Bibelkommentare

The first verse of this chapter is intended for a title to the whole book, and it is probable that this was the first sermon that this prophet was appointed to publish and to affix in writing (as Calvin thinks the custom of the prophets was) to the door of the temple, as with us proclamations are fixed to public places, that all might read them (Hab 2:2), and those that would might take out authentic copies of them, the original being, after some time, laid up by the priests among the records of the temple. The sermon which is contained in this chapter has in it, I. A high charge exhibited, in God's name, against the Jewish church and nation, 1. For their ingratitude, Isa 1:2,3. 2. For their incorrigibleness, Isa 1:5. 3. For the universal corruption and degeneracy of the people, Isa 1:4,6,21,22. 4. For the perversion of justice by their rulers, Isa 1:23. II. A sad complaint of the judgments of God, which they had brought upon themselves by their sins, and by which they were brought almost to utter ruin, Isa 1:7-9. III. A just rejection of those shows and shadows of religion which they kept up among them, notwithstanding this general defection and apostasy, Isa 1:10-15. IV. An earnest call to repentance and reformation, setting before them life and death, life if they compiled with the call and death if they did not, Isa 1:16-20. V. A threatening of ruin to those that would not be reformed, Isa 1:24,28-31. VI. A promise of a happy reformation at last, and a return to their primitive purity and prosperity, Isa 1:25-27. And all this is to be applied by us, not only to the communities we are members of, in their public interests, but to the state of our own souls.

INTRODUCTION.

ISAIAH, son of Amoz (not Amos); contemporary of Jonah, Amos, Hosea, in Israel, but younger than they; and of Micah, in Judah. His call to a higher degree of the prophetic office

(Isa 6:1-13)

is assigned to the last year of Uzziah, that is, 754 B.C. The first through fifth chapters belong to the closing years of that reign; not, as some think, to Jotham's reign: in the reign of the latter he seems to have exercised his office only orally, and not to have left any record of his prophecies because they were not intended for all ages. The first through fifth and sixth chapters are all that was designed for the Church universal of the prophecies of the first twenty years of his office. New historical epochs, such as occurred in the reigns of Ahaz and Hezekiah, when the affairs of Israel became interwoven with those of the Asiatic empires, are marked by prophetic writings. The prophets had now to interpret the judgments of the Lord, so as to make the people conscious of His punitive justice, as also of His mercy.

Isa 7:1-10:4

belong to the reign of Ahaz. The thirty-sixth through thirty-ninth chapters are historical, reaching to the fifteenth year of Hezekiah; probably the tenth through twelfth chapters and all from the thirteenth through twenty-sixth chapters, inclusive, belong to the same reign; the historical section being appended to facilitate the right understanding of these prophecies; thus we have Isaiah's office extending from about 760 to 713 B.C., forty-seven years. Tradition (Talmud) represents him as having been sawn asunder by Manasseh with a wooden saw, for having said that he had seen Jehovah

(Ex 33:20; 2Ki 21:16; Heb 11:37).

2Ch 32:32

seems to imply that Isaiah survived Hezekiah; but "first and last" is not added, as in

2Ch 26:22,

which makes it possible that his history of Hezekiah was only carried up to a certain point. The second part, the fortieth through sixty-sixth chapters, containing complaints of gross idolatry, needs not to be restricted to Manasseh's reign, but is applicable to previous reigns. At the accession of Manasseh, Isaiah would be eighty-four; and if he prophesied for eight years afterwards, he must have endured martyrdom at ninety-two; so Hosea prophesied for sixty years. And Eastern tradition reports that he lived to one hundred and twenty. The conclusive argument against the tradition is that, according to the inscription, all Isaiah's prophecies are included in the time from Uzziah to Hezekiah; and the internal evidence accords with this.

His WIFE is called the prophetess

[Isa 8:3],

that is, endowed, as Miriam, with a prophetic gift.

His CHILDREN were considered by him as not belonging merely to himself; in their names, Shearjashub, "the remnant shall return"

[Isa 7:3,

Margin], and Maher-shalal-hash-baz, "speeding to the spoil, he hasteth to the prey"

[Isa 8:1,

Margin], the two chief points of his prophecies are intimated to the people, the judgments of the Lord on the people and the world, and yet His mercy to the elect.

His GARMENT of sackcloth

(Isa 20:2),

too, was a silent preaching by fact; he appears as the embodiment of that repentance which he taught.

His HISTORICAL WORKS.--History, as written by the prophets, is retroverted prophecy. As the past and future alike proceed from the essence of God, an inspired insight into the past implies an insight into the future, and vice versa. Hence most of the Old Testament histories are written by prophets and are classed with their writings; the Chronicles being not so classed, cannot have been written by them, but are taken from historical monographs of theirs; for example, Isaiah's life of Uzziah,

2Ch 26:22;

also of Hezekiah,

2Ch 32:32;

of these latter all that was important for all ages has been preserved to us, while the rest, which was local and temporary, has been lost.

The INSCRIPTION

(Isa 1:1)

applies to the whole book and implies that Isaiah is the author of the second part (the fortieth through sixty-sixth chapters), as well as of the first. Nor do the words, "concerning Judah and Jerusalem"

[Isa 1:1],

oppose the idea that the inscription applies to the whole; for whatever he says against other nations, he says on account of their relation to Judah. So the inscription of Amos, "concerning Israel"

[Am 1:1],

though several prophecies follow against foreign nations. EWALD maintains that the fortieth through sixty-sixth chapters, though spurious, were subjoined to the previous portion, in order to preserve the former. But it is untrue that the first portion is unconnected with those chapters. The former ends with the Babylonian exile

(Isa 39:6),

the latter begins with the coming redemption from it. The portion, the fortieth through forty-sixth chapters, has no heading of its own, a proof that it is closely connected with what precedes, and falls under the general heading in

Isa 1:1.

JOSEPHUS (The Antiquities of the Jews, 11. 1, sec. 1, 2) says that Cyrus was induced by the prophecies of Isaiah

(Isa 44:28; 45:1, 13)

to aid the Jews in returning and rebuilding the temple

Ezr 1:1-11

confirms this; Cyrus in his edict there plainly refers to the prophecies in the second portion, which assign the kingdoms to him from Jehovah, and the duty of rebuilding the temple. Probably he took from them his historical name Cyrus (Coresh). Moreover, subsequent prophets imitate this second portion, which EWALD assigns to later times; for example, compare

Jer 50:1-51:64

with Isaiah's predictions against Babylon

[Is 13:1-14:23].

"The Holy One of Israel," occurring but three times elsewhere in the Old Testament

[2Ki 19:22; Ps 78:41; 89:18; Jer 50:29; 51:5],

is a favorite expression in the second, as in the first portion of Isaiah: it expresses God's covenant faithfulness in fulfilling the promises therein: Jeremiah borrows the expression from him. Also

Ecclesiasticus 48:22-25

("comforted"), quotes

Isa 40:1

as Isaiah's.

Lu 4:17

quotes

Isa 61:1, 2

as Isaiah's, and as read as such by Jesus Christ in the synagogue.

The DEFINITENESS of the prophecies is striking: As in the second portion of isaiah, so in

Mic 4:8-10,

the Babylonian exile, and the deliverance from it, are foretold a hundred fifty years before any hostilities had arisen between Babylon and Judah. On the other hand, all the prophets who foretell the Assyrian invasion coincide in stating, that Judah should be delivered from it, not by Egyptian aid, but directly by the Lord. Again Jeremiah, in the height of the Chaldean prosperity, foretold its conquest by the Medes, who should enter Babylon through the dry bed of the Euphrates on a night of general revelry. No human calculation could have discovered these facts. EICHORN terms these prophecies "veiled historical descriptions," recognizing in spite of himself that they are more than general poetical fancies. The fifty-third chapter of Isaiah was certainly written ages before the Messiah, yet it minutely portrays His sufferings: these cannot be Jewish inventions, for the Jews looked for a reigning, not a suffering, Messiah.

Rationalists are so far right that THE PROPHECIES ARE ON A GENERAL BASIS whereby they are distinguished from soothsaying. They rest on the essential idea of God. The prophets, penetrated by this inner knowledge of His character, became conscious of the eternal laws by which the world is governed: that sin is man's ruin, and must be followed by judgment, but that God's covenant mercy to His elect is unchangeable. Without prophetism, the elect remnant would have decreased, and even God's judgments would have missed their end, by not being recognized as such: they would have been unmeaning, isolated facts. Babylon was in Isaiah's days under Assyria; it had tried a revolt unsuccessfully: but the elements of its subsequent success and greatness were then existing. The Holy Ghost enlightened his natural powers to discern this its rise; and his spiritual faculties, to foresee its fall, the sure consequence, in God's eternal law, of the pride which pagan success generates--and also Judah's restoration, as the covenant-people, with whom God, according to His essential character, would not be wroth for ever. True conversion is the prophet's grand remedy against all evils: in this alone consists his politics. Rebuke, threatening, and promise, regularly succeed one another. The idea at the basis of all is in

Isa 26:7-9; Le 10:3; Am 3:2.

The USE OF THE PRESENT AND PRETERITE in prophecy is no proof that the author is later than Isaiah. For seers view the future as present, and indicate what is ideally past, not really past; seeing things in the light of God, who "calls the things that are not as though they were." Moreover, as in looking from a height on a landscape, hills seem close together which are really wide apart, so, in events foretold, the order, succession, and grouping are presented, but the intervals of time are overlooked. The time, however, is sometimes marked

(Jer 25:12; Da 9:26).

Thus the deliverance from Babylon, and that effected by Messiah, are in rapid transition grouped together by THE LAW OF PROPHETIC SUGGESTION; yet no prophet so confounds the two as to make Messiah the leader of Israel from Babylon. To the prophet there was probably no double sense; but to his spiritual eye the two events, though distinct, lay so near, and were so analogous, that he could not separate them in description without unfaithfulness to the picture presented before him. The more remote and antitypical event, however, namely, Messiah's coming, is that to which he always hastens, and which he describes with far more minuteness than he does the nearer type; for example, Cyrus (compare

Isa 45:1 with Isa 53:1-12).

In some cases he takes his stand in the midst of events between, for example, the humiliation of Jesus Christ, which he views as past, and His glorification, as yet to come, using the future tense as to the latter (compare

Isa 53:4-9 with 53:10-12).

Marks of the time of events are given sparingly in the prophets: yet, as to Messiah, definitely enough to create the general expectation of Him at the time that He was in fact born.

The CHALDÆISMS alleged against the genuineness of the second portion of Isaiah, are found more in the first and undoubted portion. They occur in all the Old Testament, especially in the poetical parts, which prefer unusual expressions, and are due to the fact that the patriarchs were surrounded by Chaldee-speaking people; and in Isaiah's time a few Chaldee words had crept in from abroad.

His SYMBOLS are few and simple, and his poetical images correct; in the prophets, during and after the exile, the reverse holds good; Haggai and Malachi are not exceptions; for, though void of bold images, their style, unlike Isaiah's, rises little above prose: a clear proof that our Isaiah was long before the exile.

Of VISIONS, strictly so called, he has but one, that in the sixth chapter; even it is more simple than those in later prophets. But he often gives SIGNS, that is, a present fact as pledge of the more distant future; God condescending to the feebleness of man

(Isa 7:14; 37:30; 38:7).

The VARIETIES IN HIS STYLE do not prove spuriousness, but that he varied his style with his subject. The second portion is not so much addressed to his contemporaries, as to the future people of the Lord, the elect remnant, purified by the previous judgments. Hence its tenderness of style, and frequent repetitions

(Isa 40:1):

for comforting exhortation uses many words; so also the many epithets added to the name of God, intended as stays whereon faith may rest for comfort, so as not to despair. In both portions alike there are peculiarities characteristic of Isaiah; for example, "to be called" equivalent to to be: the repetition of the same words, instead of synonyms, in the parallel members of verses; the interspersing of his prophecies with hymns: "the remnant of olive trees," &c., for the remnant of people who have escaped God's judgments. Also compare

Isa 65:25 with Isa 11:6.

The CHRONOLOGICAL ARRANGEMENT favors the opinion that Isaiah himself collected his prophecies into the volume; not Hezekiah's men, as the Talmud guesses from

Pr 25:1.

All the portions, the dates of which can be ascertained, stand in the right place, except a few instances, where prophecies of similar contents are placed together: with the termination of the Assyrian invasion (the thirty-sixth through thirty-ninth chapters) terminated the public life of Isaiah. The second part is his prophetic legacy to the small band of the faithful, analogous to the last speeches of Moses and of Jesus Christ to His chosen disciples.

The EXPECTATION OF MESSIAH is so strong in Isaiah, that JEROME To Paulinus calls his book not a prophecy, but the gospel: "He is not so much a prophet as an evangelist." Messiah was already shadowed forth in

Ge 49:10,

as the Shiloh, or tranquillizer; also in

Psalms 2, 45, 72, 110.

Isaiah brings it out more definitely; and, whereas they dwelt on His kingly office, Isaiah develops most His priestly and prophetic office;

the hundred tenth Psalm

also had set forth His priesthood, but His kingly rather than, as Isaiah, His suffering, priesthood. The latter is especially dwelt on in the second part, addressed to the faithful elect; whereas the first part, addressed to the whole people, dwells on Messiah's glory, the antidote to the fears which then filled the people, and the assurance that the kingdom of God, then represented by Judah, would not be overwhelmed by the surrounding nations.

His STYLE (HENGSTENBERG, Christology of the Old Testament,) is simple and sublime; in imagery, intermediate between the poverty of Jeremiah and the exuberance of Ezekiel. He shows his command of it in varying it to suit his subject.

The FORM is mostly that of Hebrew poetical parallelism, with, however, a freedom unshackled by undue restrictions.

JUDAH, the less apostate people, rather than Israel, was the subject of his prophecies: his residence was mostly at Jerusalem. On his praises, see

Ecclesiasticus 48:22-25.

Christ and the apostles quote no prophet so frequently.

Introduction to Isaiah

Section 1. Division of the Books of the Old Testament

Early on the Jews divided the books of the Old Testament into three parts - the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa (the holy writings). The Law was comprised of the five books of Moses. Priority was given to this division because it was the first composed, as well as on account of its containing their civil and ecclesiastical constitution and their oldest historical records.

The Prophets comprised the second and the largest division of the sacred writings of the Jews. This portion included the books of Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, and 2 Kings, which were called the "former prophets;" and Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the books from Hosea to Malachi, which were called the "latter prophets." Daniel has been excluded from this portion by later Jews and assigned to the third division, because they did not regard him as a prophet, but as an historical writer. Formerly, his work was doubtless included in the second division.

The third portion, "the Hagiographa," includes the Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and the two books of Chronicles.

This three-fold division of the Old Testament is as old as the time of our Saviour, because he refers to it in Luke 24:44. The Jews attribute the arrangement and division of the canonical books to Ezra. They say that he was assisted in this by 120 men who constituted 'a great synagogue;' that Daniel, and his three friends, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, were of this number; and that Haggai and Zechariah, together with Simon the Just, were also connected with it. But this statement is known to be erroneous. From the time of Daniel to the time of Simon the Just, not less than 250 years intervened (Alexander on the Canon, pp. 26, 27); and of course all these persons could not have been present. It is not, however, improbable that Ezra may have been assisted by learned and pious men who aided him in the work. What Ezra did is indeed unknown. It is the general opinion that he collected and arranged the books which now compose the Old Testament; that perhaps he wrote some of the historical books, or compiled them from fragments of history and documents that might have been in the public archives (compare the Analysis of Isaiah 36); and that he gave a finish and arrangement to the whole. Since Ezra was an inspired man, the arrangement of the sacred books, and the portions which he may have added, thus have the sanction of divine authority. There is no evidence, however, that Ezra "completed" the canon of the Old Testament. Malachi 54ed after him, and in the First Book of Chronicles 1 Chronicles 3 the genealogy of the sons of Zerubbabel is carried down to the time of Alexander the Great - about 130 years subsequent to the time of Ezra. The probability is, therefore, that Ezra "commenced" the arrangement of the books, and that the canon of the Old Testament was completed by some other hand.

The Prophets were divided into "the former and the latter." Among the latter, Isaiah has uniformly held the first place and rank. This has been assigned to him not because he prophesied before all the others. Indeed he preceded Ezekiel and Jeremiah, but Jonah, Amos, and Hosea were his contemporaries. The precedence has been given to his prophecies over theirs, probably for two reasons; first, on account of their length, dignity, and comparative value; and secondly, because the minor prophets were formerly bound in one volume, or written on one roll of parchment, and it was convenient to place them "together," and they all had a place, therefore, after Isaiah. At all times the prophecies in Isaiah have been regarded as the most important of any in the Old Testament; and by common consent they have been deemed worthy of the principal place among the Jewish writings.

Section 2. The Life of Isaiah, and the Characteristics of His Writings

Of the time in which Isaiah 54ed, little more is known than he has himself told us. In the superscription to his book Isaiah 1:1, we are told that he was the son of Amoz, and that he discharged the prophetic office under the reign of the kings Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. In regard to those times, and the character of the period in which they reigned, see section 3 of this introduction (below). It is evident also from the prophecies themselves that he delivered them during the reign of these kings. In Isaiah 6:1, it is expressly said that he had a vision of Yahweh in the year in which Uzziah died. Of course, he must have commenced his prophetic labors at least as early as during the last year of that king. If that chapter or vision was not designed as an inauguration of the prophet, or an induction into the prophetic office (see the notes on Isaiah 6:1-13), and if his prophecies were collected and arranged as they were delivered, then it will follow that the previous chapters Isaiah 1-5 may have been delivered in the reign of Uzziah, and perhaps some time before his death.

There is no express mention made of his uttering any prophecies in the time of Jotham. Hengstenberg and others suppose that the prophecies in Isaiah 2-5 were delivered during his reign. But of this there is no conclusive evidence. He might not have "recorded" anything during his reign; though he may, as a public preacher, have been engaged in the prophetic office in another mode. His writings themselves contain evidence that he was engaged in the prophetic office in the reign of Ahaz. See Isaiah 7 and the following chapters. From Isaiah 36-39 we learn that he was engaged in the prophetic office during the reign of Hezekiah. We have an explicit statement that he was occupied in his prophetic work until the 15th year of Hezekiah, at the commencement of which the ambassadors from Babylon came up to Jerusalem to congratulate him on his recovery from his illness; In Isaiah 39:1-8 Uzziah died, according to Calmet, 754 years before Christ. Isaiah must therefore have occupied the prophetic office at least from 754 to 707 b.c., or 47 years; that is, under Uzziah one year, under Jotham for 16 years, under Ahaz for 16 years, and under Hezekiah for 14 years.

It is not known at what age Isaiah entered into the prophetic function. It is probable that he lived much longer than to the 15th year of Hezekiah. In 2 Chronicles 32:32, it is said that 'the rest of the acts of Hezekiah' were 'written in the vision of Isaiah;' and this statement obviously implies that he survived him, and recorded the deeds of his reign up to his death. Since Hezekiah lived 14 or 15 years after this (Isaiah 38:5, compare 2 Kings 18:2), this would make the period of his public ministry to extend to at least 61 or 62 years. If Isaiah survived Hezekiah, he probably lived some time until during the reign of Manasseh. This supposition is confirmed not indeed by any direct historical record in the Old Testament, but by all the traditional accounts which have been handed down to us. The testimony of the Jews and of the early fathers is uniform that Isaiah was put death by Manasseh by being sawn asunder. The main alleged offence was that Isaiah had said that he had seen Yahweh, and that for this he ought to die, in accordance with the law of Moses Exodus 33:20, "No man shall see me and live." If Isaiah 54ed until the time of Manasseh, and especially if Isaiah prophesied under Manasseh's reign, it is probable the true reason why he was put to death was that he was offensive to the monarch and his court.

The circumstances which render the supposition probable that Isaiah 54ed under Manasseh, and that he was put to death by him by being sawn asunder, are the following:

(1) The fact which has been stated above that Isaiah 54ed to complete the record of the reign of Hezekiah and of course survived him.

(2) The testimony of the Jewish writers: There is indeed much that is fabulous in their writings, and even in connection with the truths which they record; there is much that is puerile and false. However, there is no reason to doubt the main "facts" which they relate. Indeed, Josephus does not expressly state that he was slain by Manasseh, but he gives an account of the reign of Manasseh which renders it probable that if Isaiah were then alive he would have been put to death. Thus, he says (Ant. book 10, chapter 3, section 1) that 'he barbarously slew all the righteous men that were among the Hebrews; nor would he spare the prophets, for he every day slew some of them, until Jerusalem was overflown with blood.' In the Talmud the following record occurs: Manasseh put Isaiah to death. The rabbi said that he condemned him and put him to death, because he said to him, "Moses, thy lord, said, 'No man shall see me and live' Exodus 33:20, but thou hast said, 'I saw the Lord upon a throne high and lifted up' Isaiah 6:1. Moses, thy lord, said, 'Who will make the Lord so near that we can call to him'; but thou hast said, 'Seek the Lord while he may be found, call upon him while he is near' Isaiah 55:6. Moses, thy lord, said, 'The number of thy days will I fulfill' Exodus 22:26; but thou hast said, 'I will add to thy days fifteen years' Isaiah 38:5, etc. See Gesenius, Einlei. p. 12. The testimony of the Jews on this subject is uniform. Michaelis (the Preface to Isaiah) has referred to the following places in proof on this point. Tract. Talmud. Jabhamoth, 49; "Sanhedrin, fol. 103; Jalkut, part ii. fol. 38; Schalscheleth Hakkab." fol. 19. Rashi and Abarbanel in their commentaries give the same statement.

(3) The testimony of the early Christian writers is the same. Justin Martyr, in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew, speaking of Isaiah, says, ὄν πρίον ζυλῳ ἐπρίσατε on prioni zulō eprisate, 'whom ye sawed asunder with a wooden saw.' Tertullian (de patientia, c. 14) says, His patientiae viribus secatur Esaias. - Lactantius (lib. iv. c. 2) says, Esais, quem ipsi Judaei serra consectum crudelissime necaverunt. - Augustine (de Civit. Dei, lib. 18, c. 24) says, 'the prophet Isaiah is reputed to have been slain by the impious King Manasseh.' Jerome (on Isaiah 57:1) says, that the prophet prophesied in that passage of his own death, for 'it is an undisputed tradition among us, that he was sawn asunder by Manasseh, with a wooden saw.' These passages and others from the Jewish writers and from the fathers are to be found in Michaelis' Preface to Isaiah; in Gesenius' Introduction; and in Carpzov, Crit. Sacr. In a matter of simple fact, there seems to be no reason to call this testimony into question. It is to be remembered that Jerome was well acquainted with Hebrew, that he dwelt in Palestine, and no doubt has given the prevalent opinion about the death of Isaiah.

(4) The character of Manasseh was such as to make it probable that, if Isaiah 54ed at all during his reign, Manasseh would seek his death. In 2 Kings 21:16, it is said of Manasseh that he 'shed innocent blood very much, until he had filled Jerusalem from one end to another.' This account is in entire accordance with that of Josephus, quoted above. In the early part of his reign, it is recorded that he did evil, and especially that he raised the high places and the altars of idolatry which Hezekiah had destroyed, and endeavored to restore again the abominations which had existed in the time of Ahab, 2 Kings 21:2-3. It is scarcely credible that such a man as Isaiah would see all this done without some effort to prevent it; and it is certain that such an effort would excite the indignation of Manasseh. If, however, Manasseh cut off the righteous men of Jerusalem, as Josephus testifies, and as the author of the Books of Kings would lead us to believe, there is every probability that Isaiah would also fall a sacrifice to his indignation. It is not necessary in order to this to suppose that Isaiah appeared much in public; or that, being then an old man, he should take a prominent part in the transactions of that period. That we have no recorded prophecy of that time, as we have of the times of Uzziah, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, leaves it probable that Isaiah had withdrawn from the more public functions of the prophetic office, and probably (see section 4 of this introduction) had given himself to the calm and holy contemplation of future and better times under the Messiah. But still Isaiah's sentiments would be known to the monarch; and his influence while he lived among the people may have been materially in the way of the designs of Manasseh. Manasseh, therefore, may have regarded it as necessary to remove him, and in the slaughter of the good men and prophets of his time, there is every probability that Isaiah would have been made a victim.

(5) It affords some confirmation of this statement that Paul Hebrews 11:37 affirms of some of the ancient saints, that they were 'sawn asunder.' In the Old Testament there is no express mention of any one's being put to death in this manner, but it has been common with all expositors, from the earliest periods, to suppose that Paul had reference to Isaiah. The universal tradition on this subject among the Hebrews makes this morally certain. It is certain that Paul could not have made such an enumeration unless there was a well-established tradition of some one or more who had suffered in this manner; and all tradition concurs in assigning it to Isaiah.

(6) The character of the second part of the prophecies of Isaiah Isa. 40-66 accords with this supposition. They are mainly employed in depicting the glories of a future age; the blessedness of the times of the Messiah. They bespeak the feelings of a holy man who was heart-broken with the existing state of things; and who had retired from active life, and sought consolation in the contemplation of future blessings. No small part of those prophecies is employed in lamenting an existing state of "idolatry" (see particularly Isaiah 40; Isaiah 41; Isaiah 56:1-12; Isaiah 57; Isaiah 65), and the prevalence of general irreligion. Such a decryption does not accord with the reign of Hezekiah; and it is evidently the language of a man who was disheartened with prevailing abominations, and who, seeing little hope of immediate reform, cast his mind forward into future times, and sought repose in the contemplation of happier days. How long Isaiah may have lived under Manasseh is unknown; and hence, it is not possible to ascertain Isaiah age when he was put to death. We may reasonably suppose that Isaiah entered into his prophetic function as early as the age of twenty. From Jeremiah 1:6, we learn that an earlier call than this to the prophetic office sometimes occurred. On this supposition, Isaiah would have been 82 years of age at the death of Hezekiah. There is no improbability, therefore, in the supposition that he might have lived 10 or even 15 years or more, under the long reign of Manasseh. The priest Jehoiada attained the great age of 130 years 2 Chronicles 24:15. Evidently, Isaiah 54ed a retired and a temperate life. It is the uniform tradition of the oriental Christians that he lived to the age of 120 years; see Hengstenberg's Christol. vol. i. p. 278.

Where Isaiah 54ed is not certainly known nor are many of the circumstances of his life known. Isaiah's permanent residence, in the earlier part of his prophetic life, seems to have been at Jerusalem. During the reign of the ungodly Ahaz, he came forth boldly as the reprover of sin, and evidently spent a considerable part of his time near the court, Isaiah 7 and following. His counsels and warnings were then derided and disregarded. Hezekiah was a pious prince, and admitted Isaiah as a counselor, and was inclined to follow Isaiah advice. In Hezekiah's reign Isaiah was treated with respect, and Isaiah had an important part in directing the public counsels during the agitating occurrences of that reign. If Isaiah 54ed in the time of Manasseh, he probably retired from public life; his counsel was unsought, and if offered, was disregarded. It is evident that he did not entirely withdraw from his office as a reprover Isaiah 56-58, but his main employment seems to have been to contemplate the pure and splendid visions which relate to the happier times of the world, and which constitute the close of his prophecies, Isaiah 40-66.

Of the family of Isaiah little is known. The Jewish writers constantly affirm that Isaiah was of noble extraction, and was closely connected with the royal family. The name of his father was Amoz, or "Amotz" - אמוץ 'âmôts; not the prophet Amos, as some have supposed, for his name in Hebrew is אמוס 'amôs, Amos. Amoz (Amotz), the father of Isaiah, the Jews affirm to have been the brother of Amaziah the son of Joash, king of Judah, 2 Kings 14:1. Thus, David Kimchi on Isaiah 1:1, writes, 'We are ignorant of his family, from what tribe he was, except that our doctors have handed down by tradition, that Amotz and Amaziah were brothers.' And thus Rabbi Solomon says, 'It is handed down to us from our ancestors that Amotz and Amaziah were brothers.' The same is said also by Rabbi Levi (in Megilla, c. i. fol. 10); and by Abarbanel, Preface fol. 1((quoted by Michaelis, Preface to Isa.) In this supposition there is nothing improbable: and the fact that he was admitted so freely to the counsels of Hezekiah, and that he went so boldly to Ahaz Isaiah 7:1, may seem to give some countenance to the idea that he was connected with the royal family.

Isaiah's father was evidently well known; see Isaiah 1:1, and elsewhere, where his name is introduced. Indeed, it is not improbable that most of the prophets were descended from families that were highly respectable, since they generally mention the name of their father as a name that is well known; compare Ezekiel 1:3; Jeremiah 1:1; Hosea 1:1; Joel 1:1; Jonah 1:1; Zephaniah 1:1; Zechariah 1:1. In the other prophets the name of the "father" is omitted, probably because he was obscure and unknown. It is morally certain that Isaiah was not connected with the Levitical order, since if he had been, this would have been designated as in Jeremiah 1:1; Ezekiel 1:3. The wife of Isaiah is called "a prophetess" Isaiah 8:3, and it is supposed by some that she had the spirit of prophecy, but the more probable opinion is that the wives of the prophets were called prophetesses, as the wives of the priests were called "priestesses."

On the question as to whether Isaiah had more than one wife, see the notes at Isaiah 7 and notes at Isaiah 8. Two sons of Isaiah are mentioned, both of whom had names suited to awaken religious attention, and who were in some sense the pledges of the fulfillment of divine predictions. The name of the one was "Shear-Jashub" Isaiah 7:3, the meaning of which is, "the remainder shall return" - designed, undoubtedly, to be a sign or pledge that the remnant of the Jews who should be carried away at "any time" would return; or that the whole nation would not be destroyed and become extinct. This was one of the axioms or fundamental points in all the writings of this prophet; and whatever calamity or judgment he foretold, it was always terminated with the assurance that the nation would still be ultimately preserved, and greatly enlarged, and glorified. Isaiah seems to have resolved this idea to keep as much as possible before the minds of his countrymen, and to this end he gave his son a name that would be to them a pledge of his deep conviction of this truth.

The name of the other is "Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz" Isaiah 8:1, "haste to the spoil; haste to the prey" - a name significant of the fact that the Assyrians Isaiah 7 would soon ravage and subdue the land, or they would extensively plunder the kingdom of Judea. Tradition says that the death of Isaiah occurred in Jerusalem near the fountain of Siloam. Just below this fountain and opposite to the point where Mount Ophel terminates is a large mulberry-tree with a terrace of stones surrounding its trunk, where it is said Isaiah was sawn asunder; Robinson's Bib. Research, i. 342. The tradition further is, that his body was buried here, whence it was removed to Paneas near the sources of the Jordan, and from thence to Constantinople in the year of our Lord 442 a.d.

Great respect was paid to Isaiah and his writings after his death. It is evident that Jeremiah imitated him (compare the notes at Isaiah 15:1-9 and notes at Isaiah 16:1-14); and there is abundant evidence that Isaiah was studied by the other prophets. The regard with which he was held by the Lord Jesus, and by the writers of the New Testament will be shown in another part of this introduction (section 6). Josephus (Ant. book 11, chapter 1, section 2) says that Cyrus was moved by the reading of Isaiah to the acknowledgment of the God of Israel, and to the restoration of the Jews, and to the rebuilding of the temple. After stating (section 1) the decree which Cyrus made in favor of the Jews, he adds, 'This was known to Cyrus by his reading the book which Isaiah left behind of his prophecies: for this prophet had said that God had spoken thus to him in a secret vision, "My will is that Cyrus whom I have appointed to be king over many and great nations will send back my people to their own land, and build my temple."

This was foretold by Isaiah 140 years before the temple was demolished. Accordingly, when Cyrus read this, and admired the divine power, an earnest desire and ambition came upon him to fulfill what was so written; so he called for the most eminent Jews that were in Babylon, and said to them, that he gave them permission to go back to their own country and to rebuild their city Jerusalem and the temple of their God. In this passage of Josephus there is an undoubted reference to Isaiah 44:28; 'That saith of Cyrus, He is my Shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure, even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid;' compare Isaiah 45:1 ff. On the genuineness of this passage of Josephus see Whiston's note. It is justly remarked (see Jahn's observation, quoted by Hengstenberg, Christol. i. 279) that this statement of Josephus furnishes the only explanation of the conduct of Cyrus toward the Jews. It is only a commentary on Ezra 1:2, where Cyrus says, 'Yahweh, the God of heaven and earth hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem which is in Judah.' It is incredible that Cyrus would not have seen the prophecy Isaiah 44:28 respecting himself before he made this proclamation.

The writings of the fathers are full of the praise of Isaiah. Jerome says of him that he is not so much to be esteemed a prophet as an evangelist. And he adds, 'he has so clearly explained the whole mystery of Christ and the church that you will regard him not as predicting future events but as composing a history of the past.' In Jerome's "Epistle ad Paulinum" he says, 'Isaiah seems to me not to have composed a prophecy but the gospel!' And in Jerome's preface he says, 'that in his (Isaiah's) discourse he is so eloquent, and is a man of so noble and refined elocution, without any mixture of rusticity, that it is impossible to preserve or transfuse the beauty of his style in a translation;' compare the Confessions of Augustine, ix. 5; De Civita. Dei. lib. viii. c. 29. Moses Amyraldus said of Isaiah that he 'seems to thunder and give off lightning; he seems to confound and mingle not Greece, as was formerly said of Pericles; not Judea, and the neighboring regions, but heaven and earth and all the elements;' see Michaelis' Preface to Isaiah, pp. 8-10; compare Josephus, Ant. book 10, chapter 3; also Sirach 48:22.

'The style of Isaiah,' says Hengstenberg, Christol. vol. i. p. 281, 'is in general characterized by simplicity and sublimity; in the use of imagery, he holds an intermediate place between the poverty of Jeremiah and the exuberance of Ezekiel. In other respects, his style is suited to the subject, even changes with it. In his denunciations and threatenings, Isaih is earnest and vehement; in his consolations and instructions, on the contrary, Isaiah is mild and insinuating; in the strictly poetic passages, Isaiah is full of impetuosity and fire. He so lives in the events that he describes that the future becomes to him the same as the past and the present.'

It is now generally conceded that a considerable portion of Isaiah, like the other prophets, is poetry. For the establishment of this opinion, we are indebted mainly to Dr. Lowth. 'It has,' says he, (Prelim. Diss. to Isaiah) 'I think, been universally understood that the prophecies of Isaiah were written in prose. The style, the thoughts, the images, the expressions, have been allowed to be poetical, and that in the highest degree; but that they were written in verse, in measure, in rhythm, or whatever it is that distinguishes poetry the composition of those books of the Old Testament which are allowed to be poetical, such as Job, the Psalms, and the Proverbs, from the historical books, as mere prose, this has never been supposed, at least has not been at any time the prevailing feeling.'

The main object of Lowth, in his "Preliminary Dissertation," was to demonstrate that the prophecies of Isaiah have all the characteristics of Hebrew poetry; a position which he has abundantly established, and which is admitted now by all to be correct. For a more extended view of the nature of Hebrew poetry, the reader may consult Barnes' introduction to the Book of Job.

In all ages, Isaiah has been regarded as the most sublime of all writers. He is simple, bold, rapid, elevated; he abounds in metaphor, and in rapid transitions; his writings are full of the most sublime figures of rhetoric and the most beautiful ornaments of poetry. Grotius compares him to Demosthenes. 'In his writings we meet with the purity of the Hebrew tongue, as in the orator with the delicacy of the Attic taste. Both are sublime and magnificent in their style; vehement in their emotions; copious in their figures; and very impetuous when they describe things of an enormous nature, or that are grievous and odious. Isaiah was superior to Demosthenes in the honor of illustrious birth.' Commentary on 2 Kings 19:2. It may be added here, that although his writings are not so ancient as those of Moses, or as those of Homer and Hesiod, yet they are more ancient than most of the admired Classic productions of Greece, and are far more ancient than any of the Latin Classics. As an "ancient writer" he demands respect. And laying out of view altogether the idea of his inspiration, and his "religious" character, he has a claim as a poet, an orator, a writer of eminent beauty and unrivaled sublimity to the attention of those who are seeking eminence in literature.

No reason can be given why in a course of mental training, Isaiah, and the language in which he wrote, should be neglected, while Hesiod and Homer, with the language in which they wrote, should be the objects of admiration and of diligent culture. In no book, perhaps, can the mere man of taste be more gratified than in the study of Isaiah; by no writings would the mind be more elevated in view of the beautiful and the sublime, or the heart be more refined by the contemplation of the pure. Few - very few of the Greek and Latin Classical writers - can be put into the hands of the young without endangering the purity of their morals; but Isaiah may be studied in all the periods of youth, and manhood, and old age, only to increase the virtue of the heart and the purity of the imagination, at the same time that he enriches and expands the understanding. And while no one who has just views of the inestimable value of the Greek and Latin Classics in most of the respects contemplated in education would wish to see them banished from the schools, or displaced from seminaries of learning, yet the lover of ancient writings, of purity of thought and diction, of sweet and captivating poetry, of the beautiful and sublime in writing, of perhaps the oldest language of the world, and of the pure sentiments of revelation, may hope that the time will come when the Hebrew language shall be deemed worthy of culture in American schools and colleges as well as the Latin and Greek; and that as a part of the training of American youth, Isaiah may be allowed to take a place "at least" as honorable as Virgil or Homer - as Cicero or Demosthenes.

It is indeed a melancholy reflection which we are compelled to make on the seminaries of learning in our land - a Christian land - that the writings of the Hebrew prophets and poets have been compelled to give place to the poetry and the mythology of the Greeks; and that the books containing the only system of pure religion are required to defer to those which were written under the auspices of idolatry, and which often express sentiments, and inculcate feelings, which cannot be made to contribute to the purity of the heart, or be reconciled with the truth as revealed from heaven. As specimens of taste; as models of richness of thought and beauty of diction; as well as for their being the vehicles in which the knowledge of the only true religion is conveyed to man, these writings have a claim on the attention of the young. If the writings of Isaiah were mere human compositions; if they had come down to us as the writings of Demosthenes and Homer have done; and if they had not been connected with "religion," we might be permitted to express the belief that the Jewish "Classics," along with the Classics of Greece and Rome, would have been allowed an honorable place in all the seminaries of learning, and in all the public and private libraries of the land.

Section 3. The Times of Isaiah

As we have seen, Isaiah 54ed for the greater part of a century, and possibly even more than a century. It is probable also that for a period of more than 70 years he exercised the prophetic function. During that long period, important changes must have occurred; and a knowledge of some of the leading events of his time is necessary to understand his prophecies. Indeed, a simple knowledge of historical facts will often make portions of his prophecies clear which would otherwise be entirely unintelligible.

The kingdom of Israel, which during the reigns of David and Solomon had been so mighty and so magnificent, was divided into two separate kingdoms 990 years before Christ, or 240 years before Isaiah entered into his prophetic office. The glory of these kingdoms had departed; and they had been greatly weakened by contentions with each other and by conflicts with surrounding nations. In a particular manner, the kingdom of Israel (Samaria, Ephraim, the ten tribes, as it was indiscriminately called) had been governed by a succession of wicked princes, had become deeply imbued with idolatry, and had so far provoked God as to make it necessary to remove them to a foreign land. It was during the time in which Isaiah discharged the duties of the prophetic function that that kingdom was utterly overturned and the inhabitants were transplanted to a distant country. In the year 736 b.c., or not far from 20 years after Isaiah entered into his work, Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria killed Rezin, king of Damascus, the ally of Pekah, the king of Samaria. Tiglath-Pileser entered the land of Israel and took many cities and captives, chiefly in Gilead and Galilee, and he carried many of the inhabitants to Assyria; 2 Kings 16:5-9; Amos 1:5; 2 Kings 15:29; 1 Chronicles 5:26.

This was the first captivity of the kingdom of Israel. Shalmaneser succeeded Tiglath-Pileser as king of Assyria in 724 b.c. In the year 721 b.c. Shalmaneser besieged Samaria, and, after a siege of three years, he took it. He carriedthe inhabitants which Tiglath-Pileser had not removed beyond the Euphrates he and placed them in cities there 2 Kings 17:3-18; Hosea 13:16; 1 Chronicles 5:26. This was the end of the kingdom of Israel, after it had subsisted for 254 years. Isaiah exercised the prophetic function during about 30 of the last years of the kingdom of Israel. But his residence was principally at Jerusalem; and not many of his predictions have reference to the kingdom of Israel. Most of his prophecies which have reference to the Jews relate to the kingdom of Judah and to Jerusalem.

The kingdom of Judah, whose capital was Jerusalem, had greatly declined from the splendor and magnificence which had existed under David and Solomon. It had been greatly weakened by the revolt of the ten tribes, and by the wars in which it had been engaged with the kingdom of Samaria, as well as with surrounding nations. Though its kings were superior in virtue and piety to the kings of Israel, yet many of them had been unworthy to be the descendants of David and their conduct had exposed them greatly to divine displeasure.

When Isaiah entered into his prophetic office, the throne was occupied by Uzziah; or as he is elsewhere called, Azariah. He succeeded his father Amaziah, and was 16 years old when he came to the throne, and he reigned for 52 years. Uzziah began his reign in the year 809 b.c., and, of course, his reign extended to the year 757 b.c. His general character was that of integrity and piety. He was a worshipper of the true God, yet he did not remove the groves and high places which had been established in the land for idolatrous worship. He greatly strengthened Jerusalem, was successful in his wars with the Philistines, with the Arabians, and the Ammonites, and extended his kingdom somewhat into surrounding regions. Near the close of his life he was guilty of one act of rashness and folly in claiming as a monarch the right of going into the temple of the Lord, and of burning incense upon the altar. For this sin he became a leper and remained so until his death; 2 Kings 15; 2 Chronicles 26. Of course, he was regarded as unclean and was obliged to dwell by himself in a separate house; 2 Chronicles 26:21. During this period, the affairs of the government were administered by his son, Jotham; 2 Chronicles 26:21. During the reign of Uzziah it is probable that Isaiah exercised the prophetic function for only a short time, perhaps for a single year. None of Isaiah's prophecies can be proved with certainty to relate to Uzziah's reign except what is contained in Isaiah 6:1-13. It is more natural, however, to suppose that those in the previous five chapters were delivered durring the reign of Uzziah.

Uzziah (Azariah) was succeeded by his son, Jotham. He ascended the throne at the age of 25, and reigned for 16 years in Jerusalem. The general character of Jotham was like that of his father. He was upright; and he was not guilty of idolatry. Yet, the high places were not removed, the groves still remained, and the state of the people was corrupt 2 Kings 15:32-36; 2 Chronicles 27:1-9. Jotham carried forward the plan which his father had commenced of fortifying the city 2 Chronicles 26:3 and of enlarging and beautifying his kingdom. In a particular manner, Jotham is said to have built a high gate to the house of the Lord, and to have fortified Ophel; 2 Chronicles 26:3. Ophel was a mountain or "bluff," which was situated between Mount Zion and Mount Moriah. From the base of this bluff flowed the waters of Siloam. This hill was capable of being strongly fortified and of contributing much to the defense of the city, and, accordingly, it became one of the strongest places in Jerusalem. Jotham also built cities, and castles, and towns in the mountains and forests of Judea 2 Chronicles 26:4, and it is evident that his great aim was to beautify and strengthen his kingdom. The principal wars in which he was engaged were with the Ammonites, whom he subdued and laid under tribute 2 Chronicles 26:5.

It was during the reign of Jotham that very important events occurred in the vast empire of the East. The ancient empire of the Assyrians which had governed Asia for more than 1,300 years was dissolved upon the death of Sardanapalus in the year 747 b.c. Sardanapalus was distinguished for sloth and luxury. He sunk into the lowest depths of depravity, clothed himself as a woman, spun amidst the companies of his concubines, painted his face and decked himself as a harlot. So debased was he that his reign became intolerable. He became odious to his subjects and particularly to Arbaces the Mede, and to Belesis the Babylonian. Belesis was a captain, a priest, and an astrologer.

So, by the rules of his art, he took it upon himself to assure Arbaces that he should dethrone Sardanapalus, and become lord of all his dominions. Arbaces listened to him, and promised him the chief place over Babylon if his prediction proved to come true. Arbaces and Belesis promoted a revolt, and the defection spread among the Medes, Babylonians, Persians, and Arabians, who had been subject to the Assyrian empire. They mustered an army of not less than 400,000 men, but were at first defeated by Sardanapalus, and driven to the mountains; but they again rallied and were again defeated with great slaughter, and put to flight toward the hills. Belesis, however, persisted in the opinion that the gods would give them the victory, and a third battle was fought, in which they were again defeated. Belesis again encouraged his followers; and it was determined to try to secure the aid of the Bactrians.

Sardanapalus, supposing victory was secure, and that there could be no more danger, had returned to his pleasures, and given himself and his army up to riot and dissipation. Belesis and Arbaces, with the aid of the Bactrians, fell upon the army, sunk in inglorious ease and vanquished it entirely. Somehow they drew Sardanapalus outside the walls of his capital. Here, closely besieged, he sent away his three sons and two daughters into Paphlagonia. In Nineveh Sardanapalus determined to defend himself, trusting to an ancient prophecy, "that Nineveh could never be taken until the river became her enemy;" and as he deemed this impossible, he regarded himself as secure. He maintained his position, and resisted the attacks of his enemies for two years, until the river, swelled by great rains, rose and overflowed a considerable part of it. Regarding his affairs as now desperate, he caused a vast pile of wood to be raised in a court of his palace, in which he placed his gold and silver and royal apparel, and within which he enclosed his eunuchs and concubines, and retired within his palace, and caused the pile to be set on fire, and was consumed himself with the rest; Universal History, the Ancient Part, vol. iii. pp. 354-358. London edition, 1779.

From this kingdom, thus destroyed, arose the two kingdoms of Assyria, as mentioned in the Scriptures, and of Babylonia. Arbaces, who, according to Prideaux, is the same as Tiglath-Pileser (compare however, Universal History, vol. v. 359), obtained a large part of the empire. Belesis had Babylon, Chaldea, and Arabia. Belesis, according to Prideaux (Connection, book i. p. 114), was the same as Nabonassar, or Baladan (see the note at Isaiah 39:1); and was the king from whom was reckoned the famous era of Nabonassar, commencing in the 747th year before the Christian era. It is not improbable that there was some degree of dependence of the Babylonian portion of the empire upon the Assyrian empire; or that the king of Babylon was regarded as a viceroy to the king of Assyria, since we know that among the colonists sent by Shalmaneser to populate Samaria after the ten tribes were carried away were some from Babylon, which is there mentioned in such a manner as to leave the impression that it was a province of Assyria 2 Kings 17:24. The kingdom of Babylon, however, ultimately acquired the ascendency, and the Assyrian kingdom was merged into the Chaldean monarchy. This occurred about 100 years after the reign of Nabonassar, or Baladan, and was effected by an alliance formed between Nabopolassar and Cyaxares the Median; see Robinson, Calmet, "Babylonia"; compare the note at Isaiah 39:1. It should be observed, however, that the history of the Assyrian empire is one of the most obscure portions of ancient history; see the article "Assyria" in Robinson, Calmet.

There is no decided evidence that Isaiah delivered any prophecies during the reign of Jotham. Most commentators have supposed that the prophecies in Isaiah 2-5 were delivered during his reign; but there is no internal proof to demonstrate it. See the analysis of these chapters.

Jotham was succeeded by Ahaz. He was the 12th king of Judah. He came to the throne at the age of 20 years and reigned in Jerusalem for 16 years, and, of course, died at the age of 36. He ascended the throne, according to Calmet, 738 years before the Christian era; see 2 Kings 16:2; 2 Chronicles 28:5. The character of Ahaz was the reverse of that of his father; and, excepting Manasseh, his grandson, there was probably not a more impious prince who ever sat on the throne of Judah, nor was there a reign that was on the whole more disastrous than his. A statement of his evil deeds and a brief record of the calamitous events of his reign is given in 2 Chronicles 23 and in 2 Kings 16. He imitated the kings of Israel and Samaria in all manner of abominations and disorders. Early on, he made images of the Baalim. He burned incense in the Valley of Hinnom to idol gods and even burned his own children in the fire. He established idolatrous places of worship in every part of the land and caused the worship of idols to be celebrated in the groves and upon all the hills in Judea.

As a consequence of this idolatry, and as a punishment for his sins and the sins of the nation, his kingdom was invaded by the joint forces of the kings of Syria and of Samaria. A large number of captive Jews were carried to Damascus; and, in one day, Pekah, the king of Samaria, killed 120,000, and took captive 200,000 more whom he planned to carry captive to Samaria. This he would have done but for the remonstrance of the prophet Obed, who pled with him, and represented the impropriety of his carrying his brethren into bondage; and, at his solicitation, and from the apprehension of the wrath of God, the captives were returned to Jericho, and set at liberty 2 Chronicles 28:15. It was at this juncture, and when Ahaz trembled with alarm at the prospect of the invasion of the kings of Syria and Samaria, that he resolved to call in the aid of the Assyrians, and thus to repel the apprehended invasion.

Though he had been able to defeat the united armies of Syria and Samaria once 2 Kings 16:5, yet those armies returned once more, and Ahaz in alarm determined to seek the aid of Assyria. For this purpose he sent messengers, with terms of most humble submission and entreaty, and with the most costly presents that his kingdom could furnish, to secure the alliance and aid of Tiglath-Pileser, the king of Assyria 2 Kings 16:7-8. It was at this time, when Ahaz was so much alarmed, that Isaiah met him at the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller's field Isaiah 7:3-4, and assured him that he had no occasion to fear the united armies of Syria and Samaria; that Jerusalem was safe, and that God would be its protector. He assured him that the kingdoms of Syria and Samaria would not be enlarged by the accession and conquest of the kingdom of Judah Isaiah 7:7-9. So, Isaiah advised Ahaz to ask for a sign (demonstration) from Yahweh that this would be fulfilled Isaiah 7:10-11.

Ahaz indignantly, though with the appearance of religious scruple, said that he would not ask for a sign Isaiah 7:12. The secret reason, however, why he was not solicitous to procure a sign from Yahweh was that he had formed an alliance with the king of Assyria and scorned the idea of recognizing his dependence upon Yahweh. Isaiah, therefore, proceeded Isaiah 7:13. to assure him that Yahweh would himself give a sign anyway and would furnish a demonstration to him that the land would be soon forsaken of both the kings which Ahaz dreaded. See the notes at Isaiah 7. Isaiah then proceeded to state the consequences of his alliance with the king of Assyria and to assure him that the result would be, that, under the pretence of helping him, he would bring up his forces upon the land of Judah and spread devastation and ruin, and that only Jerusalem would be spared (Isaiah 7:17 ff and Isaiah 8). The prophecy respecting the speedy removal of the two kings of Syria and Samaria was accomplished (see the notes at Isaiah 7:16).

At about the same time, the kingdom of Judah was threatened with an invasion from the Edomites and Philistines 2 Chronicles 28:17-18. In this emergency, Ahaz had recourse to his old ally the king of Assyria 2 Chronicles 28:20-21. To secure his friendship, Ahaz made him a costly present obtained from the temple, from his own house, and from the princes 2 Chronicles 28:21. The king of Assyria professedly accepted the offer, marched against Rezin the king of Syria, took Damascus, and killed Rezin, agreeably to the prediction of Isaiah Isa 7:16. While Tiglath-Pileser was at Damascus, Ahaz visited him, and being much charmed with an altar which he saw there, he sent a model of it to Urijah the priest to have one constructed like it in Jerusalem 2 Kings 16:10. This was done. Ahaz returned from Damascus, offered sacrifice upon the new altar which he had had constructed, and gave himself up to every kind of idolatry and abomination 2 Kings 16:12. Ahaz offered sacrifice to the gods of Damascus on the pretence that they had defended Syria and that it might be rendered propitious to defend his own kingdom 2 Chronicles 28:23. Then Ahaz broke up the vessels of the temple, shut up the doors, and erected altars to the pagan deities in every part of Jerusalem 2 Chronicles 28:24-25. Thus, Ahaz finished his inglorious reign in the 36th year of his age, and he was buried in the city of Jerusalem, but not in the sepulchres of the kings, on account of his gross abominations 2 Chronicles 28:27.

The prediction of Isaiah Isa. 7-8 that his calling for the aid of the king of Assyria would result in disaster to his own land and to all the land except for Jerusalem (see the note at Isaiah 8:8) was not accomplished during the time of Ahaz, but was literally fulfilled in the calamities which occurred by the invasion of Sennacherib in the time of Hezekiah (see the notes at Isaiah 8; Isaiah 36-39).

It is not known with certainty what prophecies were delivered by Isaiah in the time of Ahaz. It is certain that those contained in Isaiah 7-9 were uttered during his reign, and there is every probability that those contained in Isaiah 10-12 were also given then. Perhaps some of the subsequent predictions were uttered during his reign as well.

Ahaz was succeeded by his son, Hezekiah, one of the most pious kings that ever sat upon the throne of David. He was 25 years old when he began to reign, and he reigned for 29 years 2 Chronicles 29:1. Hezekiah's character was the reverse of that of his father. One of the first acts of his reign was to remove the evils introduced during the reign of Ahaz, and to restore again the pure worship of God. Hezekiah began the work of reform by destroying the high places, cutting down the groves, and overturning the altars of idolatry. He destroyed the brass serpent which Moses had made, and which had become an object of idolatrous worship. He ordered the doors of the temple to be rebuilt, and the temple itself was thoroughly cleansed and repaired 2 Kings 18:1-6; 2 Chronicles 29:1-17. He restored the observance of the Passover, and it was celebrated with great pomp and joy (2 Chronicles 30ff), and he restored the regular worship in the temple as it was in the time of Solomon 2 Chronicles 28:18. Successful in his efforts to reform the religion of his country and in his wars with the Philistines 2 Kings 18:8, he resolved to cast off the inglorious yoke of servitude to the king of Assyria 2 Kings 18:7. Therefore, Hezekiah refused to pay the tribute which had been promised to the Assyrian monarch which had been paid by his father, Ahaz.

As might have expected, this resolution excited the indignation of the king of Assyria, and led to the resolution to compel submission. Sennacherib, therefore, invaded the land with a great army; spread desolation through no small part of it; and was rapidly advancing toward Jerusalem. Hezekiah saw his error, and, alarmed, he sought to avoid the threatened blow. So, he put the city in the best possible posture of defense. He fortified it, enclosed it with a second wall, erected towers, repaired the Millo fortification in the City of David, stopped up all the fountains, and made darts and shields so that the city might be defended 2 Chronicles 32:1-8. He tried to prepare himself as well as possible to meet the mighty foe; and he did all that he could to inspire confidence in the true God among the people (see the notes at Isaiah 22:9-11).

Yet, as if not quite confident that Hezekiah could be able to hold out during a siege, and to resist an army so mighty as that of Sennacherib, he sent ambassadors to him, acknowledged his error, and sued for peace. Sennacherib proposed that Hezekiah should send him 300 talents of silver, and 30 talents of gold, and gave the implied assurance that if this were done his army should be withdrawn 2 Kings 18:13-14. Hezekiah readily agreed to send what was demanded. And to accomplish this, Hezekiah emptied the treasury, and stripped the temple of its ornaments 2 Kings 18:15-16. Sennacherib then went on down to Egypt (see the notes at Isaiah 36 and notes at Isaiah 37) and was repelled before Pelusium by the approach of Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, who had come to the aid of the Egyptian monarch. Upon his return, however, Sennacherib sent messengers from Lachish, and a portion of his army to Jerusalem to demand its surrender Isaiah 36:2. To this embassy no answer was returned by the messengers of Hezekiah Isaiah 36:21-22; and the messengers of Sennacherib returned to him at Libnah (see the note at Isaiah 37:8). At this period, Sennacherib was alarmed by the rumor that Tirhakah, whom he had so much reason to dread, was advancing against Sennacherib Isaiah 37:9, and again Sennacherib sent messengers to Hezekiah to induce Hezekiah to surrender, intending evidently to anticipate the news that Tirhakah was coming, and to secure the conquest of Jerusalem without being compelled to settle down before it in a long siege. This message, like the former, was unsuccessful. Hezekiah spread the case before Yahweh Isaiah 37:15-20, and Hezekiah received the answer that Jerusalem was safe. Sennacherib advanced to attack the city, but, in a single night 185,000 of his men were destroyed by an angel of the Lord, and he himself fled to his capital, where he was slain by his two sons Isaiah 37:36-38.

These events were among the most important in Jewish history. Isaiah 54ed during their occurrence; and a large portion of his prophecies from Isaiah 14-39 are occupied with allusions to and statements of these events. Isaiah gave himself to the work of preparing the nation for them, assuring them that they would come, but that Jerusalem should be safe. Isaiah seems to have labored to inspire the mind of Hezekiah and the minds of the people with confidence in God, that when the danger should arrive, they might look to Him entirely for defense. In this Isaiah was eminently successful; and Hezekiah and the nation put unwavering confidence in God. An accurate acquaintance with the causes, and the various events connected with the overthrow of Sennacherib is indispensable to a clear understanding of the Book of Isaiah, and these causes and events I have endeavored to present in the notes at the several chapters which refer to that remarkable invasion. Soon after this, Hezekiah became dangerously ill, and Isaiah announced to him that he must die Isaiah 38:1. Hezekiah prayed to God for the preservation of his life, and an assurance was given to him that he would live 15 years longer Isaiah 38:5. In attestation of this, and as a demonstration of it, the shadow on the sun-dial of Ahaz was made to recede ten degrees (see the notes at Isaiah 38:8).

Hezekiah, after his signal success over his foe, and the entire deliverance of his kingdom from the long dreaded invasion, and his recovery from the dangerous illness, became eminently prosperous and successful. He was caressed and flattered by foreign princes, presents of great value were given to him, and he surrounded himself with the usual splendor and magnificence of an oriental monarch 2 Chronicles 32:23, 2 Chronicles 32:27-28. As a consequence of this, his heart was lifted up with pride; he gloried in his wealth and magnificence, and even became proud of the divine interposition in his favor. To show what was in his heart, and to humble him, he was left to display his treasures in an ostentatious manner to the ambassadors of Merodach-Baladan, king of Babylon 2 Chronicles 32:25, 2 Chronicles 32:31, and, for this act, received the assurance that all his treasures and his family would be carried in inglorious bondage to the land from whence the ambassadors came (2 Kings 20:12-18; see the notes at Isaiah 39:1-8). The rest of the life of Hezekiah was in peace Isaiah 39:8. He died at the age of 54, and was buried in the most honored of the tombs of the kings of Judah 2 Chronicles 32:33, and was deeply lamented by a weeping people at his death.

The reign of Hezekiah stretched through a considerable portion of the prophetic ministry of Isaiah. A large part of his prophecies are, therefore, presumed to have been uttered during this reign. It is probable that to this period we are to attribute the entire series from Isaiah 13-39 inclusive. The most important of Isaiah's prophecies, from Isaiah 40-66, I am disposed to assign to a subsequent period - to the reign of Manasseh. The reasons for this may be seen, in part, in section 2 of this introduction.

Hezekiah was succeeded by his son, Manasseh. The reasons for thinking that any part of the life of Isaiah was passed under the reign of this wicked prince have been stated above. He was the 15th king of Judah, and was 12 years old when he began to reign, and he reigned for 55 years. It was during Manasseh's reign, and by him, as it is commonly supposed, that Isaiah was put to death. He forsook the path of Hezekiah and David, restored idolatry, worshipped the idols of Canaan, rebuilt the high places which Hezekiah had destroyed, set up altars to Baal, and planted groves to false gods. He raised altars to the whole host of heaven even in Jerusalem and in the courts of the temple, made his son pass through the fire to Moloch, was addicted to magic and divination, set up the idol of Astarte in the house of God, and caused the people to sin in a more aggravated form than had been done by the pagans who had formerly inhabited the land of Canaan. To all this, he added cruelty in the highest degree, and 'shed innocent blood very much, until he had filled Jerusalem from one end to another.' Probably most of the distinguished men of piety were cut off by him, and among them, it is supposed, was Isaiah (see 2 Kings 21; 2 Chronicles 33).

So great were his crimes, that God brought upon the land the king of Assyria who took Manasseh from the hiding place where he sought a refuge amidst briers and thorns, and bound him, and carried him away to "Babylon" 2 Chronicles 32:11 - another proof that Babylon was at this time a dependent province of the Assyrian monarchy. In Babylon, Manasseh repented of his sins and humbled himself, and he was again returned to his land and his throne. After his restoration, he removed the worship of idols, and re-established the worship of Yahweh. He built a wall on the west side of Gihon, and extended it around to Mount Ophel, and put Jerusalem in a posture of defense. He broke down and removed the altars which he himself had erected in Jerusalem and in the temple; and he removed all traces of idolatrous worship except the high places, which he still allowed to remain. There is evidence of his reformation, and the latter part of his reign appears to have passed in comparative happiness and virtue.

It was only during the early part of his reign that Isaiah 54ed, and there is in his prophecies no express mention made of Manasseh. If Isaiah 54ed during any part of it, it is evident that he withdrew entirely, or nearly so, from the public exercise of his prophetic functions, and retired to a comparatively private life. There is evidently between the close of Isaiah 39:1-8 of his prophecy, and the period when the latter part of his prophecies commences Isaiah 40 an interval of considerable duration. It is not a violation of probability that Isaiah after the death of Hezekiah, being an old man, withdrew much from public life, that he saw and felt that there was little hope of producing reform during the impious career of Manasseh, and that, in the distress and anguish of his soul, he gave himself up to the contemplation of the happier times which would yet occur under the reign of the Messiah. It was during this period, I suppose, that Isaiah composed the latter part of his prophecies, from Isaiah 40 to Isaiah 66.

The nation was full of wickedness. An impious prince was on the throne. Piety was banished, and the friends of Yahweh were bleeding in Jerusalem. The nation was given up to idolatry. The kingdom was approaching the period of its predicted fall and ruin. Isaiah saw the tendency of events; he saw how hopeless the attempt at reform would be. He saw that the captivity of Babylon was hastening on, and that the nation was preparing for that gloomy event. In this dark and disastrous period, he seems to have withdrawn himself from the contemplation of the joyless present, and to have given his mind to the contemplation of happier future scenes. An interval perhaps of some 10 or 15 years may be supposed to have elapsed between his last public labors in the time of Hezekiah, and the prophecies which compose the remainder of the book.

During this interval, Isaiah may have withdrawn from public view, and fixed his mind upon the great events of future times. In his visions he sees the nation about to go into captivity. Yet he sees also that there would be a return from bondage, and he comforts the hearts of the pious with the assurance of such a return. He announces the name of the monarch by whom that deliverance would be accomplished, and gives assurance that the captive Jews would return to their own land again. But Isaiah is not satisfied with the announcement of this comparatively unimportant deliverance. With that he connects a far greater and more important deliverance, that from sin, under the Messiah. Isaiah fixes his eye, therefore, on the future glories of the kingdom of God, sees the long promised Messiah, describes his person, his work, his doctrine, and states in glowing language the effects of his coming on the happiness and destiny of mankind. As Isaiah advances in his prophetic descriptions, the deliverance from Babylon seems to die away and is forgotten or it is lost in the contemplation of the event to which it had a resemblance - the coming of the Messiah - as the morning star is lost in the superior glory of the rising sun. He throws himself forward in his descriptions, places himself amidst these future scenes, and describes them as taking place around him, and as events which he saw. He thinks and feels and acts as if he is in that period; his mind is full of the contemplation; and he pours out, in describing it, the most elevated language and the sublimest thoughts. It was in contemplations such as these, I suppose, that he passed the close of his life; and in such visions of the glorious future, that he sought a refuge from the gloom and despondency which must have filled a pious mind during the early part of the reign of the impious and blood-thirsty Manasseh.

Isaiah was contemporary with the prophets Jonah, Hosea, and Micah. They, however, performed a less important public part, and were not favored with visions of the future glory of the church like his. In a single chapter, however, the same language is used by Isaiah and by Micah; see Isaiah 2:2-4; compare Micah 4:1-4. In which prophet the language is original, it is impossible now to determine.

Section 4. Divisions of Isaiah

Various modes of classifying the prophecies of Isaiah have been proposed, in order to present them in the most lucid and clear manner. Gesenius divides the whole into four parts, exclusive of the historical portion Isaiah 36-39; the first, comprising Isaiah 1-12; the second is Isaiah 13-23; the third is Isaiah 24-35; and the fourth is Isaiah 40-66.

Horne proposes the following division: Part I: Isaiah 1-5; Part II: Isaiah 7-12; Part III: Isaiah 13-24; Part IV: Isaiah 24-33; Part V: Isaiah 36-39; Part VI: Isaiah 40-66; See his Introduction, vol. ii.157ff.

Vitringa divides the book into the following portions:

I.Prophetic.

(1) Five prophetic addresses directly to the Jews, including the Ephraimites, reprehending, denouncing, and accusing them, Isaiah 1-12.

(2) Eight addresses or prophetic discourses, in which the destiny of foreign nations is foretold, particularly the destiny of Babylon, Philistia, Moab, Syria, Assyria, Ethiopia, Egypt, Arabia and Tyre, Isaiah 13-23.

(3) Penal judgments against the Jews and their foes, with ample promises of the final preservation and future prosperity of the Jews, Isaiah 24-36.

(4) Four consolatory addresses, respecting the coming of the Messiah, and particularly describing the events which would be introductory to it; especially the liberation from the captivity at Babylon, Isaiah 40-49,

(5) A description of the coming and work of the Messiah - his person, his doctrines, his death, and the success of the gospel and its final triumph, Isaiah 49-66.

II. Historic. The events recorded in Isaiah 36-39.

The natural and obvious division of Isaiah is into two parts, the first of which closes with Isaiah 39:1-8, and the latter of which comprises the remainder of the book Isaiah 40-66. In this division the latter portion is regarded as substantially a continuousprophecy, or an unbroken oracle or vision, relating to far distant events, and having little reference to existing things at the time when Isaiah 54ed, except the implied censures which are passed on the idolatry of the Jews in the time of Manasseh. The main drift and scope, however, is to portray events to come - the certain deliverance of the Jews from the bondage in Babylon, and the higher deliverance of the world under the Messiah, of which the former was the "suggester" and the "emblem."

The former part Isaiah 1-39 comprises a collection of independent prophecies and writings composed at various periods during the public ministry of the prophet Isaiah, and designed to produce an immediate effect upon the morals, the piety, the faith, and the welfare of the nation. The general drift is that Jerusalem was secure, that the kingdom of God on earth could not be destroyed, that however much His people might be subjected to punishment for their sins, and however long and grievous might be their calamities, and however mighty their foes, yet that the kingdom of God could not be overturned, and His promises set at nought. Hence, in all the predictions of judgment and calamity; in all the reproofs for crime, idolatry, and sin; there is usually found a "saving clause" - an assurance that the people of God would finally triumph and be secure. And hence, so large a portion of this division of the book is occupied with a prophetic statement of the entire and utter overthrow of the formidable states, nations, and cities with which they had been so often engaged in war, and which were so decidedly hostile to the Jews. The prophet, therefore, goes over in detail these cities and nations, and depicts successively the destruction of the Assyrians, of Babylon; Tyre, Moab, Damascus, Edom, etc., until he comes to the triumphant conclusion in Isaiah 35:1-10 that all the enemies of the people of God would be destroyed, and His kingdom would be established on an imperishable basis under the Messiah (see the notes at Isaiah 35:1-10). This is the scope of this part of the prophecy; and this is the reason why there is such fearful denunciation of surrounding nations. In the course of the predictions, however, there are frequent reproofs of the Jews for their sins, and solemn warnings and assurances of judgments against them; but there is the uniform assurance that they would be delivered, as a people, from all bondage and calamity, and be restored to ultimate freedom and prosperity.

This part of the book comprises the prophecies which were uttered during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah (see section 3). For convenience, it may be divided in the following manner:

First. Independent prophecies, relating to Judah and Israel, Isaiah 1-12. These are seven in number:

I. Reproof of national crimes, Isaiah 1.

II. Judah, its sins, Isaiah 2-4.

III. Judah, a vineyard, Isaiah 5.

IV. The Vision of Yahweh, Isaiah 6:1-13.

V. Ahaz; impending calamity; prediction of the birth and character of the Messiah, Isaiah 7-9:7.

VI. Samaria, Isaiah 9:8-21; Isaiah 10:1-4.

VII. Sennacherib; deliverance from him; advent and work of the Messiah, Isaiah 10:5-34; Isaiah 11; Isaiah 12:1-6.

Second. Independent prophecies, mainly relating to surrounding nations which had been regarded as hostile to the Jews, or which were their natural enemies, or which for their sins were to be cut off to make way for the introduction and permanent establishment of the kingdom of God, Isaiah 13-23. These prophecies are 14 in number, and relate to the following kingdoms and people:

VIII. Babylon, Isaiah 13; Isaiah 14:1-27.

IX. Philistia, Isaiah 14:28-32.

X. Moab, Isaiah 15-16,

XI. Damascus, Isaiah 17:1-11,

XII. Sennacherib, Isaiah 17:12-14.

XIII. Nubia, or Ethiopia, Isaiah 18:1-7.

XIV. Egypt, Isaiah 19.

XV. Egypt and Assyria, Isaiah 20:1-6.

XVI. The destruction of Babylon, Isaiah 21:1-10.

XVII. Dumah or Idumea, Isaiah 21:11-12.

XVIII. Arabia, Isaiah 21:13-17,

XIX. Jerusalem, when about to be besieged by Sennacherib, Isaiah 22:1-14.

XX. The fall of Shebna, and the promotion of eliakim, Isaiah 22:15-25.

XXI. Tyre, Isaiah 23.

Third. Independent prophecies, relating mainly to the times of Hezekiah, and to the prospect of the Assyrian invasion under Sennacherib; with a statement of the ultimate safety of the people of God, and the overthrow of all their enemies, Isaiah 24-35. These prophecies are 8 in number, and relate to the following events.

XXII. Desolation of the land of Judea, its delivery and triumph, Isaiah 24-27.

XXIII. Ephraim to be destroyed, and Judah preserved, Isaiah 28.

XXIV. The siege and deliverance of Jerusalem, Isaiah 29.

XXV. An alliance with Egypt condemned, Isaiah 30.

XXVI. Denunciation on account of the contemplated alliance with Egypt, Isaiah 31:1-9.

XXVII. The virtuous and yet unsuccessful reign of Hezekiah, Isaiah 32.

XXVIII. The destruction of the Assyrian army, Isaiah 33.

XXIX. The destruction of Edom, and of all the enemies of God, and the final triumph and security of the people, Isaiah 34; Isaiah 35:1-10.

Fourth. The historical portion Isaiah 36-39, relating to the destruction of Sennacherib, and the sickness and recovery of Hezekiah.

One great cause of the difficulty of understanding Isaiah arises from the manner in which the division into chapters has been made. This division is known to be of recent origin, and is of no authority whatever. It was first adopted by Hugo in the 13th century, who wrote a celebrated commentary on the Scriptures. He divided the Latin Vulgate into chapters nearly the same as those which now exist in the English version. These chapters he divided into smaller sections by placing the letters A, B, C, etc., at equal distances from each other in the margin. The division into verses is of still later origin. It was made by Stephens on a journey from Lyons to Paris in 1551, and was first used in his edition of the New Testament. The Jews formerly divided the books of the Old Testament into greater and smaller sections.

It is obvious that these divisions are of no authority; and it is as obvious that they were most injudiciously made. A simple glance at Isaiah will show that prophecies have been divided in many instances which should have been retained in the same chapter, and that prophecies and parts of prophecies have been thrown into the same chapter which should have been kept distinct. It is not usually difficult to mark the commencement and the close of the prophecies in Isaiah, and an indication of such a natural division throws material light on the prophecy itself. The proper divisions have been indicated above.

Section 5. The Historical Writings of Isaiah

It is evident that Isaiah wrote more than we have in the book which bears his name. In 2 Chronicles 26:22; it is said, 'Now the rest of the acts of Uzziah, first and last, did Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, write.' But the only portion of the book of Isaiah which can with any certainty be referred to the time of Uzziah is Isaiah 6:1-13. And even if, as we may suppose, the five previous chapters are to be referred to his time, yet they contain no historical statement; no record of public events sufficient to constitute a history of "the acts of Uzziah, first and last." It is therefore morally certain that there were other writings of Isaiah which we do not have in this collection of his prophecies.

Again, in 2 Chronicles 32:32; it is said, 'Now the rest of the acts of Hezekiah, and his goodness, behold, they are written in the vision of Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz.' In the Book of Isaiah we have a record of some very important events connected with the life of Hezekiah (see Isaiah 36-39). But there is no formal record of the events of the early part of his reign or of his death. What is said relates to the invasion of Sennacherib Isaiah 36-37, to the sickness and recovery of Hezekiah Isaiah 38, and to the visit of the ambassadors from Babylon, Isaiah 39:1-8. But this would scarcely deserve to be called a record, or history of his "acts," and his "goodness," (margin, "kindnesses"), that is, his actions or plans of beneficence to promote the happiness and piety of his people. It is not, however, upon this passage so much that reliance is to be placed to prove that he wrote other documents, as on the passage quoted from 2Kings.

In regard to these historical records which are not now found in the Book of Isaiah, there can be only two opinions:

(1) One is that they are lost, that they formed a part of the record of times which was then of value, and which was lost when more full and complete records were made in the Books of Kings and Chronicles. Many such writings are mentioned which are now lost or which are not found under the names of their authors. Thus, we have accounts of the writings of Gad, and Iddo the Seer, and Nathan, and the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilomite, and the Book of Jehu 1 Chronicles 29:29; 2 Chronicles 9:29; 2 Chronicles 20:34; 1 Kings 16:1, all of which are now lost, unless they have come down to us under some other name. Nor is there any improbability that some portions of the once-inspired writings are lost. They may have been inspired to accomplish a certain object; and, when that goal was gained, they may have been lost or destroyed as not further necessary, or as superseded by superior clearness of revelation. No man can tell why it should be regarded as more improbable that divine communications which are written should be lost when they have accomplished their purpose, than it is that divine communications spoken should be lost. In the mere act of writing, there is no special sacredness that should make it necessary to preserve it. And yet no one can doubt (compare John 21:25) that a very large portion of what our blessed Lord spoke, who always spoke inspired truth, is now irrecoverably lost. It never was recorded, and there can be no impropriety in supposing that portions of truth that have been recorded have likewise perished. The whole Bible will be consumed in the conflagration of the last day - but truth will live on. God has preserved, with remarkable care, as much truth as He saw was necessary to illuminate and edify His church to the end of time. There is, however, no indispensable necessity of supposing that in fact any part of the sacred record has been destroyed. For,

(2) The records which were made by Isaiah, Iddo, Nathan, Ahijah, etc., may have been public documents that were laid up in the archives of the state, and that were subsequently incorporated into the historical books which we now have. It is probable that the history of each reign was recorded by a prophet, a scribe, or a "historiographer" (see the note at Isaiah 36:3). From the following extract from the travels of Mr. Bruce, it is evident that such an officer is known in modern times as attached to a court. The extract will also be descriptive of the duties of such an officer, and perhaps may be regarded as descriptive of some of the functions discharged by the prophets. 'The king has near his person an officer who is meant to be his historiographer. He is also keeper of his seal; and is "obliged to make a journal of the king's actions, good or bad, without comment of his own upon them."

This, when the king dies, or at least soon after, is delivered to the council, who read it over, and erase everything false in it, while they supply every material fact that may have been omitted, whether purposely or not.' Travels, vol. ii. p. 596. Such a record is also kept of all the sayings and purposes of the Emperor of China by an officer appointed for this purpose. It is carefully made, and sealed up during his life, and is not opened until he dies. This is regarded in that empire as an important public security that the Emperor will say or do nothing that he will be unwilling should be known by posterity; see the Edinburgh Encyclopedia, "China." It would seem probable, therefore, that this is an oriental custom extensively prevalent. There is every reason to believe that a part of these royal biographies, or records of important events in each reign, were written by prophets (see the analysis of Isaiah 36).

These records would be deposited in the archives of state, and would be regarded as authentic documents, and placed under the custody of proper officers. When the connected history of the nation came to be written; when the Books of the "Kings" and the "Chronicles" were composed, nothing would be more natural than to take these documents or historical records, and arrange and embody them as a part of the sacred history. They may have been incorporated entire into the narratives which we now have; and the name of the writer simply referred to as the "authority" for the document, or to preserve the recollection of the original author of each fragment or part of the history. This I regard as by far the most probable supposition. And, if this is correct, then we still have substantially the portions of history which were composed by Isaiah, Gad, etc., and they have been, with perhaps some slight changes necessary to constitute a continuous narrative, or to supply some omissions, incorporated into the historical records which we now possess. These requisite changes may have been made by Ezra when the canon of the Old Testament was completed. The reasons for this opinion may be seen more at length in the analysis of Isaiah 36.

Section 6. Quotations of Isaiah in the New Testament

Isaiah refers more fully to the times of the Messiah than any other of the prophets. It is natural, therefore, to expect to find his writings often quoted or appealed to in the New Testament. The frequency of the reference, and the manner in which it is done, will show the estimate in which he was held by the Saviour and by the apostles. It may also contribute in some degree to the explanation of some of the passages quoted to have them convenient for reference, or for examination. The meaning of Isaiah may be often determined by the inspired statement of the event referred to in the New Testament; and the meaning of a New Testament writer llkewise by a reference to the passage which he quotes. In regard to these quotations, also, it may be of use to bear in remembrance that a portion is made directly and literally from the Hebrew, and agrees also with the Septuagint version, or is in the words of the Septuagint; a portion agrees with the Hebrew in sense but not in words; a portion is made from the Septuagint translation even when the Septuagint differs from the Hebrew; and in some cases there is a bare allusion to a passage. It may be useful to furnish a classification of the entire passages which are quoted in the New Testament, under several heads, that they may be seen at one view, and may be compared at leisure. For this selection and arrangement, I am mainly indebted to Horne. Introduction vol. ii. p. 343ff:

I. Quotations agreeing exactly with the Hebrew text: Isaiah 53:4 quoted in Matthew 8:17 Isaiah 53:12 quoted in Mark 15:28; Luke 22:37 Isaiah 53:1 quoted in John 12:38; compare Romans 10:16 Isaiah 52:15 quoted in Romans 15:21 Isaiah 22:13 quoted in 1 Corinthians 15:32 Isaiah 25:8 quoted in 1 Corinthians 15:54 Isaiah 49:8 quoted in 2 Corinthians 6:2 Isaiah 54:1 quoted in Galatians 4:27 Isaiah 8:17-18 quoted in Hebrews 2:13

II. Quotations nearly agreeing with the Hebrew text: Isaiah 7:14 quoted in Matthew 1:23 Isaiah 6:9-10 quoted in Matthew 13:14-15; compareAct 28:26; Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10 Isaiah 54:13 quoted in John 6:45 Isaiah 66:1-2 quoted in Acts 7:49-50 Isaiah 49:6 quoted in Acts 13:47 Isaiah 52:5 quoted in Romans 2:24 Isaiah 1:9 quoted in Romans 9:29 Isaiah 8:14 quoted in Romans 9:33 Isaiah 52:7 quoted in Romans 10:15 Isaiah 65:1-2 quoted in Romans 10:20-21 Isaiah 29:14 quoted in 1 Corinthians 1:19 Isaiah 40:13 quoted in 1 Corinthians 2:16 Isaiah 38:11-12 quoted in 1 Corinthians 14:21; cf. Romans 11:34 Isaiah 40:6-8 quoted in 1 Peter 1:24-25 Isaiah 53:9 quoted in 1 Peter 2:22 Isaiah 53:5 quoted in 1 Peter 2:24 Isaiah 8:12-13 quoted in 1 Peter 3:14-15

III. Quotations agreeing with the Hebrew in sense,but not in words: Isaiah 40:3-5 quoted in Matthew 3:3; compare Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4-6 Isaiah 42:1-4 quoted in Matthew 12:18-21 Isaiah 59:7-8 quoted in Romans 3:15-17 Isaiah 10:22-23 quoted in Romans 9:27-28 Isaiah 45:23 quoted in Romans 14:11 Isaiah 11:10 quoted in Romans 15:12 Isaiah 52:11-12 quoted in 2 Corinthians 6:17

IV. Quotations which give the general sense,but which abridge, or add to it: Isaiah 6:9-10 quoted in John 12:40; Matthew 13:14-15; Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10; Acts 28:26 Isaiah 29:10 quoted in Romans 11:8

V. Quotations which are taken from several different places: Isaiah 26:16; Isaiah 8:14 quoted in Romans 9:33 Isaiah 29:10; Isaiah 6:9; Ezekiel 12:2 quoted in Romans 11:8 Isaiah 62:11; Zechariah 9:9 quoted in Matthew 21:5

VI. Quotations differing from the Hebrew text,but agreeing with the Septuagint text: Isaiah 29:13 quoted in Matthew 15:8-9 Isaiah 55:3 quoted in Acts 13:34

VII. Quotations in which there is reason to suspecta different reading in the Hebrew text,or that the words were understood in a sensedifferent from that expressed in our Lexicons: Isaiah 60:1-2 quoted in Luke 4:18-19 Isaiah 53:7-8 quoted in Acts 8:32-33 Isaiah 59:20-21 quoted in Romans 11:26-27 Isaiah 64:4 quoted in 1 Corinthians 2:9 Isaiah 42:2, Isaiah 42:4 quoted in Matthew 12:18, Matthew 12:21

VIII. Allusion to a passage in Isaiah: Isaiah 12:3 John 8:37-38

IX. Quotations made from the Septuagint: Many of the passages above referred to are made also from the Septuagint, when that version agrees with the Hebrew. I refer here to a few passages which have not been noted before. The apostles wrote in the Greek language and for the use of those among whom the Septuagint was extensively used. Occasionally, however, they quoted directly from the Hebrew, that is, made a translation themselves, or quoted according to the general sense. All the quotations that are in accordance with the Septuagint, or that vary from it, may be seen in Horne's Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 387, 428. Isaiah 49:6 quoted in Acts 13:47 Isaiah 65:1-2 quoted in Romans 10:20-21 Isaiah 52:15 quoted in Romans 5:21 Isaiah 49:8 quoted in 2 Corinthians 6:2 Isaiah 29:13 quoted in Matthew 15:8-9 Isaiah 55:3 quoted in Acts 13:34 Isaiah 53:12 quoted in Mark 15:28; Luke 22:37

X. Quotations which differ from the Hebrew,and the Septuagint, and which were perhaps takenfrom some version or paraphrase, or which were sorendered by the sacred writers themselves: Isaiah 9:1-2 quoted in Matthew 4:15-16 Isaiah 42:1, Isaiah 42:4 quoted in Matthew 12:18, Matthew 12:21

So numerous are these quotations, and so entirely do the writings of Isaiah harmonize with those of the New Testament, that it may be regarded almost as an indispensable part of the work of explaining the New Testament to explain Isaiah. They seem to be parts of the same work; and an exposition of the apostles and evangelists can hardly be deemed complete without the accompaniment of the evangelical prophet.

Section 7. The Character and Nature of Prophecy

1. The words "prophet" and "prophecy" are used in the Bible in a larger sense than they are commonly with us. We have attached, in common usage, to the word "prophet," the idea simply of one who foretells future events, προφήτης prophētēs from πρόφημι prophēmi, "to speak before, to foretell." To a correct understanding of the prophetic functions, and of the writings of the prophets, however, it is necessary to bear in remembrance that the office of foretelling future events comprised only a small portion of their public duties. They were the messengers of God to His people and to the world. They were appointed to make known His will, to denounce His judgments, to rebuke the crimes of rulers and people, to instruct in the doctrines of religion, and generally to do whatever was necessary in order to effectually promulgate the will of God. The prophet was, therefore, a man who was commissioned to teach and rebuke kings and nations, as well as to predict future events.

With the idea of a prophet there is necessarily connected the idea that he spoke not his own thoughts, but that what he uttered was only received directly from God in one of the modes in which that will was made known. He was God's ambassador to people; and, of course, was a man who was raised up or designated by God Himself. He was not trained for this office, since a man could not be trained for inspiration; though it was a matter of fact that several of the prophets were taken from the "school of the prophets," or from among the "sons of the prophets;" 1 Kings 20:35; 2 Kings 2:3, 2 Kings 2:5,2 Kings 2:7, 2 Kings 2:15; 2 Kings 4:1, 2 Kings 4:38; 2 Kings 5:22; 2 Kings 6:1. Yet the choice from among them of anyone to perform the functions of the prophet under divine inspiration, seems to have been incidental, and not in a uniform mode. A large part of the prophets had no connection with those schools. Those schools were doubtless usually under the direction of some inspired man, and were probably designed to train those educated there for the functions of public teachers, of for the stations of learning under the theocracy; but they could not have been regarded as intended to train for that function which depended wholly upon the direct inspiration of God.

The word rendered "prophet," נביא nâbı̂y', is derived from נבא nâbâ', not used in the Qal, which is probably, according to Gesenius, the same as נבע nâba‛ - the (ע) sound being softened into (א) - and which means "to boil up, to boil forth," as a fountain; hence, to pour forth words as they do who speak with fervour of mind, or under divine inspiration. The word, therefore, properly means, to speak under a special fervor, animation, inspiration of mind produced by a divine influence; to speak, either in foretelling future events, or denouncing the judgments of God when the mind was full, and when the excited and agitated spirit of the prophet poured forth words, as water is driven from the fountain.

But the word also denotes all the forms or modes in which the prophet communicated the will of God, or discharged the functions of the prophetic office. Hence, it is used to denote:

(1) the predicting of future events (see Taylor's Hebrew Concordance or Cruden's Concordance);

(2) to speak in the name of God, or as His messenger, and by His authority, Exodus 7:1; Exodus 4:16;

(3) to chant or sing sacred praises to God while under a divine infiuence-- 1 Samuel 10:11; 1 Samuel 19:20 : 1 Chronicles 25:3 -- because this was often done by the inspired prophets;

(4) to rave, as, for example, to utter the frantic ravings of the prophets of Baal, 1 Kings 18:29; 1 Samuel 18:10.

This latter meaning is in accordance with the customs among the pagan, where the prophet or the prophetess professed to be full of the divine influence, and where that influence was manifested by writhings and contortions of the body, or by a pretended suspension of the powers of conscious agency, and the manifestation of conduct not a little resembling the ravings of delirium. Hence, the Greeks applied the word μαντις mantis, (from μάινομαι mainomai "to be mad, to rave, to be delirious") to the frenzied manner of the soothsayers, prophetic oracles, etc. It is possible that the true prophets, occasionally under the power of inspiration, exhibited similar agitations and spasmodic affections of the body (compare Numbers 24:4; Ezekiel 1:28; Daniel 10:8-10; 1 Samuel 19:24; Jeremiah 20:7), and that this was imitated by the false prophets. The two main ideas in the word "prophecy" relate:

(a) to the prediction of future events, and

(b) to declaring the will of God, denouncing vengeance, threatening punishment, reproving the wicked, etc., under the influence of inspiration, or by a divine impulse.

II. In order to obtain a clear idea of the nature of prophecy, it is important to have a correct apprehension of the modes in which God communicated His will to the prophets, or of the manner in which they were influenced, and affected by the prophetic "afflatus" or inspiration. Of course, all the light which can be obtained on this subject is to be derived from the Scriptures; but the subject is involved still in much obscurity. Perhaps the following will include all the modes in which the will of God was made known to the prophets, or in which they received a knowledge of what they were to communicate to others.

(1) a direct commission by an audible voice from heaven, spoken in a solemn manner, and in circumstances in which there could be no doubt of the call. Thus, Moses was called by God at the bush, Exodus 3:2-6; Isaiah in the temple, Isaiah 6:8 ff.; Samuel by God, 1 Samuel 3:4, 1 Samuel 3:6,1 Samuel 3:8, 1 Samuel 3:10; Jeremiah, Jeremiah 1; Ezekiel 1:3; and perhaps Joel in Joel 1:1; Amos 1:1; Jonah, Jonah 1:1; Micah, Micah 1:1; etc. In these cases there was no doubt on the mind of the prophet of his call, since it was usually in such circumstances, and probably in such a manner, as to leave the fullest demonstration that it was from God. There is no evidence, however, that the whole message was usually communicated to the mind of the prophet in this manner. Perhaps the first call to the prophetic office was made in this mode, and the nature of the message imparted in the manner that will be specified soon. All that is essential to the correct understanding of this is that there was a CLEAR designation to the prophetic function.

(2) the will of God was made known by dreams. Instances of this kind are common in the Sacred Scriptures, as one of the earliest modes of communication between God and the soul. The idea seems to be that the senses were locked up, and that the soul was left free to hold communication with the invisible world, and to receive the expressions of the will of God. The belief that God made known His will in this manner was by no means confined to the Jewish nation. God informed Abimelech in a dream that Sarah was the wife of Abraham, Genesis 20:3, Genesis 20:6. Joseph was early favored with prophetic dreams which were so clear in their signification as to be easily interpreted by his father and brethren, Genesis 37:4-6. The butler and baker in Egypt both had dreams predicting their future destiny, Genesis 40:5; and Pharaoh had a dream of the future condition of Egypt, which was interpreted by Joseph, Genesis 41:7, Genesis 41:25. God spoke to Jacob in a dream, Genesis 31:11; and it was in a dream that He made His promise to impart wisdom to Solomon, 1 Kings 3:5. Nebuchadnezzar had dreams festering his future destiny, and the kingdoms that should arise after him, Daniel 2:1, Daniel 2:5; and the will of God was made known to Daniel in a dream, Daniel 1:17; Daniel 7:1. God expressly declared that He would make known His will by dreams. Numbers 12:6 - 'If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known to him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.' Thus also in Joel 2:28 - 'Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions.' The false prophets pretended also to have dreams which conveyed them the will of God. The ancient belief on this subject is expressed in most sublime manner in the language of Elihu as addressed to Job:

For God speaketh once,

Yea, twice, when man regardeth it not;

In a dream, in a vision of the night,

When deep sleep falleth upon men,

In slumberings upon the bed--

Then he openeth the ears of men,

And sealeth up for them admonition,

That he may turn man from his purpose,

And remove pride from man.

Introduction to the Book of the Prophet Isaiah

On the term prophet, and on the nature and several kinds of prophecy, I have already discoursed in different parts of this work. See the notes on Genesis 15:1 (note); Genesis 20:7 (note), and the preface to the four Gospels, and Acts of the Apostles. A few things only require to be recapitulated. נבא naba signifies not only to foretell future events, but also to pray and supplicate; and נביא nabi, the prophet, was by office not only a declarer of events still future, but the general preacher of the day; and as he frequently foresaw the approach of disastrous times, such was the wickedness of the people, he employed his time in counseling sinners to turn from the error of their ways, and in making strong prayer and supplication to God to avert the threatened judgments: for such predictions, however apparently positive in their terms, were generally conditional; strange as this may appear to some who, through their general ignorance of every thing but the peculiarities of their own creed, suppose that every occurrence is impelled by an irresistible necessity.

To his own conduct, in reference to such matters, God has been pleased to give us a key (see Jeremiah 18.) which opens all difficulties, and furnishes us with a general comment on his own providence. God is absolute master of his own ways; and as he has made man a free agent, whatever concerns him in reference to futurity, on which God is pleased to express his mind in the way of prophecy, there is a condition generally implied or expressed. As this is but seldom attended to by partial interpreters, who wish by their doctrine of fatalism to bind even God himself, many contradictory sentiments are put in the mouths of his prophets.

In ancient times those who were afterwards called Prophets were termed Seers; 1 Samuel 9:9. הראה haroeh, the seeing person; he who perceives mentally what the design of God is. Sometimes called also חזה chozeh, the man who has visions, or supernatural revelations; 1 Kings 22:17; 2 Kings 17:13. Both these terms are translated seer in our common Version. They were sometimes called men of God, and messengers or angels of God. In their case it was ever understood that all God's prophets had an extraordinary commission and had their message given them by immediate inspiration.

In this the heathen copied after the people of God. They also had their prophets and seers; and hence their augurs and auguries, their haruspices, and priestesses, and their oracles; all pretending to be divinely inspired, and to declare nothing but the truth; for what was truth and fact among the former, was affected and pretended among the latter.

Many prophets and seers are mentioned in the sacred writings; but, fragments and insulated prophecies excepted, we have the works of only Sixteen; four of whom are termed the former or larger prophets, and twelve, the latter or minor prophets. They have these epithets, not from priority of time, or from minor importance, but merely from the places they occupy in the present arrangement of the books in the Bible, and from the relative size of their productions.

The Jews reckon forty-eight prophets, and seven prophetesses; and Epiphanius, in a fragment preserved by Cotelerius, reckons not fewer than seventy-three prophets, and ten prophetesses; but in both collections there are many which have no Scriptural pretensions to such a distinguished rank.

The succession of prophets in the Jewish Church is well worthy of note, because it not only manifests the merciful regards of God towards that people, but also the uninterrupted succession of the prophetic influence, at least from Moses to Malachi, if not before; for this gift was not withheld under the patriarchal dispensation; indeed we might boldly ask any man to show when the time was in which God left himself without a witness of this kind.

To show this succession, I shall endeavor to give the different prophets in order of time.

1. The first man, Adam, has an undoubted right to stand at the head of the prophets, as he does at the head of the human race. His declaration concerning marriage, "For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife," is so truly prophetic, that no doubt can be formed on the subject. There was then nothing in nature or experience to justify such an assertion; and he could have it only by Divine inspiration. The millions of instances which have since occurred, and the numerous laws which have been founded on this principle among all the nations of the earth, show with what precision the declaration was conceived, and with what truth it was published to the world. Add to this, his correct knowledge of the nature of the different animals, so that he could impose on them names expressive of their respective natures or propensities; which proves that he must have acted under a Divine inspiration; for known only to God are all his works from the beginning.

2. Enoch, the seventh from Adam, is expressly called a prophet; and St. Jude, Jde 1:14, Jde 1:15, has preserved a fragment of one of his prophecies, relative to the corruption of the ante-diluvian world, and the approaching judgments of God.

3. Noah was a prophet and preacher of righteousness, and predicted the general deluge, and the time of respite which God in his mercy had granted to the offenders of that age.

4. Abraham is expressly called a prophet also, Genesis 20:7; and it appears from Psalm 105:15, that he partook of the Divine anointing.

5. Isaac, Genesis 27:27, predicted the future greatness of his son Jacob, and of the race that was to spring from him.

6. Jacob was so especially favored with the prophetic gift, that he distinctly foretold what should happen to each of his sons. See Genesis 49.

7. Joseph was favored with several prophetic visions, and had the gift of interpreting dreams which portended future occurrences; (see Genesis 27, 40, 41.); and foretold the redemption of the Israelites from Egypt; Genesis 50:25. Thus far the prophetic influence extended through the patriarchal dispensation for about two thousand three hundred and seventy years from the creation.

With the Jewish dispensation the prophetic gift revived; and,

8. Moses became one of the most eminent prophets that had ever appeared. He not only enjoyed the continual prophetic afflatus, but had such visions of and intercourse with God as no other person either before or since was favored with; and by which he was highly qualified to perform the arduous work which God had given him to do, and to frame that Code of Laws which had no equal before the promulgation of the Gospel. See Deuteronomy 24:10. He predicted expressly the coming of the Messiah. See Deuteronomy 18:18.

9. Aaron, the brother of Moses, his prime minister and God's high priest, was also a partaker of his Divine influence, and declared the will of God to Pharaoh and the Israelites, not merely from information received from Moses, but also by immediate communication from God. See Exodus 4:15.

10. Miriam, the sister of Moses and Aaron, is expressly called a prophetess, Exodus 15:20; Numbers 12:2.

11. Joshua, who succeeded Moses, was a partaker of the same grace. He was appointed by Moses under the especial direction of God; Numbers 27:18-23; Deuteronomy 34:9; and has always been reckoned among the Jews as one of the prophets. See Sirach 46:1-6. Though I cannot place them in the same rank, yet it is necessary to state that, by the Jews, several of the judges are classed among the prophets; such as Othniel, Ehud, Samson, and Barak.

12. Deborah, the coadjutor of Barak, is called a prophetess, Judges 4:4. During her time, and down to the days of Eli the high priest, prophecy had been very scarce, there having been very few on whom the Spirit of the Lord had rested; for "the word of the Lord was scarce in those days, and there was no open vision;" 1 Samuel 3:1.

13. Hannah, the wife of Elkanah, is supposed to have partaken of the spirit of prophecy; and to have foretold, at least indirectly, the advent of the Messiah, and the glory that should be revealed under the Gospel. See her Song, 1 Samuel 2:1-10. And what renders this more likely is, that it is on the model, and with many of the expressions, of this song, that the blessed Virgin composed her Magnificat, Luke 1:46-55.

14. Samuel, her son, was one of the most eminent of the Jewish prophets, and was the last, and indeed the greatest, of the judges of Israel. In his time the prophetic influence seems to have rested upon many; so that we find even whole schools or colleges of prophets which were under his direction. See 1 Samuel 10:5, 1 Samuel 10:10; 1 Samuel 19:20, and elsewhere.

15. David united in himself the character of prophet and king, in the most eminent manner; and from his reign down to the captivity the succession was not only not interrupted, but these extraordinary messengers of God became very numerous.

16. Gad flourished under his reign, and was emphatically called David's Seer, 2 Samuel 24:11; 1 Chronicles 21:9, 1 Chronicles 21:19, 1 Chronicles 21:20; and it appears that he had written a Book of Prophecies, which is now lost, 1 Chronicles 29:29.

17. Nathan lived also under the same reign, 2 Samuel 7:2; and, in conjunction with Gad, composed a book of the acts of David, 1 Chronicles 29:29.

18. To Solomon also, son of David, the prophetic gift has been attributed. This might be implied in the extraordinary wisdom with which God had endowed him, 1 Kings 3:5-9; 2 Chronicles 1:7; 2 Chronicles 7:12; and in his writings several prophetic declarations may be found, even independently of the supposed reference to Christ and his Church in the Song of Solomon.

19. Iddo is termed a Seer, 2 Chronicles 12:15; 2 Chronicles 13:22; and was one of Solomon's biographers.

20. Shemaiah lived under Rehoboam; he is called a man of God, and to him the word of prophecy came relative to Judah and Benjamin, 1 Kings 12:22-24. Some think this was the same person who was sent to Jeroboam relative to his idolatry; see 1 Kings 13:1, etc.

21. Ahijah, the Shilonite, prophesied to Jeroboam, 1 Kings 11:29-39.

22. Hanani the Seer prophesied under Azariah and Asa, 2 Chronicles 16:7.

23. Jehu, son of Hanani, prophesied under Jehoshaphat, 1 Kings 16:1, 1 Kings 16:7; 2 Chronicles 16:7; 2 Chronicles 19:2; and 2 Chronicles 20:34.

24. Azariah, the son of Oded, prophesied under Asa, 2 Chronicles 15:1.

25. Elijah prophesied under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel.

26. Elisha succeeded Elijah under the same reigns. And these eminent men had many disciples on whom the spirit of prophecy rested. They, and their masters, Elijah and Elisha, prophesied in the kingdoms both of Israel and Judah. Their histories make a prominent part of the first and second Books of Kings; and are well known.

27. Micaiah, the son of Imlah, prophesied under the same reign, 1 Kings 21:9.

28. Hosea prophesied under Jeroboam the second, king of Israel, and under the reign of Uzziah, king of Judah.

29. Isaiah was contemporary with Hosea, but probably began to prophesy a little later than he did.

30. Amos prophesied about the same time.

31. Jonah, son of Amittai, is supposed to have been contemporary with the above.

32. Eliezer, the son of Dodavah, prophesied against Jehoshaphat and Ahaziah, 2 Chronicles 20:37.

33. Jahaziel, son of Zechariah, prophesied against Judah and Israel under the same reign, 2 Chronicles 20:14.

34. Micah prophesied against Samaria and Jerusalem, in the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah.

35. Oded, father of Azariah, prophesied against Asa, 2 Chronicles 15:8.

36. Nahum prophesied under Hezekiah.

37. Joel, under Josiah.

38. Jeremiah, about the same time.

39. Zephaniah, under the same reign. See their prophecies.

40. Huldah, the prophetess, was contemporary with the above.

41. Igdaliah, called a man of God, and probably a prophet, was contemporary with Jeremiah, Jeremiah 35:4.

42. Habakkuk 54ed about the end of the reign of Josiah, or the beginning of that of Jehoiakim.

43. Ezekiel 54ed under the captivity; and prophesied in Mesopotamia, about the time that Jeremiah prophesied in Jerusalem.

44. Obadiah 54ed in Judea, after the capture of Jerusalem and before the desolation of Idumea by Nebuchadnezzar.

45. Daniel prophesied in Babylon during the captivity.

46. Haggai prophesied during and after the captivity.

47. Urijah, the son of Shemaiah, prophesied under Jehoiakim. See Jeremiah 26:20, Jeremiah 26:21.

48. Zechariah, son of Barachiah, flourished in the second year of Darius, after the captivity.

49. Malachi 54ed under Nehemiah, and some time after Haggai and Zechariah.

Here is a succession of divinely inspired men, by whom God at sundry times and in divers manners spake unto the fathers, from the beginning of the world down to the restoration from the Babylonish captivity, a period of three thousand six hundred years. From the time of Malachi, who was the last of the prophets, till the advent of Christ, a period of nearly four hundred years elapsed without vision or prophecy: but during the whole of that interval the Jews had the law and the prophetical writings, to which, till the time of Christ, there was no necessity to add any thing; for God had with the writings of the last mentioned prophet completed the canon of the Old Testament, nothing being further necessary, till he should, in the fullness of time, superadd the Gospel; and this having taken place, vision and prophecy are now for ever sealed up, and the temple of God is established among all genuine believers in Christ Jesus.

It is not easy to ascertain the order in which the sixteen prophets, whose writings are preserved, have succeeded to each other. There are chronological notes prefixed to several of their prophecies, which assist to settle generally the times of the whole. Several were contemporary, as the reader has already seen in the preceding list. The major and minor prophets may be thus arranged: -

1. Jonah, under the reign of Jeroboam the second.

2. Hosea, under Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, etc.

3. Joel, contemporary with Hosea.

4. Amos, under Uzziah and Jeroboam the second.

5. Isaiah, under Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah.

6. Micah, contemporary with Isaiah.

7. Nahum, under the reign of Hezekiah.

8. Habakkuk, under the reign of Manasseh or Josiah.

9. Zephaniah, under Josiah.

10. Jeremiah, from Josiah to Zedekiah.

11. Daniel, under the captivity, after Zedekiah.

12. Ezekiel, at the same time.

13. Obadiah, during the captivity.

14. Haggai began to prophecy in the second year of Darius.

15. Zechariah, about the same time. See Zechariah 1:1; Zechariah 7:1.

16. Malachi, under Nehemiah. The last of all the prophets.

The works of these prophets constitute the principal and most important part of what is called The Bible or Old Testament.

On the style of the prophets much has been said by several learned men; particularly Calmet, Lowth, Bishop Newton, Vitringa, Michaelis, and Houbigant. Their chief observations, and especially those most within the reach of the common people, have been selected and abridged with great care and industry by the Revelation Dr. John Smith, of Cambleton, in his little Tract entitled "A Summary View and Explanation of the Writings of the Prophets," to which it forms preliminary observations, drawn up at the desire of the Scottish Society for propagating Christian Knowledge, in a small 8vo. 1804. From this work I thankfully borrow what concerns the present subject; taking occasion at the same time to recommend the whole to all Christian ministers, to private persons, and to all families who wish to read the prophets to their edification.

"The writings of the prophets, the most sublime and beautiful in the world, lose much of that usefulness and effect which they are so well calculated to produce on the souls of men, from their not being more generally understood. Many prophecies are somewhat dark, till events explain them. They are, besides, delivered in such lofty and figurative terms, and with such frequent allusions to the customs and manners of times and places the most remote, that ordinary readers cannot, without some help, be supposed capable of understanding them. It must therefore be of use to make the language of prophecy as intelligible as may be, by explaining those images and figures of speech in which it most frequently abounds; and this may be done generally, even when the prophecies themselves are obscure.

"Some prophecies seem as if it were not intended that they should be clearly understood before they are fulfilled. As they relate to different periods, they may have been intended for exciting the attention of mankind from time to time both to providence and to Scripture and to furnish every age with new evidence of Divine revelation; by which means they serve the same purpose to the last ages of the world that miracles did to the first. Whereas, if they had been in every respect clear and obvious from the beginning, this wise purpose had been in a great measure defeated. Curiosity, industry, and attention would at once be at an end, or, by being too easily gratified, would be little exercised.

"Besides, a great degree of obscurity is necessary to some prophecies before they can be fulfilled; and if not fulfilled, the consequence would not be so beneficial to mankind. Thus many of the ancient prophecies concerning the destruction of Jerusalem had a manifest relation to the remoter destruction by the Romans, as well as to the nearer one by the Chaldeans. Had the Jews perceived this, which was not indeed clear enough till the event explained it, they would probably have wished to have remained for ever in their captivity at Babylon, rather than expose themselves or their offspring a second time to a destruction so dreadful as that which they had already experienced.

"With respect to our times, by far the greatest number of prophecies relate to events which are now past; and therefore a sufficient acquaintance with history, and with the language and style of prophecy, is all that is requisite to understand them. Some prophecies, however, relate to events still future; and these too may be understood in general although some particular circumstances connected with them may remain obscure till they are fulfilled. If prophecies were not capable of being understood in general, we should not find the seers so often blamed in this respect for their ignorance and want of discernment. That they did actually understand many of them when they chose to search the Scriptures we know. Daniel understood, from the prophecies of Jeremiah, the time at which the captivity in Babylon was to be at an end; and the scribes knew from Micah, and told Herod, where the Messiah was to be born. A very little attention might have enabled them in the same manner to understand others, as they probably did; such as the seventy weeks of Daniel; the destruction of the Babylonian empire, and of the other three that were to succeed; and also of the ruin of the people and places around them, Moab, Ammon, Tyre, Sidon, Philistia, Egypt, and Idumea. Perhaps, indeed, a few enigmatical circumstances might have been annexed, which could not be understood till they were accomplished; but the general tenor of the prophecies they could be at no loss to understand. With regard to prophecies still future, we are in a similar situation. It is understood in general, that the Jews will be gathered from their dispersions, restored to their own land, and converted to Christianity; that the fullness of the Gentiles will likewise come in; that Antichrist, Gog and Magog, and all the enemies of the Church will be destroyed; after which the Gospel will remarkably flourish, and be more than ever glorified. But several circumstances connected with those general events must probably remain in the dark till their accomplishment shall clearly explain them.

"But this degree of obscurity which sometimes attends prophecy does not always proceed from the circumstances or subject; it frequently proceeds from the highly poetical and figurative style, in which prophecy is for the most part conveyed, and of which it will be proper to give some account. To speak of all the rhetorical figures with which the prophets adorn their style would lead us into a field too wide, and would be more the province of the rhetorician than of the commentator. It will be sufficient for our purpose at present to attend to the most common of them, consisting of allegory, parable, and metaphor, and then to consider the sources from which the prophets most frequently borrow their images in those figures, and the sense which they wish to convey by them.

"By allegory, the first of the figures mentioned, is meant that mode of speech in which the writer or speaker means to convey a different idea from what the words in their obvious and primary signification bear. Thus, 'Break up your fallow ground, and sow not among thorns,' (Jeremiah 4:3), is to be understood, not of tillage, but of repentance. And these words, 'Thy rowers have brought thee into great waters, the east wind hath broken thee in the midst of the seas,' Ezekiel 27:26, allude not to the fate of a ship, but of a city.

"To this figure the parable, in which the prophets frequently speak, is nearly allied. It consists in the application of some feigned narrative to some real truth, which might have been less striking or more disagreeable if expressed in plain terms. Such is the following one of Isaiah, Isaiah 5:1, Isaiah 5:2 : 'My well-beloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill. And he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a wine-press therein; and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes.' The seventh verse tells us that this vineyard was the house of Israel, which had so ill requited the favor which God had shown it. On this subject see the dissertation at the end of the notes on Matthew 13 (note).

"There is, besides, another kind of allegory not uncommon with the prophets, called mystical allegory or double prophecy. Thus it is said of Eliakim, Isaiah 22:22 : 'And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; and he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.' In the first and obvious sense, the words relate to Eliakim; but in the secondary or mystical sense, to the Messiah. Instances of the same kind are frequent in those prophecies that relate to David, Zerubbabel, Cyrus, and other types of Christ. In the first sense the words relate to the type; in the second, to the antitype. The use of this allegory, however, is not so frequent as that of the former. It is generally confined to things most nearly connected with the Jewish religion; with Israel, Sion, Jerusalem, and its kings and rulers; or such as were most opposite to these, Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, Idumea, and the like. In the former kind of allegory the primitive meaning is dropped, and the figurative only is retained; in this, both the one and the other are preserved, and this is what constitutes the difference.

"But of all the figures used by the prophets the most frequent is the metaphor, by which words are transferred from their primitive and plain to a secondary meaning. This figure, common in all poetry and in all languages, is of indispensable necessity in Scripture, which, having occasion to speak of Divine and spiritual matters, could do it only by terms borrowed from sensible and material objects. Hence it is that the sentiments, actions, and corporeal parts, not only of man, but also of inferior creatures, are ascribed to God himself; it being otherwise impossible for us to form any conceptions of his pure essence and incommunicable attributes. But though the prophets, partly from necessity and partly from choice, are thus profuse in the use of metaphors, they do not appear, like other writers, to have the liberty of using them as fancy directed. The same set of images, however diversified in the manner of applying them, is always used, both in allegory and metaphor, to denote the same subjects, to which they are in a manner appropriated. This peculiar characteristic of the Hebrew poetry might perhaps be owing to some rules taught in the prophetic schools, which did not allow the same latitude in this respect as other poetry. Whatever it may be owing to, the uniform manner in which the prophets apply these images tends greatly to illustrate the prophetic style; and therefore it will be proper now to consider the sources from which those images are most frequently derived, and the subjects and ideas which they severally denote. These sources may be classed under four heads; natural, artificial, religious, and historical.

"I. The first and most copious, as well as the most pleasing source of images in the prophetic writings, as in all other poetry, is nature; and the principal images drawn from nature, together with their application, are the following: -

"The sun, moon, and stars, the highest objects in the natural world, figuratively represent kings, queens, and princes or rulers; the highest in the world politic. 'The moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed;' Isaiah 24:23. 'I will cover the heavens, and make the stars thereof dark: I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light;' Ezekiel 32:7.

"Light and darkness are used figuratively for joy and sorrow, prosperity and adversity. 'We wait for light, but behold obscurity; for brightness, but we walk in darkness;' Isaiah 59:9. An uncommon degree of light denotes an uncommon degree of joy and prosperity, and vice versa. 'The light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold;' Isaiah 30:26. The same metaphors are likewise used to denote knowledge and ignorance. 'If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them;' Isaiah 8:20. 'The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light;' Isaiah 9:2.

"Dew, moderate rains, gentle streams, and running waters denote the blessings of the Gospel. 'Thy dew is as the dew of herbs;' Isaiah 26:19. 'He shall come unto us as the rain;' Hosea 6:3. 'I will water it every moment;' Isaiah 27:3. 'I will pour water on him that is thirsty;' Isaiah 44:3.

"Immoderate rains on the other hand, hail, floods, deep waters, torrents, and inundations, denote judgments and destruction. 'I will rain upon him an overflowing rain, and great hailstones,' Ezekiel 38:22. 'Waters rise up out of the north, and shall overflow the land,' Jeremiah 47:2.

"Fire also, and the east wind, parching and hurtful, frequently denote the same. 'They shall cast thy choice cedars into the fire,' Jeremiah 22:7. 'He stayeth his rough wind in the day of the east wind,' Isaiah 27:8.

"Wind in general is often taken in the same sense. 'The wind shall eat up all thy pastures,' Jeremiah 22:22. Sometimes it is put for any thing empty or fallacious, as well as hurtful. 'The prophets shall become wind,' Jeremiah 5:13. 'They have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind,' Hosea 8:7.

"Lebanon and Carmel; the one remarkable for its height and stately cedars, was the image of majesty, strength, or anything very great or noble. 'He shall cut down the thickets of the forest with iron, and Lebanon shall fall by a mighty one,' Isaiah 10:34. 'The Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon,' Ezekiel 31:3. The other mountain (Carmel) being fruitful, and abounding in vines and olives, denoted beauty and fertility. 'The glory of Lebanon shall be given it, the excellency of Carmel,' Isaiah 35:2. The vine alone is a frequent image of the Jewish Church. 'I had planted thee a noble vine,' Jeremiah 2:21.

"Rams and bullocks of Bashan, lions, eagles, sea-monsters, or any animals of prey, are figures frequently used for cruel and oppressive tyrants and conquerors. 'Hear this word ye kine of Bashan, which oppress the poor,' Amos 4:1. 'The lion is come up from his thicket,' Jeremiah 4:7. 'A great eagle came unto Lebanon, and took the highest branch of the cedar,' Ezekiel 17:3. 'Thou art as a whale in the seas,' Ezekiel 32:2. 'The unicorns shall come down, and their land shall be soaked with blood,' Isaiah 34:7.

"II. The ordinary occupations and customs of life, with the few arts practiced at the time, were another source from which the prophets derived many of their figures, particularly,

"From husbandry in all its parts, and from its implements. 'Sow to yourselves in righteousness, reap in mercy: break up your fallow ground,' Hosea 10:12. 'Put in the sickle, for the harvest is ripe,' Joel 3:13. 'I am pressed under you, as a wain under a load of sheaves,' Amos 2:13. Threshing was performed in various ways, (mentioned Isaiah 28:24, etc.), which furnish a variety of images denoting punishment. 'Arise and thresh, O daughter of Zion; for I will make thine horn iron, and thy hoofs brass,' etc., Micah 4:13. The operation was performed on rising grounds, where the chaff was driven away by the wind, while the grain remained; a fit emblem of the fate of the wicked, and of the salvation of the just. 'Behold, I will make thee a new threshing-instrument having teeth; thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small, and thou shalt make the hills as chaff. Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them away, and the whirlwind shall scatter them,' Isaiah 41:15, Isaiah 41:16.

"The vintage and winepress also furnish many images, obvious enough in their application. 'The press is full, the fats overflow, for their wickedness is great,' Joel 3:13. 'I have trod the winepress alone. I will tread down the people in mine anger,' Isaiah 63:3, etc. As the vintage was gathered with shouting and rejoicing, the ceasing of the vintage-shouting is frequently one of the figures that denote misery and desolation. 'None shall tread with shouting; their shouting shall be no shouting,' Jeremiah 48:33.

"From the occupation of tending cattle we have many images. 'Wo unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture,' Jeremiah 23:1. The people are the flock; teachers and rulers the pastors. 'Israel is a scattered sheep, the lions have driven him away.' 'As a shepherd taketh out of the mouth of the lion two legs, or a piece of an ear,' etc., Amos 3:12. Some of the images derived from husbandry, tending cattle, etc., may perhaps appear mean to us; though not to the Jews, whose manner of life was simple and plain, and whose greatest men (such as Moses, David, Gideon, etc.) were often husbandmen and shepherds. Accordingly, the Messiah himself is frequently described under the character of a shepherd.

[See Fleury's Manners of the Israelites].

"It was customary in deep mournings to shave the head and beard, to retire to the housetops, which in those countries were flat, and furnished with little chambers adapted to the purposes of devotion or of sequestered grief; also to sing dirges at funerals, and to accompany them with a mournful sort of music; and from these and the like circumstances images are frequently borrowed by the prophets to denote the greatest danger, and the deepest distress. 'Mine heart shall sound for Moab like pipes.' 'Every head shall be bald, and every beard clipt - there shall be lamentation on all the house - tops of Moab,' Jeremiah 48:36-38; Isaiah 15:2, Isaiah 15:3.

"The mode of burying in the Jewish sepulchers, or 'sides of the pit,' and their Hades, or state of the dead, supplied many images of the same kind. See observations on Isaiah 14 (note), and Ezekiel 26:20 (note).

"According to the barbarous custom of those times, conquerors drove their captives before them almost naked, and exposed to the intolerable heat of the sun, and the inclemencies of the weather. They afterwards employed them frequently in grinding at the handmill, (watermills not being then invented); hence nakedness, and grinding at the mill, and sitting on the ground (the posture in which they wrought) express captivity. 'Descend and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon; take the millstones - thy nakedness shall be uncovered,' Isaiah 47:1-3.

"The marriage relation supplied metaphors to express the relation or covenant between God and his people. On the other hand adultery, infidelity to the marriage bed, etc., denoted any breach of covenant with God, particularly the love and worship of idols. 'Turn, O backsliding children, saith the Lord, for I am married unto you,' Jeremiah 3:14. 'There were two women, the daughters of one mother, and they committed whoredoms - with their idols have they committed adultery,' etc., Ezekiel 23:2-37.

"The debility and stupefaction caused by intoxicating liquors suggested very apt images to express the terrible effects of the Divine judgments on those who are the unhappy objects of them. 'Thou shalt be filled with drunkenness, with the cup of thy sister Samaria,' Ezekiel 23:33.

"From the method of refining metals in the furnace images are often borrowed to denote the judgments inflicted by God on his people, with a view to cleanse them from their sins, as metal from its dross. 'Israel is dross in the midst of the furnace,' Ezekiel 22:18. 'He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver,' Malachi 3:3.

"Among the other few arts from which the Hebrew poets derive some of their images, are those of the fuller and potter, Malachi 3:2, etc.; Jeremiah 18:1, etc.; of which the application is obvious. No less so is that of images derived from fishing, fowling, and the implements belonging to them; the hook, net, pit, snare, etc., which generally denote captivity or destruction. 'I will send for many fishers, and they shall fish them; and for many hunters, and they shall hunt them; for their iniquity is not hid from mine eyes,' Jeremiah 16:16, Jeremiah 16:17. 'I will put hooks to thy jaws,' Ezekiel 29:4. 'Fear, and the pit, and the snare, are upon thee, O inhabitant of the earth,' Isaiah 24:17.

"A few images are derived from building, as when the Messiah is denoted by a foundation and corner-stone, Isaiah 28:16. The next verse describes the rectitude of judgment by metaphors borrowed from the line and plummet; and by building with precious stones is denoted a very high degree of prosperity, whether applied to church or state, Isaiah 54:11, Isaiah 54:12.

"III. Religion, and things connected with it, furnished many images to the sacred poets.

"From the temple and its pompous service, from the tabernacle, shechinah, mercy-seat, etc., are derived a variety of images, chiefly serving to denote the glory of the Christian Church, the excellency of its worship, God's favor towards it, and his constant presence with it; the prophets speaking to the Jews in terms accommodated to their own ideas. 'And the Lord will create upon every dwelling-place of Mount Zion, and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night; for upon all the glory shall be a covering,' Isaiah 4:5. 'Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean,' Ezekiel 36:25. "The ceremonial law, and especially its distinctions between things clean and unclean, furnished a number of images, all obvious in their application. 'Wash ye, make you clean, put away the evil of your doings,' Isaiah 1:16. 'Their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman,' Ezekiel 36:17.

"The killing of sacrifices and feasting upon them, serve as metaphors for slaughter. 'The Lord hath a sacrifice in Bozrah,' Isaiah 34:6; Ezekiel 39:17.

"The pontifical robes, which were very splendid, suggested several images expressive of the glory of both the Jewish and Christian Church. 'I clothed thee with broidered work,' etc., Ezekiel 16:10. 'He clothed me with the garments of salvation,' Isaiah 61:10. The prophets wore a rough upper garment; false prophets wore the like, in imitation of true ones; and to this there are frequent allusions. 'Neither shall they wear a rough garment to deceive,' Zechariah 13:4.

"From the pots, and other vessels and utensils of the temple, are likewise borrowed a few metaphors obvious enough without explanation: 'Every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness,' Zechariah 14:21.

"The prophets have likewise many images that allude to the idolatrous rites of the neighboring nations, to their groves and high places, Isaiah 27:9, and to the worship paid to their idols, Baal, Molech, Chemosh, Gad, Meni, Ashtaroth, Tammuz, etc., Ezekiel 8:10-14.

"IV. Many of the metaphors and images used by the prophets are likewise borrowed from history, especially sacred.

"From the fall of angels: 'How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning;' Isaiah 14:12. 'Thou art the anointed cherub, - thou wast upon the holy mountain of God;' Ezekiel 28:14. And from the fall of man: 'Thou hast been in Eden, the garden of God;' Ezekiel 28:13.

"From chaos: 'I beheld the earth, and, lo! it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light;' Jeremiah 4:23. 'He shall stretch over it the line of devastation, and the plummet of emptiness;' Isaiah 34:11.

"From the deluge: 'The windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake;' Isaiah 24:18.

"From the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah: 'And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch;' Isaiah 34:9. Also from the destruction of the Hivites and Amorites, etc., Isaiah 17:9.

"The exodus and deliverance from Egypt, is frequently used to shadow forth other great deliverances: 'Thus saith the Lord, who maketh a way in the sea, and a path in the mighty waters,' etc.; Isaiah 11:15, Isaiah 11:16; Isaiah 43:16-19; Isaiah 51:9, Isaiah 51:10, etc.

"From the descent on Sinai: 'Behold, the Lord cometh forth out of his place, and will come down and tread on the high places of the earth; and the mountains shall be molten under him;' Micah 1:3, Micah 1:4.

"From the resurrection, the end of the world, and the last judgment, are derived many images, of which the application is natural and obvious: 'Thy dead men shall live, with my dead body shall they arise, - awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust,' etc.; Isaiah 26:19. 'And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll; and all their host shall fall down as a leaf falleth from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig-tree;' Isaiah 34:4.

"The foregoing account of the images which most frequently occur in the writings of the prophets may be of considerable use in studying their style; but as a thorough knowledge of this must be allowed to be of the highest importance, a few general remarks are farther added, although some part of them may appear to be superseded by what has been already observed.

1. Although the prophets use words so frequently in a figurative or metaphorical meaning; yet we ought not, without necessity, to depart from the primitive and original sense of language; and such a necessity there is, when the plain and original sense is less proper, less suitable to the subject and context, or contrary to other scriptures.

2. By images borrowed from the world natural the prophets frequently understand something analogous in the world politic. Thus, the sun, moon, stars, and heavenly bodies denote kings, queens, rulers, and persons in great power; their increase of splendor denotes increase of prosperity; their darkening, setting, or falling denotes a reverse of fortune, or the entire ceasing of that power or kingdom to which they refer. Great earthquakes, and the shaking of heaven and earth, denote the commotion and overthrow of kingdoms; and the beginning or end of the world, their rise or ruin.

3. The cedars of Lebanon, oaks of Bashan, fir-trees, and other stately trees of the forest, denote kings, princes, potentates, and persons of the highest rank; briers and thorns, the common people, or those of the meanest order.

4. High mountains and lofty hills, in like manner, denote kingdoms, republics, states, and cities; towers and fortresses signify defenders and protectors; ships of Tarshish, merchants or commercial people; and the daughter of any capital or mother city, the lesser cities or suburbs around it. Cities never conquered are farther styled virgins.

5. The prophets likewise describe kings and kingdoms by their ensigns; as Cyrus and the Romans by an eagle, the king of Macedon by a goat, and the king of Persia by a ram; these being the figures on their respective standards, or in the ornaments of their architecture.

6. The prophets in like manner borrow some of their images from ancient hieroglyphics, which they take in their usual acceptation: thus, a star was the emblem of a god or hero; a horn, the emblem of great power or strength; and a rod, the emblem of royalty; and they signify the same in the prophets.

7. The same prophecies have frequently a double meaning; and refer to different events, the one near, the other remote; the one temporal, the other spiritual, or perhaps eternal. The prophets having thus several events in their eye, their expressions may be partly applicable to one, and partly to another; and it is not always easy to mark the transitions. Thus, the prophecies relating to the first and second restoration of the Jews, and first and second coming of our Lord, are often interwoven together; like our Savior's own prediction (Matthew 24.) concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the world. What has not been fulfilled in the first, we must apply to the second; and what has been already fulfilled may often be considered as typical of what still remains to be accomplished.

8. Almost all the prophecies of the Old Testament, whatever view they may have to nearer events, are ultimately to be referred to the New, where only we are to look for their full completion. Thus Babylon, under the Old Testament, was a type of mystical Babylon under the New; and the king of Syria, (Antiochus Epiphanes), a type of Antichrist; the temporal enemies of the Jews, types and figures of the spiritual enemies of Christians. We must not, however, expect to find always a mystical meaning in prophecy; and when the near and most obvious meaning is plain, and gives a good sense, we need not depart from it, nor be over-curious to look beyond it.

9. In prophecies, as in parables, we are chiefly to consider the scope and design, without attempting too minute an explication of all the poetical images and figures which the sacred writers use to adorn their style.

10. Prophecies of a general nature are applicable by accommodation to individuals; most of the things that are spoken of the Church in general being no less applicable to its individual members.

11. Prophecies of a particular nature, on the other hand, admit, and often require, to be extended. Thus, Edom, Moab, or any of the enemies of God's people, is often put for the whole; what is said of one being generally applicable to the rest.

12. In like manner, what is said to or of any of God's people, on any particular occasion, is of general application and use; all that stand in the same relation to God having an interest in the same promises.

13. A cup of intoxicating liquor is frequently used to denote the indignation of God; and the effects of such a cup, the effects of his displeasure.

14. As the covenant of God with his people is represented under the figure of marriage; so their breach of that covenant, especially their idolatry, is represented by whoredom, adultery, and infidelity to the marriage bed; on which the prophets sometimes enlarge, to excite detestation of the crime. The epithet strange does likewise, almost always, relate to something connected with idolatry.

15. Persons or nations are frequently said in Scripture to be related to those whom they resemble in their life and conduct. In the same manner, men are denoted by animals whose qualities they resemble. A definite number, such as three, four, seven, ten, etc., is sometimes used by the prophets for an indefinite, and commonly denotes a great many.

16. In the reckoning of time, a day is used by the prophets to denote a year; and things still future, to denote their certainty, are spoken of as already past.

17. When the prophets speak of the last or latter days, they always mean the days of the Messiah, or the time of the Gospel dispensation. That day means often the same, and always some period at a distance.

18. When places are mentioned as lying north, south, east, or west, it is generally to be understood of their situation with respect to Judea or Jerusalem, when the context does not plainly restrict the scene to some other place.

19. By the earth, or the word so translated, the prophets frequently mean the land of Judea; and sometimes, says Sir Isaac Newton, the great continent of all Asia and Africa, to which they had access by land. By the isles of the sea, on the other hand, they understood the places to which they sailed, particularly all Europe, and probably the islands and seacoasts of the Mediterranean.

20. The greatest part of the prophetic writings was first composed in verse, and still retains, notwithstanding all the disadvantages of a literal prose translation, much of the air and cast of the original, particularly in the division of the lines, and in that peculiarity of Hebrew poetry by which the sense of one line or couplet so frequently corresponds with that of the other. Thus: -

I will greatly rejoice in the Lord,

My soul shall be joyful in my God;

For he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation,

He hath covered me with the robe of righteousness

As a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments,

And as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels.

INTRODUCTION TO ISAIAH

This book is called, in the New Testament, sometimes "the Book of the Words of the Prophet Esaias", Luke 3:4 sometimes only the "Prophet Esaias", Acts 8:28 and sometimes, as here, the "Book of the Prophet Esaias", Luke 4:17. In the Syriac version the title is, "the Prophecy of Isaiah the Son of Amos": and in the Arabic version, "the Beginning of the Prophecy of Isaiah the Prophet". It stands first of all the prophets; though the order of the prophets, according to the Jews (a), is, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the twelve. But it is here placed first, not because Isaiah prophesied before the other prophets; for Joel, Jonah, Hosea, and Amos, begun before him, namely, in or before the days of Jeroboam the Second; but because of the excellency of the matter contained in it. Isaiah is called by Ben Syra (b) the great prophet, and by Eusebius (c) the greatest of the prophets; and Jerom (d) a says, he should rather be called an evangelist than a prophet, since he seems rather to write a history of things past, than to prophesy of things to come; yea, he styles him an apostle, as well as an evangelist (e): and certain it is that no one writes so fully and clearly of the person, offices, grace, and kingdom of Christ; of his incarnation and birth of a virgin; of his sufferings and death, and the glory that should follow, as he does. John, the forerunner of Christ, began his ministry with a passage out of him concerning himself, Matthew 3:3. Our Lord preached his first sermon at Nazareth out of this book, Luke 4:17 and it was in this the eunuch was reading when Philip came up to him, who from the same Scripture preached to him Christ, Acts 8:28. And there are more citations in the New Testament made out of this prophecy than any other book, excepting the book of Psalms, as Musculus observes. To which may be added, as another reason, the elegance and sublimity of his style in which he exceeds the greatest of orators, Demosthenes among the Greeks, and Tully among the Romans; and this is observed both by Jews and Christians. Abarbinel (f) says, that the purity, and elegance of his diction is like that of kings and counsellors, who speak more purely and elegantly than other men: hence their Rabbins, he says, compare Isaiah to a citizen, and Ezekiel to a countryman. And Jerom (g) observes, that Isaiah is so eloquent and polite, that there is nothing of rusticity in his language; and that his style is so florid, that a translation cannot preserve it. Moreover, another reason of this book being placed first may be the bulk of it; it being larger, and containing more chapters, than any of the greater prophets, and almost as many as all the lesser prophets put together. That Isaiah was the writer of this book is not to be questioned; many of the prophecies in it are by name ascribed to him, Matthew 13:14 though some others might be the compilers of it, collect his prophecies, and digest them in order: so the Jews say (h), that Hezekiah and his company wrote Isaiah, &c. At what time, and in whose days he prophesied, may be learnt from Isaiah 1:1 by which it appears that he prophesied long, and lived to a good old age. He began to prophesy about A. M. 3236, and about seven hundred and seventy years before Christ. Abulpharagius, an Arabic writer, says (i), he lived an hundred and twenty years, eighty five of which he prophesied. It is a generally received tradition with the Jews, that he lived to the time of Manasseh, and that he was sawn asunder by him; and which has been embraced by the ancient Christian writers, and is thought to be referred to in Hebrews 11:37. See Gill on Hebrews 11:37. But Aben Ezra on Isaiah 1:1 observes, that had he lived to the time of Manasseh, it would have been written, and is of opinion that he died in Hezekiah's time. According to the Cippi Hebraici (k), he was buried at Tekoah, over whose grave a beautiful monument was erected; though Epiphanius (l), or the author of the Lives of the Prophets that go by his name, says he was buried under the oak of Rogel, near the fountain of Siloam; and it is a tradition with the Syriac writers, that his body lay hid in the waters of Siloah; See Gill on John 5:4 but these are things not to be depended on; and alike fabulous are all other writings ascribed to him, besides this prophecy; as what are called the ascension of Isaiah, the vision of Isaiah, and the conference of Isaiah. This book contains some things historical, but chiefly prophetic; of which some relate to the punishment of the Jews, and other nations; but for the most part are evangelical, and concern the kingdom and grace of Christ; of which some are delivered out more clearly and perspicuously, and others more obscurely, under the type of the deliverance of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity.

(a) T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 14. 2.((b) Ecclesiasticus, ch. xlviii. ver. 22. (c) Demonstrat, Evangel. l. 5. c. 4. inscript. p. 225. (d) Adv. Ruffinum, fol. 76. D. tom. 2. ad Paulam & Eustechium, fol. 8. M. tom. 3.((e) Prooem. in Es. fol. 2. B. tom. 5. (f) Comment. in Proph. Poster. fol. 1. 2. (g) Ad Paulam, ut supra, (& Eustechium, fol. 8. M. tom. 3.) (h) T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 15. 1.((i) Hist. Dynast. p. 43. (k) P. 11. Ed. Hottinger. (l) De Vitis Prophet. c. 7. & Isidor. Hispalens. de Vit. & Mort. Sanct. c. 37.

INTRODUCTION TO Isaiah 1

This chapter, after the inscription, contains a charge of aggravated sin against the Jews; God's rejection of their ceremonial sacrifices and service; an exhortation to repentance and obedience, with a promise of pardon; a restoration from their sad estate; a prophecy of their restoration to a better; and of the destruction of idolatrous sinners. The inscription is in Isaiah 1:1 in which are the title of the prophecy, a vision; the writer of it described by his name, his descent, and the times in which he prophesied; and the subject of the prophecy is Judah and Jerusalem. The charge against the Jews is rebellion against the Lord, and the heavens and earth are called as witnesses of it; which is aggravated by the relation they stood in to God, and by the favours bestowed upon them, Isaiah 1:2 by their more than brutish stupidity, Isaiah 1:3 by the multitude of their sins, which were of a provoking nature, Isaiah 1:4 by the uselessness of chastisements, the whole body of the people, from the highest to the lowest, being afflicted without being the better for it, and so generally depraved, that no regard was had to any means of reformation, Isaiah 1:5 and by the desolation it brought upon them, which is illustrated by several similes, Isaiah 1:7 and by the grace and goodness of God in reserving a few, or otherwise they must have been for their punishment, as they were for their sins, like Sodom and Gomorrah, Isaiah 1:9 wherefore both rulers and people are called upon under those names to hearken to the law of God, and not trust in and depend upon their sacrifices and other rites of the ceremonial law, together with their hypocritical prayers; all which were abominable to the Lord, since they were guilty of such dreadful immoralities, Isaiah 1:11 when they are exhorted to repentance for sin, to the obedience of faith, and washing in the blood of Christ, whereby their crimson and scarlet sins would become as white as wool and snow, otherwise destruction must be expected, Isaiah 1:16 and then a lamentation is taken up concerning the deplorable state of Jerusalem, representing the difference between what it was now, and what it was formerly, and the sad degeneracy of the people, rulers, and judges, Isaiah 1:21 upon which the Lord foretells what he thought to do: to avenge himself of his enemies; to purge his church and people; to restore them to their former uprightness and integrity; and to redeem them with judgment and righteousness, Isaiah 1:24 and the chapter is concluded with a denunciation of utter destruction upon wicked men, who are described and pointed at as idolaters; which will cover them with shame and confusion, Isaiah 1:28 and which is illustrated by the fading of the leaves of an oak, and by a garden parched with drought, Isaiah 1:30 and it is suggested that it will be by burning with fire unquenchable, Isaiah 1:31.

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET

ISAIAH.

Isaiah.

BY

THE VERY REV. E. H. PLUMPTRE, D.D.

Late Dean of Wells.

INTRODUCTION

TO

THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH.

I. Life of Isaiah.—(1) We cannot write the life of Isaiah as we can write that of St. Paul. We have no contemporary notices of him by other writers, and only a few dim traditions as to any facts of his life and death. His writings, containing, as they do, the messages which he had to give to men from God, are as far as possible from being intentionally autobiographical. We know less of his home-life than we do of Hosea’s; less of the manner in which he was treated by priests and princes and rival prophets, than we do of the manner in which Jeremiah was treated by his contemporaries. All that we can do, in the dearth of this information from without, is to look to the prophet’s writings, and see what they tell us of the man, to draw inferences more or less legitimate from acknowledged facts, to trace out hints scattered here and there by chance, to supply a theory based upon some phenomena and explaining others, and so to construct what I have elsewhere called an “Ideal Biography of Isaiah.”[24]

[24] See a series of papers with this title in the Expositor, Second Series, 1883.

(2) Of the father of Isaiah we know nothing but the name which he bore himself, and that which he gave his son. The former, Amoz, is probably a shortened form of Amaziah (“strong is Jehovah”), and if we were to accept the Rabbinic maxim, that where the name of a prophet’s father is given it is because the father also was a prophet, we might infer that Isaiah was trained in early youth for the work that lay before him. The name Isaiah (“Jah,” or “Jehovah, saves”) would seem to indicate that he who gave it was a man whose belief in the Lord God of Israel was strong and living, perhaps that he dedicated his child to be a witness of the truth which the name implies. Isaiah’s practice of giving symbolic and suggestive names to his children may have been inherited from his father. It may be inferred, without much risk of error, from the circumstances of Isaiah’s call (Isaiah 6:1), that he was a priest. The vision which he saw was from the court which none might enter but the sons of Aaron. The reformer of the ceremonial hypocrisy that had defiled the sanctuary (Isaiah 1:11-14; Isaiah 28:7) was to come, as in the instances of Jeremiah, the Baptist, Savonarola, Luther, from the sanctuary itself. The character of a man’s mother may always in some measure be inferred from that of the man himself. In Isaiah’s case we have, besides this, suggestive allusions to a mother’s care for her children (Isaiah 49:15). The tenderness with which she comforts her son is the type of the pitying love of Jehovah for His chosen, which remembers even when that natural tenderness forgets (Isaiah 66:12-13). We may feel sure that she presented rather the older pattern of the godly matrons of Israel than the life of frivolous luxury sketched by her son in such vivid colours in Isaiah 3:16-23. Looking to the fact that from twenty-five to thirty was the normal age at which priest or Levite entered on his functions, and that Isaiah does not plead his youth, as Jeremiah did (Jeremiah 1:6), as a reason for shrinking back from his calling as a prophet, we may fix his birth at from B.C. 788-783, and accordingly we have to think of the boy as growing up during the latter half of the reign of Uzziah. His education was naturally grounded on the sacred books of his country, as far as they then existed. Allusive references to Eden and Noah (Isaiah 51:3; Isaiah 54:9), to Abraham and Sarah (Isaiah 41:8; Isaiah 51:1-2), to Jacob and Moses (Isaiah 41:8; Isaiah 63:11-12), to Sodom and Gomorrah (Isaiah 1:9; Isaiah 13:19), show that these books must have included the substance of Genesis and Exodus. The Book of Judges supplied the memories of the day of Midian (Isaiah 9:4; Isaiah 10:26). The Proverbs of Solomon, then, as always, prominent in Jewish education, furnished him with an ethical and philosophical vocabulary (Isaiah 11:1; Isaiah 11:3; Isaiah 33:5-6), and with the method of parabolic teaching (Isaiah 28:23-29), and taught him to lay the foundations of morality in the “fear of the Lord.” As he advanced to manhood, the Book of Job met him, with its bold presentations of the problems of the universe, and gave the training which he needed for his work as the great poet-prophet of Israel. (See Cheyne’s “Isaiah,” ii. 226, and essay on “Job and the Second Part of Isaiah,” ii. 243.)

(3) The Psalms which were then in use in the Temple supplied emotions, imagery, culture of another kind, which bore fruit in the “songs” or “hymns” which Isaiah actually incorporated in the collection of his writings (Isaiah 5:1-7; Isaiah 5:12; Isaiah 26:1-4), perhaps, also in the Psalms of the sons of Korah, some, at least, of which belong to the same period (Psalms 44-48), and bear traces of parallelism of thought. The instances of a like parallelism between the language of Isaiah and that of Deuteronomy,[25] are not sufficient to settle the question as to the date and authorship of that book, but they may be at least considered as contributing to its solution. Side by side with this religious education there are signs of a wider culture, of training in the medical science of the time (Isaiah 1:6; Isaiah 38:21), of some knowledge of the history and religion of the great empires which were contending for the sovereignty of the East (Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 19:11-13; Isaiah 23:12-13; Isaiah 46:1). The prosperous reign of Uzziah revived the commerce of Jerusalem, and from the men of Tyre and others he heard of the far-off voyages of the ships of Tarshish to the isles of Chittim (Isaiah 2:16; Isaiah 23:1; Isaiah 23:14; Isaiah 60:9), of the distant Shinar, and Media, and Elam (Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 13:17; Isaiah 21:2; Isaiah 22:6), and of the isles of the sea (Isaiah 11:11), even of the land of Sinim (China) (Isaiah 49:12). His knowledge of Egypt, of Zoan, and Noph, and Pathros (Isaiah 19:11), of the rivers of Ethiopia, and the seven streams of the Delta (Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 11:15), of Dibon and Nebo, and other Moabite cities (Isaiah 15:2; Isaiah 16:9), implies, if not actual travel, much intercourse with travellers, in those countries. He may have learnt the Aramaic of the northern provinces of Syria, and so been able, like Hezekiah’s ministers, to converse even with Assyrians (Isaiah 36:11), and have known more than his fellows of their names and titles, and the organisation of their armies, as in the Sargon and the Tartan of Isaiah 20:1. He may have watched with his own eyes the art of the metallurgist (Isaiah 1:25), of the sculptor, of the painter, which he describes so vividly (Isaiah 44:12).

[25] See Dr. Kay, in the Speaker’s Commentary, Note on Isaiah, chap. 1.

(4) Two facts in the reign of Uzziah would seem to have impressed themselves on the mind of the young prophet: (1) the earthquake which is mentioned by Amos (Isaiah 1:1), and Zechariah (Isaiah 14:5), and which has left many traces of its influence as a type of Divine judgments in Isaiah’s writings (Isaiah 2:19; Isaiah 24:19-20); and (2) the leprosy which came on the king as a punishment for the sacrilegious usurpation of the functions of the priesthood (2Chronicles 26:20-21), and which may well have suggested the terrible question whether he himself, and the whole nation of which he was a member, were not tainted with a like spiritual uncleanness, which yet he felt powerless to remedy (Isaiah 1:6; Isaiah 6:5).

(5) The theophany of Isaiah 6 was the answer to these questionings and misgivings. He entered on a new stage of life, with new powers, and the sense of a new vocation. The touch of the burning coal upon his lips was, as it were, an instantaneous purgatory, cleansing his iniquity. But the work on which he entered was, beyond that of any other prophet, an arduous and a terrible one. He had to be a herald of devastation, and defeat, and exile; of messages the immediate effect of which would be to increase the spiritual deafness and blindness of his hearers (Isaiah 6:10). The one gleam of hope in the thick darkness was that which told of the “remnant” in which the true Israel should at last revive, of the young scion which should rise out of the decayed tree, the branches of which had been lopped off as by the axe of the Divine judgments (Isaiah 6:13).

(6) Isaiah does not seem, however, to have entered at once upon the public exercise of a prophet’s calling. His first work was to study the present and the future in the volume of the past, and in his history of the reign of Uzziah (2Chronicles 26:22), with its material prosperity, its national arrogance, its formalism and hypocrisy, its luxuries and its pomp, its corruption and its cruelty, we may well believe that he probed to the quick the ulcerous sores which were eating into the nation’s life, as he did afterwards in the “great indictment,” with which his collected writings open. To this period of his life, under Jotham, we may also assign his marriage with a woman like-minded with himself, not without her own share of prophetic gifts (Isaiah 8:3), and the birth of the son whose name, Shear-jashub (“remnant returns”), embodying, as it did, at once the terror and the hope of his great vision, made him, even in his infancy, “a sign and a wonder” to the people (Isaiah 8:18).

(7) There are signs, however, that Isaiah was recognised as a prophet before the close of the reign of Jotham. At the beginning of that of Ahaz he had disciples, who gathered round him and took notes of his teaching (Isaiah 8:16). He would seem to have been on terms of intimacy with Zechariah, the father of the wife of Ahaz, the mother of Hezekiah, and with the high priest Urijah (Isaiah 8:2; 2Chronicles 29:1). The tone of authority in which he speaks to Ahaz (Isaiah 7:4; Isaiah 13), might almost seem to suggest that the education of the young prince had been entrusted to his care, as that of Solomon had been to Nathan. If the result, as far as Ahaz was concerned, was disappointing, the influence which he began to exercise on the mind of his future successor, born when Ahaz himself was scarcely out of the age of tutelage, must have been abundant compensation. The fact that Hezekiah’s mother was the daughter or granddaughter of one who had understanding in the visions of God (2Chronicles 26:5) suggests the inference that she may have been chosen by Jotham, under Isaiah’s guidance, as a wife for the young king, and that the devotion and purity of Hezekiah’s character were mainly due to her influence, as directed by him. Anyhow, the events of that reign, the invasion of Rezin and Pekah, the conquests of Pul, the intervention of Tiglath-pileser, the rise of the Ethiopian dynasty of the Pharaohs, represented by So, or Sabaco, the wars with the Philistines, and other neighbouring nations, must have given many occasions, over and above those recorded in his writings, for the exercise of his gifts of insight as a prophet and a statesman, seeing the secret workings that lay below the surface of things, and proclaiming the righteous government of Jehovah, as disposing and ordering all. During this period also we may rightly think of the influence of contemporary prophets such as Hosea and Amos, in the northern kingdom, and above all Micah, his friend and contemporary in Judah, as working upon his mind, enlarging his thoughts, completing the training which fitted him for the higher and more commanding position which he was to occupy in the reign of Hezekiah. To Micah especially we can trace his visions of the restored Temple (Isaiah 2:2-4; Micah 4:1), his protests against greed and drunkenness (Micah 2:1-11), his hopes of a Prince of Peace rising out of the house of David (Micah 5:2; Micah 5:5).

(8) At the commencement of that reign, Isaiah must have been over sixty. The king whom he had trained, and whose mother was under his direction, was only twenty-five, and in the whole opening policy of his reformation, the restoration of the worship of the Temple, with its psalmody and music, the effort after a renewed unity shown in his invitation to Ephraim and Manasseh, Issachar and Zebulun, to keep the passover at Jerusalem, the conversion of the heathen and their admission, as proselytes, into fellowship with Israel, (2 Chronicles 29-32), we can trace, without the shadow of a doubt, the influence of his instructor. If the prophet did not identify the king with the ideal ruler, the Prince of Peace of his earlier utterances (Isaiah 9:6), he must have seen in him the pledge and earnest of the possibilities of a future like that of the stem and branch of Jesse in Isaiah 11:1. It was a time of joy such as the nation had not seen since the days of Solomon (2Chronicles 30:26). The king himself assumed the office of a teacher, and “spake comfortably” to the hearts of priests and laity, and appeared almost as a priest interceding for the ignorant and erring (2Chronicles 30:18), in words which must have been, in greater or less measure, the echo of Isaiah’s teaching. He added to the sacred books of Israel by collecting the Proverbs of Solomon that had been floating in the minds of men, though, as yet they had not been put together, and in which, as dealing largely with the duties and the faults of rulers, Isaiah may well have found the “ideal of a patriot king” which he hoped to see realised in his pupil (Proverbs 25-29). It was not long, however, before the bright dawn was overcast. There were perils from without and from within. The successive invasions of Shalmaneser, Sargon, Sennacherib, the conquest of Samaria, and the captivity of the Ten Tribes threw the people of Judah into a state of restless agitation. Some of the king’s counsellors trusted in the prospect of an alliance with the Ethiopian dynasty ruling in Egypt, represented by Sabaco and Tirhakah (Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 20:3; Isaiah 30:2). Some thought it more prudent to acknowledge the suzerainty of the Assyrian king and to pay a moderate tribute. Some fell back on new fortifications which were to make Jerusalem impregnable, and gave themselves up to a boastful and defiant revelry (Isaiah 22:9-13). The aged prophet stood almost alone as he told men, now in speech and now in strange and startling acts (Isaiah 20:2), that their one way of safety was to repent and to seek the kingdom of God and His righteousness (Isaiah 22:12; Isaiah 26:8-9; Isaiah 28:16), and not to weave their webs of diplomacy and intrigue (Isaiah 30:1). They mocked at his iterated utterances in the name of the Holy One of Israel (Isaiah 28:9-14; Isaiah 30:11). They, for their parts, would none of Him. The king himself fell away from the bright promise of his early reign. The chief place among his counsellers was given to Shebna, of low or foreign extraction, ostentatious, arrogant, the chief advocate of a braggart and rollicking defiance (Isaiah 22:15-19). Among those counsellors Isaiah could count only on the support of the respectable Eliakim, and even he was tainted with the nepotism which is the besetting sin of Eastern rulers, and in which the prophet read the forecast of a future fall (Isaiah 22:20-25).

(9) The danger which had threatened Jerusalem from the armies of Sargon was averted by submission and the payment of tribute. He laid waste Judah, but left the capital untouched. Before long a danger of another kind threatened the frustration of Isaiah’s hopes. The king, not yet thirty-five, and as yet without an heir, was sick unto death (Isaiah 38:1). In the words in which the prophet-physician announced the danger there was a sad significance. Men who read between the lines might trace in that “set thine house in order,” the hint that there was disorder alike in the policy of the kingdom and in the inner habitation of the soul, that needed to be set right. As it was, the king’s repentance and the prayer of faith prevailed, and fifteen years were added to his life. His marriage with Hephzibah (2Kings 21:1) was probably determined by the counsels of the prophet, who saw in her very name (“my delight is in her “), an augury of good (Isaiah 62:4), and the name given to the child who was to succeed him, Manasseh (“forgetting”), bore witness that the king was following up his policy of conciliating the remnant of Ephraim and Manasseh, and of proclaiming an amnesty of all past animosities (2Chronicles 30:1-12). There was, however, even then a cloud upon the horizon. The king lent too willing an ear to the insidious proposals of Merôdach-baladan, the rebel king of Babylon, against whom Sargon had been carrying on a long-continued warfare, and had in the weakness of his pride displayed the treasures of his palace and his arsenal, as if they, and not the living God, were the strength of Israel (Isaiah 39:1-8; 2Chronicles 32:31). Against that alliance the fiery zeal of the old prophet kindled into a white heat of indignation. It was full of untold evils in its immediate and remote consequences. It was in that burst of inspiration that Isaiah had his first clear vision of the Babylonian captivity, beyond which he was afterwards led to see the dawn of a brighter day of redemption and return.

(10) The danger which Isaiah had predicted soon drew near. Sargon was murdered in his palace, and his successor (Sennacherib) having in the first year of his reign crushed the Babylonian revolt, and driven Merôdach-baladan into the marshes of the lower Euphrates (see Notes on Isaiah 36:1), turned his arms to subdue the rebels of his southern provinces, and among others Hezekiah, who had attacked and imprisoned the Assyrian ruler of Ashdod, and demanded an exorbitant tribute, which could only be paid by emptying the treasure-house, that had been boastfully shown to the Babylonian envoys, and stripping even the Temple of its gold (2Kings 18:14-16). Even this, however, did not avail. The Assyrian king, suspecting probably that negotiations were going on between Hezekiah and Tirhakah, tore up the treaty, led his armies against Jerusalem, and sent Rabshakeh and his companions to demand an unconditional surrender (2Kings 18:17-27). We need not now follow the history of that mission. In its relation to Isaiah’s life we may find in it the time of his crowning glory. At last mockers were silenced, and the people could “see their teachers” (Isaiah 30:20). King, priests, nobles, came in procession to the house of Isaiah in the sackcloth of supplication. Would he not once more intercede for them with the Holy One of Israel? The occasion was worthy of the grand burst of prophecy which was Isaiah’s last public utterance.

(11) During the three or four years that remained of Hezekiah’s reign, after the destruction of the Assyrian armies, the position of Isaiah was one of safety and of honour. It was probably during this period that he fell back upon the line of work with which he started, and wrote the history of the reign of Hezekiah, which manifestly served as the basis of 2Chronicles 29:1 to 2Chronicles 32:32. But the time must also have been one of disappointment and of dark forebodings for the future. Hezekiah had only partially fulfilled the hopes with which Isaiah had hailed his accession to the throne. He must have seen that the boy prince, Manasseh, whom he was too old to educate himself, was likely to walk in the steps of his grandfather rather than his father. As soon as Hezekiah died his whole policy was reversed. The Shebna party were once more in the ascendant. Foreign alliances and foreign idolatries prevailed as they had done in the days of Ahaz. The disciples who had gathered round Isaiah during his long career entered an unavailing protest (2Chronicles 33:10), and were slain by Manasseh as the prophets of Jehovah had been slain of old by Jezebel and Ahab (2Kings 21:16). According to a Jewish tradition, not in itself improbable, Isaiah himself perished in the persecution, being accused of blasphemy for having said that he had seen the Lord, as in Isaiah 6 and was condemned to die by being enclosed in the hollowed trunk of a tree, and then sawn asunder. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews is supposed to allude to this tradition in Hebrews 11:37. Of the sons of Isaiah we have nothing but the names; but it is well to remember that those names must have made them, as long as they lived, the representatives to the generation that came after them of all that was most characteristic in their father’s teaching. Whether the prophet himself was engaged during the later years of his life in providing for the perpetuation of his leading ideas in another form, is a question which will meet us farther on.

II. Arrangement of Isaiah’s prophecies.—(1) It is obvious that the writings of a man who has played a conspicuous part as a writer or a teacher may be brought together in very various ways. The writer may be his own editor, sifting and selecting from the MSS. of many years, and arranging them either in chronological order or else according to a method independent of that order, and determined by personal or ideal associations. Or the task of editing may be left to a friend, disciple, or secretary, acting as Baruch seems to have acted in relation to Jeremiah (Jeremiah 36:4; Jeremiah 36:18; Jeremiah 36:32). Or again, the papers may come in a loose and fragmentary state into the hands of the scribes, or men of letters, of a later generation, and they may exercise their functions with varying degrees of insight or of accuracy, editing with or without notes and glosses and interpolations. When we have no record as to which process was adopted, the problem is complicated by the possibility that all three processes may have mingled in varying and uncertain proportions. It is not to be wondered at that critics who are not content to assume that the arrangement which they find in the existing Hebrew text of the Old Testament can claim a Divine authority which could be claimed by no other, should come on these points to widely different conclusions, and be influenced by considerations more or less subjective. The task of a complete critical analysis lies beyond the limits within which the present writer has to work, and all that will be now attempted will be the endeavour to note the probable sequence of the chapters or other sub-sections of Isaiah’s writings.

(2) It is tolerably plain, at the outset, that we have three chief divisions.

(A) Isaiah 1-35. A collection, not necessarily a complete collection, of prophetic writings from the death of Uzziah to the closing years of Hezekiah.

(B) Isaiah 36-39. An historical appendix to that collection, connected with the most memorable passage in Isaiah’s life.

(C) Isaiah 40-66. A complete and systematically arranged collection, manifestly having a unity of its own, and having for its central subject the restoration of the Jews from Babylon.

It remains to examine the arrangement of the sections in each group.

(A) Isaiah 1. A general introduction to the whole, probably written in the latter part of the reign of Jotham, embodying the results of Isaiah’s study of the reign of Uzziah, possibly retouched under Hezekiah.

Isaiah 2-5. A further denunciation of the sins of Israel, and the judgments coming on them, coloured in part by reminiscences of the earthquake under Uzziah, and painting the social evils of that period. Mingling with the prophecies of judgment are visions of a future restoration (Isaiah 2:2; Isaiah 4:2-6), shared by Isaiah with his contemporary Micah. Isaiah 1-5 may be considered as deliberately placed before Isaiah 6, as showing the state of things which preceded the call there narrated.

Isaiah 7:1 to Isaiah 10:4. Narrative mingled with prophecies belonging to the early years of Ahaz. First definite prediction of the Assyrian invasion, and of an ideally righteous king (Isaiah 9:6-7); the witness of the names of Isaiah’s children; the true Immanuel.

Isaiah 10:5 to Isaiah 12:6. Clearer announcement of the Assyrian invasion of Tiglath-pileser (?), Salmaneser (?), or Sargon (?). Renewed vision of the return of the remnant (the true Shear-Jashub), and of the true Immanuel, or righteous King (Isaiah 11:1-16), coloured probably by the virtues of the young Hezekiah, and the captivity of the ten tribes.

Isaiah 13-23. Obviously in its form an independent collection of “burdens” or oracles, bearing on the history of Jerusalem and the neighbouring nations, all probably written under Hezekiah, and in some cases as an answer to ambassadors who came to consult the prophet as to the future of the people who sent them (Isaiah 14:32). “The burden of Babylon” (Isaiah 13, 14), assuming it to be Isaiah’s, was probably among the latest, written after the mission of Merôdach-bala-dan had directed the prophet’s mind to that city, as almost equally with Nineveh the capital of the Assyrian empire, and destined for a time to take its place as the great world-power (Isaiah 14:25), but is placed first, as the Epistle to the Romans stands in the New Testament at the head of St. Paul’s epistles, on account of its importance. Isaiah 18-20 are connected with the plans of an Egypto-Ethiopian alliance; Isaiah 21 with the future destruction of Babylon; Isaiah 22 with Sargon’s or Sennacherib’s (?) attack on Judah.

Isaiah 24-27. The four poems seem grouped together, not necessarily as having been written continuously, but as having for their common subject “the day of the Lord,” which brings at once judgment and redemption. The recurrence of the phrase “in that day,” in Isaiah 26:1; Isaiah 27:1; Isaiah 27:12, connects them with Isaiah 4:1; the glory of the “mountain of the Lord,” in Isaiah 25:6, with Isaiah 2:2. With the exception of the passing reference to Moab in Isaiah 25:10, the group is less definitely historical than any other.

Isaiah 28-32, like the “burdens” of Isaiah 13-23, have an outward unity in the opening formula of “Woe to” (Isaiah 28:1; Isaiah 29:1; Isaiah 30:1; Isaiah 31:1; Isaiah 33:1), in which the prophet falls back upon the model of one of his earlier writings (Isaiah 5:8; Isaiah 5:11; Isaiah 5:18; Isaiah 5:20). The whole group belongs to the time when the march of Sargon’s (?) or Sennacherib’s (?) armies was striking terror into the people, and leading them once again to projects of foreign alliances. The picture of the ideally righteous king, in Isaiah 32:1-8, reminding us of Isaiah 9:6-7; Isaiah 11:1-9, is suggestive. Hezekiah had not fulfilled the ideal. It was still in the distant future; but the hopes of the prophet were inextinguishable.

Isaiah 33-35. The close of the first great collection, historically turning mainly on Sennacherib’s invasion, and the part taken by the Edomites in his attack on Judah (Isaiah 34:5-6), but ending in a vision of the restoration of all things which transcends all history (Isaiah 35:1-10). They would have been fitting “last words” for the aged prophet, when his work seemed all but over. They were, perhaps, a stepping stone to the greater and more connected work which, more than anything else, was to make his name immortal, in Isaiah 40-66

(B) Isaiah 36-39. Probably, looking to the difference of style, not written by Isaiah, but appended, perhaps by some disciple, perhaps by a scribe-editor, in the time of Ezra, as embodying what could be gathered of the prophet’s closing work, and his almost greatest utterance, and based, perhaps, upon the prophet’s history of Hezekiah (2Chronicles 32:32). In chronological order, Isa 38:39 should come first, as dealing with events prior to the destruction of Sennacherib’s army.

(C) The question of the arrangement of Isaiah 40-66 will be considered here independently of its authorship. A tripartite division is apparently indicated by the recurrence of the burden, “There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked,” in Isaiah 48:22; Isaiah 57:21, as follows:—

-1Isaiah 41:1 to Isaiah 48:22, open with the proclamation of the return of the exiles, and pass on to the contrast between the greatness of Jehovah and the nothingness of the gods of the heathen. Cyrus appears as the central figure, the ideally righteous man, the anointed of the Lord (Isa 44:26 to Isa 45:7); but the Servant of the Lord, afterwards so prominent, appears also in Isaiah 42:1-7.

-2Isaiah 49:1 to Isaiah 57:21 are occupied chiefly with the Servant of the Lord, thought of now in his personal, now in his collective, unity, in whom the prophet is taught to see even more than he had seen in Hezekiah or Cyrus, the instrument by which God’s work for Israel and for mankind was to be accomplished, by the victory, not of power only or chiefly, but of vicarious suffering (Isaiah 49:4-7; Isaiah 50:6; Isa 52:13 to Isa 53:12).

-3Isaiah 58:1 to Isaiah 66:24. This portion ends with an expansion of the thought of the “no peace” of the two previous sections. It is remarkable as gathering up, and developing to their highest point, what had been throughout the prominent thoughts of Isaiah’s work as a teacher—his condemnation of his people’s sins (Isaiah 65:2-12; Isaiah 66:3-4); his visions of a new world of righteousness and peace (Isaiah 60, 62, Isaiah 65:17-25); of a redeemed Israel fulfilling its ideal (Isaiah 66:10-14); of one in whom the ideas of the righteous King and the Servant of the Lord are strangely blended (Isaiah 61:1-3); of the ultimate overthrow of all the enemies of God (Isaiah 66:15; Isaiah 66:24). Not a few critics have gone farther than this, and have traced an elaborate tripartite division of three sections in each part; and again a further grouping of three sub-sections under each of the nine thus formed, the structure of the whole book being, on this view, as elaborately planned as Dante’s Commedia, on the basis of the mystic number three thus squared and cubed.[26] It may be questioned, however, whether this arrangement is not too artificial, at variance with the character of Isaiah’s mind, and embarrassing rather than helpful in tracing, what it is in any case difficult to trace, the sequence and continuity of thought. A more natural explanation seems to be, that the writer’s mind, dwelling now on one great idea, now on another, wrote now this and now that section, often with a considerable interval between them, so that we have not a book after modern fashion, with beginning, middle, and end, but rather a series of detached pieces, connected mainly by subtle links of association, like the Pensées of Pascal, the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, or Wordsworth’s Ecclesiastical Sonnets. On the assumption of Isaiah’s authorship, the whole of this second volume must be assigned, with scarcely the shadow of a doubt, to the closing years of the reign of Hezekiah or the opening years of that of Manasseh, and therefore to a very advanced period of the prophet’s life. Of him, as of Moses, it might have been said, that “his eye was not dim nor his natural force abated.” The old age of Isaiah must have been the counterpart, in its receptive and apocalyptic power, of the old age of St. John.

[26] See Delitszch’s Isaiah, on chaps. 40-66 in Clark’s Foreign Theological Library.

III. The authorship of Isaiah 40-66—(1) The limits within which I must confine myself do not admit of anything like an exhaustive treatment of this question. It may be well to begin by noting what it involves. Were the authorship of Isaiah disproved, it would not follow that we had a spurious book, a counterfeit and a forgery, or even, as in the case of the hypothesis of the later date of Ecclesiastes, a case of personated authorship without the animus decipiendi. All that would follow would be that some unknown writer, at or about the time of the return of the Jews from Babylon, had so imbued himself with the thoughts and even the style of Isaiah, that his work was accepted by his contemporaries, or by the scribes who were concerned in the completion of the Old Testament Canon under Ezra, as rounding off the cycle of that prophet s teaching. In regard to all the Messianic elements in it, its great argument against idolatry, and its visions of judgment and restoration, it would still retain all the dignity and authority of inspiration, and be entitled to the place which it occupies in the Hebrew Canon. Even its appeals to the foreknowledge of God, as manifested in prophetic announcements of the downfall of Babylon and the victories of Cyrus (Isaiah 40:13; Isaiah 41:26-28; Isaiah 43:9; Isaiah 45:21), would retain their force as referring to prophecies, like those of Jeremiah and Micah, which foretold a like downfall of the city on the Euphrates, and a like restoration of Jerusalem.

(2) The arguments which have led many recent critics to the conclusion that the authorship of Isaiah is disproved, are briefly these:—

(a) That the whole standpoint of the writer is that of one who was living at the time of the return of the Jews from the Babylonian captivity, and specially that the name of Cyrus was altogether beyond the horizon of Isaiah’s knowledge.

(b) That the central thought of the Servant of the Lord, as made perfect through suffering and dying vicariously for the sins of his people, is entirely foreign to the teaching of the historical Isaiah.

(c) That the style and vocabulary of Isaiah 40-66 are so different from those of Isaiah 1-39 as to imply diversity of authorship.

(3) On the other hand, it has been urged—

(a) That on the assumption of Isaiah’s inspiration, he may have been led to place himself, as in an ecstatic vision, like that of Balaam and other prophets, in a time and country other than his own.

(b) That the name of Cyrus may have been within the limit of Isaiah’s human knowledge, or may have been supernaturally revealed to him. See Note on Isaiah 44:28.

(c) That the knowledge of Babylon and its life and worship as shown in 2 Isaiah is not more than may be accounted for by the commerce of the time, the diplomatic intercourse with Merôdach-baladan, and other sources.

(d) That the forms of idolatry condemned in Isaiah 57:5-6; Isaiah 65:3-5; Isaiah 65:11, belong much more to the state of Palestine under Manasseh than to that of the Babylonian exiles, either before or after their return.

(e) That the reference to Hephzibah and Azubah. the names of the mothers of Manasseh and Jehoshaphat, in Isaiah 62:4; Isaiah 62:12, is more natural in one living under the former king than it would be in a writer a century and a half later.

(f) That the local colouring of the book, as seen in the “clifts of the rocks” in Isaiah 57:5, the trees of Isaiah 41:19; Isaiah 44:14; Isaiah 55:12, the “tents” of Isaiah 54:2, the references to Midian, Kedar, Nebaioth, Lebanon, in Isaiah 60:6-13, is Palestinian rather than Mesopotamian.

(g) That the idea of the Servant of the Lord was one which might have been developed by Isaiah’s experience, from the failure of his earlier hopes, from teaching like that of the Book of Job, with which he was obviously familiar, and from the lesson thus learnt that in that apparent failure, in the suffering and death of every righteous servant, culminating in those of Him who was to fulfil the ideal, lay the secret of an eternal victory.

(h) That the ideal completeness of the restoration of Israel depicted in Isaiah 40:1-16; Isaiah 41:17-19; Isaiah 43:2-6; Isaiah 49:7-26, Isaiah 54, 55, Isaiah 58:8-14, is more natural in one contemplating the return of the exiles from a distance, than to one who, as a contemporary, watched the somewhat meagre results recorded in Ezra and Nehemiah, in Haggai and Zechariah.

(i) That on the assumption of the writer of 2 Isaiah having been a contemporary with the return, it is strange that there should be no trace of him in any one of the writers just mentioned, no reference in what he himself wrote to those who were contemporary actors on the stage of history, Zerubbabel and Joshua, or to the prophets who had preceded him, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel.

(j) That the resemblances of style and language between the two books—a resemblance closer than that between either of them and any other book of the Old Testament—preponderate over the diversities. The induction upon which this statement is based has been exhibited with much fulness by Dr. Kay, Mr. Birks, Mr. Cheyne, and others, in their respective Commentaries. The limits within which I have to confine myself prevent my entering on it. It will be enough to note one or two of the most striking instances:

(A) The dominance in both books of the name and the thought of the Holy one of Israel, fourteen times in each, and very rarely elsewhere.

(B) The recognition of the Spirit of the Lord as the source of the wisdom of the true king in Isaiah 11:1-2; Isaiah 61:1.

(C) The formula “the Lord” or “the mouth of the Lord hath spoken,” in Isaiah 1:2; Isaiah 1:20; Isaiah 40:5; Isaiah 58:14, and of the peculiar Hebrew form for “saith the Lord,” in Isaiah 1:11; Isaiah 1:18; Isaiah 33:10, and in Isaiah 41:21; Isaiah 66:9, both peculiar, or all but peculiar, to Isaiah.

(D) The frequent recurrence of the word tohu, the “chaos” of Genesis 1:1, three times in 1 Isaiah, and seven times in 2 Isaiah, almost, as it were, the catchword of both books, much as some modern writers are characterised by their use of phrases like “the absolute” or “the eternities.”

(E) The numerous traces in both books that the writers of each had received the same literary culture, and were cast in the same mould. Allusive references to Genesis, the Psalms, the Book of Job, Proverbs, are conspicuous in each. (See Cheyne, ii. Appendix, for details).

(4) It has to be remembered, however, that the inductive argument on either side is hardly more than tentative, and is uncertain in its results. A writer of genius, as he grows old, develops new thoughts, enlarges his vocabulary, varies his phraseology and style according to the occasion which leads him to write or the intensity of his own emotions. Many, if not most, New Testament students find no difficulty in accepting the Pastoral Epistles as written by St. Paul, in spite of the long list of words found in them which are not found in his other writings, and the peculiarities of style and thought which characterise them. On the other hand, the history of all literature shows that one writer may, either from pure reverence and love, or from a deliberate purpose of personation, so imbue his mind with the thoughts and language of another, adopt his phrases, reproduce the turns and tricks of his style, that it will not be easy even for an expert to distinguish between the counterfeit and the original. All that can be said as to the application of this inductive method to 1 and 2 Isaiah is, that the parallelisms and the peculiarities may fairly be left to balance each other. So far as I can judge, and I speak with the reserve of one who cannot claim the authority of an expert, there seems to me a slight preponderance in favour of the former.

(5) On this ground then, as well as on a review of the other elements of evidence, I adopt the hypothesis that we have in the two books that are placed in the Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament under the name of Isaiah, substantially the work of one and the same author. I admit in so doing that there is so strong a primâ, facie case for the opposite hypothesis, that it would be simply impertinent and unfair to charge those who adopt it with irreverence, or haste, or prejudice. The second part of Isaiah would remain as a priceless treasure whoever wrote it, just as the worth of the Epistle to the Hebrews is unaffected by the question whether it was written by Paul or by Apollos, or some unknown writer; it would still have for us, as Christians, the incomparable attraction of having been in part, at least, the basis of the theology of Christendom. It was given to that book to revive, from time to time, the dormant Messianic hopes of Israel; to exercise a traceable influence on the minds of later prophets, such as Jeremiah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi; to nourish the souls of those who were looking for consolation and redemption in Jerusalem (Luke 2:25; Luke 2:38); to contribute, if “the word be not too bold,” to the education of Him who was to meet those longing expectations. There, as in the mirror of the Divine word, Jesus of Nazareth saw, in the Servant of the Lord, the guiltless Sufferer, the righteous King, that which He recognised as the archetype, after which His own life and death were to be fashioned (Mark 10:45). There the Baptist found that which defined his position in the kingdom of God, as a voice crying in the wilderness (John 1:23). There the publican Evangelist found the Christ delineated as he had seen Him in Jesus (Matthew 8:17). There Peter, and Paul, and John, and Philip, found the foreshadowings of all that was most precious to them in the teaching of their Master, a witness to Jesus in His lowliness, His purity, His gentleness, His sufferings and death and victory (Acts 8:35; 1Peter 2:21-24), the ground of their hopes of the restoration of Israel (Romans 10:15; Romans 10:20), of the redemption of mankind, and of the restoration of all things, the vision of a new heaven and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness (2Peter 3:13), the apocalypse of the city of God, the heavenly Jerusalem (Revelation 21, 22). There the souls of devout Christians, century after century, have found, more than in any other utterance of prophecy, the Evangel pre-evangelised, the exceeding great and precious promises which sustained them in their conflict with temptation, under the burden of their sins, and turned their sorrow and sighing into the songs of an everlasting joy.

IV. (1) It remains that I should acknowledge the debt of gratitude which I owe, in greater or less measure, to some of my forerunners. The list of commentators on Isaiah is a very long one, and it is probable, to use a phrase of the old Rabbis, that no one has ever entered into the House of the Interpreter with reverent footsteps without finding some treasure which he might make peculiarly his own. Of these I cannot claim to have consulted more than comparatively few. The circumstances under which I have had to write the notes that follow—a somewhat prolonged absence from England, and the pressure of other work on my return—have restricted my range of choice. The English student will scarcely complain if that limitation has led me to a more careful study of those whom I chose as the safest and most trustworthy guides. The limits within which 1 have had to work forbade my discussing the views of other commentators, and I have had to be content with giving results, apart from the processes which led to them. All the more is it right that I should, here at least, acknowledge my obligations to those to whom I am conscious that I am most largely indebted—to Ewald, here, as always, suggestive, bold, original; to Delitzsch, exhaustive and complete, with an almost more than Teutonic exhaustiveness; to my old Oxford instructor in Hebrew, Dr. Kay, looking into the spiritual significance of words and phrases, and investigating suggestive parallelisms with a microscopic minuteness; above all, to Mr. Cheyne, in whom the spirit of a wide and fearless research, and the vividness of historical imagination, are blended, in a measure rarely found elsewhere, with a spirit of devout reverence and insight which makes his Commentary on Isaiah wellnigh all that the scholar student can desire. It has been my effort, while reserving to myself the right of an independent judgment so far as I felt competent to exercise it, to follow, though with unequal steps, in the path in which these interpreters have gone before me, learning myself, according to the old adage, in the endeavour to teach others.

(2) I have further to acknowledge my many obligations to Mr. Sayce, M. Oppert, and the other Assyriologists whose labours, collected in the Records of the Past series, published by Mr. Bagster, have made the inscriptions which have thrown a new light on the writings of Isaiah accessible to the average English student. Looking to the class of readers for whom I write, I have thought it better, as a rule, to refer to that series than to books like Mr. George Smith’s Assyrian Discoveries and History of Sennacherib; or Dr. Ginsburg’s Moabite Stone, or Mr. Budge’s Esarhaddon, or Schrader’s Keil-Inschriften; or papers that lie buried as it were, in the Transactions of learned societies.

Ch. Isaiah 1:2-31. The Lord’s Controversy with His People

The passage falls into two main divisions:—

i. Isaiah 1:2-20. The moral and religious issues involved in the great dispute between Jehovah and Israel.

(i) Isaiah 1:2-3. Jehovah has discovered rebellion and ingratitude in the sons whom He has reared and brought to honour. This fact, disclosed to the spiritual perception of the prophet, is the basis of the whole subsequent argument.

(2) Isaiah 1:4-9. The prophet, in his own name, presses home the charge of rebellion; the divine accusation being “translated into passionate invective and threatening by the prophet” (Delitzsch) (Isaiah 1:4). The evidence of Israel’s sin is seen in the calamities of the land; why should they invite further chastisement by persistent disobedience? (5–8). It is of the Lord’s mercy that they are not utterly consumed, like the Cities of the Plain (9).

(3) Isaiah 1:10-17. Does Israel imagine that Jehovah can be propitiated by costly rites and offerings? Nay, the whole system of ritual worship as practised by them is an intolerable insult to Him (10–15). The prophet’s invective is aimed at a deep-seated fallacy of the popular religion. In opposition to this mistaken notion he demands moral reformation and public righteousness as the only service acceptable to God (16 f.).

(4) Isaiah 1:18-20. The conclusion of the argument. Jehovah summons the nation to a trial at law, and submits the alternative: prosperity as the reward of obedience, or destruction as the penalty of continued rebellion.

ii. Isaiah 1:21-31. The necessity for a purifying judgment. This is the prominent idea in the second division of the chapter, but the connexion of thought is less obvious than in the first. The keynote is struck in

(1) Isaiah 1:21-26. A dirge over the decay of civic virtue in Jerusalem (21–23), followed by a threat of judgment (24 f.), and a picture of the city restored to its pristine purity (26).

(2) Isaiah 1:27-31. The operation of the judgment is shewn to be twofold: the deliverance of a converted remnant (27), and the annihilation of apostates (28). And a further consequence will be a demonstration of the vanity of nature-worship and idolatry (29–31).

The chapter, entitled by Ewald ‘The Great Arraignment,’ stands worthily as the introduction to Isaiah’s prophecies. Its leading ideas—the breach between Jehovah and Israel, the inefficacy of mere ritual, the call to national repentance, the certainty of a sweeping judgment—are those which underlie not only Isaiah’s teaching, but also that of all the pre-Exilic prophets; and these elementary principles are here presented with a force and clearness unrivalled m the Old Testament. Certain resemblances, both in thought and expression, to the ‘Song of Moses’ (Deuteronomy 32) have been noted by commentators, but the inference that this discourse is in any sense an imitation of that poem is on every ground to be rejected. The passage is probably a summary of several public discourses; these, however, have been worked up into a literary unity, and there is perhaps a presumption that the original oracles belong to one and the same period of the prophet’s activity.

What that period was cannot, however, be determined with certainty. Critical opinion seems to gravitate more and more to the view that the first part of the chapter (Isaiah 1:2-17) belongs to the time of Sennacherib’s campaign (b.c. 701). This conclusion is based chiefly on the historical allusions in Isaiah 1:7-9. But it is not quite clear that the expressions there used might not apply to the Syro-Ephraimitish invasion of circa 735; and there are one or two general considerations which plead for the earlier date. (1) A presentation of fundamental prophetic ideas so fresh and powerful as this points to the beginning rather than the close of Isaiah’s career. (2) It is difficult to read the whole chapter in the light of Sennacherib’s invasion. It would be surprising if a series of discourses uttered during that crisis should contain only a pair of doubtful indications of their historical setting. It is admitted, moreover, that the allusions to idolatry (29 ff.) are more naturally understood of the reign of Ahaz than of that of Hezekiah, and no counter argument can fairly be drawn from the assiduous worship of Jehovah referred to in 10 ff. (3) The tone and teaching of the chapter closely resemble the prophecies uttered by Isaiah in the earliest portion of his public work (ch. 2–5). On the whole it seems not improbable that the passage is a résumé of the principal themes of Isaiah’s early ministry, compiled shortly after the attack by Rezin and Pekah (see on ch. 7). Fortunately the interpretation of the chapter is but little affected by the question of its date.

The Vision of Isaiah (738 BC)

¹ The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.

Here is, I. The name of the prophet, Isaiah, or Jesahiahu (for so it is in the Hebrew), which, in the New Testament is read Esaias. His name signifies the salvation of the Lord—a proper name for a prophet by whom God gives knowledge of salvation to his people, especially for this prophet, who prophesies so much of Jesus the Saviour and of the great salvation wrought out by him. He is said to be the son of Amoz, not Amos the prophet (the two names in the Hebrew differ more than in the English), but, as the Jews think, of Amoz the brother, or son, of Amaziah king of Judah, a tradition as uncertain as that rule which they give, that, where a prophet's father is named, he also was himself a prophet. The prophets' pupils and successors are indeed often called their sons, but we have few instances, if any, of their own sons being their successors.

II. The nature of the prophecy. It is a vision, being revealed to him in a vision, when he was awake, and heard the words of God, and saw the visions of the Almighty (as Balaam speaks, Nu 24:4), though perhaps it was not so illustrious a vision at first as that afterwards, Isa 6:1. The prophets were called seers, or seeing men, and therefore their prophecies are fitly called visions. It was what he saw with the eyes of his mind, and foresaw as clearly by divine revelation, was as well assured of it, as fully apprised of it, and as much affected with it, as if he had seen it with his bodily eyes. Note 1. God's prophets saw what they spoke of, knew what they said, and require our belief of nothing but what they themselves believed and were sure of, Joh 6:69, 1Jo 1:1. 2. They could not but speak what they saw, because they saw how much all about them were concerned in it, Ac 4:20, 2Co 4:13.

III. The subject of the prophecy. It was what he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, the country of the two tribes, and that city which was their metropolis; and there is little in it relating to Ephraim, or the ten tribes, of whom there is so much said in the prophecy of Hosea. Some chapters there are in this book which relate to Babylon, Egypt, Tyre, and some other neighbouring nations; but it takes its title from that which is the main substance of it, and is therefore said to be concerning Judah and Jerusalem, the other nations spoken of being such as the people of the Jews had concern with. Isaiah brings to them in a special manner, 1. Instruction; for it is the privilege of Judah and Jerusalem that to them pertain the oracles of God. 2. Reproof and threatening; for if in Judah, where God is known, if in Salem, where his name is great, iniquity be found, they, sooner than any other, shall be reckoned with for it. 3. Comfort and encouragement in evil times; for the children of Zion shall be joyful in their king.

IV. The date of the prophecy. Isaiah prophesied in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. By this it appears, 1. That he prophesied long, especially if (as the Jews say) he was at last put to death by Manasseh, to a cruel death, being sawn asunder, to which some suppose the apostle refers, Heb 11:37. From the year that king Uzziah died (Isa 6:1) to Hezekiah's sickness and recovery was forty-seven years; how much before, and after, he prophesied, is not certain; some reckon sixty, others eighty years in all. It was an honour to him, and a happiness to his country, that he was continued so long in his usefulness; and we must suppose both that he began young and that he held out to old age; for the prophets were not tied, as the priests were, to a certain age, for the beginning or ending of their administration. 2. That he passed through variety of times. Jotham was a good king, and Hezekiah a better, and no doubt gave encouragement to and took advice from this prophet, were patrons to him, and he a privy-counsellor to them; but between them, and when Isaiah was in the prime of his time, the reign of Ahaz was very profane and wicked; then, no doubt, he was frowned upon at court, and, it is likely, forced to abscond. Good men and good ministers must expect bad times in this world, and prepare for them. Then religion was run down to such a degree that the doors of the house of the Lord were shut up and idolatrous altars were erected in every corner of Jerusalem; and Isaiah, with all his divine eloquence and messages immediately from God himself, could not help it. The best men, the best ministers, cannot do the good they would do in the world.