Obrazy na stronie
PDF

28 “And the "destruction of the trangressors and of the sinners shall be together,

And they that forsake the LORD sh

all be consumed.

29 For they shall be ashamed of the oaks which ye have desired,

And ye shall be confounded for the

gardens that ye have chosen.

30 For ye shall be as an oak whose leaf fadeth,

And as a garden that hath no wate 31 And the strong shall be as tow, “And the maker of it as a spark, And they shall both burn together, And none shall quench them.

* Heb. breaking. But.

TEXTUAL AND

Wer. 21. Concerning the distinction between nEy, Ty and Detip comp. Darchsler in loc. I will only took that the grammatical form py requires as its primitive, fundamental meaning “the being righteous, integrity,” therefore the idea of the verb DTX in its abstract gen- -r erality (comp. Py "J'No, py ‘Jos), whereas mo, ... ... --> ---.' -- 1 - : although also abstract, signifies integrity as the moral quality of a person, and as the prerequisite of right doing. Comp. also EwAld, 3143 a ; 150 b-toetop on the other r : • hand, involves the idea of right perse, and in every respect of its concrete realization. It is thus at once normal right, and also rightful claim, legal proceeding, verdict, and judgment. It is natural that in application the three conceptions should blend with one another—so, related by root to o is properly pernoctare, then “to stay, to dwell" generally: comp. Ps. xxv 13; Prov. xv. 31; Job xix. 4.—The verb ns") does not again occur in Isaiah; its participle Piel only 2 Kings vi. 32.-Regarding the construction of ver. 21, on "nxop is not in a manner in apposition with TN-J, as one might be tempted to think, out of liking for the easier grammatical connection, for the sense is decidedly against it. Wer. 22. D'l"O because of the derivation from 130

more correct than Dolp, comp. Ezek. xxii. 18 sq.; Ps. cxix. 119; Prov. xxv. 4; xxvi. 23; only in Isaiah again, ver. 25. x35, only found again Hos. iv. 18, comp. Isa. lvi. 12, that with which one carouses, intoxicates himself, in French, ce qui soule. ‘Ann ár. Asy, is kindred to o: circumcised, cut, comp. juglare Falernum, Martial ep. i. 18; castrare vinum, Plin. Hist. Nat. wer. 23. "ty and D'Y'Y15 (comp. xxx. 1; lxv.2; Jer. vi. 28; Hos. ix. 15) is a play on words and indicates the relation of those men to God (1. Table), as the following ('l "nion) does their relation to men (2. Table, comp. Prov. xxix. 24).-The singular sh; embraces the D**\to as unity, as rank. Donov is an asy. "no is in is. v. 23; xxxiii. 15: xlv. 13. ver, 24. On on comp. ver.4. The Niphal pro is used here in the sense “to breathe again refreshed,” i.e., “refresh oneself” as Ivii. 6; Jer. xxxi. 15; Ezek. xxxi. 16, etc. This meaning, however, changes to the kindred one of DP3 to revenge, Niphal, to revenge oneself. For re

venge is a refreshment. Therefore also is Dril joined here with |p. which construction is the usual one for

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

but as an accusative that supplies the preposition that is wanting after E (alkali fashion, comp. on DTT vers. 20 and 12), comp. Grsenius, 2 118, 3 Anm; the plural p'o-ri, lead pieces, is the only form of the word, which • * : occurs only here; comp. Ezek. xxii. 18, 20; xxvii. 12.-Kindred passages, whose authors may have had our text in mind, are Jer. vi. 20 sq.; Zech. xiii. 7 sqq. Ver. 26. The beginning with nin"tox) has almost the appearance of a rhyme in relation to the same word, ver. 25. Evidently the prophet intends to emphasize the difference of sense by the similar sound of the words. The construction is an adverbial prolepsis. For whereas otherwise, in prolepsis that, which is the effect of the transaction, is adjoined to the object in the form of adjective, the adjoining occurs here in adverbial form; (comp. Jer. xxxiii. 7, 11; and 1 Kings xiii. 6). Ver. 28. As regards the sense, it does not matter whether we take oxy (properly fractura xv. 5; xxx. 26)

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

1. The prophet first looks back into the past. What were the people formerly 2. They were a }. in whom faithfulness and righteousness ourished. . But then he asks: what are they now? A ruined nation, in which unrighteousness and violence hold the sceptre. (vers. 21–23). The Lord will subject this people to a severe process of purifying, (vers. 24, 25): whose consequences will be a future, two-fold in form; a) the good elements will attain their original supremacy, Jerusalem will again become a city of justice, and by justice become partaker of salvation (vers. 26, 27); b) but the bad elements, the apostates that have forsaken Jehovah and served idols, shall by their own works be pitiably destroyed (vers, 28–31).

2. How is the faithful city — widow come unto them.—Vers. 21–23. DELITZSCII justly remarks that ver, 21 calls to mind the tone of the To P, the Elegy. And I have myself, in the comment on Lam. i. 1, pointed to the de}. of that passage on this. The tone of ament, the To's (occurring four times in Lam.),

- "ns- the archaic form "Tson made this passage appear

[ocr errors]

the wilderness, as Hos. xi. 1; Jer. ii. 2, or the period of David and Solomon? But as the prophet speaks here of the city (TYP) by which he can only mean Jerusalem, so one can only think immedioly of the beginning period of the kingdom. The prophet seems to have especially in mind the early days of Solomon. For this, without doubt, was in respect to the administration of justice the golden age of Israel. For in answer to Solomon's prayer for “an understanding heart, to judge the people and to discern between good and bad,” the Lord had given him “a wise and understanding heart, so that there was none like him before him, neither after him should any be like him.” 1 Kings iii. 9, 12. And by the celebrated judgment Solomon r(ndered (ibid ver, 16 sq.), the people “saw that the wisdom of God was in him, to do judgment (ibid. ver. 28). And, moreover, as “Solomon loved Jehovah” (ibid ver. 3), he was permitted also to build the Lord “an house,” and thereby to join the Lord and the people together by an important outward tie. , Hence could Jerusalem, in reference to that time, be justly named a “fixed city” (comp. To DiP3 ×xii. 23, 25; () no 1 Sam. ii. 35; xxv. 28), that “was full of justice,” and in which righteousness had, not a transitory, but a permanent abode. It is therefore doubtful whether, in addition to this elewated point represented by Solomon, we may regard the reign of Jehoshaphat, with its reformation of justice, 2 Chr. xix. 5 sq., that came an hundred years later, as referred to in this place. For that effort can only be looked on as a momentary check of the downward course that the nation began with Rehoboan. It may be asked with more justice; did not Isaiah have in mind here also an earlier age than that of Solomon?

[blocks in formation]

moo must be wanting or else a corresponding adversative be found. It must either say: as reo justice, righteousness formerly dwelt in it, ut now murderers, or; full of justice, righteousness dwelt in it; devoid of justice, murderers swarm in it. But the prophet, evidently influenced by an effort at brevity, expresses in the second member of the adversative phrase only that thought that corresponds to the thought of the first member, and easily joins on to it. That one may not translate, “it was full of justice” arises from the absence of the pronomen separatum. For only in cases where this may be supplied of itself may it be dispensed with. Thy silver is become.—With these words the prophet passes from the region of the inward and general to that of the concrete outward appearance. The silver of Jerusalem has become dross, the noble wine mixed with water. The noble metal, the noble wine can only mean the noble men. And it appears from ver. 23, which explains the figurative language, that the prophet has the princes of the people in mind. “Dicitur orgentum,” etc. “The silver is said to be turned into dross, and the pure wine to be mixed with water, when judges and senators turn from purity and grave manners, from integrity, sincerity and candor, and prostitute their own dignity.” V1TRING.A. As dross is related to silver, the emblem of moral purity (comp. LEYRER in HERZoë's R. Encycl. XV. p. 111, 114) so the diluting with water to the strong wine.—On the matter of the ver, comp. Jer. vi. 28; Ezek. xxii. 18 sqq.

Thy princes, etc.—By these words the prophet himself shows, as he often does, the meaning of his figurative language. On the change of

number comp. Ps. v. 10. “It is not boy, that

they chase after, but Dubov, not peace, but pacifying their greed.” DELITzsch. Comp. ver. 23 b with ver. 17 b, and the comment there. 3. Therefore—all thy tin.—Vers. 24, 25. From the contemplation of the past and present the prophet now turns to consider the future. The transition to it shall be made by a grand act of so and purifying. The prophet introduces his discourse with solemn language, espe

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

form appears in all the rest of the places where it is used, xlix. 26; lx. 16; Ps. cxxxii. 2, 5.“Ah! I will case,” etc. The Lord announces His intervention in terms that make known His determination to obtain satisfaction. I will turn, etc.—In the passages cited (see Text. & Gram.) the hand of the subject is not said to have been previously on the object named, and as little is such the case here. The translation of UMBREIT, therefore, “let come afresh” is not admissible. And for the same reason we must not, with V1TRINGA, who appeals to xi. 11, refer, T' D'Un to the samans et benefica manus, the healing and beneficent hand of God. The totality of the nation shall be subjected to a purifying process which the prophet compares to the process by which silver ore is freed from the mixture of ignoble metal, and rendered solid silver (ons lo or PPio Ps. xii. 7). The separation of the lead ore is promoted by applying alkali, comp. WINER R. W. B., word, Metals. 4. And I will restore—with righteousness.-Vers. 26, 27. With these words the prophet indicates the positive good that shall arise from this purifying process; such judges and counsellors as shall resemble those of the early age (ver. 21) and by whose agency Jerusalem shall become a righteous and faithful city. It is seen that the prophet ascribes a decisive effect to the influence of the chiefs of the state. He must very well have known, by what he observed in his times, how great must have been this influence for evil. This place reminds us much of Jer. xxiii. 3–6; xxxiii. 15, 16. For as Isa. in this place, so there Jer, promises the restoration of a good administration that shall exercise righteousness, and procure a name that shall be significant of that righteousness. Here as there, that name shall be an ideal one (not a name actually employed, comp. my comment on Jer. xxiii. 6). The glorious end shall correspond to the glorious beginning, (comp. “faithful city,” “righteousness lodged in it,” ver. 21). It is, moreover to me very probable that by the original and first times Isa. understands, not only Solomon's

time, but also Melchizedec's. For PT, Ty and Pyop (city of righteousness and king of righteousness) comp. Heb. vii. 2, look quite too much alike. Also the name Adoni-zedec, Josh. x.; (comp. Adoni-bezek, Jud. i. 5; 1 Sam. xi. 8), proves that not only one king of Salem had a name composed of Zedec. It can only be objected that Melchizedec does not belong to the beginning of the Israel Jerusalem. Yet he does belong to the beginning of the Jerusalem of the history of grace. This city had not become the capital city of Israel, had it not before that been the city of Melchizedec; and all the glory and significance of the Israel Jerusalem is only a transitional fact, that would restore that ancient glory

of Melchizedec. (comp... my Art. Melchizedee in sing, Eng. vers. “converts ”) had to suffer hitherto

HERZOG's R. Encycl. ix. p. 300 sq.). We are so much the more justified in this reasoning as the ideal fact of the future that the prophet has in view is, without doubt, identical with the Messianic future (comp. xi. 3–5; Ps. lxxii. 1 sq.); the Messiah, however Ps. cx. 4 (comp. Heb. v. 6, 10; vi. 20; vii. 1 sqq.), is expressiy designated as the antitype of Melchizedec. Yer. 27, is difficult. The question is; by whose righteousness is Zion redeemed? To this three answers are given. Some say by the righteousness of the Israelites. Thus the Rabbins especially, “Because in it there shall be those who exercise justice, it is redeemed from its iniquities.” RASCIII. But that conflicts with vers. 24 25; for according to these declarations the Lor Himself vindicates the cleansing and deliverance of Israel as His own judging and sifting operation. Others regard the judgment and righteousness in question as God's. Against this idea there is, in itself, naturally nothing to object, in as much as there are plenty of passages in which saving effect is ascribed to the righteousness of God. DELITZSCH, who adopts this view, cites especially iv. 4; v. 16; xxviii. 17. But then ver. 27 would, in substance, say only in other words what is already contained in vers. 24, 25. It is to be considered moreover, and therein is seen the third answer to our inquiry— that in many passages, to which this is nearest kindred in its description of Messianic salvation, the righteousness of the administration of justice forms an essential element of that glorious time. Thus ix. 6 it is said, the Messiah shall order and support the kingdom of David with judgment * righteousness. Thus xi, 3–5 it is said of the rod out of Jesse, that he shall judge the poor with righteousness, and that righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins. And xvi. 5 we read that upon the throne and in the tabernacle of I)avid one shall sit, “judging and seeking judgment, and hastening righteousness.” But in Jeremiah’s celebrated prophecies, xxiii. 5 sq. and xxxiii. 15, it is emphatically said that the Lord will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and that this one shall restore judgment and righteousness in the land, and shall procure to him the name Jehovah our righteousness. And, to prevent our thinking that this righteous government is to be only the prerogative of the Messiah, it is said Isa. xxxii. 1, expressly of the “princes” too, “they shall rule, in judgment.” Our passage, also, which does not at all mention the person of the Messiah, speaks of judges and counsellors in the plural, which may remain undetermined whether the abstract pluralis generalis, is meant or an actual pluralis multitudinis. In the former case the plural would include the Messiah, and this is in the end, the more probable; in the latter case the righteous judges and counsellors would be distinguished from the Messiah, who is only presented in idea. In any case, by our construction, ver. 27 is a corollary of ver. 26. The righteous judges named in ver. 26, shall fulfil as the task set before them just that which is mentioned ver, 27; by righteous rule they shall procure deliverance from the evils under which Zion and the Do? (those return

on account of the unrighteousness of their rulers. This blat”, by reference to the yo "Ho (those turning from transgression) lix. 20 has been translated “converts;' [so Eng. ver.]. But to me it seems more likely that Isa, whose manifold use of Pot' is a prelude to Jeremiah's use of the Word, uses the word here in the double sense of the spiritual and bodily return, that it so often has in Jer. (comp, my comment on Jer. xxxi. 22). To be sure Isa, does not, in what precedes, Speak expressly of the Exile. But this notion is impliedly contained in ver, 25. For, of course the exile belonged essentially to that mighty smelting and purifying process to which the People must be subjected. Let a comparison be olde of the passages that give a survey of the Messianic salvation, and it will be seen that precisely the return to the holy land, which of course oannot be conceived of without the spiritual reform, forms a principal element (see my comment Jer, iii. 18). If therefore our text is related to later passages like the germ to the developed plant, then we are right in regarding the latter as * commentary on it, and accordingly in takin the '3? in the double sense of a spiritual j bodily, return (Ezr. vi. 21; Neh. viii. 17). 5. And the destruction — none shall quench them.—Vers. 28–31. The reverse side of the smelting process, the fate of the “dross” is presented to us here. It is difficult to say what

difference there is between Bytoń, (transgressors) and D'or (sinners). At all events the former

is the more particular, (see ver. 2), the latter the more general word. Both words signify inimical conduct, the former more toward the person of Jehovah, the latter more to the idea of the good.

At the same time son as Piel form, contains an intensive force in comparison with son ver. 4.—

The " o, “they that forsake,” are related to

“the transgressors,” as negative to positive. Whoever does evil conducts himself, in some fashion, aggressively against the Lord. But whoever deserts from the Lord is an idolater. In this sense the expression "Tns Ply is often used; so ver.

4; still more plainly lz v. 11, the sole place in Isa., beside this where the op' occurs in connection with "; comp. Hos. iv. 10; Jer. ii. 13; xvi. 11; xvii. 13 (in which place Jer., had our text before him); xxii. 9; 1 Kingsix. 9, etc.

For ye shall be ashamed, etc.—The general declaration that “the transgressors,” etc., shall bo destroyed, is more particularly established by two connected sentences, each of which begins with “for,” and the second is subordinated to the first. Those that forsake the Lord would not be destroyed if they found the expected help from those to whom they deserted. But they are destroyed because they do not find in idols this help; consequently are brought to shame in the hopes they entertained in this direction. I understand, therefore, “the oaks” and “gardens” to be synecdochical for the idols that were worshipped in them. It is past comprehension how DRECHSLER can say that “nothing whatever in the text itself or in the context suggests the exlanation of idolatry.” He could only say, so Fo he has utterly disregarded the specific meaning of " "asy, “they that forsake.” For ye shall be as an oak, etc.—This exlains how the becoming ashamed ver, 29 shall realized. The “for” of ver. 30, is therefore not co-ordinate with the “for” of ver. 29, but subordinate to it. Thus the prophet retains his figure of speach. Those that clung with their hearts to treacherous trees and gardens, and forsook the living waters, (Jer. ii. 13; xvii. 13), shall themselves become withered trees and driedup gardens. The Terebinth is not evergreen, as is commonly asserted (comp. ARNOLD in HERzog's R. Encycl. XI. p. 26). Therefore not the normal falling of the leaves is meant, but their abnormal wilting. And the strong shall be, etc.—Ver. 31. But the idols are not only powerless, they are positively ruinous. For this sin against the first commandment includes in itself all the elements of spiritual as well as bodily ruin. The prophet would say that the idolater, even if he be no poor, powerless man, resembling the withered tree, or the garden devoid of water, if on the contrary, he is rich, and mighty, and , like the tree abounding in sap, or a well watered garden, nevertheless, by the ruinous influences of idolatry he shall be destroyed. He compares such an idolater to the tow (Jud. xvi. 9); his work, however, i. e., the idols to a spark (?)s") &r-Āey.) [Ver. 21. The faithful city (“including the ideas of a city and a state, urbs et civitas, the body politic, the church of which Jerusalem was the centre and metropolis.”) “The particle at the beginning of the verse is properly interrogative, but like the English how is used also to express surprise, ‘How has she become?' i.e., how

could she ibly become? How strange that she should become!” J. A. ALEXANDER. Ver. 23. They judge not — doth not

come unto them.—“They are not simply unjust judges, they are no judges at all, they will not act as such, except when they can profit by it.” J. A. ALEXANDER. Wer. 24. “I will ease me.—This refers to what is said in ver, 14, where God is represented as burdened with their crimes.”—“It means that He had been pained and grieved by their crimes; His patience had been put to its utmost trial; and now. He would seek relief from this by inflicting due punishment on them. Comp. Ezek. v. 13; Deut. xxviii. 63,” BARNEs. Wer. 27. “This verse means that the very same events by which the divine justice was to manifest itself in the destruction of the wicked, should be the occasion and the means of deliverance to Zion, or the true people of God,” J. A. ALExAnner. “With_judgment—In a righteous, just manner. That is, God shall evince His justice in doing it; His justice to a ple to whom so many promises had been made, and His justice in delivering them from long and grievous op

pression. All this would be attended with the displays of judgment, in effecting their deliverance.” “With righteousness.--This refers

to the character of those who shall return. The would be a reformed, righteous people,” BARNEs].

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL.

1. On ver, 1. Concerning Judah and Jerusalem.–JEROME here pronounces decidedly against Chiliasm, in that he says: Scio quosdam Judaeam, etc. “I am aware that some explain Judah and Jerusalem of celestial things, and Isaiah under the person of the Lord Jesus, that He foretells the captivity of that province in our land, and the after return and ascending the sacred mount, in the last days. Which things we make no account of holding them to be wholly contrary to the faith of Christians.” Whether JEROME understands by these fidei Christianorum contraria, which the universa despises, Chiliasm generally, or only the giving this yassage a chiliastic significance may be doubted. }. on Jer. xix. 10, he says in regard to the Jewish expectation of a restitution of Israel to the earthly Canaan; Qu'e licet non sequamur,” etc. “Which we may not follow, nor yet can we condemn it; for many churchmen and martyrs have said that. And each is strong in his opinion and the whole may be reserved to the judgment of the Lord.” We see from this he inclined more to reject Chiliasm. 2. On ver. 1. In the days of, etc.—Sciamus uoque, Ezechiam, etc. We know, moreover, that Hezekiah began to reign in Jerusalem in the twelfth year of Romulus, who erected a city of his own name in Italy, so that it is very apparent how very much more ancient our history is than that of other nations. JEROME, comp. his Epist. ad Damasum, where it is said: Regnavit, Ozias annis 52, etc. "“Uzziah reigned 52 years, in the time Amulias ruled among the Latins, and Agamester 12th among the Athenians. After whose death Isaiah the prophet saw this vision, i. e., in that year that Romulus, founder of the Roman empire, was born.” 3. On ver. 2. THEoDoRET remarks that heaven and earth were qualified witnesses to the ingratitude of Israel because the people “received through them the most manifold benefits. For heaven extended to them from above the food of manna. For he commanded, says Ps. lxxviii. 23, 24, the clouds from above, and opened the doors of heaven, and rained down manna upon them to eat, and he gave them bread from heaven. But the earth brought them in the desert the needed water, and in Palestine it afforded them a superabundance of all sorts of fruits.” That heaven and earth, however, can actually bear their testimony he proves by reference to the display at the death of the Lord; “for when the Jews #. nailed the Saviour to the cross, the earth quaked mindful of the testimony; but heaven, unable to convey this sensation owing to its position overhead, displayed the sun in his course, robbed of his beams and brought in darkness as testimony against the impious deed.” 4. On ver, 3. “There God tells them to go to the beasts' school and uncover their heads before the oxen and asses as their teachers, who though the stupidest and slowest beasts, still submit to their lords and drivers, and are therefore presented to us by God that we may learn from their example, how we should have reverence before our God. Is not that the greatest shame that, ac

« PoprzedniaDalej »