Obrazy na stronie

we will

have hope in the faithfulness of God that rules 5. The LORD -housa of the LORD.over them and promises a better future. [“The Ver. 20. Concluding verse, containing once true explanation of the words is given by Cal- again the chief thought, and a summons to conVIN, viz., that the language is that of extreme tinual praise of Jehovah. “Jehovah is present agitation and distress, in which the prospect of to save me," see Text. and Grum.

So will we the future is absorbed in contemplation of the touch my stringed instruments, ibid. The preseni, and also that, so far as he does think of song accompanying the stringed instrument is not futurity, it is upon the supposition of God's excluded, though the latter alone is mentioned. wrath. Regarding death, in this case, as a proof The plural has been urged as favoring the meanof the divine displeasure, he cannot but look ing "song." But could not the musical King upon it as the termination of his solemn praises." Hezekiah understand various sorts of playing -J. A. ALEX.].

on stringed instruments ? Or, if not this, may With jubilant emotions, Hezekiah feels that not the plural be that of the general notion? he again belongs to the living, hence the repeti- Some suppose, that by the plural 12%?? tion of 'n who lives, who lives, he praises, touch," Hezekiah sets himself as the chorusetc., and the joyous DIN 313) as I this day, leader of his family. But one must not forget in which appears how much the contrast between the Levitical musicians that he himself had inthe mournful yesterday, and the blessed to-day stituted for the service of God's house (2 Chr. moves the heart of the poet. The words father xxix. 30). Corresponding to the 1777X ver. 15, to the children, etc., have a peculiar significance Hezekiah thinks here not of private divine serin Hezekiah's mouth. His successor Manasseh, vice, but of the worship of Jehovah in the according to 2 Kings xxi. 1, ascended the throne at twelve years of age. Consequently he cannot temple. The preposition by is surprising Perhave been born at this time. Indeed, since it haps one may compare Hos. xi. 11. Perhaps, was customary for the eldest son to succeed, it is too, the preposition has reference to the elevated very probable that at that time Hezekiah had no

way which, according to 2 Kings xvi. 18, led the son at all, which seems to be confirmed by R$? king into the temple, and afforded him an ele}]], xxxix. 7. Considered from this point of vated place from which he saw the greater part view our words appear prophetic. Yet, when of the house beneath him. Moreover it is to be one reflects what sort of a scn Manasseh was, it remarked, that tarrying in the house of the would almost seem to have been better had Heze Lord has a prominent place in many Psalms: kiah done nothing to avert the sentence of death xv. 1 ; xxiii. 6; xlii. 5; xliii. 4; lxxxiv. 2 sqq. ver, 1.

11, etc.


CHAPTER XXXIX. 1-8. 1 At that time Merodach-baladan, the son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent

letters and a present to Hezekiah: for he had heard that he had been sick, and was 2 recovered. And Hezekiah was glad of them, and showed them the house of his 'pre

cious things, the silver, and the gold, and the spices, and the precious ointment, and all the house of his ? Barmour, and all that was found in his treasures : there was

nothing in his house, nor in all his dominion, that Hezekiah showed them not. 3 Then came Isaiah the prophet unto king Hezekiah, and said unto him, What

said these men ? and from whence came they unto thee? And Hezekiah said, 4 They are come from a far country unto me, even from Babylon. Then said he,

What have they seen in thine house? And Hezekiah answered, All that is in 5 mine house have they seen: there is nothing among my treasures that I have not 6 shewed them. Then said Isaiah to Hezekiah, Hear the word of the LORD of hosts :

Behold, the days come, that all that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers

have laid up in store until this day, shall be carried to Babylon: nothing shall be 7 left, saith the LORD. And of thy sous that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt

beget, shall they take away ; and they shall be "eunuchs in the palace of the king

of Babylon. Then said Hezekiah to Isaiah, Good is the word of the LORD which 8 thou hast spoken. He said moreover, For there shall be peace and truth in

my days.

2 Or, jewels.

3 Heb. vessels or, instruments.

1 Or, spicery,
* chamberlain,

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. On ver. 1. The text of 2 Kings xx. 12 sqq., reads the case of chap. xxxvii. 32, compared with 2 Kings

xix. 31. 17852 77877 instead of 77777. According to the

On ver.6. Our text has 421, 2 Kings xx. 17, nha. monuments the reading of Isaiah appears to be de. cidedly the correct one. For the name in Assyrian is

On ver. 7. Our text hus inp'; 2 Kings xx. 18 only “Marduk-habal-iddina," i. e. Meroduch gave a (or the) B'ri has this reading, whereas K’thibh reads np. BON (Scurader, p. 213). The form 7787) seems to have certainly the latter is the more difficult, and inpap sprung from the attraction of sound of the three fol

pears as an emendation. The sing. may be taken either lowing words, which begin with ). What has been said as the predicate of an indetinite subject (one) or, more shows that Merodach-Baladan does not mean “ Mero- correctly, as seems to me, as predicate of a definite dacus Baladani filius," as our text and 2 Kings sjem to subject, which, however, is present only in idea, viz : understand it. (This imputed misunderstanding seems the king of Babylon. quite gratuitous in the Author.-Tr.). We have here, also, an evidence of a later writer who was indifferently text has simply '). DX bo does not occur else

On ver. 8. 2 Kings xx. 19 has os asa? where our acquainted with the subject.—On D'700 comp. on xxxvii, 14.- Our text differs from 2 Kings xx. 12, in where. EWALD ($ 324 b), takes it in the sense of “

“yea, if only.” But that is neither grammatically justified, .

nor does it give a clear meaning. According to my to correction. The editor of the text in Isaiah might view of the context (see Exeg. and Crit. below) x 57 take offence at the double '), and thus have replaced

nonne. I, therefore, take ox not as a particle expresthe first hy 1. But he also stumbled at its only being sive of desire, as many do, but it has its conditional said 2 Kings : "he had heard that Hezekiah was sick.” meaning, -- " if, in so far as.” The ') in the text of For it seemed to him that the wonderful recovery of Isaiah has essentially the same meaning, as DELITZSCH Hezekiah, and the proof it gave of his being a ruler also has admitted. For it says, that between the sentiunder the protection of a mighty god, had as much to ments that Hezekiah had betrayed in reference to the do with the Babylonian's sending an embassy.

ambassadors and his affirmation "good is the word," On ver. 2. Here, too, the two texts differ. The etc., there was no contradiction, because, in fact, while you'1 of 2 Kings xx. 13, is the more difficult reading, he lived peace and fidelity would certainly be undiscompared with which now'1 appears an emendation : turbed. At least, our text can be so understood. being the easier and more natural reading.

Whether its author really meant this, is another ques. On ver. 3. At the end of the verse our text has 5x tion. For it were possible, too, that he substituted for after 18), which is wanting in 2 Kings xx. 14.

the obscure Ox shop the general, indefinite a perOn ver. 5. Our text has nix]) at the end, which is haps only in its pleonastic sense, that introduces the wanting 2 Kings xx. 16. It may be here the same as in oratio recta.

Both seem to me traceable .ויחזק and וישׁמע reading


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL, 1. As the text needs no special comment, it | lon. The canon of Ptolemy names Mardocmay be well for the better understanding of the empad, under this year as king of Babylon, a circumstances involved, to present briefly the name that is universally regarded as identical chief points of Babylonian history relating to with Merodach-Baladan. Sargon states, that in them, according to the data of the Assyrian the first complete year of his reign (i. e., in the monuments as far as the latter have been de-year 721), after having in the year 722 comciphered. Our chapter speaks of two Baladans, pleted the conquest of Samaria, he marched viz. : Merodach-Baladan, who sent the embassy against Merodach-Baladan. But his undertakand Baladan his father. Yet there appears in ing was not successful. For Merodach-Baladan this a misunderstanding. According to the As- maintained himself, and reigned, according to syrian monuments (comp. LENORMANT, les pre- the Canon, yet twelve years as acknowledged mieres civilizations, Paris, 1874, Tom. II., in the king of Babylon. Not till the year 710 did Saressay un patriote babylonien," p. 210) our Mero- gon again take the field against him. The strngdach-Baladan was a son of Jakin. Comp. also gle extended into the year 709, ending in the dethe ostentatious inscription of Tiglath-Pileser ihronement of Merodach-Baladan (see the inmentioned above at xxi. 1, which states that he teresting description of this campaign in LENORreceived the homage of " Merodach-Baladan, son MANT, I. c. p. 243 sqq.). In this year Sargon of Jakin, king of the sea, in the city of Sapiga.” himself mounted the throne of Bahylon. The We remarked above at xxi. 1, that by tihamtu Canon, from the year 709 onwards, names 'Apréa(binn,“ sea, sea-land”) is to be understood vos, i. é, Sarrukin or Sargon, as king of Baby

lon. But the courage of Merodach-Baladan was south Chaldea, the watery region at the mouth not yet broken. He fled back into his own hereof the united rivers Tigris and Euphrates. Mero- ditary land Bit-Jakin, a narrow strip of land on dach-Baladan, when he did homage to Tiglath-the Persian gulf, extending from Schat-el-arab to Pileser, was king of Bit-Jakin (such was the Elam. Sargon marched against him again and name of the residence and of the small territory stormed first the strongly fortified position where of his father), and so remained till the year 721. Merodach-Baladan awaited him, then the city In the year 721, when Sargon ascended the Dur-Jakin, his opponent's last refuge on the mainthrone, this energetic man, who was an enthu- land. Merodach-Baladan escaped with great difsiast for the independence of Babylon, succeeded ficulty. But still he did not submit. Sargon in mounting the ihrone of all Chaldea in Baby- I was compelled, in the beginning of the year 705,

to send his son Sennacherib against the obstinate that Suzub to Babylon. Suzub, indeed, ascended rebel. But not long after, Sennacherib received the throne of Babylon. Their purpose was to cut in camp the intelligence of the murder of his Sennacherib from his own land. But the latter father by a certain Belkaspai, probably a patriotic returned in time and defeated his opponents in Chaldean and adherent of Merodach-Baladan's. two battles. He took Suzub prisoner, but spared

Then there followed a period of two or three his life. This happened in the year 687. But years, filled up with the strifes of various pre- in the following year Suzub escaped from prison, tenders to the crown, and hence designated by the was again proclaimed king in Babylon, and, in Canon as kaipòs aßloiheutos. Thus it appears by alliance with Umman-Menan, king of Elam, the the account of POLYHISTOR in EUSEBIUS (chron. successor of Kudhir-Nakhunta, and with Nabusiarmen. ed. Mai, p. 19), that after Sargon’s death, miskim, the eldest son of Merodach-Baladan, he his son and a brother of Sennacherib ascended | opposed a considerable army to Sennacherib at the Babylonian throne. But after a short term Kalul on the Tigris. Sennacherib conquered this one was obliged to give place to a certain again, and still again in another battle, by which Hagisa, who, after not thirty days' reign, was he utterly destroyed the power of his opponents. killed by Merodach-Baladan. That this was our He then resolved utterly to destroy Babylon: and Merodach-Baladan can scarcely be doubted. The this resolve was actually executed (685). Yet implacable enemy of the Assyrians boldly raised only four years after, the city was rebuilt. Senhis head anew. Sennacherib marched against nacherib died 681, and his son and successor dehim and conquered him at Kis, a city that Nebu- termined to put an end to the everlasting strife chadnezzar afterwards incorporated in the city with the Babylonians by an opposite policy. He territory of Babylon by means of his great wall. raised Babylon to equal rank with Nineveh, and Sennacherib gave the throne of Babylon to a cer- made it his residence. tain Belibus or Elibus, the son of a “wise man," The eldest son of Merodach-Baladan, Nabusuwhom, says the king, “they had brought up in miskun, was taken prisoner at the battle of Kalul the company of the small boys in my palace.” and beheaded by Sennacherib. His brother next Hence this Belibus was not an independent pre- of age to him, Nabozirnapsatiasir, reigned after tender, as would seem according to POLYHistor, him in the land Bit Jakin. A third brother, Nabut a subordinate king recognized by Sennache-hib-Marduk, submitted to the Assyrians on the rib after the expulsion of Merodach-Baladan. condition that he be put in possession of the land According to the Canon of regents (SCHRADER, Bit-Jakin. Esar-Haddon, in the year 676, actup. 319), this expedition against Merodach-Bala- ally invaded the land and conquered it. Probadan fell in the year 704 B.C. In the year 700 bly Nabozirnapsatiasir then lost his life (LENORSennacherib accomplished his unfortunate expe- MANT, l. c., p. 303). Nahir-Marduk's son, Nadition against Judah and Egypt, according to the bobelsum, returned to the sentiments of his grandentirely credible testimony of the Assyrian monu- father. He took part in the insurrection made ments. The news of his defeat appears to have by Samulsumukin, the second son of Esar-Hadbeen the signal for a new insurrection to the don and viceroy of Babylon, against his elder Chaldean patriots. For in the following year brother Asurbanipal, great king of Assyria (651); (699), according to the Taylor-cylinder (SCHRA- Asurbanipal conquered. Samulsumukin burned DER, p. 224), we find Sennacherib on the march himself in his palace in Babylon (648). After against the rebellious Babylonians. Merodach- many negotiations, and finally after an expedition Baladan had allied himself with a young prince that devastated the whole land of Elam, the king Suzub, son of Gatul, of the race of Kalban, and of Elam, Ummanaldas, was obliged to promise Belibus found it best to enter into negotiations that he would surrender Nabobelsum. The latter with these opponents. For this, according to procured his death at the hands of a master of the Berosus, he was deposed and carried prisoner to horse. Asurbanipal, when the head of the corpse Assyria. Sennacherib first attacked Suzub, whose was sent to him, had it preserved in salt. A troops were defeated; he himself escaped. Then small bas-relief, found in the palace of KujundSennacherib turned against Merodach-Baladan, schik, displays Asurbanipal banqueting in a garwho gave way before the threatening danger. den with his wives, and the head of Nabobelsum He fled by ship to the city Nagit-Raggi, situated hanging before him on a tree. Only thirty-five on an island in the Persian gulf. The territory years later Nineveh was destroyed by Nebuchadof Bit-Jakin was desolated. Sennacherib made nezzar and Cyaxares (605)! his son Esar-Haddon king of Akkad and Sumir, According to our chapter, the embassy of Me i. e., Babylon (699). After that were eleven years rodach-Baladan to Hezekiah fell in the time when of quiet. During this period, Merodach-Baladan, the former reigned undisputed king of Babylon. whom the king of Elam, Kudhir. Nakhunta, had As shown above, this was a period of twelve made lord of a strip of the coast, had moved the years, reaching from 721-709, It must not be discontented elements of Babylon and Chaldea to supposed that Merodach-Baladan would not have emigrate in mass into his land. This led Senna- sought the friendship of Hezekiah had he not cherib to build a fleet in Nineveh (they were heard of his victory over Sennacherib. An incalled “Syrian ships" because Phænician seamen scription of Sargon's (LENORMANT, I. c., 231) says manned them), with which he attacked the island of Merodach-Baladan: “For twelve years had he and the coast possessed by Merodach-Baladan, sent embassies contrary to the will of the gods of and entirely devastated them (see the remarks on Babylon, the city of Bel, the judge of the gode.” xliii. 14). At this point Merodach-Baladan dis- These twelve years are manifestly the twelve "ppears from history. It is related that the invears of Merodach-Baladan's undisputed reign. fluential Babylonians then forsook him. On the During this period the latter had sought allies for other hand, they moved the king of Elam to send the event of 'war breaking out again. Is it to be

wondered if, under these circumstances, he should was of prime importance to those ambassadors. send such an embassy to Hezekiah? According In this case oba is identical with the 1977 nys to 2 Chron. xxxii. 31, the messenger came from of xxii. 8. It appears that Hezekiah in ihis disBabylon to Hezekiah "to inquire of the wonder that was done in the land." The context shows play observed a climax descendens, beginning with that Hezekiah's miraculous recovery and the mi- the precious articles of luxury and ending with racle of the sun-dial are meant. It is, therefore,

the things of practical need. Mix (probably probable that the report of this miracle penetrated the store-houses like e. g. Joel i. 17; 2 Chron. xi., to distant lands. If it came to astrological Baby- etc.) to contain stores in case of siege. It is to be lon, what wonder if the king of this city had his noted that had this embassy come after the overattention drawn to the king of Judea, especially have had nothing to 'show “in his dominion”

throw of Sennacherib, Hezekiah would verily as it was known of this people that more than once they had been an opponent or an ally of the Assy- of the capital had been in the power of the enemy,

outside of Jerusalem. For the whole land outside rians that was not to be despised.

who would have left little worth seeing. His 2. At that time-shewed them not. - store-house, the spiceries, the fine oil,” do not inVers. 1, 2. The author would say that Hezekiah timate specially war-booty. Moreover it would gave ear to the words of those ambassadors (see then need to read: Hezekiah showed them the Text. and Gram.). Probably there is in this an spoil he had taken from the Assyrians. Conip. intimation that they already made propositions on ver. 6. of a political nature not displeasing to Hezekiah. And as he was pleased to hear what they said, so

3. Then came Isaiah - my days.-Vers. he wished them to see the things that gave him 3-8. Apart from the internal probability of it, one joy. There appears to me, therefore, in this an may conclude from 183' that Isaiah came to the tithesis of hearing and showing, to be a hint of king with the inquiry of ver. 3 while the ambasHezekiah's sin. n) is an obscure word both as

sadors were still in Jerusalem. For this Imperto derivation and meaning. In Gen. xxxvii. 25; fect can only have the meaning that the coming

was in a certain sense still an incompleted transxliii. 11 mi) either means spices in general, or, action, although the king had then shown them which is more likely, a particular sort of spice every thing (ver. 4). The Prophet regarded them (storax-or tragacanth gum. Comp. LEYRER in as advenas, arrivals, and that is a quality they Herzog's Real-Eycyclop. XIV. p. 664). Many have as long as they are in Jerusalem (comp. expositors are disposed to recognize in our ongi xxxvii. 34 with 2 Kings xix. 33; Josh. ix. 8 with (K’ri, 2 Kings xx. 13, in)) the same word, and Gen. xlii. 7). But it also seems very probable to to understand by I nia a spice magazine; on

me that the Prophet addressed his inquiries to which LEYRER, 1.c., remarks that this would im- the king in the presence of the ambassadors, and

that “these men is to be understood δεικτικώς. ply a great monopoly carried on by the kings of This suits entirely the free and exalted position

. Judah in this particular.. Others generalize the that the prophets assumed as the immediate mes. meaning and regard “spicery house” as a denominatio o, potiori for “ provision house" in general. sengers and instruments of Jehovah, even toward

the kings themselves. Comp. on vii. 14. If Others, finally, derive nid?, not from *} (" to thereby those ambassadors enjoyed the opportubeat, pound,” hence nx)," that which is pounded nity of observing for once a genuine prophet of in a mortar”), but from a root hud, not used in the true God in the exercise of his office, and if Hebrew, but which is kindred to 013,“ to gather, it was one of those revelations of His being such

thereby the true God Himself drew near to them, preserve,” and in Arabic means (Pi. kajjata) “to as the LORD at times vouchsafed to the heathen, cram, stuff full.” Of this n) would be a Niphal e. 9., Moses before Pharaoh, Balaam before Baform (xxx. 12), and mean “provision, treasure.” lak, Elisha before Naaman, Daniel before the Thus HITZIG, KNOBEL, FUERST (Lex. under kings of Babylon. To the question what said

these men? Hezekiah gives no answer, and 013 and 113), DELITZSCH (comp. EWALD, Gesch. Isaiah presses it no further. Their very presence d. V. Isr. III. p. 690, Anm. 1). The items that there and the reception they found were adequate follow, in which, beside gold, silver and spiceries proof that Hezekiah allowed himself to treat with (D'DUI, the most general expression for aromatic them, that once again, as he had done by the Bubstances, comp. LEYRER, I. c., p. 661) are par- Egyptian alliance (xxvii.-xxxii.), he bad exticularly named, of course correspond best with a tended to the world-power at least the little finword of such general significance as “provision.” ger. That, in his answer, he lays stress on the Still the subject is not satisfactorily cleared up. far country, betrays an attempt to exeuse himOn “the precious ointment," MOVERS (who trans- self. One cannot show men the door who come lates noj n'"styrax house”) makes the follow- from a distance to show one honor and friending remark: “Here Jewish expositors, no doubt ship. And Hezekiah ought not to do that. Neion the best grounds, understand the balsam oil got ther ought he to indulge in vain boasting nor to from the royal gardens, comp. 2 Chron. xxxii. 27. seek false supports. O, had he only known how Olive oil, that was obtained in all Judea, was not ill-timed both were in the case of Babylon! He stored in the treasuries along with gold, silver and would surely, without violating the duties of hosaromatics, but in special store-houses, 2 Chron. pitality, have yet avoided with anxious care every xxxii. 28.” (Phön. II. 3, p. 227 Anm.). D:63 nus adds the name Babylon so briefly to the preceding

approach to more intimate relations. That he is likely “the arsenal,” as 0957 often signifies all they are come from a far country unto me" seems sorts of war implements, and the arsenal doubtless to betray a certain embarrassment, a presentiment

of having committed a fault. [See remarks of (comp. 1 Kings ii. 38, 42). For the meaning of Tr. below.]

We stand here on a boundary of immeasurable ? (ON XSA, 2 Kings xx. 19), see Text. and Gram. importance. Assyria is done away, but Babylon I fall back on the conjecture given above, that the rises aloft. Ahaz had formally introduced Assy- ambassadors were present at this interview. If ria by seeking its help. Here Babylon offers it one then considers that the prophecy of vers. 6, 7 self. With cat-like friendliness it creeps up. presupposes war between Babylon and Judah, Hezekiah ought to have maintained an attitude of and that this poorly corresponds with the assupolite refusal. His vanity betrayed him into boast- rances of friendship just interchanged between ing and coquetting. Still by just this he yielded Hezekiah and the ambassadors, he can see that himself to the world-power. The Theocracy was

the word of the Prophet would embarrass these later, under Zedekiah, ground to pieces between parties. It would the king, because it must seem Egypt and Babylon. Only by leaning solely and strange that he, at the moment when an honorawholly on the LORD could it maintain itself be- ble embassy had brought him offers of peace and tween the southern and the northern world-power, friendship, should call the announcement of the between the Nile kingdom on the one hand, and termination of the friendship (though it should the Euphrates-Tigris kingdom on the other. He

turn to his disadvantage) a “good word.” It zekiah had unfortunately indulged in intimacies might appear as if he, Hezekiah, were a weatherboth with Egypt and with Babylon. The necessary cock, an unreliable man, who in turning about consequence was that the Theocracy succumbed knew how to transform himself from a friend into to the mightier of these. Hence it is announced an enemy. To ward off this evil appearance from to him that the precious things, of which he had himself, Hezekiah speaks these words, which are made a boastful display, must go to Babylon, yea, primarily addressed to the ambassadors.

He that the posterity that was to issue from him who would say: is it not self-evident that I call the as yet was childless, would once do chamberlain prophetic word good only on the assumption that service in the palace of the kings of Babylon. peace and truth shall continue while I live? By With this the Prophet points to a new and fatal this construction disappears also the objection future. Here, between the first and second parts that has been made to Hezekiah, as if he betrayed of Isaiah, we stand on the bridge between Nine- by this expression a sentiment like that depraved veh and Babylon. For what Nineveh was for the motto: “ apres moi le deluge." first part of Ísaiah, Babylon is for the second. It may be seen from 1 Kings xxi. 27 sqq. that

Let it be particularly noted that Isaiah says: the LORD lets Himself be moved by a penitent that which thy fathers have laid up in mind to postpone punishment beyond the lifestore until this day (ver. 6). Had Hezekiah's time of the man whom it primarily threatens.treasures been emptied by the event narrated 2 On diho occurs again Jer. xxxiii

. 6; comp. Kings xviii. 14 sqq., the Prophet could not have xiv. 13; Esther ix. 30. It means here, manifestly, spoken so. For then what the fathers had ga- peace and faithfulness in the sense of political thered came into the hands of Sennacherib; and peaceableness and fidelity to alliances.* whether, after the defeat of the latter, all was found again, one must doubt very much. Senna *[In his conjectural interpretation of Hezekiah's concherib, who knew that he would not be pursued,

duct and its relation to Isaiah's prophecy the Author

has only built on a foundation dating back to the could take all the spoils with him. Therefore the earliest traditionary exposition. And the building, one expression: "what thy fathers have laid up shall be must admit, agrees with the foundation. He has only carried captive to Babylon" favors the view that when so much is built

, and of such a sort, one is con

built further than others, but in the same style. Yet, Hezekiah showed the ambassadors the gatherings strained to look at the foundation to see if such a strucof his fathers, that therefore this embassy did not

ture is justified. The Author admits that he resorts to come after the defeat of Sennacherib. [If the conjecture; his confidence is in the natural reasonable

ness of it. But his work may be challenged down to foregoing has any force, it would equally prove the very foundation as, not only without warrant in that the Babylonish captivity must have preceded Seripture, but actually against Seripture. See Baene, the invasion of Sennacherib, "for then, after the judgment of expositors against Hezekiah, though it be latter event, what the fathers had gathered came the judgment of ages, must be reversed. into the hands of Sennacherib,” etc., as just above.

The only Scripture that can seem to give positive -Te.]

support to the (so commonly accepted) injurious view

of Hezekiah's conduct in the case before us is 2 Chr. That D'?is not simply the “ eunuch” appears of our text. But ver. 25 as clearly does not, and must

xxxii, 25, 31. Ver. 31 clearly relates to the transactions from Gen. xxxvii. 36; xxxix. 1. The word often not be brought in to shed light on them. It is in the stands for court officer, chamberlain generally (1 context separated from them by the statement of ver. Ki. xxii. 9; 2 Ki. viii, 6; ix. 32; xxv. 19, etc.). 1 of his heart, both he and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, It is clear that 703 must not be understood of di- so that the wrath of the Lord came not opon them in rect generation, and that is agreeable to usage.descriptive proof of the last statement in it, and inHezekiah’s son Manasseh went, indeed, as pri- cluded in this proof is ver. 31. See the comm. of Dr. Roner to Babylon (2. Chron. xxxiii. 11), but he .. ZOECKER in the LANGE, B W, in locp. 27. The rendid not act as chamberlain. Yet the prophecy forced, and that by the pressure of the very opinion

dering of the Eng. Ver. “How beit” for jJ1 ver. 31 is was fulfilled by what is related Dan. j. 3.

Hezekiah humbly submits himself to the de- ner." The particle introduces the additional statemont claration of the LORD. The expression Good is prosperity just described as having providentially led

of the trial Hezekiah underwent, and refers to the the word, etc. involves in general the sense of approval and acquiescence (comp. 1 Kings xviii. anything contrary to what may be included under the 24), especially that of submission under a severe

statement of ver. 26. 127y, God "left him," does not. judgment, but one that is recognized as just | The context must supply this, and we must not under.

What follows this verse is but

here combated. It means "And so" or "in this man

to it.

For it remains to be determined to what ho left him.

« PoprzedniaDalej »