Obrazy na stronie
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

2. Therefore—write them.—Wers. 16– 19. “Therefore ” introduces the consequences that follow the double guilt of Assyria portrayed above. That necessary consequence is punish: ment. The, not personal, glory of Assyria shall be burnt so as if the LoRD kindled a fire under it. The comparison of the consumption which

is not meant literally, and the 2 before tip. show

that no real fire is meant. It is the fire of God's holy wrath that is the correlative of His love. The latter is the light of Israel in whom God takes pleasure (2 Sam. xxii. 29; Ps. xxvii. 1; Mic. vii. 8), but a consuming fire for all that is against God and His kingdom (Deut. iv. 24; ix. 3; Isa. xxx. 33; xxxiii. 14). Like ix. 17, thorns and thistles are contrasted with the nobler representatives of vegetation. The comparison does not refer to the army of Assyria with its various grades of rank and file, but to the nation with all its glory. Thorns and thistles, mean all lowly and inferior persons, forest and fruitful field those of elevation and splendor. The expression “from soul to body” ("y) won "to is found only here). It is to be compared with i. 6, “from the sole of the foot to the head.” As the latter signifies the entire outward, visible surface of the body, so the latter the entire organism generally. Not only the outward, but the inward shall be anihilated. “For body and

soul are the entire man (Ps. xvi. 9; lxxviii. 26; lxxxiv. 3.”)—KNoREL. I.except to this only that the expression is restricted to men. Have not the beast and the plant a soul too? Comp. Gen. ii. 19. And is it not said in our very passage that forest and field shall be anihilated from the soul to the flesh 2 Thus in some sense soul and flesh, i.e., body are attributed to plants. From his exhaustless store the Prophet produces another figure, and calls Assyria a weakling, who pining dies away. Yet a remnant shall remain, but a very feeble one. Of the lordly forest there shall be left only a clump that may be counted; so far from numerous that a boy can count and write a list of them. And truly, what was left of Assyria after its destruction may be compared to the little forest or grove of cedars that the traveller now finds on Lebanon. But I mean not merely the overthrow of Sennacherib, but Nineveh's destruction by the Babylonians and Medes. For the Prophet's vision comprehends the whole future both of Israel and of Assyria. The figure of the boy writing down the trees, seems to me remarkable in respect to the history of culture. We hear in this place of a boy that can write, the like of which we find even Judg. viii. 14, and that counts the trunks of the trees. Is the figure pure invention of the Prophet? or was he §o to use it from observation?

CHAPTER X. 20–24.


[blocks in formation]

22 For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea,

Yet a remnant of them shall return:

*The consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness. 23 For the Lord God of hosts shall make a consumption, even determined,

In the midst of all the land.

1 Heb. in, or among. Destruction is determined, extending wide righteousness.


On vers. 22, 23. 73 after nity" is partitive, as is often the case. Comp. vi. 13; Deut. i. 35 ; Ps. cxxxix. 16, and especially passages where this E stands after words meaning “to remain over,” Exod. xiv. 28; Lev. xxvi. 36; 1 Sam. xi. 11. [Like the Engl. “one in ten "].— ')]] no. These words are difficult. two: is found

T . again only Dt. xxviii. 65, in the expression Dolly who, which, after "J"y *> (Ps. lxix. 4; cxix. 82, 123; Lam. - -.. r ii. 11) must be rendered oculorum consumtio, “consumption, failure of the power of vision.” So we must take it here in the sense of “wearing off, consuming, desolating.”—?”"n is part. pass, from yon, incidere, deci+ - r

dere, definere, decernere (comp. 1 Kings xx. 40). In Isa. it is found again only as a qualifying adjective to the threshing roller (xli. 15) or as name for the roller itself, (xxviii. 27). It is so named because an implement furnished with sharp corners and edges. Finn no can only mean, therefore: “ destruction is limited, determined, concluded.”—In Flotj is easily discerned an antithesis to l'inn: for as in the latter there is the notion of something sharply marked off, so in the former there is the notion of flooding over (viii. 8; xxviii. 2, 15, 17, 18; xxx. 28; xliii. 2; xlvi. 12). We thus obtain the figure of something determined, sharply defined, but which in a certain sense extends itself, and withal, too, overflowing with a certain effect, as it were, settling it (now with the accusat. of abundance). That which is fixed, determined, is called mos. what is widespread is said to be mpts. According to the foregoing so


And it shall come to pass — all the land.—Vers. 20–23. The Prophet turns again to his own nation. Assyria's fall is Israel's salvation. “In that day,” i. e., when the destruction of Assyria shall have taken place (vers. 16–19), Israel will indeed still exist, but only as a remnant ("so vii. 3; xi. 11, 16; xxviii. 5), and as those escaped (no comp. on iv. 2). But this remnant will at last have learned what ministers to their peace. It will no more lean on Assyria as Ahaz has done. It is plainly seen from this, that the present passage was composed at a eriod when the Assyrian alliance (2 Kings xvi.

sqq.), was already an historical fact. By the single word 37:22, which points back to ver. 5, the Prophet indicates how foolish and ruinous that alliance was. Israel’s remnant will rather lean on Jehovah, the holy God (comp. on i. 4), who is Israel's opp, rock and refuge (viii. 4). What is meant by nps: “in truth” may be best

[ocr errors][merged small]

can only designate the fate of those Israelites that do not belong to “the remnant.”—But what is TipTx? Many suppose it signifies the righteous state of the whole community, which they have attained to by reason of the judgments (DREchsler according to xlviii. 18; Amos v. 24). But the following verse seems to me to conflict with this, which seems to be wholly an explanation of the words 's 'v' on no. no.3 evidently + T corresponds to poo, nx^n) to nnn. Therefore "3 is expletive. The obscure expression ver, 22 b, which is probably a citation, for it contrasts strangely with its surroundings, is used in a form suited to common understanding. Thus the word no.2 (in Isa only again + r xxviii.22, where the whole style of address recurs; frequent beside in the combination n°5 noy, especially •r r r-r in Jer. iv. 27; v. 10, 18, etc.) – “utter ruin " stands for no. nyon) for nnn, the ferm. ending being used out of regard for the word-pair. This latter word, too,

is found only xxviii. 22, and also in Dan. ix. 27; xi. 36, where the words are repeated out of Isaiah.--But we

must taken, no as objectornoy; foramps nwy ros-52 is explanation of () Apt. Precisely thereby we see that Abu states nothing more than that wide over all the earth shall be known and manifest what pinn no is, viz., a proof of the righteousness of God. Were nDoty to mean the conformity of human condition to God's righteousness, then this thought could not be rendered by the simple (NT %22 ntvy.


entire return to Jehovah, of swearing in His name, “in truth, judgment and righteousness,” of reformation that “breaks up the fallow ground and does not sow among thorns,” of circumcision of the heart, and not of the flesh. So here, leaning on the Lord “in truth,” is such wherein the heart is no longer divided between Jehovah and the creature, but belongs to Him wholly and alone. The expression is found again in Isaiah xvi. 5; xxxviii. 3; xlviii. 1; lxi. 8; comp. Jer. xxxii. 40 sq. That it may not be thought that he has used the expression “remnant of Israel” with no special significance, the Prophet repeats it in ver. 21, with great emphasis, at the same time defining it more exactly. No false support is offered in these words, which would ill-agree with the promise that Israel shall lean on the LoRD “ in truth.” True, the Israel “according to the flesh” fancied that where Abraham's seed was, there salvation and life were guaranteed. But to them apply the words of John Baptist: “Begin not to

seen from Jer. iv. 1-4, who speaks of sincere, and

say within yourselves, we have Abraham to our father; for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: every tree, therefore, which bringeth not forth good fruit, is hewn down and cast into the fire.” Luke iii. 8, 9. From this we see that not all that remain after the great judgments belong to “the remnant,” but only those that bear genuine fruits of repentance. Paul confirms this Rom. xi. 4 sq., when, to the question “hath God cast away his people?” he replies by referring to the seven thousand that did not bow the knee to Baal (1 Kings xix. 18), and then continues: “even so then at this present time also, there is a remnant according to the election of grace.” We may say, therefore; Isaiah's remnant is the “election” (äkžoyń) of Paul. “The election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.” Rom. xi. 7. This is confirmed, too, by the way that Isaiah defines the aim of the return. Jer, says iv. 1: “If thou wilt return, O Israel, return to me.” A false returning, therefore, is possible (vid. my com. on Jer. iv. 1 sqq.). Precisely on this account Isaiah says in, our passage the remnant wifi return to hijos, “God’Almighty.” It is not the fleshly descent from Abraham that is the criterion of belonging to “the remnant,” but the return to God Almighty. It is plain that Jehovah the God of Israel is meant. But that Isaiah should call Him here just by this name,

arises from this, that the Prophet has in mind his words in ix. 5. The return to El-gibbor-Jehovah

will, in its time, be possible only in the form of

the return to El-gibbor-Messiah. Therefore Isaiah does not promise an unconditional, universal return of all that may be called Israelite, and that descends from Abraham, but he makes a most displeasing and threatening restriction.

And if in the time to which he points, the time when the world-power will be judged, Israel were numerous as the sand by the sea—a condition which is even a fulfilment of promise and a theocratic state of blessedness (comp., on ix. 2; Gen. xxii. 17)—Jehovah still can bring Himself not to make all these Israelites according to the flesh partakers of the promised blessing. This is the thought that Paul carries out in Rom. ix., and in this sense he cites our passage in vers. 27, 28. “They are not all Israel, which are of Israel,” he says yer. 6. “Nehher, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but in Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is: They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted for the seed,” vers. 7, 8. Therefore the LoRD prepares an election of which the criterion is birth from God, regeneration, faith. As proof the Apostle cites, as already said, our passage among other Old Testament Statements.



THEREFORE thus saith the "Lord God of hosts,

O my people that dwellest in Zion, be not afraid of the Assyrian:

He shall smite thee with a rod,

*And shall lift up his staff against thee, after the manner of Egypt.

And mine anger "in their destruction.

For yet a very little while, and the indignation shall cease,

And the LoRD, of hosts shall stir up a scourge for him

According to the slaughter of Midian at the rock of Oreb :

And as his rod was upon the sea,

So shall he lift it up after the manner of Egypt.

27 And it shall come to pass in that day,

That his burden’shall be taken away from off thy shoulder,

And his yoke from off thy neck,

And the yoke shall be "destroyed because of the anointing.

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

2 Heb. shall remove.

then just as ver. 3.—noon (from no tritum, con- : - r r

sumtum esse) is &m. Aey. It means consumtio, i. e., of the Assyrians. Thus the words form a fitting transition to ver. 26.

On ver. 26. *\\y used of “wielding" a scourge only here: it is used 2 Sam. xxiii. 18; 1 Chr. xi. 11, 20 of brandishing a spear. Notice the paronomasia hy

[ocr errors][subsumed]

only here and Job xvii. 1. The original meaning of bon is “to twist" (thence bon “a rope”) “to bind” - r ... ." ligare, pignore obligare. Piel, cum tormentis emiti, parere, but also “to twist round and round, to turn the bottommost to the topmost " (French bouleverser); xiii. 5; liv. 16; Mic. ii. 10; Song of Sol. ii. 15; Eccl. v. 5. In Isa. xxxii. 7 there seems beside to lie in the word the meaning of “ensnaring.” So there seems here, beside the notion of destruction, to be that of a reference to a rope

or cord. DElitzsch represents, on the authority of statements of Schegg, that to this day in the Orient the yoke is fastened to the pole by a cord about the neck. Thus the Prophet would evidently say that, because of the fat ("D.E.) causal as it often is, ii. 10; vii. 2, etc.) which grows on the well-fed Israel, the rope breaks, and thus the yoke apparatus falls off. On this account it seems to me probable that on, (though otherwise on comes from bon and not the reverse), is still here to - r be o as a Pual denominatirum and privativum coined ad hoc (comp. on Flyn ver. 33).--—The figure in 1755 "YD" is drawn from beasts of burden. In ix. 3, \op by the two words are combined; but separated T: . here as xiv. 25.


Therefore thus saith—of the anointing (fat).-Vers. 24–27. . If all that is true that the Prophet, from ver. 5 on, has said of Assyria as the momentary instrument of God's chastening, -and how shall God's word not be sure?— then Israel need not fear Assyria even in present impending danger. Assyria will, indeed, execute chastisement on Israel, but only a discipline with a staff and rods (ver. 5), not with the sword, i. e. only a transitory one, not such as ends in destruction. The Prophet intimates that the captivity by the northern world-power will be, as it were, a continuation of that suffered from the southern. Assyria therefore will tread in the footsteps of Egypt. He will raise the staff over Israel in the way (ver. 26, Amos iv. 10), i. e. in the manner of Egypt. For as Egypt could not attain his object of extirpating the Israelite by killing the male children that were born and by hard labor, just as little should Assyria succeed. For only a very little, and the wrath would cease. The Prophet, therefore, conceives of the wrath as in progress, but presents its speedy end in prospect.

The Lord will brandish the scourge over Assyria as He smote Midian at the rock of Oreb (comp. ix. 3). That was one of the most glorious victories of the Israelites; but the glory of it belonged neither to Gideon nor to his army, but to the Lord (Jud. vii. 2 sqq., 25). The second

clause of ver. 26 contains a magnificent figure full of art. First from Assyria's hand is taken the staff that he is to raise over Israel and put into the hand of Jehovah. This appears from the relation of ver. 26 b. to the last clause of ver. 24. Then this staff in the hand of Jehovah is transformed to the likeness of the rod with which Moses in Egypt prepared the Red Sea for a way of escape for Israel (xi. 16). The sea here is that which spreads out before Israel in the distress occasioned by Assyria. The raising up of the rod

here ("stol) corresponds to that raising it over Israel (so ver. 24) for which Assyria used it. A

twofold raising of the rod took place in Egypt: one over Israel, the other over the sea. Both are repeated now. Neither the rod flourished over Israel for chastisement shall be wanting, nor the rod of God, which, as there, shall open a way through the deep sea of trouble. As is familiarly known, the passage through the Red Sea is often mentioned and turned to account in a variety of ways: comp. xliii. 16; l. 2; li. 10; lxiii. 11; Ps. lxvi. 6; lxxiv. 13; lxxvii. 20: lxxvii. 13; cziv. 3, etc. At the time referred to Israel shall be freed from the yoke of Assyria (ix. 3; xiv. 25), which is signified first by the figure of the load of a beast of burden, second by that of the yoke.


[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

“As yet shall he remain at Nob that day:

He shall shake his hand against the mount of the daughter of Zion,

[blocks in formation]

34 And he shall cut down the thickets of the forest with iron, And Lebanon “shall fall by a mighty one.

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

on ver, 2s. 82 with hy like Jud. xviii. 27, it means “the falling over on.”—"DET, commisit, mandavit, deposuit, Jer. xxxvi. 20; xl. 7: xl. 10.

On wer. 32. |Br Pilel, only here; Hiph. with similar meaning, xi. 15 ; xiii. 2; xix. 16; 2 Kings v. 11. The swinging of the hand is the gesture of one threatening. —12) "Ti stands in accus. localis; Kothibh has its-n-2, which is found nowhere else, and probably results from a confounding with TTYNT n°3 on.

On ver. 33. Typ (comp. Typ xvii. 6; xxvii. 10), P. denominatirum and privativum like the German aesten from Ast, Koepfen from Kopf (comp. 531 “to cut off the

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]


1. The foregoing disposes the reader to look for an immediate portrayal of the destruction of Assyria. But to his surprise the Prophet translates him back into the commencement of the hostilities of Assyria, against Israel (vers. 28-32). This first onslaught of Assyria was so impetuous, that it seemed as if Jerusalem could not resist. But it only appeared so. How little dangerous that onslaught was appears from the brief description of the inevitable, impending ruin of the world-power, that immediately follows (vers. 33, 34). A contrast is hereby presented that gives a most striking effect, which is still more enhanced by the masterly, dramatic representation of the march of the Assyrians against Jerusalem. So that this little passage proves to be a master-piece of Art, both o: its arrangement as a whole and its execution in detail.

2. He comes—the hill of Jerusalem.— Vers. 28–32. These verses describe the last part of the march to Jerusalem. For, no doubt, Aiath is the same as Ai that lay North-east of Jerusalem ("p or 'p.'" “the stone heap,” Josh. vii. 2 sqq., soy Neh. xi. 31, my [false reading my]; 1 Chr. vii. 28), which is probably identical with boy (Josh. xviii. 23) comp. FAY in loc.). FINN, WAN DE WELDE, ARNoLD, KNoBEL, identify Aiath in Tell-el-Hadschar that lies less than an hour South-east of Beitin (Bethel). On the other hand DELitzsch, following SchEGG who personally investigated the spot, locates Aiath about six hours north of Jerusalem in Teijibe, that is situated on a hill with an extended prospect, in whose neighborhood there is still found a small village, Churbet Ai. It will perhaps depend on whether the locality of #. corresponds with Josh. viii. 11, 13, according to which there was

a valley North of the city. [Concerning the location of all the places named in the text consult “Robi Nso N and SMITH's Bib. Res. in Palestine, Vol. II.]. Migron, which is mentioned beside only 1 Sam. xiv. 2*but in all probability this Fo is corrupt: ARNoLD in HERz. R. Encycl. XIV. . 755) appears to have been quite insignificant. so regards it as identical with BurgMagram, a cluster of ruins eight minutes from Bethel. But, then, would they not have marched backwards 2 Michmash, a city of Benjamin as all the rest named here, plays an important part in the history of Saul is'Jonathan, 1 Sam. xiii., xiv. It still exists as a small deserted village with the name Muchmas one hour North of Geba (now Dscheba), three hours and a half North of Jerusalem (Ronissos and S. II. comp. RUETschi, HERz. R. Encycl. IX. p. 526). There the Assyrians left their baggage in order to press on quicker. “The passage of Michmash” is mentioned 1 Sam. xiii. and xiv. It is the Wadyes-Suweinit (according to others es-Suweikeh– comp. RUETschi, l.c.)—a deep, rough ravine, forty-eight minutes wide, immediately below Michmash. As it runs from East to West, they must cross it obliquely to approach Jerusalem. The ravine is difficult to traverse. It is hardly credible that the proper highway from Shechem or Nabulus (comp. ARNoLD in HERZ. R. Encycl. XV. p. 163 sq. Art. “Strassen in Palaestina,”) roof through it. The Prophet's description is ideal. He depicts not what is past but what is future, and that, not in the manner of historical accuracy, but as became his prophetic interests. He would depict how the enemy presses forward with utmost s , by the shortest way, deterred by no obstacles. On the arduous way they

« PoprzedniaDalej »