earth, and in the heavenly Jerusalem ( Revelation 21:3; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5).”—Wilh. Fried. Roos.

Isaiah 8:7. On Isaiah 8:5 sqq. “Like boastful swimmers despise small and quiet waters, and on the other hand, for the better display of their skill, boast of the great sea and master it, but often are lost in it,—thus, too, did the hypocrites that despised the small kingdom of Judah, and bragged much and great things of the power and splendor of the kingdom of Israel and of the Syrians; such hypocrites are still to be found now-a-days—such that bear in their eye the admiranda Romae, the splendor, riches, power, ceremonies and pomp of the Romish church, and thereupon ‘set their bushel by the bigger-heap.’ It is but the devil’s temptation over again: ‘I will give all this to thee.’ ”—Cramer.—“Fons Siloa,” etc. “The fountain of Siloam, near the temple, daily reminded the Jews that Christ was coming.”—Calvin on John 9:7.

8. On Isaiah 8:10. “When the great Superlatives sit in their council chambers and have determined everything, how it ought to be, and especially how they will extinguish the gospel, then God sends the angel Gabriel to them, who must look through the window and say: nothing will come of it.”—Luther.—“Christ, who is our Immanuel, is with us by His becoming man, for us by His office of Mediator, in us by the work of His sanctification, by us by His personal, gracious presence.”—Cramer.

9. On Isaiah 8:14-15. Christ alone is set by God to be a stone by which we are raised up. That He is, however, an occasion of offence to many is because of their purpose, petulance and contempt ( 1 Peter 2:8). Therefore we ought to fear lest we take offence at Him. For whoever falls on this stone will shatter to pieces ( Matthew 21:44).” Cramer.

10. On Isaiah 8:16 sqq. He warns His disciples against heathenish superstition, and exhorts them to show respect themselves always to law and testimony. “They must not think that God must answer them by visions and signs, therefore He refers them to the written word, that they may not become altogether too spiritual, like those now-a-days who cry: spirit! spirit! … Christ says, Luke 16 : They have Moses and the prophets, and again John 5:39 : Search the Scriptures. So Paul says, 2 Timothy 3:16 : The Scripture is profitable for doctrine. So says Peter, 2 Peter 1:9 : We have a sure word of prophecy. It is the word that changes hearts and moves them. But revelations puff people up and make them insolent.” Heim and Hoffmann after Luther.

Chap9–11. On Isaiah 9:1 sqq. (2). “Postrema pars, etc. The latter part of chap8 was νομικὴ καὶ ἀπειλητική (legal and threatening) Song of Solomon, on the other hand, the first and best part of chap9 is εὐαγγελικὴ καὶ παραμυθητική, (evangelical and comforting). Thus must ever law and gospel, preaching wrath and grace, words of reproof and words of comfort, a voice of alarm and a voice of peace follow one another in the church.” Foerster.

12. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). Both in the Old Testament and New Testament Christ is often called light. Thus Isaiah calls Him “a light to the gentiles,” Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6. The same Prophet says: “Arise, shine (make thyself light), for thy light is come,” Isaiah 60:1. And again Isaiah 9:19 : “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light.” In the New Testament it is principally John that makes use of this expression: “The life was the light of men,” John 1:4, “and the light shined in the darkness,” John 9:5. John was not that light, but bore testimony to the light, John 9:8. “That was the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” John 9:9. And further: “And this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light,” John 3:19. “I am the light of the world,” ( John 8:12; John 9:5; comp. John 12:35).

13. On Isaiah 9:1 (2). The people that sit in darkness may be understood to comprise three grades. First, the inhabitants of Zebulon and Naphtali are called so ( Isaiah 8:23), for the Prophet’s gaze is fixed first on that region lying in the extreme end of Palestine, which was neighbor to the heathen and mixed with them, and on this account was held in low esteem by the dwellers in Judah. The night that spreads over Israel in general is darkest there. But all Israel partakes of this night, therefore all Israel, too, may be understood, as among the people sitting in darkness. Finally, no one can deny that this night extends over the borders of Israel to the whole human race. For far as men dwell extends the night which Christ, as light of the world, came to dispel, Luke 1:76 sqq.

14. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). Many lay stress on the notion “child,” inasmuch as they see in that the reason for the reign of peace spoken of afterwards. It is not said a man, a king, a giant is given to us. But this is erroneous. For the child does not remain a child. He becomes a man: and the six names that are ascribed to Him and also the things predicted of His kingdom apply to Him, not as a child, but as a man. That His birth as a child is made prominent, has its reason in this, that thereby His relation to human kind should be designated as an organic one. He does not enter into humanity as a man, i.e. as one whose origin was outside of it, but He was born from it, and especially from the race of David. He is Son of man and Son of David. He is a natural offshoot, but also the crowning bloom of both. Precisely because He was to be conceived, carried and born of a human mother, and indeed of a virgin, this prophecy belongs here as the completion and definition of the two prophetic pictures Isaiah 7:10 sqq.; Isaiah 8:1 sqq.—“He came down from heaven for the sake of us men, and for our bliss ( 1 Timothy 1:15; Luke 2:7). For our advantage: for He undertook not for the seed of angels, but for the seed of Abraham ( Hebrews 2:16). Not sold to us by God out of great love, but given ( Romans 5:15; John 3:16). Therefore every one ought to make an application of the word ‘to us’ to himself, and to learn to say: this child was given to me, conceived for me, born to me.”—Cramer.—“Cur oportuit, etc. Why did it become the Redeemer of human kind to be not merely man nor merely God, but God and man conjoined or θεάνθρωπον? Anselm replies briefly, indeed, but pithily: Deum qui posset, hominem, qui deberet.” Foerster.

15. On Isaiah 9:5 (6). “You must not suppose here that He is to be named and called according to His person, as one usually calls another by his name; but these are names that one must preach, praise and celebrate on account of His Acts, works and office.” Luther.

16. On Isaiah 9:6. “Verba pauca, etc. A few words, but to be esteemed great, not for their number but for their weight.” Augustine. “Admirabilis in, etc. Wonderful in birth, counsellor in what He preaches, God in working, strong in suffering, father of the world to come in resurrection, Prince of peace in bliss perpetual.” Bernard of Clairvaux. In reference to “a child is born,” and “a son is given,” Joh. Cocceius remarks in his Heb. Lex. s. v. יֶלֶד: “respectu, etc., in respect to His human nature He is said to be born, and in respect to His divine nature and eternal generation not indeed born, but given, as, John 3:16, it reads God gave His only begotten Son.”

“In the application of this language all depends on the words is born to us, is given to us.” The angels are, in this matter, far from being as blessed as we are. They do not say: To us a Saviour is born this day, but; to you. As long as we do not regard Christ as ours, so long we shall have little joy in Him. But when we know Him as our Wisdom of Solomon, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, as a gift that our heavenly Father designed for us, we will appropriate Him to ourselves in humble faith, and take possession of all His redeeming effects that He has acquired. For giving and taking go together. The Son is given to us; we must in faith receive Him.” J. J. Rambach, Betracht. über das Ev. Esaj, Halle, 1724.

On Isaiah 9:6 (7). “The government is on His shoulders.” “It is further shown how Christ differs in this respect from worldly kings. They remove from themselves the burden of government and lay it on the shoulders of the privy counsellors. But He does not lay His dominion as a burden on any other; He needs no prime minister and vicegerent to help Him bear the burden of administration, but He bears all by the word of His power as He to whom all things are given of the Father. Therefore He says to the house of Jacob ( Isaiah 46:3 sq.): Hearken unto me ye who were laid on my shoulders from your mothers’ womb. I will carry you to old age. I will do it, I will lift, and carry and deliver,—on the contrary the heathen must bear and lift up their idols, ( Isaiah 46:1; Isaiah 46:7).”—Rambach. “In the first place we must keep in mind His first name: He is called Wonderful. This name affects all the following.” “All is wonderful that belongs to this king: wonderfully does He counsel and comfort; wonderfully He helps to acquire and conquer, and all this in suffering and want of strength. (Luther, Jen. germ. Tom. III. Fol. 184 b.). ” “He uses weakness as a means of subduing all things to Himself. A wretched reed, a crown of thorns and an infamous cross, are the weapons of this almighty God, by means of which He achieves such great things. In the second place, He was a hero and conqueror in that just by death, He robbed him of his might who had the power of death, i.e., the devil ( Hebrews 2:14); in that Hebrews, like Samson, buried His enemies with Himself, yea, became poison to death itself, and a plague to hell ( Hosea 13:14) and more gloriously resumed His life so freely laid down, which none of the greatest heroes can emulate.”—Rambach.

17. On Isaiah 9:18 (19) sqq. True friendship can never exist among the wicked. For every one loves only himself. Therefore they are enemies one of another; and they are in any case friends to each other, only as long as it concerns making war on a third party.

Isaiah 10-18. On Isaiah 10:4. (Comp. the same expression in chap10). God’s quiver is well filled. If one arrow does not attain His object, He takes another, and so on, until the rights of God, and justice have conquered.

19. On Isaiah 10:5-7. “God works through men in a threefold way. First, we all live, move and have our being in Him, in that all activity is an outflow of His power. Then, He uses the services of the wicked so that they mutually destroy each other, or He chastises His people by their hand. Of this sort the Prophet speaks here. In the third place, by governing His people by the Spirit of sanctification: and this takes place only in the elect.”—Heim and Hoffmann.

20. On Isaiah 10:5 sqq. “Ad hunc, etc. Such places are to be turned to uses of comfort. Although the objects of temptation vary and enemies differ, yet the effects are the same, and the same spirit works in the pious. We are therefore to learn not to regard the power of the enemy nor our own weakness, but to look steadily and simply into the word, that will assuredly establish our minds that they despair not, but expect help of God. For God will not subdue our enemies, either spiritual or corporal, by might and power, but by weakness, as says the text: my strength is made perfect in weakness.” ( 2 Corinthians 12:9).—Luther.

21. On Isaiah 10:15. “Efficacia agendi penes Deum Esther, homines ministerium tantum praebent. Quare nunc sibilo suo se illos evocaturum minabatur (cap. Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18); nunc instar sagenae sibi fore ad irretiendos, nunc mallei instar ad feriendos Israelitas. Sed praecipue tum declaravit, quod non sit otiosus in illis, dum Sennacherib securim vocat, quae ad secandum manu sua et destinata fuit et impacta. Non male alicubi Augustinus ita definit, quod ipsi peccant, eorum esse; quod peccando hoc vel illud agant, ex virtute Dei esse, tenebras prout visum est dividentis (De praedest Sanctt.).”—Calvin Inst. II:4, 4.

22. On Isaiah 10:20-27. “In time of need one ought to look back to the earlier great deliverances of the children of God, as to the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or later, from the hand of the Midianites. Israel shall again grow out of the yoke.”—Diedrich.

Isaiah 11-23. On Isaiah 11:4. “The staff of His mouth.” “Evidence that the kingdom of Christ will not be like an earthly kingdom, but consist in the power of the word and of the sacraments; not in leathern, golden or silver girdles, but in girdles of righteousness and faith.”—Cramer.

24. On Isaiah 11:10 sqq. If the Prophet honors the heathen in saying that they will come to Christ before Israel, he may be the more readily believed, when Isaiah 11:11 sqq, he gives the assurance that the return out of the first, the Egyptian exile, shall be succeeded by a return out of the second, the Assyrian exile, (taking this word in the wider sense of Isaiah). It is manifest that the return that took place under Zerubbabel and Ezra was only an imperfect beginning of that promised return. For according to our passage this second return can only take place after the Messiah has appeared. Farthermore, all Israelites that belong to “the remnant of Israel,” in whatever land they may dwell, shall take part in it. It will be, therefore, a universal, not a partial return. If now the Prophet paints this return too with the colors of the present ( Isaiah 11:13 sqq.), still that is no reason for questioning the reality of the matter. Israel will certainly not disappear, but arise to view in the church of the new covenant. But if the nation is to be known among the nations as a whole, though no more as a hostile contrast, but in fraternal harmony, why then shall not the land, too, assume a like position among the lands? But the nation can neither assume its place among nations, nor the land its place among lands, if they are not both united: the people Israel in the land of their fathers.

25. On Isaiah 11 “We may here recall briefly the older, Song of Solomon -called spiritual interpretation. Isaiah 11:1-5 were understood of Christ’s prophetic office that He exercised in the days of His flesh, then of the overthrow of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, who was taken to be the Pope. But the most thorough-going of those old expositors must acknowledge, at Isaiah 11:4, that the Antichrist is not yet enough overthrown, and must be yet more overthrown. If such is the state of the case, then this interpretation is certainly false, for Isaiah 11:4 describes not a gradual judgment, but one accomplished at once. There have been many Antichrists, and among the Popes too, but the genuine Antichrist described 2 Thessalonians2, is yet to be expected, and also the fulfillment of Isaiah 11:4 of our chapter. Thereby is proved at the same time that the peaceful state of things in the brute world and the return of the Jews to their native land are still things of the future, for they must happen in that period when the Antichristian world, and its head shall be judged by Christ. But then, too, the dwelling together of tame and wild beasts is not the entrance of the heathen into the church, to which they were heretofore hostile, and the return of the Jews is not the conversion of a small part of Israel that took place at Pentecost and after. The miracles and signs too, contained in Isaiah 11:15-16 did not take place then. We see just here how one must do violence to the word if he will not take it as it stands. But if we take it as we have done, then the whole chapter belongs to the doctrine of hope (Hoffnungslehre) of the Scripture, and constitutes an important member of it. The Lord procures right and room for His church. He overthrows the world-kingdom, together with Antichrist. He makes of the remnant of Israel a congregation of believers filled with the Spirit, to whom He is near in an unusual way, and from it causes His knowledge to go out into all the world. He creates peace in the restless creatures, and shows us here in advance what more glorious things we may look for in the new earth. He presents to the world a church which, united in itself, unmolested by neighbors, stands under God’s mighty protection. All these facts are parts of a chain of hope that must be valuable and dear to our hearts. The light of this future illumines the obscurity of the present; the comfort of that day makes the heart fresh.” Weber, der Prophet Jesaja, 1875.

Chap12–26. On Isaiah 12:4 sq. “These will not be the works of the New Testament: sacrificing and slaying, and make pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to the Holy Sepulchre, but praising God and giving thanks, preaching and hearing, believing with the heart and confessing with the mouth. For to praise our God is good; such praise is pleasant and lovely” ( Psalm 147:1). Cramer.

27. On Chap12 “With these words conclude the prophetic discourses on Immanuel. Through what obscurity of history have we not had to go, until we came to the bright light of the kingdom of Christ! How Israel and the nations had to pass through the fire of judgment before the sun arises in Israel and the entire gentile world is illumined! It is the, same way that every Christian has to travel. In and through the fire we become blessed. Much must be burnt up in us, before we press to the full knowledge of God and of His Song of Solomon, before we become entirely one with Him, entirely glad and joyful in Him. Israel was brought up and is still brought up for glory, and we too. O that our end too were such a psalm of praise as this psalm!” Weber, Der Pr. Jes. 1875.

Verses 5-8

II.—THE SUPPLEMENTS

1. THOSE THAT DESPISE SHILOAH SHALL BE PUNISHED BY THE WATERS OF THE EUPHRATES

Isaiah 8:5-8

5 THE LORD spake also unto me again, saying,

6 For as much as this people refuseth

The waters of Shiloah that go softy,

And rejoice in Rezin and Remaliah’s son;

7 Now therefore, behold, the LORD bringeth up upon them

The waters of the river, strong and many, even the king of Assyria, and all his glory; And he shall come up over all his channels,

And go over all his banks;

8 And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over,

He shall reach even to the neck;

And d the stretching out of his wings shall fill

The breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

On Isaiah 9:6. ויסף דבר comp. at Isaiah 7:10.—לְאַט is compounded of אַט ( 1 Kings 21:27) lenitas and the prefix. The prefix is used like in לָרֹב,לָבֶטַח (EWALD, § 217 d); comp. Genesis 33:14; 2 Samuel 18:5; Job 15:11.—Corrections of the reading like מְסוֹס (MEIER = “fainting away before Rezin,” Isaiah 10:18) and וּמָשׁוֹשׁ (“and blind groping seized,” BOETTCHER Aehrenl. p30, comp. Job 5:14 are unnecessary. Isaiah often uses the verb שׂוּשׂ ( Isaiah 35:1; Isaiah 61:10; Isaiah 62:5; Isaiah 64:4; Isaiah 65:18 sq; Isaiah 66:10; Isaiah 66:14) and the substantive שָׂשׂוֹז ( Isaiah 12:3; Isaiah 22:13; Isaiah 35:10; Isaiah 51:3; Isaiah 51:11; Isaiah 61:3) and מָשׂוֹשׂ ( Isaiah 24:8; Isaiah 24:11; Isaiah 32:13 sq.; Isaiah 60:15; Isaiah 62:5; Isaiah 65:18; Isaiah 66:10). Here מָשׂוֹשׂ seems chosen for the sake of a paranomasia with מָאַם. The following אֵת cannot be the sign of the accusative, because the subject of joy is never so designated. It resembles the proposition like Isaiah 66:10 (שִׂישׂוּ אִתָּהּ מָשׂוֹשׂ). Joy with Rezin and Pekah is the rejoicing that is felt in communion, in connection with these rulers. Moreover the substantive משׂוֹשׂ is dependent on יַעַו, which accordingly governs two clauses, a verbal and a nominal clause. Thus, too, DRECHSLER. There is then no need for regarding מְשׂוֹשׂ as the status absol. according to EWALD, § 351, 6. According to a usage especially common with is, the status constr. stands before the preposition.

On Isaiah 9:7. עצום ורב combined like Exodus 1:9; Deuteronomy 7:1; Deuteronomy 9:14; Deuteronomy 26:5; Joel 2:2; Joel 2:5; Micah 4:3; Zechariah 8:22; עצום signifying rather the intensive, רב the extensive greatness.—כָּבוֹד here involves the secondary notion of “might,” as elsewhere that of riches ( Isaiah 10:3; Isaiah 61:6; Isaiah 66:12, the last citation seeming to stand in intentional contrast with our passage. Comp. the Latin opes). KNOBEL regards את־מלד to בבודו as a gloss, because “good poets do not add explanatory notes to their metaphors.” As if Isaiah were only a poet, and had not, too, a very practical interest! Comp. Isaiah 7:17; Isaiah 7:20.—אָפִיק (not again in Isaiah) is the bed of a torrens, synonymous with נַחַל ( Joshua 1:20; 4:18); גדות, plur. tantum, in Isa only here; besides Joel 3:15; 4:18; 1 Chronicles 12:15 K’ri (beside K’thib גִּדְיוֹת), is from גָּדָה, kindred to גָּדַד incidit, secuit, is “the indentation, the shore-line, the shore.”

On Isaiah 9:8. חָלַף (comp. on Isaiah 2:18) is originally “to change” thence transire (to change place, whence “to change” in hunters’ language said of wild game). Comp. Isaiah 21:1; Isaiah 24:5. שׁטף means the spreading out, עבר the pressing forward (both notions joined as in Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:18), עד־צואר יגיע the height of the water.—מֻטּוֹת from נָטָה “to spread out,” are the out-spreadings, expansiones; ἅπ. λεγ.—The sing. והיה is in consequence of the verb coming first.—מְלֹא is to be construed in an active sense (comp. Isaiah 6:3; Isaiah 31:4; Isaiah 34:1; Isaiah 42:10). רחב not again in Isaiah.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

1. This section has the external mark of a supplement in the transition formula “the LORD spake also again,” which occurs again only Isaiah 7:10, and which here as well as there intimates that an interval occurred between these words and what goes before. But the contents, too, show that we have no immediate and necessary amplification of the foregoing words and deeds before us. Nothing more is said of the son of the Prophet. Rather the language turns suddenly against the Ephraimites who contemned the quiet fountain of Shiloah, i. e. David’s kingdom, and rejoiced in communion with Rezin and the son of Remaliah ( Isaiah 9:6). Therefore the floods of the Euphrates, which the Prophet himself explains as meaning the king of Assyria, shall overflow Ephraim ( Isaiah 9:7), but of course Judah also, the land of Immanuel ( Isaiah 9:8). The mention of Rezin and Pekah, the calling Judah land of Immanuel, and the threatening of overflow by Assyria, prove that these words belong to the same period as the preceding chief prophecies. And as the expression “Immanuel” presupposes the transactions narrated Isaiah 7:10, the insertion of this section at this place is completely explained.

2. The Lord——Remaliah’s son.

Isaiah 9:5-6. Most authorities agree that the fountain of Shiloah or Siloam is on the south side of Jerusalem; vid.ROBINSON’SPalestine, Vol. I. p501–505. The name (written שִׁלֹּחַ,שִׁלֹחַ and שִׁילֹחַ) means emissio, or emissus (comp. הִמְשַׁלֵּח מַעְיָנִים, “He sendeth the springs,” Psalm 104:10; hence ἀπεσταλμένος “sent” John 9:7; comp. EWALD § 156 a). It occurs only here, John 9:7 and Luke 13:4, in which last place is told of the tower of Siloam (so LXX and New Testament, AQU. and SYMM, THEOD. spell the name Σιλωά: VULG.:Siloe). Yet the name שֶׁלַה which the בְּרֵבַת השֶּׁלַח “pool of Siloah,” Nehemiah 3:15, bears is very probably identical with our Shiloah. The descent between the fountain of Mary above and the fountain of Siloam is very little, therefore the flow is very gentle and soft.

The weak brooklet, welling up at the foot of Moriah and Zion, represents the unobservable nature of the kingdom of God in the period of its earthly humility. It recalls the form of a servant which the Lord assumed, and the “I am meek and lowly in heart” ( Matthew 11:29). This feature is prominent in all the stages of the history of salvation. Outwardly Israel was the least of all nations ( Deuteronomy 7:7); Bethlehem was the least of the cities of Judah ( Micah 5:1); David was the youngest among his brothers, and his father supposed he must be of no account at the election of a king ( 1 Samuel 16:11 sqq.). Song of Solomon, too, at the time of our present history, the kingdom of David was very small and weak amid the world-powers. If now and then it arose to greater power, that makes but one resemblance more to the intermittent fountain of Shiloah.

And rejoice,etc. The passage is easily explained if one only notices that the Prophet does not till Isaiah 9:8 represent the swelling stream as overflowing also the territory of Judah. Then “upon them” Isaiah 9:7 means those whom the Assyrian stream, that comes in from the north, overflows first. That is evidently the Ephraimites. Therefore by the people Isaiah 9:6, to whom “upon them” refers back, must, at least primarily, be understood the nation of the Ten Tribes. The nation Israel, then, i. e. Ephraim looks down contemptuously on the kingdom of Judah as on a weak flowing brooklet, and meanwhile with proud self-complacency rejoices in its own king and in the alliance with the Syrian king that added to his strength. This haughtiness shall not escape the avenging Nemesis. From the Euphrates shall mighty floods of water overflow first Ephraim and then Judah. [“To understand this it is necessary to remark that the Euphrates annually overflows its banks.”—BARNES]. That by this is meant the king of Assyria with all his glorious army, Isaiah himself proceeds to explain. It is a proof that the Prophet before this had the territory of Israel in mind, that here he makes so prominent the trespassing of the waters into Judah’s territory, the spreading beyond its borders. In Isaiah 9:8 b, the Prophet by a glorious figure compares the volumes of water to a bird spreading out its wings, to which he is evidently moved by the fact that the floods of water mean army hordes. Accordingly he designates the wings of the army as the wings of the extended flood. Because the space covered by the expanded wings coincides with the breadth of the land, so it may be said that the stretching out of the wings is at the same time the filling up of the land. It is very significant that the Prophet closes his address so emphatically with the word “Immanuel.” He signifies thus that the land is Immanuel’s, and that consequently the violence is done to Immanuel. It is plain that Immanuel is written as a proper name, from the suffix in ארצך. Yet most editions separate the words, and several versions too, as LXX. and ARAM, translate accordingly. The occasion for this is the, of course, correct notion that in the word there is an intimation of comfort that is to be the stay of Israel in that great tribulation. But evidently the Prophet has immediately in mind a person, whom he addresses. He turns to Him who is predicted in the birth of that child Isaiah 7:14. Although He is a person of the future, still the Prophet knows Him as one already present. How else could he turn to Him with this lamentation? Herein, then, lies a preparation for what the Prophet says of the promised one in the predicates of Isaiah 9:5 (6).

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.

Verses 9-15

2. THREATENING AGAINST THOSE THAT CONSPIRE AGAINST JUDAH, AND AGAINST THOSE THAT FEAR THESE CONSPIRACIES

Isaiah 8:9-15.

9 ASSOCIATE yourselves, O ye people, 1and ye shall be broken in pieces;

And give ear, all ye of far countries:

Gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces:

Gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces.

10 Take counsel together, and it shall come to nought;

Speak the word, and it shall not stand:

For God is with us.

11 For the LORD spake thus to me cwith a strong hand,

And instructed me that I should not walk in the way of this people, saying,

12 Say ye not, A confederacy,

To all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy;

Neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid.

13 Sanctify the LORD of Hosts himself;

And let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.

14 And he shall be for a sanctuary;

But for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence

To both the houses of Israel,

For a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

15 And many among them shall stumble,

And fall, and be broken,

And be snared, and be taken.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

On Isaiah 8:9. רֹעוּ. The forms and meanings of the roots רוע,רעע and ירע cross each other in a peculiar manner. רֹעוּ can only come from the root רָעַע; but to this root has been transferred the meaning, too, of רוּעַ. Although originally רוּעַ has the meaning malum esse, as appears from the imperf. Niph. יֵרוֹעַ ( Proverbs 11:15; Proverbs 13:20) which can only be derived from a root עו׳, yet this root never occurs in Kal, but all Kal forms that mean “to be evil” are to be derived from a root רָעַע (comp. רָע Numbers 11:10, then the adjective רעַ, and perhaps, too, the forms רָעָה Deuteronomy 15:9; 2 Samuel 19:8 and infin. רֹעַ Ecclesiastes 7:3). On the other hand רעע has undoubtedly the meaning “to break” ( Psalm 2:9; Jeremiah 11:16; Jeremiah 15:12, etc.). We must therefore choose here between the meanings “be evil” and “break.” With DRECHSLER and others, I prefer the latter, because “be wicked” and “break in pieces” involve no contradiction; for where fore may not what is wicked also break in pieces? [“GESENIUS in his latest lexicons gives this verb its usual sense of being evil, malignant, which is also expressed by LUTHER (seid bِse, ihr Vِlker). It is here equivalent to do your worst.” J. A. ALEXANDER.].—מֶרְחָק frequent in Isaiah ( Isaiah 10:3; Isaiah 13:5; Isaiah 17:13; Isaiah 30:27; Isaiah 46:11; plural מַרְחַקִּים Isaiah 33:17).—The double imperative התאזרו וחתו sustain an adverbial relation to one another: break up yet break in pieces yourselves; gird ye yourselves, and spite of it break in pieces. Comp. GESEN, § 130, 2. The former word seems to me not to mean bellum parare, for the war is far progressed; but in accord with the proper vis vocabult, the girding the loins, bracing oneself up as men are wont to do in the midst of an attack.

On Isaiah 8:10. עוּץ only here and Judges 19:30. On עֵצָה comp. on Isaiah 5:19.——Pual תפר only here in Isaiah ( Jeremiah 33:21; Zechariah 11:11).——Other forms of פרר; Isaiah 14:27; Isaiah 24:5; Isaiah 24:19; Isaiah 33:8; Isaiah 44:25.

On Isaiah 8:11. חֶזְקָה wherever else it occurs ( 2 Chronicles 12:1; 2 Chronicles 26:16; Daniel 11:2) means “the being strong,” and is used everywhere of the fortified power of a potentate. חזקת היד is therefore “the hand being strong.” It is the hand of God that comes over the prophets ( Ezekiel 1:3; Ezekiel 3:22; Ezekiel 8:1; Ezekiel 33:22; Ezekiel 37:1; Ezekiel 40:1) and in fact our expression signifies the condition that Ezekiel describes with the words וְַיד י׳ עַָלי חָזָֽקָה Isaiah 3:14.——וְיִסְּרֵנִי cannot be the perf, or it must read יִסְרַנִי. But the imperf stands as jussive with the Vav. consec. (Comp. EWALD, § 347 a). ויסרני, is, then, not co-ordinate with כה אמר as KNOBEL and even EWALD would have it; but it continues and declares the object of בחזקת היד, co-ordinate with the latter, subordinate to the former (DELITZSCH. As regards the form, the imperf. יִסֹּר underlies it, which Hosea 10:10 is used in the first person.—The preposition מן is to be treated as dependent on the notion of “holding back, restraining,” contained in יסרני (constructio praegnans).

On Isaiah 8:12. לְכֹל וגו does not designate the object that is given a name. For then the second member must read: יִאמר העם הזה לו קשׁר. But, as DRECHSLER justly remarks, לְ before כֹּל = darauf hin, bei, “at,” “with,” and כֹּל has the meaning cunque (compare אֶל־בָּל־אֲשֶׁר Proverbs 17:8, “whither- Song of Solomon -ever”). Not so often as those, not incessantly shall they say קשׁר, as if there were nothing in the world to fear but this. מורא only here in Isaiah.—העריץ Hiph. in Isaiah also Isaiah 8:13; Isaiah 29:23. Kal. Isaiah 2:19; Isaiah 2:21; Isaiah 47:12. From Isaiah 29:23 it is seen that Isaiah uses the word in the sense of “timere aliquid;” in our passage it means “to fear” and Isaiah 9:13 “to affright.” Thus it appears that Isaiah uses the Hiph. sometimes as indirect, sometimes as direct causative, and then uses the latter in a transitive sense.

On Isaiah 8:13. In מראבם Isaiah has evidently in mind Genesis 9:2; Deuteronomy 11:25.

On Isaiah 8:14. מקדשׁ (again in Isaiah 16:12; Isaiah 60:13; Isaiah 63:18) means sanctuary generally, here evidently with the additional notion of asylum (comp. 1 Kings 1:50 sq.; 1 Kings 2:28 sqq.). וּ before לְאֶבֶן is adversative.—נֶגֶף only here in Isaiah and moreover אבן נגף ἅπ. λεγ.—מבשׁל “that over which one stumbles,” (again Isaiah 57:14; צור מכשׁל only here).—פח (παγίς, “cord,” vid. Isaiah 24:17 sq.). מוקשׁ “loop-snare” of the bird-catcher, only here in Isaiah.

On Isaiah 8:15. The operation of מבשׁול and פח are in Isaiah 8:15 represented by five verbs, of which the first three relate to נגף and מבשׁל, and the last to פח and מוקשׁ.—Many, e. g., GESENIUS, HITZIG, UMBREIT, refer בָּם to the two notions of stone and snare. But as KNOBEL justly remarks, it is a “chief thought of Isaiah that the judgments overtake the sinners; the pious are left as a remnant: Isaiah 1:25; Isaiah 1:28; Isaiah 6:13; Isaiah 28:18 sq.; Isaiah 29:20 sq.; Isaiah 33:14.”—כָּשַׁל comp. Isaiah 3:8. Niph. נשׁבר Isaiah 14:29; Isaiah 24:10; Isaiah 27:11; Isaiah 28:13; Isaiah 41:1.—יקשׁ Isaiah 29:21; Isaiah 28:13, in which last cited passage the verbs here employed are repeated excepting נפלו.—לבד again in Isaiah only Isaiah 20:1; Isaiah 24:18.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

1. Having reproved the perverse policy of the earthly-minded Israel, the Prophet proclaims to the nations conspiring against Judah that they, the breakers-in-pieces, shall themselves be broken in pieces ( Isaiah 9:9-10). Then he says—turning to the spiritually-minded Israel—the LORD has emphatically warned them against the ways of the fleshly-minded ( Isaiah 9:11) and forbidden them to regard the conspiracy of the enemies as most to be dreaded ( Isaiah 9:12). Jehovah ought to be feared ( Isaiah 9:13). He is to the one a sanctuary (asylum), to the others, a stone of stumbling and a snare ( Isaiah 9:14-15).

2. Associate—God is with us.

Isaiah 9:9-10. These words are addressed to the עַמִּים “peoples;” Isaiah 9:5-8 were addressed to “this people,” Isaiah 9:6. Evidently then “peoples,” Isaiah 9:9, is contrasted with “this people,” Isaiah 9:6. The Prophet plainly addresses nations, that arm themselves against the land of Immanuel, devise plans, issue commands. Nothing shall come of all this. Comparing Isaiah 7:7, it is seen that Syria and Ephraim must be meant here. A remarkable contrast is put, when he that has broken others to pieces himself breaks to pieces. Syria and Ephraim had already done Judah considerable harm (comp. on Isaiah 7:1-2); Isaiah 9:9, they are challenged to prepare still more, but spite of the breaking already accomplished, and these first attempts, they shall themselves be broken to pieces. The Prophet moreover summons distant nations to take notice of this for their own warning. The clause: “give ear—countries” is a parenthesis. As the Prophet repeats the words of Isaiah 7:7 “and it shall not stand,” with little alteration, he intimates that he has the same matter in his mind. And in fact Isaiah 7:5 sq, speaks of “evil counsel” on the part of Syria and Ephraim against Judah, the land of Immanuel, as here of “taking counsel together,” and “speaking a word.” By this arises the conspiracy (קֶשֶׁר) spoken of Isaiah 9:12, which can mean nothing but the alliance of the two states named. בי עמגו אל. For the third and last time we have the words Immanuel. They must certainly be read separate here as a clause. They express the idea of the name as an independent judgment. The world-power must shiver on the rock Israel, for it is thereby the strong rock in that God is with it. But this strong rock is not the ’Ισραὴλ σαρκικός, but the ’Ισραὴλ πνευματικός [not the fleshly Israel, but the spiritual Israel]. Comp. Psalm 2.

3. For the Lord——your dread.

Isaiah 9:11-13. Judah is safe from the breaker-in-pieces, for God is with it ( Isaiah 9:10). That is, in a certain sense, not unconditionally. For the LORD will be an asylum only to those who fear and sanctify Him; but to others, who fear men more than Him, He will be their fall. “For the LORD spake thus,” etc.: “for,” relates to the thought contained in the words Immanuel, “God is with us.” This thought is both established and limited by what follows. For God is with that part of the people only that fears Him above all things, loves and trusts Him alone. Therefore the Prophet says that this word of the LORD was directed to him. But he is representative of the believing Israel. Therefore Isaiah 9:12 continues with “say ye not,” and those addressed are expressly distinguished from “this people,” Isaiah 9:11.

“Ye shall not say conspiracy.”

Isaiah 9:12. It is impossible that the Prophet can mean to say: “Ye shall not call everything conspiracy that people call conspiracy!” For what sort of confederations did they incorrectly call conspiracies? May, perhaps, Pekah’s alliance with Rezin be justified here? Or is some conspiracy of the Prophet and his followers against Ahaz (ROORDA) approved of? Or, are the believing Israelites warned against taking part in conspiracies (HOFMANN, DRECHSLER), which does not the least lie in the words? According to Isaiah 7:2, the heart of Ahaz, and his people quaked like trees before the wind, when intelligence came to Jerusalem of the union of Syria with Ephraim. At that time, assuredly, the political wiseacres might be seen in every corner putting their heads together, and anxiously whispering: קֶשֶׁר קֶשֶׁר, “conspiracy, conspiracy.” They called the alliance of Pekah with Rezin a קֶשֶׁר and saw therein, of course with some justice, the chief danger of Judah. Thus, the Prophet adds, “and what they fear shall not ye fear.” It must therefore have been a conspiracy that was the subject of fear to the mass of the nation of Judah. The meaning then is that men ought not to say “conspiracy” so often, not so incessantly to have this word in their months, and make the conspiracy the matter of greatest concern.

4. Sanctify——be taken.

Isaiah 9:13-15. Here begins the antithesis, that says what ought to be. They ought to sanctify Jehovah, (comp. Isaiah 29:23, the only other instance of this Hiph.); He ought to be the object of fear, the terror-maker. In such a case He will be for man a safe, sheltering, holy asylum (comp. Psalm 15:1; Psalm 18:3; Psalm 23:6; Psalm 84:5). But He will be a stone of stumbling to those that fear Him not. Therefore the two houses of Israel, Judah and Ephraim, shall be destroyed just by the LORD. It would have been better for this fleshly Israel, had it never known the LORD. Jerusalem is mentioned expressly, because, as capital city, its example had great influence. To it the LORD will be a snare.

[J. A. ALEXANDER on Isaiah 9:12-14. קֶשֶׁר, according to etymology and usage, is a treasonable combination or conspiracy. It is elsewhere commonly applied to such a combination on the part of subjects against their rulers ( 2 Kings 11:14; 2 Kings 12:21; 2 Kings 14:19; 2 Kings 15:30). It is not strictly applicable, therefore, to the confederacy of Syria and Israel against Judah (GESENIUS, ROSENMULLER, HENDERSON,etc.), nor to that of Ahaz with the king of Assyria (BARNES,etc.). It would be more appropriate to the factious combinations among the Jews themselves (ABEN Ezra, KIMCHI), if there were any trace of these in history. The correct view seems to be: that the opposition of the Prophet and his followers to seeking foreign aid, viz.: Assyrian, as a violation of duty to Jehovah, like the conduct of Jeremiah during the Babylonian siege, was regarded by the king and his adherents as a treasonable combination to betray them to their enemies. But God commands not to regard the cry of treason or conspiracy, nor to share the real or pretended terrors of the unbelievers.”

On Isaiah 9:14. מִקדָּשׁ. “Although the temples of the gods were regarded as asylums by the Greeks and Romans, no such usage seems to have prevailed among the Christians till the time of Constantine (BINGHAM’S,Orig. Ecclesiastes 8:11; Ecclesiastes 8:1). As to the Jews, the only case which has been cited to establish such a practice seems to prove the contrary. So far was the altar from protecting Joab, that he was not even dragged away, but killed on the spot. [The same obtains with 1 Kings 1:50 sq, cited by NAEGELSBACH.—TR.]. The word was meant to bear the same relation to תקדישו (in Isaiah 9:13) that מורא bears to תיראו and מעריץ to מעריצו. God was the only proper object to be dreaded, feared and sanctified, i. e., regarded as a holy being in the widest and the most emphatic sense. Thus explained מהדשׁ corresponds almost exactly to the Greek τὸ ἅγιον, the term applied to Christ by the angel who announced His birth ( Luke 1:35). In 1 Peter 2:7, where this very passage is applied to Christ, ἡ τιμή seems to be employed as an equivalent to מקדשׁ as here used. To others he is a stone of stumbling, but to you who believe He is ἡ τιμή, something precious, something honored, something looked upon as holy. The same application of the words is made by Paul, Romans 9:33. These quotations seem to show that the Prophet’s words have an extensive import, and are not to be restricted either to his own times or to the times of Christ. The doctrine of the text is, that even the most glorious exhibitions of God’s holiness, i. e., of His infinite perfection, may occasion the destruction of the unbeliever.”]

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.

Verses 16-22

3. THE TESTAMENT OF THE PROPHET TO HIS DISCIPLES

CHAPTER Isaiah 8:16 to Isaiah 9:6

a) Prayer and Exhortation merging into prophetic vision

CHAPTER Isaiah 8:16-22. ( Isaiah 9:1)

16 BIND up the testimony,

Seal the law among my disciples.

17 And I will wait upon the LORD,

That hideth his face from the house of Jacob,

And I will look for him.

18 Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me

Are for signs and for wonders in Israel

From the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth in Mount Zion.

19 And when they shall say unto you,

Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards

That peep, and that mutter:

Should not a people seek unto their God?

For the living to the dead?

20 To the law and to the testimony:

If they speak not according to this word,

It is because there is no light in them,

21 And they shall pass through it, hardly bestead and hungry:

And it shall come to pass, that when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves,

And curse their king and their God,

And look upward.

22 And they shall look unto the earth;

And behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish;

And they shall be driven to darkness.

Isaiah 9:1 (23). Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation,

When at the first he lightly afflicted

The land of Zebulon and the land of Naphtali,

And afterward did more grievously afflict

Her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in kGalilee of the nations.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

On Isaiah 8:16. תעודה beside here and Isaiah 8:20 occurs only Ruth 4:7. The meaning is “testifying;” in the passive sense, “that which is testified,” which then may be taken in various senses. The divine will which the prophets testify to men ( Exodus 19:21; Exodus 19:23; Deuteronomy 8:19; 1 Samuel 8:9; Jeremiah 11:7; Jeremiah 42:19; Amos 3:13, etc.) has for contents both what men ought to do and what God has resolved to do. צוֹר imper. from צָרַר constringere, colligare ( Isaiah 11:13); חָתַם (in Isaiah again only Isaiah 29:11) is “to seal.”—למֻּד occurs only Isaiah 1:4; Isaiah 54:13 and Jeremiah 2:24; Jeremiah 13:23. It means doctus, eruditus; and is used both of spiritual and of physical relations.

On Isaiah 8:17-18. According to our construction it might be expected that there would be וַאֲנִי before חִכִּיתִי. But this ואני follows in Isaiah 8:18; for הנה אנכי does not mean “behold, I am here,” but, “behold I.” I do not deny that in itself it may mean the former. But I believe that were this the Prophet’s meaning he would have expressed it in a less mistakable form by writing הִנְנִי before אנכי or ( Genesis 49:16) הִנֶנִוּ. I think הנה אנכי, then, is epexegetical of the subject of חכיתי. Then is explained why this subject is not more distinctly marked by וַאֲנִי. The Prophet obtains a more emphatic prominence for it in the הנה אנכי.—אוֹה and מוֹפֶח are combined as in Deuteronomy ( Deuteronomy 4:34; Deuteronomy 6:22; Deuteronomy 7:19; Deuteronomy 13:3; Deuteronomy 26:8; Deuteronomy 28:46; Deuteronomy 29:2; Deuteronomy 34:11. Comp. Isaiah 20:3.—מֵעִם ונו depends on אתות ומופתים. This addition is, in relation to אשׁר נתן־לי י׳, not superfluous.

On Isaiah 8:19. אוב means an inflated leather bottle (occurs only Job 32:19, and as a proper name Numbers 21:10; Numbers 33:43), then the distended body of the ventriloquist, and then, not only the ventriloquist himself, ( 1 Samuel 28:3; 1 Samuel 28:9; 2 Kings 23:24; Isaiah 19:3; and the passage previously cited) but the pretended spirit of the dead that spoke by him ( 1 Samuel 28:7-8; Isaiah 29:4; 1 Chronicles 10:13). In many of these passages it is indeed doubtful which of these two meanings the word may have; or if it does not have both. Elsewhere the word seems to mean the secret art, necromancy, divination itself ( 2 Kings 21:6; 2 Chronicles 33:6). The plural is always אֹבוֹת. Because this plural occurs also Job 32:19, it cannot for that reason be concluded that only women were possessed of this necromancy (בעלת אוב, 1 Samuel 28:7, the witch of Endor). Still it is surprising that בעל אוב (mase.) is found only in the Talmud (vid. GESEN. Thes. p35). יִדְּעֹנִי never occurs alone, but always joined with אוֹב. It means “the knowing one, wise one, or wizard.” DELITZSCH, very much to the point, compares δαίμων according to Plato = δαίμων, “the much knowing being.”—צִפְצֵף Pilpel, found only in Isaiah. The word primarily is used of the chirping of birds ( Isaiah 10:14; Isaiah 38:14), then of the voice proceeding out of the ground ( Isaiah 29:4).—הָגָה is likewise a word that imitates a sound (comp. ach. نchsen). As צפצף represents a high, shrill sound, so חגה does a low one; for it is used for the growling of a lion ( Isaiah 31:4), of the rolling of the thunder ( Job 37:2), of the low murmuring of the dove ( Isaiah 38:14; Isaiah 59:11). It occurs again in Isaiah 16:7; Isaiah 33:18; Isaiah 59:3; Isaiah 59:13. In classic antiquity, too, we find a gentle, chirping, whispering voice ascribed to the dead. Comp. Iliad XXIII:101, where it is said of the soul of Patroclos “ᾤχετοτετριγυῖα;” Odyss. Isaiah 24:5-9, where τρίζειν stridere is equally ascribed to the souls of the dead suitors and to the whirring of the bats in the dark caves. Other examples see in GESENIUS, in loc. In our passage the necromancers are said to hiss and mutter, because they imitated the voice of the dead in this fashion.—דָּרַשׁ with אֶל (elsewhere it is construed with לְ Ezekiel 14:7, or with בְּ 1 Samuel 28:7, 2 Kings 1:2) by reason of Deuteronomy 12:30; Deuteronomy 18:11, occurs in Isaiah three times; here, Isaiah 11:10; Isaiah 19:3; comp. Job 5:8. The preposition is perhaps to be treated as depending on the notion of “penetrating” that is contained in that of investigation.

On Isaiah 8:20. לתורה ו׳ is an exclamation, a sort of shout of command. But if one must have a grammatical construction, the לְ may be taken as dependent on דִּרְשׁוּ or תִּפְנוּ (comp. Leviticus 19:31; Leviticus 20:6), whereby the remark of GESENIUS (Thes. p728) obtains, that “אֶל praemittitur homini, לְ rei locoque.” DELITSZCH compares Judges 7:18. לַיְחוָה וּלְגִדְעוֹן, but it is doubtful whether חֶרֶכ is not to be supplied there according to Isaiah 8:20.

Expositors differ extraordinarily about אס־לֹא. The explanation is grammatically quite incorrect that makes אֲשֶׁר begin the apodosis, and construes it as a particle of asseveration or of the apodosis ( = כִּי) VITRINGA, ROSENMUELLER, GESENIUS, etc.). Others (DE WETTE, MAURER, EW, HITZIG, DRECHSLER) take אס־לא as a form of adjuration: “they will say truly.” But this involves an evident contradiction. For how can he who turns to the law and testimony curse his king and God in time of need? Others (KNOBEL, DELITZSCH) take it as an interrogative particle, referring it back to הֲלֹא Isaiah 8:19 : “Or will not they accord in this word that are without dawn?” But from the context it appears that this is just what they will not do. I construe אס־לא simply = nisi, and begin the apodosis with ועבר Isaiah 9:21 ( Song of Solomon, too, DIESTEL).—שַׁחַר (comp. Isaiah 19:12) occurs Isaiah 47:11; Isaiah 58:8, as figure of the dawning revelation of salvation.

On Isaiah 8:21. בָּהּ is referred by VITRINGA, MAURER, DELITZSCH, etc., to ארץ understood as a matter of course, Isaiah 8:22. But this ארץ is not so a matter of course, because it first appears after; and עָבַר cannot be said only in relation to the notion “land.” ROORDA, DRECHSLER refer it more correctly to the condition intimated by נִקְשֶׁה—.אין לא שׁחר is the ἅπ. λεγ. If קָשָׁה means durum esse, “to be hard, heavy,” then נִקְשֶׁה is “treated hard, grieved, oppressed.”—רָעֵב ( Isaiah 9:19; Isaiah 29:8; Isaiah 32:6; Isaiah 44:12; Isaiah 58:7; Isaiah 58:10) adds to the notion of outward pressure that of incapacity to bear, that is occasioned by hunger. The full ( Deuteronomy 32:15; Psalm 78:29; Proverbs 30:9) has easily too much, the hungry too little strength.—Hithp. התקצף only here Kal. Isaiah 47:6; Isaiah 54:9; Isaiah 57:16-17; Isaiah 64:4; Isaiah 64:8.—קלל I construe with בְּ in the sense of “curse against one.” Elsewhere it is construed with the accusative, and the following בְּ signifies the higher power by which one swears, i.e., by whose mediation one imprecates evil on the object of his wrath ( 1 Samuel 17:43; 2 Kings 2:24). But with that construction there would be wanting here an object of the cursing (DIESTEL). And it is much more natural that one enraged should curse the cause of his sufferings than the sufferings themselves. קלל may be construed with בְּ after the analogy of verbs that mean striving ( Isaiah 19:2; Isaiah 30:32, etc.) and being angry ( Deuteronomy 3:26; Psalm 78:62; Genesis 30:2; Genesis 44:18, etc.).—On Isaiah 8:22. הִבִּיט Hiph. Isaiah 18:4; Isaiah 22:11; Isaiah 42:18; Isaiah 51:1-2; Isaiah 51:6, etc. צרה וחשׁכה, “distress and darkness,” vid. comment. on Isaiah 8:30.—מָעוּף caligo “obscurity,” ἄπ. λεγ.—צוקה found again Isaiah 30:6; Proverbs 1:27.—אֲפֵלָה (again Isaiah 58:10; Isaiah 59:9) is used for thick darkness, e. g., Exodus 10:22.—מְנֻדַּח some take in the sense of “scared away,” so that the transition would begin here. “As to this time the nation will have been rejected, so from now on shall misfortune, as it were, be exiled” (DRECHSLER). But the words אפ׳ מ׳ are so completely co-ordinate with both the foregoing members of the sentence, and on the other hand the transition is so utterly without anything to indicate it, that this meaning cannot be satisfactory. Others (KNOBEL, DELITZSCH) explain after the analogy of Jeremiah 23:12, as if it read וּבָֽאֲפֵלָה הוּא מְנֻדַּח, or וְהִנּוֹ בָּֽאֲפ׳ מ׳. But this also seems too artificial. The omission of the subject, when it is especially looked for on account of its generic difference from the subjects of both the foregoing members, must raise a doubt. But נָדַח has by no means only the signification “to scatter, disperse.” In Deuteronomy 20:19 it means impellers (securim), 2 Samuel 15:14, propellere, immittere (miseriam) Proverbs 7:21 depellere, “drive away; seduce.” Why then may not אפּלה מנדח mean tenebrae immissae, whereby, because the notion dispellere undoubtedly lies in the word, it may be taken in the sense of ab omni parte immissae, longe lateque diffusae? So substantially SAADIA, KOCHER. As regards the incongruity of gender, it need give no surprise. The predicate is to be construed as neuter: tenebrae immissum, expansum aliquid. It is apparent that in the three members of Isaiah 8:22 b reigns the law of unity in manifoldness. For evidently these three members are so far alike that in all of them the words are in pairs, and the notion of darkness recurs as the chief one. But in the first member occurs hendiadys (distress and darkness = obscuring distress, or distressing obscurity), in the second both are merged into one notion, dimness of anguish; in the third the predicate is added in an adjective, i. e., participial form.

On Isaiah 8:23 ( Isaiah 9:1). I construe the words אם לא Isaiah 8:20 on to מנדח Isaiah 8:22 as a parenthesis, and refer כי לא מועף וגו׳ to לתורה ולתעודה Isaiah 9:20. Where law and testimony live in men’s souls, there, spite of distress (מוּצָק only here in Isaiah; comp. Job 36:16; Job 37:10), is no darkness. לֹא מוּעָף ἄπ. λεγ. notice in Mu-aph a reverse vowel pointing from Ma-uph, Isaiah 8:22, a play of words that reflects the contrast of thought.—לָהּ anticipates the idea of “land” contained in next clause.— כְּ—.כָּעֵת וגו is not a conjunction “as,” but a preposition, and signifies the coincidence ( Isaiah 9:2; Genesis 18:1; Genesis 18:10; Genesis 18:14; Genesis 39:18; Judges 2:4, etc.) = “about the first time.” This “first time” evidently extends to the dawn of the new time that begins with the Messiah; and עת האחרון “last time” coincides therefore with אחרית הימים ( Isaiah 2:2).—קַל means levem, tenuem, exilem esse ( Genesis 8:11; Job 7:6; Nahum 1:14; Jeremiah 4:13, etc.,) therefore the Hiph. (again in Isaiah only, Isaiah 23:9) levem, exilem reddere.—אַרְצָה a poetic form of אֶרֶץ (comp. Job 34:13; Job 37:12).—והאחרון is best construed as accusative of time. It might, indeed, be taken as nominative, but elegance is against it. The same regions, that in the first clause of the verse are described as the object of the הֵקַל “degrading,” are now, in the second clause, by other divisions and names, said to be the object of הכביד, “glorifying.” [“The English version supposes a contrast that requires הֵקַל to be taken in the sense of lightly afflicting, as distinguished from הִכְבִּיד to afflict more grievously. But this distinction is unauthorized by usage.”—J. A. ALEXANDER].

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

1. I cannot help thinking that in this section we have a farewell address of the Prophet; as it were, his spiritual will. That it speaks of “disciples,” whereas there is no mention of them elsewhere, is a hint that here lies before us a written archive specially meant for them. What, then, could the Prophet have given his disciples in this written form, but something that must be valuable to them for the time, when he could no longer communicate with them by word of mouth as he could at that moment? Then, too, the prayer to the LORD, to seal in the disciples’ law and testimony, the emphatic reference to the pledges of faith given in the persons of himself and his sons, the warning against future seductions, and the reference to that which could give light and comfort in the troublous days to be expected,—all this brings me to the conviction that here we have actually the spiritual testament of Isaiah to his disciples.

2. Bind up—my disciples.

Isaiah 8:16. The opening words of this will connect appropriately with the LORD’S words of exhortation Isaiah 8:13. I have no doubt that the words Isaiah 8:16, are addressed to Jehovah. For only the LORD can do this binding up and sealing. The prophets might seal a book roll, or declare that the meaning of a prophecy is to be shut up till a certain time (vid. Daniel 8:26; Daniel 12:4; Daniel 12:9; Isaiah 10:4; Isaiah 22:10; Isaiah 29:11; Jeremiah 51:60 sqq. and my comment); but they cannot seal the divine revelation in the hearts of men. Moreover, in all the following verses the Prophet is the speaker, and the change from the words of God to the words of the Prophet must certainly have been more distinctly marked than by the simple וְ before חכיתי. The mention of binding up and sealing in a spiritual sense was perhaps occasioned by the actions appropriate to the real documents (vid. Jeremiah 32:9 sqq.). Having so disposed of the writing that contained his own will, the Prophet prayed the LORD to do still better, and enclose and seal up his testament in the hearts of his disciples. For the propriety of the metaphor, vid. Proverbs 3:3; Proverbs 7:3; Jeremiah 31:33. They are the same as “are written to life,” Isaiah 4:3. As primarily “the law” means the Mosaic law, which was the basis and norm of all prophetic announcements ( Deuteronomy 13:1 sqq.; Deuteronomy 18:18 sqq.), and which the Prophets ever and again had to reimpress ( Jeremiah 29:19), so Isaiah must mean by “the testimony” all additional prophetic testimony, especially all threatenings and promises that referred to the future. In the prayer he makes for his disciples, he does not intend the preservation of the divine testimony unto the proper time for its Revelation, but he would thereby give to themselves the only true support and comfort for the evil days to come. As, according to Isaiah 8:17, his faith in the word of God was his own sole comfort, so ( Isaiah 8:20) he directs his disciples to the law and testimony, warning them against every false comfort ( Isaiah 8:19). Though Isaiah had primarily disciples and scholars in mind, we need not suppose he was at the head of a school of prophets. What he would teach them was religious truth, not to prophesy. And thus about this group of scholars, as about a nucleus, would gather all in Jerusalem and Judah that had any heart for the spiritual jewels of Israel.

3. I will wait—in mount Zion.

Isaiah 8:17-18. This affords a touching insight into the personal life of the Prophet. He enforces the prayer just made by confessing that he holds fast to the LORD, and waits (vid. Isaiah 5:4; Isaiah 25:9; Isaiah 26:8; Isaiah 33:2; Isaiah 51:5; Isaiah 59:9; Isaiah 59:11; Isaiah 60:9; Isaiah 64:2), notwithstanding the LORD seems to have forsaken the house of Jacob (he evidently means “this people,” the fleshly Israel) and hidden His face (comp. Isaiah 50:6; Isaiah 53:3; Isaiah 54:8; Isaiah 59:2; Isaiah 64:6). But he does not hope alone. His children hope with him. This is significant. We know, indeed, nothing about the age of the children. That our passage follows close on Isaiah 8:1-4, is no proof that it originated in that period. Isaiah would hardly at that time have designated his children (plural) as companions of his faith. For Maher-shalal was hardly yet born, and this circumstance speaks rather for later composition. Isaiah knows that his children are not only children of his body, but of his spirit too. They are miraculous children, products, not only of nature, but of the divine effective power. ( Romans 9:7 sqq.: Galatians 4:28 sq.). Therefore, not only are his and their names prophetic, but their birth, too, is such; at least that of Maher-shalal. Thus they are by their existence as by their names אתות, signa, τύποι τοῦ μέλλοντος ( Romans 5:14) “finger boards,” and מופתים, miraculous pledges of miracles. “Which Jehovah has given me;” by these words Isaiah points to the support of his hope. For why should not we hope in God who has done such wonders? Our passage, moreover, recalls the words of Joshua 24:15 : “I and my house will serve the LORD”

4. And when they shall say—to the dead.

Isaiah 8:19. The Prophet now adds a warning against seduction to idolatrous necromancy. And does not this warning give the impression of proceeding from a man who is on the point of leaving his own, and who, before his departure, seeks to protect them against impending danger? “And when they shall say,” presents the superstition as at hand and to be dreaded. From Isaiah 2:6; Isaiah 3:2 sq, we see that various sorts of superstitious divination were practised among the Jews at that time. Such were expressly forbidden in the law. Comp. Leviticus 19:31; Leviticus 20:6; Leviticus 20:27; Deuteronomy 18:10-11. In all these passages אבות “familiar spirits” and ידענים “wizards” are named together, and Deuteronomy 18:11 the words דּרֵשׁ אֶל־הַמֵּתִים “necromancer” are expressly added: so that Isaiah seems to have had this passage in mind.

The second clause of the verse, “should not,” etc., is usually regarded as the reply of the believing disciples to those who tempted them [J. A. ALEXANDER]. But this seems to me unnecessary. It is primarily the answer that Isaiah himself gives, and it is to be understood that the disciples are to reply to the same effect. According to the Prophet, those seductive temptations are to be met by two arguments. First, he urges that every nation must inquire of its god as the chief disposer of its destiny. Therefore Israel onght to turn to Jehovah. It appears from this that the Prophet assumes the position that Jehovah is the national god of Israel, without challenging the existence of other gods, and that he assumes that those tempters recognize Jehovah as the proper national god. (God of the fathers). The second argument Isaiah takes from the representation of the ancients of the relation of the dead to the living. Only he that lives in the body lives really. By death he sinks deep down. Comp. FRIEDR, NAGELSBACH,Homer. Theol. VII. § 14 sqq. Nachhomer. Theol. VII. § 14 sqq. But how nearly Hebrew representations approach those of classic antiquity, may be seen from passages like Isaiah 14:9 sqq.; Ezekiel 26:20 sq,; Ezekiel 31:14 sqq.; Ezekiel 32:17 sqq.; Ezekiel 38:18 eq.; Psalm 6:6; Psalm 88:4 sqq.; Job 14:10 sqq. It is therefore folly, nonsense, to seek any help for the living among those gone down deep. Thus the words בעד וגו are to be construed interrogatively: “For the living (shall one inquire of) the dead?”

4. To the law—Galilee of the nations.

Isaiah 8:20-21 ( Isaiah 9:1). Now Isaiah refers his disciples to the divine source of light and comfort, which alone can keep them upright in the impending evil days. Whoever does not find these his support, will undoubtedly be destroyed. Who shall say: “To the law and the testimony?” All that have no dawn. They are such as nowhere see in any outward relations a ray of light, that announces the day of salvation. When such see no inward comfort and support by means of God’s word, they wander oppressed and hungry, etc. As hunger smarts, it readily happens that such fall into a bitter rage and curse their king and God, thus both the heavenly and earthly government, as being to blame for their sufferings. Most expositors understand by מלכו “his king” that a divinity is meant; and only differ as to whether, according to Psalm 5:3; Psalm 68:25, Jehovah is meant, [so J. A. ALEXANDER and BARNES] or, according to Amos 5:26; Zephaniah 1:5, the idols; agreeing that “king” and “God” mean the same person. But against this speaks: 1. בְּ occurring twice; 2. the following “he looks upward and to the earth he looks.” Similar blasphemy is described as a symptom of the anti-Christian time Revelation 16:9; Revelation 16:11; Revelation 16:21.

Wherever the wretched look, above or to earth, everywhere presents itself only the mournful sight of dark distress.

About the first time,etc.

Isaiah 8:23 ( Isaiah 9:1). The Prophet now intimates what sort of light shall arise to the believing from the law and testimony. He shall know from the prophecy, which the Prophet with these very words gives to his own (to which however, others still are added later), that the North of Palestine, which heretofore was little regarded compared with the South, shall attain to great honor, and become a place of great blessing to the whole land. He evidently refers to the Messianic time, and intimates that the glory of it will illuminate in an eminent way that northern region of Palestine. More particularly as to the how? and when? the Prophet does not know. If it is asked why he predicts this just here, we may see the ground for it in the fact that at that time, it was just from that northern quarter of the Ten Tribes, that great danger threatened Judah. The war with Syria and Ephraim was the occasion of this whole series of prophecies. The gaze of the Prophet is emphatically fastened on the North. What wonder if on this occasion he not only predicts the impending judgment of this northern land, but also the glory in store for it!

Zebulon was bounded on the North by Naphtali, eastward by the sea of Galilee, westward by Asher and Phœnicia (comp. Joshua 19:10 sqq.). Naphtali possessed the north-east of Canaan west of Jordan, for it touched the base of Antilebanon, was bounded on the east by the sea of Galilee, on the south by Zebulon, and on the west by Asher. ( Joshua 19:32 sqq.). As “the way of the sea,” according to the context, must be a land inhabited by Israelites, it cannot be the coast of the Mediterranean, as some have supposed; for Phœnicians dwelt there. It can only be the coast of the יַם כִּנֶּרֶת “the sea of Chinnereth” ( Numbers 34:11; Joshua 12:3; Joshua 13:27)—עבר הירדּז “bank of Jordan,” is East Jordan land. The expression, with and without “the sun-rising,” is extremely common ( Genesis 1:10 sq.; Numbers 35:14; Deuteronomy 1:1; Deuteronomy 1:5; Joshua 1:14 sq.; Isaiah 2:10, etc.). The region named here גליל הגוים “Galilee of the nations,” (ἄπ. λεγ.), was originally called הַגָּלִיל, “the Galilee,” (the bent, the circuit, circulus, annulus, comp. כִּכָּר) and was a part of Naphtali. Comp. Joshua 20:7; Joshua 21:32; 1 Chronicles 6:61; 1 Maccabees 2:63. The region is called also אֶרֶץ הַגָּלִיל ( 1 Kings 9:11), and הַגָּלֶילָה ( 2 Kings 15:29).

In Judges 1:30-33 we are told that, as elsewhere, the Canaanites were not exterminated from this region. From the nature of things, in a region so distant from the national sanctuary, the heathen element would increase more than elsewhere. The continual intercourse with neighboring heathen in war and peace, moreover, the depriving the land of its Israelite inhabitants by Tiglath-Pileser ( 2 Kings 15:29) may have gradually given the heathen element a preponderance. From the New Testament, we know that the Jews looked down on the Galileans with a certain contempt ( John 1:46; John 7:41; John 7:52; Acts 2:7). When, John 7:41 the Jews questioned whether the Messiah would come out of Galilee, when they, John 9:52, asserted, too, that not even a Prophet was to come out of Galilee, it is the more remarkable that, as DELITZSCH quotes, Talmud and Midrasch say: that “the Messiah shall be revealed in Galilee, and from out Tiberias shall the redemption dawn.” But Matthew sees in the fact that Jesus “came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim” a fulfilment of our prophecy, and justly (vid. Matthew 4:13 sqq.). For that the Prophet notices such special traits of the Messianic picture of the future as the ante-nuptial conception, and the going forth from Galilee will not surprise those who reflect that these special matters are no trifles, but of greatest importance, and thus in a high degree worthy of prophetic notice. For they belong essentially to that fundamental character of the plan of redemption, whereby the Redeemer and His kingdom shall rise out of the depth of humility and ignominy to honor and glory.

[J. A. ALEXANDER with HENDERSON, COCCEIUS and others regard the words Isaiah 9:16 as spoken to the Prophet “by God, or, as some suppose, by the Messiah, the מִּקְדָּשׁ mentioned in the foregoing verse; and likewise Isaiah 9:17-18, because there is no intimation of a change in the speaker, and because Hebrews 2:13, 5:17 is quoted as the words of the Messiah, not as an illustration, but as a proof that Christ partook of the same nature with the persons called His children. DELITZSCH and v. HOFMANN (vid. their comment on Hebrews 2:13), who agree in treating these words of Isaiah 8:16-18 as the Prophet’s, and yet recognize a typical and prophetic reference to Christ, explain the use made of this in Heb. l. c. by the canon: “it admits of no doubt that the writers of the New Testament, allow themselves to quote utterances of typical Old Testament personages concerning themselves as utterances, and words of Christ.” DELITZSCH.—TR.].

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. On Isaiah 7:1. “Hierosolyma oppugnatur, etc. Jerusalem is assaulted but not conquered. The church is pressed but not oppressed.”—Foerster.

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first!

Latest Additions

Video / Audio

Books

Conditional Immortality

Death

Everlasting Destruction

Eternal Punishment

Hell or Gehenna

Immortality

Perish

Sheol and Hades

Universalim Refuted

Unquenchable Fire

Misc. Articles

Videos by Topic

Videos

Articles

Video / Audio

Books

Articles

Church Life

Social Issues

Video / Audio

Eschatology

Church History

Video / Audio

Doctrine & Theology

Bible Commentaries

Lange's Commentary: Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical

Isaiah 8

Comments

Add Comment