Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

means, not זֶרַע בְּרוּכִי

the descendants of blessed ones, but those them

xxxii. sq.; Ps. cxlvii. 19 sq. It is therefore the then the ancestors themselves would be called repeculiar people (ap Dy, Deut. vii. 6; xiv. 2)sition with P. But, apart from the fact that probates. They therefore take D'y as in appothrough whom the blessing of Jehovah shall then it must rather ready, as in lvii. 3, come on all nations (Gen. xii. 2 sq.; xxii. 18; Jer. iv. 2). And in consequence of all this, it is, that scruple is entirely groundless. called "high above all nations," Deut. xxvi. 19; For Dypy is not only a posterity from xxviii. 1; comp. 2 Sam. vii. 23. The time of reprobates, but also a posterity that consists of David and Solomon, and Uzziah's and Jotham's reprobates, as lxv. 23, time, the echo of the former, are to be regarded as forerunner and type of these promises. And they have rebelled against me.-According selves blessed, and like the expressions, 21, to well-known Hebrew usage, what in substance, etc., do not stands related as opposite is designated as equiva-, I mean the sons of fools, of worthless fellows, of lent in form. y is a current word in Isa. i. prophets, of sheep, but sons that are themselves 28; xliii. 27; xlvi. 8; lix. 13, etc. Expositors inquire whether only idolatry is meant, or alo every kind of transgression. But we can't see why every thing should not be meant that could be called opposition to the Lord; or rather, why every transgression should not be regarded as idolatry. [They have broken away from me.-M. W. J.] The ox knoweth his owner.-An or knoweth his owner, any ox. The words explain the rebelling, ver. 2, by a rhetorical contrast that sets this in clearer light. The unthinking brutes, even those of lowest degree, as the ox and ass, still know their masters that feed them, and the crib out of which they eat, and acquire a certain attachment for master and crib, so that they do not voluntarily forsake them.

fools, worthless, prophets, sheep. But as the idea y points to the essential identity in fruit and seed, and to the former being conditioned by the latter, so one must think, not of the original ancestors of the nation, but rather of the generation immediately preceding, chiefly, however, of an ideal ancestry, a notion that even underlies the expression yevvhuara έxidvv, "generation of vipers," Matt. iii. 7. Dy is therefore a genitive relation, in which the ideas of causality and of the attribute are combined. The expres sion is found again xiv. 20.-Finally, the Israel

בָּנִים מִשְׁחִיתִים ites are called

"children that are

a son) is

corrupters," although, according to ver. 2, they are children whom the Lord has brought up and 3. Ah, sinful nation-besieged city.- made high; for, although any one may be called Vers. 4-8. Jehovah's benefactions have not suf-, who as a man (not as ficed to awaken in Israel the feeling of grateful, all reference must not be denied to ver. attachment. On the contrary this nation forsakes 2, and all the places that express Israel's filial its God, rejects Him, and sinks back into the dark- relation to Jehovah, e. g. Deut. xiv. 1. ness of heathendom, out of which He had rescued them. The three verbs in ver. 46 express the clared that the bad tree has borne. They have In three phrases, now, the bad fruits are depositive consequences of the negative "doth not. know," ver. 3; and vers. 3 and 4 together contain (negative) forsaken Jehovah, they have (positive) the more particular signification of "rebelled rejected with scon (v. 24; lii. 5; lx. 14), the Holy One of Israel (an expression peculiarly against me," ver. 2. Thus a climax occurs in vers. 2-4. The outward construction of the lan- Isaiah's, that occurs fourteen times in the first part, and fifteen times in the second, and in other guage also corresponds to this. Vers. 2 and 3 consist of four members, and vers. 4 of seven, of parts of the Old Testament only six times), and they have turned themselves backwards. This which the first begins with an impressive assurance. But in the first four members of ver. 4 idols. For the Lord had turned Israel from turning backwards can only mean the turning to the reason is given why Israel became untrue to idols to Himself, comp. Josh. xxiv. 2, 14. If the its God. The reason is a subjective one. Israel nation then turned their backs to Him, it was preitself is good for nothing-it is a bad tree with cisely that they might return to their idols. This bad fruit. The meaning heathen nation need not is confirmed by Ezek. xiv. 5, the only place bebe pressed, and so much the less, seeing the sin-side the present in which the expression occurs. gular is often used for Israel without any secondary idea of reproach (Exod. xix. 6; Jos. iii. 17, etc.), and also parallel with Dy. We have trans lated it "Woe world" in order to re-echo the consonance of the original as nearly as possible. It has been justly remarked besides that Israel is called here oni, "sinful nation," in contrast with 1, “holy nation," which it ought to be according to Exod. xix. 6; Deut. vii. 6; xiv. 2, 21; and 11 12 by in contrast with Dy 11, which it is called xxxiii. 24. Israel is called moreover "a seed of evil doers," though it ought to be "a holy seed" (vi. 13; Ezra ix. 2). Many expositors (e. g., DRECHSLER) scruple to render these words as in the Genitive relation, because

Vers. 5 and 6 seem to respond to an objection. For after the description in vers. 3, 4, of the nation's deep depravity, the prophet proceeds to portray the impending chastisement of it, ver. 7. But before he does so, he removes an objection that might be raised from the stand-point of exercised on Israel? if not, might not the reforbearing love, viz. had sufficient discipline been newed application of it ward off the judgment? The inquiry is negatived. For the uselessness of the smiting has long been proved by the everrepeated backsliding of the nation. It is seen that we render the beginning of ver. 5: “To what purpose shall one smite you still more?" For there are three expositions of these words. The first is: "On what part of the body shall one still smite you?" (thus JEROME, SAADA,

We

GESENIUS, ROSENMUELLER, UMBREIT, KNOBEL revolt, because it is thoroughly sick, and does
and others [J. A. ALEXANDER, BARNES].
This rests chiefly on what follows, where the
body is described as beaten all over. However,
four things are to be objected to this view: a) it

not even use curatives for its sickness.
therefore construe the words - to je
not as describing a condition resulting from the
previous smiting, much as this seems to answer

-but as a figurative ex על מה וגו,the inquiry אֵי זֶה הִכּוּ עוֹד but עַל־מֶה could not then read

especially seem to favor this כָּל-רֹאשׁ כָּל לֵבָב יי? which

or the like. For is purely the general, pression for the moral habit of the nation.
abstract "what?" never the partitive, distin-
guishing one part from another:

Job xxxviii. 6 cannot be appealed to. For the view. This does not mean "the whole head, the
meaning of that place is not: On which founda- whole heart," but "every head, every heart." If it
tions do the pillars of the earth rest?" But:
do they rest at all on anything? b) Were the read, the meaning might easily
rendering: where shall we smite?" correct, enough be that head and heart were already so
then the intermediate phrase, 'D, were But every head, every heart only expresses that no
sore and sick that no spot remained for a blow.
out of place. For then one would right off look for head, no heart remained intact.
the answer: "nowhere, for all is beaten to pieces."
The insertion of those words in this form plainly
indicate that they themselves contain the an-
swer to the inquiry, -y, and that what
follows is only to be viewed as the nearer expla-
nation of this reply. It would be very different
if the words were in apposition with the subject
of . c) It is remarked by LuZZATTO (see in
DELITZSCH) that the fact that the body was
beaten all over would not hinder its being smit-
ten more. d) The phrase, ver. 6b, etc.,
they have not been closed," shows that not the
being wounded itself was the matter of chief
moment, but the being wounded without applica-
tion of curatives. The latter, however, as little
hinders the smiting as the binding up and heal-
="where?"

[ocr errors]

על מה ing would provoke it. If

=

=

then the whole phrase, ver. 6 b, would be superfluous.-A second exposition (DELITZSCH) takes by, and ye want to be smitten. Then the remote thought would be: “That were an insane delight in self-destruction." But the "that were" must not be adopted as the underlying thought, but: "that is indeed delight in self-destruction." For: "that were" would involve the thought that this delight is not presupposed, consequently there can be no question about a wanting to be smitten. But if we supply "that is," etc., that would impute too much to the simple Imperfect. The idea of wanting it must then be more strongly indicated, say by , or the like.—According to the third rendering, which seems to me the correct one.

על-מה

means "to what purpose?" Comp. Num. xxii. 32; Ps. x. 13; Jer. xvi. 10. The imperfect Passive is then simply a briefer expression for the Active: why should I, or should one smite you more? with which at least a suffix

The context closely considered forbids our understanding by head and heart "all that exercise indispensable functions in spiritual and temporal offices" (DRECHSLER). For by ver. 6 it plainly appears that not only the heads, but all individuals of the nation, are described as secentral and dominant organs in the life of every riously sick. Head and heart are rather the structure of the outward manifestation of the life. single person, whereas ver. 6 speaks also of the From a comparison of " with ver. 6, it seems to me that by not an outward wounding of the head is meant, but an internal disorder (comp. 2 Kings iv. 19).—From the sole of the foot, etc. Ver. 6. As has been remarked, these words describe the moral condition as to its outward manifestation, as ver. 5 b described figurative language of the prophet in regard to its inward form. We must not press too far the this inward and outward disorder, and especially the wounds of ver. 6 must not be regarded as presenting something additional.

מַכָּה ט' and חַבּוּרָה פֶצַע The three substantives

are followed by three corresponding verbs, and
one is tempted to construe them as if those occu-
pying the same relative position belonged to
each other. But such strict parallelism cannot
be carried out. It is rather to be said that each
of the three sorts of wounds referred to requires
all the three means of healing. Each wound
must be pressed together, and treated with heal-
ing stuffs. The former process is two-fold: first
it is done by the hand in order to cleanse the
wound from blood and matter, and then by the
bandage, that prevents further bleeding and pro-
motes the growing together of the several parts.
Thirdly, mollifying, healing oil (see Luke x. 34;
HERZOG'S R. Encyc. X., p. 548) must be super-
added as organic means of cure.

The words of ver. 6 b moreover contain ano

כָל־רֹאשׁ need not then be ther proof for the assertion that from תּוֹסִיפוּ סָרָה .were needed

taken as a dependent adverbial phrase; as if, "in that ye add revolt," which involves a certain grammatical harshness, that might be easily avoided by a participial construction. But is principal phrase and reply to the inquiry to what purpose shall one smite you more?

זז

However, the following words give the reason for the saying. That is: Israel adds revolt to

"every head," on, only the moral habit of the
nation is described. For is not the want of all
bodily therapeutics a figure for the want of the
spiritual; i. e. repentance? Not only is Israel
inwardly sick, but also in its outward life it pre-
sents the picture of a torn and distracted exist-
ence without one trace of discipline or effort at
improvement. If the chief thought of vers. 5, 6,
were that Israel cannot be smitten any more be-

use it is beaten all to pieces, then, as already | our view that the prophet speaks of present and marked, the phrase (11 -, "not closed (the enemies eat the land) is as in xxxvi. 16; still continuing circumstances. The metonymy p," would be quite without meaning. For may a bandaged-up person be sooner smitten than one Gen. iii. 17, etc.-D71, according to the acnot bound up? But this phrase becomes very significant if we regard the words: "every head," cents and the sense, relates towhat follows. Beetc., as portraying the moral condition of things. fore your eyes, without your being able to hinFor it is most important in regard to a man's der them, the enemies devour your land. moral state whether the proper curatives for the moral disorder are used or not.

In our passage it is evident the prophet would compare the destruction of the land of which he speaks to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. He calls the Jewish country a second destroyed Sodom, only with the difference that that was a destruction of God, this of strangers. The question whether we have here a genitive of the subject or of the object thus settles itself. It is the genitive of the subject. For then God was the destroyer; here it is the strangers. If D`, "strangers," be taken as object, it will not suit the context. For immediately before the strangers were named as destroyers. How shall they suddenly be named the destroyed?-From the connection it appears that the "daughter of Zion" means Jerusalem. Zion is originally the mountain, then the castle, then the quarter built about it (2 Sam. v. 6-9; 1 Kings viii. 1); then in an extended sense the city without the inhabitants (Lam. ii. 8) or the inhabitants without the city (Mic. iv. 10), or as both together, as in our passage.

Your land, etc. The outward state of the nation answers to the moral state. The nation had already begun to reap the fruits of their revolt. The country is desolate; only the metropolis still remains intact, yet isolated in the midst of a land that has been made a desert. Therefore it may be said that the train of thought that began with ver. 5 ends with ver. 8. The Lord declares, ver. 5, that for the present He will smite Israel no more. For there is no use. This is because Israel is still sick inside and out, spite of having suffered chastisement almost to annihilation. It seems to me therefore that vers. 7 and 8 stand in contrastive relation to the two preceding, although this contrast is indicated by no particle. Israel is morally sick, the country is turned into a desert. Had things taken a normal course, then the country had been desolated, but Israel would have been in health. Then Israel had received instruction, Prov. viii. 10; xix. 20. But now that the country is waste, and Israel still sick, one sees that whipping is of Jerusalem with its inhabitants lying isolated no use. Comp. Jer. ii. 30; v. 3; Isa. ix. 13; in the midst of a desolated country is now comxlii. 25. Thus I construe vers. 7 and 8, not as a pared to: a) a booth in a vineyard; b) to a mere change from figurative language (vers. 5 hanging mat [hammock] in a cucumber-field, and 6) to literal, because, as was shown, both which like the booth of the vineyard-keeper, is ver. 5 b and 6 b contain thoughts that do not a lonely and scanty dwelling-place for men; c) answer to purely outward circumstances. More to a besieged city. But why is Jerusalem only over, according to our explanation, it is clear compared to a beleagured city? After all that that ver. 7 sqq. does not speak of future, but of vers. 7, 8 say of it, is it not such itself? First present affairs. These verses do not contain of all we must investigate the meaning of threats of judgment, but a portrait of judgment The verb 3 means primarily observare, which already accomplished. If it were otherwise, then surely the threatenings of judgment would not can be said of commandments, Ps. lxxviii. 7, stop outside of the gates of the metropolis, which and of covenants, Deut. xxxiii. 9, as well as of yet was crater and fountain of all the revolt. the overseeing of a protector or keeper, Isa. This is not opposed by Jer. iv. 27; v. 10, 18: xxvii. 3; 2 Kings xvii. 9, and of the attention "Yet will I not make a full end," which some of a besieger, Jer. iv. 16; comp. 2 Sam. xi. 16; adduce against our view. For threats of judg- Jer. v. 6. Any is therefore either a ment only for the country, but that spare the watched or a beleaguered city. But the first capital, are not to be found in any prophet. does not suit the connection. The words: "your land waste," etc., are quoted from Lev. xxvi. 33, where it is said: "Your equally unsuitable if Jerusalem at the time of land shall be desolate, and your cities waste." writing was actually besieged. But ver. 7 speaks Your ground before, etc. Here, too, impre- only of the desolating of the country. That Jecations from the Law are in the mind of the rusalem itself was besieged or blockaded is not prophet, and particularly Deut. xxviii. 33: "The said directly. At the moment of saying this, fruit of thy land, and all thy labors, shall a na- have been that the enemy enclosed the city, not therefore, the position of Jerusalem seems to tion which thou knowest not, eat up." Comp., too, ver. 51; Lev. xxi. 16, 32. From Deut. yet in its immediate neighborhood, but still so xxviii. 33, 51, it is seen what is meant by as to restrict all intercourse with it, so that it lay there isolated like a blockaded town No one It is one that Israel does not know, and whose ventured out or in, for the enemy was near, language is not understood. That the word though his forces were not seen encamped around "stranger" includes also the idea of "enemy," is the walls of the city. The other renderings: manifest from the parallel passages in Lev. xxvi. | “ as a rescued city" (GESENIUS, in loc.; Maurer, 16, 32, where for D' we have D''. occurs Isa. xvii. 10; xxv. 2, 5; xxviii. 21; xxix. 5; xliii. 12; lxi. 5. The participle D' confirms

[ocr errors]

:

T

T

The latter is

etc.), "as a devastated city" (RABBINS, VULG., LUTHER), "as a watch tower" (HITZIG, TINGSTAD, GESENIUS in his Thesaurus, p. 908), etc., which are to be found in ROSENMUELLER, either

conflict with the requirements of the language or the context.

4. Had not-we were like, ver. 9. We must regard it, not as accidental, but as an evidence of the artistic design of this address, that in vers. 2, 3, Jehovah Himself speaks, in vers. 4-8 the prophet in the name of Jehovah, and in ver. 9 the prophet in his own and the people's name. It is therefore a climax descendens. The first word belongs to Jehovah the Lord. After that Jehovah's prophet speaks in His name to the people. Last of all the prophet, who is in a sense the mediator of the people, speaks in their name to Jehovah. In this scheme is prefigured in a certain degree the direction of all prophetic discourse. For it is either Jehovah speaking, directly or indirectly, or it is a speaking to Jehovah. But ver. 9 is joined by a double band to what precedes: by 7, "had left," and by the comparison to Sodom and Gomorrah. As to the former, it is recognized that something remains in Israel, П, ver. 8, and that this remnant is owing to the grace of Jehovah. But so the clear consciousness is expressed, that but for the grace of God, the resemblance to Sodom and Gomorrah, which in ver. 7 was only slightly intimated, would have been a notorious one. This is, on the one hand, an humble confession, for this comparison is not honorable for Israel; but on the other hand there is the opposite thought that underlies the hypothetic reflection: "he has, however, left something remaining; therefore we are still not like Sodom and Gomorrah;" and that forms a comforting germ of hope for the future.

The expression 3, Jehovah Sabaoth, is not to be found in the Pentateuch, nor in Josh., Jud., Ezek., Joel, Obad., Jonah. In Exod. xii

41 (

is said of the Israelites. If one may regard the completest form as the original one, then we must designate Hosea as the originator of the expression. For in Hos. xii. 6 we

[ocr errors]

up

t

t

may be debated. Comp. DELITZSCH, The ca Name Jahre Zebaot, in der Zeitschrift f. d. ges Theologie u. Kirche 1874, Heft 2, p. 217." Hosts" becomes gradually a proper name! is so beyond doubt in God of Hosts, Ps. lix. 6; lxxx. 5, 8, 15, 20; lxxxiv. 9, and Lord of Hosts, Isa. x. 16. Probably it is to be so rendered in "Jehovah of Hosts," which is very frequent in the first and second parts of Isaiah. Also Jer, Zech., Mal., use it very often.-Dy is not added to the verb here adverbially with the meaning "almost," but united to it substantively, and as in 2 Chron. xii. 7, is object (as apposition with the object). In Prov. x. 20; Ps. cv. 12, it is similarly a predicate. In respect to its sense, it is a dimished yp, i. e. not paulum, but quasi paulum. I do not think with DELITZSCH that referring to Ps. lxxxi. 14 sq.; Job xxxii. 22, it may be construed with what follows. For with the supposition that is expressed in the first clause of the verse, they had been, not almost, but altogether a Sodom and Gomorrah. Moreover, it is affecting to observe how the man penetrates through the prophet. He began as the mouth of God, that does not distinguish himself from God; he proceeds as servant of God, that clearly distinguishes himself from God; he concludes as citizen of Jerusalem, that comprehends himself with the men against whom he directs his words of threatening.

[Ver. 7., like the overthrow of strangers, J. A. ALEXANDER, “i. e. as foreign foes are wont to waste a country in which they have no interest, and for which they have no pity." BARNES, similarly.

Ver. 9. "The idea of a desolation almost total is expressed in other words, and with an intimation that the narrow escape was owing to God's favor for the remnant according to the election of grace, who still existed in the Jewish Church. That the verse has reference to quality, as well as quantity, is evident from Rom. ix. 29, where Paul makes use of it, not as an illustranection with the Church could not save men

-similarly tion, but as an argument to show that mere con ; וַחוה אֱלֹהֵי הַצְבָאוֹת יְהוָה זִכְרוֹ find

T:

T:

Amos iii. 13; vi. 14; ix. 5. Here it is seen that from the wrath of God. The citation would have nix is still construed as appellative. They been irrelevant if this phrase denoted merely a are not the "nix, Ex. xii. 41, but ? of true believers in the midst of the prevailing small number of survivors, and not a minority Down, Isa. xxxiv. 4, whose relation to the stars unbelief." J. A. ALEXANDER].

3. THE MEANS FOR OBTAINING A BETTER FUTURE.

CHAPTER I. 10-20.

10 Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom;

Give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.

11 To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD:

I am full of the burnt-offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts;

And I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of 'he goats.

12 When ye come 'to appear before me,

Who hath required this at your hand, 'to tread my courts?

13 Bring no more "vain oblations;

Incense is an abomination unto me;

The new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with;a
It is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.

14 Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth:

They are a trouble unto me;

I am weary to bear them.

15 And when ye spread forth your hands,

I will hide mine eyes from you:

Yea, when ye 'make many prayers, I will not hear:
Your hands are full of blood.

16 Wash you, make you clean;

Put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes: 17 Cease to do evil; learn to do well;

18

Seek judgment, relieve the oppressed,

Judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD:

Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow;
Though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

19 If ye be willing and obedient,

Ye shall eat the good of the land:

20 But if ye refuse and rebel,

Ye shall be devoured with the sword:

For the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[ocr errors]

xxxv. 1; Ex. iii. 16, etc. But then the form
is found in five places: Ex. xxxiv. 23 sq.; Deut. xvi.
16; xxxi. 11; 1 Sam. i. 22. Here the question arises,
whether is nota accusatavi, or preposition with the
meaning "cum, coram," or finally, whether the accusa-
tive, as in
"Ye shall be devoured by the

sword," ver. 20, is to be taken in an instrumental sense,
As if it ought to be rendered: "was seen of God's face
(so EWALD, Gram. ¿ 279, c). This last rendering

« PoprzedniaDalej »